https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/cf89407f4d3e06ae4e3ab8c884a6e5ef.pdf f5ebdad08f78f6c5a5c603d1bd06d715 PDF Text Text -1- January, JOB COMPLETION 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ~----~---------------------------- -".Project No. __ ,Work Plan No. ,..;.W.;..,,..._4;;.,;1;;,.-,..;.R;,;.-.,..;9;..__ _..........;;B;;.,;i;;lOgL,;;h;.;.o,;;;.r,;;;n,..;.Sh;;;,;;;.;e;..,;e;.olOp;....· .;;.SU;.;.:r;_v.;..,e;;..y;...;s;;........_ I Job No. 1 ---------~-------~~~--~-------------------------_ Title of Job. _--=L::;;am=;:;;b~ing=...;;:stu=d;:.y~a=n=d.,..;P::..;r;;,.e;;.,;d::.;a;;.:t;.;:;o.::.r.,..:L=o;;.,;ss=-=o;.;.f,..;.L::,;a --Objectives: 1. To determine the number of lambs born in :relation to the number ewes in various sheep herds throughout the state. 2. To determine the survival of the yearling lamb crop, To show annual trends lambing success, to learn survival of lambs to yearling age and general herd :tnends for management. 3. To determine the predator effects, of of if any, upon the lamb population. Procedure: Field reconnaissance was conducted at the lambing grounds durtng the . lambing season; with continual sight records being kept during the summer and fall. Findings: Pike's Peak. A total of 43 sheep were observed during the annual Pikes Peak trend count. These consisted of: 11 rams ( 9 mature and 2 young), 16 ewes, 9 lambs and 7 yearlings, or a lamb:ewe ratio of 56:100. For comparison purposes the lamb: ewe ratio for an eight year period is shown in Table 1. �=2Glenwood Canyon: Several times comments have been made by game department personnel f:1tnd other interested persons regarding the apparent lack of lambs seen in the Glenwood Canyon sheep herd. During January, 1956 a two week period was spent in this locality trapping and ear tagging bighorn sheep. This offered an excellent opportunity to make some classified counts of the herd, Excludingknowridu:r,:>lications seen from day to day a total of 17 different sheep were observed. Seven of these were rams, eight were ewes with only one lamb and one yearling each being observed. On the basis of this count the lamb:ewe ratio was 13:100 and the ram:ewe ratio 88:100. This is one more piece of evidence to support the theory that excessive rams in a sheep herd may cause the lambing production to remain at a low leveL Georgetown: The largest count at Georgetown was made on July 9, 1956. This count comprised the following: 1 ram, 23 ewes, 14 lambs and 12 yearlings, or a lamb: ewe ratio of 61:100. Table 2 shows the counts of ewes and lambs and lamb:ewe ratio : for an eight year period. Table 2. year Georgetown lamb:ewe ratios. lambs 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1949=1956, :ewes: 1 18 13 2 19 27 8 11 4 19 23 lamb:ewe ratio 50:100 95:100 48:100 no record 2 16 14 73:100 50:100 84:100 61:100 Lamb to yearling survival: No record of lambs was obtained on the Pike's Peak sheep herd for 1955 so no lamb to yearling survival estimate can be made. At Georgetown the 1955 lamb count of 16 lambs and the 1956 yearling count of 12 yearlings indicated a Iamb to yearling survival of 75 percent. For Buffalo Peaks the iamb to yearling survival was 62 percent based on 13 lambs counted ill 1955 and 8 yearling,s counted in .1956. Predation: No evidence of predation was noted in any of the areas covered during 1956. Recommendations: In order to more fully understand the rate of productivity :zreg_ardingbighorn sheep it is recommended that a study along this line be instigated. Prepared by Clifford A .. Moser Date January, 1957 Approved by: Laurence ,E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �5 -3~ January, 1957 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPEOJECTS State of. ...;C;..o~l;;.;;o;.;;;r.;;;a;.;;;d;.;;.o _ ProjectNo. VVorkPlan No. Title of Job. -VV~-~4~1~-~R~-~9~-----~.;;;B;;.;;i~g~h;.;;.0~rn~Sh~e;.;;;e.p_SU~r~v~e~y~s~-~ I=-- __;__-J.;;..o~b;;--=.N;;.;;0;..;..---~4.;;....;.--------~ Census and Distribution Studies on Selected Herds. Objectives: L To make studies of distribution and seasonal movements and to develop improved techniques of census. 2. Attempt to establish a method of aerial census which would be less time consuming than the present ground counts. 3. To establish permanent trend sites on applicable major bighorn sheep ranges and to compile and list all of these areas on maps to be turned over to game management. . ;. .". " . Procedure: The areas in which sheep herds ~ere loc'ated were covered by foot and horseback and records made on the numbers of 'sheep' seen ... Comparisons were made. with past records for trend purposes, 2. The aerial census was conducted on the winterrange at .BuffaloPeaks. Findings: Aerial Census: At· the beginning of this study it was .thoughtthat aerial counts would be more successful. if made. durtng the winter months when the sheep' would be concentrated to a greater degree on their winter range. During the various. flights which were made during the w~nter months atotal of two hours arid twenty minutes were utilized on actual counting of sheep with only 34 sheep being seen. It was then decided that perhaps counting would be .more successful madedurfng the summer when the sheep could be at higher elevations. Consequently, on July 27, 1956, a total on one hou~ and fifty minutes flying time was spent on' aerial census of the Buffalo Peaks bighorn sheep herd. The area covered extended from approximately four miles south of Marmot Peak:..north to the horseshoe basin we.st of the town of Fairplay. This area comprised the entire range for this particular sheep herd. tr Only 42 bighorn sheep were observed on the south slope of East Buffalo Peak. This herd was located in open meadows above timberline, but due to wind currents it was Imposstble to reduce the air speed or get close enou~h to accurately determine the sex or approximate age of the animals. Some lambs were. seem but from the air it was impossible to !e:ll how many there were. �~4= A considerable amount of the time was spent strip flying the area north of Buffalo Peaks where the rams are usually located during the summer months but no rams were located. Almost invariably rams can be located in this area by ground coverage, either foot or horseback. Aerial census work conducted in other states indicated that good counts could be made by air, but the areas where this work was conductedwas at considerably lower elevations than that which an airplane has to operate in the mountains of Colorado. Many times a flying schedule would have to be postponed due to impractical flying conditions, and then when a flight could be made it might have to be interrupted before completion because of turbulent air. Classified Ground Counts: Glenwood Canyon January 25; 1956. 7 rams, 8 ewes, 1lambs, 1 yearlings. Gore Creek January 30, 1956. 6 rams, 4 ewes,1lambs. Januaey 31, 1956 2 rams, 5 ewes, 1 yearlings. Cache La Poudre February 10, 1956. 2 rams, 6 ewes, 1 lamb. Mr. Lyman Nichols Jr., a graduate student at Colorado A & M College had spent a considerable amount of time observing the Poudre sheep herd during the winter and spring of 1956. From his observations he provides the following figures:)7 rams, 31 ewes, 22 lambs. He estimated that there are well over 100 sheep in this herd at the present time. Taylor River March 5, 1956. 8 ewes. Buffalo Peaks (Four Mile Creek) March 6, 1956. 14 rams, 32 ewes, 12 lambs, ·8 year'Iings. Empire-James Peak March 12, 1956. 1 ram, 2 ewes, lambs. Georgetown March 12, 1956. 3 rams, 8 ewes, 7 lambs, 4 yearlings. Mt. Evans May 31, 1956. 7 ewes, 4 lambs, 3 yearlings. Maroon Bells June. 1956. 27 sheep (not classified) seen by Richard Denney and Robert Terrill. Dillon June 12, 1956. 5 ewes .. Seen by Conservation 'Officer Jay Waldren in a timbered flat three miles 'northeast of Dillon. ° �-5~ Kiowa June 12, 1956. Mr. Sam Kimsey who operates a ranch three miles south of Kiowa observed three sheep in an alfalfa field east of his house. He and his and his brother watched these sheep the greater part of the day and took several photographs of them. The photographs indicated one ram (probably 3 or 4 years old) and two ewes. These sheep possibly came from the Platte Canyon, and when last seen were moving in an northwesterly direction at a steady walk. As far as is known this is the only recorded observation of bighorn sheep being found so far out (roughly 42 miles) on the plains. Mt. Evans July 24, 1956. 5 rams. La,dore Canyon August 7, 1956. 1 ram, 5 ewes, 1.. J~mbs,4unidentified Mt. Evans August 24, 1956. 3 rams. Pike's Peak August 27-28, 1956. 11 rams, 16 ewes, 9 lambs, 7 yearlings. Georgetown October 20, 1956. 10 rams. Mapping of Bighorn eteep Range: The establishment of permanent trend sites and compilation of maps for the use of game management personnel will not be submitted in report form; rather, fhe maps with trend sites, as completed, will be submitted to the federal aid office for distribution to the appropriate areas. Recommendations: Because of the difficulty encountered in making accurate sex ratio counts from the air when sheep could be observed, or finding suitable flying conditions at high altitudes, it is felt that no practical census work can be accomplished on bighorn sheep in Oolorado, Prepared by_~C..;;;l,;;;;;if;;;.fo.;;;.;r;;;..d;;;;...;;.A';;';'....;;;,;M;;;.;o;.;;s;,.;e..;;;r Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid 'Coordinator Date _;J;_a_;;;n;;.;,u;;,;;_a..;;;:r ••. y.•.. , ...;1;.;.9..;;;5..;;;7 --,._ ��8 -7- January, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of._" __ .::C...:O:.::L::.;O;;;,:R~A:..:;D=-O=-- ProjectNo. ~VV~-_4~1~~~R~-~9~ Work Plan No. Title of Job. I!.- _ ~~B~ig~h~0~r~n~Sh~e~e~p~SU~r~ve~y~s~ _ __z·_..:;:J:,:;:0!;:;b...::N:,.:..0::::.:.:.,.___:_7....;,.. -------- ~C::.;o~m;!!t:p~a::::.r.::::at.::.::i;.!.v.::::e~R:;.:ang=:z..:e~Stu:.::.::;d::.yt:....:::a~n:::::d~St::.;.: . :.;A:.:;n:;::a:::,lyz..:.s:;:.:i:.:;s:___ Objectives: To determine the food habits of sheep through field observations and analysis of stomach samples, and the palatability zating. of the plants involved. Procedure: _The same procedure was used for photographing the range transects was outlined in the Colorado Quarterly Report, October, 1954, p. 67. as Findings: Hunters were not required to obtain a stomach sample from the sheep which they killed for it was felt that the 81 samples already analyzed adequately determined the food preferences of bighorn sheep, These results have been submitted for publication as required in Job 8, Work Plan No. 1. Publication of Information. Range Transects: The Douglas Mountain transects were completed during September, 1956. No significant changes. were apparent other than the fact the sheep had not utilized the area as early as they had in previous years. These transects were established for long=time trend purposes rather than for yearly forage production-util ization analysis. Therefore, it will be several years before any trend is noticeable. Bighorn sheep do not appear to show any marked preference for any particular species of plant present on the range, and in the course of their feeding appear to take the available vegetation in relation to its abundance. Consultations with range personnel from both the Game and Fish Department and Forest Service indicated that no benefit would be realized from the establishment of Parker Transects on present bighorn sheep range. Consequently, no transects of this type were established. Recommendations: It is recommended that no further work be done along these lines with the exception of the Douglas Mountain transects which should be recorded every other year. Prepared Date: by: Clifford A. Moser Approved by: __;,.J.;:,;.an_u_a_r"""y'-',_.;;;..19;;...;5;;...;7~ _ Laurence E. Riordan .Federal Aid Coordinator (: ��-9JOB COMPLETION January, 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO ~------~~~~~~---------------- State of Project No. __;W_-_4.;;.;1;;..-..;.;R_-....;9;__ Work Plan No. Title of Job :. ....i-_B=ig~h;;_;o;.;;r..;;;n;;...Sh,;;,;,;.;e;;.;;e.p~SU;.;,;rv;;....;...;e~y..; _ rr Job No. 1 --------~--------------~~--~~------------------------~ _..;;;M;::,· o.;;.;u;;;;;n;;;;;t;,;;;a;_;;;in::.....;;G;;_;o;;.;;a;,;;t_C;;..e,;;,;n;;;;;s;;,;u;;.;s:;....;;;a;;;n;;;d...;SU=r;,, _ Objective: To determine the increase or decrease at Mt. filavano and Cottonwood Creek, for possible of fourteen head of goats, future management. Findings: This segment of the project was inactive during the report of concentration of work on more pertinent phases of the project. Recommendations: This job should be continued on a part-tune to determine survival and success of the transplant. Prepared Date by: Clifford A. Moser January, 1957 Approved by: released period because basis in order Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��UftRAlff. n;:"~t.J-\KGM Gtr" Yk.R DlViS10~ OF W!lDlZiU P. O. BOX 2287 FORT COLUNS, ~ ,I~i~~l~~,~\n~I\\ ~li'~~{\I'tlill ll\llllllllllli J "'; BDOW022146 ~j -11January, 1957 COMPLETIONREPORT , INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ----------~~----------------- .Project No. W-38-R-10 Work Plan No. Job No. ~III~ Deer- Elk Investigations ~~F~o~r~ag~e~a~nd~Ran~~g~e~U~t~il~iz~a~t~io~n~sru~d~l~· ~1~2~,~sru~~dy~0~f~f~0~r~ag~e~u~t~il~iz~a~t~i~on='~b~y_e~l=k~an=d~d~o~m=e~s~ __~ South Fork of the White River. Objective: To determine the relative amounts of forage and the plant species consumed by elk and sheep in the parks of the Flat Tops region of the White River National Forest. Procedure: In the summer of 1955, a study area was located in the Lost Solar Park at the head of Lost Solar Creek; a tributary of the South Fork of the White River in Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Transects were laid out in this park in such a manner as to evenly distribute 494 plots throughout the park. To get a complete and even coverage, the transect lines were spaced every 2.68 chains and were run in an east to west direction, starting at the ' south end of the park. The starting point was randomly picked, and the lines were laid out by staff compass and pacing. They were run from the edge of the timber on one side of the park to the edge of the timber on the opposite side, and were marked at each end by a blaze and line number on a nearby tree. Plots were established at 2.68 chain intervals on the lines, with the centers being permanently marked by wooden stakes with a small nail in the top of each.' Before the range study was undertaken in 1955 and again in 1956, estimation of weight and utilization was practiced by the method of estimating, clipping, and then weighing to check the estimation. When the ability to estimate forage weight to within 10 percent and utilization to within 5 percent had been reached; the measurement of forage production and utilization in Lost Solar Park was begun. A circular plot of 9. 6 square feet was inscribed from each staked plot center, and the weight in grams of all the included vegetation wa s estimated. The amount of utilization in grams was also estimated and recorded. In 1955, the weights of forage production and utilization were estimated by plant species encountered. Because of the time required to make the estimations by species, only 162 plots could be completed, but �-12= every third plot was used in order to cover the area.' In order to obtain a larger sample for more accurate statistical analysis,. estimation by vegetational classes was used in 1956, which included grasses and grasslike plants, forbs, and browse, and all 494 plots were to be used. Unfortunately, however, a party of fisherman camped in the study area for several days, .and grazing by their horses necessitated the eliinination of 75 plots, leaving a total of 419 plots used in 1956, Domestic sheep arrived in Lost Solar Park about mid-August both in 1955and 1956; the elk utilization study was made just prior to their arrival under the assumption that all grazing use before this was by elk. At.the same time, forage production was estimated since the vegetation was at the point of maximum growth during this period. As soon as the sheep left the park, another study was made on the same plots in order to determine the. additional forage use by sheep. During the time the sheep were in the area, no elk were observed using it, and very few tracks were found, giving a basis .for the assumption that all forage removed between the two studies was by sheep alone.. Elk days of use were determined by pellet counts made at the time of the elk utilization study .. Circular plots of 1/100th acre were inscribed about the same center stakes used for the range plots, and all elk pellet groups deposited therein since the preceeding winter were counted. In 1955, all 494 plots were used for the pellet count; a second count was made at the end of the summer. InJ956, however, only the 419 plots used in the range survey were used for the pellet count in order to determine the elk days of use only on that part of the park included in the range study. The second pellet count was made at the time of the sheep utilization study in 1956, to obtain an indication of the amount of elk use on the park while the sheep were there. Elk use after this period was not of primary interest because the forage was dried up and no longer growing; therefore, any more utilization, unless extremely heavy, would not affect the range. Results of both forage production and utilization and pellet count surveys for both summers were analyzed and compared statistically in order to determine the accuracy of the study, and to make valid conclusions possible, Analysis of data: Analysis of the 1955data for forage production and elk and sheep utilization by plant species was discussed in the January, 1956, Quarterly Progress Report. Data for 1955has been re-analyzed into forage production and utilization by.vegetational classes in order to compare it with that for 1956. Table 1 summarizes forage production and utilization by classes and by totals for both 1955and 1956. This table includes the mathematical means or averages (X) with their confidence intervals' computed at the ten percent accuracy level (the.true mean will fall between the upper and lower confidence limits for the computed mean, X, with only one cha~ce out of ten of its falling outside these limits), and the standard errors of the means (SX)which give an indication of the sample variability. �~'? _~:. "'~:J -13Table 2 shows the comparison between means of elk and sheep utilization and forage production by vegetation classes and by totals. Also shown are the ratios of elk utilization means for the various classes and total to those of the sheep. Upon examination of Tables 1 and 2, marked differences may be seen between elk and sheep utilization. Similarities are evident in the forage production of both years, as well as in elk and sheep utilization for both years, except for elk utilization of browse in 1955 as compared to that in 1956. However, a comparison of means alone may not always lead to valid conclusions due to variability in the samples; therefore, forage production and utilization data have been compared statistically by means of the "ttest", and the results listed in Table 3. By way of explanation, a significant difference as used here (demoted by *), shows that there are 9 chances out of 10 that the true means of the data compared are actually different. A highly significant difference (denoted by **), shows that the chances of difference are 19 out of 20. No significant difference means that the chances of difference are less than 9 out of 10. In other words, a comparison of the means of two samples, for example, elk utilization of grass in 1955 vs. elk utilization of grass in 1956, may show a difference. The se means, however, are merely the means of a sample taken each year and, due to sampling error or variability, may not be the true means of the actual total utilization of grass on the area. It is possible that the total elk use of grass each year is the same, but that the sample taken may not be a perfectly average sample of that used and, therefore, shows a mean value that differs from the true mean value. By comparing the data from both samples statistically it has been shown, in this case, that the .chances are better than one in ten that, though the two samples vary from each other, they actually show the grazing use to be the same for each year. Elk-days of use on Lost Solar Park have been computed by means of pellet counts, which were averaged, analyzed, and projected to give the number of pellet groups on the whole study area. This figure was divided by 13, the accepted number of groups deposited by one elk in 24 hours, thus giving the number of elk-days on the park. Sheep days on the study site were found by observation and by obtaining sheep numbers from the herder .and the Forest Service. The results of the animal-use data analysts have been Iisted in table 4 for both 1955 .and 1956. Discussion: There are several points that should be brought out concerning the gathering and analysis of the data presented. Forage production and elk utilization studies were run at the time of maximum plant growth, both in 1955 and 1956, and were completed at about the same dates on both years (August 22, 1955; August 21, 1956), The sheep arrived the day after completion of the study each year, and the sheep-utilfzatlon study was commenced immediately after departure of the sheep. The weather was mild during late August and early September of 1955, with no heavy frosts. However, in August 1956, frosts occurred nearly every day, and these frosts caused the vegetation, especially forbs, to dry up and shatter easily. By the time of sheep use, �-14TABLE 1 .... FORAGE PRODUCTIONAND UTILIZATION DATA FROM. LOST SOLAR PARK, COLORAPO FORAGE PRODUCTION 1955 I - 54.7 lbs , /acre Sx = 33.0 HE .. 558~9 1_ 6.2.3 Ibs. /acre Sx= 37.51bs. 11,0/;.. ,4. 6 Ibs. /acre . Sx\'O 2.7 lbs. Grass x = 542.0 Forbs x - Browse x. ...,... Total x = 1105.61 -9.8.9 Ibs./acre Sx = 59.6 lbs. 1956 x = 532.2 I Forbs x = Browse x -- 3.2 lbs. /acre Sx = . 1. 91bs. Total -x ;:;;1163.4 i_ 70.2 lbs. /acre Sx ,42.61bs. Sx= 0.85Ibs. Grass 62L 8 1_·34.1 9.91 Sx= , 26.4lbs. .43.5 Ibs. /acre , Sx = 20.7lbs. lbs. /acre ELK UTILIZATION -- Grass x Forbs x Browse x = Total x _. = 4.88 I_ I. 41lbs./acre 3.931 1. 26 lbs. /acre . 0.06/_ 0.06 lbs. /acre Sx = 0.04 lbs. 8.86 1_ 2.11lbs./acre Sx = 1. 27 lbs. Sx = O.761bs. (. �1ft _.•.t_ ._ •.•• -15TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) 1956 Grass x = Forbs x = 5.431 Browse x Total x = II: 3,70 I L 02 Ibs. /acre Sx = 0.62 Ibs. 1. 04 Ibs. /acre Sx= 0.63 Ibs. 0.21 Ibs. /acre Sx = 0.13 Ibs. I - 1. 78 Ibs. /acre . Sx= 1. 08 Ibs. 0.44 .;.. 9.86 SHEEP UTILIZATION 1955 Grass x = 19.40 I 8.48 Ibs. /acre Sx = 5.11 lbs .. Forbs x = 18.75/_ 6.46 Ibs. /acre Sx = 3.89 Ibs. Browse x = 1. 231 0.64 Ibs. /acre Sx= 0,38 Ibs. Total x = 39.381 11. 06 Ibs. /acre Sx = 6.66 lbs. 1. 31 Ibs. 1956 Grass x = 15.38 1_ 2. 16 Ibs. /acre Sx = Forbs x = 20.51/_ 4. 091bs. /acre Sx = ·2.481bs. Browse x -- 1. 18 1_ 0.66 lbs, /acre Sx = 0.40 Ibs. Total x = 37.33 I 5.73 Ibs. /acre Sx -- 3.47 lbs, �-16= TABLE 2 COMPARISONOF FORAGE PRODUCTIONAND UTILIZATION MEANS GRASSES 1955 Elk Utilization = 0.90% of forage production Sheep utilization = 3.58% of forage production. R,atio of elk utilization to sheep utilization = 1:3.98 1956 Elk utilization = 0.70% of forage production Sheep utilization = 2.89% of forage production Ratio of elk utilization to sheep utilization = 1: 4. 16 FORBS .1955· . Elk utilization = 0.70% of forage production Sheep utilization = 3.36% of forage production Ratio of elk utilization to sheep utilization = 1:4.77 ( 1956 Elk utilization = O. 87% of forage production Sheep Utilization = 3.30% of forage production ·Ratio of elk utilization to sheep utilization = 1:3:78 BROWSE 1955 Elk utilization = 0.55% of forage production Sheep utilization = 11. 16% of forage production Ratio of elk utilization to sheep uttlfzatron = 1~20';:43 1956 Elk utilization = 4. 44% of forage production Sheep utilization = 11. 91% of forage production Ratio of elk utilization to sheep util'ization e 1:2.68 �-17- TABLE 2 (CONTINUED) TOTAL 1955 Elk utilization = 0.80% of total forage production Sheep utilization = 3.56% of total forage production Ratio of elk utilization to sheep utilization = 1:4.44 1956 Elk utilization = 0.85% of total forage production Sheep utilization = 3.21% of total forage production .Ratio of elk utilization to sheep utilization = 1:3.79 TOTAL ELK AND SHEEP 1955 UTILIZATION Elk and sheep utilization = 4. 36% of total forage production 1956 Elk and sheep utilization = 4.06% of total forage production �-18TABLE 3 . STATISTICALCOMPARISONOF FORAGE PRODUCTIONAND UTILIZATION DATA BY ANIMALCLASSEDANDYEARS Forage production, 1955 vs. 1956 Grass - no 'significant difference Forbs - no significant difference Browse - no significant difference Total -: no significant difference Elk utilization, 1955 VS. 1956 Grass - no significant difference Form ...'- no significant difference Browse - significant difference* Total - no significant difference Sheep utilization, 1955vs. 1956. Grass - no significant difference 'Forbs - no significant difference Browse - no significant difference Total - no significant difference Elk utilization vs. Sleep utilization, 1955 Grass - highly significant difference * * Forbs - highly significant difference** Browse - highly significant difference** Total - highly significant difference** Elk utilization vs Sheep utilization, 1956 Grass - highly significant difference ** Forbs - ~wnificant d~ference* Browse -/slgnificant difference Total - highly significant difference** �-19- TABLE 4 ELK AND SHEEP DAYS OF USE ON LOST SOLAR PARK Elk days of use on study area: Before sheep arrival 1955 x = 1, 138 1_ 167.8 elk-days of use 1956 x = 2,2471_ 256. 8 elk-days of use After sheep arrival 1955 x = 110. 5/_40. 1 elk-days of use x = 45.61_ 1956 28. 1 elk days of use Sheep days of use on area (known): 1955 9600 sheep days of use (not including lambs) 20400 sheep days of use {including lambs) 1956 6400 sheep days of use (not including lambs) 11200 sheep days of use (including lambs) �=20the forbs were badly shriveled and shattered, and accurate estimation of utilization was very difficult. Therefore, to prevent over=estimating sheep utilization, forbs were considered as utilized only when it could be seen that they were definitely bitten off, and not when they were missing, which could have been due to natural shattering. Because of this, the figures arrived at for sheep utilization of forbs in 1956are very likely to be low. Grasses and grasslike plants and browse were not so affected by the frosts, and their utilization was much more easily estimated with accuracy. Examination of Tables 2 and 3 reveal that elk utilization of browse increased in 1956over that in 1955, and was, in 1956, not significantly different from sheep utilization of browse. A possible explanation of this is that there were almost twice as m~ny elk-days of use of the area in 1956as in 1955, but elk utilization of grasses and forbs did not increase in proportion to the increase of days of use or to the increase in browse utilization. Perhaps the increased utilization of browse was due to a change in elk preference over the two years. Another possible explanation is that the increased browsing was not done by elk but by deer, which may have increased on the area. A weakness in the study was that all utilization prior to sheep arrival was attributed to elk, which, however, may not have been true, since deer used the park frequently. No means were available to obtam the proportion of forage removed by deer. However, for management purposes, the forage was used by wildlife, whether by deer or elk. Another point that may be noted from the information in Tables 2, 3 and 4, is that, although there were almost double the number of elk-days of use on Lost Solar Park in 1956as compared to 1955, forage utilization by elk remained constant with the exception of browse. A possible explanation may be that, in 1955, most of the elk seen on the area were grazing while, in 1956, most of the elk observed were resting or moving rather rapidly throu~h the park. Perhaps in 1956the elk use of the park, though longer, was primarily for resting purposes during the daytime in order to escape insect harrassment. Forage has been steadily improving in the forest since the death of the trees due to beetle attack, hence it is becoming more and more attractive to game as a feeding area, giving both cover and large quantities of succulent feed. For this reason, the elk may have done most of their feeding in the forest rather than in the open park. This, in fact, appears to be the case, as indicated by observations made during reconnaissance of the neighboring forest areas. Consequently, forage utilization per elk -day on the study area was lower in 1956. Another fact, even more difficult to explain, is that there was no significant difference between forage utilization by sheep in 1955and in 1956, while the number of sheep-days on the park in 1956was only a little over half of the number on the park in 1955. Several ideas may be advanced by way of explanation, but no definite reason is knownfor this anomaly. There was some evidence in 1955that the sheep �-21= did not remain at all times on Lost Solar Park, but were allowed to move onto . parts of the adjacent allottment for an unknown length of time, thereby reducing the actual number of sheep-days on Lost Solar Park by an unknown amount. ill 1956, there was no evidence of the sheep leaving the park during the allotted time of their stay. In 1955, the sheep were close herded while, in 1956, they were loose herded under a different herder. According to Jardine and Anderson (1919), sheep will gain more when loose herded than when close herded, possibly because they eat more when they are loose herded and quiet. They also mention that the grazing capacity of a range may vary 25 percent when used by the same sheep under different herders. Another possible reason for more utilization per sheep-day in 1956 may be related to the cooler weather during August in 1956. On warm days, the sheep would move about and graze only during the cool periods of early morning and late evening, spending the rest of the day bedded down in the shade of the timber. It is possible that they spent more of each day grazing in 1956 than in 1955 because of the cooler days. Although no proof was found, one or more of the above assumptions may have caused the increase in utilization per sheep-day on Lost Solar Park from 1955 to 1956. This point, though a minor one in the whole field of results, has been dealt with rather extensively since it appears to point out an error in the gathering or analysis of the data which is not believed to be present. It may be seen from Table 2 that the total combined elk and sheep utilization amounted to only 4.36 percent of the total forage production in 1955, and 4. 06 percent in 1956-totals which show no significant difference when tested statistically. These small utilization percentages indicate that there was no range over-use by elk or sheep, or by both, as was originally believed. Some of the drier sections of Lost Solar Park were used heavily by the sheep, but the data from these parts were balanced out by the very low utilization percentages from the marshy areas, which were only lightly used. Perhaps, in future studies, it would be wise to limit the forage production and utilization plots to the drier sections of the parks, thereby gaining a truer picture of what is happening on the parts which are most used by both elk and sheep, and eliminating the balancing effect of the lightly used marshy areas. Although elk and sheep use of Lost Solar park is light, the range still appears to be in poor condition. It may be that this poor range condition is attributable to the very high roden population of the area. Pocket gopher mounds were very numerous over all the drier sections of the park, and evidence of a high population of Microtus was noticeable in 1956. A study of the effects of these rodents on the range may prove of value in determining the factor which is causing the poor appearance of the range in these high parks. . �=22Summary: Range surveys were conducted on:Lost Solar Park in the White River National Forest, , Colorado, during the summers of 1955and 1956, in order to ascertain the forage production and the amount utilized by elk and domestic sheep. The data collected in the surveys have been analyzed statistically and presented in tables, and these results have been discussed. In 1955the mean elk utilization was 0.80 percent, and the mean sheep utilization was 3.56 percent, of the total production, while the sheep used 4.4 times more than the elk. The mean combined elk and sheep utilization was only 4.36 percent of the total forage production. In 1956, the mean elk utilization was 0.85 percentand the mean sheep utilization was 3.21 percent, .of the production, with sheep using 3. 79 times more than elk. The total combined elk and sheep utilization in 1956 was 4.06 percent of the forage production. Statistical comparison of the data shows that there was no significant difference between forage production in 1955 and that in 1956, nor between elk utilization in 1955and 1956, and sheep utilization in 1955and 1956. A highly significant difference was found between total elk utilization and total sheep utilization in both 1955and 1956. Elk utilization of browse increased significantly from 1955to 1956, and was not significantly different from sheep utilization of browse in 1956. Elk-days of use on Lost Solar Park before sheep arrival increased from about 1, 138 in 1955, to about 2,247 in 1956, although total elk utilization did not increase significantly. Sheep=days of use decreased from 20,300 (ewes and lambs) in 1955, to 11,200 in 1956, with no significant decrease in utilization. Although the total combined elk and sheep utilization over the whole park was only a little over 4.0 percent of the forage production for both years, the drier sections of the park were utilized more heavily, being balanced in total average by the lightly used marshy parts. It is recommended that future studies be limited to the . drier areas of the parks considered, in order to get a more nearly true picture of those sections which are getting the greater part of the grazing use. A study of the effects of the high rodent population, especially pocket gophers, presenton the range is recommended. It is possible that rodent damage , rather than elk or sheep overuse, is responsible for the poor appearance of the range in Lost Solar and neighboring parks. Determination as to why, -pocket gophers are so abundant on the park area, in terms of previous land use, would particularly be helpful as a f 'uture management guide. Literature cited: Jardine, James ,T., and Mark Anderson, 1919. Range management on the National Forests. USDABull. no. 790. Washington, 1;>.C. Prepared by: Date: Lyman ,Nichols, Jr. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~J~an~u~a=r~y~,~1~9~5~7 _ ( �-23- January, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Smteof. C~O~·=L~O~RA~·~D~O~ Project No. _ ; Beaver Investigations W-83-R-3 Work Plan No. __;.;;II;;___--''--E....;xp ••..e.;...r_i_m_e'''''n_m_I_B_e_av_e_r_T_r_a ...• p•..• p._ing_.... •..a_n_d.;......R_e.;...s_t_o_c....;k;.;;;; Job No. ~5 _ Title of Job :...,-_~E;;.:xp=..;e;.;r;.;i;;;;;m;;.;e;.;;n;;.;t;.;.;a;;.;I..;;H;;.;a;,;.;r;;;..v.;...e;.;;s;;..;t;...Stu~;.;;d;;;;;i;;.;e; _ . Objectives: To determine the optimum number of beavers that can be harvested according to habitat quality in order to maintain beaver colonies in balance with growth of food plants. Procedure: As reported in the October, 1956, Quarterly Report underWork Plan II, Job No.. ·1, the location of prospective study areas for this job was narrowed to two streams, Haypark Creek in Grand County and Pebble Creek in Summit County. DuringIate September, 1956, these two streams were surveyed for the purpose of censusing beaver populations and determining carrying capacity, using the techniques developed by students working under the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit. The completion of these studies was written up in Segment 2, under Work Plans V and VI, of this project. At the time of the stream survey, measurements were made of the amount of available food; stream channel stabil.ity, and distance traveled by beavers for food. Using the data gathered from these stream surveys, rates of harvest for the' beaver populations were decided upon. Trapping of the recommended number of beavers was done during October, 1956, by project personnel. Findings: A tract of private land at the lower end of Pebble Creek, owned by the operator of a guest ranch, offers the only route of access to this stream. At the time of the initial stream survey, and at the time Job No.1, Location of Experimental streams, was written up, the landowner promised full cooperation and appeared tobe convinced that, for the good of the habitat, some of the beavers should be removed from this heavily overpopulated stream. However, when it came time to do the trapping, he was much less enthusiastic .. Guests at the resort do a great deal of fishing in the beaver ponds, and he said he was afraid that if any beavers were removed, the quality of fishing would deteriorate .. It was impossible �-24( to convince him that deterioration in the next few years is almost a certainty if the present overpopulation is allowed to remain. When he became antagonistic, it was decided to eliminate Pebble Creek as a study area, in spite of the fact that all of the beaver habitat is located on National Forest land. At the present time, Haypark Creek is the only establ ished study area for this job. Unfortunately, a companion study area, to provide comparisons, has not been' located as a replacement for Pebble Creek. It is hoped that such a stream can be found during the coming year. This report on findings, therefore, is confined only to the established study area, Haypark Creek. The results of the stream survey and subsequent trapping of Haypark Creek are given below in tabular form: Table 1 -- Habitat Characteristics, Carrying Capacity, and Beaver Harvest on Haypark Creek, Fall. 1956. Amount Feature . 3.7 acres Area of available aspen Average Stand condition of aspen (6 acres/colony 1/ None Amount of aspen reproduction 9.1 acres Area of available willow Average (18 acres stand condition of willow per colony) ~/ 50 yards Average distance traveled for food Stream channel and dam stability Poor on sites abandoned by beavers; good on beaver-occupied sites. 6 beavers Gross carrying capacity of stream 10 percent Deduction for livestock competition Net cairyiDg capacity of stream 5 beavers Estimated beaver population, September, 1956 12 beavers Beaver harvest, October, 1956 7 beavers .!/ Based on an average of 6 beavers per colony. As noted in Table 1, 7 beavers were removed from Haypark Creek during 1956~ The population is now at the level indicated for carrying capacity. The population will be maintained at this level, and habitat changes in terms of food increase. decrease, or stability, stream and dam stability, and distance traveled for food, will be r ecorded. annually. Prepared by: Date : William H. Rutherford Approved by: __.;:J;;;a:.:;n;,;;;u;.::a=.ryo4,.L., ..=1.;;.9.;;.5.:..,7 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �?4 -25January, JOB COMPLETION 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of__ ..;..C=O.:L::.;O;..;;R;.::A:.:;D=O ProjectNo. ~VV~-~83~-~R~-~3 _ ~~B~e~a~v~e~r~In~v~e~s~t~~~a=t~i~o~n~s _ VVork Plan No. _-=m::__--,.~-=]lj:::a=v.:..;e:.:r:.....::.P_=r_=o_=d:.::u:.;;;.c..:.:ti;.:.v..:.ity~ __ ~_=J_=o;.::b~N:..:.;;.o.:.. .......,·_4~ _ Title of Job : ,;::;C_=o~n..:.:tr::.;o;..;;l.:.;le::;,:d:::..· ._=Stu=d::.ly~o:::..f _=P:...:r::.;o;..;;d:.;::u;..;;c..:;tI::.;·v-=i.:.<ty~ Objective: To determine resident beavers. the rate of population build-up from a knownnumber' _ of Reportr During the summer of 1955, the entire beaver population of Lost Creek, a tributary of the VVilliams Fork River in Grand County, was removed. A barrier. against beaver ingress and egress was constructed, and 5 beavers were livetrapped, ear-tagged, and transplanted above the barrier. This job was reported in the October, 1955, Quarterly Report. Work for 1956 consisted of periodic trips to the area for the purpose the activities and behavior of the beavers, and performing necessary work on the barrier. of observing maintenance The beavers are located in two different colonies, and appear to be staying in their respective colony areas. Evening observations failed to disclose the presence' of any young beavers, however. During the fall, the height of the dams on both colony areas was raised, the lodges were repaired, and food caches were placed in the ponds .. There is every indication that the transplants are successful. . .. . . . . A tree which had fallen overthe fence was removed, and the fence was repaired. Debris which had collected against the stream barrier was also removed. Definite information on. the population build-up will not be available until the fall of 1958 or 1959, when a complete trap-out will be done again. In the meantime, work on this job will continue to consist of periodic observations and maintenance. ' Prepared Date: by :._......:.W.:..,;l:,:·l:=,;h:.;::· a:;:m:.:_..:.H::,: .......::,R.:::u:,.::t.:::;h.::,e::,;rf::.;o;..;;r;..;;d:.._ __ _..;Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Division --=J;..;;a:.;:n:.;:u:.;::a:;::ry.M....J..., :...:1;,.:;9..;:5..:.7 _ ��-27January, 19-57 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ~----~~~~~------------------- ProjectNo. ~VV~-_8~3~-~R~-~3 _.~B~e~a~v~e~r~In~v~e~s~t~igg~a~ti~o~n~s~ __~-------------- VVorkPlanNo. ~V~I~__~~B~e~a~v~e~r~C~e~n~s~u~s_T~ec~h~n~l~·g~u~e~s~~~J~0~b~N~0~._7 _ Title of Job : ;;.;A~e~r~ia;;.;;;l;;....;;:B~e~a;;..;v..;;e..;;r_C.;;;...;;.o;;;lo;;.;n~y.......,;;C;..;o;;..;u~n;;.;t~s _ Objectives: To continue the year-to-year aerial beaver colony counts over the routes previously established, as a basis for estimating the annual trend in beaver numbers. Procedure: The aerial trend routes which were established in 1955, and reported in the January, 1956, Quarterly Report, were again flown to continue the collection of aerial trend count data; Most of the recommended deletions, additions, and changes were made in the routes, and no more such changes are contemplated .. The flying this year was done by Department pilot Sam Clifford, in a Cessna 180 plane, with Wi.lliam Rutherford as observer. The plamwas flown between 700 and 1,000 feet above the streams, with an air speed of 100-120 miles per hour. Data were recorded on standardized forms, a copy of which appears in the January, 1956; Quarterly Report. Last year, difficulty was experienced in scheduling flight times which would not conflict with other uses of the plane, principally that of law enforcement flying during big game season. As a result, the flights at that time were not made until late October and early November, and were forced to a termination by weather before they could be completed. This year, it was decided that early October flying was more advantageous because of the greater possibilities of good flying weather and trouble-free plane scheduling, in spite of the fact that all beaver food· caches had not been built. However, since this is a trend only, future flights in early October will be comparable. Accordingly, the flying this year was done on October 1, 2, 3 and 4. The mo st important information recorded for each route was the number of fresh food caches, since these are used as the crtterton for colony centers. Other incidental information on beaver activity was also recorded. Findings: Total stream miles covered were 671 3/4, on which 202 beaver colonies were recorded. The data are summarized by individual streams in Table 1 Immediatelyfollowing: �=28.aolony .. Table 1. Aerial Beaver;counts on Sample Stream Sections, Fall, 1956. Stream Mflesper Ending point oolony stream Beginning point miles Colonies Bridge on' Hwy. Big Grizzly Cr. Muddy Pass 37 19 & N. Platte R. west of Walden TeUer City Jack Creek & Walden 33 1/2 11 3.05 Illinois River Laramie River Chamber sLake 31 State Line 9 3.44 Blue River . HWY. bridge at Green Mountain 11.83 351/2 3 upper end of Reservoir Goose Pasture William Fork R. Leal William Fk. Res. 19 2.71 7 Troublesome Cr. Headwaters Confluence with 20 7 2.86 Colorado R. Big Muddy Cr. Muddy Pass 30 Kremmling 14 2.14 Rio Grande Cr. Rio Grande' Res. Wagon' Wheel Gap 371/2 6 6.25 Goose Creek Humphrey Lake Wagon Wheel Gap 6 4 1. 50 South Fork of Mouth of Pass Confluence with 1. 36 121/4 9 .cr. Rio Grande R. Rio Grande-R. San Juan and West Headwaters of Pagosa Springs 10.25 201/2 2 Fork San Juan R. West Fork Los Pinos R. Vallecito Res. Bayfield 13 5 2.60 Bear River and Stillwater Res. . Craig 15 86 5.73 Yampa River White River Trappers Lake Buford 26 4· t?;.50 S. Fork White Mouth of Lost 15 Buford 7.50 2 R. :Bolar Creek. Cochetopa Cr. Mouth of Nutras Confluence with 34 1. 17 29 Creek 'I'omichi Cr. Tomichi Cr. White Pine Gunnison 37 1/2 4 9.37 East River. Headwaters Confluence with 30 4.29 7 Taylor River. ,. Taylor R. Headwaters Taylor Park Re's~ '18 1/2 10 1. 85 West Mancos.R, Headwaters Mancos 14 7 2.00 Dolores R. Abandoned R. R. Dolores 44 1/2 5 8.90 bridge above Rico S. Fork South Fairplay II-Mile Res. 33 4 8.25 Platte River Michigan Cr. Headwaters .Confluence with 9 6 1. 50 Jeffer'son.Or-. Jeffer-son. Cr. Jefferson Lake Arkansas R.. Tennessee Pass Confluence with Michigan, Cr. Mouth of Two-bit. Creek Totals 10 3 19 10 1. 90 671 3/4 202 3.32 �·9'1>"'/ [ ••••• -29The data in the preceeding table are in no way comparable with the aerial trend data collected last year, for the following reasons: 1. The flying was done almost a month earlier this year. were different, and beavers had not built as many caches. Weather conditions 2. The plane and pilot were different. Last year's flying was done in a Piper Super Cub at a height of 300-800 feet and an air speed of 70-80 miles per hour. This year's flying was done in a Cessna 180 at a height of 700-1,000 feet and an air speed of 100-120 miles per hour. The Super Cub has a tandem seating arrangement, enabling the observer to see from both sides of the plane. The Cessna has a side-by-side seating arrangement, which means that the observer can see from only one side of the plane and will often miss stream sections up to 1/2 mile long. 3. Last year's flights were made primarily for the purpose of establishing the trend routes, uncovering mistakes, and perfecting techniques. Changes were made in the routes this year to the extent that areas and distances are not comparable. For these reasons, no attempt at comparing 1955 and 1956 data will be made. It is .hoped , and anticipated, that these variables will be controlled in future years, so that reliable trend data can be taken. It is recommended that the aerial beaver colony counts be continued toprovide index to population fluctuations from year to year: an Prepared by:__ W..;.;..,;;i;;;.;ll;;,;;i_am_;;;.;H;;.;;,._R.....;..;.,;u_th.;.,;e;;,;;rf;;.;;.;;.o;.;..rd,;;;;;. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan .Federal Aid Coordinator Date: _.;;;..J.;;;;an:::.u;;;;a;;;.:ry::...L...l!_.;:.;19;;..;5;;..;7~ _ "]I ��Ifiiiiil~jlli' BDOW022150 -31- January, 195.7 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS ~teof.~ ~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O~ _ ProjectNo. VV~-~8_3_-_R~-_3 ~_B~e_av_e_r~In~v_e_s_t_~~a_t_i_o~n_s ~------------------ VVorkPlanNo. V~I __~~~B~ea~v~e~r~C~e~n~s~u~s-T~ec~h~n~i-q~u_e_s~ __J_ob~N~o~.~~8~ Title of Job: Refinement of Cenus Techniques Objectives: To determine the number of beavers occupying winter colonies. Procedure: The previous two years work on census techniques has developed the need for a broad samplefzemrrany ecological types which can be statistically analyzed as a basis for determining the average number of beavers per winter colony over the state. With this goal in mind, project personnel have collected data from certain beaver colonies over the state, by live- and steel - trapping during the fall after beavers have-concentrated in colony centers for the coming winter. To date, the only sources of such data have been trapping operations carried out by, or under the control of, project personnel. Anytime that reliable data can be secured from state or private trappers, such data will be included; thus far, however, these trappers have not concentrated upon the removal of entire colonies, which is absolutely necessary for reliable data. It is recognized that a comparatively large sample will be necessary for statistical analysis. The existing sample is inadequate for such analysis; therefore, the data will be presented as such. It is planned that this job will be continued over a period of several years, with the annual addition of as many beaver colonies as possible. C><:) ._ Cl, o(J Q '::t. <S"-- Findings: Table 1, immediately following, presents the accumulated data, to date, on numbers of beavers in various colonies . _ �-3~~ Table 1. -- .,Nu.medc,a.LComEosition of 17 Beaver Colonies in Various Habitats. Altitude Year Trapping Major food No. of history beavers. Stream feet, est. sEecies traEEed Williams Fork R. Williams Fork R. Willow Willow Lost Creek Willow Lost Creek Willow Lost Creek Willow N. Platte River Aspen Aspen N. Platte River Aspen N. Platte River N; Platte River Aspen Aspen N. Platte River N. Platte River Water Lily Nutras Creek Willow Nutras Creek Willow Nutras Creek Willow Little Muddy Cr. Willow E. Troublesome Cr. Willow .E. Troublesome Cr. Willow 9,000 8,800 1954 1954 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 .10,500 10,500 10,500 8,500 9,000 9,000 1954 1954 1954 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1956, 1956 1956 untrapped trapped previous year; new colony untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped 7 4 4 76 10 7 8 untrapped 3 untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped untrapped 11 7 3 5 9 4 6 3 Average number of beavers per colony: 6.1 Prepared Date: by: William H. Rutherford Approved by: ~J.;;.;;an;;;;;.u;;;;;.a;.;.;r;..oy.,...;;;.;19;..;5;..;7~ _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ( �-33January, 1957 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT DEVELOPMENT-- 1956 &ateof. ~C~O~L~O~RA~~D~O~ ProjectNo. VVorkPlan No. Title of Job: _ VV~-~5~9_-~D_-~8~ __VV~il~d~1~il~e~H~ab~1~·t_a~t~bn~p~r~o~v~e~m~e~n~t _ 1 Job No. 1 --------~--------~--~~~~------------------------------Establishment of Food, Nesting and Cover Plots Note: This report is a part of and additional to the report of July, 1956numbered pages 103-105 of the July Quarterly. Objectives: To plan and supervise the planting and establishment of seventy-five wildlife plantings on the plains of eastern Colorado; to supervise maintenance and protection of plots planted in previous years; to plan and supervise advance work on plantings on Btate-owned lands in 1957;to plant State-owned lands with woody or herbaceous cover and food plots in order to assure maximum wildlife benefits. Procedures and Results: Forty-one plantings were made with cooperators of former years in order to get their old plantings in better shape and in establishing new cover plantings. These wildlife planting s were those which had been carefully screened in order to assure an established planting in an area where it was felt a wfldlife planting would accomplish the most· insofar as wildlife was concerned. Seven state-owned properties were planted with woody and herbaceous cover type plantings. Approximately 160 plantings were made in cooperation with Soil Conservation Dist.rIcts, mainly in eastern Colorado. These plantings were mainly of the farmstead-windbreak type; five rows, with shrubs ~n one side and evergreen species on the other, the remainder of the planting comprised of taller trees. It was felt that our supervision on design would make up for the loss in location insofar as wildlife benefits were concerned. The planting') were destgnedso that wildlife could rlerive the maximum in food and cover. Due to lack of interest by Soil Conservation District members in planting field windbreaks (only five percent), we have plantings mainly around farm buildings. All plans submitted to project technicians by Soil Conservation Service personnel, were inspected in order that the maximum good for wildlife as regards to food and cover would be followed. ( The drout h which has plagued the high plains for the last several years continued through 1956. For example: Burlington, in Kit Carson County, had six inches of precipitation in 1956compared to a 40 year average of 17 inches. These figures held true for most of the area in which planting took place. Thus, it is easy to see that as long as the drouth continues, the establishment of seedlings is severely restricted. �ry,1 (•. :I_~- -34- . state-owned plantings were made on: Cobb Lake, near Wellington; Two Buttes near Springfield; Ryan's Ponds near Rocky Ford; Bonny Dam in Yuma County; Las Animas Hatchery; Wray Hatchery; and the west portion of the Smith property near Crook was planted, but the bulk of the planting was delayed for a year due to lack of moisture in the area. The ground was fallowed again in the hopes that 1957would provide more moisture and thus insure better survival and growth. Seedlings were received from private nurseries by the middle of March. All planting was completed by May 1 by the Game and Fish Department personnel as well as the Soil Conservation District members. SUMMARYOF 1956 PLANTINGS Seedlings (Game and Fish Cooperators) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seedlings (Game and Fish Property) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seedlings (Soil Conservation Districts) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T~~ ------------- 28,437 5,436 115,767 149,640 Herbaceous plantings (Game and Fish Property) - 455 pounds of clover, sand love, blue stem, millet and blue grama. 1956--SEEDLINGS PURCHASED, HEELED - IN AND USED SPECIES ~. scoEulorum P. pine Blue spruce Olive Squawbush S. elm Hackberry Lilac' Caragana Cottonwood Plum Sandcherry Dropmore elm PURCHASED 35,000 23,000 32,650 6,000 POTTED OR HEELED -IN 9,779 17,940 13,320 856 3,000 4,579 .. 116 . 10,000 61 7,000 350 787 TOTAL 9,779 17,940 13,320 35,856 26,000 32,650 10,579 116 10,000 61 7,000 350 787 PLANTED 9,779 17,940 3,320 35,856 25,963 31,173 10,579 116 9,766 61 4,150 150 787 SURPLUS 10,000 37 1,477 234 2,850 200 Ten thousand p.otted blue spruce are still available. Three hundred elm and two hundred sandcherry were given to the Fish and Wildlife rabbit repellent research division in Denver leaving a total loss of 4,298 seedlings or a handling loss of 2. 8 percent. �-35Table 1 gives the names, counties, legal descriptions, seedlings planted on Game and Fish Cooperators. numbers and species of Table 2 gives the name, county, numbers and species of woody plants and grass species and weight in pounds of plantings made on state-owned properties. Table 3 is a summary by districts Districts during 1956. Table 4 is a listing plantingsin 1956. of Individualfand of the plantings locations made in Soil Conservation by districts of those making TABLE 1. . COLORADO COOPERATORS CODE NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 L4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NAME Adolph, c. Amen, D. Beck, L. Bond, Larry Buol, Kermit Buol, Kermit Buol, Martin Cox, Dave Dudden, R. Jr. Dudden, R. Sr. Exberg, Harry Gergen, Paul Graves, Bros. Harper, Lorin Henzelman, R. Hockstraaser , H. Hutchins, C. Jacobson, O. Jones, AI. Knapp, T. C. Oliver, M. Patterson, C. Paulter', Art. Pavel, E. Penney, G. Raddutz, O. Reed, Vic. Roth, R. W. COUNTY Kit Carson Logan . Cheyenne Weld Kit Carson Kit Carson Kit Carson Washington Phillips Phillips Yuma KiLCarson Larimer Larimer Lincoln Morgan Larimer Larimer Kit Carson Kit Carson Phillips Kit Carson Kit Carson Kit -Carson Kit Carson Logan Weld Cheyenne LOCATION R. 45 W., T. 8 S., Sect. 8 . R. 49 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 21 . R. 43 W., T, 16 S., Sect. 20 . R. 64 W., T. 5 N., Sect, 15 , R. 43 W.• T. 8 S. , Sect. 19. R. 44 W., T. 8 S. , Sect. 24 R. 44 W., T. 8 S. , Sect. 24 R 54 W. , To 4 N., Sect. 21 R. 43 W., T. 9 N. , Sect. 22 R. 43 W., T. 9N. , Sect. 14 R. 43 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 15 R. 43 W., T. 7 S. , Sect. 33 R. 69 W., T. 4 N. , Sect. 9 R. 69 W., T. 4 N., Sect. 33 R. 56 W., T. 7 S., Sect. 12 So. Platte River R. 56 W., T. 6 N., Sect. 28 R. 56 W., T. 6 N., Sect. 28 R. 49 W., T. 8 S., Sect. 14 R. 43 W., T. 5 S. , Sect. 34 R. 45 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 10 R. 44 W., T. 8 S., Sect. 36 R. 46 W., T. 8 S., Sect. 27 R. 44 W., T. 9 S., Sect. 27 R. 43 W., T. 9 S., Sect. 3 R. 52 W., T. 12 N., Sec. 24 R. 43 W., T. 13 S. , Sect. 20 �33 -36( Table 1--Colorado Cooperators-Continued. CODE COUNTY NAME No. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Salyard, E. Schierman, H. Scott" R. Shultz, Phil Smithburg, H. Soehner, L. O. Stone, Swanda, C. Thompson, M. Tollmen, H. Weidman, George Wheeler, R. Young, G. Sedgwick Kit Carson Kit Carson Phillips Lincoln Yuma Logan Larimer Phillip Larimer Kit Carson Weld Logan LOCATION , R. 47 W" R. 46 W., R. 42 W., R. 43 W., R. 53 W., R. 47 W., T. 10 N., Sect. 27 T. 9 S. , Sect. 8 T. 8 S., Sect. 28 T. 6 N., Sect. 6 T. 9 S., Sect. 34 T. 4 S., Sect. 19 R. 69 W., R. 43 W., R. 68 W., R. 44 W., R. 67 W., R. 49 W., T. 5 N., Sect. 10 T. 6 N., Sect. 17 T. 4 N., Sect. 35 T. 7 S., Sect. 17 T. 8 N., Sect. 31 T. 11 N., Sect. 31 �G.iIl'E AND FlSH Table 1 DEPARTM&NT COOmRATORS 'SEBDLINGS Code 'No.,· 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 J,~ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 PLAN'lED Olive 33 100 375 34 2 660 660 26 15 100 35 13 11 50 14 87 38 21 50 35 100 51 53 100 ].50 150 36 208 39 30 14 35 35 Plum. 10 14 84 38 20 50 ].50 35 670 670 880 880 15 62 140 56 20 69 35 61 68 81 55 150 118 64 81 100 300 149 50 53 175 263 100 200 100 4000 100 200 138 17 100 800 150 104 86 110 60 . 104 37 100 200 61 160 100 650 650 .S.· E'lm Hack 9 23 47 Lilac Cottonwood 1 38 23 675 675 7 100 150 1000 50 150 50 150 50 lSo· 15 100 48 60 ~. 115 78 295 70 90 75 250 150--Sandcherry Total 9 50 151 1035 '237 229 530 200 3535 3535 71 361 285 535 550 6500 200 535 321 168 150 240 171 76 327 297 865 519 100 396 176 100 890 I c..:> -:J I :~"~ i~ �(.,,, ;;'.n GAME AND FISH TABIE 10 DEPARTME!NT COOPERATORS SEEDLINGSPLA.NTED Continued:t: Code Noo 3 3S 36 37 38 39 ho 41 Olive So Plum SoElm 100 So So 200 12S 700 300 ~o 397 1279 100 Totals 300 .'3S 29 200 31 1300 49 100 170 1645 170 . 2918 200 9269 l340 Hack Lilac Cottonwood Total 116 61 200 2S0 900' 2160 149 300 1030 _. Sandcherry ISO 100 100 40 1366 ~o.. 46 2150 I Grand Total _"",\ 28,437 c.:I 00 » �36 -39TABLE 2. STATE LAND PLANTINGS SEEDLINGS PLANTED Name County Juniper Bonny .. Dam Yuma . Cobb Lake Larimer Las Animas Hat. Bent Smith Prop. Logan Two Buttes Baca Wray Hatch. Yuma TOTAL P. Pine Olive 600 Caragana Squaw S. Elm 100 175 100 250 485 240 50 10 Ryan Ponds Otero '- 118 168 Total 975 787 50 1762 100 340 91 151 Dropmore Elm 242 441 1023 1010 300 100 100 500 357 1837 200 • 767 1526• 566 100# Yellow Blossom Sweet Clover 100# Mixture Rye, Millet, Sweet Clover 250# Mixture Bluestem, Blue Grama 5# Sand Love 787 Grand Total 5436 �.~ F;~j .TABIE 3 SUMMARY _ OF SOIL CONSKRVATION DISTRICTS PLANTINGS FOR 1956 Soil Conservation Dist .• Akron Big Sandy Big Thompson Black Squirrel Branson-Trinchera Cope East Adams Hale Horse Rush Haxtun N .E. Prowers N. s. Yuma Padroni Peetz Rock Creek Sedgwick So. Platte S.E.We14 Spanish Peaks Teller Upper Arkansas West Adams West Greeley West Rp\lttTOTAL BY SmCES ~-_" HackJuni r 12 0 200 150 50 150 500 600 500 125 650 BoB 300 325 1100 350 400 25 150 Pond. pine 1000 500 325 500 500 2116 ·1500 400 1500 2000 500 500 1000 50 100 50 67B 600 100 5.00 30 Olive 1 00 2000 2000 500 ,500 1000 2000 1600 800 1500 2000 3000 600 600 1000 600 600 250 1000 1500 50 100 75 125 100 350 125 250 600 300 350 ~50 ~9B3 1~B54 ]jBO 2~750 ~ .. Plum So .Elm . ber 600 1600 300 1000 1900 2800 2000 50 100 2000 1200 2100 300 2500 1000 1300 1300 1000 1000 50 500 600 1200 200 3700 1500 800 600 800 3000 800 600 1000 2300 1000 1100 1000 1300 2500 700 1000 200 400 1000 800 1000 400 600 300 300 600 300 350 400100 100 300 25Q .250.. 2~950 ~300 11~767 Boo 300 J.20 - 2~750 SOOO 3,92B 3,900 1;305 2,550 3,700 1,750 500 1,175 1.700 1400 300 ~200 1200 1200 200 500 Total 10,0 0 6,500 4,150 1,975 4,:If00 6,900 9,476 7,000 3,525 9,650 5,700 11,208 3,700 4,375 l.. 6,950 l' �-41~ COOPERATORS··· Name All V'OJ1 SC]) Alexander, Bruce Cooper, Leslie Elliott, Emerson Ericson, Francis Esken, sui Esken, Mrs .. James Fay, Phillip Fletcher, A. J. Emerson, Ivan Fender, A. K~ Gebauer, Alferd Hanna, Earl Hayes, Allan Hendricks , Joe Hendricks, John Henry, Roy Klassen, Carl Knutzen, F. E. Kuntz, Ed. Resler, Irven Resler, Leslie Walters, - Ray Walton, Bernard Walton, Glen R. 52 W. T. 2 N. Sect. 22, NW 1/4 R. 54 W., T. 1 N., Sect. 12, S 1/2 R. 52 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 9" SE 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 2 N. Sect. 19, NW 1/4 R. 51 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 18, S 1/2 R. 51 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 7, NE 1/4 R. 51 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 15, NE 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 11, NW 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 2, N 1/2 R. 50 W., T. 2 N., Sect. 3, SW 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 1 N., Sect. 8, N 1/2 R. 52 W., T. 1 N., Sect. 9, NW 1/4 R. 49 W., T. 2 N. Sect. 28, NE 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 2 N. Sect. 28, W 1/2 R. 52 W., T. 1 N. Sect. 4, NW 1/4 Black Squirrel SCD McCelland, 'J. E. Roid, Bill Washburn, A. E. ,R. 63 W., T. 12 S. Sect. 11 ,R. 64 W., T. 13 S., Sect. 10 R. 62,W; T. 14 S., Sect. 20 Brans on- Trinchera Cummins, Walt Doherty, J. L. Doherty; J. L. Friyell, Harry Hudson, Fred Hudson, R. E. Kirkpatrick, R. Miyer, Bill Newcomb, Jr. Salas, Onimaso Smith, Excel Steinferd, Ken. Sumpter, Howard Waldroup, Bill Waller, Laddie R. 55 W., R. 53 W., R. 50 W., R. 52 W., R. 50 W., R. 50 W., R. 51 W., R. 53 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 12, NE 1/4 T. 1 S., Sect. 19, S 1/2 T. 2 N., Sect. 6, NW 1/4 T. 1 N. Sect. 6" NW 1/4 T. 1 S., Sect. 7, SW 1/4 T. l. S" Sect. 17, NE 1/4 T. 1 N., Sed. 13, W 1/2 T. 1 N., Sect. 1, NE 1/4 R. 58 W., T. 33 S., Sect. 14, NW 1/4 R. 56 W., T. 35 S. , 'SeCt. 8, NW 1/4 R. 57 W., T. 32 S., Sect. 35, SE 1/4 R. 57 W., T. 32 S., Sect. 21, NE 1/4 R. 57 W., T. 30 S., Sect. 31 R. 58 W., T. 34 S., Sect. 5 ,R. 51 W., T. 33 S., Sect. 29 R. 52 W. T. 30 S., Sect. 19 R. 59 W., T. 32 S., Sect. 3, NE 1/4 R. 60 W., T. 35 S., Sect. 14, NW 1/4 R. 51 W.,T. 33 S., Sect. 3 R. 56 W., T. 33 S. , Sect. 5, SE 1/4 R. 57 W., T. 33 S., Sect. 31, SW 1/4 R. 57 W., T. 30 S., Sect. 35 �39 -42CooEerators-continued. Name Cope SCD Cecil, H. L. Cecil, Jack Dobrinki, Roger Glenn, H. A. Jackson, Dorman McBeth, Ray McKie, Ray Montgomery, Guy Norris, Clare Reser, E. A. Shook,Dillon Thoma, Olen Thorson, Leon Vaughn, Roy Wagner, Ray Walters, Ray Young, Birdsall Zielke, Bill East Adams SCD Caldwell, Frank Causey, Clifford Cooper, Lee Englebrecht, Otto Freeman, Gene Jess, Russell Kerksiek, William Lindors, Howard Linnebur,. C. J. Montgomery," Eddie Neilsen, Ralph Price, Jim Rice, Vern Stroh, Jack Thornburg, Cranor Thornburg, Jim Trupp, Don Tupps, Harold Weddell, T. J. R. 49 W., T. 4 S. , "Sect. 11, NE 1/4 R.48W.,T.4S., Sect. 20, NW 1/4 R. 54 W., T. 5 S., Sect. 14, NW 1/4 R. 50 W., T. 5 S., Sect. 7, NW 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 3 N., Sect. 23, NW 1/4 R. 54 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 35, SW 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 3 N., Sect. 15, N 1/2 R. 53 W., T. 3 N., Sect. 15, N 1/2 R. 54 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 20 R. 52 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 33, SW 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 3 N., Sect. 24, SW1/4 R. 55 W., T. 4 S., Sect. 13, NE 1/4 R. 49 W., T. 5 S., Sect. 31, SW 1/4 R. 51 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 32, N 1/2 R. 53 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 2, N 1/2 R. 49 W., T. 2 N.• Sect. 28 R. 51 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 32, S 1/2 R. 51 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 21, E 1/2 ( R. 61 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 15, NE 1/4 R. 60 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 14, SW 1/4 R. 62 W., T. 3·S., Sect. 18, SW 1/4 R. 60 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 4, SE 1/4 R. 62 W., T. 4 S., Sect. 7, NE 1/4 R. 62 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 26, NW 1/4 R. 59 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 18, NW 1/4 R. 6,2W., T. 2 S.,' Sect. 13, NW 1/4 R. 59 W., T. 4 S;, Sect." 2 R. 62 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 24, NW 1/4 R. 60 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 19, NE 1/4 R. 62 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 28, SE 1/4 R. 57 W., T. 1 S., Sect. 24, NW 1/4 R. 63 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 24, SW 1/4 R. 63 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 20, SE 1/4 R. 63 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 9, SW 1/4 R. 64 W., T. 3 S., Sect. 14, SW1/4 ' ' �-43Coo2erators :- continued. Name Ha S .lJ Akey, Clifford Alison, Steve Bagley, Darrell Jones, Raywood Like, Clifford Obrien, Bob Reitmeyer, Herman Stattsworth; W. Stults, Clarence Stul ts, Oscar Yenter, Ted Zion, Gerald Ze- ( Haxtun SCD Allen, Annie Atkins, Lyle Eckman; Orville Firme, 'Harold Franson, R. Freemyer, F. Fryrear, Co J. Garretson, Alvy Ham, Winston Heginbotham, M. Hinde, Bob Heasling, Clinton Klitz, ,AI. Korell, D. J. Kurtzer, Bob Kurtzer, ' Gene Lambert, Henry Mailander, Leo McConnel , Harold Meakins, Chase Morrill, Ken Nelson, Earle Nimme , R. T. Olson, Claud Rhodes, John Sagehorn, H. Salvador, Bill Shannep, True Smidt, Ernest Starkibaum, L. Thomas, LeRoy ,Wagner, Edwin Wernsman, J. o R. 47 W., TIS., Sect. 36, NW 1/4 R. 46 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 13 R. 46 W., T. 2 S., Sect. 1, E 1/2 R. R. R. R. R. R. R. 43 W., 43 W., 47 W., 45 W., 44 W., 42 W., 44 W., T. T. T. T. T. T. T. 5 S. , Sect. 5 So, Sect. 4 S., Sect. 1 N., Sect. 1 S., Sect. 5 S., Sect. 4 S., Sect. 26 4, SE 1/4 24, SE 1/4 32, S 1/2 20, NE 1/4 17, NE 1/4 5, SE 1/4 R. 48 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 34, SE 1/4 R., 46 W., T. 7 N. , Sect. 16 R. 46 W., T. 8N. , Sec. 11, SE 1/4 R. 48 W., T. 9 N. Sect. 32, SW 1/4 R. 47 W., T. 5 N., Sect. 5, SE 1/4 R. 46 W., T. 6 N., Sect. 16, SW 1/4 R. 46 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 19, SE 1/4 R. 47 W., T. 5 N., Sect. 14, N 1/2 R.44W., T. 6 N., Sect. 18, S 1/2 R. 48 w., T. 6 N., Sect. 23, SW 1/4 R. 44 W., T. 6 N., Sect. 5, N 1/2 R. 45 W., T. 7 N., Sect. 17, SE 1/4 R. 45 W., T. 7 N. Sect. 10, NE 1/4 R. 46 W., T. 6 N., Sect. 3, NW 1/4 R. 46 W., T. ,,6 N., Sect. 5" RW 1/4 R. 48 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 21; NE 1/4 R. 46 W., T. 7 N., Sect. 36, SW 1/4 R. 47 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 8, N 1/2 R. 48 W., T. 9 N. , Sect. 33, NW 1/4 R. 48W., R. 48 W., R. 47 W., R. 46 W., R.44W., R. 46 W., R. 47 W., R. 44 W., R. 46 W., R. 48W., R. 46 W., T. T. T. T. T. T. T. T. T. T. T. Sect. 19, SE 1/4 Sect. 35, N 1/2 Sect. 2, SE 1/4 Sect. 28, SE 1/4 Sect. 15, NE 1/4 Sect. 10, SW 1/4 Sect. 24, SE 1/4 Sect, 2, SW 1/4 7 N" Sect. 5, NE 1/4 8 No, Sect. 7, S 1/2 7 N., Sect. 5, NE 1/4 7 N." 9 N., 8 N., 9 N., 7 N., 5 N., 8 N., 8 N., �111 __ ~_:t•.• -44Cooperators-continued. Name Horse Rush SCD No planting plans available ( N. E. Prowers SCD No planting plans available N. E. Yuma SCD Blecha, Harry Bledsoe, Henry Brady, Robert Brophy, T. E. Brown, . Cecil Conrad, Kenneth Doyle, Bacil Gelvin, Ray Harmen, Everett Hodges and Sons Jeurink, G. Kerst, Bernard Larreau, Joe Miller, A. R. Peterson, C. H. Veal,· Ira Wi1Jiiams, J .. A. Padroni and Peetz SCD Beahm, Orley Budin, Paul Cave, Harold Dickinson, Don Dickinson, ·W. E. Donahue, Wm. Eller, Wm. Fairchild, H. Fehringer; Don. Fehringer, George Fehringer, Walt Felzien, Ira Frasco, Charles Fritzle.r, Bob Graham, Wm. Karg, Albert Kloberdang, F. Korrey, George R. 44 W., R. 44 W., R. 45 W., R. 40 W., R. 44 W., R.46W., R. 42 W., R. 45 W., R. 43 W., R.42W., R. 44 W., R. 42 W., R. 45 W., R. 43 W., R. 44 W., R. 45 W., R. 42 W., T. 4 N. , Sect. 23, NE 1/4 T. 3 N. , Sect. 13, SW 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 23, SE 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 17 T. 3 N., Sect. 21, SW 1/4 T. 2 N., Sect. 2, SE 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 21, NW 1/4 T 2 N., Sect. 10, SE 1/4 T. 5 N., Sect. 7, NE 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 5, NE 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 28, SE 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 19, NE 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 23, NW 1/4 T. 4 N. , Sect. 22, SW 1/4 T. 5 N., Sect. 28, NE 1/4 T, 3 N., Sect. 12, NW 1/4 T. 5 N., Sect. 31, Nw-1/4 R. 55 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 2, NE 1/4 R. 49 W., T. 11 N., Sect. 16, SW 1/4 R. 52 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 12, W 1/2 R. 56 W., T. 8 N., Sect. 34, S 1/2 R. 52 W., R. 52 W., R. 52 W., R. 51 W., R. 55 W., T. 12 N., Sect. 26 T. 12 N. Sect. 25 T. 11 N., Sect. 2, NE 1/4 T. 6 N., Sect. 21 T. 8 N., Sect. 10 R. 51 W., T. 8 N. Sect. 4 R. 53 W" T. 6 N., Sect. S R. 51 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 8 { ( �-45- CooEerators-continued. Name Padroni and Peetz SCD -continued. Lebsack, Paul Meisner, Alec Morn, Richard Reihe, Vi;,gil Schell, John Smith, Floyd Weigel, Pat 52 W., T, 8 N., 57 W., T. 9 N., 52 W., T. 8 N., 54W., T. 9 N., Sect. 5, S 1/2 Sect. 13, SE 1/4 Sect. 9, W 1/2 Sect. 19, SW 1/4 R. 49 W., T. 10 N., Seet. 10, SE 1/4 R. R. R. R. R. Sect. Sect. Sect. Sect. Sect. R. R. R. R. Rock Creek SCD Banks, John Bowland; Norris Boyer, L. Burns, Joe Campbell, Alene Conrad; Dick Corman, Carl Dressel, Floyd Erhman, Bill Gebauer, Charles Hansen; Ernest Hansen,' Vern Harms, .James Hodges, J. C. Holtorf, ,John Hueske, John Johnson, Orville McKie, Ray Preston, Cecil Reid, Fritz' Roys, Sam Souser, C: Stephens, Richard Strand, Art. Tramp, William Winters, Ed, R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. Sedgwick SCD Buaerle, Albert Deckert, R. E. Evans, Charles R. 43 W., T. 10 N., Sect, 15. NE 1/4 R. 47 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 13, SW 1/4 R. 47 W_., T. 9 N. Sect. 9, NE 1/4 49 W., T. 3 N., 51 W., T. 4 N., 50 W., T. 5 N., 52 W., T. 3 N., 52 W.; T. 4 N., R. 50 W., T. 4 N., 51 W., 51 W., 50W., 50 W., 50 W., 50 W., 52 W., 51 W" 51 W., 52 W., 51 W., 51 W., 51 W., 50 W" 51 W., 50 W., 54 W., 51 W., 12, SE 1/4 11; NE 1/4 2, SE1/4 34, NW 1/4 17, NE 1/4 Sect. 33, NW 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 21, SE 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 9, SW1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 34, NW 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 24, NE 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 27, 'SE'1/4 T. 5 N.• Sect. 18, NW1/4 T. 5 N., Sect. 34, SE 1/4 T. 4 N, Sect. 12 T. 5 N., Sect. 33, SE 1/4 T. 3 N., Sect. 15, NW 1/4 T, .5 N., Sect. 36, SW ~/4 T. 4 N., Sect; 17, N 1/2 T, 5 N., Sect. 6.. SW 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 8, NW 1/4 T. 5 N" Sect. 36, SE 1/4 T. 4 N., Sect. 4, NE 1/4 T. 5 N., Sect. 9 SW 1/4 T. 5 N. Sect. 27, SE 1/4 �-46Cooperators-continued Name Sedgwick SCD Fulscher, Max Hiatt, Lon Ingwer son, J. Johnson, J. Johnson, Ray Kinnie, L. Matoush, Dick Munson, Layton Ness, Emil Race, Ed. Ricker, J. C. .Roos, Richard Schuler H. A. Shold, Lloyd Sitton, Fred 9 R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. . R. R. R. 43 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 16, NW 1/4 44 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 2, SW 1/4 43 W., T. 12 N, Sect. 29, NW 1/4 45 W., T. 10 N., Sect. 8, NE 1/4 45 W., T. 11 N., Sect. 3, SE 1/4 44 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 8, NE 1/4 43 W. T. 11 N., Sect. 28, NW 1/4 46 W., T. 10 N., Sect. 8, NW 1/4 43 W., T. 11 N., Sect. 4, SW 1/4 45 W., T. 9 N. Sect. 8, E 1/2 46 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 14, SE 1/4 46 W., T. 9 N., Sect. 9, E 1/2 43 W., T. 9 N. Sect. 8, NE 1/4 46 W., T. 9 N., Sect; 14, SW 1/4 46 W., T. ri N., Sect. 32, NW 1/4 So. Platte SCD No Planting Plans Available ( .s, E. Weld SCD Hoff, Wm. She 1ton, Ray.· R. 63 W., T. 2 N., R. 61 W, T. 1 N., Spanish Peaks SCD Abeyta, Mila Arazon, Tobias Blasi, Alex Cusimano, Pete Doyle, .Leo ... Fefste.r 'Brothers Grosso, Martin Jack, Cleo Masch, John McCollough, W. L. McDonald Bros. Porter, Bill Powell, AI. Robinson, AI. Thompson, H. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. R. 66 W., 62 W., 64 W., 66 W., 65 W., 68 W., 65 W.; 67 W., 68 W., 66 W., 67 W., 67 W., 67 W., 67 W., 67 W., Sect. 21, E 1/2 Sect. 7 .NE1/4 9 T. 31 N.• Sect. 10, NE 1/4 T. 32 N. , Sect. 4, SE 1/4 T. 33 N. , Sect. 27, NE 1/4 T. 31 N., Sect. 18 T. 30 N., Sect. 26, SE 1/4 T. 31 N., Sect. '25 . T. 33 N., Sect, 34, S 1/2 T" 31 N. Sect. 26, S 1/2 T. 31 N. Sect. 22, N 1/2 T. 31 N. Sect. 15, SW 1/4 T. 32 N. Sect. 26 T. 32 N., Sect. 34 T. 33 N. Sect. 9, N 1/2 T. 33 N. , Sect. 10, S 1/2 T. 32 N. , Sect. 5 �-47~ Cooperator s-continued Name No Planting Plans Available -- Teller Park SCD UpperArkansas SCD Adams, Albert Brooks, C. W. Button, F. E. Cameron, Danial Campbell, B. Carpenter, M. Cavaili, Pete Chisolm, D. Graff, Henry Hoover, R.. R. 78 W., T; 13 S. Sect. 31, NE 1/4 R. 80 W. T. 8 S., Sect. 33, SE 1/4 R. 78 W., T. 15 S., Sect. 4, SE 1/4 R. 79 W., T. 14 S., Sect. 26, NE i/4 R. 79 W., T. 12 S., Sect. 35, SW1/4 R. 8 E., T. 50 N., Sect. 22, SE 1/4 R. 80 W., T. 9 S., Sect. 32, NW1/4 R. 78 W., T. 14 S., Sect. 18, NW 1/4 R. 9 E. , T. 50 N. Sect. 31, SW 1/4, . R. 8 E., T. 49 N., Sect. 9, NW 1/4 West Adams No Planting Plans Available West Greeley SCD Brunner, Fred Emeson, Bros. Lend, H. F. Warreal, R. R. 67 W., R. 66 W., R. 67 W., R. 61 W., T. 7 N., Sect. 26, S 1/2 '. T. 4 N. Sect. 1, S 1/2 T. 7 N. Sect. 23, SE 1/4 T. 10 N., Sect. 6, NE 1/4 Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator' West Routt SCD Acherman, F. Fulton, Charles James, M. Murphy, Home'r Signs, Wes Smith, Wayne Williams·, V" . Wright, Bill Big Sandy SCD No Planting Plans Available. Big Thompson SCD No Planting Plans Available Submitted by F. A. Metsger Richard Takes Date ~J~an~u~a~r~y~,_1~9~5~7 _ ��·1~~llllli'BDOW022152 ijl~'llil~jrllI11[im~~~lil]illllijll 6:·5 -~ -49January, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT -- 1956 State of;..._ C.;;..O=L:..;;O..;;;RA=D;._O~ _ Project No. _ __;.W;...-...;;5;..;;9_-..;;;D;_-...;;8 _ _.._W~i;;;;.;ld;;;;1_if;..;;e....;H;.;;.;.;.;ab;;.;i;.;;.t;...at",-=Im~p;...ro.;;..v..;..e;;;.;;m. _ Work Plan No.1· Job: No. 2 ----------------_..;..~~~-------------------------------- Title of Job :.__-=E~v.:::a;;.;lu::.:a::.:t;.:.io;;.:n:=..;:o.=,.f...:P:...;l:;::a=n.:::ti:.:;ng:l:l·~s....;(~SU=r..:.v.=,.iv;_;;a;; _ Objectives: To determine survival of seedlings planted from 1949 through 1955 and to classify each planting in a group to show condition of planting area. Procedures and Results: A completion report for the years 1949 through 1954 was completed and 1949 through 1954 was completed and submitted in 1955. This report will be concerned with plantings made in 1955. It is felt that a two year growing season interval should be maintained to secure a more accurate figure. Five years after a planting has been made another check will be made to ascertain survival. Thus, for the years 1949 through 1953, with a survival check having been made in 1955, no intensive survival count will be made until 1960. In this manner a staggered method of computing will be followed in order to even out the work load. Since each planting is visited and a total count of seedlings on the area counted; it is clear that a total count every year would pyramid until the task would be impossible. All plantings made in 1955 were visited and seedlings on the area counted. A classification of six groups was established and all plantings (1955) were included. The six classifications are listed below. Photographs of each classification appear later in report. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Good growth with clean cultivation between rows and seedlings. Good growth with clean cultivation between rows. Cultivation between rows; but they are suppressed due to poor care and drouth. No cultivation, little care, suppressed seedlings. No seedlings left but plot has not been returned to regular farm practices. No seedlings left. Plot returned to regular farm practices. Table 2 shows survival by species for all seedlings planted during 1955. The approximate number of seedlings planted during this period on Game and Fish cooperators and State-owned land was 33,147. The sample used in the survival figures was 24,801, or approximately 75 percent. �-50( The survival classification Table 1. by species was ascertained (Table 1). Summary of plantings Group I Group II Group III Group IV Group V GrouE VI Totals by an actual count and was based on our group by classification groups 10 Cooperators 4 Cooperators 31 .Cooperators 12 .Cooperators 4 Cooperators 1 .CooEerators 62 Cooperators for all plantings made in 1955. 16% of Total 6% of Total 50% of Total 20% of Total 6% of Total 2% of Total 100% TABLE 2. SURVIVAL BY SPECIES AND GROUP Group 1. Species Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squaw. Plum S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Total Seedl.ing s Planted 690 218 572 638 724 Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Seedling Alive 145 76 475 530 408 509 200 348 120 69% 60% 378 304 80% 50 25 50% 50 4,029 10 2,441 20% 60% 200 350 . 65 70 50 55 35% 14% 85% 480 260 20 400 185 15 83% 71% 75% Group Total Percentage 21% 35% 83% 83% 57% n ~-- 1,375 775 56% Survival ( �-51- Table 2-continued. Grou Species Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Total .Seedling Planted ill Seedling Alive Percentage 1983 1739 1505 510 403 815 26% 23% 54% 2477 710 2720 690 205 400 23 1361 390 1475 375 55 178 10 55% 55% 54% 54% 27% 45% 44% 50 30 60% 12,502 5,602 45% 200 940 1245 40 135 385 20% 16% 31% 1525 490 32% 1000 100 440 35 44% 35% 200 50 25% 5,210 1,575 30% GrouEJV Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Total --- Survival �-52= Table 2-continued SEecies Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Total SEecies Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Total GrouE V and VI Seedling Plaited Seedling Alive 70 0 160 0 0 425 10 0 0 130 270 20 0 0 600 0 1,685 0 Total Planted 3143 3407 3812 :648 5336 710 4759 1030 205 1578 23 50 50 50 24,801 Total Alive 765 664 1730 530 2659 390 2448 545 55 532 10 25 30 10 10,393 Percentage Survival Overall % Survival 24% 19% 45% 83% 50% 55% 51% 54% 27% 34% 44% 50%·· 60% 20% 42% v. ( �-53- Summary: It is evident that with the more selective type of choosing cooperators the survival·of seedlings is improving. The drouth is a factor which cannot be measured, however, it is clear that in a normal precipitation year, the survival will be appreciably higher. Listed below is a comparison of 1955 percentage of cooperators with the 1949 through 1954 cooperators in each group. GROUP I II ill IV V VI 1949-1954 7.4% 14.7% 21. 9% 15.3% 16,5% 24.2% in each group compared 1955 16% 6% 50% 20% 6% 2% By the above comparison one can see that Groups V and VI in which there are no seedlings alive have decreased so that these groups which usually indicate poor cooperators are not too important a factor anymore. The overall survival percentage of seedlings for 1949 through 1954 was 17. 7%. The overall survival percentages of seedlings planted in 1955 was 42%. This indicates a definite trend upwards. It is felt that this figure might be even higher if optimum moisture conditions had occured. Prepared Date: ( by:__ F~. ..,;;A;..;;.;...• ...;;M...;;e.;;;.t~s.gr...;;e...;;r __;;A;.;;.!p!;,lp.:;.;;roved by:_-=L;;;:a;;;:u;;_re;;;.;n::;c;;.;e;_:;E:..; .......;;;_R;,=.io;;;.;r::.;d::;a;;;:n;;;._ _ Richard T. Takes Federal Aid Coordinator ___;J;;.;an=u;;,;;a;.;;;r-""y..l., ...;;1:,;;9....;;5...;,7 _ ��I~~~~'I~~'~(~l[l\ml~~~f~'I~~l I~\~'\ BDOW022153 -55January, 1957 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS ffiateof~ __ ~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O~ ProjectNo. _ \V~-~8~8~-~R~-~2~ ~~\V~at~e~rf~0~w~1~SU~r~v~e~y~s~an~d~In~v~e~s~tl.·g~a~t~i _ \Vork Plan No. 2 Job No. 2 ----------~~--~--~~~~----~-------------------------- Title of Job: Experimental Studies on Improving the Status of Canada Goose Populations in Colorado. Objectives: (1) Development and evaluation of techniques for initial establishment and/or increase of goose populations on all major drainages in the State. (2) Permanent establishment of resident goose flocks on all large water impoundments and major river systems as determined by the preliminary survey of goose nesting areas in the State. (3) Retention of resident and migrant goose flocks wintering in the State. Procedure: (1) Experimental releases of Canada goose goslings as nuclei for the establishment of resident breeding flocks on streams and lakes of suitable habitat ... (2) Establtshmentof captive.flocks as a source of gosifng supply, and where possible, artificial propagation and liberation experiments utilizing eggs 'collected from wild . . goose nests. ' ._ Nl (3) Formulation of measures designed to regulate fishing pressures in affording maximum protection for geese during the nesting season. as an aid e" () o '* C3"" (4) Recommendations for closure of restoration areas to goose hunting, where applicable, for a minimum period of two years following initial release. �S:1 ..... ......:..._ -56- Results; This report briefly summarizes the activities of Project personnel for 1957 in this phase of the work. It is broken down into three portions for presentation; (1) Check on the 1956 goose plant in the San Luis Valley; (2) planting activities for 1956; and (3) recommendations. Check on the 1956 Goose Plant in the San Luis Valley. In June of 1955, 16 Great Basin Canada Goose Goslings were trapped at Bowles Lake near Littleton, Colorado, and released on the Rio Grande Management Unit in the San Luis Valley. The activities of these birds during the summer and fall of 1955 have been given in a previous report, and will not h.e repeated here. During May of 1956, while conducting aerial breeding-pair studies in the San Luis Valley, some time was spent, searching the Rio Grande River bottom for these geese with no success. T~lking to local Wildlife Conservation Officers, it was determined that the geese were observed inthe locality of Mr. Louie Chadwell's ranch, and he reported they stayed in the marshes on his property until early January. From here they may have moved to Smith's Reservoir near Blanca, Colorado, where several hundred geese were observed to winter. However, no definite sight records were obtained. The next factural report of these geese was the sight observation of two geese with neck bands, red stripe on blue (the color put on the San Luis Valley geese) at Bowles . . Lake where they had been originally trapped. This observation was made in late June, and Mr. Dan Gallagher, who lives at the lake reported that after about a week they disappeared. One band return has been received from the 1955 plant in the San Luis Valley. This bird was killed November 8, 1956 about 10 miles south of Bounty, Saskatchewan, Canada. This may indicate that some of the birds joined migrating flocks of geese in the spring, and ended up in Canada. Apparently, the neck bands are wearing . good since the goose was reported with a neck band. During banding operations in July, 1956, some time was spent searching for any remaining birds in the San Luis Valley with no success. If some did remain, they were probably in the maze of marshes, and back-waters of the Rio Grande River where they would be yery difficult to find. Planting Activities for 1956 Two plants were undertaken in 1956 as follows: North Park. A total of 16 birds were captured on Bowles Lake, three miles west of Littleton, Jefferson County, Colorado, June 22, 1956; banded and released on Lake John, 10 miles west of Walden, Jackson County, Colorado. The band numbers, ( �-57age and sex were as follows: 508-27101 Loc F 02 Loc M 03 Loc F 04 Loc. M 05 Loc M 06 Loc F 07 Loc M 08 Loc F 508-27109 Loc F 10 Loc F 11 Loc M 12 Loc M 13 Loc M 14 Loc M 15 Loc F 16 Loc F These birds were observed periodically during the summer by waterfowl project. personnel. Reports from ranchers and other Game and Fish personnel as late as September 14, 1956, indicate from 14 to 16 birds were flying from Lake John to the Butte Lakes, to the North Platte River, staying periodically at all three places:. Numerous other sight records were received, and the local people were very happy with the presence of geese in North Park, The geese were observed occastonally during early October, and then disappeared with the Ire.eztng of North Park Waters. Two band returns were received from these 16 birds during the 1956hunting season (complete reports are not in, and more may have been taken). Both of these birds, band numbers 508-27103 and 106 were taken by the same man on November 16, 1956, three miles east of Walsenburg, on Martin Lake, Colorado. Both were still carrying their neck band of yellow stripe on red, the color assigned to North Park. The hunting' season for geese was closed in North Park for 1956, and it is anticipated that the Commission will again be requested to close the season in 1957 if the geese return, or if more birds are planted. . . San Luis Valley. In 1956, the Colorado Game and Fish Department purchased 38 goslings from Mr. Carl Strutz of Jamestown, North Dakota. These birds were transported on June 28, from Jamestown to the Russel Lakes in the Sari Luis Valley. One bird was lost enroute making a total of 37 b~.cEplanted. Band numbers placed on the 37 birds were 508-272484. Most of these birds were observed for approximately a week on the release site, but then they began to scatter to the small lakes and marshes which make up the Russel Lakes. Reports of geese were received from ranchers up to three and four miles away from the Russel Lakes. What apparently happened was that the birds s.plit up into several small bunches, since at least 20 remained constantly on several of the lakes in the Russel Lake group. These birds were observed consistently throughout the summer and a flock of 20 were observed on the Russel Lakes as late as the last week in October. Their fate after this time is not known. �-58The San Luis Valley was also closed to all goose hunting. during the 1956 season, and depending upon the activities of the birds and new transplants it will probably be recommended for closure again in 1957. Recommendations for 1957. As long as goslings are so difficult to acquire, it is recommended that the majority of birds obtained be planted iri the San Luis Va.lley . . and North Park. Depending upon the number of birds obtained for the 1957 season, it may be well to attempt an initial plant on Valmont Reservoir near Boulder, Colorado. ~.' At present, there are tentative plans by the Colorado Game and Fish Department to raise the~lev.el of water in Lake John by diking across a portion of the reservoir to improve fi~ing. This will affect only the west side leaving the east lake u~~· distuzbed. If these plans are carried through, . it has been recommended to Director Kimball and the Commission that the peninsula separating the two parts of Lake John be closed to all fishermen in order to preserve the east lake for waterfowl. If these plans do not materialize; 'then it is recommended that a predator-proof fence be constructed on the north end of the penisula to protect nesting geese and other waterfowl. No action can be taken until final plans of the Department are known. Since the captive breeding of flock located at Bonny Reservoir will probably not produce goslings this year due to the immaturity of the flock, it is recommended that geese again be purchased from Mr. Carl Strutz at Jamestown, North Dakota. This will undoubtedly be the last purchase from Mr. Strutz because our captive flock should begin production in 1958. Finally, it is recommended that as many goslings as possible be taken from Bowles Lake, and transplanted in either the San Luis Valley or North Park. Submitted by: Jack R. Grieb Approved by: Dare:..__~ J~an~u~a~ry~,_1~9~5~7 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �111~111111~'Illffl' 1111~1I11111nflill ~11111I111111~II BDOW022154 January, -59- 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Smteof~ C~O~L~O~R~A=D~O~ ~ _ Proj ect No. __ ...;.W.:..-_;9;..;0:;_-..;;R;.;.-..;2;.._....l-___;;E~v,;..;a;;.;;1;.;;;u;.;;;a.;.;ti;.;;0..;;;n;...0;.;f:;_t.;,;;h; t.;.;a.;..t ..;;Im~p;.;;r...;;o...;.v..;;e.;;;;m.;..e;. on Wildlife. Work Plan No. Title of Job: =-1 Mapping and Planimetering z...._..::.J..::.ob;;:;....::N~0:;.;:.~_.;;.3 -- of Study Areas Objectives: To determine agricultural land use patterns on all, study areas and analyze acreage data to show statistically Significant variations. Since agriculture affects a much greater portion of wildlife habitat than the development program, these land-use effects must be determined before .the effects of habitat development can be evaluated. ( Procedure: Base maps of all study areas were drafted from aerial photos for the 1955 surveys. These maps were copied and used for field survey work in 1956. In computing land-use acreages each section was planimetered separately. Th~ acreages involved in roads and roadside waste were computed, subtracted from 640. 0 and the remainder apportioned to the various land-uses in accordance with the ratio indicated by planimetering. Because many sections do not actually contain 640.0 acres, and because the secretaries hired to do the planimetering in 1955 and 1956 did not work exactly alike, it is apparent that this computation method precludes complete accuracy. It is felt however that computation based on a standard of 640. 0 acres is the most accurate method available without actually completing an engineering survey on each study area. Land-use data: Land classifications on all study areas were delineated in the following groups: small grains, fallow, sorghums, millet, pasture, corn, farmsteads (in many cases including shelterbelt tree plantings), waste (a classification which includes many areas not suitable for wildlife use), .road and railroad tread and miscellaneous (including small acreages of sugar.beets, beans, alfalfa, some shelterbelt tree plantings and all open water surfaces). Of these types, only the first six have been analyzed for the following report. ,The remaining four types are either being evaluated by another method or present analyses which cannot be interpreted. �-60Complete tables showing acreages of each land-use type by Sections will not he presented in this report. Such tables, because the most important relationship are brought out in the analysis tables, would consume an unreasonable amount of space without adding anything to the report. ( Analyses of Variance Two tests for each land-use type are presented. The first, a normal 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance with an unequal subclass in the Control group, does not test for the variation among areas classified according to Type of planting because such an analysis confounds planted and control area data. In additi()n, it has been noted that the unequal subclass introduces a cumulative error in the, analyses. This error is such that in the low acreages analyses the sums of squares removed by testing for Type and its interactions may be so large as to result in a negative sum of squares for some second and third order interactions;· The second analysis for each land-use type is a 3 x 3 x 2 Latin square involving only the study areas on which plantings are present. This test allows comparison of areas according to Type without confounding planted and control area data. Following each analysis of Variance table the means of the individual variates for which significance is indicated are listed and the "d" factors shown. This data requires no further comment because conclusions concerning agricultural land-use effects on pheasant populations will be made in a late!' report. ( SMALL GRAlNS- 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance deleting the Type factor and its interactions Source DF SS MS F TOTAL 467 5786472.40 Year 1 14783.07 14783.07 1. 29 Density 7..6876.93 2 38438.47 3.35* Location 308645.46 2 154322.73 13.45* DxY 2 1725.62 862.81 0.08 LxY' 5794.11' ' 2 2897.06 0.25 DxL 4 81156.17 20289.04 1. 77 DxLxY 4 132378.39 33094.60 2.88* Error 450 5165112.65 11478.03 Density means: 9 planting areas 6 planting areas Control areas 188.64 196.73 219.48 d-24.15 1. The mean acreage of wheat per Section is significantly higher on control areas than on 9 planting areas. I, �-61North Central South Location means: 1. The mean acreage study areas. d-24.15 225.77 . 211. 71 166.51 of wheat per Section is significantly DxLxY means: 9 plantings 6 plantings Controls North Central South North Central South North . Central South 1955 176.72 215.20 158.42 248.23 192.86 124.93 . 249.74 205.76 189.41 smaller 1956 202.66 205.53 173.31 215. 10 200.53 198.72 262.17 266.72 154.26 1. The mean acreage of wheat per Section on 6 planting South areas higher in 1956 as compared to 1955. SMALL GRAINS - 3 x 3 x 2 Latin sguare Analysis of Variance MS Source DF SS TOTAL 323 3849825.86 .Density 1 5296.60 5296.60 Year 1 14219.23 14219.23 Type 2 221185.23 110592.62 Location 137503.12 68751. 56 2 DxT 2 88155.78 44077.89 DxL 2 47756.37 23878.19 DxY 1 663.36 663.36 TxL 4 184063.79 46015.95 TxY 2 13759.06 6879.53 LxY 2 39240.73 19620.37 Dx Tx L 4 79455.36 19863.84 DxTxY 12026.80 2 6013.40 TxLxY 4 35426.85 8856.71 DxLxY 2 48338.45 24169.23 DxTxL,xY 4 71428.39 17857.10 Error 288 2851306.74 9900.37 Type means: Evergreen areas Deciduous areas Mixed areas 224.30 160.31 193.43 d-26.55 on the southern d- 65.59 is significantly F 0.53 1. 44 11. 17** 6.94** 4.45** 2.41 0.07 4.65** 0.69 1. 98 2.01 0.61 0.89 2.44 1. 80 �," r;l",:? .. ' - ::: -621. The mean wheat acreage per section is significantly higher on evergreen areas than on mixed areas and mixed areas are in turn significantly higher than deciduous areas. , 2. The mean wheat acreage per Section on evergreen areas is, significantly higher than the total mean and the mean on decidious areas is significantly lower than the total mean. Location means: same relationships as shown by the previous analysis. 9 planting 205.17 173.65 211.36 Dx T mean: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed 6 planting 243.44 146.98 175.51 d-37.72 1. The mean wheat acreage per Section on 6 planting evergreen areas is higher than the total mean and 6 planting deciduous areas it is significantly lower than the total mean. North 257.69 175.79 198.55 T x L means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed Central 190.96 179.43 240.20 South 224.26 125.73 141. 55 ( d - 46.78 1. The mean wheat acreages for north evergreens and central mixed are significantly higher than the total mean and the means for south mixed and south mixed and south deciduous are significantly lower than the total mean. FALLOW - 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance deleting the Type factor and its interactions Source DF· '".:'-, ss· . MS TOTAL 467 6169311.63 10181.74 Years 1 10181.74 0.83 Density 158894.49 79447.25 2 6.45** 2' Location 224711.21 112355.61 9.12** DxY 12042.84 6021.42 2 0.49 LxY 6576.52 2 3288.26 0.27 DxL 143331.87 4 35832.97 2.91* 72357.20 Dx Lx. Y 4 18089.30 1. 47 Error 450 55:41215.76 12313.81 .:» Density means: 9 plantings 6 plantings Control 187.28 217.46 231. 59 d-24.90 1. The mean fallow acreage on 9 plantings areas is significantly lower than the means lower than the means on 6 planting and control areas. i \ �-63- Location means: 1. The mean fallow acreage on southern means on central and northern areas. Density x Location means: d - 24.90 226.03 228.69 181.28 North Central South study areas . 9 plantings 6 plantings Controls d - 47.38 1. The mean fallow acreage total mean. on northern is significantly North 170.51 243.75 263.84 control areas Densi ty means: same relationship Type means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed as shown by previous 253.50 158.49 195.11 South 177.42 183.67 18~.74 Central 213.91 224.94 256.49 is significantly FALLOW - 3 x 3 x 2 Latin square Analysis of Variance MS Source DF SS 4218612.79 TOTAL 323 Density 1 73766.56 73766.56 Year 1 14520.25 14520.25 Type 495999.44 247999.72 2 Location 85290.75 42645.38 2 DxT 104955.94 2 52477.97 DxL 75433.18 37716.59 2 DxY .1 7702.99 7702.99 233144.95 TxL 4 58286.24 TxY 2 32953.74 16476.87 LxY 38191. 22 2 19095.61 DxTxL 4 192855.82 48213.96 DxTxY 10439.62 2 20879.24 DxLxY 13112.75 2 6556.38 TxLxY 4 63024.05 15756.01 43767.58· DxTxLxY 4 10941. 90 Error 288 2827970.27 9819.34 lower than the larger than the. F 7.51** 1. 48 25.2,6** 4.34* 5.34* 3.84* 0.78 5.94* 1. 68 1. 94 4.91** 1. 06 0.67 1. 60 1.11 analysis d - 26.44 1. The mean fallow acreage on evergreen study areas is significantly higher than the mean on mixed areas and this in turn is significantly higher than the mean on deciduous areas. �-642. The mean fallow acreage on evergreen study areas is significantly higher, and the mean on deciduous areas is significantly lower, than the total mean -. Location means: same relationship as shown by previous analysis D x T means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed 9 plantings 261. 45 122.50 177.89 6 plantings 245.&6 194.48 212.33 d-37,81 1. The mean fallow acreage on 9 planting evergreen and 6 planting evergreen areas . is significantly higher than the total mean and the mean on 9 planting deciduous areas is significantly lower than the total mean. D x L means: 9 plantings 6 plantings North 170.51 243.75 Central 213.91 224.94 South 177.42 183.67 d - 37.81 1. The mean fallow acreage on 6 planting north areas is significantly higher than the total mean. T x L means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed North Central 263.21 229.45 141. 79 190.93 216.39 237.90 South 267.84 142.76 131. 04 d-46.59 1. The mean fallow acreage on north evergreen and south evergreen areas. is significantly higher than the mean and the mean on north deciduous, south deciduous and south mixed .is significantly smaller than the mean. D x T x L means: 9 plant - north central south 6 plant - north central south evergreen 265.15 241. 21 277.98 261. 28 217.69 257.71 deciduous 44.03 163.38 160. 10 239.55 218.47 125.42 mixed 202.34 237;12 94.19 230.43 238.67 167.89 d-67.07 1. The mean fallow acreage on 9 planting, ever~reen, south areas is significantly higher than the total mean. The mean fallow acreages on 9 planting, deciduous, north; 6 planting, deciduous, south and 9 planting, mixed, south areas are significantly smaller than the total mean. �ro .. ~~'.. "'). -65PASTURE - 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance deleting the Type factor and its interactions MS F SS Source DF 7607237.79 TOTAL 467 6610.54 0.47 Year 6610.54 1 6.40** Density 180407.24 90203.62 2 386641.07 27.43** Location 773282.14 2 0.03 719.18 359.59 DxY 2 82.01 0.01 164..02 LxY 2 DxL 299975.93 74993.98 5.32** 4 641. 35 0.05 DxLxY 4 2565.38 Error 6343513.36 14096.70 450 9 plantings 6 plantings Controls Density means: 128.80 118.90 82.25 d - 26.41 1. The mean pasture acreage on both 9 planting and 6 planting areas is significantly higher than the mean on control areas. 2. The mean pasture acreage on control areas is significantly lower than the total mean. Location mean: North Central South 69.47 97.45 164.71 d - 26.41 1. The mean pasture acreage on southern areas is significantly higher than the mean of central areas and this mean is significantly higher than the mean for north areas. 2. The mean pasture acreage on south areas is significantly higher than the total mean and the mean north areas is significantly lower than the total mean. . . . on ~. : '. "'. ~ . .,' . ..' D x L means: 9 plantings 6 plantings control . north central 135.03 96.91 48.52 122.18 24.85 61. 16 . south 154.44 185.98 153.71 1. The mean pasture acreage on 6 planting south areas is significantly larger than the total mean and the means on 6 planting north and control north areas are significantly smaller than the total mean. ... PASTURE- 3 x 3 x 2 Latin .square Analysis of Variance (next page) " �-66= Location means: same relationship as shown by previous anal;vsis. Type means: . evergreen deciduous mixed 70.66 163.35 137.52 d - ?8.46 1. The mean pasture acreage on deciduous and mixed areas is aignificantly higher than the mean on evergreen areas. 2. The mean pasture acreage on deciduous areas is significantly higher than the mean total and the mean acreage on evergreen areas is significantly lower than the mean total. PASTURE - 3 x 3 x 2 Latin sguare Anal~sis of Variance MS Source DF SS 5156448.52 TOTAL 323 6110.02 Year 1 6110.02 -Density 1 7936.83 7936.83 Location 365347.41 182673.71 2 Type 494214..80 247107.40 2 359.74 1 359.74 DxY 338.20 LxY 2 676.:n 1610.15 805.08 TxY 2 119092.90 238185.80 DxL 2 ,2 113771.71 56885.85 DxT 4 228856.37 57214.09 LxT 1854.53 2 927.26 Dx~Y 1926.92 481. 73 4 LxTxY 645.06 322.53 DxTxY 2 . 413032.56 103258.14 4 ·DxLxT 4417.48 1104.37 DxLxTxY 4 3277502.75 11380.22 Error 288 ,'4 •• F 0.54 0.70 16.05** 21. 71** 0.03 0.03 0.07 10.46** 5.00** 5.03** 0.08 0.04 0.03 9.07** 0.10 .., ; D x L means: same relationship as shown by previous analysis. . Dx T means: Evergreen . Deciduous Mixed 9 planting 61. 85 155.57 168.96 6 planting 79.48 171. 13 106.08 d=40.71 1. The mean pasture acreage on 9 planting deciduous and 6 planting mixed areas is significantly higher than the total .mean and the mean on 9 planting evergreen and 6 planting evergreen areas is significantly lower than the total mean. ( �-67Lx T means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed North 37.86 148.96 88.51 Central 97.45 130.87 100.33 South 76.69 210.23 223.73 d - 50.15 1. The mean pasture acreage on south mixed and south deciduous areas is significantly higher than the total mean and the mean on north evergreen areas is significantly lower than the total mean. . D x L x T means: 9 planting evergreen deciduous mixed evergreen 6 planting deciduous mixed North 43.19 240.61 121.28 32.52 57.31 55.74 Central 80.76 103.17 106.81 114.13 158.57 93.84 South 61. 60 122.93 278.80 91. 78 297.52 168.65 d- 72.20 1. The mean pasture acreage on 9 planting north, deciduous; 9 planting south mixed and 6 planting south deciduous areas is significantly higher than the total mean and the mean on 9 planting north evergreen and 6 planting north evergreen areas is significantly lower than the total mean. SORGHUM- 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance excluding the Type factor and its interactions Source DF SS MS F TOTAL 467 1906637.57 Years 1 29290.10 29290.10 7.44** 12519.28 Location 2 25038.55 3.18* 3;6503.20 Density 2 18251.60 4.64* Lx Y 2 22472.33 11236.17 2.86 Dx Y 2 2933.03 1466.52 0.37 LxD 4 12354.35 3088.59 0.79 DxLxY 4 7604.22 1901.06 0.48 Error 450 1770441.79 3934.32. Years means: 1955 1956 60.70 44.88 1. The mean sorghum acreage on all study areas dropped significantly from 1955 to 1956. Location means: North 60.10 . Central 42.33 South 54.78 d-14.07 �-68~ 1. The mean sorghum acreage on north study areas is significantly higher than the mean on central areas. Density means: 9 plantings 6 plantings Controls 62.61 53.65 40.78 d- 14.07 1. The mean sorghum acreage on 9 planting areas is significantly higher than the mean on control areas. SORGHUM- 3 x 3 x 2 Latin sguare Anal;y:sisof Variance MS DF SS Source TOTAL 1471095.84 323 Years 1 29339.88 29339.88 1 Density 6505.32 6505.32 Type 2 47703.53 23851. 77 Location 2 35148.06 17574.03 DxY 1 220.69 220.69 TxY 2 11875.86 5937.93 LxY 2 8760.73 4380.37 DxL 2 1350.93 675.47 DxT 2 77849.68 38924.84 _T x L 4 89509.23 22377.31 DxYx T 2 313.72 156.86 D x Y x.L 2 2553.43 1276.71 LxYxT 4 12551. 03 3137.76 LxDxT 4 22328.87 5582.22 DxYxTxL 4 8656.83 2164.21 Error 288 1116428. 05 3876.49 F 7.57** 1.68 6.15** 4.53** 0.06 1.53 1.13 0.17 10.04** 5.77** 0.04 0.33 0.81 1.44 0.56 Years means; same relationship as shown by previous analysis. Type means: Evergreen . Deciduous Mixed 44.36 73.88 56.15 d- 16.61 1. The mean sorghum acreage on deciduous areas is significantly higher than the means on evergreen and mixed areas. . Location means: North Central South 68.19 43.78 62.41 d - 16.61 1. The mean sorghum acreage on north and south study areas are significantly higher than the mean on central areas. 6 planting D x T means: 6 planting 56.71 d - 23.76 Evergreen 32.00 48.82 Deciduous 98.94 55.40 Mixed 56.89 ( �-691. The mean sorghum acreage on 9 planting deciduous areas is significantly higher than the total mean and the mean on 9 planting evergreen areas is significantly lower than the total mean. T x L means: North 35.34 100.43 68.80 Evergreen Deciduous Mixed ,Central 61. 06 46.33 23.95 South 36.66 74;.89 75.68 d - 29.27 1. The mean sorghum acreage on north deciduous areas is significantly higher than the total mean and the mean on central mixed areas is significantly lower than the . mean total. MILLET - 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance excluding the Type factor and its interactions Source DF SS MS F 140368.0 ..97 TOTAL 467 Years 1 4577.82 4577.82 1. 60 Location 2 18132.15 9066.08 3.18* Density 2 31948.31 15974.16 5.60** LxY 2 5372.34 2686.17 0.94 11650.94 DxY 2 5825.47 2.04 44536.41 11134.10 Dx L 4 3.90** 3645.40 911. 35 DxLxY 4 0.32 1283817.60 Error 450 2852.93 Location means: North 24.75 Central 28.43 .South 39.19 d - 11.64 1. The mean millet acreage on south study areas is significantly higher than the means on central and north areas.' . . . . Density means: .' ,. 9 planting 9 planting Controls d-12.00 22.07 29.46 42.38 1. The mean millet acreage on control areas is significantly higher than the means of 9 planting and 6 planting areas .. D x L means: 9 planting 9 planting Control North 23.76 25.02 25.47 Central 19.29 37.05 29.23 South 23.17 26.32 68.07 d-20.36 �-701. The mean millet acreage on south control areas is aigniffcantly higher than the mean total. MILLET - 3 x 3 x 2 Latin sguare Anal;y:sisof Variance Source DF SS MS TOTAL 323 801346.74 Year 1 529.26 529.26 Density 1 4424.47 4424.47 Type 2442.08 1221. 04 2 Location 941. 12 2 470.56 DxY 1 8049.08 8049.08 TxY 7340.93 2 3670.47 LxY 2809.13 1404.57 2 DxT 2 390.27 195.14 DxL 2201.41 2 4402.82 TxL 36748.92 4 9187.23 YxDxT 2 6908.82 3454.41 YxDxL 2 1673.57 836.79 DxTxL 4 25862.94 6465.74 YxTxL 4 2364.66 591. 17 YxDxTxL 4 6881. 00 1720.25 Error 288 689577. 67 2394.37 T x L means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed North 14.70 15.38 43.09 Central 39. 16 31. 91 13.44 South 12.87 31. 07 30.29 F 0,22 1. 85 0.51 0.20 3.36 1. 53 0.59 0.08 . 0.92 3.84** 1. 44 0.35 2.70* 0.25 0.72 .\ d - 23.00 1. The mean millet acreages for north evergreen, north deciduous, south evergreen and central mixed areas are significantly smaller than the mean acreages for north mixed and central evergreen areas. D x T x L means: 9 planting - evergreen deciduous mixed 6 planting- evergreen deciduous mixed North 8.12 1.19 48.21 21. 28 29.57 37.98 Central 38.24 30.00 14.85 40.08 33.83 12.02 South 14.83 26.77 38.21 10.92 35.37 22.38 d-33.12 The mean millet acreages for 9 north deciduous, 9 north evergreen, 6 south evergreen, 6 central mixed, 9 south evergreen and 9 central mixed areas are significantly smaller than tile mean acreage for 9 north mixed areas. L ! �-71CORN - 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance excluding the Type factor and its interactions MS F SS Source DF 539578.67 TOTAL 467 677.29 0.63 1 677.29 Year 0.0,4 40.71 81.41 Location 2 49223.,45 24611.73 22.77** Density 2 213.82 427.64 0.20 LxY 2 499.13 0.46 DxY 998.25 2 0,38 412.92 DxL 4 165L 66 0.05 DxLxY 207.54 51.90 4 Error 450 486311. 43 1080.69 Density means: 9 planting 6 planting Control 24.18 1.39 4.34 d - 7.16 1. The mean corn acreage on 9 planting areas is significantly higher than the, mean on 6 planting and control areas. CORN - 3 x 3 x 2 Latin sguare Analysis of Variance Source' SS MS DF TOTAL 323 488005.44 Year 1 25.06 25.06 -Denstty 1 42113.88 42113.88 Type 37584.48' 2 75168.95 Location 2 63.05 31. 53 DxY 1 97.46 97.46 TxY 1133.77 2 566.89 LxY 2 53.91 26.96 DxT 38662.94 2 77325.88 DxL 2 680.44 340.22 TxL 4 2875.53, 718.88 DxYxT 2 1773.67 886.84 l ' 2 35.29 Dxy"L L7.65 DxTxL 4 3509.85 877.46 YxTxL 4 788.78 197.19 Dx'I'x.L x Y 4 1401. 81 350.45 Error 280958.11 288 975.55 " Density means: same relationship as shown by previous analysis. Type Means: Evergreen 1.48 d - 8.33 Deciduous 34.31 Mixed 2.56 F 0.03 43.17*'" 38.53** "0.03 0.10 0.58 0.03 39.63** 0.35 0.74' '0.91 0.02 0.90 0.20 0.36 �-72- 1. The mean corn acreage on deciduous areas is significantly higher than the mean total and the mean on evergreen and mixed areas is significantly lower than the mean total. D x T means: Evergreen Deciduous Mixed 9 planting 0.00 67.44 5.11 6 planting 2.96 1. 19 0.00 d-11.92 <; ••. ~/:: • 1. The mean corn acreage on 9 planting deciduous areas is significantly higher , than the total mean and the mean on 9 planting evergreen and 6 planting mixed areas is significantly lower than the total mean. Discussion and COnllusions:, The foregoing analyses show, quite conclusively, that agricultural land-use factors which may affect pheasant population levels are not comparable among the various study areas of Project W-90-:-R. For this reason it is very obvious that any effects agricultural land-use factors may have on pheasants must be evaluated and removed from the population estimates before it will be possible to evaluate the effects of habitat development work. When the project outline was written it was planned to remove land-use effects by application of Analysis of Covariance correction factors for each type, but the complications introduced by the missing subclass in the control' group are such that thistest may be statistically unsound. At the present time, a substitute test, , with slightly Iess.power but with wider applicability than the Analysis of Covariance, is under examination. Initital tests have been promising in indicating significant landuse factors, but until the test Is reviewed and approved by Dr. .Remmenga, Statistician at Colorado Sta1eUniversity, it cannot be presented. Although the Analysis of variance, as used in this report, does satisfy the requirement of indicating land-use factors which are significantly important, it does not satisfy the eventual requirement of allowing correction for the effects on pheasant population levels. For this reason, no further examination beyona showing the significant factors after each Analysis of Variance table have been attempted. ( �-73SUMMARY 1. Base maps of all study areas were drafted from maps used in the 1955 land-use surveys. Crop types were then noted in field work' and all maps were planimetered to determined land-use acreages. 2. Land-use types were classified in six crop-type and four cultural and mi scel.lan-. eous groups. Of these groups only the six crop classifications were examined because the other groups either offer no wildlife cover or are being examined by another method. . : 3. Two tests for each type are presented. The first, a 3 x 3 x 3 Latin square Analysis of Variance, includes all data but excludes tests for the effects of Type. The second, a 3 x 3 x 2 Latin square Analysis of Variance, uses only planted area data and shows tests' for'the effects of Type. 4. Analysis of wheat acreages show means are significantly: a. Larger on control areas than on 9 planting areas. b. Smaller on southern areas than on north and central areas. c. Larger in 1956 on 6 planting south areas. d, Larger on evergreen areas than on mixed areas which are in turn larger than deciduous areas. e. Larger tha n the total mean on 6 planting evergreen and smaller than the total mean on 6 planting deciduous areas. f. Larger on north evergreen and central mixed areas and smaller on south mixed and south deciduous areas than the total mean. 5. Analysis of fallow acreages show means are significantly: a. Larger on 6 planting and control areas than on 9 planting areas. b. Smalle:r on southern areas than on north and central areas. c. Larger on northern controls than the total mean~ , . , d. Larger on evergreen areas than.mixed areas which are in turn larger than. deciduous areas. e. Larger .on evergreen areas and smaller on deciduous areas than the total mean. f. Larger on 9 planting evergreen and 6 planting evergreen areas and smaller on 9 planting deciduous areas than the total mean. g. Larger than the total mean on 6 planting north areas .. �-74h. Larger on north evergreen and south evergreen areas and smaller on north deciduous, south deciduous and south mixed areas than the total mean. i. Larger on 9 planting evergreen south areas and smaller on 9 planting deciduous north, 6 planting deciduous south and 9 planting mixed south areas than the total mean. 6. Analysis of pasture acreages show means are significantly: a. Larger on 9 planting and 6 planting areas than on controls. b. Smaller on controls than the total mean. c. Larger on south areas than central areas which are in turn higher than north areas. d. Larger on south areas and smaller on north areas than the total mean. e. Larger on 6 planting south areas and smaller on 6 planting north and control north areas than file total mean. f. Larger on deciduous and mixed areas than on evergreen areas. g. Larger on deciduous areas and smaller on evergreen areas than the total mean. h. Larger on 9 planting deciduous and 6 planting mixed areas and smaller on 9 planting evergreen and 6 planting evergreen areas than, the total mea]:l. i. Larger on south mixed and south deciduous and smaller on north eve;rgreen areas than the total mean. j. Larger on 9 planting north deciduous, 9 planting south mixed and 6 planting south deciduous and smaller on 9 planting north evergreen and 6 planting north evergreen areas than the total mean. 7. Analysis of sorghum acreages show means are significantly: a. Smaller in 1956as compared to 1955. b. Larger on north areas than on central areas. c. Larger on 9 planting areas thanon control areas. d. Larger on deciduous areas than on evergreen and mixed areas. e. Larger on north and south planted than on central planted areas. f. Largeron 9 planting deciduous lind smaller orr 9 planting, evergreen 'areas than the total mean. g. Larger on north deciduous and smaller on central mixed areas than the total mean. 8. Analysis of millet acreages show means are Significantly: a. b. Larger on south than on central and north areas. Larger on control areas than on planted areas. �-758. Millet analyses (continued) show means are significantly: c. Larger on south control areas than the total mean. d. Smaller on north evergreen, north deciduous, south evergreen and central mixed areas than north mixed and central evergreen areas. e. Smaller on 9 north deciduous, 9 north evergreen, 6 south evergreen, 6 central mixed, 9 south evergreen and 9 central mixed areas than on 9 north mixed areas. 9. Analysis of corn acreages show means are significantly: a. Larger on 9 planting than on 6 planting and control areas. b. Larger on deciduous areas and smaller on evergreen and mixed areas than the total mean. c. Larger on 9 planting deciduous and smaller on 9 planting evergreen and 6 planting mixed areas than the total mean. Report by:__ Date : ___;;;L;;..;. ..._;;_Ja;;.;.c.;..;k;;;.....;;L;;;,oy~o;..;;;n;..... __ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator J;;_;a;.;;.;;n;;;.;u;;;.;a;.;.;;r;;.,..y~,__;;;"l9;;_;5;;_7;__ _ � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/9930140e8944b7a3ce0ce80631e88b3b.pdf 4fbed5a13c3c1e1846cf4c893bae89ae PDF Text Text -1- April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~ateof~ __ ~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O ProjectNo. __~~~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~O _ ~;~D~e~er~-_E_l_k~In~v~e~s_tl~'g~a_tl_'o_n~s _ Work Plan No. _-=-1 ---l;:.......::L::.;o:;.:c:..:;a;;.:t.:.:io;;.:n=-=an=d~E:::x;.:.;t:..:;e;.::n;.;;.t~o;.:.f....;S:;.:e:..:;a;.;;;s .•.. ; _J;;;...0;;.;b~N....;0:..:;. __ __;4;;..._ _ Title of Job: Location and Extent of Winter Elk Range on the South Fork of the White River. Introduction: A study of elk winter range on the South Fork of the White River, White River National Forest was initiated in June, 1956. Since big game winter range problems are ever increasing, this study was deemed necessary to serve as a guide to more efficient management of the White River elk herd. Jt will also help to supplement elk summer-range the Flat Top Wilderness Area. studies currently being conducted on The. South Fork of the White River was selected for intensive investigation known. to be a perennial wintering area of the White River Herd. since it was In accordance with present big game range management techniques, and due to the size and inaccessibility of the area, it was felt that a determination of the key forage species would be of most value as a future management tool. Obj ec ti ve s: L To determine the overall limits of the winter range used by the South Fork elk herd. 2. To provide a working map of winter range as an aid to more intensive and progressive elk-range management. Procedure: A general reconnaissance survey was made of the area along the South Fork and its tributaries at all elevations, on all exposures, and along all reaches available as winter range. Location and intensity of winter elk use was determined (so far as p.ossible) by noting degree of browsing, intensity of barking (aspen), and pellet concentrations. �-2Also, the reconnaissance was used to determine general vegetative types, and the relative abundance and kind of existing vegetation. Special effort was made to delimit the critical, or key areas. Aerial photographs, vegetative type maps, and topographic maps were used to aid in determination of vegetative types and subtypes. Game wardens, forest rangers, and landowners were contacted with regard to history, abundance, and distribution of South Fork wintering elk herds to supplement the field reconnais sane e. Description of Study Area: The South Fork of the White River is approximately 40 miles long. The headwaters originate on the Flat Tops Wilderness Area in the vicinity of Trapper's and Shingle Peaks. The river flows in a general northwesterly direction ultimately flowing into the White River at a point approximately one mile west of Buford, Colorado. Elevations \QXyfrom approximately 7,000 feet at Buford to over 10,000 feet on the Flat Tops. Results: The lower twenty miles of South Fork Canyon, from Buford to slightly above Park Creek was delimited for the winter range study. The altitude at Park Creek is about 7,900 feet. 'j Topography: The topography of the canyon from Park Creek to South Fork Camp Ground is one of steep slopes and occasional large benches which are mainly flat, or gently sloping. Vertical cliffs arecommon along the edges of the benches, and talus slides are abundant near the river. The slopes vary from 10 degrees to 60 degrees in pitch. The rock type is predominantly granitic. Two permanent creeks flow into the South Fork in this region - Park Creek -and Lost Solar Creek~' "' ' The valley floor is mainly steep and narrow with occasional aspen groves and sagebrush flats. Some of the sagebrush flats are up to one-fourth mile wide; however these are not numerous. The lower canyon, from the Camp Ground to Buford, becomes gradually wider, and the slopes and benches become somewhat le~s defined. Creeks and ridges are more numerous in this area, and the descent from the Flat Tops becomes considerably more gradual. The rock types becomes more sedimentary, especially on the lower slopes, �r+: -3- The river valley, below the camp ground, is wide (up to three-fourths mile) arid level. This lower valley is privately owned, and present land use is irrigated mountain meadow. Vegetation: The shrubby vegetation of the South Fork Winter Range consisted of the following spec ies: Species Oak Serviceberry Snowberry Chokecherry Big Sagebrush Rabbitbrush Wild Rose Aspen Douglas Fir Ground Juniper Gooseberry Spruce Rocky Mt. Juniper Squaw Current Dogwood Narrow leaf cottonwood Rocky Mt. Maple Elderberry Birch Sub-alpine fir Mountain mahogany Hawthorne Bitterbrush Scientific Name Quercus gambelii Amelanchier utahensis Symphoriacarpos spp. Prunus melanocarpus Artemesia tridentata Chrysothamnus spp. Rosa spp. Populus tremuloides Pseudotsega mensiesii Juniperus communis Ribes spp. Picea engelmannii Juniperus scopulorum Ribes spp. Cornus spp. Populus angustifolia Acer glabrum Acer negundo Betula occidentalis Abes lasiocarpa Cercocarpus montanus Cratp.egus spp. Purshia trideIitata The vegetation was found to consist of three major vegetative types: aspen, open shrub, and coniferous. These three major types were broken into subtypes with regard to species present and density. The coniferous type is mainly spruce-fir forest. This type predominates on the Flat -Tops and is associated intermittently throughout the South Fork drainage. The aspen type was broken into subtypes on the basis of understory. If the understory was predominatly herbaceous - it was called aspen-herb; and if the understory was predominatly shrubs - it was called aspen-shrub. The open shrub type was subtyped according to the dominant shrub present. These dominant shrubs were usually oak, serviceberry; chokecherry, snowberry, or big sagebrush. �-4The southern and western sIQpes,. which are mainly northern exposed, are predominatly spruce-fir forest with intersperston of aspen, especially on the benches. Occasional open-shrub types are represented on the lower western slopes between the camp ground and Buford. The nor-thern and eastern slopes, which are mainly southern exposed, and characterized by numerous aspen groves on the benches and ridges, and abundant open shrubby on the steeper slopes, Associattons with coniferous forest become increasingly abundant higher up. UtilizatiQn: The browse plants on the northern and western slopes of South Fork Canyon SlAQwed heaviest utfliz ation. Distrfbution of pellet concentrations was also indicative of this. CIQse Inspection of the southern side indicated that, due to' exposure, elk movements and feeding were limited to'favorable years, and could not be representattve of general use. Grasses and f orbs, as a whole, were not considered since they are largely unavailable during the winter months. Winter RecQnnaissance: A winter survey was made of the South Fork during the third week of December, 1956. The road, at this time, was not passable beyond Hill Creek due to' deep snow. A snowshoe trip was made from Hill Creek to' Lost Solar Creek. At the time of this survey, heaviest utilization occur-red below the camp ground. elk were seen in the hay meadows to' the south and west of Buford. Most During the snowshoe trip, a total of 27 elk were seen between Hill Creek and the camp ground. NO' elk were seen above the camp ground and very little sign was evident, although the elk had cut a deep trail in the snow along the river. No elk sign was. visible in the inthe vicinity of Lost Solar Creek. Snow depth varied from two tofive feet. General indications were that the lower canyon receives heaviest winter use by elk, and that elk utilfzatlon above the camp ground probably varies from year to year depending upon snow depth. It is possible that this portion of the canyon receives heaviest utilization in the early spring when the elk begin moving back up to summer .range. Submitted by: John Harris Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan --~~~~------------Federal Aid Coordinator Date: ....;A:.;.pJ::.I'::.;l:.:;·l.z.., -=1:;:.,9:;:.,5..:...7 _ �-5- April, 1957 ( JOB OUTLINE INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~----~~~~~------------------- State of COLORADO Project No. Work planNo. Job NOo ; Deer-Elk Investigations W-38-R-10 ~rr~ __~~p~op~u=l~a~tl~·o~n~SU~r~v~e~y~s~ _ 6:;._.l..;_C~o;;;:ll:.::e;.;::c.::ti:.;:o~n:..o~f:....;:da:::.t;:;.:a:...:..on::...:E::.::l;:;k:..an=d::;...:;:D;..;o _ Alpine Range. Objective: To gather as much information as possible relative to elk numbers, sex-ratios, number of young, feeding habits, seasonal migrations and movements from place to place on the range as influenced by grazing sheep. Also to gather information on length of grazing season, number of sheep, method of herding, dates of use plus any other pertinent information encountered. ( Procedure: Our principal means of collecting elk and sheep data was by field reconnaissance on foot and horseback which was facilitated by aerial photos. One airplane flight was taken early in the season and counts were made on additional flights over the area .. In addition, personaltntervtews with people-usfng thearea such as personnel of the Colorado Game and Fish Department, U. S. Forest Service, local residents, stockmen, and sportsmen were used to gather information relative to the study. Findings: More elk were observed this summer as a result of several significant factors. First, and most important, the for,:~e utilization study was expanded over considerably more territory.; secondly, there were four men working in the area as compared to two last year; .thtrd, personnel were better acquainted with the country and habits of the elk; and fourth, more time was available for this study. A total of 713 elk were counted this year (excluding the plane count) as compared to 204 last year primarily in the Lost Solar Park area. Some duplication is frievitable and by reducing the figures to 542 it should present a truer picture of herd composition and sex-ratio. Bulls 59 10.9% Cows 361 66.6% Calves 122 22.5% Total 542 100% �-6~ Forty percent of these elk were juveniles as yearlings made up 17.5 percent of the count and calves 22.5 percent. These figures indicated a sex ratio of one bull to 6.1 cows which include the yearlings. Most of the bulls observed were young .ones from two to four years old. A table of the daily observations is found at-the end of the report. Preparations for the summers work was completed by the middle of June with two base camps being established in the South Fork Canyon. No elk were observed during these trips up the canyon although several dead animals were found. Earlier investigations by the author and Wildlife Conservation Officer William Goosman indicated the winter loss to be light in the area. Actual reconnaissance commenced on June 17, 1956, as we rode up Park Creek to the top of the Flat Tops. At this time the elk were migrating from their wintering areas to their summer range. The cows and calves were found on the upper .reaches of the winter range where they had their calving grounds. These are usually 'Iccated in the aspen-type Inter'spereed with open grassy benches or mixed browse. The bulls were found higher in the aspen-spruce type pushing the snow line and alone or in pairs. The hillside above Park Creek is COl e red with aspens which have a dense understory of Mertensia~. and these groves are interspersed with open grassy benches. Investigation of this area disclosed some elk use along the streams and' boggy areas and a dozen cows, . calves, and yearlings (including one cow with twins) were surprised while grazing near the aspens. However, the elk were not using the area as heavily as last year. A ride up Lost Solar Creek netted only one cow and one bull although there was considerable elk sign at the confluence of Bear Creek. On top, the snow melt was several weeks earlier than last year but , the weather remained cool and the vegetation was slow in "greening up." The park at the head of Park Creek and Nichols Creek, which is an early developer, revealed very few elk tracks .. A little snow remained in Lost Solar Park and vicinity with the .ground being very wet and soft. :.. . -" . . . During the remainder of June the students walked the benches on both sides of the .South Fork Canyon and reported very little elk.sign, Areas included Bloomfield Bench, Lost Lake, Patterson Creek, and up to Budge's Resort .. Most elk sighted were high on the ridges and in small groups. Pilot Norman Hughes and the author flew over the South Fork area on the morning of June 29 to determine where the elk were concentratirig. A total of 360 elk were counted including 10 large bulls. The animals were well scattered and in small . groups although .some herding was evident. With the exception of Lost· Solar Park; the' elk were using the smaller parks in the timber adjacent to thefr summer range. Thirty were counted in the White Springs area, 50 in Lost Solar Park, 56 near Shingle Peak, 39 near Rim Lake, 33 at the head of Patterson Creek, 23 above the Meadows of the South Fork, 19 along the South Fork, 41 on Burro Mountain, �-7and the remainder scattered throughout the area. No elk were observed in the vicinity of the Marvine Peaks, on Fawn Creek, on Bear Creek, nor above the South Fork Camp Grounds. On July 2, Nichols established a camp on top near Lost Solar Park and discovered a definite herding movement as the elk began to use the large open parks. During this first week, John Harris sighted 46 elk near Oyster Lake and 52 in Johnson Park while Lyman Nichols found 98 in Lost Solar Park. Shortly afterwards, Tom Williams counted 22 in Park Creek Park, Nichols and Smith counted the largest herd of 130 to 150 animals between Doe Creek and Trapper's Peak, and 78 more at Oyster Lake. These large , groups were composed of cows, calves, and yearlings with an occasional mature bull. During this period the animals were not wild but seemed content to fatten up on the tender shoots of early growing grasses and forbs. Others would liedown and sun themselves while the calves would play until they became tired .or hungry. Sacks of sheep salt tied high in the trees were found ripped open or knceked to the ground by salt .... starved elk. Reconnaissance in the Big Marvine and Shingle Peak areas revelled little evidence of elk use. Domestic sheep began to arrive on top July 17th and the large elk herds began to split up and move to the smaller parks and spruce timber. Vegetation in the large parks was reaching maturity and the streams were beginning to dry up. By the end of July the best feed on top was found in the beetle-killed spruce stands interspersed with small open parks and this source was utilized considerably by both elk and sheep. Near the base of Trappers Peak, Smith saw 37 elk feeding and loafing in a small park surrounded by , timber quite indifferent to a band of noisy sheep grazing not more than 100 yards away. , During the month of August the elk began to disappear into the heavy timber on top and .into the heads of the drainages. Most sheepherders reported seeing very few elk although one claimed he saw 300 as he scouted for water and feed. Upon investigation of this report Smith located only 35 elk near Little Marvine Peak although there was considerable sign behind the peaks indicating more elk down in East Marvine Creek. The older bulls were especially difficult to locate as they moved off by themselves and prepared for the rutting season. Evidence of this could be found on the boggy sites where they had wallowed in the mud and rubbed the velvet from their antlers on small trees. Later in the month the cows and calves began moving into the dense cover and it was during this time that elk were the most difficult to find. We received reports of bulls bugling as early as mid-August although the first bugling we heard was on September 9, signalling the start of the rut. Shortly afterwards the older bulls were seen with their harems which were usually small. One group on Lost Solar Creek was composed of one five or stx point bull, six cows, four calves, and one spike, The bugling continued until mid-October and elk were ,seen scattered from the top all the way downto the intermediate range. �=8TABLE 1. ELK OBSERVATIONSFOR 1956 Date June 17 18 19 20 21 25 29 July 3 6 6 8 Mature Bull Cow 6 5 4 2 8 2 8 43 74 6 3 1 2 2 1 12 13 14 16 17 10 2 51 18 19 4 19 20 25 30 August 2 7 3 2 Yearling Bull Cow Calf Total 2 4 1 2 2 3 2 1 7 27 3 2 1 1 1 25 19 1 19 98 96 10 9 1 1 24 22 2 88 4 130 11 34 3 14 9 1 8 11 2 4 2 2 2 2 1 4 9 7 12 15 5 23 26 Sept. 12 13 10 15 16 1 TOTAL 292 7 12 10 2 11 5 2 2 37 4 3 3 6 1 1 3 1 33 69 1 1 5 10 4 1 7 26 1 122 Remarks Above Park Cr., Feeding. In timber- Lost Solar ridge. Above Park Cr., Feeding. South Fork bottoms. In timber on Lost Solar ridge. Lonesome Horse Mtn. 360 elk by aerial count. On top near Park Cr. Park. Oyster Lake and Johnson Park. Lost Solar Park. Big Marvine & Lonesome Horse Pk. . Park Cr. Park, feeding. 50 to 100 elk near Doe Cr. Near Oyster Lake & vicinity. Big Marvine area, feeding. Near Doe Cr. Maybe 150. Unclassified. Near Doe Cr. Part of herd above. Trappers Peak - were more. Lost Solar Park-grazing. 23 more in Lost Solar Park. Base of Round Mtn. 19 35 11 1 Base of Trappers Peak. Unclassified. Above So.: Fork .Canyon, East Marvine Cr. Northwest of camp. Edge of Lost Solar Park. 4 21 1 2 542 171 713 On Burro Mtn. Unclassified. Lost Solar Cr. Harems. Bear Cr. bugling. Above Lost Solar Canyon. Classified Unclassified Total observed ~ I I �Fig. 1. A herd of nearly 100 elk was using Lost Solar Park early in July. ( Fig. 2. Late in August the sheep began using Lost Solar Park. �t I 1'NeH :. 2f MILES " . J.o.f'J\(\d? l,., ;t\\C. H?£I).I' "II, "," ,(I, . ".~ "- .•., , .Buford ~: ':~ p~(\.1< . White SpnfljS @ 0ysTtlr Lo. t<~ .! TO ",,! WeASTL! IR ""1, :aLII " """T~. ::. ---- ,~ '--- "r,.:.._\ .: .- (f --",-.~-- ~7 C.u _ , , ,. "'\,j '" �.~:l ,~, ,_" =9= The hunting season caused them to seek the most dense cover on top and under the rims. If the hunting pressure persisted in an area they would move back on top or to an area where the hunters had moved out. By the end of October there were few elk still on top as deep snow began forcing them down to their winter range. They were usually travelling in small groups. Range studies were conducted on three sheep allotments and sheep data was obtained from these bands. Personnel of the U. S. Forest Service were very helpful in supplying background for this data. .The Big Marvine allotment of Garr Jones is located on top and his sheep were the nrst ones seen. The sheep are allowed on the forest July 15 and are supposed to be off by September 10th. He had 900 ewes and their lambs (about 800) and they used the Doe Creek Study area for a total of only four days although they were in the vicinity almost eight weeks. Their- presence seemed to cause the large herd of 130 elk to split up and shift to the head of the South Fork Canyon. The herder used one permanent camp and attempted to cover the complete allotment from this point. He didn't appear as conscientious as the others although his herding methods were satisfactory and he was very cooperative. The Nichols Creek allotment of Joe Robinson starts down in the Meadows and his sheep did not reach the top until August 3rd. This band of 800 ewes and 600 lambs used the Park Creek Area for five days before moving out on the ridge and eventually to Lost Solar Park. On August 30th they passed through the Park Creek Area on their way down but did not stop. According to the camp tender, earlier use of this park by cattle was responsible for its poor condition. Thirty eight head of cattle from the allotment on Park Creek did come to the top just before the sheep arrived and used the park for several days. The herder practiced good herding techniques and used considerable feed in the timber. Mike Rapasard ran sheep on the Rim Lake allotment and these did not arrive in the Shingle Peak Study Area until August 18th. This was the biggest allotment numbering 1200 ewes and 1400 lambs which was split into two bands. As this was the end of .their allotment the bands were combined here and they used .the.study area a total of four days although they remained in the vicinity until September 7th. The two herders were very capable and seemed quite interested in conservation. This area was very dry all summer and in a low-fair condition. All the herders practiced open herding in the parks although a closer watch was necessary in the timber. They attempted to use all their allotment as the food supply would allow and they used the timber considerably. They worked their sheep early in the morning and again in the evening moving them often to new bedgrounds and watering areas. All herders and stockmen were quite cooperative with us on our range survey. �-10The writer is indebted to Graduate Students Lyman Nichols, Jr., and John Harris; Student-helper Tom Williams; and to Ross Campbell, Biologist who helped early in the season for their contributions to this study. Summary: A total of 713 elk were observed during the summer of 1956 as compared . I to 204 the previous year. This large increase was due primarily to an expansion of the range study. Observations indicated a herd composition of 11 percent bulls, 67 percent cows, and 22 percent calves. In addition, yearlings comprised 18 percent of the total herds. The sex-ratio was 1 bull to 6.1 cows. Actual.reconnaissance was begun June 17th, 1956, as the elk migrated from their wintering areas to their summer range. Cows and calves were found on the calving _grounds in aspen-type at the upper extent of their winter range. The bulls were higher and near the snow line. An airplane count on June 29th located 360 elk which were scattered in small groups. By early July the elk began using the large open parks on the Flattops and we were able to find herds ranging from 22 to 130 on these areas. Toward the latter part of the month they began to split up into smaller bunches and move to the small parks in the timber as domestic sheep began to use the large parks and timber. As the sheep continued to use the top throughout August, "theelk began a movement into the thick dense stands of spruce at the heads of the drainages making observations extremely difficult. Preparations for the rutting season were evident as we found wallows in the boggy sites and small trees where the bulls had rubbed the velvet from their antlers. The first bugling was heard on September 9th and shortly afterwards small harems could be observed usually composed of one large bull, several cows and their calves, plus afew yearlings. The bugling continued until mid-October when some elk began to move into their intermediate range. The hunting season scattered them widely as they sought the more dense cover on top and under the rfrns. As the pressure subsided and the snow became deeper they drifted down onto their winter range in small groups. c Range studies were conducted on three sheep allotments and data was obtained from them. The total number of sheep allowed was 2900 ewes and their lambs (2800) which came on the forest July 15th and were off by September 10th. They used the three study areas (excluding Lost Solar Park) a total of 13 days. All herders practiced good herding methods as they worked their sheep early in the morning and again in the afternoon, used all of their allotments in addition to the timber,. and moved their sheep often to new bedgrounds and watering areas. Their cooperation was very helpful Approved by: Submitted by:._....;D;;,.o:;.:n:;.:a:=.ld=...;::Sm=i~th=--_ Date: .....;;.;A;,..p;.;;.r,;;;il;;"L,...,;1;;,;;9....;;5...;,7 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �Ii~II~IIIl~I~(~l[l\mliij~fl~ll~rllll\l\ I~I~II BDOW022158 -11April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ~----~~~~~------------------- Project No. W-38-R-10 ; Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. III Forage and Range Utilization· Studies Job No. __;1;;.;;2~...l......;.;;St~u;;;;.d;;;.y~o.;;.f...;;F;..;o;.;;r;..;.a,.l;gl,.;e;.......;;.U..;.;ti;.;;1,;;,iz.;...a...;t.;;.io ••.. y_E;..;l""k;;..._a,;;,n.;;.;;d_D_o.;...m_...;;e.;;.s..;.;ti_c_S _ the South Fork of the White River. Note: This job was divided into two sections during the year 1956-57 in order to expand the utilization study initiated in Lost Solar Park last year. This enables us to gain a much better perspective of the problem of competition as well as having a better know= ledge of the movements of the elk. This is a report on the expanded portion. B. EXPANSION OF THE UTILIZATION STUDY Objectives: To determine the relative amounts of forage and the plant species consumed .by elk and sheep in the parks of the Flattops region of the White River National Forest. ·Procedure: (1) Four new study areas were selected in the vicinity of Lost Solar Park during the month of June, 1956. Three of these are multiple-use areas and the fourth is used only by elk. (2) Line transects were laid out by staff compass and pacing at regularly intervals to provide a complete and even distribution of samples. spaced (3) Plots were established at regular intervals along these transects .with the centers being permanently marked by wooden stakes. (4) Since the vblume-welght-esttmate method was used, a training period was necessary in order to practice estimates of the vegetative weight and utilization. Estimates were checked by clipping and weighing until an accuracy to within 10 percent of the weight and 5 percent of the utilization was obtained. (5) Forage was lumped into three catagories; grass and grass-like plants, forbs, and browse, instead of by individual species. However, records were kept of species present in each area and those receiving utilization were noted. The actual range survey was begun on July 30, 1956. A circular plot, 9.6 square feet ..in area, was inscribed from the wooden stake and the weight in grams of each vegetative class was estimated and recorded. The amount of utilization, in grams and percent �-12- was also estimated and recorded. In addition, circular plots, 1/100 acre in area, were inscribed from the same center point and all elk pellet groups deposited since winter were counted and discarded from the plot. This procedure was then followed on all remaining plots, a total of 300. ( Immediately following this survey the sheep were allowed to use the study areas and little was seen of the elk. Upon removal of the sheep from the study areas, a second range utilization survey was run in order to determine the amount of sheep utilization. Again elk pellet group counts were made and the field survey ~as concluded on September 16, 1956. In order to obtain the accuracy of this study and to compare the individual areas, the resulting data were analyzed statistically at the 10 percent accuracy level. Forage production and utilization data were computed by green-weight because it reliable conversion factor to air-dried weight was unobtainable on account of the lumping of species into vegetative classes. Findings: The first range survey was conducted during the first two weeks in August when forage production was at its maximum. All utilization previous to this time was attributed to elk although there was evidence of a negligible amount of use on several areas by stray livestock. During the interval between the two surveys practically all grazing in the parks was done by sheep for the elk had split up into smaller herds and moved into dense timber to feed. The second survey was run during the first half of September immediately after the sheep were removed from the study areas. By subtracting elk utilization from this total utilization estimate it was possible to ascertain the amount used by sheep. One of the four areas (Big Marvine) is situated within a designated Wildlife Area and is off-limits to domestic livestock use. Its purpose is to compare an area used strictly by elk to the areas used jointly by elk and sheep. The.following table is an analysis of the total forage production and utilization data by individual areas plus a weighted average of the multiple-use areas. ' TABLE 1. FORAGE PRODUCTIONAND UTILIZATIONDATA ACREAGE FORAGE PRODUCTION ELK UTILIZATION SHEEP UTILIZAPounds / Acre Pounds / Acre TION Pounds / Acre .Doe Creek 62.5 1902.0..t: 90.4 63.8 :1: 14.6 130. 1.t:. 14.4 . Shingle Peak 62.5 2142.4.:t129.4 6.6· 17.7i. 200.01:" 33.6 Park Creek 40.0 1968. 21241. 3 26.6 i: 14.5 91. 0 :t: 51. 2 AVERAGEOF MULTIPLE- USE AREAS 165.0 2009.1±141. 8 37.31:. 11. 6 174. lr 30.6 Big Marvine 31,25 2183.4.t:l75.3 74.0 15.7 None AREA z: ( �Fig. 1. Estimating forage production and animal utilization on circular plots, 9.6 square feet in area. Fig. 2. To determine elk day of use, pellet group counts were made on circular plots, 1/100 acre in area. �Fig. 3. A view of one of the study areas showing a typical open grassland park surrounded by timber. These high mountain parks are the summer range for the White River Elk Herd and domestic sheep. ·Figure 4. Sheep, as well as elk, utilize the abundant forage found in timber. Trees were killed by the Spruce Bark Beetle during the <-the 1940 's. �-13The figures that we are most interested in are the ones for the Average of Multiple - Use Areas for they will give a picture of the over-all range use. From Table 1 we find that the average forage production on the multiple-use areas was approximately 2,009 pounds per acre. Elk utilization at the same time was 37 pounds per acre or 1. 9 percent of the total forage production. The second survey indicated that sheep ate 147 pounds of forage per acre of 7.3 percent of the production which is nearly four times (3, 84) as heavy as elk use. If we wish to compare it with the smaller Wildlife Area (Big Marvine) we find that the forage production here is only slightly higher (2, 183) but that elk utilization has nearly doubled. They ate 74 pounds of forage per acre or 3.4 percent of the total production on this park. Total utilization on the miltiple-use areas amounts to only 9. 2 percent of the forage production. Although this figure appears extremely low, certain areas received much more use thanothers resulting in quite variable data. For instance, most elk utilization was found near the edge of the timber and around water holes while much of the sourrounding range remained untouched. Sheep use was more general although they concentrated on dry rocky knolls, at salt stations, and near water holes where erosion is already a serious factor. Another reason is that elk spend a great deal of time in the timber and only during the month of July do they tend to concentrate on the large open parks.' The grazing habits of elk make it difficult to see the actual utilization for they move about while they eat, taking only a bite here and there. Even where the larger herds were observed feeding utilization was light and wide spread. Since the elk used the parks during the early part of the summer when the earth is moist and soft, the effects of trampling was considered. Although areas where large herds had concentrated were easily discernible, damage to the range did not appear serious due to the wide cruising radius exhibited by these animals. Most plants at this time are 'still growing -and recover rapidly if not damaged too sezerely. Sheep on the other hand will concentrate on one spot if feed is available and utilization is much more notic eable. They use the parks more than the elk and will take a wider variety of plants before moving on. Trampling is serious on the bare rocky knolls where they prefer to bed down and erosion here is quite evident. Due to a very dry summer season and early frosts, vegetation in the parks dried out early this year causing both elk and sheep to seek the more luscious feed found in the timber. By analyzing our vegetative classes we are able to obtain a better understanding of the type of production and food preferences. In Table 2, individual areas and a weighted average for the multiple-use areas is broken down for comparison. �~,t) o TABLE 2. Forage Production and Utilization by Vegetative Classes AREA FORAGE PRODUCTION Pounds per Acre Grasses Forbs' ELK UTILIZATION Pounds per Acre Browse Sheep Utilization Pounds IE r Acre Grasses Forbs Browse -- Grasses Forbs Browse 30.4 t9.3 .4!:5.7 39.8'::5.7 Doe Creek 623.1'1:55.3 J:272.4.f68.6 5.9.i3.7 33.0 + 10.1 Shingle Peak 702.5t 84.3 1420.8i: 99.0 19.1tl7.1 4.8 1::. 2.3 11.6i. 4.7 1.3:t1.6 79.5i23.9114.6!16.1 Park Creek 523.4~05.6 1425.4il73.4 19.41:"23.9 8.4 t: 4.5 56.4t38.1 15.4!:9.6 2.8!'3.2 88.3:tl1.3 32.4 t: 15.6 2.0_-1.:.1.4 5.9j:.4.2 2.2.:L4.0 I ~ I Average of Multiple-Use Areas 629.21-78.5 136'.7!105.'14.2!l3.5 16.3 t 5.8 19.6!7.6 1.3.:t1.6 ,8.9t Big Marvine n4.0.t"83.1 1421.6!l15.637.8!40.2 20.41- 7.1 49.0!12.3 4 .6i:.5.6 20., 84.7+ 14.2 3.':!:3.1 None �q1 I: w_." •• ~'._ -15Table 2 is easier to interpret if we convert the green weights to percent and figure a preference factor (P. F.) for each class. This is found by dividing the peroent total of the animal utilization by the percent total forage production for each vegetative class. This was done in table 3. TABLE 3. FORAGE PRODUCTIONAND UTILIZATIONBY PERCENT % OF TOTAL % OF TO'.['ALELK P. F. %.OF TOTAL SHEEP PRODUCTION UTILIZATION UTILIZATION· AREA MULTIPLE-USE AREAS Grasses Forbs Browse 31. 3 68.0 .7 43.8 52.6 3.6 33.1 65.1 1.8 27.6. 66.2 6.2 .77 5.14 40.0 57.6 2.4 .83 none 1. 39 P. F. 1. 28 .84 .3.43 BIG MARVINE Grasses Forbs Browse 1. 01 3.44 From the table above, we see that on both multiple-use areas and the wildlife area grass and grass-like plants constitute nearly one-third of the forage production, that forbs constitute approximately two-thirds, and browse only a fraction of the total production according to weight estimates. A preferenc e factor (P. F.) of 1. 0 indicates that the animal took this vegetative class in relation to its abundance. If it was over 1. 0, it means there was a preference for that type, and if under 1. 0 that the class was avoided. A review of the multiple -use areas in table 3 shows that both elk and sheep have a decided preference for browse, which are two types of willow. .Nearly all that was taken were the tender young shoots of the year. They both showed about equal preferences for the grasses, although elk preference was slightly higher. This was taken more or less in relation to its abundance. Both elk and sheep exhibited a low preference for forbs although sheep sought them out more than elk. This may be due to the fact that there are many low growing forbs constituting forage production which are never grazed. Examination of the wildlife area also indicates a high preference for the willows. However, here there was a low P. F. for grasses which is unusual. This is due.to the fact that much of the grass present was comprised of undesirable species which were avoided. This included timber oatgrass, {Danthonia intermedia} and Letterman'S needlegrass, (8t'ipa letterman i). There seemed to be no particular preference for forbs and these were taken according to their abundance on the park. -, �-16- Notes we~e kept on species receiving most of the utilization. The elk ate both types of willow, the alpine willow, (Salix petrophila), and the false lapland willow (Salix psuedolapponum). They also showed a high preference for tufted hairgrass, (Deschampsia caespitosa) , marsh-marigold (Caltha H~~ptosepala),and the sedges, (Carex spp.). Less preferred plants were rushes (Juncus spp.) , mountain dandelion (Agoseris spp. ), Geranium spp., mountain parsley (Harboria trachyPleura), and rock ragwort of Senecio, (Senecio carthamoides) . The diet of the sheep consisted of a greater variety of both grasses and forbs. In tlieir search for browse they also ate both types of willows and actually ate nearly three times as much browse as elk. They also p:r;eferred alpine timothy, (Phleum alpinum) , tufted . hairgrass and the sedges, The forbs which showed the most use were marsh-marigold, American bistort, (Polygonum bistortoides), dandelion, and .mountain par-sley. Elk use on the areas was computed from the data obtained on the two pellet group counts taken during the range surveys. If we figure arithmatically, we find that there were 223 elk days of use before the sheep arrived and only 5 elk days during and after sheep use. However, since only one additional pellet group was found during the final survey it was impossible to run a statistical analysis on elk days of use before and after sheep use. Therefore, Table 4 is an analysis of the total number of pellet groups recorded or 45. In order to compare the multiple-use areas with the wildlife area it is necessary to convert to an equal acreage basis. This was done by dividing the pellet groups per area by the number of acres in that area. AREA Doe Creek Shingle Peak Park Creek Multiple Use Areas Big Maruine TABLE 4. ELK PELLET GROUP DATA ACRES PELLET GROUPSON AREA ± PELLET GROUPS PER ACRE 62.5 62.5 40.0 165.0 979.4 1625.0 173.1 125.0 1360.0 i: 746.8 2970.01:.. 1001. 9 26.0 2.0 34.0 18.0 ---r :t. 15.7 2.8 18.7 6.1 31. 25 1000. O:f:; 487. 5 32.0 -I- 15.6 ± 01-I- Although table 4 shows a higher number of pellet groups on the multiple-use areas, 2970 compared to 1,000, we find that by comparing the areas by acreage the wildlife area contains nearly twice (1. 8) as many groups, or 32 compared to 18. However, if we notice the extremely low count on the Shingle Peak area we can understand why the average for the multiple-use areas is down. An early pellet count was taken on 100 plots in Park Creek Park, June 21 and only one pellet group was found despite the fact that this is one of the first parks to which the elk return in June. From the data in Table 4 we are able to determine the number of elk days of use shown in table 5. This is found by dividing the number of pellet groups on an area by 13, the assumed number of pellet groups by one elk in one day. Sheep days of use was computed by multiplying number of animals by number of days on the study area, �Q'). ';.' .~., -17- AREA ACRES 62:5 Doe Creek 62.5 Shingle Peak 40.0 Park Creek AVERAGEof MULTIPLE- USE AREAS 165.0 . BIG MARVINE 31. 25 TABLE 5. ANIMALUSE DATA ELE;DAYSOF USE ELK DAYSOF USE SHEEP DAYSOF PER AREA PER AeRE USE PER AREA 125:0+ 9. 6 -f 104.6!: 75:3 13.3 57.4 228.5- .!- 77. 0 -f76.937.5 1. 1:2 2;0 • 15 i: 2.6:!= .21 1.4 1. 38:!: .47 2.46 1:: 1.20 3600 4800 4000 12,400 None Since we used tbe.data from Table 4 our interpretations of the elk days of use will have the same relationshlp. In other words, the number of elk days of use per acre on the wildlife area is again nearly twice that of the multiple-use areas. However, Table 5 is set up to compare elk days of use to sheep days of use. An average of the multipleuse areas reveals a total of 228 elk days as compared to 12,400 sheep days indicating a considerable difference in use. There was considerable pocket gopher activity on all the ranges and whether this is the . cause or a result of the unsatisfactory condition remains unanswered. Summary: The range utilization study initiated in Lost Solar Park in 1955 was expanded in 1956 to gain a better perspective of the problem. Three new areas are used jointly by elk and sheep while a fourth is used by elk alone. An analysis of the data gathered during the summer reveals an average forage production of 2,009 pounds per acre on these multiple-use areas. Elk utilization was 1. 9 percent of the total production while sheep utilization was 7.3 percent or nearly four times as much. However, the combined total utilization amounted to only 9.2 percent. Forage production on the.wildlife area was nearly identical although elk utilization nearly doubled,' 3. 4 percent. The principal reasonfor such low utilization figures was due to the fact that both elk and sheep used the feed in the timber to a considerable extent. Another reason is the numerous low growing forbs avoidedby the animalswhich comprised a large portion of the production. The tendency of the animals to concentrate on certain areas, smaller elk herds and their grazing habits, in addition to the dryness of the range during the latter part of the summer, are also important factors. An analysis of the vegetative classes show that grasses constitute nearly one-third of the production by green weight, forbs about two thirds, and browse only a fraction. On the multiple-use areas both elk and sheep exhibited a decided preference for browse (willow), took the grasses in relation to their abundance, and tended to av40id the forbs except for more choice species. However, on the wildlife area the elk Seem to prefer the forbs over the grasses. This is due to the amount of undesirable grasses in the sample plots. I ~ �-18- Elk use was determined by the number of pellet groups recorded and was found to be nearly twice as heavy . , on the wildlife area as compared to the areas used jointly by elk and sheep. The total number of elk days of use on these areas was 228 days as compared to 12,400 sheep days. Future studies should include closer observations of the grazing habits of elk early in the summer, food preferences of both elk and sheep, and actual amount of gopher activity. Prepared by: Date:__ Donald G. Smith __;:,A.:..;p;;.::r;.;:il:.l.,_1:.;:9;..;:5~7 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �Colo. Pe.rt. ~ (i..W1 ~ t' +is "'- GS; '~... '~" Iiilmll~'~I~~il~illilli~~il~~~~li~illll'ijll Q\loJr~~'1 R~fo~t Af""l BDOW022159 -19JOB COMPLETION April, 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATLON PROJECTS State of..__...:C::.::O~L:=.O=R::.:A:::D;..::O~ Proj ect No. __ _ ___;W~-!!.38~-:.:R!::.!:.:.-1~O::._ ....z...-=D::.::e::.::e::.:r~-.!:E:!1~k...:In:::.:.v..:::e.:;:s.::.:ti:.cg~a;,:;tl:;:' o;.:;n:.::s;__ _ Work Plan No. _ _!.:!III~.J.i ~F:...!o~r:.!:a~gr.!:e:..;a~n~d:!..!Ra.:::::!:ng~e:...U~ti:!.h!!· z::.:::a::.::t~io~n~ ...:::St:::.:u~d:::i..:::e.:;:s..:..: _J:::,.o:::,;b:::....:,N.:.,;o:;.:._:;.1.:::,8 _ Title of Job. __ _:N:!:u~t~r;.!.it!:.!i;.!v!:!e..:.A:.!;n~a::::l~y..::s~is~o::.f....:;b::.:r~o:..:.w:.::s::..::e::....:::.s:::.:am:::,tp _ OBJECTIVES 1. To determine seasonal variations in the nutritive composition of big sage,· bitterbrush, Gambel oak, mountain mahogany, and serviceberry browse samples. 2. To provide factural information on the nutritive composition of these five browse species, by seasons and plant parts, as an aid to more effective big-game range management. 3. To obtain spring, summer, fall, and winter samples of big sage, bitterbrush, Gambeloak, mountain mahogany, and serviceberry for nutritive analysis. 4. To determine nutritive composition after initial exploratory analysis. 5. To obtain all information with other field projects. possible and range in deterioration from collections made prior of sample retained to 1956 in connection ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to credit Harold Shepherd, biologist in charge of the MesaVerde Clip Plot Study, with establishing the study area for this investigation and also to . thank him for. his assistance and advice in securing the stems and leaves of the browse species to be studied. Gratitude is extended also to Dr. Robert H. Udall for his assistance and advice in securing the necessary equipment and chemicals needed in the laboratory and for his aid in perfecting the various chemical procedures needed for the study. METHODS AND PROCEDURES Collections Four seasonal collections of the current annual growth of the five browse species have been made. The dates of the collections were as follows: June 18-22 (late· spring), Sept. 18-22 (late summer), Dec. 18-22(1ate fall), and March 18-22 (late winter) covering the periods June 1956 to March 1957. �-20( It was established by this writer that twenty stems (including leaves) from twentyfive individual plants of one species would make up a representative sample when selected at random. The random selection of the plants was done around the perimeters of the clip plot exclosures established by Harold R. Shepherd at Mesa Verde National Park and the Hermosa Oreek area north of Durango, Colorado. It was found during the collections in the field that only Gambel oak and serviceberry yielded enough material from twenty stems per plant to secure enough for chemical analysis. The number of stems per plant was .therefore increased for the other three species. The current annual growth was separated at the nodes by hand and placed in paper bags , After the samples were brought back to Fort Collins, they were allowed to dry at room temperature until they were considered air-dry. The stems were then separated from the leaves and both parts weighed separately. The separated leaves and stems were ground in a Wiley mill and placed in tightly stoppered jars for subsequent analysis. The jars were labeled as to species, plant part, and date collected. CHEMICALANALYSIS Protein: The macro - Kjeldahl method of testing for protein was used on the samples collected from!949-1955. The micro-Kjeldahl method was employed on the season collections of browse plants. Both methods are explained in the A. O. A. C. Official Methods (1955). Carotene: The method given by A. O. A. C. (2£. cit.) for testing for carotene as modified by this writer was used. The method involves extracting the carotene with an acetone and commercial hexane mixture, separating the pigments by use of a chromatographic column, and finally reading the optical density of the carotene solution on a spectrophotometer. The optical density of the sample solution whem compared to the optical density of a standard carotene solution will give the amount of micrograms of beta carotene per gram of sample. Ash: A weighed sample is placed in a porcelain crucible and heated at 600 degrees C. in a muffle furnace until only a gray residue (ash) remains. (A.O. A. C. ,..212.: crt.}, Calcium: The method of precipitating the calcium as calcium oxalate and titrating against 0.05 N. K. Mn 04 was used as outlined by A. O. A. C. (o_p. cit. ). Phosphorus: A method used by Dr. Udall was modified by this writer for the determination of phosphorus. It consists of reading the amount of phosphorus as phosphovanado molybdate on a spectrophotometer and comparing the results against a standard phosphorus curve. Crude Fat: The A. 0.- A. C. Official method (2£. cit.) was used. It involves extracting the fat with ether, driving off the ether on a water bath, and weighing the residue. �-21- Crude Fiber: The A. O. A. C. Official method_(2p. cit.) was used. The material is boiled in weak acid, filtered, boiled in a weak base, filtered, dried, and weighed. The material that withstands boiling in a weak acid and then a weak base is termed crude fiber. Nitrogen Free Extract: The percent of the sample left after the sum of the percentages of crude fiber, crude protein, crude fat, moisture, and ash is subtracted from the 100 is the nitrogen-free extract. (Esplin, 1937). FINDINGS Samples Collected 1949-1955 Analysis: Protein - The leaves were far higher in protein than were the stems. The plants ranked from high to low as follows: 1. Gambel oak leaves, 1949. 2. Gambel oak leaves, 1955. 3. Bitterbrush leaves, 1949. 4. Mountain mahogany leaves, 1949 ±/. 5. Bitterbrush leaves, 1955. 6. Big sage stems and leaves, 1955. 7. Serviceberry leaves, 1955. 8. Serviceberry leaves, 1949. 9. Bitterbrush stems, 1955, 10. Bitterbrush stems, 1949. 11. Gambeloak stem, 1949. 12. Mountain mahogany stems, 1949 }/. 13; , Serviceberry stems, 1955. 14. Serviceberry stems, 1949, 15. Gambel oak stems, 1955. When the leaves and stems for the browse plants were tested together they ranked from high to low in protein value as follows: . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Big sage Bitierbrush Mountain mahogany Gambeloak Serviceberry 9.75% average 1955 only 9. 62 % Average 1949 and 1955 9.31 average 1949 and 1955 8, 52 average 1949 and 1955 6.74 average 1949 and 1955 1/ Insufficient material to test stems and leaves of mountain mahogany separately in 1955. �-22The intensity of clipping apparently caused no significant effect on the protein values of the browse plants. There was as much, if not more, variation between the three plots having the same clipping treatment (20 and 80 percent) as between plots of a different clipping treatment. (See Table 1 for a list of protein values. ) Ash: - At this time only two species, mountain mahogany and Gambel oak, have been tested for ash. The stems ofmountain mahogany were very much higher in ash content than were the leaves, however, the Gambel oak stems were only slightly higher than the leaves in ash content. (See Table IT for ash values). Calcium - Mountain mahogany and Gambel oak have been tested for calcium. The leaves of mountain mahogany were generally higher in calcium than were the stems. The stems of Gambel oak had about the same percent of calcium as the leaves. There was very little difference in the calcium content of these two browse plants between the two years 1949 and 1955, and also betwen the different clipping intensities. (See Table II for list of calcium values). Phosphorus - The above two mentioned species have also been tested for phosphorus. The leaves of mountain mahogany tested slightly higher in phosphorus' than did the stems while the leaves of Gambel oak tested almost twice. as high in phosphorus as did the stems. As with calcium, the years or clipping intensity appeared to have little effect on the phosphorus content of the browse plants.( See Table IT for list of phosphorus values). Carotene - The carotene of plants is lost so rapidly during open storage, that these samples were of no value for testing. The 1949 materials were practically devoid of carotene. Other nutrients -Because of the limited time available for this study, it was decided not to test for the other less important nutrients except on a seasonal basis. Plans For Further Studies: The ash, calcium, and phosphorus 'will be determined on bitterbrush, big sage, and serviceberry for the years 1949 and 1955, and also between the 20 percent clipping intensity and the 80 percent clipping intensity. I �-23TABLE L NUTRITIVE CONTENT OF BROWSE PLANTS COLLECTED AT MESA VERDE NATIONAL PARK, COLORADO (Dietz, 1956 a) Species Year Plot 1/ Plant Part Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany 1955 1955 1955 1949 1949 1949 1949 . 1. 2. 3A 1. 3D 2D 1. 2A 1.2D 3A 3A Stems & Leaves stems & Leaves stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves stems & Leaves Leaves stems Percent Protein 9.03 8.61 8.90 9.58 10.43 11. 28 5.80 Gambeloak Gambeloak Gambeloak Gambeloak Gambel oak .Gambel oak Gambeloak Gambeloak Gambeloak . Gambel oak 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 " 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1A 2.3A 1. 3D 2D 2D 1A 2.3A 3D 2D 2D stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves Leaves Stems Stems.& Leaves Stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves Leaves Stems 8.83 8.17 8.21 13.23 4.42 8.33 8.31 9.28 14.26 5.81 Big sage Big sage Big sage Big sage Big sage Big sage Big sage Big sage 1955 1955 1955 1955 1949 1949 1949 1949 ]A 2.3A 1.2D 3D 1A 3A 1.2D 3D Stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves stems and Leaves stems and Leaves stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves 10.51 10.17 9.35 8.88 7.68 8.50 8.35 8.43 Serviceberry Serviceberry .Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry Serviceberry 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1. 2A 3A 1D 2D 3D 3D 1A 3A 1D 2D 2D stems and Leaves stems and Leaves stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves Leaves Stems Stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves Stems and Leaves Leaves Stems 6.83 6.33 6.98 6.62 8.80 5.49 6.35 6.15 7.91 8.64 4.69 �-24( TABLE I. (Concluded) NUTRITIVE CONTENT OF BROWSE PLANTS COLLECTED AT MESA VERDE NATIONAL PARK, COLORADO Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush Bitterbrush 1/ 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1. 2A 3A 1. 3D 2D 2D 1. 2A 3A 2.3D 1D 1D Stems & Leaves Stems and Leaves Stems & Leaves Leaves Stems Stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves Stems & Leaves Leaves Stems 9.80 9.95 9.20 10.78 7.02 8.43 10.20 10.15 12.43 5.83 Legend: A= 20 percent clip of seasonal growth. D:::80percent of seasonal growth. ( �Table II NUTRITIVE CONTENT OF TWO BROWSE PLANTS COLLECTED AT MESA VERDE NATIONAL !ARK, COLORADO (Dietz, 1956 b) Y Species Year Plot Plant Part Ash Percent Calcium Phosphorus Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany 1955 1955 1955 1949 1949 1949 1949 1.2.3A 1.3D 2D 1.2A 1.2D 3A 3A Stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves stems and Leaves Stems Leaves 5.2 5.1 5.3 4.9 5.5 8.0 1.9 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.30 1.41 2.31 0.41 0.113 0.118 0.109 0.108 0.144 0.108 0.084 I ~ en I Gambe1 oak Gambe1 oak Gambel oak Gambel oak Gambel oak Gambel oak Gambe1 oak Gambel oak Gambel oak Gambel oak !I Legend: 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 :LA 2.3A 1.3D 2D 2D lA 2.3A 3D 2D 2D Stems and Leaves stems and Leaves Stems aridLeaves Leaves stems Stems ani Leaves Stems and Leaves Stems and Leaves Leaves Stems A--20 percent clip of season growth; 5.1 4.3 4.3 4.0 3.9 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.6 1.07 1.02 1.04 0.85 0.97 0.99 1.05 0.99 1,.03 0~94 0.146 0.145 0.138 0.174 0.106 0.172 0.172 0.194 0.259 0.146 D--80 percent of seasonal growth. 1"'--{" ':) ;."'~ �1n~: L~.··' !(lo.". -26= SEASONALNUTRITIVE CONTENT OF BROWSEPLANTS Analysis: Protein - The leaves of the browse plants with .the exception of big sage were higher in protein than were the stems in June. The leaves of big sage were combined with their stems for analysis since it is an evergreen plant.. In September, the stems of serviceberry were higher in protein value than were the leaves; however, in the other browse plant s the leaves were still higher in value. During December, there were few leaves found on bitterbrush, serviceberry, and mountain mahogany. There were many oak leaves but they were dead and shattering. Only big sage had green leaves at this season. Gambel oak leaves gave the highest values in June and September, and the lowest values in December. Big sage followed by bitterbrush stems were the highest in protein during December. TABLE m. RANKINGOF BROWSEPLANT PART BY SEASONIN PROTEIN CONTENT FROM HIGH TO LOW September 'DecemberJune Gambel oak leaves Big sage stems & leaves I. Gambel oak leaves Big Sage steins and leaves Bitterbrush stems 2. Bitterbrush leaves Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany 3. Mountain mahogany leaves stems leaves Bitterbrush leaves Serviceberry stems 4. Serviceberry leaves Mountain mahogany stems 5, Big Sage stems and Gambel oak stems leaves Bitterbrush stems Gambel oak leaves 6. Mountain mahogany stems Serviceber-ry stems 7. Bitterbrush stems Serviceberry leaves 8. Gambel oak stems Gambel oak stems 9. Serviceberry stems Carotene - The leaves of the browse plants were far superior in carotene content than were the stems in June and September. Gambel oak leaves gave the, highest carotene values in June and September and the lowest values in-December. Big sage stems and leaves combined gave the highest carotene values in December. Gambel oak and serviceberry stems were consistently low in carotene values during' the three seasons. �1.03 -27- TABLE IV. SEASONALPROTEIN CONTENT OF BROWSE PLANT CLIPPINGS (Dietz, 1957) COLLECTED AT MESA VERDE NATIONAL PARK, COLORADO, 1956. Percent Protein Dec. Species June Sept. Part 1/ 11. 90 11.58 Big Sage 10.12 Leaves ~/ and stems Bitterbrush Leaves stems 12.85 7.45 Leaves stems 9.65 8. 85 ~/ 12.67 7.50 7.15 10.72 7.45 Leaves 14.25 14.06 stems 5.60 4.371/ i/ 4.70 i/ Serviceberry Leaves stems 10.75 5.04 5.20 5.77 5. 72 ~/ Legend: ,!/ The leaves and stems are from current annual growth. Mountain Mahogany GambelOak 7. 73 ~/ 3.90 ~/ The leaves and stems of sagebrush were combined for analysis. ~/ There were a few remaining leaves on the stems of these plants and they were combined with the stems to get a better idea of how much protein was available to the deer during that season.' 1/ Below 5 percent is listed as critical researchers. for deer by most �Ai ..·r•..'3 ~ .r. r r s.: ~..... .t, -28TABLE VI. SEASONALCAROTENE CONTENT OF BROWSEPLANT CL!PPINGS COLLECTED AT MESA VERDE NATIONALPARK, COLORADO, 1956 (Dietz, _2P. cit.) Species Part.!/ Micrograms Beta Carotene per grame of sample June Sept. Dec. 40 43.75 30.00 Bitterbrush Leaves £;_/ and Stems Leaves .Stems 128.75 12.50 73.75 10.00 15.001/ Mountain Mahogany Leaves Stems 107.50 11. 25 62.50 10.00 5. 00 ~/ Leaves Stems Leaves Stems 152.50 7.50 80.00 2.50 101.25 3.75 28.75 3.75 Big Sage GambelOak Serviceberry 3.75 21. 25 10.00 1/ Legend: 1/ The leaves and stems are from current annual growth. ~/ The leaves and stems of sagebrush were combined for analysis. 1/ There were a few remaining leaves on the stems of these plants and they were combined with the stems in order to check the total carotene content available to the deer during that season. �-29TABLE V. RANKINGOF BROWSEPLANT PART BY SEASONIN CAROTENE CONTENT FROM HIGH TO LOW June December September Big Sage stems and leaves 1. Gambe1 oak leaves Gambe1 oak leaves Gambe1 oak stems 2. Bitterbrush leaves Bitterbrush leaves 3. Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany Bitterbrush stems leaves leaves 4. Serviceberry leaves Big sage stems & leaves Serviceberry stems 5. Big sage stems & Mountain mahogany stems Serviceberry leaves leaves 6. Bitlerbrush stems Gambe1 oak leaves Bitterbrush stems 7. Mountain mahogany Mountain mahogany stems stems 8. Gambe1 oak stems Gambe1 oak stems 9. Serviceberry stems Serviceberry stems PLANS FOR FURTHER STUDIES Tests for protein and carotene will be made on the March collection of material. The four seasonal collections will also be analyzed for ash, calcium, phosphorus, crude fat, crude fiber, moisture, and nitrogen free extract. LITERATURE CITED Association of 'Official Agricultural Chemists. 1955. Official methods of analysis. 8th· Ed. 1008 pp. Wash., D. C. Dietz, Donald R. 1956a. Nutritive composition of browse plants. Coop. Wildl. Res. Unit. 10 (1):10-13. Quart. Rept. Colo. ----------------- 1956b. Nutritive composition of browse plants. Coop. Wildl. Res. Unit. 10 (2}:19-23. ---------------- 1957. Nutritive composition of browse plants. Quart. Rept. Colo. Coop. Wildl. Res. Unit. 10 (3). Esplin, A. C. , et. _&. 1937. A study of Utah's winter range. Bul. No. 277. 58 pp. Prepared by: Donald R. Dietz Date: April 1, 1957 Approved by: Quart. Rept. Colo. Utah Agr. Exp. sta. Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid.Coordinator l ��-31- April, JOB COMPLETION 195.7 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of. C=-O.=;..:L~O~RA==D;.;O;.._ ProjectNo. Work Plan No . _ ~~·_-~3~8_-~R~-~1~0 ~~~ __e_r_-_E_l_k_1ri~v_e_st_~~a_ti_o_n_s_. ....,;;m=- _ --'-;~F_o~r..;;lagliLe~an=d_Rang...;..;.;;~e;..".;;U_til~· _iz;;.;a_t_io_n_:_J_o_b~N_o_._2_0 __ Title of Job. __ ":;;~;;.i(/,;;;n;:;d;;....;;;C..;;'·o..:;;m;;;!p~o;:;.;· s;:;.;i:.;,;tl;:;.;· o;,;;n;..;,;;;an;;;.d;;;...;;D;..;e;,;;n;,;;s;,;;i .• ty:....;;;o,;;,f..;;M..:;;a;;.JI.;;· o;,;;r;.....,;;;;E..:;;lk;;;...;;F;..,;o;..;o;.,;d;,;;s;,,;. _ Objectives: 1. To determine the major species of elk food on winter range and the area of each. 2. To provide a quantitative basis for ulitimate determination this elk winter range as an aid to more effective management. of carrying capacity of Methods: Aerial photographs, general vegetative type maps, and topographic maps were used in conjunction with the field reconnaissance to delimit the winter range as well as to aid in determination of types and sub-types, and extent of each, Vegetative line transects, consisting of a series of 100 foot strips were established at approximate one mile intervals along the southern and western exposures (north and east side) of the South Fork of the White River. Transects began one-forth mile south of Buford at the junction of the north and south forks (see map-Figure 1). Vegetative sub-types were delimited at each one mile interval and 100 foot strips were sampled within these sub-types. All transects began at the edge of the South Fork and were run directly up slope to the upper limits ·of elk winter range at that point .: The upper limit of winter range WclES determined by utilization of browse, and amount and type of pellets. _. . .' - . ' .. ' . The number of 100 foot line transects taken with a sub-type, depended upon the width of that sub-type. Distance between strips varted approximately 50 to 200 yards . depending upon the number and extent of .types encountered. . Each 100 foot strip was located by township, range, section, and aerial photo number on a map. starting points were usually recorded with reference to some major or permanent topographic feature (when possible) as an aid to location. �-::,. -32General comments were made at each area sampled regarding degree of slope (estimate), exposure, rock type, erosion, and fire history. In aspen type. samples, the percentage of trees barked, and degree of barking (light, moderate, heavy) was noted. Browse Measurement Technique: A 100foot cloth tape, calabrated in inches was used as the line intercept. The tape was stretched in a straight line directly upslope (cross-strata) to allow for strata, moisture, and other variations. Only shrubs and other woody species were measured. considered. Herbaceous material was not The canopy width of each shrub encountered was measured to the nearest inch. Where dead or incomplete peripheral growth was encountered, imaginary straight lines from one living twig to the next nearest one was used as the canopy. By close observation of past hedging, and using other similar studies as a guide (McCulloch, 1955;Young, 1938), only that portion of the canopy lying above the one foot level was measured. This measurement assumes that the average snow depth for the South Fork is one foot; therefore, only that browse above one foot in height was considered as available. A small stick with a one foot marker was used for the proper height determinations. Similarly, no browse above seven feet in height was measured. This was in accordance with studies by Gaffney 0941) and McCulloch (1955). For each shrub species encountered along the line injercept, the canopy width was recorded in inches together with the degree of past utilization expressed as light, moderate, or heavy. Also, general location and description of each transect was recorded describing starting and stopping points, number of 100 foot strips taken and description of types and sub-types encountered. Past and recent elk utilization was observed with regard to hedging of shrubbery, aspen barking, and pellet counts. Also, abundance of deer and livestock was determined by sight records and droppings. Range condition was noted generally with respect to utilization, recovery (or retrogression), and erosion. Pellet counts were made at each 100foot strip by using a yardstick and projecting it one yard on each side of the line transect. The frequency of all pellet groups (by species) occuring within the 6 ft. by 100ft. belt was recorded. No effort was made to distinguished the pellet groups by year. �TABlE I. SOUTH FORK WINTER RANGE BROWSE CANOPY >-3 Z r:: '1 § ~S '10- rn (ll Q ...•. I;) ~ 0- rn o: '1 0 (ll <. r.;' •••••(ll (ll 'g'1 0 rn (ll 0 '1 '1 ...., I-' 0 •..... (ll cr' P $2 0 ;0;"' (ll (ll Q 0- '1 '1 '<: to o ~ cA' ~(ll ::r CD '1 '1 PJ 00- •.... & 2 rn ~ •.... •...• > rn 0.. '0 ::0 p (ll 0 rn (ll '< ~ 0 3 246 82 1 9 239 293 313 327 2 6 198 262 71 245 0 ~•.... 0 '1 g~, rn III 5- ~ •.... 2' P •.... '0 0 0 0 .g; ~ Q tn (ll 0- (ll c...::o § g ••••• ;0;"' 'g'<: '1 ~ (ll ...•. '1 '1 279 408 1 221 27 30 282 19 14 56 35 21 5 4 208 344 ?4fi 6 1 300 III 18 7 4 681 249 62 8 2 322 145 353 72 213 9 10. 2 9 72 107 120 2003 15 433 75 58 14 :39 5 11 12 12 268 11 707 433 602 945 384 133 7 39 184 31 90 64 4 23 13 12 478 58~l 655 10 16 8 14 12 661 596 869 6:3 32 30 15 12 115 425 500 16 55 43 16 17 10 492 11 671 294 441 490 379 79 49 135 618 3. 6 70 . 9 18 5 300 216 135 5 199 26 2 ~ o r:: ~ 0 0 Q.. o PJ ~ '1 o '1 ::s 0 ~::o trl PJ 0 '0 Q •••.• ;0;"' •...• to •.... ~rn •....r:: 0; '1 (ll Q '1 0I 8t"' ~ nZ '1 0- (ll,<: $2 $2 ::r' 5' '1 '1 e, ::0 ~o o r:: oq p (ll 0.. III III p s- '< P •..•. ::t: $J to •.... ~ (ll >-3 3'1 rn ...•. •.... 0 PJ r:: rn (ll '< o..(ll > •..... '0 (ll ~~ t:s"' 57 45 638 17 10.68 1238 60 30 1 17311 94 I 68 84 23 1 23 PJ b 0 ...•. 7 81 AND DENSITY) I 13 4 ox '§ '1 '1 (ll p '< '1 3 (COMPOSITION WIDTH TOTALS (ll 8 577 563 4 a87 . 31 3 b '1 ::r' '< ~ ::0 ANALYSIS 7 943 8 I 33 939 15 55 20 45 163 262 400 15551 46 1128, 23 14 126 60 317 44 , W W 798 2763, 40 13 4 I Tot Perc 27 83 35 27 1800 ll2 2 14 5 20 26 2330 78 1 8 21241 1942 2350 72 98 1 1616 :J<! z <!<!!:J:J 881 72 29047 87 40 235 112 3 91 76 444 290 298 141 174 229 91 1~7 7850 5862 7545 2196 1831 3~W 566 160 lOOt: nt ..• 2701" 202 .260 ,.076 .063 .011 .019 .006 .005 .006 .008 .004 .004 .003 .015 .010 .010 .001 .002 .008 .005 .004 .000 ,--- ~ I ,.-'" "''\!'Ii �=34FIELD FORM Project 38-R Date._· Type. SOUTHFORK WINTER ELK RANGE SURVEY Browse Composition and Density _ _ SUbtype. Transect No. 100' Strip No..... _ -----_ Location: T R;..._ Reference Point Sec. Photo No. ----------------- Slope.___________ Exposure._________ Rock Type:. Erosion:......_______ Fire history:.__ ...-..:.._______________ Degree of barking: Species % of trees BROWSE SPECIES' n. In. U't U't In. U't. Iii. U't. _ Droppings: Elk:__ Deer Rabbit:..._ Horse. Cattle. Sheep - -----------_ --"-__ - CANOPYWIDTHAND UTILIZATION In. U't. In. U't In. uu, In. U't i 1 I ! I ~ I I I I .. Total for 100' strip. Inches Remarks: Recorder: -------------------- �Figure I SOUTH '//////////////////// r: r 1('.905' / PIO FORK, WHITE BLANCO /////)/~/// ~ ~ SIXTH COUNTY, PRINCIPAL RIVER COLORADO MERIDIAN 'l/. 0/. /////. ///// -'l/ ~ 5 CAL E: 3/4" = I MIL E ~ ~~ ~ N '/. 'l 'l , \ \ \ "c-4 .,. ~ ~ /' \ ~ /. TO NEW ~ ~;;; CASTLE "'0 "// //// ~.s- //// /// 'l 'l'/ ~. LEGEND ~--~RIVER ~CREEK /' •• LAKE ->',-----ROAD .::.....----IMPROVED ROAD X BRIDGE ~\\IIIII,,- PEAK ;/11"11\- Ii/Imlllill/RIDGE TOP ----oc- COMP., DENSITY o UTI LlZATION TRANSECT !O,74~1 TRANSECT CAMP GqOUND WHITE ~ ,":'r.'>. 'm " .<? 'tR _____ I U_LWJ I rR~9..~ R.._8.9_- _ �Figure II SOUTH FORK BROWSE UTILIZATION ---------------------------------~ o CLASSIFIC;~TION CRITERIA: H •.... .:Heavy or tigbtly hedged ; frequently hedged beyonii annual growth; clubbed appeanance . M - Moderately hedged; general utilization of annual growth • •... b - Little to no utilization; terminal portions of twigs lightly nipped. ~ i~_.:J \_t) �=35= Results: Approximately two-thirds of the .field work was conducted by the writer and one assistant. The remaining one-third was done by the writer alone. The study was completed in one month (July 7th to Aug. 6th, 1956). Approximately 21 days were, actually spent in laying out the transects. Two men could run as many as 12 strips (100 ft) a day over a transect distance of 2-3 miles. A considerable portion of each day was spent on horseback, especially in the area above the South.Fork Camp ground. On the basis of total measurements; oak, snowberry, serviceberry, chokecherry, and big sage comprised slightly over 87 percent of the South Fork browse 'canopy. The remaining shrubs were present in relatively small percentages, 2 percent or less (Table 1). Some plants occurred more frequently than the percentage indicates, however, growth type was especially true of bitterbrush where it occurred. Chokecherry was most abundant as an open shrub type above the South Fork Camp Ground. Snowberry was most abundant as an open shrub type below the camp ground, and was mainly associated with aspen elsewhere. The cottonwoods, dogwoods, elderberries, along the river and tributaries. birch, and maple were most common Utilization estimates (Figure 2) of the more abundant species showed that oak, serviceberry, and chokecherrywere receiving heavy utilization. The available portions of these species were utilized moderate to heavy whereever they occurred. These three shrubs were selected as the key species on the basis of composition and degree of utilization. Other species such as mountain mahogany, bitterbrush, maple, narrow leaf cottonwood, dogwood, and young aspen also showed moderate to heavy utilization. However, due to their relatively restricted occurrence throughout the range, they are probably more aptly termed "ice-cream plants". Although snowberry was second highest in abundance, (26%), utilization was light to none in almost all instances. On this basis, and in view of what has been observed on otherzanges, this species may have value as an indicator of overuse on the South Fork. Some shrubs, such as big sage and wild rose showed differential utilization which seemed to be largely dependent upon site. Also, it is probable that deer utilize, the sagebrush to a large extent .. Degree of utilization, expressed in percent, for the seven most abundant browse species is presented in tabular form as follows: �-36- SQecies Oak Snowberry Serviceberry Chokecherry Big Sage Wild Rose %ComQosition azo 26.0 20,2 07.6 06,3 019 . No. Shrubs Observed 508 569 465 181 129 88 .%Heavy 82.1 00.0 77.4 76.8 11. 5 23.9 Utilization %tModerate %Light 13.4 4.5 17.7 82.3 15..5 7.1 17.1 6.1 34.9 53.6 43.2 32.9 Barking of aspen varied from none to heavy barking of all trees visible. This too depended somewhat on site. Trees were barked from approximately 11/2 to 5 feet in height. Although many trees appeared to be completely "girdled", few appeared to be detrimentally affected possibly because barking had been done over a period of years. The amount of recent barking (winter 1955-56) observed was relatively small. Evidence of winter utilization usually terminated in the coniferous belt which extended below the rim of the Flat Tops. Since pellet groups could not be separated as to year deposited the method of projec ting for elk days use would not be applicable. However the frequency of occurrence gives a fair indication of the degree of use by each species. ( SQecies Elk Deer Cattle Horses Rabbits Total 609 240 161 81 17 1,108 Average Per Transect 32.0 12.6 8.5 4.2 0.9 Average Per 100 ft. striQ 4.4 1.8 1.2 .6 .12 Percent 54.9% 21.6% 14.6% '7.4% 1.5% 100. % A_ few elk were seen in the vicinity of Park and Lost Solar, Creeks during early summer. They were all cows, and undoubtedly hadcalves in the area. Deer were seen frequently throughout the summer on all portions of the winter range. Small bands of cattle were observed throughout the summer in the vicinity of Park and Lost Solar Creek. They were strays from the Oyster Lake allotment. (U. S, Forest Service-White River Allotment) which began in the upper Park Creek Region. Ranchers were having extreme difficulty in trying to hold their cattle on the high' summer ranges. Utilization by horses was incidental since most horses in the area were being used for packing, riding! or working livestock. �-37Only four shed elk antlers were found during the summer, - high-near the Flat Tops rim. and these were extremely Five dead elk were found: Two were cows and one was a five point bull which had been strangled to death by approximately 10 yards of barbed wire around his neck and antlers. The remaining two were twin calves which had apparently been aborted or had died shortly after birth. All carcasses were well decomposed, and with the exception of the bull, cause of death was not evident. Literature Cited Gaffney, William S. 194L The effects of winter elk browsing, south fork of the Flathead River, Montana. Jour. Wldf. Mgt. 5(4): 427-453. McCullmh, Clay Y. Jr. 1955. Utilization of winter browse on wilderness game range. Jour. Wldf. Mgt. 19 (2): 206-215. Young, Vernon A. 1938. The carrying capacity of big game range. Mgt. 2 (3) : 131-134. Submittted by:_ __;J;...;o;,;;hn::;;...;;;T..;..' _,;H=ar;;;.;r;;.,;i;,;;s;.._ .;;.;A.pproved by: Date: ..;..A ...• p•... r_;i,;;"ol,:....;;..19 •... 5•... 7_-..,. _ Jour. big Wldf. Laurence Eo Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��Aj~c.: J.... :.-:( -39- April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ~----~~~~~~------------------- ProjectNo. ~VV~-_3~8~-~R~-~1~0 ~i~D~e~e~r~-~E~I~k~hw~e~s~ti.g~a~t~io~n~s~ _ Work Plan No. .~II;;;;I~ __ ~;;;;.F~o.;;;.r_'_'ag,g.;;;.e_'_'a~n~d~R.;.;;an=gl..,;;e~U_tl..;;·I_'_'iz_a...;.t...;.i...;.o;; e;.;;s,-,;_J~o;;..;.b;.....;;;N...;.o;;..;.;._ Title of Job :, ---,-..;:C;..;:o;.::n;.::d:=.it;;:i:.;::.o;;:n_;o~f...;.VV.:..:..;:;in:=.t:..;:e;.;:r_E=lk:.:....::F:....;o;..;:o;.;:d;.:: _ Objectives: L To determine on winter range. the general health, vigor, and degree of utilization of elk foods 2, To provide a quantitative basis for ultimate determination of carrying of this elk winter range as an aid to more effective management. capacity Methods: Key species and key areas, as determined by general reconnaissance and the compositiondensity range survey, were sampled by the 10 point browse utilization check described in U, S. Forest Service (Region 7) Range Analysis Handbook, A total of forty-eight 10 point utilization transects were established at one-mile intervals along the southern and western exposures of the South Fork beginning one and one-fourth miles above Park Creek and continuing downstream to Buford (see map), The abundance and distribution of key species present at each mile interval the number of transects established at that location, Transects established intervals varied from one to four, The key species cherry. selected for the utilization study were oak, serviceberry determined at these and choke- . The transects were perrnantly marked with aluminum plates nailed to trees at, or near, the starting point, General location descriptions as well as cardtnal compass readings were recorded for each transect as an aid to relocation, Location on aerial photo maps was also recorded. �-40FIELD FORM Form 174-R2 (Revised January, 1956) W MANAGEMENT PELLET GROUPCOUNTS ______________ (Forest) _ (Name of Key Area) ____________ (District) (State Game Management Unit (Game Herd) (Date) Locationof transect and plots _ Veg. Type --:Size of Plots * - 1/100 A. Slope Examiners _ Pellet group counts by individual chain lengths within sample strip; or by circular plots: (Specify animal involved) 1 '2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total: . Av . SUMMARY Deer Elk Other .{§pecify) 1. Total pellet groups counted (total strip) 2. Pellet groups per acre (total pellet groups X 10) 3. Days use per acre** (pellet groups per acre) (13 (game) or 12 (cattle) * 1/100 acre strip transect = 6.6 feet (79.2 inches) X 66 feet: Total strip - 660 feet X 6.6 feet = 1/10 acre. 1/100 acre circular plot l:l! 9 radius; 10 plots - 1/10 acre ** Tally groups separately by species, i. e., deer, elk, cattle, and specify which species is involved in summary. = W ' �1::,? ~41- W Form 174-R2 (Revised January, 1956) MANAGEMENT Big game • Forest BROWSE UTILIZATION Area Used By: Deer ------ -------------------------- District;__ _ No. & Name of Game Herd Examiner Period of Use: .__------- ------------------------ ________ ·...;;Elk _ ..;;Sleep _________ Other (Specify) Location of Transect Aerial Photo No. Plant Species Tagged Exposure & % Slope. Specify Year of Growth Measured {Current or old growth) Date Examined: Before Browsing After Browsing ;__-------------------------------- ------------ Bush & Tag No. Bush Location (Bearing & Distance to Marker) Tag Degree of Location {Example Hedging 1/ and Age 30" high on NE side) Class E_/ Totals Notes Before Browinz s Length of Shoots (Record No. of ea. to nearest shoots 1/2 in. & Total) ~/ _ _ _ After Browsing Length of No. Shoots of shoots Record to nearest 1/2 in. & Total) I . (Current Growth Percent Utilization (Old Growth l/ Degree of hedging (available portion of bush) 1.: Light or none 2 = Moderately ~/ hedged 3 = Tightly hedged. Age Classes: S = Seedling Y = Young plant ~/ If grazed before initial measurement, M = Mature plant D = Decadent plant. estimate total length of growth and circle figure. �1:t8 -42One hundreth acre pellet count plots were established at each one chain interval of the 10 point transects using rock piles to mark the center of the plots. Old pellets were either removed from the plots or crushed to eliminate error from future counts. Special metal (alloy) twist-on tags were used to mark the branch from which the twigs were measured. Also, special black pencils were used to number the tags. Location of the tag with regard to the bush as well as location of the bush (tagged) with regard to the rock pile were recorded on appropriate form. Measurements of current years growth were began on August 20th, after all linear growth had stopped. All transects had been established by September 6th. Each bush measured was also classified as to age (seedling, young, mature, decadent) and degree of past hedging (light, moderate, tight) as the method prescribes. Re suIts: Of the 48 transects established: 24 were in oak, 17 in serviceberry, 6 in chokecherry, and 1 in mountain mahogany. These figures are somewhat indicative of the relative abundance of these key shrubs. Although mountain mahogany was not abundant enough to be considered a representative species~ one utilization transect was established in this species as a matter of interest since it is a key species on many big game ranges. Degree of hedging for the key species was moderate to tight in almost all cases, however, most of the shrubs appeared to be healthy and showed good recovery. Pellets on the area indicated that the range had formerly been used by deer, elk; cattle, horses, and rabbits. Deer,' elk and rabbit sign was distributed over the slopes as well as the bottom. Cattle and horse sign was more abundant in the lower meadows and aspen groves. The majority of the shrubs Were in the young and mature age classes. Occasionally oaks and serviceberry would show decadence depending upon site, competition, and past hedging. Total production figures are presented in tabular form (Table I). The average current linear growths were as follows: oak - 1. 25 inches;serviceberry - 1. 007 inches; chokecherry 1. 66 inches; and mountain mahogany - .96. �Figure I KEY SPECIES .... HE,!)GINGCLASSIFICATION 100% ~------~-..--------.------~----------------- ..•. --~------ ------~--~--~------ H --- 100,% 75% M OAK - - - - - H M L SERVICEBERRY L -- ---- - - -- - - H AGE CLASSIFICATION ------- - - - .-. - _ ~ - 1>1 L CHOKECHERRY ------------ - - - - __ - - 50% _ .•... _---- Y M OAK D Y lv! ,n SERVI CEBERRY Y M D CHOKECHERRY Y - Young (simple branching)'; M - !v1a ture (complex branching) j. D - 'Decaden t (more than ;t crown (lead); No seedlings mea sur-ed , •.•. �SOUTH FORK BROWSE PRODUCTION (1956) Oak Z~ r:: 11 S0"1:1 III (I) 00 11 ~ e+ B3~ g<"t'C'"S 00\(1) 11 ..... 0 Serviceberry ~~t'""4~ (I) (I) 0 II) aq' ~<-t- •....• It 00· OJ r:: 11 (I) 0.. ::r 0 ....., t'""4~> (I) ~ <: ~ •.••(I) Z~ r;t 0"1:1 (I) 00 aq 11 ~ (I) 1 82 128 1.56 103 206.5 2.00 4 131 2.32 304.5 5 8 140 112.5 .80 10 122 191.5 1.56 12 111 171 .64 14 129 185 1.43 16 141 1.26 178.5 18 81 81 1.00 20 107 1.29 139 24 .88 119 135 123 142 25 1.15 28 107 .55 59 29 1.41 140.5 99 100 31 117 1.17 32 103 139.5 1.35 112.5 83 1.07 34 102 36 1.68 95 106 1.08 178.5 39 1.10 40 129 140.5 82 42 1.32 90.5 128.5 1.42 43 97 46 108 76 .92 48 91 84.5 24 2,633 3,300.00 Ave. No. shoots/transect-109.77 Ave. No. shoots/shrub - 10.97 r:: 11 S ~~ g•••.S0" ~0t'""4~ ....., (I) 0 Chokecherry t'""4~> (I) ~ <: 1:1 •.••(I) 11 ~ 11 ~ It aqaql1 00 ~~ •••.••.•.• r;t ~ r:: •.••::r l1aq e-+ g, 0.- II) 3 6 11 15 17 21 23 26 27 30 33 35 38 41 44 45 47 17 00 (I) (I) OJ 106 82.5 129 206 93 208 95 159.5 115 72 120 117 88 178.5 88 97 47.5 99 73 59.5 87 90 90 24.5 96 52 70 24 89 . 30 52 41 104 84.5 1,553 1,564.5 (I) .77 1.59 2.23 1.67 .62 .97 2.02 .90 .47 .81 1.03 .27 .54 .34 .33 .78 .81 g ~ S ~ 0"1:1 (I) 00 11 (I) Cl e+ 2 7 9 13 19 22 6 rg.~ g....C'"S 00 (I) 11 ..... 0 106 99 78 79 89 76 527 ~~t'""4~ (I) (I) 0 aq' ~ It ••.•.• (Jtl)aql1 ::r r;t aqIII II) 00 r:: 00 11 0 ....., (I) 226.5 192 126.5 123 89 120 877 2.13 1.93 1.62 1.55 '1.00 1.57 (I) 0.. t'""4~> (I) ~ <: 1:1 •.••(I) H ~ . c..:> Ave. No. Shoots/transect - 87.83 Ave. No. shoots/shrub - 8.7-8-Ave ..twig length - 1.66-- i Ave. No. shoots/transect-91.35 Ave. No. shoots/shrub - 9.13 Ave. Twig Length - 1.007 Ave. twig length1.25 ~ -'"j '.,,:;' �-44Measurements following elk winter browsing, will be taken again in the spring (1957) as soon as snow conditions permit. Also the pellet counts will be made at this time. From these figures, an estimate of percent utilization of elk days on the range can be calculated. of the key species Submitted by:__ J;::;,;o:;.:h;;:;n~T;..:.._..::.;:H::;;a;::.r.::.r;:.:is;,._ A;;.:' ~pproved by: Date: ;:.:A~p.;;.r.;;;;;il •.,..,;.1;.;;,9..;.5,.;;.,7 _ and number Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �-45April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~~~~--------------------- Project No. Work Plan No. Title of Job : ~\V~-~9~6~-~D~-~1~ __~~VV~i~ld~T~u=r~k~e~y_De~~v~el~o~p~m~en~t~ _;;.I ----i·~J..;;;o..;;;;.b...;N;.;.o.;;....;...._...;l;..._ _ _ ._..;p;;...o""'p ••.. u;.;;;;l;.;..a;.;..tI;;..;· o;.;;;n;_..;.St;;...a...;.tu..;.;.s~ _ Objectives: To gather data on population status, and development in both original and transplanted areas. To instruct other Departmental personnel in methods of securing population status data. To eventually turn over to the Game Management Division the securing of population status data in areas in which, open seasons turkeys have been held each year. on Procedure: VVildlifeConservation .Officers on the eastern slope were asked to record all wintering flock counts on special notebook forms during the period from November 1, 1956 to March 1, 1957. These were turned-in to the Regional Game Manager at the end of each month. The Regional Game Manager in turn passed this information on to project personnel where the data was analyzed and as many duplicate counts eliminated as possible. Data on the numbering of winter flocks on the Western slope is incomplete as the men had not been supplied with the data sheets. Consequently, the data shown here is taken from diaries, field notes and a general inquiry into the status of the turkey flocks. Exact dates and the hour of observation were not kept inmany instances. The periods of observation and numbers gathered are placed .as near as possible to their actual occurrence. In a few instances the names of ranchers seeing the turkeys were not recorded. In such cases the term rancher is used; Then where data was kept by rangers often the exact rangers were not recorded. Hence the term ranger appears where this occurs. Credit is given wherever possible. Where birds were trapped from a flock the number of birds was subtracted from the 'flock and that forms the recorded number. Findings: Eastern Slope. The number of wild turkey wintering population counts was much smaller in number than desired but it is felt that much valuable information was secured. Some counts made by interested land owners have been included for areas in which no counts were secured by Departmental field men. �-4(iTable 1 shows population counts by counties. Las Animas County shows the largest wintering population count on the eastern slope. This can be accounted for by two reasons; the wild turkey population is highest in this County and a better coverage of the area was made by the Wildlife Conservation Officers concerned. Then too, all of the wild turkey live-trapping work on the eastern slope was done in this area making it possible for the.writer to secure a number of accurate flock counts. Table 2. shows the number of wild turkeys transplanted to eastern slope areas which were not included in the wintering population flock counts. This was the first time that data on wild turkey wintering populations has been gathered in exactly this manner, therefore no comparative data is available for past years. TABLE 1. WILD TURKEY WINTERING POPULATION COUNTS--EASTERN SLOPE* November 1956 to March 1957 County Date Time Number Observer' Drainage Noon 101 M. Mizer, T. Baca Carrizo Cr. 12/3/56 Everett &' D. M. Hoffman 18 Custer' Babcock Hole Leo Broux 12/29/56 S. Hardscrabble 1/15/57 60 B. Donley Total 78 Douglas Fremont Indian Cr. Oak Cr. .West Cr. 3/1/57 2/8/57 2/27/57 Fall,56 7 34 17 45 96 J. Grover Stan Ogilvie Dan Riggs L. Banta 3 15 62 .80 Dan Riggs M. Mosher .Eo VanCleve 2:00 P. M. 1 10:00 A. M. 4 10.00 A. M. 7 2:00 P.M. 9 11:00 A.M. 50 DonWurm Don Wurm Don.Wurm Don Wurm Don Wurm & A. Hamilton 4:30 P. M. 1:00 P. M. Total Herfano Huerfano R. .Cucharas R. Santa Clara Cr. 2/22/57 12/13/56 1/10/57 3:00 P. M. Total Las Animas Chicken Cr. Laurinsido Cr. Martinez Cr. 12/4/56 12/18/56 12/17/56 2/23/57 12/15/56 �1~0/',1 : ._ .,o.~)- ',. -47Wild Turkey Winter Population Counts--Eastern Date County Drainage Las Animas-continued. Sarcillo Can. 2/4/57 N. Trujillo Cr. 1/10/57 Mavricio Can. 1/28/57 Del Aqua Gan. 1/18/57 San Miguel Can. 2/6/57 Frisco Can. Sugarite Can. Pinon Ridge Pearly Can. Time 3:00 P. M. 2:00 P. M. 5:00 P. M. 4:00 P. M. 12/21/56 1/3/57 12/6/56 1/27/57 2/25/57 3:00 P. M. 105 20 47 15 17 3:00 P. M. 7 Total Red Cr. Wales Ranch Ridge Rd. Squirrel Cr. Number 147 32 28 46 ,.29 3/7/57 Pueblo * Slope-Table I-continued. 12/29/56 12/29/56 12/29/56 12/29/56 D. M. Hoffman D. M. Hoffman D. M. Hoffman D. M. Hoffman C. M. Scott & D. M. Hoffman C. M. Scott C. M. Scott C. M. Scott E. Hudson C. M. Scott & D. M. Hoffman C. M. Scott & D. M. Hoffman ·564 12 14 20 10 Total Observer 56 SUMMARYOF DATA: Total number of wild turkeys counted 982 Total number of separate flocks observed 30 Average sz e of flock observed 32.73 * Duplicate counts have been disregarded in so far as possible. Leo Broux Leo Broux Leo Broux Leo Broux • �-48TABLE 2 TRANSPLANTS MADE 19S6-1957* County Las Animas Huerfano Clear Cr. Larimer Area Date Transplanted Soldiers Canyon 10/20/56 Muddy Creek 12/11/56 & 12/23/56 Mt. Evans 11/6/56 & 12/23/56 Buckhorn Creek 1/6/57 Total Number 14 10 11 15 50 * These have not been included in wintering population count data Table 1. TABLE 3 WILD TURKEY WINTERING POPULATION COUNTS--WESTERN SLOPE November 1956to March 1957 County Archuleta Period Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Total Fall Total Number 47 28 31 16 26 148 57 57 Observer M. Burget hunter hunter Mr. King rancher Blanco R. Blanco R. Winter Winter Total 26 17 43 C. Vavak B. Chambers Mill Cr. Mill Cr. Fall Winter Total 33 28 61 hunter D. Hott Snowball Cr. Snowball Cr. Snowball Cr. Snowball Cr. Fall Fall Fall Fall Total 31 8 17 11 67 R. Macht R. Macht R. Macht R. Macht Drainage Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo Little Navajo Mr. Caulk �-49Wild Turkey Wintering Population Counts--Western Slope--Table 3. Period Number Observer Winter Total 41 41 C. Ford San Juan R. Winter Total 17 17 C. Vavak E. Fork Piedra Winter Total 28 28 W. Carlan Butcher Spring Butcher Spring, Fall Winter Total 21 16 37 C. Vavak E. Burster Devil Creek Winter Total 46 46 C. Ford Piedra. River Piedra River Piedra River Winter Fall Fall Total 23 22 19 64 Mr. Thompson L. Bartholomew Logger San Juan Fall Total 57 57 Logger Stallstimer. C. Stallstimer C. Fall Fall Total 24 17 41 S. Belmear F. Copeland Beaver C. Fall Fall Fall Fall Total 33 28 31 29 121 C. Tcwnsend S. Biers C. Townsend F. Morrison Beaver Cr. Winter Total 49 49 C. Monger Bear Cr. Bear Cr. Fall Fall Total 32 17 49 D. Holcomb F. Womer County Drainage Archuleta-continued. Fourmile Cr. �-50Wild Turkey Winter Population Counts--Western Period Number Observer Fall Total 34 34 Mr. Touchstone Pine River Pine River Pine River Fall Fall Fall Total 19 29 13 61 Mr. Newman Mr. Newman rancher Florida River Fall Total 11 11 rancher Animas River Animas River Animas River Fall Fall Fall Total 29 24 :6 59 rancher rancher hunter Cherry Creek . Cherry Creek Cherry Creek Winter Winter Winter Total 9 17 19 45 R. Frame R. Frame R. Frame Mancos River Mancos River Mancos River Winter Winter Fall Total 37 39 41 117 H. Hawkins ranger R. Chad Turkey Creek Turkey Creek Turkey Creek· .Turkey Creek Fall Fall Fall Fall Total 11 29 7 33 80 R. Wallace· R. Wallace R. Wallace R. Wallace Lost Creek Lost Creek Lost Creek Fall Fall Fall Total 17 22 29 68 ranger ranger ranger Dolores River Dolores River Dolores River Dolores River Fall Fall. Fall Winter Total 67 16 9 16 108 B. Fisher M. 'Burget H. Van Pelt H. Van Pelt & C. Ford Drainage Count~ Archuleta -continued. Texas C. Montezuma Slope-Table 3 - continued. r �-51.Wild Turkey Wintering Population Counts--Western Period Number Observer Fall Fall Total 21 17 38 C. Neilson M, Burget San Miguel R. San Miguel R. San Miguel R. .San Miguel R. San Miguel R. Winter . Winter Winter Winter . Winter Total 11 17 '6 4 23 61 B. Mangus B. Mangus B. Mangus R Mangus B. Mangus Clay Creek Winter Total 12 12 Mr. McKever .Cottonwood Or. Cottonwood Cr. Fall Fall Total 84 28 112 J. Howlett J. Howlett Tabaguache Cr. Fall Total 16 16 J, Howlett Dry Creek Fall Total 8 8 H. Cox Drainage County Montezuma-continued House Creek ;'; Montrose Slope-Table 3-Continued. I " Ouray Uncompahgre R. Winter Uncompahgre R. Winter Uncompahgre R. Winter Uncompahgre R. Winter Uncompahgre R. Winter Uncompahgre It Fall JJncompahgre B..' Fall Total Delta Gunnison River Gunnison. River . Gunnison River Gunnison River Gunnison River Gunnison River Gunnison River Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Total 41 3 10 14 5 14 17 104 T, Sodousky M, Weeks M. Weeks M. Weeks M. Weeks T, Morgan M, Weeks 27 8 7 12 ranger H, Cox H, Cox H. Cox W. Mink W. Mink rancher 6 25 11 96 �~52Wild Turkey Wintering Population Counts -- Western Slope-Table 3-Continued . Period Number Observer Winter Winter Total 38 12 50 H. Fullenwider S. Nelson Surface Creek Surface Creek Winter Win1ar Total 6 5 11 H. Fullenwider H. Fullenwider Plateau Creek Fall Total 37 37 W. Woodard Parachtze Cr. Fall 6 Fall Total 16 22 F. Dunham and M. Lowery F. Dunham and M. Lowery Mam Creek Fall Total 13 13 M. Lowery Beaver Cr. Fall Total 16 16 M. Lowery Divide Cr. Divide Cr. Divide Cr. Fall Fall Winter Total 11 17 M. Lowery rancher \ M. Lowery and F. Dunham-W, Hall .Drain~e . Coun!I "Delta-con tinued. LaRue Creek LaRue Creek Mesa ..' Garfield 44 72 Garfield Cr. Garfield Cr. Fall Fall Total 9 11 20 rancher rancher Alkali Cr. Fall Total 29 29 rancher Canyon Cr. Canyon Cr. Canyon Cr. Canyon Cr. Canyon Cr. . Canyon Cr. Canyon Cr. Winter Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Winter Total 37 56 31 18 16 7 17 rancher M. Burget M. Burget F. Prelwitz F. Prelwitz F. Prelwitz Mr. Tibbits 184 ��-54Summary: Eastern Slope. . A total of 982 wild turkeys were counted during the wintering population survey on the eastern slope from November 1, 1956 to March 1, 1957. These were in thirty separate flocks for an average flock size of 32.72. An additional fifty birds not counted in the wintering population survey were transplanted to new areas on the eastern slope during the period. Summary Western Slope. A total of 2700 turkeys were observed and reported durirg the winter. A total of 69 observers assisted in this work. The number of flocks observed was 122 with an average size of 22. 13 birds per flock. The largest flock was reported by J. Howlett with 84 birds. The smallest flock contained three gobblers and was counted by Manuel Weeks. Double counts in these reports have been culled as closely as possible. Submitted by: __ Date : ..;;,M;;:.a;;;;r;;...t;.:i=n...:L=. ...:B=-u;;;;r;;.Jg~e:;.;t;.._ ...:A:.:.rpproved by: Laurence E. Riordan Donald M. Hoffman Federal Aid Coordinator ___;A;.:.p!;..r;;.;i;;;;.l.l..., -=1~9~57~ _ �lijjjiill~IWU 4l ??' ."/ ;:,.; .. _.'l. BDOW022163 -55= April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of. Project C;::,.;'..::;,O=L:..,;:O;.::R.::,A,:.:D::..;O:;..._ _ No. ~VV~-_9~6~-~~~1~ Work Plan No. __ -!:n~ ~;~VV~1=·1~d~T~u~r~k~e~y~D~e~v~e~lo~p~m~e~n~t _ _z.....!J~o::.::b:.;;N~o.:.... __;1=-- _ Title of Job :,__-..!T:..!r;.!;a::.tp:.t:p:!.ing!!fL~an==::d!....!T...:::r..:::a:!:!n;;:s~p~lan=:t::=i~ngt:L..:M::;:.::e;::.r. _ Objectives: To restore Merriam's wild turkeys to areas within the State found to be suitable habitat. To transplant turkeys to as many suitable locations within the known former range and other unoccup Ied sites as feasible. To create wherever possible huntable surpluses of wild turkeys. Procedure: 1. 'Selection of trapping areas on the basis of surplus birds or need for removal from inhabited areas. 2. Trapping operations consisting of pre-baiting of area, erection of live-trap, trap site observations, catching of birds, banding, and placing in transportation crates. 3. Transportation to release site and release. Artificial feed is used to hold newly transplanted birds in the area until they become located. Findings: Eastern Slope. Four areas on the eastern slope received transplants of Merriam's wild turkeys during the trapping and transplanting season from October 1956 through February 1957. These areas were examined during the late summer and fall of 1956 and recommended for filling. The areas receiving transplants include (a) Soldier's Canyon in Baca and Las Animas Counties, (b) MountEvans Management Area in Clear Creek County;' (c) Muddy Creek - Bruff Creek in Huerfano County, and (d) Buckhorn Creek in Larimer County. In addition to the above mentioned transplants, six surplus toms were released in two different trapping areas as exchange breeders. ' A total of fifty-nine wild turkeys were caught during the season on the eastern slope. Of these, a .total of fifty-five were released at the different transplant sites in-good condition while four were casualties resulting from the live-trapping and transplanting operations. One juzenile torn died as the result of nervous exhaustion while banding, ' a juvenile hen hit a tree on flying from a transportation crate and died of a broken neck, a mature hen died shortly after release apparently from:' injuries received in the trapping operations, and one juvenile hen appeared weak from release apparently from the loss of blood during transportation. The carcass of this latter bird has not been found to date. �-56The aluminum leg bands were discontinued during the latter part of the trapping season. IIJiffy" wing bands manufactured by National Band and Tag Company, Newport. Kentucky were experimented with during the season. The wing bands are easily applied and should remain in place longer than leg bands. The different trapping areas are discussed separately below: . Cottonwood Creek-Carrizo. Creek Area. Feeding to begin concentrating the wild turkeys in this area was started on September 26, 1956. A total of 115 turkeys were ranging in the area at the time. Permission to live-trap was granted by rancher Bob Dodge. Fifteen wild turkeys were caught on October 19, 1956with one dying from nervous exhaustion. The remaining fourteen including ten hens and four toms were released in the Soldier's Canyon area west of Pritchett on October 20, 1956. Sarcillo Canyon Area. The upper Sarcillo Canyon area consisting of the Sakariason and MacDonald properties was closed during the past wild turkey season by Commission regulation in order that surplus birds could be used for transJ?lPri:, purposes. This area is continuing to prove to be one of the better wild turkey wintering grounds in the Spanish Peaks area. Management practices conststrg of the establtshment of two small grain food . plots and limited predator control along with good public relations are thought to be the major factors involved in the population increase seen during the past five years in the area. A total of twenty-five wild turkeys were live-trapped in three catches during the. past trapping season with the assistance of rancher Sakariason. An experimental chickenWire trap was used in all cases. The Mount Evans Management Area and Muddy Creek transplants were made from this area and two additional surplus toms were taken from this area to Frisco Canyon for exchange breeders. Actual counts in the area at the conclusion of trapping operations in February, 1957 showed a total of 143 wild turkeys with approximately one hundred hens. It was hoped that at least one more transplant site could have been filled from this flock but the late winter weather proved unfavorable to trapping wild turkeys. Four surplus toms from San Miguel Canyon were released in the Sarcillo Canyon area as exchange breeders. These have been seen several times since their release and have apparently located in their new home. �~57The first catch in Sarcillo Canyon was made on November 5, 1956. A total of ten wild turkeys were caught and all were released on the Mount Evans Management Area in Clear Creek County the next day. One juvenile hen died after hitting a tree on release. The remaining birds consisting of five hens and four juvenile toms were released in good condition. Two mature toms were caught in the Sarcillo Canyon area on December 22, 1956 and added to the Mount Evans flock, Baled oat hay and grain was used successfully with the assistance of Custodian Wm. Forgett to hold the turkeys in the transplant area. The second catch in Sarcillo Canyon was made on December 10, 1956. A total of nine hens were caught at this time and transplaIied to Muddy Creek in Huerfano County on December 11, 1956. An attempt was made to release these birds on Bruff Creek but heavy drifted snow prevenjsd.this , Muddy Creek is in the same general area as Bruff Creek. One mature hen died shortly after release and the band was returned to W. C. O. Dan Riggs. This bird apparently died from injuries received in the trapping operations. All of the other hens were in good condition upon release. Two mature toms caught in the Sarcillo Canyon area on Decembe.r-zz , 1956 were added to this transplant of hens on December 23, 1956. The hens were observednearby at the time the release of toms were made. Baled oat hay and grain was used successfully with the assistance of W. C. O. Dan Riggs to hold these transplanted birds in the area until they became established. Two additional surplus toms caught on December 22 1956 in the Sarcjl lo Canyon area were released in the Frisco Canyon area by W. C. b. Chester Scott for exchange breeders. San Miguel Canyon Area. . A winter feed ground was established by W. C. O. Chester Scott in San Miguel Canyon during the late fall of 1956. _Approximately thirty-five wild turkeys used this feed ground regularly. A suggestion for a wild turkey live-trap based upon many field observations of the species was received from W. C. O. Chester Scott and by cooperative effort an experimental trap was erected. This was a large sized chicken wire drive trap which has definite possibilities in future wild turkey live-trapping and transplanting work; Pictures of the trap and site are shown in Figure 1, 2, and 3. Approximately $45. 00 in wire and other material was used in the building of the trap. Two days were spent in erecting the trap with.W.· C. O. Chester Scott and William Scott assisting the writer on the project. The site for the trap was carefully selected. The site chosen had a dense Gambell s oak cover with an intermixture of tall evergreens. There was a moderate slope of the ground to the east. The wire of the trap was cut and rewoven around the trees at the site so the trap is considered permanent for all practical purposes. A sketch of the trap is shown in .Figure 6. �-58Baiting of baled oat hay and grain was done in front of and through the main pen with the two wire doors rolled up on long poles. The small door to the catch pen was . wired closed during the baiting period. A catch of nine t.een wild turkeys was made on January 5, 1957 at 3:00 P. M, with Wildlife Conservation Officer Scott and Mr. Leon Swift assisting with the catch. Included in the catch were seven hens, eleven mature toms, and one juvenile tom. Four of the surplus mature toms were released in Sarcillo Canyon on January 6, 1957by Wildlife Conservation Officer Scott for exchange breeders. Seven hens, one juvenile tom, and seven mature toms were. released on Buckhorn Creek, Larimer County on the C. C. Wi:s.domproperty on January 6, 1957. One juvenile hen appeared weak from loss of blood during transportation. The remaining bird~ were released in good condition. The remarkable feature about this catch was that all of the wild turkeys which were in front of the trap were caught. Those outside the entrance were driven into the main part of the trap without attempting to fly. The site selected for this trap is apparently of prime importance in this respect. In a location such as the trap-site in San Miguel Canyon the birds did not fly when being crowded toward the main part of the trap due chiefly to dense cover. The wild turkeys of the San Miguel Canyon area are of true wild stock and therefore should be excellent birds for transplanting purposes. Table No.1 Trapping Site: Cottonwood Creek - Carrizo Creek Area. A. Date and Time: October 19, 1956 2: P.M. Spur Wt. Beard Leg Band Wing Band Sex Age (mm) (lbs) (em) No. No. 11 1200 1 Hen 2 yrs. 1202 2 Hen Juv. 8 11 1203 3 Hen Mat. 1204 4 Hen Mat. 9 1205 Tom Juv. Button None 5 13 1/2 1206 7 Hen Juv. 10 1207 6Hen Juv. 7 1/4 1208 Tom Juv. 13 Button 8 None 1209 9 Hen Juv. 10 1/2 1210 10 Hen 2 yr. 10 1/2 1211 11 13 Button Tom Juv. None 1212 Button 12 Tom Juv. 14 1/2 4 1/2 14 Button .None 1213 13 Tom Juv. 1214 10 14 Hen Mat. 1215 15 Hen Juv. 8 1/4 -- .Disposition: Number 1208 (Wing Band No.8) died at trapsite from nervous exhaustion. All others released October 20, 1956in Soldiers Canyon area west of Pritchett in Las Animas and Baca Counties. �-59( Trapping Site: Sarctllo Canyon. Assisting with Catch: Mr. John Sakariason. A. Date and Time: November 5, 1956 7:00 A. M. Leg Band No. 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 Wing Band No. Sex Age Wt. Spur (lbs) (mID); 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Juv. 2 yr. Mat. 2 yr. Juv. Juv. Juv. Juv. Juv. Mat. 9 9 12 1/2 -8 1/2 -14 1/2 Button 14 1/2 Button 13 1/2 Button 14 Button 9 10 1/2 -- Beard (cm) -None None None None Disposition: Number 1216 (Wing Band No. 16) died at release by flying into tree. Remainder released in good condition Mount Evans Management Area, Clear Creek County on November 6, 1956, 8:30 A. M. Assisted with release: Bill Forgett, Laurence E. Riodan, Ferd Kleinschnitz, and Mr. Clarence W. Baker. Trapping Site: Sarcillo Canyon. Assisting with Catch: Mr. John Sakariason. A. Date and Time: December 10, 1956 3:30 P. M. Leg Band No. 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 Wing Band No. Sex 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Age Juv. Juv. Mat. Mat. 2 yr. Juv. 2 yr. Juv. Mat. Wt. - Spur (lbs) (mm) ~O 1/2 10 1/2 10 11 9 10 9 8 1/2 -13 Beard ('em) 8 Disposition: Number 1234 (Wing Band No. 34) did not fly at release and carcass found shortly after by Wildlife Conservation Officer Dan Riggs. All others released in good condition Paul Wolf Ranch, Muddy Creek, Huerfano County. December 11, 1956, 10:30 A. M. Wildlife Conservation Officer Dan Riggs and Mr. Hess assisted with the release. �-60Trapping Site: Sarcfllo Canyon. Assisting with Catch: Mr. John Sakariason. A. Date and Time: December 22, 1956 3:30 P. M. Leg Band Wing Band Sex Age Wt. (lbs) No. No. 35 36 37 38 39 40 Tom .T'om Tom Tom Tom Tom Mat. Mat. Mat. Mat. Mat. Juv, 19 18 1/2 20 18 20 16 Spur (mm) Beard 19 19 15 16 25 Button 26 18 21 22 25 None (em) Disposition: Numbers 39 and 40 released December 23, 1956 Frisco Canyon by W. C. O. Chester Scott and William Scott. Numbers 35 and 36 released Mount Evans Management Area, December 23, 1956, 4:15 P. M. Numbers 37 and 38 released Muddy Creek, Huerfano County, December 23, 1956, 9:30 A. M. F. Baker and son assisted with the release. Observed nine hens transplanted earlier at this release site. Remarks: Leg bands were discontinued because of the large size of the tarsi on mature toms and evidence has shown the leg bands do not stay with the birds long enough to justify their use. Trapping Site: San Miguel Canyon. A. Date and Tillie: January 5, 1957 3:00 P. M. Assisting with Catch: Wildlife Conservation Officer Scott and Mr. Leon Swift. Leg Band Wing Band Sex Age Wt. Spur Beard No. No. (lbs) (mm) (cm) 41 Tom Mat. 15 9 19 42 Tom MaL 15 11 17 43 Tom Mat. 14 1/2 18 16 :8 Mat. 16 4i1 Tom· 15 45 Tom 19 1/2 Mat. 5 19 46 Tom Mat. 16 10 17 Tom Mat. 47 17 10 20 48 Tom Mat. 15 7 20 49 Tom Mat. 17 10 1550 Tom 10 Juv. Button None 51 Hen Juv. 9 52 Tom Mat. 17 14 7 53 10 Hen Juv. 54 2 yr. Hen 11 Tom 55 Mat. 19 21 23 56 Hen Juv. 9 57 Hen Juv. 9 1/2 58 Hen Juv. 9 59 Hen H Mat. �1 .•..~?~ , .',_:: -61Disposition: Numbers 41 through 44 released in Sarcillo Canyon January 6, 1957, 2 :00 P. M. by Wildlife Conservation Officer Chester M. Scott. Numbers 45 through 59 released Buckhorn Creek, Larimer County on the C. C. Wisdom Ranch. This release was made 2:30 P. M. January 6, 1957. Assisting with the release was: Wildlife Conservation Officer's Sig Palm and Gurney Crawford, Mr. Leon Swift, and rancher J. Graham. One juvenile hen did not fly on release but its carcass has not been found to date. Use of Baled Oat Hay at Transplant Sites: Experimentation with the use of baled oat hay in conjunction with necessary winter feeding activities on the eastern slope was described in the Colorado Quarterly Report, April, 1956. During the live-trapping and transplanting season of 1956-1957, the use of baled oat hay and grain was used very successfully with the Mount Evans, Muddy Oreek and Buckhorn Creek transplants. Special thanks are due Custodian William Forgett, and Wildlife Conservation Officers, Dan Riggs, and Sig Palm, and Gurney Crawford for the care and rebaiting of feedgrounds. In all of the transplants mentioned, the newly transplanted wild turkeys readily found the feedgrounds and returned from time to time during the winter to feed. During open mild weather, the birds do not use the feed grounds as often as during severe weather. On Muddy Creek where only hens were released during the lirst transplant, the baled oat hay and grain held these birds in the area until the toms could be added. The. flock of he.ns was seen above the feedground at the time the toms were released. On Mount Evans, two mature toms readily found a transplant made earlier upon releasing near the established feed ground. The greatest value in this type of feeding activity is the holding of the transplanted stock within the desired area until nesting season so that they will become located. The wild turkeys using the feed stations stay wild and do not become accustomed to people if the feedgrounds are carefully selected away from inhabited areas. The time involved in care and rebaiting of the feedground is small since these need" not be visited except at intervals of one to two weeks usually. During periods of heavy snow when travel to the feedground is often difficult, some feed is available in the bales which oan be scratched apart by the turkeys and enough grain secured to sustain the flock until the weather opens up. . �-62Table 2. Materials Used in Conjunction with Eastern Slope Transplants 1956-57-. Transplant Site Soliders Canyon Mount Evans Date Transplanted October 20, 1956 November 6, 1956 (2 toms added Dec. 23, 1956) Materials 4 sacks wheat 8 bales oat hay 6 .sacks wheat 3 sacks oats Muddy Creek December 11, 1956 (2 toms added.Dec. 23, 6 bales oat hay 2 sacks wheat 1 sack oats 1956) Buckhorn Cr. January 6, 1957 5 bales oat hay 2 bales alfalfa hay 2 sacks wheat 1 sack oats Findings - Western Slope Turkey trapping on the western slope got away to a slow start in 1956. This was the result of two main factors, hunting pressure and open fall weather. This was coupled with plentiful feed in the field. Since the turkey hunting season first opened in the fall of 1949 the turkeys have become more and more wary. This fall the turkey season was late. Two weeks of big game hunting put the turkeys on the alert. They had just begun to settle down a little when the turkey season gave them another jolt. Because of this the first trapping tries were in areas where there had been no turkey season. Since the turkeys had built up rapidly in the Glenwood Springs-Rifle area this was the most .Iikely spot to start our trapping season in. More than seventy-five turkeys were in East .Canyon Creek, ..while thirty more were in Main Canyon Creek. Many flocks of birds were reported over the area. For this reason it was felt safe to -set some traps in this area to take out a plant or two if we could get them. Feed grounds were started in East Canyon Creek, East Elk Creek and Main Elk Creek. When storms came in' December there was a lot of shifting in flock location. Some flocks seemed to disappear completely While others moved out on south facing slopes. In some areas the turkeys showed up in areas where they had never been seen before. It seems evident that turkeys as well as other game species sense the approach of winter. More, they know how to care for their needs when the going gets rough. In an observed flock of fifteen turkeys in Lightener Creek west of Durango-the birds remained in the trees for ten days during the heavy snows of late January. Snowpiled up to a depth of over three feet. After the first heavy snow, it rained and formed a heavy crust.' Then two feet of loose snow covered this crust. This top snow was soft.' If the turkeys dropped into this they would have floundered, became exhausted and died of exposure. They did not come to a feed ground in I l �-63the area for more than two weeks. There was one turkey that disappeared from this flock - cause unknown. In March some of these turkeys were trapped as exchange breeders. They were found to be in excellent physical condition. At the Turkey Ranch the birds disappeared completely during this January storm. A circle trip was made by Clark Ford to see if he could locate turkeys or find out what had become of them. No sign was found in a three mile circle. Later turkeys were observed in the Stallstimer notch area on the south facing slopes south and east of the turkey ranch. A bob-tailed hen (evidently caused by a predator attack) was observed in this flock. Later birds returning to the ranch feed ground contained a bob-tailed hen. Evidently the turkeys flew from ,tree to tree until they reached these south facing slopes. Here they found open ground. The Turkey Ranch slopes are rather heavily timber and do not open too readily. Foods were in comparative abundance in the summer and fall of 1956. While pine and pinon cones were in fair abundance there were areas where there were none. Acorns too, were spotty. Normally turkeys show a high preference for natural foods over anything but oats. Wheat and corn have no hulls while natural foods; such as grass and weed seeds do have. This preference proved out in trapping tests this year. Wheat is preferred as a trapping feed as it will hold the turkeys in one place for a longer period. Attempts were made to establish feed grounds inten western slope areas aside from the turkey ranch. These were as follows. 1-Canyon Creek; 2- East Elk Creek; 3-Main Elk Creek; 4-Divide Creek; 5-Fourmile Creek; these were all in Garfield County. 6- Norwood district; Montrose County; 7-Muddy Creek in Montezuma County near Mancos; 8-Granath Mesa near Dolores in Montezuma county; 9 -Confer Hill southeast of Pagosa Springs in Archuleta County and later in the season; 10 - Lightner Creek in La.PlataCounty. This last test was for the purpose of doing some exchange in breeding stock. The Lightner Creek area has shewn little progress for some time. Some 61 turkeys were ranging in east Canyon Creek up to two days before a trapping try was made. The trap - canon net type - was set up. There were eleven large gobblers in this flock. The first day at the trap only the eleven gobblers came in. The next morning the gobblers came in early. They fed and left. After consultation it was decided that we would take five of these gobblers to use as breeders at the turkey ranch if they came in alone, then try for more birds later. They returned at 9:15 A. M. and the trap was sprung ten minutes later on eight of the birds. The five we wanted were in the trap, three having escaped under the edge. Feeding was continued but the birds came in irregularly. Storms closed the road and the area was abandoned. �-s r...,1: _l_. . ~~._ -64Turkey Ranch - In October more than 100 turkeys were ranging in and near the turkey ranch. As winter approached some of the turkeys drifted out of the area even though feedirg was done regularly. On December 12th Clark Ford tripped the ranch trap - permanent pole type - on 15 turkeys. These included three toms. Since the jeep pickup will only handle six crates at a time, twelve turkeys were banded and loaded. Three young hens were released and the twelve were taken to Red Dirt Greek to be released in one of the recommended areas. This is a side canyon flowing into the Colorado River about eight miles down from the Derby area. East Elk Creek - Feeding was started in this area late in November. At one time more than sixty turkeys were ranging here. Then they dropped down to twentyfour. Feeding was continued and they built up to thirty six and it was-decided to try for a plant. It was known that more birds were in the.area. For the first time the trap was set entirely on snow. The birds had peeked out an area large enough to accommodate the trap. Here too, the cannon net was used. It was sprung on the morning of December 29th on 16 turkeys. These included three toms. ,.Wheri. the cover was in place there were only nine birds caught and only one of these was a tom, and he was a juvenile. The birds were banded with Jiffy wing bands. These birds were crated and taken 'to Stove Canyon in the Salt Wash area no-rthwest of Grand Junction. They were released about 4:00 P. M. By early and mid January more than four feet of snow had blanketed the Bakers Peak and Elk Head planting sites. Delivery of the birds for these plants would have to be made by snowmobile. Then the problem of feeding until the area. opened tip would have been serious. In talking with Regional Coordinator Glenn Rogers concerning these problems it was decided to hold up the plants until further information could be 'gotten on the area. Mancos - Mud Creek: By mid-January,' the Mud Creek feed ground was ready to trap. Seventeen turkeys were caught in the portable slat type trap on January 24th. The birds were crated (15 of them) to the Pine Ridge area in the Blue Mountain area of southeastern Utah. All birds were released in good condition. Two of the young birds were banded and released in the trap area as markers. Fourmile Creek - A flock of turkeys inFourmile Creek south of Glenwood Springs were ranging too close to tame. turkeys. As a corrective measure it was desirable to move some of these turkeys. A trap was set up in February and the birds were lured to the area by feeding. The problem of where to move these birds arose. It was felt best to release them in Mesa Verde Park where two hens were ranging near Park Headquarters. Other plant sites had been filled or closed by snow so this was feasible. On February 23rd twelve turkeys were caught. The ten birds were taken to Mesa Verde Park on February 24th.. Two birds were banded and released in the Fourmile area. �-65Divide Creek. A flock of 44 turkeys were ranging in East Divide Creek. A feed ground had been set up in January and a trap was set up in mid-February. When the weather began to break the birds came to the feed irregularly and finally left the area. There was net sufficient room to use the cannon net so the slat trap had .been set in. The turkeys only worked in at the ends of this. Plentiful natural foods in the area ~as the main lure for the turkeys. Lightner Creek. A flock of turkeysrangizg in this area have never increased to any degree. Numbers ranged from nine to around eighteen. In a flock of fourteen birds six were toms. On March 16 three toms and one hen were caught. Two of the toms were taken to Stove Canyon and one tom and one hen were trapped at the turkey ranch. Then on March 19th four hens were trapped at the turkey ranch and released in Lightner Creek. II I r I �-66Table No.3 Trap Site - East Canyon Creek - Glenwood Springs Area Date - Nov. 30, 1956 Band * 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 Time 9:30 A. M. Sex Tom Tom Tom Tom· Tom Age 2-Years .Mature 2- Years 2-Years 2-Years Disposition - * indicates leg bands used. Birds banded and crated and-...•.moved to ....._. State Turkey Ranch. Released in good condition December 1, 1956. . Trap Site - state Turkey Ranch - Devil Creek Drainage. Date - Dec~ 12, 1956 Time 7:15 A. M. Band Sex 1034 Hen 1035 Hen Tom 1036 Hen 1037 Hen 1038 Hen 1039 Tom 1040 Tom 1041 Hen 1042 Hen 1043 Hen 1044 Hen 1045 Age 1 year .. Juvenile 1 year 1 year Juvenile Mature 1 year Juvenile Mature Juvenile Juvenile 1 year Disposttion » three young hens caught with this group were released at the Turkey Ranch withoutbanding. Leg ba~ds have yielded so little Information it was felt best to discontinue leg banding birds released at the ranch. Twelve turkeys including three toms were banded, crated and taken to Red Dirt Creek. Release was on December 13, 1956. Release site recommended in October report. Trap Site-East Canyon Creek - Near New Castle. Date- Dec. 29 -1956 Time - 8:30 A. M. Band Sex tom 301* Hen 302 Hen 303 304 Hen Hen 305** Hen 306 307 Hen Age. ;Juvenile 1 year Juvenile .'Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile I-year �1./~_lil~ -67Table 3-continued-Trap Band 308 309 310 Site East Canyon Creek - Near New Castle Sex Age Hen Mature Hen Mature Juvenile Hen Disposition - * Wing band only. ** Band lost in snow. Birds banded crated and hauled to Stove Canyon N. W. of Grand Junction. Birds released at 4: 00 P. M. same day they were caught. Trap Site - Mud Creek - near Mancos - Birds taken under Game Management Date - January 24, 1957 Band 311 312 313 314 315 316* 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324* 325** 32f) 327 328 Time 10:30 A. M. Sex Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Tom Age. Juvenile 2-years 2-years Juvenile Juvenile :Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile 2-years Mature Juvenile Juvenile 2 years Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile 1 year 1 year Disposition - * Juvenile birds released after banding in area. ** Band Lost in snow 15 turkeys were banded and crated. Taken to the Pine Ridge area of Blue Mountain near Montecello, Utah. All birds released in good condition. r I �-68Trap Site-Four Mile Creek-Near Glenwood Springs-Table 3. -Continued: Date- February 23, 1957 Time - 4:00 P. M. Band 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339* 340* Sex Hen Tom Hen Hen Hen Tom Hen Tom Hen Tom Hen Tom Age. 1 year Mature Mature Mature Mature 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 2- years 1 year Disposition - * Birds banded and released as markers in trap area. Ten turkeys including four toms were removed to Mesa Verde Park. Release at 2:3b P. M. All birds in good condition. Lightner Creek - West of Durango Date- March 16, 1957 Time - 5 :00 P. M. Band 341 342 343 344 Sex Tom Tom Hen Tom Age 1 year 1 year 2 years 2 years Disposition- Nos. 341 and 342 wel.'.etaken to Stove Canyon and released to supp-lement the flock released December 29, 1956- See above. . . Release, was on March 17, 1957. Nos. 343 and 344 were released at Turkey Ranch March 16, 1957at 6:00 P. M. Trap Site - State Turkey Ranch Time 6:00 P. M. Date- March 19, 1957 Age Band Hen 345 Hen 346 Hen 347 Hen 348 Sex 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year Disposition - Birds were banded, crated and taken to Lightner Creek as breeders. Release at 10:00 A. M. �Fig. 1. Location of experimental chicken wire drive trap in San Miguel Canyon; Note blind to left and dense oak and evergreen timber in center where trap is located. L_ .Fig. 2. Looking along right wing into main pen of experimental chicken wire drive trap in San Miguel Canyon. Catch pen is located in far right of photo. �Fig. 3. Catch pen portion of experimental chicken wire drive trap, San Miguel Canyon. This portion of trap is located in the northeast corner of main pen. Covering of evergreen boughs holds snow out of the pen. Fig. 4. A baled oat hay stack at Mount Evans Management Area transplant site. The stack should be fenced when domestic stock is present. �Fig. 5. A baled oat hay stack in late winter after all bales had been scratched apart by wild turkeys. The loose straw has been raked into a small stack and loose grain scattered therein. Frisco Canyon. �,.} 1i~Q ..... -69- ~ __ _br(_-.------___' Wire Door Catch Pen 3' high 1" mesh Main Pen 4' high 2" mesh -, Wire Door Figure 6, Sketch of Experimental Chicken Wire Drive Trap San Miguel Canyon (Not to Scale) , ~ �·1:~ '1-"]1' _" .••...•_! -70Summary: Eastern Slope. A total of fifty -nine wild turkeys were live-trapped on the eastern slope during the 1956-57 trapping season. Four transplants Were made from these fifty-nine birds caught. Sites planted include Soldier's Canyon in Las Animas and Baca Counties (ten hens and four toms), Mount Evans Management Area in Clear Creek County(five hens and six toms), Muddy Creek in Huerfano County (eight hens and two toms) and Buckhorn Creek in Larimer County (seven hens and eight toms). In addition to the above transplants, areas as exchange' _breeders. six surplus toms were exchanged between trapping Three wild turkeys died during the live-trapping and transplanting operations from various causes and one additional bird appeared very weak upon release. The aluminum leg bands were discontinued during the trapping season in favor of "Jiffy" wing bands. A new experimental chicken wire drive trap was used for the first time with good success. ExperimentGtion with baled oat hay and grain was carried out for holding transplanted , wild turkeys in the new locations. Western Slope Summary: A total of 65 wild turkeys were trapped and banded on the Western slope during the trapping season 1956-1957. Five toms from East Canyon Creek were released at the Devil Creek Turkey Management Area, Three toms and nine hens caught at Devil Creek were released at Red Dirt Creek. One tom and nine hens from East Canyon Creek were released in stove Canyon near Grand Junction. Four toms and six hens from Fourmile Creek were r.eleased in Mesa Verde Park, Two Toms from Lightner Creek were released in stove Canyon and a tom and a hen were released at Devil Creek. Four hens from Devil Creek were released. in Lightner Creek, Fifteen turkeys were sent to Utah. Salary time and expenses were charged to the Game Management Division. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Donald M. Hoffman Date :__ ___;;A.;;.lp",-r.;..;i~l •... , .,;;1.;;.,9.;;.,5.;;.,7 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �1"-A 1. .", ~~ .:.' .. 11"1111111111"llll"I~ii 11111111111~~~~llf~lilll~11 BDOW022164 -71- April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO ----~~~~~~------------------ State of Project No.____;W~-;;;.8;;;.8-....;R::.;:..-=2 _.z..__;W;,.;.,;;;a.;.te;;..;r;;,;;;.;;fo....;.w;_;;1;_Su=rv;;;..;.,,;e;;"'Yl...:s Work Plan No. Title of Job:. I Job No. 2 --------~----------~~~~~~~---------------------- -=T-=r-=a;!;;p,l;;p=in~g:2....::a;;;;n;.::d:....:B=a:.:n=d=in~g:2....::Du;..=.;:c;.:;.k;;:s;....;;;; _ Objectives: (1) To trap and band ducks and geese for the purpose of obtaining migration and life history information. (2) To trap the Great Basin Canada Goose as a means of securing brood stock for transplanting in suitable nesting areas throughout the state for the purpose "of enlarging the breeding range of this species in Colorado. Scope: Bonny Dam (Yuma County), North Park(Jackson County), San Luis Valley (Saguache County and others), the Cache la Poudre Valley (Larimer, Weld, and other counties), and Two ..Buttes Reservoir (Baca County) . Personnel: Ken Baer, Ed Wellein, Jim Robinson, and Ray Buller, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Dori Neff, Oliver Scarvie, Mitchell G. Sheldon, I. R. Poley, Harold M. Swope, and Jack R. Grieb, Colorado Game and Fish Department. Introduction: This report summarizes the banding activities of Project W-88-R-2 for the fiscal year April 1, 1956 to April 1, 1957. Since, the analysis of band recoveries will be done under another job (Plan I, Job 3), little interpretation will be made of these data. Thus, the report will be limited to a factual description of number and location of birds banded, with brief comments on goose weight data collected at Two Buttes Reservoir. Meth oos: Banding activities have been roughly divided into two phases-s- summer banding, and winter banding. Summer banding. takes place on the breeding grounds, and emphasizes the banding of yoing ducks, and adults which breed in the vicinity of the banding site. Wintering bandin g is done on the wintering grounds such as Bonny Reservoir, and Two Buttes Reservoir. Four methods were used to trap and band ducks. and geese during 1956 and 1957; (1) Drive trapping using the Hawkins drive trap where the ducks are driven· into long wings extending out from the Hawkins trap and finally into the trap itself; (2) run-down method where broods are scattered and especially along road-side ditches where each brood observed is chased and captured by hand or with a dog; (3) Colorado duck trap, using bait to lure the birds in; and (4) the cannon net trap. �-72Results: A total of 1348ducks and 655 geese were banded during theepast fiscal year. No winter duck banding was accomplished at .Bonny Reservoir this past year, because of poor weather conditions which prevented concentrating the ducks in the trap area. Table 1 lists the number of summer banded ducks by species and location, while Table 2 lists the number of geese banded by location. Table 1. --Number of Ducks Banded by Species and Location, 1956. Species San Luis North Park Poudre Mallard 424 126 78 Pintail 11 65 30 Gadwall 19 26 4 Baldpate 73 1 12 Shoveller 7 Green-winged teal 17 16 3 Cinnamon or Blue-winged teal 36 124 23 ~sdirr e ea ~aup mg-necked Duck Canvas back Ruddy Duck American. Coot %~ 13 16 2 51 461 579 Total by Species 628 ·106 49 74 19 36 2 183 ~~ 16 ,2 72 308 123 1348 Table 2. --Number of Geese Banded by Location in Colorado, 1956-1957 Location Date How Number Remarks Captured Banded Canada Bowles Lake 6-22-56 Drive Trap 45 San Luis Valley 6-28-56 Drive Trap 37 Two Buttes Reservoir" 1-16-57 to 1-24-57 Cannon Net Trap 516 Bonny Reservoir 2-28-57 Cannon Net Trap Total Canada Geese Bonny Reservoir 3-20-57 Total all geese 16 neck-banded with yellow stripe on red, released in North Park. Purchased from Carl Strutz, Jamestown, N. D. and released in San Luis Valley. Neck-banded with red-stripe on blue. Released immediately after banding. Released. 604 Snow Cannon Net Trap· in 655 Released �-73- All geese captured at Two Buttes Reservoir this year were weighed and sexed. The purpose of this operation was twofold: (1) to determine, if possible, the species of white-cheeked geese using this area for wintering purposes; and (2) to investigate weight differences, if any, between the birds in 1957 as compared to 1952 and 1953, and thus determine whether undue harassment during the 1956hunting season had affected the general well-being of the flock. The result of this incidental investigation revealed that it is very difficult to tell the differences between the species of white-cheeked geese wintering at Two Buttes Reservoir. It is fairly certain that the three-sub-species are present, namely, The Richardson's, Lesser, and Great Basin, Canada. However considering weights and external characteristics of the birds, while it is possible to determine species of the small birds and the very large ones, it was impossible to separate the Lessers from the Richardson's where they overlap particularly in weight, and the same for the Lessler's and the Great Basin Canada Geese. Results of the 1957 weighing study are given in Table 3, where it is compared with similar information from 1952 and 1953. Table 3. Average Weights of Geese at Two Buttes Reservoir, During Banding Operations. Average Weight of Birds that No. Birds Average Year Weighed 4. 5 to 7 Pounds. Weighed Weight 1952 1269 6.28lbs. 6.16 lbs. 1953 1481 6.05lbs. 5.971bs. 1957 527 5.68lbs. 5.83 lbs. Considering the average weight of all birds weighed, it appears that the 1957 average is considerably below that of the other two years. However, this may be, and probably is, due to causes other than extreme harassment during the hunting season, which in turn affected the birds ability to feed. The following are some of the things affecting these averages: (1) In 1957, the birds were banded and weighed immediately after the hunting season, while in 1952 and 1953there was a time lapse of one to two months until the last bird was weighed. Thus, birds had the opportunity the former years to feed without hunting harassment, for some time before being weighed, and many of the starving, wounded birds would pass out of the picture during this time. Consequently, weight differences between years may be due to this differential in weighing time from the hunting season. (2) Feed conditions were different between the three years. It is known that feed was extremely scarce in 1956-57, and also concentrated in a few areas. Thus, it would be difficult to determine from these weight data whether differences in weights between years reflect hunter harassment, or a normal situation resulting from a scarcity of food. �-74(3) In 1952 and 1953, weights were taken to the closest two ounces, while in 1957, weights were read to the nearest ounce. While this error may be compensating for anyone year, it is also a source of error for comparison between years. (4) Changes in sub-species composition of birds present on the lake from one year to the next could very greatly influence the average weight by year. Thus, those years when more Great Basin Geese were present would have a higher average weight than other years, and vice-versa for the small Richardson I s Goose. In an attempt to eliminate the effect of differing percentages of Great Basin and Richardson Geese from one year to the next, the last column in Table 3 lists the average weight of these birds that weighed 4. 5 to 7 lbs. Here again we see a differ.ence between years, but in this case, not as extreme as when all data are considered. Considering all of these factors, it is believed that the geese trapped in 1957do weigh somewhat less than previous years; but, it is impossible to determine exactly what caused this difference, and it is believed that it is a combination of things rather than anyone factor It is known that the birds handled in the trap in 1957were mostly in fair to good shape. 0 Submitted by: Jack R. Grieb Date: Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~A.p~r~il~,~1~9~5_7_ L �1IIIII"'Illi; BDOW022165 -75April, JOB COMPLETION 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS &ateof. C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O~ ProjectNo. ~\V~-8~8~-~R~-_2~ Work Plan No. Title of Job :__ Objectives: _ ~\V~a~t~e~rf~0~w~1~SU~r~v~e~y~s~an~d~In~v~e~st~i~g~a~ __=I~ ~__=J..;;;0,;;:;,b...;;N;.;..0;;.;.~...;;3~ ......:;.A.:;:n.:;:al="-y.=.s.:;:is:;...;;.o~f ...;,W.;.;a;;;.t;.;e;.;;;r.;;.fo;;_w;.;.;;_l.;;;;B;.;.a;.;;;n;.;di;;;;·ng=.,..;;D;..;a;;;_;t.;;;;a _ To analyze the large quantity of data obtained from banding ducks and geese in Colorado, and to make this information received available from the Federal All kill reports Banding Office in Patusent.", Maryland have been filed accordirg to place banded by species. killed from those birds banded at Two Buttes Reservoir returns Reported Date. .1 for use in management. Results: on a map. _ Very little additional Location of goose have been placed work has been: done on this job other than to keep the filed in such shape to facilitate easy analysis when desired. by: __ ......:;.J.;;a;;:;c.:;:k...;R~ .....;;G::.;r;;.,;i;;:;e,;;:;,b Approved by: --=A~p;;.,;r;.;i~l!~19;;.;5;;.;7~ _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��-77~ State of INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~VV~-~9~O~-~R~-~2~ __ ~=E~v~a~lu~a~t~io~n~0~f~th~e~E~f=f~e~c~ts~o~f~H~a~b~i~ta~t~bn~p~ro~v~e~m~ on Wfldlife. I:;..._ of J ob :. The stated to review all new publications particularly _._~J~ob:.:.....;;N.;..;o;;..;;. __ ;;;;.l _ ......;;.;R~e...;.v.;;..ie;;..w;..;.......;o;.;;;f...;L::;;l;;.;·t;.;;;.e.;;.r.;.;;atu~r;...;;e~ Report: published of the available time objective evaluation of this job during concerning studies. that it was impossible the 1956-1957 the various Other project year phases of the project work however consumed to complete _ was so much the job and this report be negative. Submitted Date: REPORT COLORADO Work Plan No. must JOB COMPLETION 1957 ~---~~~~~~---------------- ProjectNo. Title April, by: __ _..;;;L;;.;..__;.J.;.;;ac;;..k;;;;...;;;L;;;oy""'o;.;;;n;;...... A_·.;i,>.proved by: ~A.:;,I;p=r~i::.ll,~19;.:5;.:7~ _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��Illilfjij~i~i BDOW022167 -79April, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS ;PROJECT S State of COLORADO ~------~~~~~~----------------- ProjectNo. VV~-~9~O-~R~-~2 __ ~E~v~a~l~u~a~tl~·0~n~0~f~t~h~e~E~f~f~ec~t~s~o~f~H~a=b~i~ta~t~hn~p~r~o~ _ on VVildlife. VVork PlanNo. ~ll~ Title of Job : To determine the pheasant the effects of habitat improvement harvest in northeastern Report: No data of a useable season. The opening day of the .season experienced 6~ _ ___;H=u.::n:.;;.;ti:::::ng;g_~Se;:;..a;;;;s;:;..o~n~SU=r..:.v..;:;e"'_y Objectives: reducing, ~;~J~0~b~N~o~. in northeastern day of the pheasant by snowdrifts, during the 1956 pheasant in the last five years. hunting Even on the second other than the main highways, and many of the personnel roadblocks planning to assist were closed in field work were halted or icy roads. Most of the hunters who braved the weather conditions because were unable to findcover in which to hide, but the hunter-load pheasants was so light, complete Date: and other hunting conditions a survey of the nature proposed Submitted by: or coinctded with the -end of the worst blizzard season most roads, by Highway Department in aiding, Colorado. nature was collected Colorado plantings _ L~.~J;.;;a~c..:.k;;_;;;;;L •.•. y..;;;.o.::ni •... · ~A;.:.pl:,;r:.:i;.:.ll-, ~1;:;..95~7:.,__ ---_ so abnormal, found hunting very good that no attempt was made to under this job heading. ___;A;,.;.••.. pproved by: _ ___;;L;;_;a;.;;u;.;;;r;.;;e..;;;n;._c..;;.e...;E;;;.;;_. _R...;.;i;.,;;o.,;;;r..,;;;d;.;.,;a,;; _ Federal Aid Coordinator ��~81April, JOB COMPLETION 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~~~~~-------------------- Project No. .Work Plan No. Title of Job :. W...;..._-..;..90..;..-_R...;.._-2;;;._-,-_E_v..;..a...;;1_u_a...;.;ti_o...;.;n_o.;_;f_t..;..h.;;_;e...;..._E_ff;;_;e t.;..a.;;_t ..;;;Im=p;.;;;rc...;;o.....;.v...;;.e_;;;;;m;.; __ on Wildlife II Job No. 4 ----~;;;._----------~~~~~--~-------------------------------_ ....-.;;.P.:;h;.;:e;,;;;a;,;;;s;,;;;a;;;:n;;;.t....;W..;,..;;;;;in;;;.;t;.;;e_;;;r_C,;;..;;,o..;.v,;;;,e;;;.r...;P:...;r:;..e;:;;f;.; _ Objectives: To determine the preferred winter cover types in the study region and to evaluate the effects of habitat improvement plantings on pheasant preferences. ( Procedure: During the first winter of the project, 1955-1956, sample plots, 10,000 square feet in area, were established in the major agricultural types, in permanent weedy cover and in habitat development plantings. This work showed that weed cover was tooscarce to be of major importance to wildlife and that pheasant cover preferences ranked development plantings first and wheat stubble a very poor second. Accordingly, during the second winter, the two major preferred .types were selected for a more intensive study. Twenty-one plots, 10,000 square feet in area, were established for study. Nine were in wheat stubble, nine were tree plantings and three were miscellaneous other types. These plots were searched twice a month from November 12, 1956, to March 27, 1957. Additional field observations after the early April storms were made, but formal search of the plots was discontinued because spring agricultural operations had affected several areas. All evidence of wildlife use noted during searches was recorded and roost sites were destroyed to prevent replication counts. Study Areas: Study plots were divided into two general groups; thirteen in Sedgwick and Phillips Counties and eight-in Logan County. This arr angeme.n facilitated field work and separates area descriptions into two groups which roughly correspond to two major divisions of the pheasant population density in the study region. Sedgwick and Phillips County Plots Development No. I-seven row windbreak planting. Elm, olive, hackberry (2), plum, sandcherry(2). Cultivated except around plum rows. Development No. 2 - six row windbreak completely filled with tumbleweeds. planting. All elms. Not cultivated. Understory �~82Development No.3-seven rowwfndbreakplanting. Cottonwood, alternating plum and cottonwood (2), plum, alternating plum and cottonwood, cottonwood (2). Cultivated except around plum rows. Tumbleweeds occasional. Development No. 4- three row windbreak planting. rows. Tumbleweeds between trees. All elms. Cultivated between Development No.5. three row windbreak planting. Tumbleweeds between trees. Caragana, elm, olive .. Cultivated. Development No. 6- timberclaim. One row plums, willow clump and scattered boxelders in study plot. Understory annual weeds and grasses. Wheat stubble No. 1-6-8" tall, fairly heavy weed growth. Wheat stubble No. 2-6" tall, very weedy. Wheat stubble No. 3 - 12-14' tall, partially weedy. Wheat stubble No. 4-6-8" tall. Wheat stubble No. 5 - 8-10" tall. Wheat stubble No. 6-8-10" tall. Miscel laneous No. I-Panic grass, little bluestem and annual weeds Logan County Plots. Development No. 7- Three row windbreak planting. story grassy and full of tumbleweeds. All elm. Not cultivated. Under- Development No.8- Two row windbreak planting. cultivated. Tumbleweeds between pines. Juniper and Ponderosa pine. Clean Development No. 9- Two row windbreak planting. tumbleweeds between rows. All boxelder. Cultivated outside, Wheat stubble No. 7- 10-12" tall, weedy. Wheat stubble No. 8 - 8" tall, weedy. Wheat stubble No. 9-8-10" tall. Miscellaneous No. 2- Natural intermitteait creekbottom area. clump, cattails, annual and perennial weeds. Cottonwoods, willow �1_.:a.... ,~-:;O ".. ':'., =83= Miscellaneous No. 3-weedy eroded area in wheat stubble. Mostly large annual weeds. Roost sites and pheasant use ratings Table 1. presents data showing the number of pheasant roosting sites recorded in each of the study plots during the twice-monthly examinations. This data is supplemented by the ratings in Table 2 which evaluate not only roost sites but the presence of tracks, birds, scat and other pheasant sign. Ratings are based on a five point scale in which values were assigned as follows: 1 point - few tracks observed. 2 points-many tracks, birds or scat observed. 3 points-roost sites counted. 4 points-roost sites and other pheasant sign observed. 5..> points-roost sites and birds observed. Table 1. Pheasant roost sites recorded, 21 study areas, northeastern Colorado, winter of 1956-1957. Area Jan. Feb. Mar. Dec. Nov. 1 2 Total 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 Development No. 1 1 1 2 Development No. 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 14 Development No.3 6 2 3 12 1 Development No. 4 3 2 2 1 3 0 Development No. 5 Development No. 6 2 2 2· 1 4 3 4 1 6 Development No. 7 2 23 1 3 10 Development No. 8 1 3 2 1 2 1 ·4 Development No. 9 12 Subtotals 0 9 12 10 3 7 70 8 9 1 1 2 Wheat stubble No. 1 1 1 Wheat stubble No. 2 .Wheat stubble No.· 3 2 2 Wheat stubble No. 4 0 Wheat stubble No. 5 1 1 0 Wheat stubble No. 6 .Wheat stubble No. 7 1 1 1 3 0 Wheat stubble No. 8 0 Wheat stubble No. 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 Subtotals 0 0 3 9 1 1 Miscellaneous No. 1 2 6 2 Miscellaneous No. 2 0 1 Miscellaneous No. 3 4 5 1 11 Subtotals 0 1 0 0 3 0 2 4 90 7 10 15 14 8 16 1 10 9 Totals �-84Development Plots: The above data demonstrates quite conclusively that development plantings are used by pheasants for winter cover much more consistently than other types examined. It is notable however that several of the development sites were used no more than wheat stubble plots and that 84. 3 percent of all roost sites in plantings were recorded in only four plots (No.3, 4, 7 and 8). Among these four plots similarities are not particularly striking except for the presence of tumbleweeds in the understories of three plots and the low evergreen branches in the fourth. This factor would appear to be determinative except that several other plots No.2, 5, 9) had .stmtlar under stories and were not important as winter cover. The reasons for pheasant use or non-use of apparently similar plantings may not be as obscure as it seems however. Comparison of the 1956-1957roosting site data with that of 1955-1956does suggest some possibilities. Table 3 presents this comparison. Since the total number of roost sites recorded was not the same in both years the compar-tsona are expressed as percentages of roost sites counted in plantings. Table 2. --Pheasant use ratings, 1956-1957 Area Nov. 2 Development No. 1 Development No. 2 Development No. 3 Development No. 4 Development No.5 Development No. 6 Development No. 7 Development No. 8 Development No.9 Subtotals Wheat stubble No. 1 Wheat stubble No.2 Wheat stubble No. 3 Wheat stubble No.4 Wheat stubble No.5 Wheat stubble No.6 Wheat stubble No. 7 Wheat stubble No. 8 Wheat stubble No. 9 Subtotals Miscellaneous No. 1 Miscellaneous No. 2 Miscellaneous No.3 Subtotals Totals 21 study areas; northeastern Dec. 1 2 3 Jan. 1 2 2 1 5 5 2 5 3 1 3 4 1 5 5 3 5 3 3 1 22 1 4 20 1 1 1 1 1 4 5 2 4 4 3 4 24 17 Colorado, winter of Feb. 1 2 5 5 5 4 3 2 5 5 1 Mar. 1 2 Total 1 1 12 2 1 4 1 5 1 30 18 24 2 7 6 2 3 4 21 3 5 4 5 4 1 1 1 33 1 17 1 14 2 2 2 35 "24 16 172 8 3 5 3" 7 2 7 2 3 2 2 o 1 4 3 14 2 o o 5 5 1 8 3 3 2 5 2 3 2 8 3 '6 43 16 o 2 0 9 5 0 34 18 3 6 2 3 5 7 3 o 26 36 25 29 42 28 20 241 10 �-85Table 3. --Percentage of pheasant roost sites recorded in each of nine development plantings, winters of 1955-1956and 1956-1957, northeastern Colorado. study Areas Percentages 1955-1956 1956-1957 1.6 Development No. 1 2.9 Development No. 2 24.9 4.3 Development No. 3 7.4 20.0 Development No. 4 23.8 17.1 19.0 Development No. 5 0.0 Development No. 6 2.1 2.9 Development No. 7 0.5 32.9 Development No. 8 20.6 14.3 0.0 Development No. 9 5.7 Roosting sites recorded 189. 70 Plots 2, 4, 5 and 8 showed relative decreases in the amount of pheasant use from 1955- 1956to 1956- 1957while plots 1,3,6,7 and 9 showed increases. In examining the differences between the winters involved in the study only two physical factors appear to have varied in their relationship with development plantings; adjacent landuse types and the amount of windblown.snow collected by plantingJ. Data relating pheasant use trends to adjacent cover types and snow conditions are presented in Table 4. Land-use types are a matter of record, but snow drift depth and persistence were unfortunately not recorded and these observations are therefore based primarily on the memories of the observer. During 1955-1956very little snow fell, and drifting in plantings was not a problem. In 1956-1957however, the first snowfall of the winter, on November 1-2, 1956, was heavy and accompanied by high winds. Large drifts were left by this storm, and additional smaller storms throughout the winter maintained some drifts until March. Spring blizzards ·in late March and early April left drifts in almost all planted areas, but these were not in most cases as deep as those left by the November blizzard. Since snow depths in 1955-1956were not particularly important to birds only the drift conditions in 19561957 are listed in Table 4. Because data based on human.memory usually leaves much to be desired only the most general descriptive terms have been used as follows: Depth - deep; three or more feet of drifted snow medium; two to three foot drifts shallow; drifts under two feet Persistence - very; present almost all winter fairly; present about half the winter none; drifts melted about as snow in the fields did L �=86Table 4. Trend of pheasant use, adjacent land-use and comparative snow conditions in 1956.,.1957, nine development plots, winters of 1955-1956 and 1956-1957, northeastern Colorado. Pheasant Adjacent Land Use SnowConditions Plot Use Trend 1955-1956 1956-1957 Depth Persistence 1 up pasture, waste, fallow pasture, waste, stubble deep fairly 2 down waste, road, fallow waste, road, stubble deep very 3 up waste pasture waste, pasture medium none 4 down stubble, road fallow, road deep fairly 5 down pasture, stubble pasture, fallow deep very 6 up timberclaim timberclaim shallow none 7 up fallow stubble medium none 8 down stubble fallow deep very 9 up stubble, pasture fallow, pasture medium fairly In examining these comparisons it is noticeable that pheasant trends show a direct correlation with the presenceof stubble on all but two areas where a land-use change was noted. This relationship may be quite important because it indicates that plantings where food and travel cover are not available will not be used by pheasants. "The relationship of snow cover to pheasant use is almost as obvious and certainly more important. It appears probable that persistent deep snow in a planting precludes pheasant use. Not only did the plots in which snow drifts were persistent show a decline in use irrespective of adjacent cover relationships; the number of roost sites recorded in November (see Table 1), when deep drifts were common, was at a minimum for all plots. Observations on Development No.2 may show why this relationship is present. During this area was more heavily used than any other study area. Adjacent cover conditions were slightly improved in 1956.;..1957, but pheasant use declined almost· 'completely. During the November blizzard the tumbleweed understory in this planting was completely covered by snowdrifts up to five feet deep. Subsequently, windblown dust covered the snow and additional snow covered the dust layer. These sandwiched protective layers very effectively prevented melting of the original snow and except for small melted areas around individual trees precluded wildlife use of the tumbleweeds. 1955-1956 In effect, a very similar coverage of understory vegetation occurred to some degree in every planting examined. Thus, even though pheasant use in some plots was high for the total winter period it seems quite probable that tree plantings of the type examined in this study are totally ineffective as winter cover because the shelter which they offer birds is not available at the time when it is most needed. The only exception to this generalization appeared to be the evergreen planting (No.8) in which the evergreen branches were the major shelter factor and deepening snows only shifted cover values to higher branches. (, �-87- Wheat Stubble Plots: Even though wheat stubble plots selected for examination did not receive as much)cli~Efor winter roosting as development plantings it is interesting that several of the plots did receive as. much use as the lowest ranked tree plantings. Considering the almost unlimitedacreage of wheat stubble present in the study region it seems amazing that nine random samples would show as much pheasant use as was actually recorded. Among the wheat stubble plots pheasant use was too sporatic to allow evaluation of individual areas, but some additional information on the effects of weeds and height of stubble may be examined. In general terms stubble plots may be divided into three groups to show that taller stubble is preferred by birds for winter roosting (short stubble plots(3), 3 sites; medium stubble plots (4), I site; tall stubble plots (2), 5 sites). The sample however is very small, and the strength of this relationship is . easily questioned. The correlation between pheasant use and the presence of weeds in the stubble is somewhat stronger (weedy stubble plots (4), 6 sites; clean stubble plots (4), 1 site), but the sample size still leaves some doubt concerning the reliability of any conclusions. The influences of snow in affecting cover values of wheat stubble were not as obvious as the effects on development plantings, but several conclusions seem inescapable. Deep drifts are rarely encountered in stubble unless total snowfall is greater than the. stubble height, but snow blown from fallow fields does tend to collect in wheat stubble. Since stubble appears to be inadequate cover in any case it seems probable that even very light snowfalls accompanied by winds remove Whatever cover values are present. Until a much larger sample than 90,000 square feet is sampled however, it will be almost impossible to determine the point at which stubble cover values become completely nil. Agricultural sttbble cannot of course be controlled for wildlife management, but pheasants do apparently use stubble co ver fairly. extensively and it seems possible that a similar cover, protected by development cover, might have a value exceeding that of either type alone -. Miscellaneous Plots: The three additional areas examined in this study were included primarily to allow comparison between cultural and natural cover types in the study region. Actually, good natural cover of any type is at ~ minimum and the number of birds benefitting from such cover can only be a small portion of the total pheasant. population. Plot No.1, consisting of tall, mostly perennial grasses, and Plot No.3, a weedy area surrounded by stubble, ranked somewhat better than stubble but poorer than many development sites. Plot No. 2 however provided some additional information concerning the effects of snow on pheasant use of cover. This area is in an intermittent creekbottom and includes a misture of cottonwoods, willows and cattails. During 1955-1956, although no roost sites were recorded, the area did provide resting cover for a number of pheasants and consequently received a rating comparable to the central range of development sites. In 1956-1957 the first blizzard of the year left a snowbank .l : I �-88which covered most vegetation except the trees, This drift was very persistent, and because additional snowfall replaced melted snow pheasants were effectively prevented from using the cattails and willows throughout the winter. Discussion and Conclusions: The winter of 1956-1957, even though present indications are for a small wildlife loss in northeastern Colorado, will be classified as a very hard winter. Early fall and late spring blizzards presented very difficult conditions for humans, livestock and, presumably, wildlife. In all probability, the only reason enormous pheasant losses were not recorded was that none of the storms lasted more than 36-48 hours. Spring crowing counts will indicate whether an unobserved loss did occur, but at present it appears that very few pheasant succumbed to weather conditions. Even though wildlife losses were small tbe relationship of development plantings to wildlife needs during blizzard conditions was demonstrated fairly conclusively. In most of the development plots examined, heavy drifting snows collected in the planting and removed at least part of the cover value at a time when it was most needed. Because of this phenomenon it seems probable that changes in the planting pattern must be accomplished if developments are to be really effective as winter cover. Several possible steps toward increasing winter cover values were suggested by this study: First, it appeared that almost all plantings would have been more effective had they been wider. In those plantings involving seven or more rows the major part of the snowdrift was deposited over the first four rows. Where fewer rows were present, particularly if all species in the planting had the same general height and growth characteristics, the whole development was covered by drifts. A second method by which most plantings could apparently be improved is by inclusion of at least one row of evergreens. These species are slow to mature, .but they, particularly Ponderosa pine, appear to furnish effective cover in almost any snowdrift because the -upper branches are not materially different from the lower ones. Finally, there was some slight evidence that more efficient control of snowdrifts for the benefit of wildlife might be attained through proper arrangement of plant species within the planting. To be effective, a planting must either not collect snow or collect it in such a way that part of the planting always remains snowf'ree.: Since all plantings apparently do tend to collect snowdrifts to a greater or lesser extent, a planting design which allows 3-4 rows of "snow fence" species to protect 2 or more rows of wildlife cover would appear to be effective. Even a single r-owof some tall species will apparently afford sufficient protection for wildlife cover plants if a space is left downwindfor drift accumulation. Based on the drifting patterns in the developments examined in this study the poorest design was one in which all rows c; of a development were the same species or had the same general growth pattern, �1~-,;:s ',' -89= The relationship of wheat stubble to the effectiveness of developments also suggested some possible methods for improvement. Although it was not apparent whether-food or cover relationships were involved, development plots adjoining wheat stubble were used more consistently than those adjoining fallow fields. In establishing development plots for the use of wildlife a site which adjoins both fallow and stubble should be sleeted. Thus, stubble cover will always be adjacent to the development. It also seemed possible that annual grains planted between tree rows in developments might improve the overall wildlife values. Such work however woul-dbe relatively expensive.- ; and should -be-thoroughly tested before any extensive work is proposed. Summary: 1. Twenty-one 10,000 foct plots: nine in wheat stubble, nine in development plantings and three in miscellaneous natural cover types; were searched twice each month I· . . from November 12, 1956, through March 27, 1957, for evidence of pheasant use. 2. Numbers of pheasant roost sites counted, and ratings based on pheasant use recorded for each plot, are presented in two tables. 3. The data in these tables demonstrates quite conclusively that development areas are used by pheasants during the winter period more than other cover types. 4. Four development areas received over eighty percent of the use recorded for this type while the remaining five were rated no higher than the best wheat stubble plots. 5. Among the four most used development areas the major physical similarity was the presence of an understory of tumbleweeds or low level evergreen branches. 6. Data is presen~~d to show the percentage of roost sites recorded in the nine development areas in 1955-1956 and 1956-1957 so that comparisons can be made. 7. Comparison of pheasant use trends with adjacent land-use in the nine development areas showed a direct correlation between use and wheat stubble. 8. Pheasant use trends were also affected adversely by the depth and persistence of snow drifts in development plantings. 9. Wheat stubble plots were used for roosting, but this use was so sporatic that evaluation was impossible. '"," �-9010. Two of the three natural cover types were ranked about midway between development cover and wheat stubble in roosting cover value while the third was not used by pheasants because drifting snow had covered the available shelter. 11. It appeared that almost all developments examined could have been better for wildlife in one way or another. Three possible methods were suggested for improvement of future plantings. a. Make developments wider so that blowing and drifting snow will not cover all shelter during storms. b. Include at least one row of evergreens because the shelter values of evergreen species are not concentrated at ground level. c. Plan species arrangement within developments so that taller species collect snow and the best wildlife cover is in a downwind, protected position. 12. Wheat stubble influence on development effectiveness Ieadsto the suggestion that stubble adjacent to, or possibly within, a planting might improve the overall wildlife values. Report submitted by: Date L. Jack Lyon ~A~p~rl~·I~,~1~9~5~7 Ap;proved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/88b01c51f436686c0158b4007f13b41f.pdf 4b31273ae26c1f8449b026757387c6b9 PDF Text Text . '(. =1- July; 1957. JOB COMPLETION REPORT' INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of COLORADO ~----------~~~~~-------------- Project No. Work Plan·No. W_-_3_7_-_R_-_1_O_ •..•;:....-G_a_m_e_B_ir_d_SU_rv_e •.•y'-- ___,. _ I Pheasants, Job No. 1 --------~--------------~------------------------------- , .: ~- Ti tle of Job :_ __;P:...:;.r,;;.e-_;n::;.e;;;.s;;;.t;;.:i=:ng,g_;s::..;tu=d;;;.ie;;;.s;;......)o{p •.r;;;..e;;..pj;;..a::;.r::..;a::..:t;;.;;;i.;;.on;;;;_;;f;.;:;o,;;.r_a;;;.jp~po;.;l;;.;;;ic.;;.. _ p~easant crowing count census method and sex ratio counts in management. SUmmary: 1. Sex ratio count zones and crowing-count region of Colorado for use during pheasant routes were selected census work. in the southeast 2. Sex ratio and crowing counts were conducted in the areas selected. ..'> 3. A total of 124 pheasants was sexed, which showed a sex ratio of 1. 06 hens per cock. The greatest number of pheasants was observed in the lower, _or e~st~rn, . end of the Arkansas Valley and in the Konantz-Stonington-Midway area. 4. Crowing counts indicated a fairly uniform distribution of pheasants (with a low population density) in the Arkansas Valley. The count was about four times as high on the dry-farmed lands in the Konantz-Stoningtcm-Mldway area . , . .. .~ l.J) 5. Maps of selected sex ratio and crowing-count zones and routes are being prepared and will be incorporated In pheasant census record books for use by . personnel in the southeast region. Prepared Date: by: Wayne W. Sandfort July, Approved by: Laurence E.. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator 1957 ;_' . \ ��..... f•.. r~ .'....- ...•.••3 .• ~ =3= July, .,» .J~ 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVE STIGATIONS PROJECT State of'-- _ _;.C....;O....;;;L~O;....R_A...;.;D~O~ Project No. __ .Work Plan No. _ ..:..W:...-..,;;3;..;.7_~.;;;.R:...--=1.;;.O ---,~G;;;.;am=.;;;.e...;;B;;.;i;;::r-=d;...;Su=r;..;.v..,;;e ..•. y _ ...;;I;___~_--=P-=h;;::e..;;;a.;;;.s.;:;;;an;;;;.t;;::s., __ _...;;J..,;;o.,;;;b..,.;N;:.;,o,;;.:.... _...,;1;__ _ Title of Job :..,....._..;;P;..;r;..;e;..;-..;;n;;.;e;;::s;..;t;;.;ing;;;g....;;;s_.;;.tu.;;;_d.;;;;;l;;.;· e..;;s~(po;..;r;..;e"""p;..;a;;..r;..;a;..;t;;.;io;;.;;n;;...,.;;;.fo;;.;r~a.p.p..;;;l_ic;..;a;;;.; crowing count census method and sex ratio counts in management). Objectives: (1) To establish (2) To establish permanent permanent, representative zones or areas (3) To instruct other Department sex ratio count procedures. personnel (4) To eventually turn pheasant Scope: Southeast region of Colorado. crowing-count census routes. for making sex ratio counts. in the standardized crowing count and crowing counts and sex ratio counts over to management. Personnel: Leo Broux, Gail Boyd, Jack Combs, C.· W. Clifton, and Wayne W. Sandfort. Techniques: Sex ratio count zones and crow-count routes were selected in five areas in the southeast region. These zones and routes were "tied-in" with previously described brood-count routes (see completion report, Work Plan I, Job 3, this report) so that a distin~{ census unit was formed.· . Maps of sex ratio count zones were prepared and made available for use by Wildlife Conservation offfcers. Orow-count statipns and routes also were mapped, and information obtained for preparation of base maps for long-term census. Winter sex ratio counts and spring crow-counts established census units. were conducted within the five Maps of sex-ratio count zones and crow-count routes are not included here. These will be incorporated Inthe final report which will be completed by March 31, 1958. �=4= Findings: Information obtained from sex-ratio counts and crow counts is summarized in Tables 1, 2, and. 3. Table 1. --PHEASANT SEX RATIO COUNTS, SOUTHEASTREGION, FEBRUARY, 1957 Census Unit St. Charles Mesa - AvondaleVineland .(Pueblo Co. ) Fort Lyon- Las AnimasCornelia (Bent Co. ) Cheraw-Rocky Ford-Hawley (Otero Co.) Lamar- Bristol- Holly (Prowers Co.) Konantz- Stonington-Midway (Baca Co.) ALL AREAS Total Miles Total Minutes Pheasants Observed ,Cocks Hens Unclass. Total 23.6 173 5 4 33. 1 161 11 13 34.8 111 1 46.0 193 15 ' 19 1 35 1. 27 43.1 180.6 160 798 22 54 21 57 8 13 51 124 1. 06 4 Hensl .Cock 9 .80 28 1. 18 1 .95 TABLE 2~. --'PHEASANT CROW -COUNT DATA. SOUTHEASTREGION, MAY, 1957. Census Unit. . Date of County Average Calls per Sta. St. Charles Mesa-Avonda1eVineland May 8, 1957 4.5 Fort Lyon-Las AnimasCornelia May 3, 1957 3.8 May 2, 1957 Cheraw-Rocky Ford-Hawley 4.7 Lamar- Bristol- Holly May 9, 1957 5.7 Konantz- Stonington-Midway May 23, 1957 18.4 Table 3. --SPRING BREEDING POPULATION J;NDICES, SOUTH_EAST REGION, 1957 (based on crowing counts and winter sex ratios). Average Calls Hens per Spring Breeding Census Unit per stop . Cock Population Index (P= C -I CH) St. Charles Mesa- . Avondale-Vineland 4.5 .80 8.1 Fort Lyon-Las Animas1. 18 Cornelia 3.8 8.3 Cheraw-Rocky FordHawley 4.7 1. 27 Lamar=Br-lstol-Holly 5.7 12.9 Konantz- Stonington.95 35.9 Midwar 18.4 �=5Analysis and Recommendations: Data obtained in preceding tables is insufficient to draw highly accurate conclusions. In general, however, it appears pheasant populations in the Arkansas Valley are very low and somewhat uniform. There appears to be an increase in the number of pheasants as one approaches the lower, or eastern portion of the valley. The Konantz-Stonington-Midway area, south and east of Walsh, contains a fair pheasant population, much higher than that in the irrigated, Arkansas Valley. Major accomplishments during work under this job relate to establishment of permanent sex ratio count zones and crow-count routes and stations from which uniform and systematic data can be obtained in future years. Maps of these zones and routes, with instructions for making counts, will be included in pheasant census handbooks. Summary: L Sex ratio count zones and crowing-count routes were selected in the southeast region of Colorado for use during pheasant census work. 2. Sex ratio and crowing counts were conducted in the areas selected. 30 A total of 124 pheasants was sexed, which showed a sex ratio of 1. 06 hens per cock. The greatest number of pheasants was observed in the lower, or eastern, end of the Arkansas Valley and in the Konantz-Btonington-Midway area. 4. Crowing counts indicated a fairly uniform distribution of pheasants (with a low population density) in the Arkansas Valley. The count was about four times as high on the dry-farmed lands in the Konantz-Stonington-Midway area. 5, Maps of selected sex ratio and crowing-count zones and routes are being prepared and will be incorporated in pheasant census record books for use by personnel in the southeast region. Prepared by:__ Date W..:..:..:;a:;aLy.=:;ne_W.:.;...;.,_S;;.;an=df=o,;;;,r.;..t __ __.::.A.pproved by Laurence ·E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~J~u~ly~,_.;..19~5~7 _ ��Iljilfjilifull BDOW022170 =7= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECT State of COLORADO ---------~~~~~~-------------------- Project No. .\Vork Plan No. ~\V~-3~7~-~R~-_1~O~· ~;~G~am~e~B~i~r~d~SU~rv~e~y _ I Pheasants ,Job No. 3 ------~----------~~~~~~--~~~~~~----------- Title of J ob:____;P;;..h;;;;e.;;.a;.;.s~an=t;...;_]3;;;;;...;r;.;.;o;.;;o;;..;d~Su...;....r~v.;;.,ey-...;.;..s_· . .,....... _ Objectives: (1) To standardize methods for ascertaining annual pheasant production. (2) To establish permanent representative brood-count routes in all Colorado pheasant range. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in the standardized brood-count procedure. (4) To eventually turn over pheasant brood surveys to management. Scope: Southeast Region of Colorado. Personnel: Leo Broux, Gail Boyd, Jack Combs, C. \V. Clifton, Preston Steele, Robert R. Elliott, stan Ogilvie and Wayne W. Sandfort. Techniques: Discuss ions were held among personnel listed above to determine areas or units of pheasant range wherein surveys would be conducted to determine annual reproduction by pheasants. Five census units were selected. Four of the units are comprised of irrigated lands in the Arkansas Valley and one unit includes a portion of the dry-farmed and well-irrigated land south and east of Walsh. Field work was conducted, following decisions on the general areas where census units would be located, to accurately select the actual routes to' follow. during pheasant brood counts. Routes were chosen which were approximately thirty miles in length and which went through some of the better pheasant range in .the units considered. Brood-count routes were not selected until after the brood-count period .. Consequently, counts to determine reproductive success during 1956 were not obtained. Findings: The names of pheasant census units, and the length of brood count routes within these units, are tabulated oJ:!v1he nextpage. �-8~ Name of Census Unit Length of Brood-count Route (Miles) 29.0 St. Charles Mesa-Avondale-Vineland (Pueblo Co. ) Fort Lyon-Las Animas -Cornel ia (Bent Co.) , Cheraw-Rocky Ford-Hawley (Otero Co';) Lamar-Bristol - Holly ( Prower s Co.) Konantz-Btonington-Midway (Baca Co.) TOTAL MILES (ALL ROUTES) 28.7 28.0 32.3 28. 1 146. 1 Analysis and Reoorn,mendations: Census units selected are belteved to be sufficient to adequately sample major pheasant areas in the southeast region. Plans have been made to prep~l'~ permanent maps of pheasant brood-count routeaand to include these in "Pheasant Census Record Books" for use by Regional and District personnel. These census record books should be complete by August 1, 1957. Summary: 1. Five brood-count routes, totalling 146.1 miles in length, were selected in the southeast region of Colorado. 2. Maps of brood-countroutes census record books, are being prepared to include in pheasant Prepared by:__ , _W_a ...• y._n....;e~W_._S_an..;.df_....;o_r_t Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan . .Federal Aid Coordinator Date ~ __ ~J~u~ly~,~19~5~7------------------------ ., ._ �lijlrfjr~jijl BDOW022171 =9= JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS state of:...-_--,C~O,;:;..;;;;L..:;.O..:;.RA;;;.;;;.;;;D;-;O;---------- Title of J ob: _,...,.....;Ex=p c,e;;.;r~i;;;;.m=en~t~a.;,;;l'-C~o.-op •..e.;;..r.;_a'-t;.;;;i..;..v.;;..e-'P;;..;h_e.-a_s.;_a_n.;_t_M...;an.-;;;..a ..•• g;L.;e;_m __e""n.;_t -,U;...;n""i;.;..t _ __,._,......--_ ABSTRACT To gather-information upon which Colorado may base plans for future pheasant management practices, available literature on the various types of cooperative pheasant hunting or management areas which many states have established, was reviewed. In addition, Ietter s of Inquiry were sent to states located in pheasant range, askingfor; more detailed information. . As ~aresult of the replies to the letters of inquiry, 21 states were eliminated from consideration. These states have not established cooperative units of any kind, or did not reply to the letters. The cooperative program which California has established cbnsists of areas upon which huntin,g'only is controlled, and upon which no management is undertaken. Landowners who control a contiguous block of at least 2, 500 acres mayoffer their land as a cooperative hunting area, after which the Department agr-ees to post the area and control all hunting. Land is zoned as closed, restricted, and open. The .landowner , if he wishes,' may charge a fee of $2. 00 per hunter. These units are very effective, but the rather high cost of operation is felt to be a major drawback. "., In Connecticut, all cooperative areas are established bymujual agree:nl.ent between a sportsman's club and the landowners, with the Department acting only as a go-between.' The areas are atIeast 2,000 acres in size, preferably contiguous.' The landowner tuinsthe hunting rights over to the state, after which the sportsman's organization responslble for the program sets up the operation. 'I'htsprogram' works well under limited funds. '" i .) " -. ; 'Idiiho's cooperative areas are set up as both hunting and management areas; Areas must b,e at least 640 acres in size, and cannot exceed 10,000 acres. Safety zones, refuge areas, and open hunting zones are established., Foodalldcover'plantings are made 011 th~ areas. The landowner agreements allow the Departnienito adiP,inister ,the hunting rights on the area. The Department posts and patrols '~e areas, ~d otherwise controls hunting. ' �=10In illinois, the only cooperative arrangement existing is one in which the Department supplies pheasant chicks to sportsman's clubs to raise, after which the clubs release them on lands belonging to individuals who have hunting rights agreements with the clubs. In Michigan, cooperative areas are established and operated by the landowners themselves. The Conservation Department has practically nothing to do with the plan. Nebraska has 3 areas set up as Federal Aid exper imental projects, on which control of hunting is incidental to the research purposes for which the areas were established. The Department assists the landowners on these areas in reducing trespassing. New Jersey operates under a plan whereby the Department leases hunting rights on contiguous areas of 1, 000 acres or more. Whenever possible, wildlife habitat improvement projects are initiated on these areas. The areas are zoned as safety zones, refuges, and open hunting zones. The Department controls all hunting by requiring hunters to register, and by enforcing trespass and game laws on the areas. The major drawbackis that there is no provision to prevent the areas from being taken over by private clubs after they have been built up. ~. New York, frqm 1939 until 1945, experimen1ed with a program essentially similar to that of New Jersey. An evaluation in 1945 showed that the program was too expensive to be practical, at which time it was abandoned. Oregon operated several cooperative pheasant hunting areas from 1950 to 1955. The program has since been abandoned, with emphasis now on "Hunting by Permission" and "Safety Zone" signs furnished by the Department. The essential provisions of the abandoned plan, were that areas should be at least 1,000 acres in size, that habitat development was .done only if landowners were interested, that the landowner would allow free access if the Department would post the property and patrol the area, and that no attempt was made to control the number of hunters. It was felt that the plan was impractical due to landowner dissatisfaction over no control of hunter numbers, the difficul ty of keeping large blocks of land under the agreement, and the heavy manpower drain of Department personnel. Pennsylvania has the largest and most intensive cooperative program of any of the states. It is a true management program, as contrasted with some others which are concerned only with the control of hunting. Areas must be at least 1,000 acres in size, with a maximum Iimlt of 20, 000 acres. Safety zones, refuges, and open hunting zones are established. A large-scale program of wildlife food and cover planting, erosion control, woodland border improvement, and purchase of standing crops for food and cover, has been instttuted. The landowner leases hunting rights to the Commission under a binding agreement which cannot be broken without just cause. The Commission furnishes protection to the property by posting and patrolling, It is felt that this program is very effective, and in view of the large total acreage involved, is not prohibitively expensive. , " . �Utah administers cooperative areas which are established at the instigation of landowners, for the control of hunting only. Landowners petition the Department to set up such an area, and establish an Association to govern it. The Department grants a Posted Hunting Areas license, and regulates fees, permits, and law enforcement. The landowners, through the Association, perform the actual control of hunting on the land. Landowners are authorized to collect a fee of $1. 00 per hunter for the season. Wisconsin leases SOmeprivate lands for public hunting, but has no established program of hunter control or wildlife management on these lands. The state much prefers to' purchase lands for public hunting grounds, rather than to become involved in agreements and programs on private land. Introduction: One of the most pressing problems in upland game bird management, particularly the ringnecked pheasant, in recent years has been how to preserve public hunting in the face of increasing human populations, increase in intensive farming practices, and increased antagonism on the part of landowners toward the hunting public. Thi.s problem is of nationwide scope, and is certainly shared by Colorado. In attempts to alleviate this situation, many states have inaugurated systems whereby blocks of private land are set up, by various agreements with the landowners, as controlled cooperative hunting or game management units. Some of these systems have been in effect for several years, and evaluations of their results have been made. With the thought in mind that establishment: of similar management units in Colorado may prove beneficial, the available literature was reviewed for the purpose of gathering information on these units. In addition, letters of inquiry were sent to game management agencies of the states located in pheasant range. The results of this literature review and correspondence follow: States eliminated from consideration: As a result of the replies to the letters of inquiry regarding cooperative units, it was determined that the following states have not established cooperative units of any type: . Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, No rth Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. States which failed to reply to the letter, and on which no literature is available, are Maryland, Massachusetts , and South Dakota. States which have established cooperative units: Following is the available information on each of the states which has or has had some type of controlled cooperative pheasant hunting or management unit in effect. , . �~12= CALIFORNIA The cooperative plan was developed in California in 1949. In published reports and in co rrespondence, officials are careful to explain that California r s program involves cooperative pheasant hunting areas, not cooperative pheasant management areas. The only management undertaken consists of stocking birds and regulating the harvest (Hart, Chester M;, Ietter dated February 19, 1957). Size and zoning of units: When the cooperative program was first developed, the provision :w~s made that the areas should be at least 5, 000 acres in size, to consist of the..adjoining lands of one or more owners (Harper, 1949; Harper~ al, 1950). A revision in 1954 reduced the minimum open zone acreage to 2,500 acres (Wright~ al , 1955). There is no maximum limit on area size. Each area, or' unit, consists of three types of zones: Closed, or safety, zones inthe immediate vicinity of buildings; restricted zones, open to hunting Oldyby landowner permrsston: and open zones, open to the public by permit. Re stricted zones are limited to .20 percent of the total area, and open zones must consist of '.' , at least 50 percent of tbe entire area or a minimum of 5, 000 acres (now reduced to 2, 500 acres), whichever is larger (Harper~ al, 1950). The areas are selected 9n the basis of capacity to support a maximum number of hunters, heavy pheasant populations, availability to hunters, and willingness of landowners to cooperate. The maximum number of hunters allowed at anyone time is one for each 5 acres of open land (Harper et al, 1950): . '" -. ',,': In 1949, California managed a total of 72,100 acres of privately owned land during the pheasant season (Metcalfe and Harper, 1950). By 1954, this acreage had increased .to 189,885, but dropped to 161,417 in 1955 (Wright et al, 1955). -\ Types of dev~lopments for wildlife within these units: As previously stated, no management in the form of wildlife or habitat developments is undertaken. Legal agreements between landowners and the wildlife agency: When a group of landowners controlling a: contiguous block of land agrees to the provistons of the cooperative' program, the Department draws a formal statement, or legal agreement, to the effect that it will be responsible for all posting, will enforce game laws and trespass laws, and willoperate checking stations (Harper, 1949; Harper~~ 1950). up Methods of rei:mburs~ng landowners: The agreements contain a provision that the landowner, at, his own discretion, may charge a fee not to exceed $2. 00 per hunter day, but the number of such pay areas operated is negligible (Wright._=:J et al 1955) . .' The only reimburseinent on the part of the Department is the actual control of hunting and trespass. �=13= Methods of controlling hunting: Each type of zone is posted at least every 1/5 mile, with different colored signs as well as different wording being used to identify the type of zone. Checking and permit stations are set up at entrance roads. Each hunter is issued a permit and an arm band colored the same as the signs designating the zone. At the end of the hunt, the permit and arm bands are turned in and the hunter; is requested to complete a questionnaire with information on number of birds bagged, number crippled and lost, band numbers if any, number of hours hunted, whether a dog was used, and remarks and suggestions (Harper ~t aI, 1950). Sexes of pheasant shot: Cooperative units operate under the same regulations as any hunting area hi the State. Until 1955, only cocks could be legally taken. In 1955, the bag limit was changed to allow one hen in the northern part of the state (Wright~..&, 1955). The limited take of hens was continued in 1956. It is felt that this hen harvest has not resulted in any loss of reproduction in the areas involved (Hart, Chester M., letter dated February 19, 1957). Effectiveness of units: Officials believe that the cooperative program has been effective in :finproyingfarmer-sportsman relations. It has opened land to the sportsmen for hunting, and has relieved landowners of the problem of controlling hunting on their lands and protecting their property from damage by hunters. In several places, however, the state-operated cooperatives have gradually been replaced by controlled hunting areas operated by communities or organizations on a fee basis (Hart, Chester M., letter dated February 19, 1957). Cost of operation: In 1955, it took 210 employees to operate 18 cooperative units, at a total cost of nearly $120,000. It is felt that this expense is the major drawback to the program, and in recommendations to other agencies, the statement is made that close patrol, the most expensive part of tie operation, should be avoided if possible (Ha~t, Che~ter M., letter dated February 19, 1~57). CONNECTICUT Connecticut's .regulated shooting program, with periodic' modification, has been in operation since 1930. This program provides a sportsman group and the Department an :.opportunityto cooperate with landowners in long term management plans at a relatively low cost. All cooperative areas are established by mutual agreement between a sportsman's club and the larrl0Vll.IIe'is involved, with the Department acting only in the capaciiY.of a go-between (Lamson, 1954). Size and establishment of units: The sportsman or landowner group selects a suitable areaofz , 000 acres or more, preferably contiguous and bordered by roads to facilitate posting. The group then contacts the Department to verify suitability and to obtain a supply of landowner agreement forms. The group sponsoring the area contacts the Iandowners, explains the program, and obtains the Iandownerls signature on the agreement forms. If adequate acreage is signed, the group then requests the Department to establish the regulated shooting area (Lamson, 1954). �-14Types of developments for wildlife within these units: The Department does not undertake habitat development or other management on its own. If the sponsoring club and the landowner agree on such development, the Department matches the sportsman's group funds dollar for dollar up to $100.00, with the club members doing the work of putting in food and cover plantings (Lamson, 1954). Legal agreements between landowners and the wildlife agency: The landowner signs an agreementgranting; to the state the right to permit hunting on hi s property, excepting such portions designated as being closed for safety reasons. The right of ingress and egress is al so granted to the state. The state, in turn, egress to govern the public use of the property, and to post it in such manner as desired. Club members are responsible for getting landowners to sign the agreement. Methods of reimbursing landowners: There is no cash transaction involved. Reimbur semenf is .inthe form of control of hunting. Methods of controlling hunting: Legislative authority allows the Department to make regulattonscontrolltng seasons, bag limits, methods of taking game, and sportsman behavior on the areas. This involves the patrolling of the areas by , ConservationOfflcer-s (Lamson, 1954). Sexes of pheasants shot: The State of Connecticut allows the taking of pheasants of either sex (Pamphlet of laws and regulations, 1956d957). Effectiveness of units: Officials believe that the system has some drawbacks; but considering theIimited funds available for operation, it works fairly well in promoting landowner - sportsman harmony (Lamson, Arroll L., letter dated February 13, 1957). IDAHO Idaho's cooperative program is patterned. after that of Pennsylvania. Objectives are: (1) to interest-the Iandowner In game management on his own land" (2) to provide the general public withhunttng, and 'to open up landtliat was closedby posting, (3) to ' attempt to educate the hunter in proper sportsman conduct while he is on private land, (4) to provide food and cover for pheasants, (5) to assure farm property of protection under the existing game code {Lundy, 1950). Size and zoning of units: Groups of adjacent farms make up the cooperative area. These areas 'must-contain at least 640 acres, but cannot exceed 10,000' acres: in .. size. Safety zones are established to include areas within 100 yards of any used, building. Game refuge areas, a few acres in size, are established and posted with "No Hunting" signs. At least 2/3 of the total project area must remain open to public hunting (Lundy, 1950). )' _' .- �~i.8? ___ -15= Types of developments for wildlife within these units: The Department, at the time the cooperatives are set up, enters into an agreement with the landowners involved to the effect that food and cover plantings may be placed on portions of the land so designated by the landowner. These units are mostly in the southern and eastern part of the state, where many plantings have been made. The Department furnishes the nursery stock or seed, and the labor required (Casebeer, 1952). Legal agreements between landowners and the wildlife agency: As previously stated, the Department ente~s into agreements for habitat development on private property. Also, a landowner who enters a cooperative program signs an agreement that hunting rights only on his land are available to the Commission for a period of 5 years or mor~. A clause provides for continuation of the program after 5 years have elapsed, unless either party wishes to discontinue. Agreements can be cancelled for just causes. Establishment of safety zones and refuges are made a part of the agreement, with the provision that game surpluses may be trapped and removed by the Department (Lundy, 1950). Methods of reimbursing landowners: There is no cash transaction involved. The only retmbur-sement on the part of the Department is in the form of protection to the property. Methods of controlling hunting: The Department is responsible for posting of the cooperative areas, including the safety zones and refuges. During the season, officers patrol the areas and enforce regulations (Casebeer, 1952). The literature did not reveal whether there is any set maximum number of hunters allowed at anyone time. Sexes of pheasants shot: Idaho law provides that only cocks may legally be taken. Effectiveness of units: No statement was made in the literature of the cooperative units, as to the effectiveness ILLINOIS The information available on cooperative programs in illinois is very meager, consisting only of a one-page letter from Mr. John Montgomery, Superintendent, Division of Game Propagation, dated March 1, 1957. illinois does not openats pheasant management areas, as the term is commonly understood. Their only cooperative program is a farmer-sportsman' s club arrangement whereby the clubs obtain pheasant chicks from the Department, raise them until the season starts, and then release them on cooperator's lands for shooting. The clubs supply all hf the equipment and labor. The Department supplies one-half of the feed required to raise the birds, plus a technician to supervise the projects. In addition, the Department maintains 7 state-owned public shooting areas on which birds are released immediately before the season begins. ;'::'.1 �MICHIGAN As with lllinois, 1b.einformation on cooperative programs in Michigan is also meager. The Michigan Conservation Department cooperates with landowners in a Federal Aid habitat restoration project, whereby trees, shrubs, and seed are furnished and planted at no cost to the landowner (Janson, V. S., letter dated February 20, 1957). The only other existing cooperative program is the Williamston ;PUm of controlled hunting. A group of far;mers organizes to control trespass troubles and to encourage natural production of wildlffe. This plan is strictly a landowner organization, and the Department requires onlythree things: that the area be not larger than 10,000 acres, that no charges be made for hunting, and that hunting be not restricted to any special group. Beyond this ; theDepartment has nothing whatever to do with the plan {Hill, 1940). NEBRASKA The State of Nebraska has no cooperative pheasant hunting or management program set up primarily for the purpose of controlling hunting on private land. The Federal Aid Division has set up three experimental areas for research purposes, on which control of hunting is incidental to the major reason for establishment. On these areas, agreements are drawn up with the landowners involved providing that the Commission will erect signs designating the areas as "Wildlife Research Areas", assist the landowners in reducing trespassing by hunters, and exercise due care and consideration of the farmer's property (Agee, Phil; letter dated February 18, 1957). NEWJERSEY The State of New.Jersey has experimented with several different plans over a period of years, starting with a modfication of the Williamston Plan as practiced in Michigan. At the present time, the state is operating under a plan which allows hunting by registration on certain lands. which are set up as cooperative areas (Mimeo. report,. "The New Jersey Hunter Cooperative Plan," Dept. of ,Cons., Div. ofEish and Game). . • , <>.... ~ .'.; . -.~.., ..•. ...• ',.: . ~~ .' ' .. Size and zoning of urilts: . Only areas of 1, 000 acres or more are considered, in which the state can bring. together as many as 20 landowners' having land in a contiguous block (MacNamara., L. G., letter dated February 27, 1957). Only lands that are or have been posted against hunting are eligible. Land that is open to unrestricted hunting is not constdered, Ten percent of each cooperative area IS set aside as a state Game Refuge, and safety zones are established in the vicinity of buildings and pastures. No hunting is allowed in these zones (Mimeo. report, "The New Jersey Hunter Cooperative Plan"). Types of developments for wildlife within these unitsr. Whenever possible habitat improvement' projects are instituted on these cooperative areas. This includes planning and establishing of food and cover facilities in coordination with existing farm management (MacNamara, L. G., letter dated February 27, 1957). �~17~ Legal agreement between landowners and the wildlife agency: The agreement is in the form of lease, whereby the landowner grants all hunting rights for a specified period of years to the Department. The Department then has the right of ingress and egress, the right to post the property as a cooperative hunting area, and the right to undertake habitat improvement work. The Department agrees to protect the property against trespass and vandalism, and to enforce game laws thereon (Mineo. report, "The New Jersey Hunter Cooperative Plan"). a Methods of reimbursing landowners: No method is included for the reimbursement of the landow:ner,other than that of protection against vandalism and the control of hunting pressure (MacNamara, L. G., letter dated February 27, 1957). Methods of co.ntroUing hunting: Hunting is allowed on the cooperative areas through the process of .reg lstration. Areas are posted "Hunting by Registration, n with the signs directing the hunter to the place where he can register. The hunter then signs a registration card, agreeing to abide by all rules. The Department assigns men to patrol the areas. Registration cards are issued for one day only and are limited to one man per 20 acres for each hunting day (Mimeo. report, "The New Jersey Hunter Cooperative .Plan"). Sexes of pheasants shot: The State of New Jersey allows the harvest of cocks only, with the exception commercial shooting preserves. of Effectiveness of units: The State has found that the effectiveness of these plans is of short dur-ation. They are very effective in building up bird populations and increasing the .supply of game, through stocking and habitat improvement, which ultimately works to the detriment of the plan. As soon as birds have increased appreciably, local sporting clubs find it to their advantage to take over the areas which had been operating on a cooperative basis. When this occurs, the State withdraws f.rom the cooperative agreement. As yet, no method has been found to circumvent such occurrences (MacNamara, L. G .• letter dated February 27, 1957). NEW YORK In 1939, New Yo'rk inaugurated an experimental plan known as the.Cooperative Landowner- Sportsman Program. This program was essentially similar to that of the present-day New Jersey program in most of its provisions. In 1945, an evaluation was made, of the benefits derived and the cost of operation, at which time it was concluded that the program was too expensjvs to be practical (Bromley, 1945). After the evaluation was completed, the program was discontinued. The Department Is now attacking the landowner-sportsman problem from the viewpoint of providing greater incentive to keep land unposted. An enabling act is now (March, 1957)being considered by the Legislature, with passage almost certain. It is still too early to offer any comments on the feasibility of the plan (Mason, Charles; letterdated March 11, 1957). , ' �-18= OREGON Oregon operated from one to seven cooperative pheasant hunting areas a year from 1950to 1955. The program has since been abandoned. The emphasis is now on the use of "Hunting by :Permission" signs and "Safety Zone" signs furnished by the Department to landowners. A letter from W. V; Masson, Chief, Upland Game; dated February 11, 1957, outlines the provi sions of the abandoned cooperative plan. This letter is quoted verbatim, as. follows : Size of units~ A thousand or more acres was the usual goal although some units were smaller. Extent of unit usually dependent on the amount of land that could be signed up in a continuous block . . Developments: NOdevelopments were made under terms of this five-year contract except if the' 4tQividual was interested or could be interested in habitat improvement work. It was not a condition of the contract, however. Legal Agreement: A five year contract with the landowner stating that he would allow free hunting access to this property during regular open season. In turn, the Game Commtssjon would post his lands, permit a percentage of his lands --such as stock yards, farmstead, vulnerable crops, etc. -- to be posted as safety zones, and would patrol the area during the season. Reimbursement: No reimbursement was provided for landowners other than as mentioned in the next paragraph. Control of hunters: No attempt was made to control numbers of hunters on the area although the 'area WaS patrolled at all times as a law enforcement measure. Hunting pretty much limited itself within a short period each day. Sexes of pheasants shot: Cooperative shooting areas were subject to statewide rules and regulations with only cock pheasants allowed in the bag. Effectiveness: Thi~ type of unit did not prove too practicaldue largely to the heavy hunting pressures causing landowner dissatisfaction and the difficulty in keeping large enough blocks of land intact when several owrerships were involved. Also, the posting and patrolling, especially if several of these units were in operation, caused a heavy manpower 4rain and confined a great many of our, personnel to these specific areas all dur'jIlg the season. Hunters were generally satisfied with this type of setup as heavy releases of game farm birds were made on the areas. �1.0';3: -19= PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania is the pioneer in intensive development of cooperative management programs. Their plan, which has increased in scope every year, was first adopted in 193p and was called the Cooperative Farm -Game Program (Biddle, 1938; Conklin, 1939). Several of the other states which have experimented with cooperatives have used the Pennsylvania program, or modifications of it, as a basis. It is a true management program, as contrasted with some others which are concerned only with.the control of hunting. Size and zoning of units: farmers who wish to combine in a cooperative proj ect must be able to pool at least 1, 000 adjoining acres, with a maximum limit of 20,000 acres. The Commission creates safety zones within 150 yards of any occupied or used building, and establishes game refuges of a few acres. Safety zones are posted with signs, and refuges are posted also, as well as being marked with a single strand of wire. Refuges !IDdsafety zones cormined may not total more than one-third of each cooperative area., ' The remaining two thizds must remain op-ento public hunting (Wolf, 1956). There are now 168 such cooperatives in Pennsylvania, embracing 10,404 farms having a combined total area of 1,054,229 acres (Wolf, 1956). Types of developments for wildlife within these units: The Commission furnishes nursery stock; seed; planting machinery, and labor for making food and cover plantings on cooperator's lands. It is mandatory, however, that the landowner furnish the tractive power required (Roberta, Harvey A., letter dated March 7, 1957). In addition to the consideration of plantmgs for wildlife, the Commission takes steps to plant where erosion is a problem .. Windbreaks and farm ponds are also a part of the program, as well as contour plowing, hedge planting, woodland border planting (or in case a field is cultivated up to the edge of woodland, "cutting back, It or removing a 25 foot strip of woodland to create a woodland border), woodland improvement cuttings, and preservation of waste areas (Wolf, 1956). The Commission purchases areas of field COrIi',soybeams, and.alfalfa to leave standing through the' year forthe purpose of providing food and nesting cover, and fences these areas to exclude domestic stock (Roberts, Harvey A., letter dated March 7, 1957). Legal agreements .between landowners and the wildlife agency: The owner or tenant signs an agreementto the effect that hunting rights on his land will be made available to the Commission for 5 years or more. This agreement can be cancelled by either party, but the landowner must present a valid reason for cancellation. For example, if he is offering his farm for sale, the prospective new owners may not wish the property to be encumbered by previous commitments. This constitutes a valid reason for cancellation. This valid reason provision is made to prevent such occurrences as experrenced by New Jersey; that is, the taking over by lease of a well-developed area by a restrictive club or other organization. The Commission agrees to furnish such protection to the property as lies within its power, by patrolling and enforcing regulations, and to do all posting of the property (Wolf, 1956). �=20= Methods of reimbursing landowners: There is no reimbursement, other than that of protection of the property and the control of hunters (Wolf, 1956). Methods of controlli:o.ghunting: This phase of the program is implied, rather than stated in derinrte terms, in the literature. Apparently, the hunters are responsible for securing the permission of the landowner, who exercises his own opinions as to how many hunters he wants at anyone time. Any hunter who has not secured permission is in violation of trespass laws, and can be arrested by Commission officers (Wol~, 1956). Sexes of \pheas~nts shot: There was no indication, either in correspondence or literature, whether or not Pennsylvania allows the taking of hens. Effectiveness and cost of units: Commission officials believe that the Pennsylvania Farm-Game ?rogram is the most successful plan of its type in the United states. They state emphatically that it has come closer to solving the landowner=sportsman problem than anything yet attempted. The cost of this program is approximately $350,000 per year, or roughly 35 cents per acre, which is considered a modest fee by those concerned (Wolf, 1956). UTAH The State of UtI¢. operates cooperative pheasant hunting areas which are established at the instigation of landowners. The landowner must make the first move; aate officials do not go around looking for areas to be put under cooperative operation. Thus, their program is much less intensive than that of Pennsylvania or California. In common with that of California, the Utah program is strictly a cooperative hunting program, and.no management is practiced. Establishment an.d size of units: Cooperative units are established by petition of landowners whose 'aggregate lands equal or exceed 1, 000 acres. Upon receipt of the petition, the Commission investigates the area, and if acceptable, a license is granted to the landowners to operate a Posted Hunting Area. The landowners are required to set up an organization known as a Posted Hunting Area Association. This Association Is then empowered to administer the area as prescribed by law (Utah, Sta.te of. Fish and game laws, 1955-1956. Utah Fish and Game Comm. Pamphlet). Types of developments for wildlife within these units: The units are operated by the landowners, ahd:~ot by the state. Therefore, there are no habitat development projects undertaken by the state on these lands. Legal agreements between landowners and the wildlife agency: These agreements consist only of the Initial Itcenses to operate such units, and are explained above. �=21= Methods of reimbursing landowners: Landowners are empowered by the Commission to operate collector stations at entrances to their property, and to assess a fee of $1. 00 per hunter for hunting privileges for the season. Methods of controlling hunting: The operation of the Posted Hunting Area is strictly a landowner pr()pbsifion. The only control the state has over these areas is in granting the license to operate, in setting the hunter fee, in defining the period of time during which landowners may issue hunting permits and collect fees, in prescribing the type of sign which may be used in posting, and in enforcing regular state laws regarding the legal taking of game. The landowners, through the Association, are empowered limit the number of hunters as they see fit (Utah, state of. Fish and Game laws, 1955-1956). to Sexes of phea,sant shot: In accordance with statewide regulations, only cocks may legally be taken. Effectiveness of units: Commission officials believe that farmer=sportsman. relattonships are improved over those of unrestricted hunting. The exact nature of the effectiveness of these units was not mentioned (Greenhalgh, Clifton M., letter dated February 13,' 1957). WISCONSIN The State of Wisconsin has no cooperative pheasant management areas as such: that is, areas of private land which have been set up under agreement with the landowners, and upon which hunting is controlled. The state operates what are known as Public Hunting Grounds, which consist of state-owned land with adjacent private land upon which hunting rights have been leased by the state. The only agreement involved is the lease; beyond this, there is no established program. The lands are open to unrestricted hunting. An extensive habitat development program of food and cover plantings is operated onthese lands, as well as a stocking program involving from 20 to 25 thousand cock pheasants per year. The general feeling among administrators is that it is preferable for the Department to purchase land, .rather than to lease it (Smith, J. R., letter dated February 21, 1957). BmLIOGRAPHY 1. Biddle, Nicholas, 1938. Cooperative farm-game program .. ' Pennsylvania Game News, 9(5):6-9. 2, Bromley, A. W. 1945. Evaluation of the New York state experimental cooperative landowner-sportsman controlled public hunting grounds program. Trans. N. Am.. Wildlife Conf., 10:9-29. �-22= 3. Casebeer, Robert L. 1952. Upland game bird habitat development in Idaho. Proc. Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 32:119-122. 4. Conklin, W:. Gard. 1939. The Pennsylvania cooperative farm-game program. Pennsylvania Game News, 10(1):4-7, 30. 5, Harper, Harold T. 1949. Game management areas in California. Proc. Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 29:139-143. 6. Harper, Harold '1;., George Metcalfe, and John F .. Davis. 1950. Upland game cooperative hunting areas. Calif. Fish and Game, 36 (4):404-432. 7. Hill, Russell G~ 1940. Some observations on farm game management cooperatives in Michigan. : Jour. Wildl. Mgmt., 4(4):383-391. 8. Lamson, Arroll L. 1954.. Cooperative game programs. Board of Ftsher-ies and Game pamphlet, 12 pp. Connecticut State 9. Lundy, Maurice H. 1950. Cooperative farm game program in Idaho. Proc. Western Assn, •. Game and Fish Commissioners, 30:199-204. 10. Metcalfe, George and Harold Harper. 1950.. Cooperative hunting areas in California. .Proct Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 30:95-96. 11. Utah, State of. 1955-1956, Fish and game laws. Commrsston pamphlet, 12. Wolf, Bill. 1956.. The Pennsylvania plan. March and April, 1956. Utah Fish and Game Sports Afield, Jan., Feb., 13. Wright, 'l'revenen A., Ernest Clark, and Donald Grider. 1955. Pheasant cooperative hunting area. results. California Department of Fish and Game, mimeo. report. 43 pp. Submitted by: Date William Rutherford Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _;;;J..;,;u~1;Y.:..l,.".""..;;.;19;;,..;5;;,..;7~------ �_--.--.---_-.-----.~--- ._- I~IDIII'I~r~,~rllil~mlli~~' ~~ill~r~' lij~~il 1 . <1"QO 'tEl, -.. :.t. ••~. BDOW022172 ir =23- . - - July, '1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT state of COLORADO Project No. W-37-R-10 Work Plan No._..;.._--:.IV.;..._ Title of Job: ·...;C;;_;h::;u:::k;;:.:a;::r~P.;;;;a.;;;.rt;::r;.;:i.;;;ldg.:l.e~.....I.....;J;.;o;.;:b N;;.;.;;,o.;.,. _. ...;2~ ___;. __ .....z...' --=P..;;r:..;:o;.;:d:.;;;u;.:.c;;:.:ti;.;:o.;;;;n;-;s;;_;tu=d:.;;.ie;;_;s;;_;.;...._-------------_ Summary: 1. Fifty-three chukar broods were observed in 21 areas during June 13' to September 10, 1956. These broods averaged 8.5 young. 2. Reports of 85 broods were received during the survey period. Actual counts on 76 of these broods showed an average of 9.4 young per; brood. .v: : 3.. Counts of young and adults, during the period July 15 through August 15. showed 1. 19 young;per adult in areas of established chukar populations. In areas of recent chukar release, the ratio was 1. 60 young-per adult .. It is believed insufficient information was gathered to draw highly accurate. conclusions regarding reproductive success. . . . 4. .: 'r Preclpitation during theJ956 nesting period, April" May and June, was 57. 4 percent below normal. This drought was responsible for poor .chukar food condittons and probably adversely .affected reproduction. " Prepared Date by: . Wayne W.·· Simdfort • .... -r Approved by: Laurence E .. Riorda.n . Federal Aid~Co'ordina~r'.· July, 1957 ';' ��=25= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECT State of COLORADO -------~~~~~~------------------ ProjectNo.~ __~~~VV~-3~7~-~R~-~10~~;~G==am~e~B~ir~d~Su~rv~ey~~ _ Work Plan No.__ ......,._--=IV-=-~C:;.:h::;;u=k=a:.:r~P.::ar;:..t:.:r;.::i.=idgi:l.,;e;;....,.~, ...;:J...;:0..::;b...:N~0:;.:.:__:2=-_ Title of Job. _ ___;P::...r:::...;o~d:!:u:!.:c::.::t:.!:io~n!...:::s~tu~d=:i~e:!;:s.:.. __;_ _ Objectives: To determine the. production by chukars and the conditions affecting reproduction. Scope: Chukar partridge areas within the state. Personnel: Harvey G. Bray and Wayne W.· Sandfort. Techniques: Routine surveys were conducted in areas containing established chukar partridge populations and in areas where recent releases of these birds had been made. During these surveys, records were kept of the total number of chukars observed and the number and size of broods. Additional information on chukar reproductive success was obtained through interviews with persons residing within or near chukar areas. Data on precipitation during the months of April, May and June was obtained from the United States Weather Bureau of Walker Field, Grand Junction, Colorado. These data were analyzed to determine possible relationships between weather and reproductive success. Findings: Findings from this investigation are summarized to show the average size of broods observed, size of broods reported, and the reproductive success by chukars as indicated by the young-per-adult ratio.· Additional information on factors relating to or responsible for reproductive success also is given. Average Brood Size Fifty-three chukar partridge broods were observed in 21 areas during the period extending from June 13 to September 10, 1956. These broods contained 448 young, giving an average of 8.5 young per brood. The smallest brood observed contained two young and the largest 18. �Reports of 85 chukar broods were received throughout the survey period. In many cases .these reports probably related to broods observed by project personnel. An actual count was given on seventy-six of the 85 broods repo:rted. These contained a total of 718 young, or an average of 9.4 young per brood. Young-per-adult Ratio Counts of young and adults were made where it was possible to separate these two age classes. Analysis of this information is believed to provide a more accurate idea of reproductive success, as non-productive as well as productive adults are considered, Information obtained during the period July 15 through August 15 shows a total of 110 adults and 131 young observed in 11 areas of established chukar populations. This gives a figure of 1. 19 young per adult. In six areas of recent chukar releases, 55 adults and 88 young were observed; a ratio of 1. 60 young per adult. Factor's Affecting Reproductive Success Data on precipitation, during the months of April, May and June, 1956, shows a departure from normal of minus 1. 08 inches or 57. 4 percent . . Extremely dry weather during the spring months, and the resultant adverse affect on feed conditions, undoubtedly was unfavorable for chukar reproductton. Problems in adaptation to a new environment, on the part of newly released birds, probably was another factor unfavorable for good reproductive success in some areas. Analysis and Recommendations: The average size of chukar partridge broods (8.5), observed during the summer of 1956, indicates fair reproduction. When one considers the young-per-adult ratio, however, one cannot be so optimfstic , Figures of 1. 19 and 1. 60 young-per-adult in areas of established chukar populations and' in areas of new release, respectively, show much better reproductive success could have occurred. Only poor to fair reproduction-undoubtedly- resulted, in part, 'from drouth 'condtttons and poor chukar food growth. Limited d:riIikingwater-may also adversely affected chukar reproduction. have Surveys inJ955 showed reproduction was much poorer in areas of new release than in areas of established chukar populations; the contrary appeared to hold true in 1956. This inconsistency probably occurred because of insufficient data from which to draw accurate conclusions. It is recommended intensive field surveys be conducted iJ;l1957, particularly during the period of July 22 to August 7, to '. �-27obtain more reliable information on chukar partridge reproduction. Summary: L Fifty-three chukar broods were observed in 21 areas during June 13 to September 10, 1956. These broods averaged 8.5 young. 2. Reports of 85 broods were received during the survey period. on 76 of these broods showed an average of 9.4 young per brood. Actual counts 3. Counts of young and adults, during the period July 15 through August 15, showed L 19 young per adult in areas of established chukar populations. In areas of recent chukar release, the ratio was 1. 60 young-per-adult. It is believed insufficient information was gathered to draw highly accurate conclusions regarding reproductive success. 4. Prec Ipitation dur-ing the 1956nesting period, April, May and June, was 57.4 percent below normal. This drouth was responsible for poor chukar food conditions and probably adversely. affected reproduction. Prepared bY:_._,..._W~a~yn..;;;;..;;;e_W;;..;...;.._San=;;;;.;df;;;;;;..;.o~r.;..t A.pprovedby: Laurence E.. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date ~~-J~u=1~y~,~1~9~57~---------- ��,~ ,..L Q.6I .._ ":~. I ~mllllflllllll~ll~11 111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022173 July, 1957' =29= " JOB COMPLETIONREPORT .i .,' ",' ~ .. -: ... , INVESTIGATIONSPROJECT .: ' ',1," ".',. State of Project No. ,', ; COLORADO W=37=R-10 Game Bird Survey ':(Jn~l:J:d~'s release of Title of Job:" Trapping and transplanting chukar partridges. game-farm birds). Summary: .. :,' ',' Trapping and Transplanting Wild Birds 1. Twenty chukar traps were operated a total of 1,150 trap days during a period extending from October 20 through December 17. Trapping operations were carried out in Escalante Canyon, Delta County. 2. ' A total of 128 birds were captured. An additional two birds died in traps before being removed. .; 3. Large-style, modified, clover-leaf traps, constructed of one inch mesh wire, were found to be most effective in catching chukars. 4. Twenty-one chukars were lost after being removed from traps. Two of these escaped during loading operattons.. The remaining birds died from fright, or other undetermined causes, while in the holding pen. - ~ o 5. A Cooper's hawk and Goshawk were caught in chukar tr-aps, The Goshawk had, killed a chukar, and the Cooper's hawk had frightened two chukars, causingthem to sustain severe head injuries. 6. Inspectionof spurs and general appearance 0 f the birds showed a sex ratio of 112 cocks per 100 hens. 0' .~ (J--. , ' , '7. As indicated by the depth of the bursa of fabricius, 54.3 percent of the chukars captured were juveniles and 45. 7 percent were adults. .. . ,: • - 0'" , " ; ) . :,' ",' .. �~308. Accurate weights of 94 chukars were obtained. Weights varied from 14.59 ozs. to lIb., 9.33 ozs. The average weight of all birds was lIb., 3.41 ozs. 9. Three releases of chukars were made as follows: 32 birds (16 cocks and 16 hens), Wil$onCreek, Fremont County; 30 birds (15 cocks and 15 hens), Cottonwood Creek, Montrose County; and 45 birds (24 cocks and 21 hens), East Salt Creek, Garfield County. Releasing Game-farm Chukars 1. A total of 1, 000 six week old chukars WcES received from Utah during July, 1956. 2. Birds were held in a 3/4 acre holding pen at the Little Hills Experiment station until March, 1957. Twenty-seven birds died in the holding pen. . 3. Chukars were released in 13 areas during March, 1957. Release groups consisted of 50 or 100 birds (except for 73 at Little Hills). A total of 973 ehukars was released. 4. The 1957releases represented the final release in six areas. These areas are typical of potential chukar range in their respective sections of the state. Results of development in these areas should serve as a guide to future chukar development activities. Prepared by: Wayne W" Sandfort Date ~J~u~ly~,~1~9~57~ Approved by:' Laurence E.- Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ �=31= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of COLORADO ----~~~~~~------------------- Project No. W-37-R-10 i Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. IV Job No. 6 ~~------~~--------~~~~~--~~--------~--- Ti tle of Job : ..;;.T""r..,.a..,pp ••.n.g....._an;;;_d;;;..;;;.t..;.ra..;.n;;;;s;;..,jpo;.;;l;;;;a;;;;;;n;.;.;ti;;;;;;n •• gL.,.c.;.;h;;;.;u;;;;;k;;;.;:ar;;;;;_ ••. pa,;.;;r;;..t;.;;r;_;;;i.;;;idg;;z..e;;.;s;;....;.. --J{.::;In:::.,;c;,.:l;,;;;u;,;;;d;;:;,e=.,s _ l_;;;;· release Objective: of game-farm To increase birds). the range and number of chukar partridges. Scope: Trapping and transplanting --Escalante Canyon, Delta County. Release of game-farm birds -- Mesa, Delta, Garfield, Rio Blanco; Moffat and Fremont counties. Personnel: Trapping and transplanting and temporary labor. - ... Dwight E. Owens, Wayne W. Sandfort ,~el~ase of game-farm birds --R. W, Betts, Harold Hood, Walt Woodward, Dwight Owens, Preston Steele, Don Smith, A. M. Greer, Pat Burke, Nelson Cain, and Wayne Sandfort. Techniques: Trapping. and 'I'ransplanting Wild. Birds The main phases of this job were: .: (1) trapping, (2) obtaining miscellaneous information c'apture-d birds, (3)holding, and (4) release. Shbrt discussions of these activities are given below. on Trapping:. -- Trapping operations were initiated on October 20 and terminated December 17. Twenty traps were used during this period. Traps were the modified clover-leaf styles, constructe d of one-inch mesh chicken wire. Eight small traps and 12 large traps were used (see Quarterly Report, April, 1952, p. 48). Wheat was used for bait. Traps were checked every afternoon and birds were removed by hand. �-32. . .. Obtaining miscellaneous information.-- Chukars were weighed on a balance scale, accurate to O.1 gram: . , . Age was determined by measuring the bursa of fabricius. This was done by using a stainless steel probe inserted into a feather quill sheath. The probe was slipped into the bursa the maximum distance, while the quill sheath slid back on the prom and remained at .the entrance to the bursa. The distance between the end of the sheath and the end of the probe was measured with a rnm, rule to determine depth of the bursa. The sex of each chukar was judged by shape am size of the spurs, and by general appearance of the birds. The preceding information, in conjunction with other trapping data (dates, trap numbers, etc.), was recorded on 3" x 5" file cards for future reference. Holding. -- Chukars were removed from traps, placed in a crate, and transported to a burlap-lined holding pen at Grand Junction. Birds were provided with fresh water and fed a grain mixture, until time for li'elease. . Release; -- Preparations were made to place .chukars in a new area, when a sufficient number of birds had been captured to form a suitable release group. Birds were removed from the holding pen, transportedto the release site, and allowed to fly from the shipping crate. Three releases were made during the 1956 trapping season. Releasing Game-farm Chukars One-thousand, stx-week-old chukar partridges were obtained from the State of Utah during J~ly, 1956. These birds were held during the winter in a 3/4 acre holding pen: at the Little Hill.s Experiment Station, Rio Blanco. County. Birds were removed fromtOOholding pen during March, .1957 and distributed in 13 areas within the st~te~. . ... : <. ,. .•. .... •.. ': . .., . r'. . .• Findings: Findings from trapping and transplanting wild chukar s during 1956, and releasing game-farm chukars during the spring of 1957, are given under appropriate headings below. TRAPPING AND TRANSPLANTING WILD arans. . . . . ~. Trapping--Trapping was carried out continuously for 59 days. During this period twenty traps were operated a total of 1,150 trap-days. Eight small traps were in operation 472 trap-days and twelve large traps were in operation 678 trap-days. �-33A total of 128 chukars was captured. The greatest number of chukars captured in a trap at one time was five, and the largest catch for one day was 12. As shown in Table L, trapping success decreased gradually during the trapping period. This occurred, at least in part, because of a gradual decrease in the number of chukars irr the canyon, and also because of increased wariness of birds as trapping progressed. Table 1. --TRAPPING SUCCESSzESCALANTECANYON!1956. Number of Birds Number of Number of Birds CaEtured CaEtured Eer TraE-Da;y TraEEing Eeriod TraE dals October .186 20-31 210 39 November 43 1-15 300 .143 16-30 20 .067 300 December .076· 1-17 26 340 .111 1150 128 ENTIRE PERIOD As in previous years, the large-style traps were more efficient in catching chukars than the small traps. The large traps averaged . 091 of a bird per trap-day and the small traps. 125 of a bird per trap-day. Twenty-three chukars were lost during trapping operations. This exceptionally high loss occurred even though birds were handled in the same manner as during previous years. Nineteen birds died shortly after being removed from the traps _ or while in the holding pen. Two escaped in the vicinity of 12th Street and Wellington Ave. in Grand Junction, during loading operations. An additional two birds were lost in Escalante Canyon during trapping activities. One of these was killed in a trap by a Goshawk (which was 'also captured): The other chukar was f~und dead in a trap with two live chukar's. Cause of death of this bird was undetermined. . . .. .... '. _',\ Two chukars and a Cooper's hawk were captured in one trap ~ ..October 24. Both chukars had severe head injuries, suffered in their attempt to escape the hawk. These two birds died later in the holding pen. One of the most noticeable differences, in trapping during the 1956 season, was the complete absence of Pinon jays. In previous years, these birds caused considerable disturbance around traps and consumed much of the bait. Their absence in 1956 may have resulted because good.food conditions existed in other areas. The pinon nut crop was excellent during the fall of this year. �Miscellaneous information. -- This section includes various data on sex ratios, age classification, and weights. Sex ratio Based on shape and size of spurs, and general appearance of chukars, 67 males and 60 females were .captured, giving a sex ratio of 112 cocks per 100 hens. Age Classifioation As determined by measurement of the bursa of fabricius, 54.3 percent of the chukars captured were juveniles (birds of the year) and 45. 7 percent were adults. The juvenile birds included 25 hens and 26 oocks. Sixteen of the mature birds were hens and 27 were cocks. As in previous years, measurement of the bursa appeared to provide an accurate method for. aging chukars. The bursa averaged 16.4 mm. in depth in immature birds, varying from 7.0 to 20.5 mm. In mature birds, forty-one possessed only 'bubsal scars. II . The remaining 17 birds possessed very shallow, vestigial bursas . . These varied from 1. 0 mm, to 4.0 mm. indepth, Data in Table 2 show the average depth of.the bursa of fabricius in immature chukars during the trapping period. Table 2. --DEPTH OF THE BURSAOF FABRICIUS.INIMMATURECHUKARS·OF BOTH SEXES BY TWO WEEK PERIODS, OCTOBER,. NOVEMBER•. DECEMBER 1956. Two - week Perfod October 20-31 November 1-14 November 15-28 November 29-December 12 December 13-17 Number of Measurements 25 21 9 12 2 Average Depth of Bursa (mm) 16.6 16.9 15.0 16.3 15.8 WEIGHTS Weights of chukars, captured during the 1956 trapping season, are shown in Table 3. �-35Table 3. --WEIGHTS OF CHUKARPARTRIDGES CAPTURED IN ESCALANTE CANYON FALL 1956. Average Minimum Maximum Weights Number Weights Weights ozs. sex of Birds lbs. ozs. lbs. ozs. lbs. Age Female 1 1 1.11 Immature 0 14.59 4.93 25 16 1 0.43 1 4.21 1 2.08 Female Mature Male Male Immature Mature 26 27 1 1 1. 15 0.72 1 1 7.83 9.33 1 1 4.36 5.40 Female (All ages) (All ages) Male ALL BffiDS 41 53 94 0 1 0 14.59 0.72 14.59 1 1 1 4.93 9.33 9.33 1 1 1 1.49 4.89 3.41 Holding. -- As previously mentioned, rather poor success was experienced in holding birds. Chukars which died in the pen appeared in good physical condition in most cases and cause of their death was not accurately determined. Death of some of these birds may have occurred from fright or some nervous condition, as was observed in previous years. Despite loss of a number of chukars, sufficient birds were held until three suitable release groups were accumulated. ReleaSing. -- Information on the three releases made during the 1956trapping season is given in tables 4, 5, and 6. Table 4--WILSON CREEK CHUKARRELEASE,FREMONT COUNTY, 1956. Type of Information .Loeality where birds were trapped .- - - Period during '~hich birds were trapped- Date of release - - - - - - - - - -. - - - Locality where birds were released - - - - Number of birds released- - - - - - - - - Data Escalante Canyon,' Delta County., October 20, 1956 to November 13, 1956. November 15, 1956 Wilson Creek (tributary of Four-mile Creek; .4 mile above Fuller H.' stock's farm house; north and east of Canon City. 32 (16 cocks and 16 hens). �P'~1 -"l: • • ~ =36= Table 5. --COTTONWOOD CREEK CHUKARRELEASE, MONTROSE COUNTY, 1956. Type of information . Data Locality where birds were trapped - - - - - _. Escalante Canyon, Delta County. Period during which birds were trapped - - - November 1 to November 8, 1956. Date of release - - - - - - - - - - = - - - - - November 9, 1956. Locality where birds were released - - - - - .Sec. 33, T. 50 N., R. 13 W. ; approximately 15 miles up the 25Mesa road from the Roubideau Cr. bridge; on Ray Hawkins ranch on the north side of Cottonwood Creek. Number of birds released - ~ - - - - - - - - 30{15 males and 15 females). Table 6. --EAST SALT CREEK CHUKARRELEASE, GARFIELD COUNTY, 1956. Type of information Data Locality where birds were trapped - - - - - - Escalante Canyon, Delta County. Period during which birds were trapped - - - - November 9 to December 17, 1956. Date of release - - - - - - = - - - - - - - - - - December 18, 1956. Locality where birds were released - - - - - Sec. 29, T. 7 S., R. 102 W. ; 17.6 miles north of Loma on state Highway 139; east side of Salt Creek. Number of birds released - - - - - - - - - - - 45 (24 males and 21 females). RELEASING GAME-FARM CHUKARS The distribution of game-farm chukars during March, 1957 is shown in. Table 7. Table 7. --RELlSASES:OF CHUKAR PARTRIDGES2 GAME -FARM STOCKI MARCH119q7. General At.' ea ... . County Date of Legal Description Number of birds klease. Four-orrile Creek Fremont Sec. 4, T17S, R 70 W 50 3/12/57 Wilson Creek Sec. 3, T 18S, R 70 W Ff:emont 50 3/12/57 Gateway Mesa Sec. 16,. T51N, R 19 W 100 3/23/57 DeBeque Canyon Mesa Sec.36, T 9S, R 98 W 100 3/23/57 stove Canyon Mesa Sec. 23, T 8S, RI02 W 100 3/26/57 Wells's Gulch Delta Sec. 3, TI4S, R 97W 50 3/27/57 Prairie Canyon .Sec. 6, T 8S, R104W Garfield 50 3/28/57 Camp Gulch 1/ Garfield Sec. 11, T 8S, R103W 100 3/26/57 Parachute Creek ·Garfield Sec. 8, T 6S., R 96W 100 3/22/57 Little Hil,ls Exp. sta. Rio Blanco Sec. 11, T 8S, R103W 73 3/26/57 White River Rio Blanco Sec.H, T 2N, RI01W 50 3/20/57 White River Rio Blanco Sec. 15, T 2N, R101W 50 3/20/57 Brown's Park Moffat Sec. 6! T10Nz R103 100 3/21/57 TOTAL BIRDS RELEASED 973 1/ Camp Gulch represents the only new release area for 1957; the remaining areas receiving supplemental releases. �-37- Analysis and Recommendations: A total of 130 chukars were trapped in Escalante Canyon during 1956. Two of these died in traps and 128 were taken from the canyon alive, On the day traps were closed, approximately 200 partridges were observed in Escalante Canyon, indicating the chukar population had not been harmed by trapping activities. Examination of spurs and general appearance of wild chukars appeared to provide a suitable method for sexing birds. Additional information was obtained in 1956, which shows the bursa of fabricius is a good criterion for determining age in chukar partridges. The bursa persists, at least until mid-December, and jrovides an easy method for separation of birds of the year from adults. Chukar traps-of the large, modified, clover-leaf style were most effective in catching partridge and are recommended for future trapping operations. Most of the 1957 releases of game-farm chukars were male in areas where birds had been placed previously; Camp Gulch being the only new release area, Three or more releases have now been made in the following areas: Four-mile Creek, DeBeque Canyon, Well's Gulch, Prairie Canyon, Little Hills Experiment Sta., and Brown's Park. It is felt sufficient numbers of birds have been placed in these areas to adequately test them for chukar partridge development. These areas are typical of potential chukar range in their respective sections of the state, Success or failure in these localities should serve as a reliable guide for further chukar development activities. Good success in holding chukars at Little Hills was experienced during the winter, of 1956-57. A total of 27 birds was lost out of the original 1, 000.. Most of these losses resulted from birds flying into the wire mesh ~d suffering mechanical injuries, " Summary: Trapping and Transplanting Wild Birds 1, Twenty chukar traps were operated a total of 1, 150 trap-days during a period extending from October 20 through December 17. Trapping operations were carried out in Escalante Canyon, Delta county. 2. A total of 128 birds were captured, being removed. An additional two birds died in traps before �=38= 3. Large-style, modified, clover-leaf traps, constructed of one-inch-mesh wire, were found to be most effective in catching chukars. 4. Twenty-one chukars were lost after being removed from traps. Two of these escaped during loading operations. The remaining birds died from fright, or other undetermined. causes, while in the holding pen. 5. A Cooper's hawk and Goshawk were caught in chukar traps. The Goshawk had killed a chukar, and the Cooper's hawk had frightened two chukars, causing them to sustain severe head injuries. 6. Inspection of spurs and general appearance of the birds showed a sex ratio of 112 cocks per 100 hens. 7. As indicated by the depth of the bursa of fabricius, 54.3 percent of the chukars captured were juveniles and 45. 7 percent were adults. 8. Accurate weights of 94 chukars were obtained. Weights varied from 14.59 ozs. to 1 lb. , 9.33 ozs. The average weight of all birds was 1 lb., 3.41 ozs. 9. Three releases of chukars were made as follows: 32 birds (16 cocks and 16 hens), Wilson Creek, Fremont County; 30 birds (15 cocks and 15 hens), Cottonwood Creek, Montrose County; and 45 birds (24 cocks and 21 hens), East Salt Creek, Garfield County. Releasing Game-farm Chukar s: 1. A total of 1,000 six week old chukars was received from Utah during July, 1956. 2. Birds were held .in a 3/ 4-acre holding pen at the Little Hills Experiment Station until March, '1957. 'I'wenty=seven "birds died in the holding pen. 3. Chukars were released.in.13 areas during M;:trch,.1957. Release groups consisted of 50 or 1'00·birds .(except for 73 at"Little Hills). A. total of 973'chukar s was released. . 4. The 1957 releases represented the final release in six areas. These areas are typical of potential chukar range in their respective sections of the state. Results of development in these areas should serve as a guide to future chukar development activities. ' Prepared by: Date W_..;.a"",yn~e_W~._S....;an~df_o;...r....;t -,-A .pproved •• by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator J_u~ly~,~19_5;...7 _ �-....,., =39- . July, 1957~,-~' ,,;-."_ state of~ __ Project No. JOB COMPLETION REPORT. INVE STIGATIONS PROJECT : ...;;C...;;O;..:L~O;;..;R;;.;;A=D.;;:;O _ W-37=R-IO Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. .;;.IV..;.._ " .-' f '-;-, .: " .l-C;;.;h;;;;u;;..;k;;;,;:a;;;;r~P.;;;a;;;.rt;;;;r;..;;i.;;;dgl;l.e;;;.._·l_, _;;;.Jo.;;;b;;;...;.;.._;N;;.; . .;;.o.:.,.. • .;.;;~'7•••.. ~,.~ :.·_-· '..;...__ ',\', " ''''_-' z,_ E=xp~er;;;..l;;..·m en_t"-a..;;;l_h;;..a..;.;b..;;;i.;.;ta.;.;t_d_e;;..v;..;e_l..;;.o ••. pm;;;.;..;e_n_t ...• <•••p_r_o;;;..v_,id_i_ng'"""""s_u .•• p••• p_l_em..;..· ..;.;e_n_t_al;;;....;.;w_a_te..;;.·' -Tftle of Job :__ through the use of gallinaceous guzzlers). Summary: 1. Chukar summer watered at all three experimental guzzlers of 1956. Very light use was noted at the Prairie the guzzlers . 2. partridge were heavily Heavy snow during used in the Well's the winter the spring of 1957, created of 1956-57, conditions in little -'- Dispersal and above normal for abundant or no use of guzzlers until hot, of chukars, during dry weather water prectpttation and succulent and perhaps the spring of 1957. winter In \0 Date: by: __ during' feed in the . rnortaltty, occurs. ..;.W.;..;a:;,.ynL.=.,;e;... . .;.W.;..;.~ ..:;;S.;;;an=df:;.;o;..;;rt:.:.... --=A:.=J'pprovedby: ....;J;..;u;;;;;ly"-l-, ....;;1.;;..9.;;..57~ resulted Use of water.developments . Prepared . Gulch area . .' areas. . is not expected . Canyon ,unit, whereas" . experimental during the . E: Laurence Riordan .Federal Aid Coordinator _ ~ o o "*" .~ " ',_', v. ��July, 1957 =41= JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT ~~eof. ~C~O~L~O~RA~D~O~ _ Project No, W..;.:_-...:::;3...:.7_-;:,;R;,_=-=1,;.0 __ .l-...___;G;:,;am=...:::;e...,;B;:,;1;;,;;' r...:::;d;;_Sur=;..;v...;e;..Ly Work Plan No. __ _.;;;..IV;;__ Title of Job: Experimental _ ~_C;;;..;h_u~k.;;.;a;;;;;r_.;;;..P..;;.;a_rt.;.;r;.,;;;i..;;;jdg ••. e.;;..o,'_____..;J;...;o;...;b;...;N~0..;.,.. ;...;7 _ habitat development (providing supplemental water through the use of gallinaceous guzzlers). Objective: To increase the range and numbers of chukar partridges. Scope: Delta County (Well's Gulch) and Garfield County [Prafrte Personnel: Canyon), Harvey G. Bray, Dwight E. Owens and Wayne W. Sandfort. Procedure: Three California-type gallinaceous guzzlers were constructed during 1953 and 1954 in west-central Colorado to determine the possibilities of Increastng the range and numbers of chukars through the provision of water (see Quarterly Report, October, 1954, pp. 17-21). Activities during the period extending from July 1, 1956 through May, 1957 consisted of: (1) conducting per-iodic checks of three gallinaceous guzzlers and (2) releasing 50 chukars at Well's Gulch guzzler #2 on March 27, 1957 and 50 at the Prairie Canyon unit on March 26, 1957. Ten checks were made during the survey period at Well's Gulch guzzler # 1, eight at Well's Gulch guzzler # 2, and six at the Prairie' Canyon guzzler. Findings: Development of chukar populations in the vicinity of experimental water developments appeared favorable throughout the summer of 1956. Heavy snowfalls, during the winter of 1956-57 and above normal precipitation during the spring of 1957, however, created conditions wherein it was difficult to follow the movements of these birds. Heavy snows and precipitation eliminated the necessity of chukars using guzzlers, and undoubtedly were responsible for greater dispersal of birds in the experimental areas. The heavy snows may have been responsible for considerable chukar mortality. As of this writing, May, 1957, it is impossible to ascertain success of chukar development around guzzlers. Regular use of the water by chukars probably will not occur until dry, hot weather returns and other sources of water, including succulent vegetation, are eliminated. �-42~ Specific information from periodic checks at experimental guzzlers are summarized below. Well's Gulch guzzler # 1. -- Use by chukars was frequent and relatively heavy during the month of July, 1956. Two broods were observed in the vicinity of this unit on July 27. Heavy use was continued in August, with numerous tracks, droppings and other sign prevalent. Small chukar feathers (probably molted) were conspicuous on top of the water in the guzzler; a good sign of use. Adults and young of three different age classes were observed at guzzler #1 on August 7. Two checks were made of this unit during early ;$~ptember, and heavy use by chukars still occurred. Fifty chukars were estimated to be in this area . . No further checks were made until March 27, 1957. At thts time, some snow still remained on the ground. Water and succulent vegetation was present in many localities, and little use of the guzzler was noted. Several fresh chukar tracks and some fresh droppings were noted, indicating at least one bird had recently been in the area. One chukar was flushed near this unit on May 6, 1957. Little use of the guzzler was found. Green, succulent grasses and ether vegetation were abundant in the area at this time, and a need for supplemental water by chukars probably did not occur. Well's Gulch guzzler #2. =- Use of guzzler #2 by chukars very much followed the pattern.found at unit #1. Chukars used the guzzler quite heavily during July, August and September. The estimate of birds using this guzzler during early September also totalled 50. Although no young were observed at guzzler #2, tracks indicated their presence. Use of .this guzzler was lacking on March 27, 195·7 .•.when50 new game-farm . chukars we're released .. A follow-up check on May 6 also indicated no.use. Lack of use of guzzlers by chukars inthe experimental areas, during the winter and spring of 1956-57, differs from the pattern shown in previous years. Reasons for lack of use probably are related to an ample supply of water, either free water or that contained in succulents. It also is possible that many of the birds in the Well's Gulch area did not survive the relatively severe winter. The major difference observed between the two Well's Gulch guzzlers was the occurrence of predators at unit #.2and the lack of predators at unit #1. Five hawks, .Cooper's and Goshawks, were trapped at unit #2;no hawks were trapped at the other guzzler. �20,'""; ~~ ... -_.' =43= Prairie Canyon guzzler #3 --The Prairie Canyon area differs from the dry-Well's Gulch area in that some water may be present in this area, periodically, depending upon the amount of rainfall. Several rains occurred during the summer of 1956, which temporarily provided water in reservoirs a short distance from the Prairie Canyon guzzler. Prior to, and following, these rains some use was made of guzzler #3 by chukars. Use was much lighter, however, than that observed in Well's Gulch. One adult with two young was observed at the Prairie Canyon guzzler on July 11. Fifteen adults also were observed at this time. Sufficient water was present in reservoirs in Praf rie Canyon and in the small creek to provide water br. chukars during August. No use of the guzzler was made during this month. In September, some use of the guzzler again occurred, although water was present in Prairie Canyon creek about two miles above this guzzler. Five chukars were observed in the vicinity of George Annis's cabin (about one-half mile above guzzler #3) on March 26, 1957. Water was present in two small reservoirs in this area. lifty game-farm chukars were released in the vicinity of the Prairie Canyon$Uzzler on March 26. Summary: 1. - Chukar partridge watered at all three experimental guzzlers during the summer of 1956. Very light use was noted at the Prairie Canyon unit, whereas, the guzzlers were heavily used in the Well's Gulch area. 2. Heavy snow during the winter of 1956-57, and above normal precipitation during the spring of 1957, created conditions for abundant water and succulent feed in the experimental areas. Dispersal of chukars, and perhaps winter mortality, resulted in .Iittle or no use of guzzlers during the spring of 1957. Use of water developments is not expected until hot, dry weather occurs. Prepared by: Date Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~J~u~ly~,~19~5~7~------------- Wayne W. Sandfort ��111111111111111111111111111 "1111111111111~lllliilill~'~11 BDOW022175 July, 1957' =45• JOB COMPLETION ',.1' REPORT :::.- ..... : INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT ----------~~~~~------------- State of COLORADO Pr~ectNo. VV~-~3~7~~R~-~10~ Work Plan No. ~IV';_ ~~G~am~e~B~ir~d~.~SU~r~ve~y~ ···_· _ •. _," .-.l.._·...;;C;..;;h;;.;;u;;;;;k;;;;;a;;;;.r..;;P;;.;a:;;rt~r.::.;idg=..;e;....J~J.;.ob:;;.. __ ....,.._ Title of Job:.__ __;;A.;;.d;.;.;a;;,jip;.,;.t.;..;;ab.;;.l;.;;·l.::.;ity~, •••• SU=rv...;..;;.iv.;..;al;;;;...;an=d;;...;;.P..;;,o •. pu.;..;;l;;.;;a;;.;;t;;;.;io;.;;n;....;;.C.;;;;h;;;;.ec.::.;k:;;s;;.;o;..._ .;._...;... _ .... ,,_; J Summary: 1.. Routine surveys were conducted during the summer of 1956 to determine . adaptability and survival of chukar partridges in Colorado. . the 2. A total of 936 birds was observed in 45 areas in the state during the above stated period. This included highest counts in each area during a single survey • . 3. The estimate of total chukars in the areas surveyed was 4.465 birds .. This surpasses the spring breeding population estimated by only 1,005 ohukars. \; 4. Poor development is believed to be related to drouth conditions. Above normal precipitation has occurred during the spring of 1957. Intensive surveyswill be conducted to determine the effects of improved moisture on chukar development. Prepared Date by: Wayne W. Sandfort Approved by: Laurence E •. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator . July, 1957 .> . . ~ .- .. r - . ~.' . ·f . .,' ,',_, .' .. ��July, -47JOB COMPLETION 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT COLORADO ~----~~~~~~---------------- state of ProjectNo. ~ork ·~~-~3~7-_R~-~10~ Plan No. ~IV~ Ti tle of J ob : ~;_G~am~e~B~i_r~d_SU~r~v~e~y _ ~C~h=u=k=a=r~P~a=r~t~rl=·dg~e~, __ ~J~o~b~N~o~._8~ _ ~A:.;.d:;;a~p~t;,;;;a;::.b.:::il:.=.ity;;;,{...l.,_..;;.SU=r::..v.:..:i:..;v.;;a;::.l...;;a;;;;;n;;.;;d:...;P::...;;;.op~ _ Objectives: (1) To determine the adaptability and survival of chukars. (2) To evaluate the environmental factors in relation to the increase or decrease of this species. Scope: Chukar areas Personnel: within the state. Harvey G. Bray, Dwight E. Owens and Wayne~. Sandfort. Techniques: Surveys were conducted in chukar partridge areas during the summer of 1956. These surveys consisted of interviews with local farmers and ranchers and field reconnaissance along waterways and in other areas where it was likely for chukars to be found, Attempts were made to determine the approximate number of birds in each area. Findings: Principal findings obtained during work on this job consist of (1) the maximum number of chukars observed during a single survey, and (2) an estimate of the total population of birds within each area~ These findings are summarized in Table 1. Table 1. --CHUKAR County PARTRIDGE POPULATIONS AND DISTRIDUTION. Area Maximum number of Birds Observed (summer, 1956) SUMMER 1956. Estimated Number Birds in Area(late summer, 1956) ~/ Delta Angel's Ranch(Gunnison River) 57 lacklican¥on..{DortiQnt.of Delta Co) --1/ roue: fton ')S uFcnara \uunnlson .ttJ 20~ ~ scarante canyon Hargrave's, Ranch (Gunnison River) 17 Little Dominguez 18 Little Peach Valley 4 100 50 50 100 �0''':;0 ;~ \.J -48- Table l.--CHUKAR PARTRIDGE POPULATIONS AND DISTRIBUTION, SUM~R, ·1956. Continued. Maximum Number Estimated of Birds Observed Number Birds County (summer, 1956) in Area (late Area summer 1956)~/ Delta (cont. ) ,..... ' North Fork of Gunnison River Oak Creek (west of Eckert) Peeple I s Orchard (Gunnison R. ) Red Canyon {tributary of Gunnison R. } · ~ith :Fork(tributary of Gunnison R. ) Tongue Creek (west of Eckert) West Redlands Mesa We~l's Gulch SUB-TOTALS 47 25 150 100 0 30 39 0 120 50 48 460 175 1,725 2 50 2 50 0 0 81 29 3 25 10 200 100 75 41 0 154 150 50 610 .0 50 Fremont Four-mile Creek Wils~n'~ Creek SUB TOTALS Garfield cottonwood -Gulch (east of Grand Valley) ·Glenwood Springs {Airport area) Parachute Creek ~rairie Canyon Prince Creek · Rifle Creek and Graham Mesa . Area Roartng Fork (near Carbondale) SUB-TOTALS Jefferson Guy Gulch (West of Golden) Las Animas i\pishapa Rive.r �-49= Table 1--Chukar Partridge County Populations and.Distribution, Summer, 1956., Continued' Maximum Number ' Estimated Number of Birds Observed Birds .In Area Area ~summer, 1956) (late s~:rer, 1956)=- Mesa Bridgepo-rt{Gunnison River) Coon Hollow (southwest of 'DeBeque) DeBeque Canyon East Creek (Uniweep Canyon) Gateway Area Horsethief Canyon-Ruby Canyon Area Krumah Creek (lower) Kannah Creek (upper) Plateau Creek stove Canyon SUB-TOTALS 8 100 0 0 20 16 10 100 15 7 18 8 21 113 75 100 100 100 100 875 21 85 .75 160 40 150 Moffat Brown's Park(Blevin's Ranch and vicinity) Brownls.Parktlsull Canyon Area) SUB-TOTALS 40 61 Montezuma ,McElmo Canyon Weber Canyon SUB-TOTALS ~- ,,_ ... Montrose Black Canyon (portion in Montrose County) , Dry Creek DucketttsDraw (West Canal area) Red Rock's Ranch Area South Canal Area South ~inn Park Area SUB-TOTALS , ' , 2 2 0 28 35 4 71 150 2,0, 25 100 250 30 575 �-50~ Populations and Distribution, . Summer, 1956--Continued. Maximum Number Estimated Number of Birds Observed Birds in Area Area (summer, 1956) {late summer, 1956) Table 1. --Chukar Partridge " County 1~, Pueblo Buelah -Rye Area Turkey Creek SUB-TOTALS - 0 25 25 10 25 35 100 120 220 0 Rio Blanco Little Hlfls Exp. Sta. (Turman Cr.) White River (east of Rangelyf, SUB-TOTALS Saguache . CurttsRanch TOTALS Area(east and north of Saguache) '.Saguache Creek Area(south and west of Saguache) SUB-TOTALS 0 25 40 40 150 175 Fo_~-:-:four Areas 936 4,465 .!/ ,.Two dashes indicate no survey was made during the period considered. ~/ Numbers based on observations of birds, tracks and other signs, reports of btrds, and general knowledge of chukar populations in the area. • I" ,:' ,-- •••• ,': -.' • :.," ,"'. .'. " •••• :•• Analysis and Recommendations: ,Surveys conducted during 1955-56 showed an estimated breeding population of 3, 460 chukars in the various areas of tbe state, during the spring of 1956 (information unpublished at present), If this figure is accurate. and the figure on late summer populations (shown in this report), it can be seen that poor progress was made in chukar development during the 1956 breeding season. An estimated gain of only I, 005 chukars is indicated. Reasons for poor progress in chukar development during the summer of 1956 are; probably related to extreme drouth conditions and a poor hatch (Site completion report On Work Plan IV, Job ,No.2, Production Studies, this publication). �~51Above normal precipitation during the spring of 1957 has placed chukar ranges in very good conditions, in respect to feed conditions. Intensive surveys will be conducted during the summer of 1957 to determine the extent of chukar partridge reproduction and development . .Summary: 1. Routine surveys were conducted during the summer of 1956 to determine the adaptability and survival of chukar partridges in Colorado. 2. A total of 936 btrds was observed in 45 areas in the State during the above stated period. This included highest counts in each area during a single survey. 3. The estimate of total chukars in the areas surveyed was 4,465 birds. This surpasses the spring breeding population estimate by only 1, 005 chukars. 4. Poor development is believed to be related to drouth conditions. Above normal precipitation has occurred during the spring of 19570 Intensive surveys will be conducted to determine the effects of improved moisture on chukar development. Prepared by:__ ( Date __,;.W.;..a;,;ayn~.;;,.;e •... W...;.;..;'_ . ...;,San=df;;.;..;;.o.;;.rt..;... _ J_u~ly~, __19_5_7 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal. Aid Coordinator. ��'2~Li "", .•." • ..J:... . . ,r .~: " . . .. ','. ,~ =53- • -v _. " J r-. ." July, 195.7 . . JOB COMPLETION . / ;..' " REP()RT : , . . INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS· " State of:.- __ ...;C;;,.;O;;;,;L_O_·· ;;,;RA=D.,;;O;;.... Project __;W;.;.._-3;;..7.;...-...;;R;,;.-...,;1;;.;O~ l..,....;G;;.,· am=;.;;;e...,;B;;.,l;,;;·r;.,;;d;.,.: Su=rv:;...;..;;e;M.Y_· "_.' No. __ Work Plan No. V;..;I;.._ _ ~ ,I........:SC;...;..;.;a;;;.;le;..;;d;...Q~u.;.;,;al;;;;.·I_..:_.~Jo.;..;.b;...,.;;.N...;;0,. .;... .. ...;;l -~;..._;....;,o· :._.;., ... ••Title of Job:;...__ __,;E~xp-....;e;..;;r;.,;;i;;;;;m.;..;e;..;;n;;;;;t.;;.a;;..I.;;.H;;;;;a;;,;b..;;.it.;.;a;.;.;.t-D-. _ev_e;..;l_o .•.• p_m_e_n_t .•..... . ":~<'_. ~ {Review of Literature) -." ABSTRACT Experiments made by other states, notably California, in habitat· developments f6r valleyand.Gambel'.s quail, have been quite successful. ·lnan'attempt:to determirt~ '.. the value of the application of these experiments to scaled quail management fi,{' . . . .Colorado, available literature on the subject was reviewed. The first habitat developments consisted of placing shelters and. constructing feed ". troughs for supple mental winter feeding of quail. It was found .that such ~ p~6grain. was not justified by hunter-bag returns. .:-.:. It was conceded by many investigators that lack of permanent water was a defh:lit~' limiting factor to maximum quail populations, and after 1945, 'habitat improvement programs placed emphasis on water development. The developments t6ok:th~ of impoundments, opening up of springs and seeps, installation of well.s; pU:mps,' and . tanks, and construction of rainwater catchment devices. ' The most practtcalof these . was found to be the rainwater catchment device, later named the "galfinaceous ~~~ier" . by California biologfstsc ,. . . ' .', form ( In conjunction with these guzzlers, the importance of adequate food and cover iD. the" proper distribution cannot be overlooked. The best places 'f~r ~ater developments, therefore, are areas where food and cover already exist, and where it can be proved that hick of water is the limiting tactor.: If feasible, guzzle;rs.call be·iJ;lS~all~d'and. .....,'. food and cover plantings and other habitat developments made iIi the. vicinitY.: ': l,i6wever,' habitat suitability is the prtmary . consideration in the placementof these ·<iev~lopnlents. ': , ;. ,', :-. ,._.. -, '- ..•. ,.:,,;._ _ Intervals of one to four miles have been found to be satisfact~ri guz~lel' in~tallatio~ • for valley and.Gambel+s quail •. It appears that scaled quai1have.ab,6~tthe 'same ,' cruising radius as .the Gambel's quail, indicating that 3-4 miie1ntel'VaIs ~r~ , .. :. satisfactory • in. .,;c' " I ',. .,'. "" '." ", . �The concrete guzzler is an underground cistern or tank which collects and holds rainwater, makes it available to birds, and exposes a minimum of water area to evaporation. It has a concrete apron, the size of which is determined by the minimum annual rainfall, which channels water to the storage tank. The water is made available by constructing a sloping ramp at the open end of the tank, down which the birds can walk to the water level. The roof is of concrete, covered with earth .. Recently California has experimented with the installation of a plastic guzzler tank. This eliminates the necessity of .pourfng concrete, except for the collecting apron, and has been found to be suitable where cnncrete aggregate is in short supply. 9 At the present time, the costs of the installed guzzlers, both concrete and plastic types, . are about the same, ranging from $400. 00 to $425.00. Three guzzlers have been found to be very effective in increasing nucleus breeding populations of quail in their immediate vicinity. Probably their greatest value is to .attract birds from less desirable habitat. There is no definite proof that they are instrumental in increasing the total population over a large area, prfncipally because evaluation techniques have not been developed which will furnish this information. Probably the best evaluation technique would be to locate and enumerate all coveys of quail over an area of several hundred square miles of range prior to the installation of water developments. This could be done on foot by searching for sign, tracks, and dusting areas and thereby locating each covey, or by ridiIg _onhorseback over the . area in a systematic pattern and flushing each covey. After the developments had been in place for one or two years, the census could be repeated to determine the number of quail in the area, waterhole counts could be made to determine the value of the developments in attracting birds. Introduction: Habitat development as a technique in the managment of quail was pioneered by the state of Californta, the first attempts along this line being made approximately 20 years ag ..0. As the program increased in scope from the building of artificial shelters and roosts through the installation of artificial water catchments, other states have followed with developments of their own. There is now a store of literature available on fhe subject, most of which deals with habitat developments for California valley quail and .Gambel 's quail; however, many of the techniques outlined are also applicable to scaled quail. In an attempt to determine the value of the experiences of game management agencies of other states in quail habitat development, the following review of available literature is presented. �-55History of habitat development: The first habitat improvement experiments were made by California in 19~7-1938with the California valley quail (Dill, 1939). Emphasis was placed on bringing as many birds through the winter as possible, by placing brush piles and constructing shelters in areas of high population density. Supplemental winter feeding was also done. In these early experiments, there was little regard for habitat saturation; in fact, the attempt to artificially bring more birds through the winter than the habitat would actually support is analagous to the winter feeding of deer, the fallacies of which are now well known. Biologists found that although valley quail could be maintained at a high level by supplemental feeding, the cost in labor and feed was not justified by hunter-bag returns. Predator control also was determined to be too expensive and too impractical (Ross, 1951). As recently as 1952,supplemen tal' winter feeding was a part of the management program for scaled and Gambel's quail in New Mexico (Campbell, 1952). The early experiments of California were not attempted by other western states, consequently quail management during and immediately after World War II in most states consisted only of trapping and transplanting birds to suitable uninhabited range. The presence of permanent water was considered the major criterion of range suitability . . Figge (1946)stated that permanent open water should be considered as. a requisite in any attempt to extend the range of scaled quail. Ligon (1946)stated that all quails can probably survive indefinitely without free water, and appear to take greens in preference as a source of moisture. However, he conceded that all species would do far better if water were available to them during prolonged dry periods, and believed that adaptation-_of birds to an existence without water is largely due to necessity rather than to choice. Earlier investigators could not agree on the necessity of water for quail populations. Grinnel (1927)attributed much of the decline in quail to' a general lower-ing of the water table, and to deterioration of existing springs due to overuse by livestock. Vorhies (1928)and Gorsuch {1934)minimized the importance of free water, and cited many instances of quail thriving for long periods in areas far removed from any available water. These early investigators, however, were concerned with the Ga~el's quail only. It is now known whether any comparable studies were made to determine the value or free water to scaled quail populations, although a recent observation (Campbell, 1952)indicated that scaled quail do not seem as dependent on water as the Gam bel's, quail. I By 1945, investigators in California had become convinced that lack ofwater was a definite limiting factor to maximum populations of valley quail (Emlen and Glading, 1945). Ross (1951)stated that available water is rnost.Important during the nesting and hatching season,. since chicks must reach water within a few hours after hatching or they will not survive. The value of correct cattle 'and sheep stocking practices, the fenctng of small plots adjacent to water holes prevent livestock from trampling and destroying cover, and the construction of shelters of small logs and brush had already been established. It was at this time that the first experiments with artificial watering devices were made. The most practical of these was found to �-56~ to be a device for catching and holding rain water, thus making it available during dry periods. This device was later named the "gallinaceous guzzler." (Emlen and Glading, 1945; Ross, 1951). Refinements of water developments and use of other habitat improvements: . .) '" . Ca:lifornia has experimented with development of springs and seeps, drilling of wells and the use of a pump (either windmill or motor driven) to fill tanks from file wells, and reservoirs both excavated and impounded, in addition to rainwater catchments (Ross, 1951). Arizona uses windmills with .tanks where practical but hadfound' that each, reservoirs are not practical (Wright, 1953). The invention and perfection of the gallinaceous guzzler, however, has proved the most practical and least expensive method of providing permanent water. At first, all guzzlers were fenced to protect quail cover and to keep livestock off the the roof of the tank. Indications now are that concrete guzzlers do not need to be fenced. The use of plastic guzzlers, however, requires fencing, unless the range is very lightly stocked, as the weight of an animal on top will collapse the structure. Plastic guzzlers are simply placed in an excavation and covered with a layer of earth (MacGregor, 1953). It has been found that roosting, nesting, feeding, lpafing , and escape cover should be present in .the correct quantity and distribution, or birds will not use a guzzler. The mostlogicallocation for a guzzler, therefore, is in an. area where these other' . habitat requirements already exist. If it can be shown that development of cover i~ feasible, then a guzzler can be built and food and cover plantings made in the vicinity (MacGregor, 1950; Ross, 1951; MacGregor, 1953). Nevada has fJotndthat general farm-game habitat management is necessary in conjunction with the place= ment of guzzers (Gullion, 1954). These observations apply to Giimbel's :ind .JalleY . quail, but are equally true for scaled quail habitat development, with the exception of roosts. Scaled quail do not use arboreal roosts, but roost on the ground in the open (C~pbe~l, 19?2). Placement of water developments: The key to placement of guzzlers or other water developments is the suitability of the habitat. .If quail habitat exclusive of the lack of waterIs marginal, addition of water will have very little effect on quail populations (MacGregor, 1953; Gullion, 1954). If the area is marginal because of lack of water, but seasonally produces a good supply of,food and cover, it should be considered 'for water develoment (Wright, 1953). On the ~ther hand, the necessity for water in the area should be well established, before building guzzlers (MacGregor, 1953). It can be seen, therefore, that theevaluation .of.water developmertsbegins in advance of the actual construction. �-57- In addition to the consideration of habitat suitability exclusive of water, other factors governing placement of water developments are: construction cost, accessfbfl ity of the site, availability of the land for development, hunter use and access, other land use, depth of water table, suitable topography for drainage, and a knowledge of game needs (Ross, 1951). ... . ., Glading (1947) found that in valley quail range, it was necessary to place guzzlers at approximately one-mile intervals, while with.Gambel+s quail, intervals of up to 4 miles were satisfactory. No specific reference.to the placement for scaled qu'~n could be found, although Russell (1931) and Figge (1946) state that the crulsing radius of scaled quail is about 3 miles. Methods and costs of installation: The concrete guzzler is a subsurface retangular tank or cistern which holds runoff rain water and makes it available to birds while at the same time exposing a' , minimum of water surface to evaporation. The tank is open at one end where a sloping drinking trough or .ramp is installed, sloping from the bottom of the tank up to ground level. As devised and used by California biologists, the tank is 30 inches deep, 5 feet wide, and 5 feet long, with a capacity of 700 gallons. A concrete partition, . 3 inches thick and 30 inches high, runs the length of the tank and trough; this partition supports the roof. A baffle made of concrete slabs is placed on a plane parallel to the bottom of the ramp and about 7 inches above it; this separates the drinking ramp from the storage compartment and cuts down evaporation. The tank is poured in place, while the concrete forms being placed in the excavation. The concrete roof and baffles are poured in forms placed on nearby leveled ground immediately after the tank is poured, and after setting, are removed from fq!~~ and mortared in place over the tank and drinking ramp. The tank is then covered ~ith earth, leaving only the entrance to the drinking ramp exposed (Gladmg, i947). . . After experimenting with light road oil and an asphalt road mix for the surface of the rain collecting apron, it was Iinally established that a concrete apron 3 inches thickwas much.more durable and satisfactory. The apron is placed uphill from ' the tank; water :tdnning down the apron enters the tank from the back through' a small trough. The size of the apron is calculated by dividing the minimum annual rainfall by two, then computing the total area needed to provide water to fill the 700 gallon tank to capacity (Glading, 1947). The plastic guzzler is a tank molded to size and shape, and merely placed in the excavation and covered with a layer of earth. The concrete rain collecting apron is still a necessity, of course (MacGregor, 1953). The tank should be placed with the open end away from the prevailing wind and, if possible, facing north to cut down on evaporation. The installation should be made on a relatively flat slope, rather than in a draw or wash, otherwise the, tank will become filled with debris (MacGregor, 1953). �=58= Glading reported that in 1947 the cost of the concrete guzzler was approximately $130. 60 per unit, including fencing. Since that time, labor and material costs have gone up considerably, so that at the present time, the total cost of an installed concrete guzzler is in the range of $400. 00 to $425.00. This cost varies according to distance from a source of concrete aggregate, current labor costs, and number of guzzlers to be installed. The manufacturer's price on the plastic guzzler is $215.00, F. O. B., - Costa Mesa, California. When installation costs are added to this, the cost of the installed plastic guzzler is approximately the same as that of the concrete type. - It has been found that where the guzzler site is located more than 50 miles from a source of aggregate, or where only a few guzzlers are to be installed, the plastic guzzlers are less expensive than the concrete ones (Ferrel, C. M., letter dated April 15, 1957). Effectiveness and methods of evaluation: In .California, indications are that when guzzlers are installed, quail populations usually climb 3 or ~ years to a peak. A slight decline then takes place, after which the population is established at the new higher carrying capacity of thehabitat (MacGregor, 1953). Glading (1947) stated that a wise distribution of supplementary wateririg places is the most important and effective way to increase quail on arid lands. Nevada biologists do not credit water developments with such a high degree of effectiveness, since they state that available water during dry years is believed to be the key to pulling large nucleus populations through' a drouth period and maintaining a well-dispe-rsed breeding stock until such time tha favorable breeding conditions permit the rebuilding of a large population, but that they do not believe that guzzlers will maintain 0'1' increase high quail populations during drouth years (Gullion, 1954). In Arizona, quail counts, at the time of guzzler lnsta11aticncompared with counts made one or two year's " later showed heavy bird increases (Wright, 1953), but there was no indications as to whether the total population had been increased, or if the guzzlers had merely attracted birds from other areas. MacGregor (1953) states that the most valuable influence of guzzlers is to attract birds from less desirable habitat. The technique of censusing quail by waterhole counting is relatively simple. In Nevada, studies showed that summer waterhole counts sample about 90 percent of the Gambel's quail living in an area not exceeding 2.5 square miles. Nevada managers use waterhole counts and roadside counts to provide trend figures (Gullion, 1954). In California, the evaluation was made by comparing developed sites with check areas by censusing each area. In.this census, a man stations himself in position either before dawn or about noon, and counts birds seen during a 24 hour period (MacGregor, 1953): There was no indication as to how large the censused area should be. In Arizona, --the procedure was simply an observation of water development to record the number of birds using each unit (Wright, 1953). Apparently, check areas were not used. It appears ~om the foregoing that evaluations of water development effectiveness have not been entirely satisfactory. Obviously, the best evaluation would be a thorough census over a large area before installation of developments, fpllowed by a census in the same manner after a few years of operation of the developments. Glading (1941) suggests �-59a census using S.men on horseback, riding abreast 200 feet apart and making 24 man strips per lateral mile. Birds are counted 100 feet on either side of each man as they flush. The rider in the center is the recorder. To avoid duplicating coveys, the recorder indicates direction of movement by an arrow on a map.· Campbell (1950) suggests using a 2-man crew with a fyke net, and driving birds 'into the net 'by'foot or on horseback. This has the advantage of.allowing inspection and aging of the birds, to determine brood survival by counting juveniles, ~s well as accomplishing the census, Earlier, Figge (1946)used a census technique involving the spotting of sign, tracks, roosts, and dusting spots and listening for early morning calls, then searching until the covey or coveys could be located and enumerated. Whatever the census method used, it is certain that it would have to be applied over a very large area in order to determine the total quail population of the area before. the construction of developments. Only in this way can the true effectiveness of the developments be determined. Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Date ~Ju~l~y.!~1~9~5~7 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Division _ �??1 • ~ •.• ··I·~ =60= BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Campbell, Howard. 1950. A suggested method for estimating pre-hunting season status of scaled quail populations. Sci. 111 (2871):15. 2. .1952. Habitat improvement for upland game birds in New Mexico. Proc. Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 32: 115-118. 3. Dill, Herbert H. 1939. Winter feeding and shelters for the California valley quail. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf., 4:474-477. 4. Emlen, John T. Jr. and BenGlading. 1945. Increasing valley quail in California. Bull. 695, Univ, of Calif., Berkeley. 56 pp., illus. 5. Figge, Harry. 19~6. Scaled quail management in Colorado. Proc. Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 26:161=167. 6. Glading, Ben. 1941. Valley quail census method and populations at the San Joaquin experimental range. Calif. Fish and Game. 27 (2):3 "-38. 7. 1947. Game watering devices for the arid southwest. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf., 12:286=292. 8. Gorsuch, David M. 1934. Life history of the Gampel quail in Arizona. Biological Science Bull. No.2, Univ. of Ariz. , Tucson. 89 pp., illus. 9. Grinnel, J. 1927. A critical factor in the existence of southwestern game birds. Sci., 65:528-529. 10. Gullion, Gordon W. 1954. Management of Nevada's Gambel quail resource. Proc. Western Assn. Game and Fish-Commissioners, 34:234-239. 11. Ligon, J. Stokley. 1946. Uplandgame bird restoration through trapping and transplanting. N. Mex. Game and Fish Comm., P-R Bull. 77 pp., illus. 12. MacGregor. Wallace G. 1950. The artificial roost -- a new management tool for California quail. Calif. Fish and Game, 36(3):316-319. 13. .1953. An evaluation, of-California .quail management. Proc, Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 33:157-160. 14. Ross, Fred. 1951. California's quail development program. Proc. Western .Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 31:124=130. 15. Russell, Paul. 1931. New Mexico's scaled quail investigation. Am.· Game Conf., 18:226-229. Trans. 16. Vorhies, C. T. 1928. Do southwestern quail require water? Amer. Nat., 446-452. 17. Wright, J. T. 1953. Q~ul:ilrainwater catchments and their evaluatiori.. Proe.. Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 33:220-223. ' �I~~llllllij'jl~'llll~jrlilli[ifl~~~~1 ij~~lii~11 BDOW022177 =61= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT COLORADO ---------~~~~~~---------------- State of Project No, Work Plan~ Job No. ..;.W.;..-...;;3;..;8;...-..;;;R.;;..-...;;1;..;O~ __ ..l;....;;;D;..;e;..;e;.;;r..;.-..;;;E;.;;I;.;;k_In;;;;. ;;.;.v..;;,e_;;;;;s..;.;ti;lOlg:.;.;a..;;.;ti;.;;o..;;;n_s -~. I~· ~~L~o~c~at~i~o=n~an~d~e=x~te~n~t~o~f~s~e~a~s~o=n~ru~~;=~e~s~. _ ..;;.l-..l....;;;L~o;.;;c~a;.;;t~io;.;;n~,~e=x~te;.;;n~t~an~d~o;...w..;.;n;;;;e~r;...s;.;;h=i.p_o~f~s..; _ Objectives: To complenthe construction of maps showing approximate boundaries of all major summer ranges for deer and elk, based on average weather conditions. A job started several years ago, but never written up completely. Since virtually all summer ranges are on National Forest lands, very little work will need to be done on ownership, as will be needed in Job No.2 following. Procedure: This is a project intended to utilize the past observations of many fieldrnen from several departments in addition to regular Federal Aid personnel. Very little, if any, new field observation should be needed. The map drawing work was started in several areas last year, on 1/2 inch to the mile scale, and a separate set of maps for deer and elk was begun. Where advisable, land ownership was to be shown on township plats. Findings: 1. At this writing maps of all deer and elk summer ranges in western Colorado have been prepared except for a few counties along the "front" range. These will be done in a few weeks. 2. It was decided that preparation of township plats showing ownership of big game summer ranges would be unnecessary at this time. However we will have plats prepared showing summer ranges that overlap or adjoin the winter range. These are being done as part of Job 2. This job will be completed by the end of the fiscal year. Prepared Date by: William T. McKean ~J..;;;u~Iy~.~19;...5;...7..;._ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan .Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��=63= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECT COLORADO ~------~~~~~~---------------- state of ProjectNo. Work Plan No. Job No._2 VV __-~3~8-~R~=~10~ ~D~ee~r~-~E~1~k~In_v~e~s~t~ig_a~t~io~n~s~ _ I Location and extent of seasonal ranges. .__L~0~c~a_ti_o_n.,_e_xt __e_n~t~an~d __o_w_n_e_r_s_h~ip~o_f_w~l~·n_t_e_r~r~a_ng~e~s_. _ Objectives: 1. To prepare maps and plats showing approximate boundaries of all winter ranges for deer and elk, based on average weather conditions. To include in those maps sufficient detail as to land ownership so that decisions can be made by the Department to purchase, lease, or withdraw from public sale (public domain) as opportunities arise. 2. To furnish this information to state office officials of the Bureau of Land Manage= ment, especially, in.order that they may have it readily available for study whenever public lands that may have wildlife values come up for sale or disposal. Procedure: 1. Map drawing work assigned last year to be completed. This is to be on county base maps at a scale of 1/2" per mile. Separate sets of maps for deer and elk are being prepared. 2... Game ranges and the land ownership thereon will be shown on township plats at a scale of 1" per mile. Findings: 1. At this writing maps of all deer and elk winter ranges in western Colorado have been prepared except for a few counties along the "front" range. These will be done in a few weeks. . 2. Township plats on a scale of 1" to the mile have been prepared to show the winter range lands and landowners of them, except for names of private land owner's, Prepared by William T.. McKean Date: ~J~u~ly~,~l9~5~7 Approved by: Laurence E .. Riordan Feder~l Aid Coordinator _ ��=65= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ----~~~~--------------------- Project No. W-38-R-I0 Work Plan No. In Job No. 13; Deer=Elk Investigations Forage and Range Utilization Studies Rodent Effects on,Deer Winter Range Objective: To learn how rodents may affect the composition, ground cover, and reproduction of vegetation in a pinon-juniper type deer range, with particular emphasis on browse plants, Methods: The study is located in Mesa Verde National Park, Specifically, the study site is about 50 yards each of the main park road leading from the entrance to the administrative area, and it is about one eighth mile south of Far View Ruin. The site is in pinon-juniper type deer range used by deer both summer and winter. Within the site are represented the five most important Colorado deer browse plants: big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, serviceberry, mountain mahogany, and oakbrush in addition to grasses and forbs. Exposure is to the southeast. Field work on the study to date has consisted of the selection of the site and the construction of the rodent exclosure. Considerable office time has been spent in making a search of the literature, in planning sampling techniques, and in corresp-ondence with federal and state agencies and manufacturer-s relative to rodent control measures and kinds of traps and poisons. Actual field work for the project year began August 7, 1956with the selection of the site and ended December' 1with .the completion of tneexclosure fence: '. ~ ~ ~ ~ -::::t-- ~ The exclosure, Figure 1, is 300feet by 435.6 feet comprising 3 acres, The fence' is constructed of one quarter-inch mesh, 23 gauge, galvanized hardware cloth, 48 inches wide. It is supported by steel posts driven into the ground and spaced 10 feet apart. The top of the fence is 24 inches above the ground level and consists of a strand of heavy, smooth galvanized wire to prevent deer from riding the fence. down. About 2 inches below the strand of smooth wire is the top, edge of the hardware cloth, which extends 15 inches below the ground level and terminates in an 11 inch right-angle outward bend or shelf to discourage rodents from gaining entrance to the exclosure by digging under the fence, Figure 2. �Figure 1. Rodent exclosure fence of hardware cloth topped with band of sheetmetal. �July, 1957 State of~ JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~~~-M __ ~ COLORADO ProjectNo. __~VV~-~3~8~-~R~=~1~O~ _ ~;~D~ee~r~-~E~1=k~·=In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t~io~n~s~ _ Work Plan No. ill; Forage and Range Utilization Studies; Job No. 16 Title of Job : ..;;T;.;;h:;.;e;.......;V..;;a;;;l.;;;u.;;;.e~o;;;f;..:In=t.::.e.:;.rn;;;a3.=e;.;.:..;;C..;;o..;;u;;;;n;.;.t~s..;;i;;; Objectives: Explore the possibility of determining the percentage utilization of browse annual stem growth by a comparison of the number of internodes left uneaten with a number of typical for the species. Techniques Used: During the latter part of the winter of 1956-57, current-growth stems of oakbrush and serviceberry plants were collected for laboratory study. The stems were collected .from plants growing in northern exposures, in southern exposures, in different localities, and at different elevations. Ten plants of each species were sampled from each exposure, and ten stems from each plant sampled were clipped from different parts of the plant. A node count was begun on the stems collected, according to kind of plant, site, and year. the data being recorded in chart form Laboratory equipment required for preserving, staining, and sectioning terminal buds was obtained; and arrangements were made for the use of laboratory space at Fort Lewis A and M College. Findings: Most of the work done on the study was preparatory and exploratory in nature, as indicated in the descr'iption of "Techniques' Used" above. The stem collections which were made and the node-count data which' were tabulated are only a beginning on the study. Much more work will have to be done next year before any results can be stated or any conclusions drawn with reference to the objectives of the study. Recommendations: 1 .. During the project year of 1957=58, additional collections of current-growth stems should be made from the several species to be studied. If these collections are made .from many plants growing in various habitata.. node counts alone may be sufficient to satisfy the objectives of the study, without recourse to terminal bud sectioning. Prepared Date: by: Harold R. Shepherd ~J~ul~y4,~19~5~7~ Approved by: _ Laurence E.. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July, -69- 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of~ __ __;;;C;..;O;;.:L;;;..O;;..RA=· ;;;;.D..;;;O ProjectNo. ~\V~-~3~8~-_R~-~1~O~~~··_De~e~r_-_E_lk~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t~i_o~n~s _ Work Plan No. Job·No. _ ~IV~__.i __M~o~r~t;.;..a_li;.;.t""'y~F;...a;.;.c~t;..;:;o"""r.;.;;.s....;A-f-f-e~c-ti_n ••• g~.D~e.;;;..er;.;.....a..;;;n~d~E=lk __H~e~r....;d~s _ l~ __ ....;T_i;.;..tl_e~of~J..;;;ob~:_ .....;D;...e~t..;;;e~r;...m_i_n_a_ti~o_n_o_f __H~u-n_tin~g~L--o;.;.s~s----------------INTRODUCTION Acknowledgements .In presenting this information I wish to recognize assistance and cooperation on the part of: - Douglas L. Gilbert, Assistant Professor of Game Management, Colorado A & M College, who initiated the the study. Dr. LeeE. Yeager; Leader of the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, who provided access to a great deal of information . . Colorado Game and Fish -Department; C. E. Till, Regional Coordinator and Velma Merkle of the Game Management Division for pertinent suggestions and valuable information. Conservation Departments of: Alabama, -California, Idaho, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsln. Objectives To provide a basis for future study. To provide factual information on crippling losses deer, elk, and antelope. To provide information of big game, on wounding losses by two harvesting namely methods. RESEARCH CENTER LIBRARY DIVISION OF WILDLIFE P. O. BOX 2287 FORT COLLINS; CO. 80521 �To help provide information for the determination of the ultimate total number of animals removed from a given range. To help promote effective management of big game in regards to hunter crippling. Methods Information was gathered through an intensive review of the available literature and letters to various state game departments. CRIPPLING LOSSESOF THE WHITE~TAILEDANDMULE DEER In order to develop a sound big game management program it is necessary to know the total number of animals removed from any given range. Frequently information regarding the number of deer lost through hunter crippling is inadequate or even lacking. Accurate data is difficult to obtain as interviews and questionnaires are not always dependable and complete field studies are both expensive and hard to carry through. Factors Influencing Crippling Losses Mule deer and .White tailed deer are combined in this paper as the same factors generally apply to both, as well as to all big game species. The type of season (bucks only, two deer, and either sex) and the type of area (terrain and cover) are two of the most important considerations in the number of animals crippled. Of a lesser important are the number of hunters (their attitude and weapon used), weather (snow cover and local weather), and the number of law enforcement officers in an area. Methods for Determining Loss Personal observation: . The crippling 19S5 can be estimated from observations on the number' of hunters seen wounding game oxfromthe number' of cripples seen at the conclusion of the hunting' season (Kabat, 1953; Hancock, 1955, and Leopold, 1931). Questionnaires: Limited information can be obtained from sending questionnaires to hunters selected at random (Leopold, 1933, and Colorado see Appendix B). Personal interview: A series of questions asked at various check stations have proved very valuable in detarmining.the wounding loss in Colorado (Rogers, 1953; Riordan, 1948). Hunters have also been questioned in the field by conservation officers, in limited areas (Costley, 1948; Robinette, 1947)' Intensive field research: Careful studies were conducted on the Dixie National Forest in Utah by Costley and the loss determined from the number of paunches seen (an index of legally removed deer) as compared with the number of dead deer seen (by special �field men) and .reported (by hunters) .. Robinette's studies on tile Fishlake National Forest in Utah were carried on from 1939to 1946, inclusive (also since then but no further information was available). Hunters were asked to dock one ear from each dead deer found and turn them in to local authorities. The total number of ears received was compared to the total number of dead deer found in post-hunt checks. The number of paunches was also comparedto total dead deer counted In.this study. Michigan simply compares the number of dead deer found classified as having been shot to the total number of dead deer found. (Costley, 1953; Michigan, 1956 as in Appendix C; and Robinette, 1947). No attempt is made to evaluate the relative accuracy of the different methods, as much is available in the literature on sampling. In crippling loss studies, as well as many other phases of game management, there is a great need for uniformity of expression. It is believed that percent of the total reported kill is the most practical and useful method of expressing crippling loss. All percents are so expressed in this report, unless otherwise .indicated. Analysis of Crippling. Studies In a short summary such as this, it is impossible to include all information f.ound, but the most important studies will be considered here. TABLE 1 -Comparison of the legal kill and the crippling loss on the Fishlake National Forest, 1939 to 1946 . Deer Bucks .Does Fawns Le~,al Kill 77,000 50,000 14,000 Total 141,000 Crippling Loss 5,200 12,600 5,900 23,700 528 Number of paunches reported observed 199 Number of dead deer reported observed Correction factor (observation distance deer to paunch 2.24 17% Range loss of the tot:;;;:al=.,.=.le;;.t:g:2.:a;;;l~ki:;;;:··::;;ll;"._ _ .. (Robinette, 1947) .% Crippling Loss 7 25 42 16.8 1944 '45 1944 '45 1944 '45 8 yr average Compared to this 17%,.Colorado found a,9. 2percen~ loss (Hunter, 1954)from a stx . year average. �-72TABLE 2 A ten year comparison of Colorado's wounding loss 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 -------15.0 15.0 13.7 13.8 10.6 5. 1 10.6 10.6 10.6 1953 10.6 Average 11.5% (Hunter, 1945; Hunter, 1954; Riordan, 1948) The percentage for the various years were arrived at by several methods, questionnaires and interviews. The seasors, in Colorado, were a eomhination of either sex and bucks only. In Utah, 17 percent was reached through field investigations. In most instances, facts show that the wounding loss is, in general, 'h,igher in areas where antlered only are legal than in areas where either sex may be taken. The information in The Deer of North America (Taylor, 1956)as presented in Table No.6, page 178tends to contradict this. TABLE 3 . Crippling Loss Any Deer Massachusetts Ohio Wil'Eonsin I,. Pennsy1van~1_·a~ Type of Season A.O. Both A. O. E. S. E. S. Both Both A. O. Bucks only 5. 5 5. 0 11.0 4~.~4~ 2.7 Texas Arizona 4.7 11. 0 Wisconsin P~e_nn __s~y~lv_a_n_i~a 1.4 (Taylor, 1956) TABLK4 .. 1947 - 1948 Crippling loss by area and season 1948 1947 Type of % of wounding loss, %wounding loss, season no. animals per no. animals per successful hunter successful hunter 3,1 A.O. 1.2 Both 12.3 10.3 15.7 20.2 Both 5.8 10.9 E.S. . E. S. 17.5 9.6 20.0 Both 1.6 14.1 Both 13.2 11. 8 Both 11.4 (Riordan, 1948; Searle, 1949) Area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 �=73= As near as can be determined from the available information the average crippling loss for an either sex season is 12.2 percent of the total kill and for an antlered only season 15. 4 percent of the total kill. It can be concluded that the number of animals lost through hunter crippling,. with any tyPe of season, amounts to a considerable figure. TABLE 5 Percent Neg. 4 6 or less 10 or more 10-15 15 15-25 16-20 17=22 19 20 20.2 21 25 3'P 42 50 60 67 68 130 .Percentages of crippling losses from various sources Source Remarks Krefting, 1955 Intensive study Bryan, 1952 illegal combined .Does in bucks only season Kelker, 1940 Leopold, 1933 Robinette, 1947 Rasmussen, 1957 Rasmussen, 1947 Haugen, 1954 Estimate Guettinger, 1950 Julander, 1950 Nelson, 1944 Also Dasmann, 1952 Hiersman, 1951 301, 600 subjects, personal interview Leopold, 1933 1916 survey Costley, 1948 Either sex, very intensive study Leopold, 1933 . Costley, 1948 Bucks only, very intensive study Leopold, 1949 Buck only Sander's, 1938 Grange, 1948 illegal in bucks only Sanders, 1939 Bucks only, 1937 season Dahlberg, 1956 Bucks only, 1947 study Survival of Cripples As is well known a certain percent of the deer that are wounded during hunting seasons survive. Sut~ival will depend on the degree of injury, hunting pressure, severity of winter, range condition, animal populations, animal condition before injury, and msny other factors. From observations .at artificial feeding stations, an estimate of 2 percent of the deer seen in February are cripples; after a December season (Kabst, 1953). In the 1946 Utah season 2 deer out of 286 brought through a check station had been wounded in a previous season, this would be about 0.7% survival for one year (Robinette, 1947). �=74= Salvage of Cripples by the Hunters Rogers (1953) found that 47 percent bucks, 38,7 percent does, and 13,9 percent fawns were present in those wounded deer that are recovered by hunters other than those who first shot the animals. A total of 0.56 percent of the wounded animals were recovered statewide in the 1949 season for Colorado, In 1947 and 1948, respectively, 1. 5 percent and O. 29 percent previously wounded deer were recovered by the hunters (Searle, 1949). Year 1947 Successful Hunters TABLE 6 ,Colorado,Wounding Loss for 1947 and 1948 Animals .Wounded Wounded Left Over - all Wounded Bagged in Field Wounding Loss 20,318 22,073 3,00% 1. 90% 1. 5% 0.2% 1. 4% 1. 5% 13,7% 10.6% (Searle, 1949) Information tends to show that a higher number of bucks are recovered than does or fawns, Colorado uses .the following method for computing the total crippling loss (Riordan, 1949: see Appendix B). 428 - Total deer reported wounded, Question 1. 66- Number of crippled deer killed, Question 2. 362 - Wounded deer unaccounted for, divided by two (equal chance for survival or for death), 2175 - Number deer reported abandoned, Question 3 plus 181 2356 = Total ortpplmg loss for area. Deer Abandoned in.the Field Often deer are left in the field intentionally because of inferior size, the animal was badly shot up, or because of Illegal. shooting and some deer are not again found by the hunter who must return to the kill to pack it out, . TABLE 7 . Condition of dead, Deer Found 1939-1946 Condition Dressed Not Dressed Bucks Does .Fawns Totals 16% 24% 63% 50% 21% 26% 25% 75% Totals 22% 53% 25% 100% (Robinette, 1947) �=75= This indicates that bucks are more highly prized than does and bucks are more Iikely to be followed and recovered than does or fawns (See Table 1). Rogers (1953), in : 1949either sex season in Colorado, found that 2.3 percentof the total kill was left abandoned in the field . Of this, 23.3 percent were bucks, 52.4 percent does, and 23.3 percent were fawns, Management Applicatio n Knowledge of the population present at a given time is necessary for successful management. The crippling and abandoning loss should be included in the kill figures in order to determine the total number of animals removed from a given range. However, it must be remembered that the figures here are from those deer that are found, the actual loss is probably higher in most cases. Accurate crippling loss information is very much Iacking.. particularly for the more prized species such as elk, sheep, moose, and bear, APPROXIMATECRIPPLING LOSSESOF ELK TABLE 8 1947-1948Crippling Loss in Colorado Compared by area and Season Type of Season A.O. A.O, A. 0, A.O. A,O. A.O. A,O. %! Wounding Loss, No, Animals per Successful Hunter 12,50 20.90 39.20 10.70 4.26 8.05 / 16. u( c.-/, If''\ ~1 1L/ ~\\, IV' Type of Season % Wounding Loss, E.S. E.S. Eo S. E.S. E. S. E.S. No. Animals per Successful Hunter .3 10.8 8.9 1.0 8,1 3.2~. E. S. 1. 3L Area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (Riordan, 1948 and Se~. e, ,1949) tI 0 r,,/f(,Ocp'-\' ,tl ,'/ Figures for 1947were based on 1715 successful hunterii interviewed, and 1948figures on 4260 hunters, In each instance the same area is compared, but with an antlered only season in 1947and an either sex season in 1948. Eliminating other factors ,such as snow cover, weather, numbers of hunters in an area, etc., this tends to show that a more serious loss occurs with an antlered only season. However Searle (1949)says a heavier loss occurs with a hunters choice season because the hunter does not ha\te to define the sex before shooting the animal, �=76= Colorado reports a 7.4 percent annual loss .from a six year average {Hunter, 1954}. McCain estimates one elk is wounded and lost for every ten that are shot and retrieved (Murie, 1951). From warden observations and hunter reports obtained at check stations a three year loss of 7. 9 percent of the total kilf was reported by Hancock in 1955. His figures for the 1951, 1952, and 1953 seasons are 9.8, 5.0, and 8. 1 percent respectively. Both Olsen (1939)and Hunter (1945)reported a 15 percent loss due to crippling, while Riordan's (1949)Colorado survey found a 10 percent loss of the total kill. In Utah, a loss of 15 and 18 percent was estimated for one herd during the 1949 and 1950 seasons (McCormack, 1951). As with deer, much information has been obtained from hunter interviews, particularly by Colorado. Although this method of gathering information has its errors and limitations, our knowledge of elk crippling losses has been greatly increased. However, more accurate information must be obtained for successful management. TABLE 9 A Ten Year Comparison of Colorado's Wounding Loss 1944 12.4 1945 14.6 1946 1947 11.7 11. 7 1948 1949 1950 -6.8 6.1 6.8 1951 1952 1953 9.0 9.0 .. t6.S Average 9.49% (Hunter, 1945; Hunter, 1954; Riordan, 1948) The type of season, in Colorado, varies each year from antlered only to either sex, 'depending upon the kill necessary in each game management unit (the state is divided into 93 units for game management convenience). The percentage of the total kill for the various years were arrived at by several different methods; estimates, mailed questionnaires, and personal interviews. Year -- 1947 1948 TABLE ~O Colorado Woundi!!liLoss for 1947 and 1948 Successful Animals Wounded Wounded Left Hunters Wounded in Field Bagged 1,740 1. 55% .34% 1. 21% 4,522 2.43% .42% 2.01% Over-all WoundiAALoss 11. 72% 6.83% Riordan, 1949 Riordan (1948)and Hunter (1949)determined that 0.34, 12.4, and 10.7 percent of the elk brought through the check stations in Colorado, for the years 1945, 1946, and 1947 respectively, had been previously wounded. The ratio of wounded elk salvaged in 1949 was 41. 7 percent bulls, 42.7 percent cows, and 15.5 percent calves when most areas were open to either sex (Rogers, 1953). �=77= ( TABLE 11 1945 - 1946 Elk Survey 1945 Percent of hunters wounding game Percent of hunters sounding game that injure two or more animals Number lost for game obtained Percent of elk wounded by successful hunters 1946 5.1 3,7 54.5 19.0 1 to 7 1 to 7.3 81. 8 91. 3 (Hunter, 1949) . Elk Abandoned in the Field Rogers (1953) found, in the 1949 general elk season in Colorado, 33.5 percent bulls, 61. 9 percent cows, and 4. 5 percent calves of the total number abandoned even th\ough a large area was open to either sex. Approximately 2.3 percent of the total estimated kill Was abandoned in the field, in 1949, for one reason or another (See Appendix B, for the 1949 and 1950 elk questionnaires and their results). SOMECONSIDERATIONS.ON THE ANTELOPE In Oregon the observed loss by crippling has averaged approximately 20 percent of the total annual number of antelope legally killed (Einarsen, 1948). Also, in Oregon, . Einarsen (1939) found an estimated 13 percent of crippled antelope in a horned-only season. From combined air and ground observations in Arizona a 3 percent hunting loss was determined (Powell, 1955). In all cases it is safe to say that not all wounded animals were discovered and the losses could have been considerably higher. It appear's that the greatest cause of antelope crippling is indiscriminate herd shooting. particularly in areas where any animal is legal. In many cases a hard running pronghorn will pass from sight before showing signs of having been hit, and the hunter assumes a miss. The antelope's extreme endurance, even after a fatal hit, can carry him several hundred yards and into protective cover. In the more open antelope habitat a large percentage of the wounded are salvaged by the hunters. The number recovered is directly related to the cover type and the. number of hunters present in that given type. It has been suggested that by issuing buck �=78- and doe permits, herd shooting would be somewhat controlled (Powell , 1955). In some areas an early season will catch the antelope before they bunch greatly and thus lessen the wounding.." ~ Colorado, aSeptember season would accomplish this rather than the one in October or November: however, from the Iandowner+s cr.op harvest and livestock management standpoint this is not practical. Air reconnaissance and conservation personnel can help direct the hunters' to wounded animals and help salvage otherwise lost animals. CRIPPLING LOSSES THROUGHARROWWOUNDING It is known that a certain percentage of deer, also other big game species, are crippled or lost during the archery season. As the.bow hunter's kill is relatively insignificant when compared to the total kill by all hunters, management need not be any more concerned with the deer lost by archery hunting than those lost by rifle hunting. The percentage of those deer that recover from arrow wounds is possibly less than those that recover from gunshot wounds as an arrow has unusual penetrating power and kills by severing veins and arteries.thus causing internal hemmorrhages, However. this is a much debated point. TABLE 12. . Deer Loss In Wisconsin by Archers Year 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953" 1954 1955 Arrow -wounded· Deer 14 35 35 30 35 ~ 21 20 24 76 97 Deer Found Dead Later 5 22 10 5 9 9 7 9 13 25 43 .Registered Total Kill 160 256 368 279 551 383 188 126 355 743 1131 (Appendix A,· Wisconsin) The crippling loss in .this instance ranged from 26 to 8 percent of the total legal removal. with an eleven year average of 13.6 percent, These are minimum figures only. and how far below the true loss is yet to be determined. The factors influencing losses by archers are much the same as those influencing other types of hunting. although the presence of snow may be more important for successful recovery toarchers than other hunters. �=79- TABLE 13 Bow and Arrow Losses as reported by Minnesota Year Kill ReEorted Loss %Loss 1946 1947 1954 1956 24 3 24 2 100.0 66.6 96 Large number 30 plus 32.3 (Appendix A, Minnesota) No definite conclusions can be accurately ascertained because of varied and limited available information, The loss as reported by archery hunters is approximately 10 percent of the total kill , However, limited information tends to show it much higher than this. As more and more hunters of this type taketo the field each year, a field study should be made of the crippling loss through arrow wounding. Summary Crippling losses are seldom included in the big game kill estimates, although they sometimes are equal to half the number of legally taken animals. Much information has been obtained in Colorado by hunter surveys and in Utah by intensive field checks. It is felt that approximately 12 to 15 percent of the total kill is lost through hunter crippling in this mountainous region. Future investigations of big game should include studies of losses through wounding by hunters. BmLIOGRAPHY Deer Anonymous, 1957. Briefs; Harvest 56. Wyoming Wildlife 21(3): 26, 28-33. Baker, R. H. and H. R. Siepler. 1943. Use of bag records of big game to determine sex ratios and population densities. Jour. Wildl. Mgt.~'((I): 11-13 .. Banasiak,· Chester F .. 1955, Does Maine need a new.deer season f Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Game. A Contribution of Fed. Aid Project. Bersing, otis S. 1950. Fifteen years of bow. andand arrow deer hunting in Wisconsin. Wis, Cons.. Dept. Pub.. N~. '349-50. . Bryan, Homer and W. I. Long. 1952. Results of the 1950 special deer hunt on Mineral King National Game Refuge. Calif. Fish and Game 38{3): 235-239. Costley, R. J. 1948 Cripplfug losses among mule deer in Utah. Trans. 13th N. A. wuat. Conf. : 451-458. Dahlberg, Burton L. and R. C. Guettinger. 1956. The white-tailed deer in Wisconsin Wis. Oons.. Dept; , 'I'echn. Wildl. Bull. No. 14. « . �=80= · Dasmann, R, F. 1952. Methods for estimating deer populations from kill data Calif. Fish and Game 38 (2):225-233. · Douglas, Gordon A. 1949. Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid Div., Colo. G & F Dept. January:60. Elliott, R. R. 1950. Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid Div., Colo. G & F Dept. October :17. _ .......•.. ~. a1. 1950.. Dear-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Prog. Report, · Fed. Aid Div. Colo. G & F Dept., July :11. Foote, Leonard. 1945. The Vermont deer herd, a study in productivity. Vermont F & G Service, state Bull. No. 13. Fowle, C D. 1950. The "natural" control of deer populations. Conv. Internatl. Assn. Game, Fish and Cons. 40:56-63. Gilbert, Paul F. 1951.·Dear-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid Div., Colo. G & F. Dept. January, April. · Grange, Wallace B. 1948. Wisconsin grouse problems. Wis. Cons. Dept., Madison. 318 pp. Guettinger, Ralph C. 1950. Deer management research project 4-R •. Wis, Wild. Research. 9(2):6-12. Hammit, Harold C. 1951. Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart .. Report, Fed. · Aid Div. " Colo.· G & F. Dept. January:20-22. Haugen, Arnold O. 1946.. Deer hunting-indian style. Mich.· Cons. 15(5):8-11. ___ ~ 1948. Bow 'N' arrow hunting-good conservation. Trans. 13th ·N. A. Wildl. Conf. :459-464. Hjersman, H. A. 1951. The 1948 surveys of California's hunting take and their Significance. Calif. Fish arid Game 37:77-95. Hunter,. Gilbert N. 1945.·Crippling loss. Big game kill. Colo. G & F. 2:10-11. ________ 1948. Big game kill 1946-1947• Game Mgt. Div. " Colo. G & F. Dept. Current Report No. 23. Hunter, Gilbert N. 1949. The personal interview method of obtaining information on game and fish resources. Final report, Fed. Aid Div., Colo. G & F Dept. Current Report No. 24. ______ and L. E. :Yeager. 1949. Big game management in Colorado. Jour. Wild. Mgt. 13 (4):392-411. ________ 1954. Deer-elk-bear seasons in Colorado 1948-1953, Inc. Colo.. G & F.· Dept. p. 21. .J'ulander, O. and .W. L, Robinette. 1950. Deer and cattle range relationships on Oak-Creek range in Utah. Jour. For. 4.8:419-415. Kabat,. Cyril, N. E.. CofIias, and R.. C. Guettinger. 1953. Some winter habits of white-tailed deer and 'the aey~lo;pmentof cenus methods in the Flag Yard of northern Wisconsin; 'Wi~.: C;ons~·. .De:p~.,Techn, Wild. Bull. No.7. 32pp. Kelker, G. H. 1940. Estimating deer population by differential hunting loss inthe sexes. Proc. Utah Acad. ScL, Art~, and Letters, 17:65-69. e ' �?,0~ :~'. =81= Krefting, L. W., A. B. Erickson and V. Gunvalson. 1955. Results of controlled deer hunts on the Tamarack National Wildlife Refuge. Jour. WildL Mgt. 19 (3):346-352. Lauckhart, J. B. 1953. Future objective of big game management. Proc. 33rd An. Conf. Western Assn. State G & F Comm's, June, pp. 87-92. Leopold, Aldo. 1931. Game survey of the north central states. Sporting Arms and Ammunition ;Manufacturers' Institute, Washington. 299 pp. ______ 1948. Game Management. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, Londpn. pp. 174-175. -----....; 1949. A Sand County almanac. Oxford University Press, New York. p 178. Leopold, A. Starker, .et. al. 1951. The jawbone deer herd. Div. of F & G Calif. Dept. of Natural Resources. Game Bull. No.4. Longhurst, W. M., A. S. Leopold, and R. F. Dasmann. 1952. A survey of California deer herds, their ranges and management problems. Calif. Dept. of F & G., Game Bull._No.6. Machle, W. 1940. Lead-absorption from bullets lodged in tissues. Jour. Amer. Med• . Assoc. 115(118):1526-1542. Mohler, L. L., John N. Wampole, andE, Eichter, 1951. Mule deer in Nebraska National ,Forest. Jour, Wild. Mgt. 15 (2):129-157. Nelson, Urban E. 1944. Losses of crippled deer. Cons. Volunteer ,7(43):34-35. Rasmussen, It I. and E. R. Doman. 1947. Planning of management programs for Western big game herds. Trans. 12th N. A. Wildl. Conf. ; 204-211. Riordan, L. E. 1948. Deer-elk-bear investigations, outline for Prog. Report. Fed. Aid Div., Colo. G & F Dept. January: 25-27. 1949. Colorado crippling loss survey. Quart., Report, Fed. Aid Div., - Colo G & F Dept. April:43-45. Robinette, W. Leslie. 1947. Deer mortality from gunshot wounds. U. S. D. 1. F & W. Serv. Wildl. Leaf. 295. 8 p. ______ 1950. Mule deer crippling losses from gunshot wounds. U. S. F & W Serv., unpub. manuscript. 8 p. Rogers, Glenn E. 1950. - Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report., Fed. Aid Div., Colo. G & F Dept., Apri1:80-81. Sanders, Roy Dale. 1939. Chequamegon National Forest study of harvesting Trans. 4th N. A. Wildl.- Conf. pp. 549-553. Sanderson, Glen G. and E. B. Speaker. 1954. Results of Iowa's first deer season in recent years. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 61:615-630. Searle, Lloyd W. 1949. Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid. Aid. Div., Colo. G & F Dept. April:41, 45. Sell, F. E. 1949. Don't lose that woundedbuck. Field and Stream 54:40. Stenlund, M. H., M. A. Morse, et. al. 1952. White-tailed deer bag checks, Superior National Forest. Jour. Wild. Mgt. 16:58-63. Taber, R. -D. and R. F. -Dasmann. 1954. A sex difference in mortality in young Columbian Black-tailed deer. Jour Wildl. Mgt. 18(3):309-315. co-> ------ e : ~- .. .. �2(.2 =82~ Taylor, Walter P. (editor) 1956. The deer of North America. The Stackpole Co. , Harrisburg, Pennsylvania .. ------;...._-~1947. Some new techniques-hoofed mammals. Trans. 12th N. A. Wildl. Conf. :293-324. Teague, Richard. 1951. Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid Div, Colo. G & F Dept. January: 28. Tolman, Carwin D. 1949. Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid. Div. ,Colo. G & F Dept. January:58. Townsend, M. T. and M. W.: Smith. 1933. White-tailed deer of the Adirondacks. Roosevelt Wildlife Bulletin 6(2):231-234. Roosevelt Wildl. Exp. Station. Trlppensee, Reuben Edwin. 1948. Wildlife management, upland game and general prtnciples. McGraw-Hill Book·Co., Inc. p. 214. Williams, ~es~e E. 1951. Deer-Elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid. Di~. " Colo.· G & F Dept. July: 70. Cary, Merrit. 1911. A biological survey of Colorado. North American Fauna , No. 33. 256 pp. . . DeVore, Jack. 19\51.Deer-elk-bear investigations. Quart. Report, Fed. Aid. Div.,· . Colo.' G':&F. Dept. J,anuary:14. Gilbert, \ Paul F and Ralph R. .mu. 1956. Healing of the fractured leg bone of an elk. Jour. Mamm. 37 (1):129. Hancock, Norman V. 1955. A management study of the Cache Elk Herd. Utah Sta~e .Dept, of Fish and Game. Departmental Information Bulletin No. 22. . McCorm~ck, ~oger J.' ~951. A. population ,study of the South Cache Elk Herd. M. s, TIles~s,,.Logan, Utah. 88 pp. unpublished. . . .' . Murie, Olaus J. 1951. The elk of North America. The Stackpole Co., Har rfsburg, Penn, pp. 159-169.' , '. . Olsen, Orange A. 1939. Letter. Nebo Elk files. Utah State Fish and Game Department, Lt;>gan.. " ..... .. .' Rognned, 'Merle. A study of big game in the Contmental and adjacent units. Montana Fi$h ~d Game Depart. 188 pp. . Antelope. Einarsen, Arthur S. 1948. The pronghorn antelope and its management. Wild. Mgt. Inst, , Wash., D. C" . . .: . . , . _____ ,...-·19.39. Oregon's open season on antelope in 1938. Trans. 4th N. A. \\fi}'qI. Conf. :216-220. . , Powell, taw-renee E. 1955. Antelope hunt information. Arizona Hunt Information Completion Reports 195.4-l955~Wildlife Restoration Diviaion, Ari~ona Game and Pi.sh Department, ~ : . '. - I -, Caribou Harper, .Erancts. 195.5.The barren ground canibou of Keewatin. fdiso: .Puh, No.. 6 . University of Kansas, Lawrence, '164 pp~ ., " Darling, F. Fraser. Prepared by: Date ~ed Deer 1937..• .(hei-a of red deer. Oxford University Press, Robert J. Tully with Paul F. Gilbert July, 1957 Approved by: London. Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �·1~~lllllij' lil~'ll'l~irllI11~lim~~~1 i~fllfll~" BDOW022182 =83= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS ~Mecl COLORADO ------~~------~----------------- ProjectNo. __~VV~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~O~i~~D~e~e~r_-~E~lk~m=v~e~s~t~ig~a=t~i~on~s _ Work Plan No.__ Title of Job :. VI..;..;;.. ......•. ....;;.J.;;;.ob.;;;....;;N~o~.;_;;.3 _ ~E=xp=e:;;r::.;l=·m=e~n.:;;ta;;,:l:...W...;.;...:a::.;t;;;e.;;.r~D=ev.:..e:;;l:.;o:.l;p~m=e:;;nt=_ The Problem: In the pinon-juniper type ranges of southern Colorado there are some areas where better summer-range use b y deer might occur if water were moce readily available. Objectives: The purpose of the study is to learn if better summer range use in the pinon-juniper type ranges of southern Colorado can be obtained for deer by the development of sources of water in .dry areas. Procedure: Construct small concrete dams on shelf rock drains, build guzzlers, or improve springs with collection boxes and water piped to troughs. Make preconstruction and post-construction pellet-group counts in the vicinity of the water development to measure the changes in deer population and range use resulting from the increased summer water supply. Findings: During the summer of 1956, a seep spring was developed in McElmo Canyon near Cortez, Colorado. Upon completion of the development, October 8, the Spring was named Lizard Spring. Lizard Spring is at the base of a sandstone cliff near the head of Sand Gulch, a tributary to McElmo Creek. The confluence of Sand Gulch and McElmo Creek is app~oximately 11 miles below the U. S. Highway 666 bridge across McElmo Creek, south of Cortez. The spring is approximately threefourth of a mile north-east of the second carbon dioxide gas well at the end of the gas well road up Sand Gulch. The source of water for Lizard Spring is a very slow seep from the base of a sandstone cliff. Attention to the site was directed by a lone cottonwood tree growing near the base of the cliff. Extending for a distance of about 45 feet along the base of the cliff, was an accumulation of fine, moist, sand eroded from the cliff, Fig. 1. Growing upon the sand, were mosses and lichens. Roots of the cottonwood tree had formed a close network throughout the accumulated sand; and, seeking water, they were pressed against the sandstone. When the sand and tree roots had been shoveled and cut away from the base of the cliff, a seep was found sufficient to keep the cliff face moist but not sufficient, at anyone place, to run a stream. �-84To collect enough water from the seep to pipe to a reservoir, two groove-like gutters were cut with chisels for a .combined distance of about 30 feet in and along the base of the sandstone cliff, Figure 2. The gutters were sloped just enough to permit the collected water to drain into a basin cut into the rock at the confluence of the two gutters. To prevent water from seeping out of the gutters and basin, they were coated with concrete. From the collection basin, water was piped across a draw to a 55-gallon oil drum, buried with its top edge near the level of the ground, . Figure 3. Although the summer of 1956was exceptionally hot and dry, the developed spring produced enough water to fill the oil drum in 24 hours. On October 10, two days after water was developed, 10 pellet-group plots were established on a line running 45 degrees N. W. of the reservoir, for the purpose of obtaining pellet-group datato indicate if the development of a supply of water during the summer in this dry area will increase the number of deer using it, Figure 4. Each pellet-group plot is a circular plot having a radius of 11 feet 9 inches and an area of l/100 acre. A numbered steel stake painted red locates the center of each plot. When the plots were established, the deer pellet-groups in each plot were counted 'and thrown out of the plot. Table 1 shows the number of pellet-groups per plot on October 10, 1956 and on May 1, 1957. All of the pellets in the plots October 10 were thought to be 6 months or more old. . During the summer of 1956, whenever the spring site was visited for development work or observation, the writer looked for fresh deer sign. From 1hescarcity of fresh tracks it is believed there were no more than 5 deer within Sand Gulch during the summer. About a week after Lizard Spring was developed, the tracks of two deer were found at the reservoir; and it appeared that the deer had drunk from it. On May 1, 1957, the spring was visited; and the number of pellet-groups were counted. The reservoir was full of water, but enough sand had fallen into the collection gutters, as a result of winter and spring erosion, to block further flow of water; and the cement lining the gutter had pulled away Iromthe cliff in several places enough to permit escape of the water. There were no fresh tracks around the reservoir. but there were numerous fresh deer tracks at pellet-group plot No.2. There were many small pools of water, from recent rains, in rock depressions within the area; and a seep spring about one half mile from. Lizard Spring was flowing, Consequently, on May 1, water was readtly available to deer at many places in Sand Gulch, besides at Lizard tSpring. . I . . It is anticipated that the study will have.to be continued for several years before sufficient data will have been obtained to determine if spring development is effective in increasing summer deer u~e of the area. ' . . . �Figure 1. A lone cottonwood tree, .growing in sand erroded from the base of a sandstone cliff, attracted attention to the site of Lizard Spring. �Figure 2. After the sand and tree roots were removed from the base of the the cliff, .a gutter was cut into the rock to conduct water to a collection basin. �Figure 3. Water from Lizard Spring was piped across a draw to an oil drum buried in the ground. �FIG. 4 LIZARD PELLET-GROUP PLOT LOCA TION SPRING 0.,PLOT 10 '(".0 ,0_ , '0 PLOT ,,~ .9 ,V'" ,,..... ,, , PLOT 8 0, '~V' ,>.. , , '0 PLOT 7 LINE OF PLOTS 45"° W. OF N. TRENDS ,.... ,~_ '0 PLOT 6 , •••.. ,1- "{> .. '0 PLOT s ' ,.1'-0 ... '-: - 'O PLOT " 4- '''',0_'0 PLOT 3. ,<~ '0_ '0 PLOT 2- ,-,a-. ~QPLOT .~ JY LIZARD SPRING H.R.5h'_phcrd 5"-&-S7 t �2~/';Q -""- - -,.-,' =85= Recommendations: 1. The collection gutter should be strengthened with a masonry wall to prevent freezing and thawing from causing leaks and consequent loss of water. 2. Additional barrels should be installed as warranted by increased deer use. 3. The pellet-group counts should be made twice yearly to determine seasonal use by deer. Table 1. --Deer Pellet-group the amount of Counts Vicinity Lizard Spring Development Pellet-Groups Plot No. Oct. 10, 1956 May 1, 1957 1 0 2 1 2 3 7 9 3 1 2 4 1 0 5 6 0 0 0 7 ?0 0 8 9 2 2 10 1 5 Prepared Date by_...;;;H;;;;ar-.;;o_;;.;ld;..;;;.R;.;.._;;;;;Sh;;.;e;,l;p;;;;h;;.;;e;.;;;r,;;;d;_ __ ....;;;A~~proved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid: Coordinator ...;;;J~w.y~,~1;.;.9~5~7 ~ _ ��RESEARCH CENTER ~~_ERMZY mViSION OF W!Li)Ud~ ~ :J 80): 2287 :.·.-'-,·l.·,·... ~ ),-.1:::'.. (:0. :.:.. -:_.": ~-c~)p-:-- =S7- July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of~_.;;;.C..;;;O..;;;L;.;;;O;..;;RA=D;..O;;...._ _ Project No.. i Deer-Elk Investigations W-38-R~10 Work Plan No._..;I;;;;n;;.....o;~F;..o;;.;r;.;ag=.;;e;...;;;an;;;;d.;;;...;Ra=ng=.;;e;....;;;U..;;;tI;.;;·I.;;.;iz;;.;a;;.;t~io;;.; _ Job No. S; Detailed study of range forage by use of fenced exclosures. SUMMARY 1. Antelope Pass Game-Cattle Exclosure. Deer and cattle pellet group counts were made in 1956 and 1957 giving the following results for the indicated rates o:fuse effective for the specified periods or seasons; Inside Cattle Part of Exclosure. Deer, Fall-winter-spring, 1955-56 - 1. 96 acres per deer-month. Deer, Fall-winter-spring, 1956-57 - 11.1 acres/deer-month. Outside. Unprotected Plot. Deer, Fall-winter-spring, 1955-56 - 2.3S A. /deer-month. Deer, Fall-winter-spring, 1956-57 - 20.00 A. /deer-month. Cattle and horses, Year (5/56 - 5/57) - 2. OSA. / AUM. 2. Basalt Deer Exclosure. The line interception range study method was aJ?plied.to the inside and outside plots to determine plant compositions and densities. Modifications in procedures are explained, and results are given in two tables. A Student' s Hypothesis "t" test on total browse inside and outside resulted in a significant difference at the SOpercent confidence level, the browse being higher in density inside than outside. The difference in density is probably due to the protection from deer use but could have been present eight years ago when the fence was built. A pellet group count on the outside plot in May, 1957, revealed an indicated rate of use by deer of .31 acre per deer-month for the period July IS, 1956 through May 17, 1957. 3. Broken Road Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Deer pellet group counts were nlad~ 1956 and 1957 and resulted in the following indicated rates of use for reasons specified: Inside Cattle Part of Exclosure. .' Fall-winter-spring, 1955-56 .; 1. 51 A:. per deer-month. Fall-winter-spring, 1956-57 -5.6 A. per deer~IIwnth .•• in. �zr:::-t Outside, Unprotected Plot. Fall-winter-spring, 1955-56 Fall-winter-spring, 1956-57 - 3.22 A. per deer-month. 7.7 A. per deer-month. Although the outside plot is on a permited B. L. M. cattle allotment, use the past year was so light that. 7 fecal piles were recorded on the count done August 16, 1956 and none on May 14, 1957. 0", . 4. Brushy Ridge Deer-Livestock Exclosure. General observations included the fact that there was active sheet and gully erosion present on the outside areas and also inside of the livestock part; serviceberry plants were not recovering very rapidly inside of both parts nor outside; and grass densities were improving inside of the livestock part in contrast to the outside. 5. Dead Badger Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Deer and cattle pellet group counts were made in 1956 and 1957. Following are the resulting Indicated rates of use for each class of animal byperfods or seasons: Inside Cattle Part of Exclosure. Deer, Fall-winter-spring, 195£;...56 - 20 A. per deer-month. Deer, Year (5/9/56 - 5/16/57), with most use coming in the fall-wtnter-jsprtng season - 20 A. per deer month. Outside, Unprotected Plot. Deer, Fall-winter-spring, 1955-56 - 14.3 acres/deer-month. Deer, Year (5/9/56-5/15/57) - ·Negligible, not computed. Livestock, Fall, 1956 - 4 acres per aum. 6. Hernage Gulch Exclosure. A Student's Hypothesis "t" worked out on the total browse intercept inside and outside showed a significant difference at the 99 percent level of confidence with the outside being about half of the density found for the inside. Mountain mahogany on the outside is receiving continued destructive use by deer and cattle. A pellet group count for deer and cattle use on the ouside plot showed 1. 15 acres per deer-month and 11. 1 acres per AUMindicated rate of U3e for the period August 21, 1956 through May 16, 1957. i: Kelly Flats Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Pellet group counts were made upon the two outside 1 1/3 acre plots in order to obtain indicated rates of use for deer and cattle. Presented are figures for deer use on plots "An and "C" for four periods from 1955 through this spring, and for cattle on both plots for last summer, 1956. 8. Middle CottonwoodCreek Game ExClosure. A test, run upon the intercept of mountain mahogany inside and outside, showed significance at the 97. 5 percent level with the inside having the larger intercept. �...2·,'-'r;; .: :,' =89= A pellet group count which was done this spring resulted in an indicated rate of use of the outside plot by deer of 2.33 acres per deer-month. The period of time which this rate covered was about 10 months, from July 25, 1956through May 13, 1957. 9. Thomas Creek Exclosure. Statistical tests showed significantly greater amounts of browse inside over the outside plot at the 99 percent level of confidence. However, this is probably unimportant since the outside and inside are not comparable when plant compositions are considered. Most browse species under protection are showing good recovery except highlined coniferous species. The indicated rate of use by deer on the outside plot was. 43 acre per deer-month. This was determined by a pellet group count this spring in May and was effective for a 10 1/2 month period prior to the 17th of the month (Fall-winter-spring, 1956-57). Prepared by: B. D. Baker Date: J_u~ly~,~19_5_7 Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Division --: . r .~~ ��=91= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of. ProjectNo. ~ork ...;:C;,.;o;,:;l:.,;;;o,;;,r,;;;a:;;;do.;... _ ~~-.;;.3,;;,8-~R __-.;;.10~·~;_.~D~e:.,;;;e_r_-~E:;;;lk~fu.;;.v~e;,:;s~t~ig~a;.:;t~io~n~s~ _ Plan No._·~ __ ·~I~rr~~;_· ~F~o:.;;;r~ag~e~an~d~R:.;;;ang~_e_U.;;.t~i~li~z:.;;;a~tl~·o:.;;;n~Stu~d~i.;;.e.;; _ Job No. 8;;...._ .•.•. ,~D;..e;..t;.;.;a_i1~e~d_s.;;.tu;;.;.;;.;;d.y_o~f;...;;..ra ••;ng~e;_.;;.fo_r_ag~e__.;.by........,;u,;.;;s;..;;e of fe~n;;;..c_e;..;;d;_.;;.exo.;;.c.;..;l_o~s;..;;u_r..;;. .•... _ Objectives: To determine (1) the rate of recovery of key forage species, and (2) plant composition, densities, and browse plant age and form class composition on fenced grazing study plots. Also to determine ,(3) the intensities of deer use on the outside range plots as compared to inside of the livestock fences on two-part exclosures. Along with the latter objective, the intensity of use by livestock where present on the outside plots will be determined. INTRODUCTION As is indicated under the preceding heading titled Objectives, studies accomplished in fhe field in 1956 and 1957 fell into two main categories. The first category included the studies relative to the vegetative cover, and the second category included the determination of intensities of use (or occupancy) on partially protected or unprotected plots by either or both deer and livestock. In further consideration of the first category above, the Parker 3-Step and the Line Interception methods of range study had been given use prior to the beginning of field work in 1956. The former method was used on four Middle Park exclosures and the latter at Kelly Flats (Baker, 1956). At the time the Job Outline was prepared for the 1956-57 work year, the Parker 3-Stepmethod was favored by the author for adoption as a standard method for use in all exclosure studies. However'.. subsequent and closer comparisons between it and the ¥ne Interception method showed up considerable weakness in the 3-Step as regards the accuracy of the compositions and densities which are arrived at through what is essentially a line-point procedure. Thus, four 1/4 acre· exclosures, which had had little previous work done on them, were studied in the summer of 1956 by means of the Line Interception method. These exclosures, Basalt; Thomas Creek, Hernage Creek (Gulch), and Middle Cottonwood Creek, will be treated separately in following paragraphs. The exclosures that had field studies done on them will be taken up in alphabetical order although descriptions of procedures will not be repeated but noted only (with deviations, if any) if duplication would occur. ., '.,.<' �=92= ANTELOPE PASSGAME..;.CATTLEEXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts Objectives: To determine the intensity of fall-winter-spring and summer use as well as totai use for the year by deer on the outside open range plot and inside of the cattle part of the exclosure. Also, to determine the amount of livestock use on the outside plot. Procedures: The area inside of the cattle exclosure is 2.5 acres being 330 feet square. An allowance of 25 feet was made from all fences to eliminate possible influences direct or indirect which the fences might have upon the deer. This reduced the area sampled to 280 by 280 feet or 1. 8 acres. Beginning in 25 feet west and south from the northeast corner of the exclosure, the centers of four belt transects f9~~ f.~~J;inwidth 'Xe,re.selected randomly from a table of random numbers. Placement was considered to the half of a foot. Rather than straddle the chalk line used to mark the center of the belt transect, 1 1/2 x 16 inch unpainted wood stakes were offset north 2 feet thus making the chalk line guide the north boundary of the belt transect and enabling easier work along the transect. A stick four feet in length was held in hand as the transect was worked south of the line in order to check the placement on the transect of pellet groups as they were encountered. All deer pellet groups and fractions estimated to tenths were counted and cleared from the transect. All of these groups were believed to have been deposited in the previous fall-winter-spring season of use. Because the cattlepart of this exclosure is somewhat less than 330 feet square, the actual lengths of the transects were 255 feet and the area sampled is 255 by 280 feet or about 1. 6 acres. The four belt transects, 255 feet long by 4 feet wide give a sample area of .096 A. or 6 percent for the 1. 6 acres. The above E!ameprocedure was, followed on 14e outside plot using the same placement of the belt 'transects and the northwest corner of the 'total exclosure (or deer part) the starting point. The field work was done on May 8; 1956 and repeated May 14, 1957. A repeat count for summer deer use was planned for August, 1956, but a check of the two plots then disclosed that the old deer .pellet groups had scattered onto the transects due to washing from rains and also that little evidence of summer deer occupation existed on the area. Thus no repeat counts were made for deer pellet groups and cattle groups. What little use was made upon the ·outside plot by cattle in the summer was from a few unpermitted head. The May, 1957 count of cattle and horse fecal piles on the outside plot was, however, high enough to warrant a computation of the amount of fall use by livestock on the area within the past year (by cattle, mainly). �~93~ Results: Deer pellet groups counted and removed in May, 1956, from the four belt transects inside of the cattle exclosure totalled 19. 2.. Computing the indicated rate of use from this sample resulted in 15.4 deer-days use for 1 acre. The 15.4 deer-days equals. 51 deer-month, or stated conventionally, the indicated rate of use was 1. 96 acres per deer-month for the period of fall-winter-spring, 1955-56. '; The number of deer pellet groups counted on the outside plot transects totalled 15,8. This figured out by computation to be 12.7 deer-days use or .42 deer-month .. Converting to conventional useage, the indicated rate of use on this outside plot would be a little less than for the inside cattle part or 2.38 acres per deer-month. The entire procedure was repeated again on May 14, 1957, in order to obtain another year's data on the rate of fall-winter-spring indicated deer use on the range plants inside of the livestock part and upon the unprotected range plot outside of the fences. Also, the use by cattle and horses was found heavy enough upon the outside plot that the rates of use by AUMare given for the livestock. The results of the May 14, 1957 pellet counts are summarized as follows: Inside Livestock Part of Exclosure Deer- Use (Indicated Rate) -. Period: Fall-winter-spring, 1956-1957. Total No. deer pellet groups, 4 transects Total No. deer pellet groups per A.= 3.3 = 34,4 =~ No. deer-days use per A. = 34.4= .096 2.65 13 No. deer-months use per A. = 2.65 = .09 or 11.1 A. per deer-month. 30 Outside, Unprotected Range Plot Deer-Use (indicated Rate) - Period: Fall-winter-spring, Total deer pellet groups, 4 transects = 2.0 Total deer pellet groups per A, 20.8 1956-1957. =...1.:__= No. of deer-days use per A. = .096 20. 8 ~ 1. 6 13 No. deer-months use per A. = 1.6 = .05 or 20 A. per deer-month. 30 �=94= Outside, Unprotected Range Plot - continued Livestock Use (Indicated Rate) - Period: Year (May, 1956 - May, 1957), with season being summer-fall. Total C & H groups, 4 transects = 16.5 Total. C & H groups per Acre 16.5 = 171. 9 = .096 = No. C & H days use per A.= 171. 9 14.3 12 No Animal Unit Months use per A. = ,,14.3;: .A8 or. 2.0-8 A. per AUM 30 Discussion: The deer pellet group counts on transects following the fall-winter-spring season of use in 1955-56 indicated rates of use that were about equal for the outside range and inside livestock exclosure plots. The rates of use dropped off considerably this past fall-winter-spring season (1956-57) on both plots with .the inside livestock exclosure part range plot getting about twice the indicated rate than that plot on the unprotected outside range. Both indicated rates of use for the past season are relatively insignificant when considering the numbers of acres required per deer-month involved. The reason for the drop in deer use on this and other Middle Park exclosure plots seems to be a general decline in the numbers of animals rather than herd shifts. Deer herd trend counts reportedly were down this past winter throughout Middle Park. Although current use on greened-up grasses was heavy as noted on May 14, 1957, very little fresh deer sign was seen, and no livestock nor fresh signs of them were observed either. There was, however, indications of a high population of jack rabbits on the open range as well as inside of ~e livestock exclosure fence. The use by rabbits appeared to be somewhat less inside of the woven wire deer proof fence by gross examination. It is believed that the woven wrre affords at least a partial barrier to rabbit movements. The general condition of the wheatgrass plants and the higher apparent density inside of the deer part than on either of the other two plots with free' access to rabbit use points to a condition where these animals are of considerable influence on thevegetative cover. Sm'-all,. rodent-proof fenced plots will be erected on all three treatments as an aid. in pinning' down the effects of rabbit use on the reseeded grass range. BASALT DEER EXCLOSURE Ranie Vegetation Studies , . ". , Objectives: To determine plant composition, densities, and browse plant age and form class comjnsttionInside of the exclosure and upon an adjacent area of comparable size outside of the exclosure. . �"",95Procedures: The Forest Service report by Canfield (l950) on the line interception method was used as a guide in applying that range study technique to this exclosure and also the Thomas Creek, Middle Cottonwood Creek, and Hemage Creek exclosures, The latter three exclosures will be reported on"separately in later jarag raphs, however the following general methods are applicable to all. A few modifications were made in the line interception procedures to adjust for its use in shrub vegetation. One of these was in the use of longer steel rods for end supports in order to facilitate the suspension of the 50 foot transect wire over the tops of the shrub crowns. The steel rods that had been used previously with Parker 3- Step studies worked well for this purpose (Baker, 1956), Three-thirty-seconds inch galvanized flexible aircraft cable was used for the transect wire to eliminate possibilities of kinking and-stretching, Small copper clamps were secured on the transect wire tomark the zero and 50 foot points. One inch diameter iron harness rings were attached to the ends of the transect wire beyond the clamps marking the zero and50 foot ends. The rings are large enough in order that they could be slipped up and down on the 3/4 Inch support rods or be placed on the sliding hook attachment of the end support rods. Since the outside plot corners and boundaries had never been established nor marked, the first step on this and the other three previously mentioned exclosures was to pick an area outside of the exclosure which upon gross examination appeared to have closely similar plant species composition. Usually this was on either side rather than below or above, slopewise, and enough distance from the fences to eliminate direct or indirect influence by animals drifting along the fence, drifting snow, and so forth. The outside plot corners were then set by compass and tape using white or aluminum painted wooden stakes to mark them. The next step was to find the zero ends of the first transect. The location of this point and five other transect zero points per treatment (plot) were determined from a table of random numbers. Distances were taped off from a plot corner (or fence corner, if inside) .•.used for reference as a starting point. The transect wire zero end marker was placed over the located point and the. transect wire end ring attached to the 3/4 inch by 5 1/2 foot steel support rod. The steel support rod was .dziven into the ground after the transect bearing was located by compass. The wire was stretched out along the bearing which was always the same as and parallel to the nearest side of the exclosure. The 50 foot end ring of the transect wire was attached to the second steel support rod and that rod was driven making sure light tension was obtained upon the transect wire. The transect wire then was adjusted to the tops of the shrub crown layer with an effort being made to keep it as close EO the ground as possible. The transect wire was not, however, "threaded" through the shrub stems except in thin stands of plants like mountain mahogany. When the plant measurements were completed along the transect, 16 inch x 1/2 inch "rebar" steel stakes painted with 2 coats of industrial aluminum paint were placed in the holes created and left by the end support rods after the rods were removed. The ends .of the transects thus were permanently marked for possible later remeasurements, �Measurements were made of the plants intercepted by the transect wire as prescribed by Canfield (1950) when the wire could be placed relatively close to ground level. A change in procedure was made, however, when the wire was over the plants at about 20 inches or more in height. Two sets of pointed plumb bobs made from metal scribes with weight added and nylon fishing line strings attached to them were plumbed at or near the outer points of intercept of the lower growing plants. With these points on the perpendicular projection of the line established on file ground, a plant measurement could then be taken at ground level. Although t~is procedure could have caused a chance for errors in measuring the grasses aridweeds at ground level, these two classes were usually of minor importance in the composition and secondary to the b~owse plants which are of major import to the studies affecting deer and/or elk. . . For purposes of accurately relocating the transect wire on subsequent studies, it was thought impractical to try to get the wire at ground level through the mazes of shrub stems on most of the areas encountered, particularly in the thick stands of mountain brush mixtures or sagebrush. An exception, which was mentioned previously, was in a relatively open stand of mountain mahogany at the Middle Cottonwood Creek exclosure. There the wire, was consistently placed relatively close to ground level because little extra effort was needed to "thread" and maneuver it down through the stems meanwhile keeping it on a straight course. Information on the age-form classes of browse plants was obtained by classifying by the method of Dasmann (No Date) each shrub intercepted and measured on the line. The age-form class designation was put down with each shrub measurement and then th ese summarized by species for each treatment. The results of the age -form class determinations will not be included here unless they have a direct beartngon the . .evaluation of differences in vegetation under the different treatments. Results: The densities of the major browse plants, the class taken as a whole, and the grass and weed classes are given in Table 1. The densities are expressed both as the total intercept on 300 feet of transect and also as the percentage of ground occupied. The percentage composition is also given and explained in the footnote. Table 2 lists the names of plants not mentioned in the Table 1 summary but encountered in minor measurable quantities. Department statistician Jack Grieb ran an analysts of zaniance on the four major browse plants {snowberry, big sagebru.;h, serviceberry, and mountain mahogany) between the inside and outside plots and found no significant differences for any of them. A student's Hypothesis Itt" test which was done on the total browse intercepts inside and outside resulted in a significant difference at the 80 percent confidence level, with, of course, more browse inside under protection than on the outside plot. Grasses and weeds were of such minor importance along with questionable accuracy in their measurements that they were not tested. �=97= Table 1.--Basalt Deer Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect Summary of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition, by Species and/or Class, 1956. Measurements to Hundredths of Feet. Composition 1/ Total Intercept Percentage of Percentage on Six 50 foot Ground Species or Inside Outside Occupied Treatment Transects Class Outside 0.00 0.00 Oakhrush Quercus gambellii Inside 27.80 9.27 ~Overstor~~ 9.18 34.93 Snowberry Outside 27.54 24.08 9.52 SYM Inside 28.57 Mtn. 9.73 2.56 Mahogany Outside 7.69 CercocarEus 24.10 montanus Inside 28.60 9.53 Big Sagebrush Outside Artemisia Inside 'tridentata 18.04 26.99 6.01 8.99 22.85 Serviceberry Outside Amelanchier sp. Inside 23,79 7.93 30.13 11.75 3.92 1.87 .62 22.75 7.58 Miscellaneous Outside Shrubs (Browse) Inside 22.75 9.90 2.36 100.00 Shrubs Outside Inside (Browse! Grasses and Outside Grass-like Inside Plants Weeds and Outside. Half- shrubs Inside 78.93 118.66 3.71 5.54 26.30 39.54 1.24 1.85 7.27 7.78 2.42 2.59 19.17 100.00 33.79 41. 59 66.21 100.00 58.41 100.00 1/ For browse, this is based upon the total crown intercept by treatment of a species divided by the total browse crown intercept for each treatment. , Grasses and grass-like plants and weeds and half-shrubs are grouped for computing composition because of stmil artty in growth form and in method of measurements. The latter clas's:es were not broken to species because of the relative unimportance of anyone species, with the classes taken in total, also being very minor in the amount of,ground occupied. �Table 2. --Basalt Deer Exclosure - List of Species Encountered on Line Intercept Transect Measurements, JUly, 1956, Not Specifically Noted in the Table 1 Summary, Ranked in Order by Class by Highest Total Measurement for 12 Transects. SHRUBS(BROWSE)1/ Oakbrush - Quercus gambellii Pinon Pine- Pinus edulis Bitterbrush- Purshia tride:iltata Utah Juniper - Juniperus utahensis GRASSESAND GRASS- LIKE PLANTS Squirreltail - Sitanion hystriX Bluegrass - Poa sp. Subalpine Nee8~.erass - StiRa cOJumbiana ---- ~~!:~~iex ~OPSlS hyll tmoltls Beardless Bluebunch Wheatgrass - Agropyron inerme .Canada Bluegrass - Poa compressa WEEDS AND HALF-SHRUBS Little. Rabbitbrush - Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Beardtongue - Penstemon sp. Fringed. Sagebrush - Artemisia frigida Bastard Toadflax - Comandra sp. 1/ This category is the same as "Miscellaneous Shrubs (Browse)" in Table 1. Since this exclosure had been up seven years, it could not be assumed that there were equal amounts of total browse to begin with inside and outside of the exclosure. Any differences that would appear might possibly have been there originally. Thus no attempt was made to establish additional transects in order to increase the confidence level. Pellet Group Count Objective: To determine the intensity of deer use upon the outside open range plot. Procedures: The outside 1/4 acre plot staked out for plant measurements was cleared of all deer pellets on July 18, 1956. A chalk line and a one hundred foot tape were used as guide lines for strips to facilitate systematic coverage of the entire area. The deer pellets were picked up and carried outside of the plot and deposited where there would be no chance of them washing back in. �~99= The pellet groups which were deposited by the deer on the 1/4 acre during the 195657 fall-winter-spring period of concentration were counted by a similar method of "Stripping" the plot on May 17, 1957. The pellets were pulverized by scuffing them out since they were moist and coul8,crumbled with relative ease. Results: The calculations for the indicated rate of use by deer on the outside 1/4 acre plot are given in summary as follows: Total No. of deer pellet groups on 1/4 A. = 311 Total No. of deer pellet groups on 1 A. = 4 x 311 = 1244 No. of deer-days use per acre = 1244 = 95.6 13 No, of deer-months use per acre = 95,6 3.19. or 31 A. /deer-month. 30 = The period for which the above rate applies is from July 18, 1956through May 17, 1957 or approximately 10 months. BROKENROADDEER-CATTLE EXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts Objectives: To determine the intensity of fall-winter-spring use by deer onthe outside open range plot and inside of the cattle part of the exclosure, Also, to determine the amount of livestock use on the outside plot, Procedures: Procedures used in making pellet group counts on the two plots accessible to deer and the one to cattle are identical to those explained under the same heading for the Antelope Pass Game-Cattle exclosure. The belt transects were longer than at Antelope Pass, being 278 feet in length, This makes the two plots under study 278 by 280 feet or about L 8 acres in size. The area sampled is ,102 acres or 5,7 percent for the 1. 8 acres. The transects were laid out, counted, and cleared on May 10, 1956, Only the deer groups which appeared to have been deposited in the previous fall-winter-spring season (1955-56)were tallied on the two sets of transects, and all cattle groups were cleared on the outside set but not counted, since aging them accurately was difficult and would have led to erroneous results. Results: The results of the May 10, 1956counts are summarized Inside Livestock Part of Exc10sure, Deer Use (indicated Rate) - Period: F;all-winter-spring, Total pellet groups, .4 t.ransebts = 26i~2' . Total pellet groups per acre ,,=-' 26,2 = ~5'6.9 ,102 . in following: 1955-56, �=100No. deer-days use per A. = 256.9 = 19.76 13 No. deer-months use per A. = 19.76 .66 or 1. 51 A. per 30 deer-month. = Outside, Unprotected Range Plot Deer Use (Indicated Rate) = Period: Fall=winter-spring, Total pellet groups, 4 transects e 12.4 Total pellet groups per acre _= 1955-56. 12.4 '" 121. 6 .102 No. of deer-days use per A. '" 121.6:g 9.35 13 No. of deer-months use per A. 9.35 "" . 31 or 3.22 A. per 30 deer-month. = Severe washing of pellets onto and off of the transects and negligible summer use by deer ruled out the feasibility of counting and clearing the plots for deer groups on an August 16, visit to the area. The outside plot transect were checkedto determine the amount of summer use by cattle, and only . 7 of a cow group was recorded on all four transects. This indicated very light or negligible use by the cattle on the outside plot for the summer, 1956, season. The transects were counted and cleared of deer pellet groups again this spring on May 14, 1957. No cattle groups were seen on the transects of the outside plot indicating that there had been no livestock use after last August (1956). In Summary, this spring's count is as follows: Inside Livestock Part of Exclosure. Deer Use (indicated Rate) - Period: Fall';;winter-spring, 1956=57. Tot. pellet groups, 4 transects = 7. 2 Tot. pellet groups per acre "'. 7.2:;;: 70.6 .102 No. deer-days use per A. '" 70.6 '" 5.43 13 No. deer=months use per A. 5.43 '" . 18 or 5.6 A. per deer-month. 30 = Outside, Unprotected Range Plot. Deer Use (Indicated Rate) - Period: Fall-winter~spripg! 1956=57. Total. pellet groups, 4 transects = 5,. 3. .~, Tot. pellet groups per acre "'....,22.: 52. 0 No. of deer-days use per A. "'.~ ::: 4.0 13 No. of deer-months use per A. = 4 . 13 or 7.7 A. per deer-month. 30 �=101= ( Discussion: The determination of the indicated rates of deer use on the two plots for the 1955-56 Iall-winter=sprfng season of use showed that deer had been inside of the livestock exclosure part ~ about twi_cethe rate that they had been upon the outside plot. The only logical reason for this might be in the fact that the range plot under livestock fence has a portion of taller sagebrush which would have drawn animals inside when snow covered the plants of average height outside e . The amount of deer use on the inside of the livestock part was also about 2 acres per deer-month greater than the outside in the fall-winter-spring season of 195657, although about 4 acres per deer-month less intense than for 1955-56. The explanation for this decline in deer use intensity is perhaps the same as that discussed for the Antelope Pass exclosure. The very light cattle use on the outside range plot can not be explained. This exclosure is relatively close to water ..i~The amount of grass in the composition is minor, however, and. perhaps this possfbly could be a reason for the light use. BRUSHY RIDGE DEER-LIVESTOCK EXCLOSURE General Notes and Observations This exclosure was visited on September 1, 1956 mainly to obtain information on exclosure dimenaions and bearings of the sides for later preparation of a detail map. Some notes were also made at the same time relative to observed conditions of the plant and soil mantles, and these shall be included here in the paragraphs to follow. Severe sheet and gully erosion was in evidence on the outside adjacent range despite relatively easy slope. There was moderate sheet erosion present inside of the livestock part. No noticeable differences could be seen in current growth and vigor of sagebrush plants between Instde of the livestock part and on. the outside adjacent area. Grass density and vigor was approximately twice inside of the livestock part then what it was outside. There was not noticeable regrowth and recovery from hedging on serviceberry inside of the livestock part and outside. The serviceberry inside of the deer part shows improved vigor but lacks leader type of shoot regrowth . .... . DEAD BADGER DEER-CATTLE EXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts Objectives: To determine the intensity of fall-winter-spring and summer use as well as total use for the year by deer on the outside open range plot and inside of the cattle part of the exclosure. Also, to determine the amount of livestock {cattle and horse) use on the outside plot. �=102= PrDcedures: F.r general methods used in making pellet group counts refer to the section on procedures in the write-up on the Antelope Pass exclosure , The transects are 283 feet long by four feet wide differing from those at Antelope Pass and Broken Road in. the length. The plots under study, the ref ore , are 283 by 280 Dr approximately 1. 8 acres in size. The area sampled is . 104 acres Dr about 5.7 percent of the total. As at the two previously mentioned Middle Park exclosures, the transects were laid out, counted and cleared. This was done on May 9, 1956.- Deer pellet groups which were judged to have been deposited during the previous: fall-winter-spring season (1955-56) were tallied on the two sets of transects, and all cattle groups were cleared on the outstde but not counted for reasons stated in procedures discussed for the other two exclosures .. CDunting procedures were repeated on August 15, 1956 and May 15, 1957r for both deer and cattle use. Results: The results of all three counts are given below as follows: Inside LivestDck Part .of Exclosure. Deer Use (Indicated Ra tel - PeriDd: Fall-winter-spring, Total pellet groups, 4 transects = ...b...Q_ Total pellet groups per acre 2,0 '" 19.2 1955-56. = .104 No. of deer-days use per acre = .l9..Z '" 1. 5 13 No. of deer-months use per acre = 1. 5 = .05 or 20 A. per deermonth . 30 . Deer Use (Indicated Rate) - PeriDd: 5/9/56 - 5/15/57. Total pellet groups, 4 .transects j, k1... Total pellet groups for 1 acre. 2.2 = 21. 1 = .104 No. of deer-days use per acre =; 21.1 . = 1. 6 1~ No. of deer-months use per acre - 1. 6 = : 05 or 20 A. per deer- 30 .month. �=103= Outside, Unprotected Range Plot. Deer Use (Indicated Rate) - Period: Fall-winter-spring, Total pellet groups, 4 transects = 2.8 Total pellet groups per acre = 2.8 = 1955-56. 26.9 .104 No. of deer-days use per acre = 26.9 ..; 2.1 13 No. of deer-months use per acre = 2. 1 = . 07 or 14.3 A. per deer-month. 30 Deer Use (Indicated Rate) - Period: May 9, 1956 - May 15, 1957. . Total pellet groups, 4 transects« . ..L Note':Jhis count indicates negligible deer use and the acres per deer - month figure is not computed. Livestock Use (Indicated Rate) - Period: 8/15/56 - 5/15/57, (Fall). Total C & H groups, 4 transects = 9.3 Total C & H groups per acre = 9.3 = 89.4 .104 No. of C & H days use per acre ~ 89.4 - 7.5 12 No. of Animal Unit Months use per A. = 7.5 30 -.25 pr 4 A. per AUM. No cattle groups were encountered on the August 15, 1956 count of the outside transects which was made after the summer season of use as set and the information given by Bureau of Land Management. Only 1. 1 deer pellet groups were encountered on the set of transects inside of the cattle part on this same date, and none were seen on the outside set. Since the above number indicates negligible summer use, it was added to those counted this May in order to arrive at the full season's indicated rate of use. Discussion: From the foregoing presentation of results of pellet group counting, it is apparent that deer use at any season the year or for all year was very light on the two plots which the deer have access ·t¢ Use by ltvestook on the outside unprotected range plot came in the fall of 1956 ~ather th~ the sU:lllinerwhich was understood to have been the season set by the B. lL.· M~ ]~~yge~er~lly accepted standards, this rate of use by livestock could be considered moderately heavy on this range type. of e ,, �-104- HERNAGEGULCH EXCLOSURE Range Vegetation Studies Objectives: The objectives are the same as for the Basut exclosure. Procedures: The line interception range study method as described and modified under procedures for the Basalt exclosure was used here at Hernage Gulch. Results: The results of the plant measurements are summarized in.Tahles III and IV. A student's Hypothesis ''ttl test was done on the total browse inside and outside and found to be significant at. the 99 percent confidence level. Here again, as on the Basalt exclosure study, it was difficult to find an area outside for comparison. It appears that there was more browse inside, originally, in the composition, and in particular, mountain mahogany.' Although no measurements were recorded for mountain mahogany on the outside transects, .it was present and was continuing to receive destructive use there from cattle andsdeer, Live growth on the plants inside was from suckers and riot from old hedged stems indicating that growth .recovery initiated with new stems when released from browsing. Table III. --Hernage Gulch Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect Summary of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition, by Species and/or Class, 1956. Measurements to Hundredths of Feet. ,Species Dr Total Intercept Percentage Percentage Composition Class Treatment on Six 50 foot of Ground Outside Transects Inside Occupied Big Sagebrush Outaide 47.79 15.93 89.61 Artemisia tridentata 11. 60 Inside 34.79 31.61 Mtn. Mahogany Outside Cercocarpus montanus· Inside 0.00 . 0.00 .60.56 20.19 Miscellaneous Shrubs (Browse) Outside 5.54 1. 85 Inside 14.70 4.90 Shrubs (Browse) Outside . Inside 53.~33 110.05 17.78 36.68 Grasses and Grass-like Plants Weeds and Half-Shrubs Outside 1. 52 .51 Inside Outside Inside 3.14 5.58 5·.95 1. 05 0.00 55.03 10.39 13.36 100.00 1.86 100.00 2,1. ~1 34.54 7.8~59 . 1.98 100.00 65.46 100.00 �=105- Table IV. --Hernage Gulch Exclosure - List of Species Encountered on Line Intercept Transect Measurements, August, 1956, Not Specifically Noted in the Table m Summary, Ranked in Order by Class by Highest Total Measurement for 12 Transects, SHRUBS(BROWSE).!/ Oakbrush - Quercus gambellii Serviceberry -::Amelanchier sp. Smooth Horsebrush - Tetradymia canescens Snowberry - §Ymphoricarpos sp. Utah Juniper - Juniperus ut:iliensis .. ; GRASSESANDGRASS-LIKE PLANTS Ricegrass - Oryzopsis hymenoides Junegrass - Koelaria cristata Bluebunch Wheatgrass - Agropyron spicatum Bluegrass - Poa sp, Western Wheatgrass - Agropyron smithii Squirreltail - Sitanion hystrix WEEDS AND HALF-SHRUBS Beardtongue - Penstemon sp. Winterfat - Eurotia lanata Little Rabbitbrush - Ch;rysothaninus viscidiflorus _Clubmoss - Selaginella spo Vetch - Vicia sp. . . . Bladderpod - Lesquerella sp. Yellowweed - Haptopappus nutallii _Cryptantha - Cryptantha sp, Fleabane - Eriseron sp. , Scarlet Globemallow - Sphaeralcea coccineum Loco- Astragalus sp. ." ;, . .!/ This category is the same as "Miscellaneous Shrubs (Browse)" in Table III. . •• I' . �=106= At the time that the measurements were taken (August 21, 1956), current growth on sagebrush and mountain mahogany was good. Also in the way of general observations, ..;in spite of six yearS protection, "the area inside has increased its density only to the extent where the shrub layer has expanded. Erosion remains severe and the lower layer of grasses and weeds, although perhaps greater than originally, has not filled the large patches of bare soil and pavement. Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the intensity of use for deer and cattle for the fall-winterspring season, in this case from August 21, 1956through May 16, 1957 (about 9 months), on the outside plot. Procedures: The outside plot was cleared of all deer and cattle groups in August, 1956, by the methods described under the report for the Basalt exclosure. A count of the groups deposited in the intertm on the 1/4 acre plot was made this May (1957) using techniques described previously for work at the Basalt exclosure. Results: The steps summarizing the computations for the indicated rates of use by deer and cattle are as follows: Deer Cattle Total No. of Pellet groups on 1/4 acre 86 8 Total No. of pellet groups on 1 acre 344 32 No. of deer and animal = days use/A. 26 2.67 No. of deer-months and animal-months use/A. .09 .87 Thus, the indicated rates of use are 1. 15 acres per deer-month and 11. 1 acres per AUM, for deer and cattle respectively. Discussion: .Considering the rate of use by deer and the general condition of the outside range, this range received perhaps three times what it should have the past winter (1956-'57). Admittedly, the winter was severe compared with the average, but the fall and spring use by livestock seems to be compounding the detrimental effects of the over-populations of wintering deer. KELLY FLATS DEER-CATTLE EXCLOSURE Pellet Group, Counts Objectives: To determine the intenstties of use by deer and cattle on the two outside range plots for the years 1955 throughi957 for the former and the summer,' 1956,, season for the latter class of animal. ( �~107= Procedures: Plot or Block "A" is the designation of the outside plot north of the drift fence which has had continuous deer and cattle use. Plot or Block "C" is the outside plot south of the drift fence which has had deer use plus some unpermitted cattle use. The drift fence was constructed in 1933. How much use has been made by cattle on Block "C" is unknown prior to the last two summers when the author began making observations on the area. The rate of cattle use on this Block "C" was determined only for the 1956 summer season with the presence of cattle being noted only in the summer of 1955. Plots nAt' and "C" were systematically stripped by a crew of department and Forest Service men on April 27, 1956. All deer pellet groups which were believed to have been' deposited in the fall-winter-spring season prior to that date were tallied and either scattered or scuffed out. All cattle groups were removed from the two plots, but they were not counted since estimating their ages was not feasible. The above procedure was repeated on October 16, 1956, in order to obtain the use by deer and cattle on the two outside plots for the summer season, April 27 through October 16. On April 26, 1957, the same general procedure was repeated to obtain the fall-winterspring use by deer and, added to the results of the October, 1956 count of deerg roups, to give the intensity of use by deer for the entire year. One new technique was applied on the count this spring, and that on a trial basis. Yellow center-line highway paint was sprayed or squirted on the deer pellets with a Plewes oil pressure can and an Lemite tree marker gun in order to cancel them out for future counts. Results: The results of the three. pelletgroup summarized as follows: counts for the rates of deer use are Period of Use: Fall-winter-spring, 1955-56. Tot; No. groups on plot (1. 3 A.) Tot. groups per acre No. of deer-days use' per acre No. of deer-months use per acre No. of acres per deer-month Period of Use: Summer, 1956. (4/27/56 - 10/16/56) Total number of groups on plot Total number of groups per acre No. of deer-days use per acre'. No, of deer-months use per: acre No. of acres per deer-month Block "A" Block "C" 57 43.8 3.4 ; .1.2 8.3 143 ,.110 8.5 .28 3.6 Block "An Block "C" 14 10.8 . 93 . 03 33.3 124 95.4 7.3 . 24 4.2 �=108= Block "A" Block "C" Period of Use: Fal1:-winter-spring, 1956-57 (10/16/56 Total number of groups on plot Total number of groups per acre Number of deer-days use per acre Number of deer-months use per acre Number of acres per deer-month Period of Use: Year, 4/27/56 - 4/26/57 Total number of groups pn plot Total number of groups per acre Number of deer-days use per acre Number of deer-months use per acre Number of acres per deer-month - 4/26/57) 35 26.9 2.1 .07 14.3 164 126.2 9.7 .32 3.1 49 37.7 2.9 .10 10 2.88 221. 5 16.3 .54 1. 85 The cattle use on the two blocks for the summer season of 1956 is given as follows: Block "A" Block "C" Period of Use: Summer, 1956 (4/27/56 - 10/16/56) Total'number of cattle groups on plot 95 20 15.4 Total number of groups per acre 73.1 1.3 No. of animal - days use per acre 6.1 No. of animal-months use per ac_re .04 .2 ..Number of acres per AUM 25 5 .Discussion: From the foregoing summary of results it can be seen that Block "C" received an appreciable amount of deer use through the course of a year. The summer use in 1956 nearly equalled the figures obtained for the indicated rates for the 1955-56 and 1956-57 fall-winter-spring seasons of use. Probable principal factors for the heavy deer use are the location of Block or Plot "C" near a ridge top, the trapping effect of the deer proof fence and the drift fence, and the high proportion of trees and shrubs for cover and food. Plot 11AIt in comparison is covered principally with blue grama and lack desirable qualities of cover. MIDDLE COTTONWOODCREEK GAMEEXCLOSURE Range·.Vegetation· studies Objectives: The objectives are the same as stated for the Basalt exclosure. Procedures: .Again.. as at the Basalt and Hernage Gulch exclosures, the line interception method was employed here in order to determine compositions and densities of the protected and unprotected plots of range vegetation. Results: Table V and VI summarizes the results of plant measurements made on the 12 transects. A Student's Hypothesis "til test was done on the total browse intercept on the six transects inside and outside, and a significant difference was found at the 80 percent confidence level. The total intercepts of mountain mahogany were tested and a significant difference was found at the \9.7.5 percent confidence level. Total �~109= grass and weed intercepts .tested significant at the 60 and 99 percent confidence levels. Comparisons for all classes, except grasses, and mountain mahogany showed greater intercepts (as a measure of density) on the outside over the inside. There was a higher intercept of grasses outside than inside but the accuracy of the results was also considerably less. Table Vo --Middle Cottonwood Creek Game Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect. Summary of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition, by Species and/or Class, 1956. Measurements to Hundredths of Feet. Total Intercept .Percentage Percentage Composition Species or Treatment on Six 50 foot of Ground Class Inside Occupied Outside Transects Mtn. Mahogany 60.73 Outside 9.09 27.26 Cercocarpus 88.23 "montanus Inside 58.57 19.52 Pinon Pine Pinus edulis Outside Inside 10.48 .89 3.49 .30 23.35 Currant Ribes cereum Ottside Inside 4.24 6.92 1.41 2.31 9.44 Outside 2.91 .97 6.48 Inside 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Shrubs Outside '; .Inside (Browse) Mtn.Muhly tside Muhlenbergia Montana Inside 44.89 66.38 36.13 100.00 14.96, 22.13 12.04 30.00 10.00 Outside 17.48 5.83 Inside 9.59 3.20 Outside Inside 3.54 4.26 1.18 1.42 Outside 57.15 19.05 Inside Outside 43.85 2.32 14.62 .77 Inside 7.25 2.42 Outside 2.76 .92 Inside 6.64 2.21 smooth Horsebrush Tetradymia , canescens au Blue Grama Bouteloua gracilis Miscellaneous Grasses and Grass-like Plants Grasses and Grass-like Plants Fringed Sage Artemisia frigida Miscellaneous Weeds and Half-shrubs 1034 10.43 5~.06 51. 96 28.09 16.61 '·5.69 7.37 3.73 12.56 4.43 100.00 11. 50 100.00 �=110= Table VI. --Middle Cottonwood Creek Game Exclosure = List of Species Encountered on Line Intercept Transect Measurements, -Iuly, 1956, Not Specifically Noted in the Table V Summary, Ranked in Order by Class by Highest Total Measurement for 12 Transects. SHRUBS(BROWSE) None GRASSES AND GRASS-LIKE PLANTS Needle and Thread - Stipa comata Junegrass _- Koelaria cristata Squirreltail - Sitanion hystrix Bluegrass ~ Poa sp. Arizona Fescue = Festuca arizonica Sleepy Grass = Stipa robusta Western Wheatgrass - AgrOpYron smithii WEEDS AND HALF-SHRUBS Fendler+s Ceanothus - Ceanothus fendleri Prtcklypear Cactus - Opuntia sp. Clubmoss - Selaginella sp. Phlox - Phlox sp. Pincushion Cactus - Mammalaria sp. Pingue - Hymenoxys sp, Wild Onion - Allium c.ernuum· Soapweed - Yucca sp. .: Pussytoes - Antennaria sp. Evening Primrose - Oenothera sp. Herbaceous Sage - Artemisia sp. Stonecrop - Sedum sp. Cinquefoil - Potentilla sp. Because the exclosure is in a stand of mountain mahogany which has the plants more evenly di·stributed· thaD.:might be found, usually, tlie significantly· higher. total intercept for that species on thednside compared with the outside plot could be a reflection of the increased vigor and growth of the plants released from a moderate amount of deer use. Prior to the time of construction of the exclosure, this area had extremely heavy use by both deer and livestock. Also, of a 23 mountain mahogany plant sample inside, 100 percent were in Form Class 1 (Dasmann, No. Date), whereas 12 of 18 plants mountain mahogany outside were placed in Form Class 3. This wruld indicate that deer (and some elk and bighorn sheep) use, although not classed as severe the past 8 years, has prevented considerable expansion of the shrub crown layer. �-111= Pellet Group Count Objective: To determine the intensity of deer use for the fall-winter-spring season, in this case from July 25, 1956 through May 13, 1957 (about 10 months), on the outside plot. Procedures: Methods practiced and described for the Basalt exclosure were used here. Please refer to the part of this report on Procedures for that exclosure for details, Results: The summary of the results and the steps in the determination of the indicated rate of deer use for the period mentioned above are given as follows: Total Number of Pellet Groups on 1/4 acre :: 42.3 Total number of Pellet Groups on 1 acre - 169.2 Number of deer - days use per acre = 13. 0 Number of deer-month use per acre - .433 Number of acres per deer-month - 2.33 THOMASCREEK EXCLOSURE Objectives: Range Vegetation Studies The objectives are the same as those stated for the Basalt exclosure. Procedures: The techniques and methods used and enumerated for the study done at the Basalt exclosure also apply here on the Thomas Creek exclosure study . . Results: The summary of line interception plant measurements is given in Table VII and vm. Student's Hypothesis "t" tests done on total browse and weeds showed significant differences at the. 99 percent confidence level between the inside and outside plots. Little importance can be attached to these findings, however, because it is quite apparent that the plant composition was different at the start when the exclosure was constructed. . . Inside of the exclosure the browse and perennial weeds show good recovery from the past heavy use by deer and Livestock although the pinon and juniper are not filling out beneath old highlines. Oakbrush reproduction inside is coming in strong around mature and highlined islands. General destructive use continues outside on all classes of vegetation. �-112= Table VII. --Thomas Creek Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect Summary of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition, by Species and/or 'Class! 1956. Measurements to Hundredths of Feet. Composition Total Intercept Percentage Percentage Species or on Six 50 foot of Ground Inside Class Outside Treatment Transects OccuEied Utah Juniper Outside 14.85 4.95 JuniEerus utahensis Inside 0.00 0.00 Oakbrush Outside 11. 57 3.86 Quercus· gambellii Inside 25.67 8.56 Overstory {Small Treesl Big Sagebrush Artemisia tridentata Outside Inside Outside 26.42 25.67 5.59 8.81 8.56 1.86 Inside 45.07 15.02 Bitterbrush Purshia tridentata Outside 3.83 1.28 .Inside 14.17 4.72 Oakbrush Quercus gambeUii Outside 2.60 .87 Inside 14.23 4.74 Miscellaneous Shrubs ~Browse! Outside Inside 2.62 7.25 .87 2.42 38.18 55.83 26.16 17.55 17.76 17.64 17.90 100.00 Browse Blue Grama Bouteloua gracilis Miscellaneous Grasses and Grass-like Plants Outside Inside . Outside 14.64 80.72 0.00 4.88 26.:.91 0.00 Inside 4.19 1.40 Outside 4.85 1.62 Inside 1.08 .36 4.85 5.27 1.62 1.76 12.41 4.14 1.63 2.31 .54 .77 . Grasses and Grass- Outside Inside like Elants Low Rabbitbrush Outside Cbr;y:sothamnus Inside deEressus Miscellaneous Outside Weeds and Halfshrubs Inside 8.98 100.00 0.00 49.24 24.78 12.69 63.41 19.15 11.81 " 1.61 .54 100.00 18.92 100.00 �-113- Table VITI. --Thomas Creek Exclosure - List of Species Encountered on Line Intercept Transect Measurements, August, 1956, Not Specifically Noted in the Table vn Summary, Ranked in Order by Class by Highest Total Measurements for Transects. SHRUBS(BROWSE)11 Serviceberry - Amelarichier sp. Snowberry - Symphoricarpos sp. Mountain Mahogany - Cercocarpus montanus GRASSESAND GRASS-LIKE PLANTS Ricegrass = Oryzopsis hymenoides Needle and Thread - Stipa comata Sand Dropseed = Sporobolus cryPtandrus Sedge- Carex sp. . Squirreltail - Sitanion hystrix Western Wheatgrass - AgropYron smithii Bluegrass = ~ sp. Bearded Bluebunch Wheatgrass - Agropyron spicatum Junegrass - Koelaria cristata WEEDS AND HALF- SHRUBS Pricklypear Cactus - Opuntia sp. Snakeweed - Gutierriezia sp. Yellowweed - Haplopappus nuttallii Aster - Aster arenosus Fleabane Daisy";' Erigeron sp, Herbaceous Sage - Artemisia sp. Scarlet Globemallow - Sphaeralcea coccineum Thistle - Cirsium sp, 11 This category is the same as "Miscellaneous Shrubs (Browse)" in Table VII. �~114~ .... Pellet Group Comt Objective:/ To determine the indicated rate of use by deer on the outside plot for the period August 7, 1956 through May 17, 1957 (about 10 1/2 months). Procedures: Methods used were the same as for the Basalt exclosure. Results: Listed below are steps in the computation of the rate of use for the 1956-57 fall-winter- spring season for deer. Total number of pellet groups on 1/4 acre ~ 222 Total number of pellet groups on 1 acre = 888 Number of deer-days use per acre 68.3 Number of deer-months use per acre = 2.28 No. of acres per deer-month .43 Several deer were seen in the immediate vicinity of the exclosure on May 17 this spring indicating that the animals had not broken up their winter herd groups and dispersed to higher ranges for the summer and fall, at least in this area. The high indicated rate of use obtained on the outside plot might be considered misleading when correlated with the low densities for all classes of vegetation on it (Table VII) ~ although current use on plants on the plot bore out the fact that the deer were not just using this south exposure for bedding down and a lane of traffic. REFERENCES Baker, B. D. 1956. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept. Colo. Game and Fish Dept., July, pp. 47-61. Canfield, R. H. 1950. Sampling Ranges by the Line Interception Method. Res. Rept, No.4, Southwestern Forest and Range Exp. Sta., Forest Service, U. S. D. A., Tuscon, Arizona., Processed, 28 pp. Dasmann, W. P. (No Date). Deer Range Survey Methods. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game. Mimeo., 25 pp. Prepared by: B_. __D...•. _B_ak.;.....;.e_r --:-__ Date: .....;;..Ju_l""'y .•. ,...• 1_.9 ..•. 5.,.;.7 - Approved by: Laurence E .. Riordan Fed. Aid Coordinator _ �July, 1957 =115= JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS COLORADO ~------~~~~~---------------- state of Project No. Work Plan No. Job No. W=38-R:;;'10 IT Deer Elk Investigations Population Surveys V~__~i_·~D~e~te~r~m~in~a~t~io~n~.o~f~W~· ~in~t~e~r_L~o~s~s~ _ Note: This report is for fiscal year period 1956-1957, Objectives: To improve the techniques for determining deer winter losses. Procedure: Seventeen transects each eight miles long and one hundred yeards apart, were run on foot, Dead deer observed by each observer were tallied as to sex and age class. An average sight distance was recorded for each dead animal seen. Live deer observed were tallied only when they passed between the observer and the man on his right. The number one observer followed the high water line of the Gzeen Mountain Reservoir, having the reservoir to his left. The counting was done by senior Wildlife and Forest Recreation students from Colorado State University on May 14, 1957, . FindingsL The average sight distance calculated this year from 176 observations, was :.26,06-yards. This compares with previous years as follows: 1955 1956 , 1957 36.26 28.15 26.06 c e The result, of the count is as follows: Total live deer observed. 498 Total transects . , . , , . 17 Total dead deer counted. . . . . . 176 Total area. . . . . .. 4,654 acres Sample. . 3,364 acres 0 • 0 • • • • • • • • • 0 �=116= Total estimated dead deer: 176: 3,364 x : 4,654 3,364 x = 819104 x = 243 = Calculated winter loss 46.78 percent. This year calculation is again based on an average sight distance worked out in a detailed gunny sack count reportedin Colorado Quarterly Report, July, 1954. This figure has been used in calculations for previous years. This will be used until more suitable average sight distance can be compiled for the Green Mountain Study Area," Summa~;," YEAR LIVE DEER TOTAL EST. OBSERVED ,DEAD DEER 263.1/ 1951-1952 1952;,;,.1953 714 1953-1954 1,094 1954-1955 1, 129 1955-1956 1,276 1956-1957 498 612 28 17 41 79 243 CALCULATED PERCENT WINTER LOSS 69.9 3.8 1.5 3.5 5.8 46.8 KILL FROM PREVIOUSFALL UNIT 37 601 260 500 923 472 893 1/ Emphasis was not placed on counting live deer in 1952. Therefore, winter loss is probably too high for this year. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date:.•.• ,, J...;..ul;;...y'-',_'_19_5_7_-------- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �dJ>~jq :~"-.-- l~illllllij' ~I~'llil~liI1llinlij~~ilrlllil[I'ill BDOW022185 July, ....., 1957 =117= JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State··nf· COLORADO ------------------~----------- ProjectNo. ~VV~-~3~8~-~R~=~9~~~D~e~e~r~-~e~lk~i~nv~e~s~t~ig~a~t~i~on~s _ Work Plan No. _,,_,,;;m~_;r...;;;E;;;.;xp~lo;..;;r~a;..;;t~o;;;..ry......,;.a;.;;;n;.;;;al;;;.y~s;;.;i;;,;;s_o;;.;f~b;;;.r;;;.. o;;;.w;.;,.;;;.se.;;....;c;.;;l.;;,jipl;",-"""p~l~o~t ..;;;s..;;;am=po;.,;l~e..;;;s •.,....;J~o;..;;b;;....;;;1;.;.7~._ Title of J:ob: A_n_a_l .••. y_s_is __o_f_b_r_o_w_s ....• e_s_a_m ....••• p_leo......;c_0....;ll_e_c...;.te....;d--..;;1....;94_9....;-_1_9 ....• 5_5....;. --, _ Objectives~ During the quarter ending June 30, 1957, the writer devoted full time to Work Plan No. m, Job 18, Nutritive Analysis of Browse Samples. The original schedule for submission of the completion report for Work Plan No. III was March 15, 1958. When it became apparent that the analysis work would not be carried on for 1951, it seemed. expedient to complete the collections made in 1956 in the time remaining because: (1) these materials constituted the only samples available for standardized analysis; and (2) collections made previous to 1956 had deteriorated in some respects so that.analyses were invalid for one ormore nutrients. Completion of Work Plan III, Job 18 has required several weeks beyond the enforced termination date of the project, June 30, 1957. Completion of this phase of the investigation, and submission of the completion report to the Federal Aid Division, on the, writer's time, is in appreciation of the Department's interest and support during th.e period of April 1, 1956 to June 30, 1957. Every effort will be made to submit the completion report for Work Plan ill, Job 18 by September 15, 1957. It is for these reasons -= the necessity for doing the most valuable and important jobs before June 30, 1957 -- that Job·No. 1·7was inactive durmg the quarter. Prepared Date: by:._ _..;;;D;..;o~n;;;.;al=d..;:D~i;;.;:e;,.;;t;;;.z --=Approved by: ..;:J..;;;u;;;.ly'-',:......;;.;19;...;5;..;7 .....__ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��Ii~llllll~' ~I~'~il~iII1lli[~ilij~~~1 II]i1~llijll BDOW022186 July, 1957 =119= JOB COMI:ILETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No. __ ••.. W .... -_3;;..8;;..-_R_-_1_0;..;i.......,;;D;;..e;;..e;..;r_-_E;..;1;;;;;k .... !n~v...;;e_s_ti;lOg~a;,;;;h;;.;· o_n;.;;;s~ Work Plan No. ill, ••• Forage and Range Utilization studies, _ Job No. 19 0" Title of JOQ:~__;I;;;;d;;;;e;,;;;n;,;tl:;;;·f;.;.ic;;.;a;;;;;t;.;;;i;.;.o:;;;n ••.. o:;;:f;..;K=e¥-y .... b;;.;r:..;o;;,.;w~s;;.;e;;;...:s;.&;p;.;;e;.;;c;,;;i;;;.e;;;.s .... o;.;;n::....;:e.=;lk:.:....;.w:..:i=n;,;te;;;.r;;;...:Jt';.;;an=gt __ ~_ Objectives: 1. To identify the key browse species on winter range. 2. To determine condition of key browse species on winter range. 3. To provide a factual, quantitative appraisal of key browse conditions as an aid to more effective winter-range management. Procedure: L Identify key winter browse species during field work and in subsequent analysis of data relative to other jobs of this work plan. 2. Determine general condition of key winter browse species during field work and in subsequent analysis of data relative to other jobs of this work plan. 3. Prepare progress report in presentation of these findings. Re sults; The key browse species on elk winter range were :deterIIlined:in/ conjunction with the stand composition and density studies of work plan 1ll,-,,-< . Job No. 20. Past studies by DeVore and Shepherd, and floral keys were used in initial identification of the browse plants. Browse specimens. will be collected during the 19.57summer field work period. A more positive laboratory identificationcan be made of these specimens. to suppl iment the present data. The condition of the key browse species was partially determined during the stand composition and density, and utilization studies relative to other jobs of this work plan. The key browse species were classified as to age and past utilization in conjunction with these studies. This data is presented under the respective job completion reports. Final appraisal of the condition of the key browse species awaits completion of production-u t ilization studies currently in progress. Information relative to plant vigor, form classes, and annual production will be forthcoming from this data. Prepared Date by: John T. Harris J;;..u~1~y~,...;;1~9~57...._ Approved by; J"aurence E. Riordan 'Federal 4id Coordinator _ �� https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/17a403e01f5fb6f7ad6582a8e0043bd8.pdf acbe11d87940d867f8188e0acf3c5083 PDF Text Text July, 1957 =121= JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS &~eill:, ProjectNo. VVorkPlanNo. JobNo. ~C~O~L~O~RA~D~O~ _ VV~=~3~8_-~R~=~1~O~i~D~e~e~r_-=E~lk~In~v~e~st=i~g=a=ti~o=n=s _ I~~i_L~o~c=at~i~o=n~an~d~ex~t~e~n~t~o~f~s~e~a~s~o~n~a~l~r~ang=·~e=s~. _ ~3~_·~i~M~ig~r~a=t~io~n~b~e~vw~e~e~n~s~u~m=m~e~r~an~d~w~i~n~te~r~r~an ---- A. '!rapping and Tagging Program with Present Methods. Objectives: To determine the pattern and extent of migration and/or residency of deer in the following areas: (1) White River, (2) Douglas Creek, (3) Piney=Sheephorn, (4) Mesa Nerde, (5) Brown's Park, (6) Billy Creek. Procedures: Trapping and tagging of deer was done on the above listed winter range areas using both-Individual and group type traps. Several other types of traps were used and is explainedunder' part B. Information from tagged animals was collected at check stations and from reports mailed in. These were followed up by correspondence to get the complete information and to extend.cou rtesy.to persons turning in the reports. (1) White River Deer Trapping Operations, 1956-1957. Little Hills Experiment Statton .Value: The problem here is to determine where liberal hunting seasons. and increased harvest should be applied in order to reduce deer numbers on specific winter range problem areas such as Piceance=YellowCreek and strawberry Creek. Findings: Trapping operations were begun on October 31, 1956, and terminatedon March 19, 1957. Work was done by personnel assigned to Little Hills. Ten individual box-typetraps were used and second cutting alfalfa hay grown at the Station was used as bait. Two clover deer traps were set up and used for a brief period of time. The winter ofI956~1957 was longer and harder than usual resulting in an increased number of catches and recatches and a noticeable winter kill of fawns, especially bucks. Snowcover remained several feet deep throughout most of the winter and temperatures ran consistently low. The weather broke about the third week in February and the snow began to melt. �=122= A total of 149 deer were tagged in addition to 16 recatches tagged in previous years. Repeats were quite a problem and traps were moved as often as possible to prevent this. Tag returns: There were five tag returns from the 1956 hunting season. Three were shot 10 to 12 miles away from the trap site and a fourth was kil led about 60 miles northeast of the station. The last return came from the local locker plant and details were lacking •.Complete return .information for all areas is found in table 8. TABLE 1. DEER TAGGED DURING WINTER OF 1956-57 Date 10/31/56 Sex and Age Mature Doe 11/2/56" Buck. fawn LITTLE IDLLS EXPERIMENT STATION Left Ear Right Ear Round Tag Weight Remarks Cattle Tag v-150 Recatch from 1/19/56 2081 A 190 156 Ibs. Pasture #7 58 Pasture #. 7 Killed. 2801 1951 4/8/57 Mature Doe 2080 A 189 11/3/56 . Mature Doe 11/3/56._ .... Mature Doe 2802 2803 1952 1953 11/3/56·. /137 Recatch Weight 1/13/56140 lbs. Pasture # 7 Pasture # 7 Pasture # 7 Killed 3/27/57 11/4/56 Buck fawn 2804 1954 67 11/4156 11/4/56 Doe fawn Mature doe 2805 2207 1955 1577 70 v'139 Pasture # 7 Killed 4/8/57 11/12/56 11/131. 56. Doe fawn Mature doe 2806 2807 1956 1957 V" 11/13/56 --Mature doe 2082 A 191 -/'150 11/13/56 11/15/56 Doe fawn Buck fawn 2808 2809 1958 1959 40 55 60 155 Pasture # 6 Recatch Wght. on 3/8/55 138 lbs. Pasture #6 Pasture # 6 Pasture # 5 Killed 4/5/57 Recatch Wgt. on 2/18/56 130 lbs, Pasture # 5 Pasture # 5 Pasture # 5 Killed 4/5/57 11/16/56 11/16/56 Buck fawn Doe fawn 2810 2811 1960 1961 60 53 11/17/56 Mature doe 2812 1962 /162 Pasture # 5 Pasture # 5 Killed 4/6/57 Pasture # 4 Winter kill �, "c- ~ ,~..• /JI~.:J.. s-: r;c /6~ .I- tJ( ef!.-~~ (.r/l'¢~~cf;X~ (~~"t~J~ ~,~ ~,~ '1,.A.••.J!,.L /,F.J , • /:..., ",.1 ;P'L-l' 1St) .r' ";123= Table 1. Deer T~ged During Winter of 1956-57--Little Hills E2illeriment station Left Ear Right Ear Date Age and Sex Round T~ Cattle T~ Weight Remarks /"1'57 11/18/56 Mature doe 2813 '1963 Pasture #4 Winter Kill 11/18/5611/20/56 Year!. Buck Mature doe 2814 1964 1863 >"170 /133 11/20/56 Buck fawn Doe fawn 11/21/56 11/21/56 Buck fawn 11/22/56 ' Mature doe 11/22/56 Mature doe 2.815 - 2816 2817 2818 2684 1965 1966 1967 1968 40 64 58 Mature doe 2078 A 187 /155 11/22/56 ..... Mature doe 11/22/56 Mature doe 11/23/56 Buck fawn 11/23/56, Buck fawn 11/23/56 Buck fawn 11/24/56 Mature doe 11/24/56 Mature doe Yearl. doe 11/24/56 2819 2820 2821 2822 2823 2824 2825 1969 1970' 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1579 /128 /160 73 83 68 /128 /147 " 136 11/25/56 11/25/56 11/25/56 11/25/56 11/26/56 Buck fawn Buck Lawn Buck fawn Buck fawn Mature doe . 2826 282{t 2828 2829 2830 1583 1584 1585 62 91 98 91 ,/ 132 11/27/56 11/27/56' 11/27/56 11/27/56 11/28/56 11/29/56 12/1/56 ' 12/1/56 12/2/56 12/3/56 12/4/56 12/7/56 12/10/56 12/10/56 Doe fawn Yrlg. buck Buck fawn Mature doe ,Mature doe Doe fawn Buck 2 yrs. Mature doe Doe fawn Mature doe Doe.fawn Doe fawn Buck fawn buck fawn 2831 2832 2833 2834 2835 2836 2837 lost 2838 2839 2840 2841 2842 2843 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 282 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 0 , 11/22/56 ., v145 ,/ 135 ? 1586 49 /117 74 1"150 " 128 57 none v 160 Pasture #5 Recatch Wgt. on 2/14/56 120 lbs. Pasture # 4 Died FeR~ 57 ~Pasture# 5 \PastUre ·#4 ' i~asture # 6 Pasture # 3 Killed 5/21/57 RecatchWght. 11/25/55 136 lbs. Pasture # 3 Recatch Wght. 12/21/55 1541bs. Pasture # 6 Pasture # 6 Pasture # 6 Pasture # 5 Pasture # 5 Pasture # 4 Pasture # 4 Killed 5/27/57 Pasture-s 4 Recatch Wght. 2/14/56 68 Ibs, Pasture # 4 Pasture # 4 Pasture # 4 ' Pasture # 4 Pasture # 4 Pasture # 4 Escaped from pasture, reweighed 3/7/57 1291bs. Pasture #4 Recatch 52 '.' 140 51 80 48 Got away from box Winter kill 1/22/57 �=124= Little Hills (Cont. } Date Age and Sex 12/11/56 Buck fawn 12/11/56 . Year!. buck Left Ear RoundT~ 2844. 2845 Right Ear CattleT!!K Weight 1600 88 A-I 155 12/11/56 12/12/56 12/12/56 Buck fawn Buck fawn Mature doe 2846 2847 2848 A=2 12/12/56 .. 12/13/56 12/16/56 12/16/56 12/17/56 12/17/56 12/17/56. 12/18/56 Doe fawn Buck 2 Yr. Doe fawn Buck fawn Mature doe Mature doe Buck fawn Mature buck 2849 2850 2851 2852 2853 A-5 2854 2322 12/1S/56 .. Buck fawn 2855. Doe fawn 12/18/56 2856 12/19/56 . .Buck fawn 2857 12/19/56 .. Mature buck 2858 Mature doe 12/19/56 2859 12/19/56. Mature doe 12/19/56. Buck fawn 2860 . 2861 Buck fawn 12/20/56 Mature doe 12/20/56 2862 12/23/56- Mature doe 2863 Mature doe 12/26/56 2864 Year!. buck 12/28/56 2865 12/30/5& Mature doe 2866 12/30/56 Buck fawn 2867 12/31/56 .Mature doe 2868 Mature doe 12/31/56 2869 Buck fawn 1/1/57 2870 Mature doe 2871 1/1/57 1/1/57 Buck fawn 2872 .Doe fawn 1/2/57 2873 2874 ~cklawn o . aw'Woe 2Js7fi> . a~re WIN 1/4/57 1/5/57 1/5/57 1/6/57 Buck fawn Buck fawn Year!. buck Doe'fawn 2877 2878 2879 2880 A-3 A-4 A-6 A-7 A-8 A=9 262 A-10 none 66 57 ,/156 none none 56 66 : 160 v 167 150 y 137 82 76 v 148 >/160 .. 154 Winter kill 1/17/57 found 4 pt. and too large for box Recatch Wght. 2/5/50 Reweighed 1/26/57 72 lbs. /~6 .J1g5_ A-23 A-24 A-25 No scales Recatch 'Wgt. 2/1,.8/56 110 Ibs; A-15 A=22 Reweighed 1/26/57 147 Recatch 60 none 63 . none A-17 A-18 A-L9 A-20 A-21 " 62 A-11 A-12 A-13 A-14 A=16 Remarks Recaught 5 times Reweighed 2/18/57 153 lbs. Winter kill 1/15/57 68 ./157 J 155 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 Recaught once 58 J 152 54 62 1.~ !1~ 1834 1835 1836 1837 54 61 143 48 v Found dead in fence 1/20/57 Winter kill 2/1/57 Reweighed 3/17/57 Found dead 5/13/57 on pry Fork Trap death 3/15/57 Recaught 11 times ',;~ �=125Little Hills (Cont.) Left ear Round Tag 2881 2882 2883 2.885 2886 2887 2888 2889 2.884 2890 2891 2892 2893 2894 2895 2896 2077 Right Ear Cattle Tag lS3.$ 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1501 1502 1503 A-18.6 Doe-fawn 1/24/57 Deefawn 1/24/57 Doe-fawn 1/24/57 Mature doe 1/24/57 1/24/57 . Mature doe Doe fawn 1/26/57 1/26/57 . Yearl. buck Mature doe 1/26/57 Buck fawn 1/26/57 Doe fawn 1/27/57 1/28/57 BU.9kfawn Mature doe 1/29/57 .Mature buck 1/30/57 Mature doe 1/30/57 2.898 2899 2900 2901 2902 2903 2904 2905 2906 2.907 2908 2909 2910 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 A 375 1/31/57 1/31/57 . 2/1/57 2/1/57 2/2/57 Buck fawn Buck fawn Doe-fawn Buck fawn Mature doe 2911 2912 2913 2914 1518 1519 1520 1521 A 45 80 82 68 51 1"154 2/3/57 2/4/57 !.iature buck Buck fawn 2915 2916 1522 1523 , '166 48 2/5/57 Buck fawn 2917 1778 43 Date. Age and Sex Mature doe 1/7/57 -Yearl. buck 1/10/57. Buck fawn 1/10/57 1/12/57 Buck fawn 1/12/57 . ~ature doe Buck fawn 1/12/57 Mature doe 1/13/57 .Doe fawn 1/13/57. Buck fawn 1/14/57· 1/14/57· Buck fawn Buck fawn 1/18/57 1/21/57 . Buck fawn 1/21/57. Mature doe Doe fawn 1/21/57 ·>Mawre doe 1/22/57 Doe fawn 1/22/57 Yearl. doe 1/23/57 .:~ .. '. -0 ' Weight Remarks· -1.48 Reeaught once ,152 54 60 Recaught twice .' 152 48 /160 50 55 Recaught twice 50 Reweighed 3/18/57 53 lbs. 48 Recaught three times 66 Recaught nine times ,,...155 42 v 127 Recaught seven times 50 Recaught five times " 105 Recatch of 12/~9/55 Wght. 701bs . 70 68 75 v 122 y' 148 71 i'127 ,/ 155 70 55 none ...-156 >-164 "-161 No scales Antlers fallen RecatchWght. 11/27/54 1791bs; Recaught twice Winter kill 4/23/57 Recaught once Recaught once Recatch 1/14/55 Wght. 160 lbs. when it was injected w/ Anectine Recaught once very weak Winter kill 2/21/57 �-126Little Hil\ls (Cont. ) Date 2/5/57 2/5/57 2/5/57 2/6/57 2/6/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 2/8/57 2/8/57 2/11/57 2/11/57 2/12/57 2/14/57 2/14/57 2/15/57 ", .Age' and Sex Mature doe Buck fawn YearI. doe Doe fawn Mature buck Mature doe Mature doe Mature buck Mature buck Mature doe Mature buck Mature doe Mature buck Mature doe Buck fawn Mature doe Left Ear Round T~ 2918 2919 2920 2921 2922 2923 2924 2925 2926 2927 2928 2929 2930 2931 ,2,932 2933 2/15/57 2/16/57, 2/16/57 2/17/57 2/18/57 2/18/57 2/19/57 2/19/57 Buck fawn Mature doe Doe fawn Doe,fawn Doe'fawn Mature doe Doe-fawn Mature Buck 2934 2935 2936 2937 2938 29~ 2940 2318 1795 1796 1797 1798 " 1799 1800 1072 2/20/57 2/23/57 2/25/57 2/27/57 2/27/57 3/7/57 3/8/57 3/12/57 3/15/57 3/18/57 . Buck fawn Doe fawn Mature buck Mature doe Doe fawn Doe-fawn Mature doe Doe fawn Xearl. buck Mature doe 2941 2,942 2943 2944 ,2945 2946 2947 2948 2949 2,950 1525 1054 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 Right Ear Cattle Tag 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 Weight 0/'159 53 /157 56 /153 /147 '-'135 ,/166 169 ,i 144 168 r: 152 ,146 ,,163 52 ,,137 58 ,/141 64 68 52 ./148 40 163 61 60 /142 .- 139 54 67 /125 none ,/'106 ,/126 Remarks Recaught once POOl"shape 2 Points 2 Points Reweighed 3/6/57 1231bs. Recatch of 2/9/56 141 4 points lbs. Recaught once Recaught three times Very weak (2) Douglas Creek Trapping Operations 1956-1957. -. Value: More knowlet\$e is essential about how the White River wtntertngherd ties ill with the wintering deer population on Douglas Creek. Although some overlap has been noted, wise management plans cannot be formulated upon such meager returns. �=127- Findings: Trapping at the Cathedral Creek station was again carried out by George Crandell) working unassisted. Since the tagging report for 1955-1956 has not been published previously it is included in this report. A total of 27 deer were tagged that winter and are listed under table 2. During the past. winter of 1956-1957, 28 deer were tagged and one recatch from a previous year was recorded. Numerous recatches hampered trapping activities as hungry deer were reluctant to leave the trap sites. Tag Returns: Four deer tagged in 1955 were killed during the hunting season of 1956 but information on three of these is lacking. A deer tagged in 1952·was also killed this past hunting season. Information indicates that both located kills were in the vicinity of the trap sites. Complete information is found :i:;n table 8. TABLE 2. .DEER TAGGED DURINGWINTER OF 1955-56 Date 1/3/56 1/4/56 1/4/56 1/6/56 1/7/56 1/9/56 1/9/56 1/10/56 1/10/56 1/11/56 1/12/56· 1/12/56 1/20/56 1/21/56 1/21/56 1/23/56 1/23/56 1/24/56 1/25/56 1/30/56 2/4/56 2/12/56 2/13/56 2/13/56 2/15/56 2/26/56 2/26/56 Sex and Age BUck'fawn Mature doe Buck fawn Buck fawn Buck fawn Mature buck Mature buck Buck fawn Mature doe Mature doe Doe fawn Mature doe Buck fawn Mature doe Doe fawn Buck fawn Buck fawn -Buck fawn Mature doe Buck fawn Doe fawn Mature doe Buck fawn Buck fawn Mature doe Doe fawn Doe fawn CATHEDRAL CREEK STATION Remarks Cattle Tag Round Tag 2.80 281 2~ 283 ·232 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 293 292 294 295 296 297 298 2500 .2501 2502 2503 2504 2505 2506 2507 1170 1i7.1 1Jt2 1169 1174 1175 1176 1178 1177 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 ·.··.Killed 1956 Killed 1956, 2 Point Killed 1956, a Point Trapped on East Douglas Trapped on East Douglas East Douglas East Douglas Killed 1956 East Douglas East Douglas East Douglas East Douglas �=128TABLE 3. . DEER TAGGED DURINGWINTER OF 1956='57 . Date 11/28/56 11/28/56 11/29/56 11/29/56 12/13/56 12/17/56 1/4/57 1/4/57 1/6/57 1/7/57 1/7/57 1/7/57 1/8/57 1/13/57 1/13/57 1/25/57 1/26/57 1/28/57 1/29/57 1/31/57 1/31/57 Sex and Age Mature doe Doe fawn Mature doe Doe fawn Mature buck Mature doe Buck fawn Buck fawn Young doe Buck fawn -Doe fawn Mature doe Mature buck Buek fawn Buck fawn Mature buck Young doe .Mature doe ' Mature buck Buck fawn Mature buck 2/1/57 2/2/57 2/4/57 2/4/57 2/7/57 2/8/57 2/20/57 2/22/57 Mature doe Mature doe Doe fawn Mature buck Mature doe Mature doe Mature doe .Doe fawn . - - . CATHEDRAL CREEK STATION Round.Tag T~No. . Cattle T~ 282 1198 2514 1197 2515 1199 2511 1601 none 1604 none 1605 .none 1606 .none 1609 none 1608 none 1616 none 1611 none 1612 none 1607 none 1602 none 1113 none 1614 none 1615 none 1617 nOlle 1618 none 1619 none none .,none none . none none none 1627 ' " 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 162.6 Remarks East Douglas Cr. 2 Point East Douglas East Douglas East Douglas East :ppuglas ~a~t Douglas :E:astDouglas Eas~ Douglas East Douglas East Douglas Recatch from 2/1/52 Tagged as fawn East Douglas East Douglas East Douglas East Douglas (3) Piney Sheepbl>rntrapping operations Value: Here again it is necessary to know the whereabouts of deer during the hunting season so that a proper harvest can be made to alleviate the overused dl,eer :winter range problem existing in this area. �-129Findings: Trappfng was done by Marion Ruth and J~ck.Truax beginning December 9, 1956, and ending on March 11, 1957: . indivldualbox-type traps were used in additionto one group trap and Clover deen traps. Opezations included both the Radium and Middle Park areas. A total of 129 deer were tagged and 15 recaught from trapping operations of previous years. Cattle tags-only were used. one being placed In each ear. Here again. recatches were a problem due to the hard winter. Tag Returns: There were eight tag returns from the 1956hunting season, mostly. fromthe Idaho Springs checking station. Seven of these were does. Half of these returns indicated kills in the Gore Pass vicinity and several others were in the Kremmling area. Results are shown in table 8. H TABLE 4. Date 12/9/56 12/11/56 12/12/56 12/15/56 Sex and Age Doe fawn Mature doe Year!. buck Doe fawn 12/16/56- Year!. buck 12/17/56 12/18/56 Year!. buck Mature doe 12/19/56 12/19/56 Mature doe Year!. doe 12/19/56 12/19/56 12/20/56 12/20/56 Mature doe Mature doe Mature doe Mature doe 12/20/56 -Mature doe 12/21/56 12/21/56 Mature buck Buck fawn 12/21/56 Yearl. doe DEER 'I'RAPPED DURINGTHE WINTE.ROF 1956-'57 RADIUMAND MIDDLE PARK Left Ear· Right Ear .Remarks 'Cattle t!!!:fi Cattle t!!!:fi Weight Middle Park A 1397 86 A 1396 Middle Park 140 A 1400 A 1398 Middle· Park 126 A 1601 A 1602 Wght. ·1/20/57 A 1604 81 A 1603 69 Ibs. lVI. Park Wght. 2/13/57 A 1181 118 A 1180 L09lbs. recatch ". Radium Radium A 1625 A 1605 Recatch of 1/25/56 A 1113 A 1112 138 Radium Middle Park A 1608 A 1607 RecatchWght. A 1309 95 A 1308 2/16/56 Radium 70lbs. A 1610 122 Middle Park A 1609 Radium A 1611 A 1612 A 1614 Radhim A 1613 145 -, 14,3 RecatchWght. A 1172 A 1173 2/8/56 142# Radium 127 Recatch 2/20/56 A 1324 A 1325 wght. 137 Radium Radium A 1615 A 1616 132. Radium Winter 68 A 1617 A 1618 ~ill 1;tadium A 1619 A 1620 91 �=130- _H". Table 4. Deer Trapped During the Winter of 1956-57--Radium and Middle Park .Ri~ht Ear Left Ear .. .Sex and Age •Date Cattle t~ Cattle t~ Weight Remarks '12/21/56) . YearL doe A 1306 A 1307 92 Recatch 2/15/56 Radium Mature doe 12/22/56 A 1621 A 1622 155 Middle Park 12/22/56 Mature buck A 1623 A 1624 160 Radium 12/22/56 Doe fawn 'A 1626 A 1627 67 Radium 12/23/56 Buck fawn A 1628 A 1629 73 Middle Park 12/23/56 Mature buck A 1184 A 1185 ··162 Recatch 2/10/56 129ft: Radium 12/23/56 Mature doe A 1630 A 1631 140 Radium 12/23/56 Mature doe A 1165 A 1166 152 Recateh 2/6/5l; 153ft: Radium 12/24/56 Doe fawn "A 1634 A 1635 70 Radium Mature buck 12/24/56 A 1636 A 1637 130 Radium 12/24/56 Buck fawn A 1638 A 1639 72 Radium Reweigh 1/12/57 7041= 12/24/56 Mature buck A 1360 A 1361 140 Recatch 3/1/56 133ft: Radium Mature doe 12/27/56 A 1640 A 1641 145 Middle Park 12/28/56 Mature buck A 1642 A 1643 157 Middle Park Car' kill 12/28/56 '_ Mature doe A 1644 A 1645 152 Radium 12/29/56 .Doefawn .A 1646 A 1647 59 Middle Park .Mature buck 12/29/56 A 1648 A 1649 150 Radium Mature doe 12/31/56· A 1650 A 1651 Middle Park 12/31/56 Buck fawn A 1652 A 1653 Middle Park Year!. doe 12/31/56 A 1654 A 1655 Radium 1/5/57 Buck fawn A 1656 ·A 1657 64 Radium Buck fawn 1/6/57 A 1658 A 1659 52 Radium 1/7/57 Buck fawn A 1660 A 1661 72 Middle Park 1/7/57 . Mature doe A 1662 A 1664 Middle Park Killed on' R. R. track at mouth. of Rock Cr. near Parshall. 1/7/57 Buck fawn :A 1665 A 1666 Radium 83 . Mature buck 1/8/57 . A 1667 .Radium A 1668 126 Mature doe 1/10/57 A 1669 A 1670 129 Radium 1/10/57 Mature buck A 1671 A 1672 Radium Mature buck 1/10/57 A 1673 A 1674 129 Radium, 1/10/57 Mature doe A 1675 A 1676 ~icldle Park 1/11/57 Doe fawn A 1677 A 1678 Radium. 83 • '. _ 'H. " ••• _ •••••••• ~ .• H • �-131= Radium and Middle Park (Cont.) Right Ear CattleT~ A 1679 Left Ear . Cattle t~ A 1680 ·A 1682 1/11/57 1/12/57 Sex and Age Buck fawn Yearl. doe 1/13/57 1/13/57 1/13/57 1/14/57 Mature buck . Yearl. doe Doe fawn Mature buck A 1683 A 1685 ·A ·1687 1/15/57 1/17/57 yearl. doe Mature doe A 1689 A 1388 A 1690 A 1389 1/18/57 1/19/57 1/19/57 1/20/57 1/20/57 1/20/57 1/20/57 1/20/57 1/21/57 1/22/57 1/22/57 1/22/57 1/22/57 1/23/57 Doe fawn . Doe fawn Doe fawn Mature buck Yearl. doe Mature buck Buck fawn Doe fawn Doe fawn Doe fawn Yearl. buck Mature doe Doe fawn Mature doe A 1691 A 1693 A 1695 A 1697 A 1699 A 1801 A 1803 . A 1805 A 1807 A 1809 A 1811 A 1813 A 1815 A 1817 A 1692 'A 1694 A 1696 A 1698 A 1700 A 1802 A 1804 A 1806 A 1808 . A 1810 A 1812 A 1814 A 1865 A 1818 1/23/57 1/23/57 1/23/57 1/23/57 1/24/57 1/25/57 1/25/57 1/25/57 M-ature doe Doe fawn Buck fawn ..Mature doe Yearl. buck Doe fawn ·Mature doe :Mature doe A 1819 ,A 1821 A 1823 A 1825 A 1827 A 1829 A 1831 A 1128 A 1820 A 1822 A 1824 A 1826 A 1828 A 1830 A 1832 A 1129 1/26/57 1/26/57 1/26/57 1/27/57 Doe fawn Mature doe Buck fawn Doe fawn A 1833 A 1835 A 1837 A 1839 A 1834 A 1836 A 1838 A 1840 Date . A 1681 A 1684 A 1686 A 1688 A 1121 Weight 81 176 103 57 135 64 62 124 66 73 62 131 60 73 130 161 64 H9 70 Remarks Radiun Mid.dle Park Killed due to injury Middle Park Radium Radium Recatch 1/27/56 Radium Middle Park Recatch 3/21/56 Radium 138 lbs. Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Radium Radium Radium Middle Park Middle Park Radium Radium Radium Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Car kill 57 Middle Park Radium Radium Radium Middle Park lV{iddlePark Middle Park Recatch 1/29/56 #160 Radium ~~Qium Radium Radium 14iddle Park t, •.. .: �-132- Radium and Middle Park (Cont). -,-- Date .Sex and Age Mature buck Mature doe Mature buck Mature doe Mature doe 1/27/57 1/27/57 1/28/57 1/28/57 1/29/57 1/29/57 1/30/57 1/30/57 1/30/57 1/30/57 1/30/57 1/30/57 _ Right Ear Cattle T~ A 1841 A 1843 A 1845 A 1847 Left ear Cattle t~ A 1842 A 1844 A 1846 A 1848/ A 1143 Mature doe Buck fawn Buck fawn -Doefawn .Doe fawn Buck fawn Mature buck A 1849 A 1851 -A 1853 A 1855 A 1857 A 1859 A 1334 A 1850 A 1852 A 1854 A.. 1856 A 1858 A 1860 A 1335 1/31/57 1/31/57 2/1/57 2/1/57 2/1/57 2/2/57 Mature doe Doe fawn Mature doe Buck fawn Buck fawn Mature doe A 1861 A 1863 A 1866 A 1868 A 1870 A 262 ·A 1862 A 1864 A 1867 A 1869 A 1871 A 263 2/2/57 2/2/57 2/3/57 2/3/57 2/3/57 2/3/57 2/4/57 2/4/57 2/4/57 2/5/57 2/5/57 2/5/57 2/5/57 Doe fawn Buck fawn Mature doe Buck fawn .Mature doe Mature doe Mature doe Doe fawn Mature doe Year'l, doe Mature buck Yearl. buck Buck fawn A 1872 A 1874 A 1878 A 1880 A 1882 . A 1884 A 1886 A 1888 A 1890 A 1892 A 1894 A 1873 A 1875 A 1876 A 1877 A 1879 A 1881 A 1883 A 1885 A 1887 A 1889 A 1891 A 1~93 A 1895 2/5/57 2/5/57 2/5/57 Yearl. doe Doe fawn Buck fawn . none none none none A 1896 A 1897 A 1898 A 1899 Weight 129 138 140 138 120 66 66 66 72 180 123 67 143 66 120 136 50 125 115 160 115 Remarks Radium Radium Middle Park Radium Recateh 2/1/56 -Wght. 143 lbs. Radium Radium Middle Park Radium -~adium Radium Radium Recatch 2/22/56 Radium Radium Radium Middle Park Radium ".J;l Radium Recatch 1/25/51 Button tag 803 Hot SulphurM. Prk,. . Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Radium Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Radium , Park Middle ;Par~, Drug kill 57 Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park '. ',I �-133Radium and Middle Park (Cont.) Date 2/6/57 2/6/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 "Sex and Age Doe fawn Mature doe Mature doe Doe fawn ,,·Buckfawn Doe fawn Right Ear Cattle T~ A 1900 A 1502 A 1504 A 1506 none none Left ear Cattlet~ A,1501 A 1503 A 1505 A 1507 A 1508 A 1509 ' Remarks 2/6/57 Weight Radium Park 57 Radium Park 130 Middle Park Middle Park Middle' Park Middle Park Killed M. Park. 2/l3i57Un~ble to stand Middle Park Middle Park Radium Recatch 2/16/56 145 1431bs. Radium Middle Park Middle Park 185 Radium .. Park 57 Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Radium Park 52 Radium Park Radium Park Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Drug Kill '57 175 Middle Park Middle Park Middle Park Radium Radium Park . 2/7/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 2/7/57 Mature buck Buck fawn Mature doe Mature doe A 1510 A 1512 A 1514 A 1310 A 1511 'A 1513 A 1515 A 1311 2/8/57 2/8/57 2/9/57 2/11/57 2/11/57 2/12/57 2/13/57 2/14/57 2/14/57 2/17/57 2/17/57 2/1'1/57 2/21/57 2/22/57 Buck fawn Mature buck Buck fawn Doe fawn -Buck fawn Doe fawn Buck fawn Yearl. buck Year!. doe Buck fawn Doe fawn Buck fawn Mature buck Mature buck A 1516 A 1518 A 1520 A 1522 A 1524 A 1526 A 1528 none none . A 1532 A 1534 A 1536 A 1538 A 1540 A 1517 A 1519 A 1521 A 1523 A 1525 A 1527 A 1529 A 1530 A 1531 A 1533 A 1535 A 1537 A 1539 A 1541 2/24/57 3/4/57 3/9/57 3/11/57 Mature buck Doe fawn Mature doe Buck fawn A 1542 .A 1544 A 1546 A 1548 A 1543 A 1545 A 1547 A 1549 f ' (4) Mesa Verde Trapping Operations Value: Thep,roblem in this area is preculiar to other deer winter areas closed by inaccessibility, either naturally or man caused. Amore comptete understandingof deer movements into, inside of, or out of the Mesa Verde National, Park could lead to more effective means of reducing the deer numbers wliile making thegame available to hunters, and thus reduce the heavy use on browse apparent in places in tp.epark.. '; , :1 .. :j t ... �=134= Findings: During the winter of 1956-57 deer we-re trapped and tagged in Mesa Verde National Park by park personnel. Trapping success was poor because of the heaviest mid-winter snowfall on record for the ar'ea. .Deer which normally winter in the park were forced to winterelsewhereandsowerenot available to trap. Consequently; only 6 deer were trapped. Four of ..- ..these were tagged for the first time, the others were recatches. Fourteen tndivtdual box-type traps were used, and alfalfa hay was the bait. The first deer was caught November 11, 1956, and the last was taken March 5, 1957. To prevent tagged deer from being retaken and monopolizing the traps, most trapped deer were h-auled away from the trap site to adjacent areas within the park for release. Tag returns: Since the last report of tagging operations, two tags have been recovered from tagged deer killed by hunters. Pertinent information is shown in table 8. TABLE 5. DEER TAGGED DURINGWINTER OF 1956-67 . Date 11/18/56 11/25/56 11/25/56 11/26/56 2/14/57 3/5/57 ~.. Age andSex Yearl. buck 1, Mature doe Doe fawn -- Doe fawn Mature buck MESA VERDE NATIONAL PARK Buttont~· .Cattle t~ 1109 A 729 1110 4730 1373 A 839 1111 A 731 1112 A 732 843 A 703 Remarks Released Prater Canyon Released Prater Canyon Recatch 2/1/55 Released Released MocassinPe-Hto/<>n Released near Hdqtr's. Recatch 3/7/55 Released MorefieldCariyon. (5) Brown 's Park Trapping Operations • . Value: More knowledge is needed about the extent and pattern of movement of deer in this area, particularly in relation to possible seasonal shifts between Colorado and Utah. Findings: Trapping and tagging in Brown's Park was done by A. M.;-<;:T~erand.Tommy Blevins. The first deer was trapped on December 13, 1956, and the last on the 17th of February. Eight indi-vidual-box-type traps, two Clover deer traps, . The bait was alfalfa hay grown at Little Hills. and one group trap were used . A total of 63 deer were tagged and there were 5 recatches from previous operations. The hard winter resulted in many recatches forcing the crew to move the traps often. �=135= ,Tag returns: The-re was one tag return from Utah as a result of the 1955hunting season. During the past hunting season, 1956; another came from Utah and three from Colorado near the 'Utah border. Details are listed in table 8. TABLE 6. DEER TAGGED DURINGWINTER OF 1956=57. Date 12/13/56 12/13/56. 12/13/56 12/14/56 12/15/56 12/16/56_ 12/16/56 12/17/5.6 12/18/5& 12/18/56 12/19/56 12/19/56 12/20/56 12/20/5& 12/20/56 12/20/56 12/21/56 12/21/56 12/21/56 12/22/56 12/22/56 12/23/56: 12/23/5612/23/56 12/23/56 12/25/56 12/2i5/56 12/25/56 12/26/56 12/28/56 12/29/56 12/30/56 12/31/56 1/4/57 ,1/6/57 Age and ..S¢x c.· (Round Doe tag) .Doe BROWNSPARK --Right Left "Cattle t!!/?i Cattle t!!/?i 2674 A 143 Bu-ck, Yrl. Doe J~oe Doe .¥ear. Buck 1768 1764 1876 1878 1880 1882 1776 2264 2261 1877 1879 1881 1883 2273 Buck ;Doe Buck Doe Doe Doe Buck fawn Doe fawn Doe .Buck Buck fawn Doe .Doe Buck Doe Buck fawn .Doe fawn Doe Buck fawn Buck Doe fawn Yearl. Buck Year!. buck Buck fawn Doe Doe, old Doe, old 1884 1887 1891 1892 1894 1900 1896 1898 1927 1929 1931 1756 1766 1934 1890 1936 1938 1940 1942 1944 1946 1948 1950 1978 1979 1983 1985 1886 1888 1885 1893 1895 1926 1897 1899 1928 1930 1932 2254 2263 1933 1935 - 1937 1939 1941 1943 1945 1947 1949 1976 1977 1980 1984 1~86 ' '·Doe Remarks Weight Recatch3 /9 /55 120 Wght. 113 Ibs. 105 106 120 103 130 137 Recatch 3/4/56, 121 584#= 147 128 Too large, 5 pt. 150 145 130 66 60 149 145 :8.1 129 135 152 73 80 143 68 131 66 110 101 80 149 130 135 Recatch 1/28/56.1254#= Recatch 2/16/56, 133# Too large, 5 pt. �=136= Table 6. Deer Tagged DurillgWinter of 1956-57 Brown's Park-Continued. Right. Left Age:md· Se~· Date . Cattle t~ •Cattle t~ Weight Remarks 1/7/57 Buck fawn ·1987 1988 70 1/7/57 . ·Year!. buck 1989 1990 127 1/8/57 Doe 1991 1992 1.26 1/9/57 Buck fawn 1993 65 19:4 1/10/57 -Buck fawn 1995 19 6 62. 1/12/57 Buck 1997 1998 140 'Doe 1/13/57 1999 2000 139 1/13/57 Doe fawn 1901' 1902 62 1/14/57 Doe 1903 1904 135 .Buck 1/20/57 1905 1906 2 point .Buck 1/23/57 1907 1908 112 1/23/57 -Buck 1909 1910 128 1/24/57 Buck 1911 1925 105 Doe 1/24/57 missing 2271 145 Recatch 3/2/56, 134# 1/27/57 1/27/57 1/29/57 1/30/57 1/30/57 1/31/57 1/31/57 2/1/5';1 2/1/57 2/3/57 2/3/57 2/7/57 2/8/57 2/9/57 2/10/57 2/11/57 2/13/57 2/15/57 2/17/57 Doe Doe fawn Doe Doe Doe Buck fawn Buck fawn Doe Doe Doe . Doe. Doe fawn 'Doe fawn .Doe fawn Buck Buck fawn Doe Doe Doe fawn 1912 1914 1916 1918 1920 1922 1924 A 52 A 54 A 56 A 58 A 60 462 A 64 A 66 A 68 A 70 A 72 A 74 1913 1915 1917 1919 1921 1923 A 51 A 53 A 55 A 57 A 59 A 61 A 63 A 65 A 67 A 69 A71 A 73 A 75 125 61 136 130 122 72 70 118 130 100 130 75 55 71 Too large, 3 pt. 68 141 103 none (6) Deer 'I'aggedDurfng Bighorn Sheep Trapping Program. There have been 16 deer tagged in various other parts :of the St~te during' the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 'I'r'appfng-operations carried out by Cliff Mosel"tBiolpgist. Modifi~d·· , Clover deer traps were used and only one cattle tag was attached to the ear. Details of this trap are found in the April, 1956, issue of the Quarterly Progress REport. .. �=137= TABLE 7 .. DEER TAGGED DURING WINTERS OF 1955-56 1957 BIGHORN SHEEP OPERATIONS . Glenwood Canyon ...~.. .......•.. - . -."\,," " ·Date· 1/24/56 1/25/561/25/56 1/30/56 .2/1/56 2/2/56 ' , ...;,Se,rand Age -Mature doe '~oefawn '])be fawn Mature buck Mature doe . Buck fawn Remarks .C attle 'l'iig .A 1204· '.A 1207 A 1208 .A 1213 A 1211 A 1214 :Georgetown Remarks .Cattle·Tag 11/23l56~ 2/8/57. 2/8/57 . 'A 1298 A 1276 A 1277 Maturefdoe ' ..t!oefa~ r~ature-doe--- . Cache La Poudre 12/29/56 1/1/57 11/26/56 12/28/561/1/57 2/14/57 Sex. and AI!' '"Mature doe Yearling doe Mature doe .Mature buck Mature buck Mature buck . Cattle Tag A 1226 A 1227 A 1228 A 1229 A 1230 A 1231 2/19/57 Doe Fawn A 1232 Date .Remarks ·Two year old ·Dted.cause unknown Two years old · Three year old Three year old, Antlers shed. DEER TAGGED AT THE BILLY CREEK GAME MANAGEMENT AREA DURING THE WINTER· 1956 ~ 1957 Date -Sex 2/2/57 2/2/57 2/3/57 . 2/3/57 2/3/47 2/26/57 .Buek Buck Doe Doe Doe Cow Age Mature •. Yeal'ling .Fawn ...Mature Yearling . Calf elk . TABLE 9 .Button tag . 359 .36.0 361 362 Cattle tag. 1451 1952 1453 1454 1455 1456 Remarks . . Only one ear tagged Only one ear tagged On~r one ear tagged W~~dini;~tJ;Ilo~!h_ Pet,: rele asecI~fthe Sapin$ro sta~ipn·. . . �~138= RETURNINFORMA'1'ION,ON DEER TAGS T,ABLE 1Q Button . C-attle Date Tagged 2/20/56 Released or Place of tag '1'hurman Cr. Sex and Age Buck 2 Yr. 232!3Lost 2/18/56 Thurman Cr. Buck fawn 2305., 1/23/56 Thurman Cr. No. 1 LEtft'" '~rugiit Lost .1866 2 3 A 196 Buck fawn ", . 4 5 Lost 2076 10122/22/56 A 185 12/17/55 !l.urman Cr .. Doe mature Thurman Cr. ' Doe mature 6 293" 1182 1/20/56 Cathedral Cr. Buck fawn 7 8 Lost 11~3, A 285 .·A284 ,2/20/52 1/7/56 , Cathedral Cr.· Doe Year!. ,Doe Mature .Radium 9 10 LostA.1114 A 1127 A~1126 1/27/56 1/29/56 Radium Radium Doe Fawn Doe Mature 11 A 1137 A-U36 1/31/56 Radium Doe,Mature 12 A 113·9 'A 1138 1/31/56 ,Radium Buck Yrlg. 13 14 15 A 1i77. A 1176. 2/9/56 A 1197. A 1196 2/14/56 A 1339 A 13382/22/56 Radium Radium Radium Doe Mature " Doe Yrlg' Doe Yrlg 16 17 18 2135,· 866 2229 . 867· (Btn)12/22/53 1316 12/15/54 Lost 1/6/56 Mesa Verde Mesa Verde Brown' sPark Buck Fawn Buck Mature Doe Mature 19 20 22692639 Lost A 105 2/27/56 2/1/55 Brown's Park -Doe Mature Brown's Park Buck Yrlg. ·A 117 2/8/55 Brown's Park ~Doe Fawn A 120 2/12/55 Brown's .Park "Doe Mature A 802 12/12/53 .E. Elk Crk. 21 22 23 2652 Buck Fawn . Recovered Location and date 10/23/56 Dark Canyon) , ' 10 mi. W/20/56 Pyrmid Pk. 65 mi. 10/15/56 Timber'GuL 12 mi. 10/20/56 Gas Well~. 10'mi~ 10/-/56 Unknown, Returned from Meeker' Locker plant. 10/24/56 Lower Tommies Draw. 10/56 E. Douglas Cr. 10/56 Carter Mtn. , Kremmling' . 10/16/56 Troublesom:e 'Cr. 10/29/56.Gore Pass 15 .Area· 10/20/56 Willow Cr. 18 •Area 10/56' Blue River 3 mi. from Kremmling 10/24/56 Gore Pass 27 Area 10/21/56 Gore Pass 15 Area 10/30/56:Gore Pass 15 Area 9/25/56 Deckers Ranch 9/27/56 Decker Ranch 11/9/56-3 mi. east SwingingBri~e 10/56 Talamantes Cr. 12/14/56 Green River 1mi. from Utah 10/20/56 -Taylor MDt. Utah 10/23/56 Pot Creek .DiamondMt!l. (Utah) 10/56 E. Elk-dr·; Gunnison i , . ' " . �=139= Table 10(9.?~Y~t .J:te~~n~ormation 24 25 A 811 12/17/53 26 -A 854 12/10/54 27 -A.857 12/14/54 28 -A-855 12/13/54 ••• <. - .". • . ~ • - . :Z9 282- --..·-1:,172 1/4/56 30 285-- i175 1/9/56 31 286 1176 1/9/56 B. Recovered Location and date 10/56 Lake Erwin, -. Crested Butte 10/26/56 nyCreek Doe Mature E." Elk Cr. 6 mi. No; 50 10/26/56 Sapinero Mgmt. . Doe Mature E. Elk Cr. Area' 10/26/56 between Red Buck Yrlg. 2nd.DryCr. Cr. and E.- Elk Cr. Highway Kill 3/1/56 Doe Mature 2nd-Dry Cr. US 50 10/56 Lower Tominies :Cathedral Cr. Buck Fawn '.Draw ( 2 miles) 10/56 Cathedral Cr. Cathedral Cr. BuckYrlg, (1 mile) (2 Pt.) 10/56 Cathedral Cr. Cathedral Cr. Buck Mature (1 mile) (3 Pt)· Place of Tag Date -.Sex and Age or Release T~gedBuck-Fawn 12/12/53 _ -E.- Elk Cr. - Cattle Button . ..~Left -- Right .. .. -A 803 No. on Deer Tags Reviewof.-DeerTrapping Literature and Investigations .Into More-Efficient Trapping. Value: The·--Coloradodeer trapping and tagging program needs a review of-the techniques and an evaluation of the methods involved as regards monetary cost and human effort expenditures.' This part of the job therefore, is an attempt to summarize what has been done here and elsewhere, and to make all possible improvements. Objectives: The objectives of this p~ase of the job are (1) to obtain as much information as possible on the tried technique of deer trapping, and (2) to experiment with new ideas in trapping deer in-order to increase the efffciency of tagging operations. Techniques: A review of literature relative to past deer trapping operations through reference libraries. Correspondence with and questionnaires sent to other state agencies will afford information on currently used techniques and perhaps improved type s of traps .. FindiIy{s: A lack. of time did not allow intensive research into this Jhase of the job, especially the library work and evaluation report of the past techniques. However, through the combined efforts of Project Leader Paul Gilbert, Bighorn sheep Biologist Cliff Moser, Regional Game Manager Richard Denny and others, we were able to remain informed of new and different types of traps and techniques used in other states. In addition, we tried new devices of our own. �-140The Clover -deer trap, developed by the California Department of Fish and Game, was tried near Georgetown, Colorado" during the winter of 1955-56 to trap and tag Bighorn sheep. Since results appeared promising, 6 more of these traps were made and experimentedwithjduring the 1956~1957 deer trapping program. Modiffcattons included slight changes in the overall dimensions, a smaller and lighter netting, and the use of only one drop gate. Trip mechanismswere improved upon to prevent accidental closing of the door. . . . Alfalfa hay was used as bait and trapping was carried out in areas of abundant snow cover. Two of these traps' were used in Brown I s Park after a brief trial at the Little Htlls Experimental station and <1: were used in the Middle Park and Radium areas. Fair success was achieved at Little Hills and Brown's Park with' a total of 11 does and fawns being eaughtand tagged. Additional recatches were not recorded. In the Middle Park vicinity, 14 deer were caught, three of which were bucks. I . Some difficulties.were encounted during the experiments. It seemed that they were in need of continual repair. Upon the approach of tagging crews, deer caught in the trap . would fight violently to escape. Sometimes they would shear a bolt, get their legs or head tangled in the netting, or break the trip mechanism or trip wire. Fawns would rub themselves raw attempting to get out through the net. , Rabbits were also a problem as they would chew the net to get at the bait inside. The rat trap trip mechanism used would set too light and release the door if the trap was jarred from. 1hewindor a deer attempting to reach the bait from the sides. It was also impossible to -obtain weights of animals caught in this type of trap with the small weigh boxes which we use .. The door of the Clover trap is nearly twice as wide as the door of the-weigh box. The use of drugs to facilitate handling .of the animals should eliminate this problem. On the other hand; this type of trap is definitely an asset when we consider its purpose. Being light and collapsible it makes possible a one man trapping operation whereas the old wooden ones were so heavy and bulky that two men were needed to move them about. Labor costs. would,be cut in half. They are simple to set up requiring' only a minimum of time ...The space saved in storing or moving is also important. The tagging process is actually easier once the trap has been folded snd the animal quieted down because of the ease of grabbing an ear through the net. AnotherIrqpertant point is the time saved in setting up and operating this type of trap. For best results and ease in handling deer, the trapping crews preferred the old style box traps. However, with minor modifications and more experience in working with these traps we should be able to devise a good portable trap to be used in a more efficient trapping program. �=141= Modifications.-ofthe old style box type trap proved encouraging. The old problem of the slidi.ngdoors hanging up due to the trip wire being caught on release or a door being warped was studied. By using only one door the bait could be shoved far enough back so the animal would come all the way inside. This also eliminated use of one door and excess trip wire. This trap proved as successful as the two door trap in Middle·.Park but was attempted too late in the season at Little Hills . . Deer in Middle Park were even caught in a box trap with the sides completely covered. Recommendations: Our present trapping operations have failed to provide sufficient tag returns. It is felt that through more intensive research into new trapping techniques we will be able to provide information for a larger and more efficient program.· Hence, future plans should include the continuation of part "B" Investigations into More Efficient Trapping Techniques." Whereby new types of traps can be tried under actual field conditions. The present trapping program should be retained atLittle Hills for the purpose of stocking the Deer pastures for the Grazing study. Summary: The 1956~57 deer tfappingprogram was continued in the seven areas where information is needed to determine the migration or residency of dee;r in order to apply wtse. management plans. j A total of 387 deer were tagged during the winter of 1956-57. An additional 33 deer tagged during the 1955-56 program and not recorded before are also included in tae following table. TABLE 9. Bucks Location Winter of,1955';"56 2 Cathedral Creek 1 Bighorn Sheep Program.Glen,wood Canyon Winter of 1956~57 18 Little Hills CathedralCz, .. 5 14 Radium 11 Middle P,~k· 15 Brown's Park 1 Mesa VeJ;de··N'at. Park (Sex of onanotsecorded) Bighorn Sheep Program Georgetwon 0 Cache la Poudre TOTAL 3 70 NUMBER OF DEER TAGGED BY AREAS .Does Fawns Total 8 2 17 3 27 6 48 12 19 22 28 83 11 28 34 20 2 149 28 61 67 63 4 1 1 200 3 7 415 ? 2 3 144 or 145 �~142~ There were 30 tag returns during the 1956hunting season. Most of the deer were shot within 20 to 30 miles of the trap sites although occasionally one was found to wandel' much farther" A long yearling buck tagged at Little Hills in February 1956, was killed almost 60 airline miles northeast of the trap site. New types of traps and techniques were tried this past winter in an effort to increase the efficiency of our present program. The Clover deer trap, a light collapsible net trap? holds promise although certain modifications are needed. The use of only one door on our old box trap worked-good during a hard winter and eliminated much of the "hanging door" problem. Success of the two group traps was poor due to the fact that tagged deer monopolized the traps. Prepared by: Donald G. Smith Approved by: Date:, ~J=ul~y~,~1~9~5~7 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid.Division �July, 1957 ~143JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS state of -..;..;C~O;;.;L:;;.O;;.;RA=D:;;.O.;;..;.. _ Project No. Work Plan No.,_' Job No. ' .Deer--Elk Investigations W-38-R,,:,10 ..;:;II=- --Z._=-P.;;.opE:.ul=a:.:;tI;.;·o;.::n:...;SU~r:..:v:.;:e;aL.y.:;s _ Determination V of Winter Loss Note: This report is for fiscal year period 1956-570 Objectivesj", To.Improve the techniques for determining deer winter losses. Procedure: Seventeen transects each eight miles long and one hundred.:.y.ar-"ds~~pait, were runon.foot.. ' Dead deer observed by each observer were tallied ~s to SEK and age clas,srAn average' sight distance was recorded for each dead animal seen. Live deer observed were tallied only when they passed between theobserver and the man on his right. The number one observer followed the high water line of the Green Mountain Reservoir, havtngthe reservoir to his left. ' The counting was done by senior Wildlife and.Forest state University. Recreation students from Colorado Findings·: -The.average sight distance calculated this year from 176 ob~ervations,' 26.06 yards. This compares with previous years as follows: May 14. 1955 ...•. 0 0 .. 0 .. 36.26 1956 . . 00 0 . 0 • . . 0 28. 15 1957 . • . 0 0 0 0. 26. 06 0 0' • • 0 • • 0 • • 0 0 0 • , The result of the count is as follows: Total live deer observed Total transects . 0 0 0 .0 Total dead deer counted Total area Sample .. 0 0 • • • • ., ••••••• . • 0 498 0 17 " 176 4,654 acres 3, 364 acres 0 was �=144= Total estimated dead deer: 176: 3,364= 4,654 3,364x::: 819104 x = 243 Calculated winter loss 46.78% This years calculation is again based on an average sight distance worked out in a detailed gunny sack count reported on in Colorado Quarterly Report, July, 1954. This figure. has been used in calculations for previous years. This will be used until more suitable average sight distances can be compiled for the Green Mountain study Area. Summary~ YEAR LIVE DEER OBSERVED TOTAL EST. . DEAD DEER CALCULATED PERCENT WINTER LOSS KILL FROM PREVIOUS FALL UNIT 37 1951-1952 263.!/ 612 69.9 601 1952-1953.. 714 28 3.8 260 1953-1954 1,094 17 1.5 500 1954-1955· 1,129 41 3.5 923 1955-1956 1,276 79 5.8 472 1956-1957 498 243 46.8 893 .!/ Emphasis was not placed on counting live deer in 1952. Therefore, is probably too high for this year. Prepared by Paul F. Gilbert Approved by: Date:, ~Ju~1~y~,~1~9~57~ _ winter loss L. E. RioI'dan Federal Aid Oocrdinato.r �=145= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of:..-._~_..;::C;.;::O~L::.;:O::.;RA;::.:;D:;; . =O .. , _ . projectNo. .~~~-~3::.;:8~-~R~-~9~~~ __ ~D~e~e~r~E~lk~In~v~e~s~tl~·g~a=tl~·o~n~s~ _ VVorkPlan No. ~5~~/ ~~P~h~y~s_i~0~10~g~i~c~a~I~St~u_d=i~e~s JobNo. ~l ~i_··~D~e~n_t~it~io~n~an~d~a~g~e~-~w~e_i~g~h~t~c~o~r~r.e_ - .~" •.~J _ Objective:;..·To determine weight groups by age classes for any given area within the state .. Techniques:. Deer trapped at Little Hills, Brown's Park, Middle Park and Radium were weighedIn a plywood weigh box.· .Deer and box are weighed together, the deer then released, and the box reweighed. Its weight is then subtracted from the total thereby obtaining the deer's weight. These weights are recorded in the tables under VVorkPlan No.-l·;.' Job No.3. .It _""',. ' .. ~ . The use of experimental drugs to facilitate handling was not used this year in the actual trapping program. However, a review of literature and correspondence was done to keep us posted on recent developments in other states. In addition, research in this field is currently being carried out by Dr. Robert Davis, Veterinary College, , Colorado State University. Finding'S: During the winter of 1956-57 a total of 306 deer were weighed and the averages by age classes are shown in the table below. There were 154 weighed at Little Hills,. . 244n.Middle Park, 63 at Radium, and 65 in Brown's Park. ._. . -:, . Table 1. Live Weights by Area .Trapped Buck Doe ~earling Mature Yearling . Mature Area ,.No. Wght. Wght. No:· No.. Wght. No. VVght. 140.8 159.7 8 132.7 9 147.1 3 Little auis 56 Brown's 115.8 129.7 7 5 Park .33. 129.8 ------117.5 142.0 4 98.4 11 18 136.5 5 Radium Middle 1 126.0 170.6 115.0 5 136.9 1 Park 8 ~:,. ~ : .... " Fawn :ijuck Doe No. Wght. No:' Wght. 49 63.5 29 58.0 ,..:.-- 9 65.8 12 65.8 11 13 70.5 68.2 66.9 2 67.5 7 �""\ " =146= Summary: In comparing the average weights of deer by areas we find that the White River-Piceance herd continues to produce heavier adult and yearling animals although fawn averages were the lowest. Brown's Park was again low in adult animals yet the fawns weighed slightly more than those in other areas. Mature bucks ran heaviest in the Middle Park area with an average of 170 pounds. At radium the deer ran in the middle weights except for a low yearling doe average. Of course the number of samples taken in an:y one year is not sufficient to base wise management plans upon or even to accurately compare the various herds. This coming year it is planned to compile an'back data in order to provide ~ clearer" conception of actual herd conditions. ." ,~ I " Prepared Date:. bY:._...:;;D;,;;o.;;;n:;;:al::,;d::...,;:;G:.;" ....;Sm;;;;;;,;;;;;.;ith;;;;... __ --,.;;Approved bY:._-...:;;L::,;a::,;h=r.,;;;e.;;;nc.;:;,e;;;...:E;,;' .~R;,;.io:;;.;;r;.,;d::,;an;;;;;;';:...· •.;.;.. __ -.Federal Aid ¢ffi)rdinator J;.,;u::,;l~y~ • .;;;19;.,;5;.,;7~ _ �-147- July, 1957 JOB COM:Pr.ETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of -- COLORADO -------~~-------------------------- ProjectNo. __~~~VV~-a~8~-~R~-~10~ ~;-=D~e~e~r_-=E~lk~In~v~e~st~i~g=at~i~o~n~s __~ ~ _ Work Plan No.__ ~m=- Title of Job:.--.; ...;L::;;.;itt;.;;;l;.;::;e...;Hi=·l:.;;;ls::;...;;G;.:r;.;::;a::;z;;:;ing:.;g,,;_.;;:Stu~d~y .!...-.::.J.:::.ob~N::..;.;;.o;... _...:5:..- _ _ Objectives: To determine degree and selectivity of forage use by deer, sheep and cattle in enclosures under various intensities of grazing. Techniques Used: Pasture enclosures were stocked with cattle, sheep, and deer during the regular.grazing season. Utilization was determined by estimate, with exploratory work on a new system of measurements using tagged plants. Stocking ofen.clOSilres: Table 1. Summary of 1956 stocking Records. Class of' No. of SPRING STOCKINGDATES Removed Pasture livestock animals stocked 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Sheep Cattle. -. Cattle Deer Deer SheepDeer neer Deer Cattle Sheep May 16 12 May 16 *4.5 May 16 *2.5 /VOL!.:l - AIO '-', .:< :i.. 17 ()cl.2~ A0u . ..27 40 May 16 7 -A/",,,,, . .:23 /Voc.t /3 10 t1/ •• ,/,.2~ 12 /VOu, <f 7 CJc -/: .28 .- r¥90f. <I May 16 *3 May 16 13 No. of FALL STOCKING DATES animals Removed .stocked Dec. 6 July 15 12 Oct. a Oct. 22Sept. 28 July 3 9 July 3 5. -J .:zp, Sept. 28 Oct. 26 $pring. 1!!?7Afl. jj - Me Nov. 2-22, 1956 Spring,] 95711.:,- j-J~/7".2?Oct. 26-Nov.27 Dec. 5 6 Oct. 3 July 15 ,sp 19m M4r.;2.8-Ju.?<! I Nov. 13-23 85 Sj3!1tBg, 196'P4;r. <1-...kf~Nov. 4-.22 SpIiag, 1957/ffa.,A'{; -+,~SOct. 28-Nov.4 Sept. 28 Oct. 26 July 2 6 Dec. 3 Oct. 3 July 15 13 The cattle placed in the pastures in the spring (*) were estimated to weighabout 500 pounds. Thus, Ross Campbell considered them as being only one-half of an animal unit (based on 1000 pounds being one unit). In the fall the cattle were considered as being one unit, thus giving an average of three-fourths of a unit for that years stocking period. �=148= The reason for this was that when the cattle were removed from the pastures in the fall, they. had not yet reached the weight of 1000 pounds. Upon removal of the sheep in Pasture 9 on July 15, one ewe was missing, ewe had given birth to a lamb. and another The removal of-the deer entailed the usual problems. More pressing duties delayed the removal of several deer until June. However, the deer did not get into other pastures as it.sometimes happened in the past. Table 2. Summary of 1956-57 Stocking Records No. of Season Pasture -Acres Livestock Animals of use 1 77.37 Sheep 12 Spring 12 Fall 2 16,7.25 ' 'Cattle . 4.5 Spring '.-. 9 Fall .,11;)2.,81 Cattle 3 Spring 2.5 Fall 5 ", Deer 17 Winter 4 144 ..64· Deer 40 Winter 86...42 5 Sheep Spring 7 6 Fall Deer 10 Winter 6 99.93 Deer 12 Winter -90.,67 . Deer 7 7 Winter 8 206.43 .Cattle Spring 3 6 Fall 9 156.55 , Sheep Spring 13 ,Fall 13 Animal Unit months : '" The total deer days are as follows: Pasture 3 -~- 2,965 days . Pasture 4 --- 6,213 days -Pasture 5 --- 1,514 days Pasture 6 --- 1,874 days Pasture 7 --- 1,080 days .r .·c·,· • f _____/ll'r'] il".~';/ 1. 56 24.0. 25.5 7.2 7.2 4.0 4.7 11.6 18.8 Sl:l98-8 ~ Acres per Animal Month ,207./ 14.0 14.7 4ea50·</7 ~ t;:<..97 ~3'~.v 4.7 5.6 26.0 26.4 2.0 /~5 Oliii! 0•• 70 3.0 2;!;0 1.7/ =/&00 3.0 .2.5:A-, 19..·:8 2.99 , ;,! i c,~ Spring Util-i.zation,Estimates: Following the removal of the livestock from the experimental pastures,' Hal Boeker and A. M. Greer made the annual utilization estimates in each of the pastures.- The technique, which was inaugurated in 1950, entails ocular estimation of six plots in, each pasture. The results are shown in Table 3. Fall Utilization Estimates: The fall estimates are usually made the following spring. However, due to the lack of trained personnel and the unexpected demands of more pressing duties, it was impossible to obtain these estimates. �~+~'~7 1'70'" C Table 3. (Cont'd) Past. I-shee~ Freq. Avg. Occur. util. Forage Specias Artemesia frigilia_! __,4.'~ Eriogonum umbellatum r~ ~. tristicum.. --::flJ' Sphralcea coccinea_ Gilia aggregata II1-«oI ••,e)Sisymbriuril spp._ 2 Lithospernum ruderale Castilleja chromosa 1 Hedysarium pabulare __ m /•• : () 10 %.1 ' u ~gpt1a.~-'~_:",. , '? q/' .•.••. ,g;- . 20 80 Past. 2-Cattle Freq. Avg.% Occur. Util. Past. 3-Cat tIe Freq. Avg.% Occur. Util. Past. 5 Sheep Past. 8 Cattle Freq. Avg.% Freq. Avg.% Occur. Util. Occur. Util. ·r':2' .... r:~ .]::,>. ,·2--"5-' -·1~' -0 ~ ]? ~:.l· - -'t -c' - .rr-I 0 1 ",T~l :1.. 0 ... y:? ~ ·--Z _5e"17 o· - 1 ,. ....... -"~O ,fo'f) :373 If! ~. ~ ;53 .,,;i .;. C! r4-: f(.) t"l ~() ~::)' ,r'c' ,...t:"" ~ c' 2 ,"':0 "..; ::L ,..y..:!l :Jfr/ .1-.:1".J: :3 .,t.'o 7".:i- ....1"/ _ ,,: c) "'') '" 3"'--" ~ /:,,'" ~ %0 ;Y~F I ..r) ,.. .,J- ~.~ ~'L .l"~5' 'T~~ ~-r; 4 21 ./5t e: .et:."> ,3'5" 3~- ~? 2 + ~~·t 1 ,;t G·, -T<l~ 2 :r::L ,rr-:i. 2 :1':1. -2'3 '12'3 'l'" " .b~ ;lj' ,T':L ;-1 (/ ~ ..2--"3 ·6e~'1'o """'·1- 3 :J5 ,.0 ;~ ej). r)U~l;·p£;'''I)'; .,Ij 0 -'.)" 0 CI - '- / (:.,' ' _J.. ' I ::1 {:' 0 ,0 ( ss :",;1. c..,..-- -- -~ J:'C; 4 0 -/ ,.ill~ / .~,...\-. %..1 ,1),,4, -3-&' E~· "z;:3 b ./ ,.r.,..•. ;(I Jf'1 l~':" ,I ,- 15 r: 0 ~1 ........ J{£~_ ,.,:.C' i':~ - ('--- , '" ?,,04 i" S"t:.. o .J "y' C./" ,,-( 'j" 1(.--'-.". 71 F]:"~\. .JI"I .s: t. . -f) ,J:':'~ )~l):!_,(ltJ.J~~·"rL;ji_:$,_ .nil (),~~.T~';r tJJ)~tttl. ...;.,;S '0 i- urah~!tJ!;!'') T~C; _1 Amelanchier utahensis --7(i.c -11-/./ 6 2 Cercocarpus montanus "'J 53 4 10 Artemesia tridentata '-' o ..2---{ "T*' I Chrysothamnus visidiflorus 5 32 t 6' -bO Chrysothamnus---":! -' ':f-j :J} ;l)' nauseosus 26 5 Symphoricarpos-:---. l""0tetonensis ~5'.(: ~2IIS Pushia tridentata3 . 60 4 45 ..!f:L Quercus gambelii-.: .1 '?' c· ,1':1 Eurotia lanata 2 .Jr:L Tetrademia cane scens-·---3-----·· 7------- 2""47 Ribes spp.i----)0_ ·1------£1. tyj .~ L .•••. " />•... J;.. .•,. •••• ' -~" " 1 '....... ,4.. -0' ~ _"LL1_""'·(J.JI..f.od._·L_f:_.J.,.',.ti....J..L..:.J. '_.' " '.~_. ' _ . .J.~~' L 2 .r;:1 ~3:i.) Past. 9-5heep Freq. Avg.% Occur. Util. ~ r'$ -0 -" .) .» ,. .•... :<.. ..:, 3 ,-3~" ./ ,%,:,'1. l,n ... - -2'-.:1. ~T"O .!.!":L .,to •.';l'-IP 16~~-::i 3 ;t' ~<' ~> " -,lJ- -- (i .,1(.'71 1 £0' «.o ~ '0' f4' z .p:. o 3 {? ,.] o o j -re. _J, ,":::;;" ~t. o 5"J .];--:1- .. ,T~.:1. , 0.. /;' J- .ro ,rb <!\ ',x 4 -0 - 10 1 , ·1 -1(.1 7 .~2·6:' I o ,'f ,-I~ ..... c;" c. -T~;L o -" ~-' ~ ~~ I I-' ~ co I �•••.•••.•(..:..-i;·· ••... c Table 3. Average Percent Utilization Past. 1-5heep Forage Species Freq. Avg.% Occur. Utile Grass and Grass-like 10ryzopsis O. 6 hymenoides 31 ."L·I.~,. ~/ /0:'.... ra-: A J .A:"-, -- / i :.... 1~~"";': 5 5 91 4 6 37 I~ .••. A'j ,.51.(1-:3 /.~; f'Y I ,.., J _':. 31;1;' .J:~-- -10' -s: '1 /'Agropyro n inerme 6 ~2-;rJ..1. 6 90 6 34 6 2 jh 1'4-2) ~v. ." 3~!)r" .6/ J-j :'Carex spp , 4 30 4 84 4 27 3 6 3 ~6'"/,-? J"// 2 Poa spp , 6 60 JJ'6 94 6 55 6 : ..10 6 49 6 16 1 20 2 6Zt' f;1 /0 -:'.:1 -., -0 7~i ';0 "3' T""" ( cristata ~:{ -2~1 2 84 5 15 4 6 .4 ~ J:2' ; /J ..Z5/ ,,3/ J Agropyron smithii 4 19 4 42 S rj 5 38 /:f' +C? Elymus condensatus 3 7 2 15 1 T1.. 1 50' tl -0 hystrix Koeleria stipa comata. A< t'.-~.~...., c: f' t: t/: _....) ~ o.-_ .. 1,- ~(J 52 '. 1 2 90 92 ,"'I (-/r, .,:.r" -:.~ ( ani Frequency of Occurrence by Pastures During Spring Grazing ::;;7;/ ~--G:" Past. 2-Cattle Past. 3-Cattle Past. 5 Shee~ Past. 8-Cattle Past. 9-5heep Freq. Avg. % Freq. Avg. % Freq. Avg. Freq. Avg. % Freq. Avg.% Occur. Utile Occur. Utile Occur. Utile Occur. Utile Occur. Util. micrantha Sitanion ~'i.' " r,/ .~./.. '~"~-;J' c:c.=/ Z}!"; :Y 1'..;\ 4 66 4 '~»7" __ .;;,,) (Ir ~ ~_i . j' .>',o'? $'c;,. 20 /' ~;" / .i.D I ~ o C1l /$'t;J .' 'J.'j)'" ;U... , .3'/r (V / 0 ~ 0 .... 1 ":5" o / Forbs A l1li:; ijl'l.;l t: ,,::,,j;;'h-',-rhZi;:: ~ A c h';/It?o.lc/n,jt;~c\. -A.sfer-s PP.'i ..... ....::;:J.. -.. ... .' A..ill1Ji)J. t.e. ~l'/' S I'/-' r;'P. Chenopodiumalbum , ...Gr-U;:Sf."'.TP?G. -.-,v '7':>' ... /'/.Lc';l - <:"-, , j':-~ ~"': ~ .. Artemesia dracunucul.otdes L- L...~e:~? ni i j; It) m <..••//!-u.iI ,,'Hi -....,Hj~ , r; ···jf····· -!:I'-" -'0 -C y;.;{ /.L ..) <Q,..J.. ~i ;1~~ ,,",; vi '~V"_."""", r>"'.l'JP','·/'/·, ,,/, t,... .""'-' f C,·/1.i ...•.. >~ ) f ~.",......_..l .(.,"'" ...... ,.. .::...:.> SO": ';....;"''0 /:.I:.'J ~, .•........ ;.." Jl / ....................•......... ;;t.·.. ·~:~::'··i}.f :3 :~-. cr"" ci . _1. :'.- ,c~ £ .,.. , ;.9...".1, .. . 0 3?J . "li:)t'(i' (.) •••.. ~-"i~..~:f?:"·~~;:.~~::·:1i. o 4:.. v!, (> 2 17 -:.~ :£ b "") ~~. -'l ".. -:1:. I -;. 0 3 16 c> - c~ > 1 30 . ~...t.:;L._._..__:. !;)..."._. ,:r 4- ~. wrightii ? ::: e:.>. o Chrysopsis villosau.K : .. 1-•.- G, ;)tie!:.L.§..'!- i.lJ, ~':~.~A hH;.l~~ Sideranthus _~pp_!._~: xi t-:t: /~R'(!,! ,-~7:l! ~ F' /. :5 0 $/ ,..:1' ""'" /'-3 o o ,1.. , o· .E 1 10 -0 ,J.{"" .~c .,... /-:£. o !,.. ..•• "".J~ ·..·,~r �=151Browse measurements: The measurements were confined to Cercocarpus montanus and PUrshia.ti'identata, using the same method described in the July, 1955 Quarterly Re port. The only exception was .the use of a thin metal tag on which the locations, etc. were printed with a grease pencil. This proved to be much faster than the previously used embosser, This is the second year the measurements have been taken on ly on these two species . / j '{7,<1...,,'.: .( Or- . .!~F->".,"'/"'-""', "r' cJ /o.P" , i j" J.~, , C.L'1.0 . Chart Quadrats: As in prevtous-years, the measurements of the quadrats were continued, with Roger ;Evans and ca~fud taking the measurements. The exclosures in Pastures 1, 2, and 3 were measured , and also the deer-tight exclosure by pasture 2. Pastures 10 and 11 were-measured, and the 10 "outside" quadrats. In addition to the regular quadratmg; .10·pl-ots were placed in the exclosures of Pastures 3, 4, 5 and 6. Summary: "The-nine experimental pastures were stocked acc,ol£'di~ to the. plan inaugurated in 1955. .Howevez, the stocking rate was reduced in pasture 2 due to the lack of forage. The browse measurements of Cercocarpus montanus and Purshia tridentata were continued. New meter quadrats were placed in four more pasture exclosures. Recommendationsalone. One biologist should be assigned specifically to the grazing study Exclosures should be placed in pastures 7,8, and 9. Meter quadrats should be placed within each new exclosure. The period between quadrat measurements effect) to 5 years. Prepared by:__ Date:. should be extended from 3 years (now in .....;C::;.;a:::;;r::.:l~L:::in:;:;d=--..:A;.:spproved by: Laurence E. Riordan Feder:al Aid Coordinator ~J~u~ly~,~19~5~7~ _ ��=153= July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ~------------~-------------------- Project No.W-38-R-10 Work Plan:'No._~--.;6~ Job No. _..;..-.~ __ A. Evaluating i Deer-Elklnvestigations -4.._' ;;;;D..;;;am=ag;;g,;;e;...;.;.8t¥..,,;;ud.;;;;;l:;;;:·e;.;;;s;.... __ .-;... _ ...;::I __ .l..-..;M=.:;.et:;;h:;:o;.::d::::s;.;.o;:;.:f::....=E~v_=al::.;u:::.:a:::.:t~ing::g...::an:::::.:;:d:..;P=_=_r =D;,;;:a;;;;;;m:::,:ag;;;g,;e to Crops. Damage Objective:· To determine .methods of accurately determining the amount of losses might occurto agricultural crops from the grazing of big game animals. that Procedure ~. (1) Observation 'I'ower » The observation tower was' constructed on the north edge. of the field in a position that gave maximum coverage of the field. The floor of the tower is 15 feet off the ground, which when combined with the height of the observer wilLput the spotting scope or binoculars about 20 feet above the ground. From this height. practically all of the field can be seen and no portions hidden even though some hills and swales are present in the field. It is felt by theauthor the tower. of the field are that a deer cannot be on the field and escape being counted from The construction of the tower has not been completed lighting system will be installed this fall and winter. to date, but the inside and the The only weather instruments that were available to be set up this year was the recording anemometer. It was mounted on the west side of the stairway at the back of the towezx. about 10 feet off the ground. Readings were taken from 1he dial at 7:15 P. M. each night the counting was taking place. . (2) Alfalfa Field - The portion of the damage study field north of the center ditch (see map) that did not have a good stand of alfalfa was disked and harrowed and then seeded to mixture of oats and alfalfa. The oats were seeded at a rate of 32 lbs. per acre, while the alfalfa was seeded at 12 lbs. per acre. The variety of alfalfa used was Ranger, as it seems to do better in this area because of the presence of a bacterial wilt that attacks other varieties. The oats were a standard brand, Colorado 37. The field then was marked and irrigation started as soon as the spring rains had ceased. �-154= (3) Study p!ots·...;The plots that are to be compared in the damage study field were located in the. following manner: 1. The field was divided into five portions as nearly equal in size as pcssfble. 2•. Within these areas were located two plots measuring 200 feet per side, They were located by a random method that was limited only by the size of the plots. As the plots had to be square, bey could not be located in a part of the field that .was -less than 200 feet from edge to edge. 3•.The plots were marked by driving a steel post into the ground at each corner. The original plan had been to fence one of the plots against the deer and then compare thedifferences in production between them. However, after a talk with Mr. Riordan, it was decided only to mark the plots this year and compare them to see if there was anyaignificant difference in production between the plots before they. were fenced. This would allow us to make a more definite statement in the future and would also stop any adverse talk about the study, such as we picked a spot that produces more-tonnage for our study plots . . This was donee- and the plots will be fenced next year, 1957-58). B-Pellet Group.Count Plots - These plots were 11 feet 9 inches in radius or 1/100 acre in area. It was arbitrarily decided to have the plots two chains (132 feet) apart on each transect and .each transect to be five chains (330 feet) apart. The first plot was located by standard random sampling methods as follows: .1. Five numbered slips were shaken up and one drawn out. This number gave the number of chains the first transect was from the north end of the field (see map, starting point A). 2. Two numbered slips were shaken up and one drawn out. This number gave the number of chains the first plot was east of the ditch (starting point B). The first number drawn was f:ive, and the second number was one. This meant that a distance of five chains had to be paced in a southwest direction from A and two chains had..to be paced east of B. This was the location of the first plot. The rest of the plots in the field were mechanically spaced from this first plot, and are located.In a random manner because the starting point was randomly located, a mechanical random sample. This method located 20 plots in the field. area this year. No plots were set out in the newly seeded �ALFALFA BILLY DAMAGE CREEK GAME STUDY FIELD MANAGEMENT AREA .... "" "" D LEGEND • OBSERVATION o~ PELLET TOWER GROUP TRANSECT, PLOT LOCATION AND NUMBER D ALFALFA PRODUCTION PLOTS A,B STARTING POINTS FOR RANDOM LOCATION OF PELLET PLOTS . �-155= Each plot was-marked with a steel post, however, the center of the plot was located 11 feet 9 inches directly south (.>f the post, and this point marked with a stake. The plot was then cleared of pellets and counted at various times during the spring. Findings: ,The dates for the completion report for this job are such that about one-half of the.study will not be completed when the report is due. The harvest of the alfalfa will. not be completed until about July 20, 1957, and the report is due May 15; 1957. Rather than turn in only part of the data necessary for the complete report, a supplementary report will be turned in about August 15, 1957 when the data from the alfalfa plots are worked up. The supplementary report will include all of the recommendations that will be necessary to make the study more complete. Several items ,turned up this first year that will. require a slight change in the study for next year. . .. . This first year on the study with only part of the data being gathered had several advantagesIn that any "bugs" in the study could be detected and corrected before the whole job was set up and in operation. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Approved by: Date :'_-.;...__ -.:J:.;u::ly.u..' ,.:;19::;,.:5;:..:7-.;... _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July, 1957 =157JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS ~~eof ~.~C~O~L~O~·~RA~DO~~ Project No, W-38-R~10 Work Plan NO. Job No. B. .;;.6 _ ; Deer-ElkInvestigations .l--..;;;D;.;:am;::;;:;;:;;;jag.e:;.. ..;;;st;.;..:u:.:;:di:;.;· e~s;;...._ _ ..1.; Methods of Evaluating and Preventing· Deer and Elk Damage to Crops Prevent.ing,Damage Objective:._ 'l'o.determine methods of lessening or preventing deer and elk damage to agricultural-crops. Procedurer-Alfalfa fields either in existence or to be planted will be sprayed with different types of chemical repellents and the effectiveness of each will be evaluated. Findings: A combination of bad weather and a complete changeover in the dates of this project.did·not allow any work on this job beyond a review of literature from several chemical companies on possible deer repellents. Prices have been obtained for three type'sof:-repellents and they will be ordered in time to be used inthe spring of 1958. However, :from some general observations made at the Billy Creek Game Management Area this past year indicate that the alfalfa field that was to be used for-the repellent study does not get enough deer use in the spring to warrant using it for the tests. A large field at the north end of the property is to be planted to alfalfa this fall if at all possible and it should get enough deer use in the spring to make tests of repellentsyalid .. In general the report on this section of the damage studies must be considered negative at this time. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Date:. ~Ju~l~y~,~1~9.;;.5~7 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��July, 1957 -159JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ~meof ~--~~~~~------------COLORADO Project No.__ Work Plan No. Title of Job:__ .:.;W:....-..::9:..::6:....-.:::D:..... --':........:.W:..::i::;ld::....::T;;.:u:.:r::..:.k:.::e~y..::;D.:::e.:.v;::.el:.::o:.sp::..: _ --=.I ..z...--=J.:::ob.:::...:N~0;;.:._.=.4 ....;F:....;;;.oo;;.;d;;...;;St;.;.u;;.d::.:i:.:::e;.:;s~ - _ -_-_ Summary - Western Slope. The later hunting season in the faU of 1956 pushed many of the turkeys into back country and crops collected during the season showed a larger proportion of native range foods. Twenty-one crops were collected on the western slope. Four of these taken in the early morning were completely empty. Two others did not contain sufficient food to use in evaluation tables. Three crops containing grain were separated from the native food crops. The tables contain the result of this examination. In the native food crops 77 percent of the total was vegetative items while 23 percent was animal matter. Eastern Slope. The analyses and compilation of data from the series of 200 eastern slope crops from the early fall period have been completed. A total of 540 droppings from the winter period and 630 droppings from the spring period were collected in the field and analyzed in a laboratory as the second segment of work designed to yield year-round food habits information for the wild turkey in southeastern Colorado. A total of thirty-six food items were identified in the winter samples and thirty-three in the spring samples. Winter food preferences were strong towards green grass leafage, Ponderosa pine nuts, cultivated oats, and insects. The green grass began showing up in the samples in good amounts in mid-February. Spring food preferences were strong towards green grass leafage, forbs green leafage, insects, and dandelion flowers. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Approved by: Donald M. Hoffman Date:. .:::J~u~ly~,_1:.::9~5~7 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �July, 1957 JOB COiVIPLETIONREPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS· ---~~~~~~----------- State of COLORADO Project No. W-96-D Work Plan No. Title of Job :__ ~ __ ::..I Wild Turkey Development ~_J::.;o::;,;b::....::..N:.;::o~. --.:4~ _ ---:F;;.,o,;;.o,;;.d;;..;;St;.;,u;;,d;:;;i;,;;;e;,;;:s:..- _ Objectives: To study year-round food habits of wild turkeys through crop and dropping analyses in order to secure needed information to intelligently manage the species. Procedure: (Eastern Slope) Series of droppings were collected in the field during the winter and spring periods. These were analyzed by a dry method to secure frequency of occurrences for the food items which could be identified. Data from all eastern slope crops secured during the early fall periods and reported on in earlier job completion reports were recompiled during the present report period. Findings - Western Slope. The mid-November wild turkey season on western slope ranges gave some additional information on wild turkey feeding habits. During most of the seasons previously the birds have been killed on lands between farm land and forest areas. Within these areas the ranchers raised a considerable amount of small grain. The presence of hunters during the big game season and shooting that continued near the birds for more than two weeks pushed the birds back into forested or native ranges. Therefore, in 21 crops collected only three showed any appreciable amount of grain. One of these collected northeast of Norwood by W. C. O. Mangus was entirely filled barley with the exception that there were three seeds of redroot pigweed, Amaranthus sp. The second was taken on the ranch of IVir. Monger some seven miles east of Bayfield. Here the birds had been feeding in a harvested wheat field. The third taken about one mile north of Cromo had been feeding on a field of oats that had been hailed out and not harvested. �-161- Three of the 21 crops weretaken in early morning shooting and were completely empty. Another taken In 1I1eafternoon of the second day had three acorns and one snowberry, indicating the birds had not been feeding. Crops showing native foods were filled with acorns, pine seed or nutlets and grass leaves. Crop No.2 (in the order of examimtion) had 336 pine nutlets; . crop No. 3 contained 153 acorns. Evidently some of these birds had been killed at rather close range as the foods'werefragmentized and feathers had been driven into and through some of the 'food items. Grasses (greens) also show prominently. Crop 4 had 25 percent grass; crop 6 - 31 percent; crop No. 12- 18 percent; crop No. 15-·42 perceny .. As a usual rule skunkberry, Rhus trilobata and thornapple, Crataegus sp. show rather plentiful in the turkeys diet. This year they were completely missing. TABLE 1. Statistical Data - Basis 3 Crops. Species Red root pigweed seed, Amaranthaceae Serviceberry leaves, Amelanchier Dandelion leaves, Taraxacum officinale 63 Dogwood seeds, Cornus canadensis Cultivated oats, Avena sativa Cultivated barley, Hordeum vulgare Bluegrass leaves, Poa Dropseed seeds, Sporobolus~. Cultivated wheat, Triticum aestivum .TrifoHum le.aves, Leguminosae Ponderosa pine seeds, Pinaceae 1% % Frequency of occurrence 33% 33% 33% 33% 3% 23% 6% 1% 60% 1% 3% 33% 33% 33% 66% 33% 33% % of Volume T T ··"1% 33% TABLE 2 Species- Vegetable matter 77% % of Volume Serviceberry fruita; Ame:anchier sp. Aster family, Asterace"4e True prickley letip;c.e,Lactuca scariola Dandelion Ieaves.: Ta.raxicum officinale Trifolium leaves Oak acorns, Q.uercus Gambelli Bluegrass leaves, ~ Sp. Snowberry fruits and seeds, Symphoricarpos sp. Ponderosa pine seeds, Pinus ponderosa 3% 1% 5% Trace 1% 36% 17% 9% 14% % Frequency of occurrence 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 84% 58% 66% 66% �-162-. Table 2-continued. % Frequency of occurrence Species-Animal Matter 23% ..% Volume Shorthorn grasshoppers, Acrididae Ground bettles, Carabidae Tomato hornworms, Lepidoptera order Darkling beetles, Tenebrionidae TOTAL Trace 2% 24% 17% 58% 4% 24% Non-food items Gravel and sand Woodfragments %of volume 99% % of volume . 1% 8% 100% % of frequency 84% 100% Findings: Eastern Slope. A total of 200 wild turkey crops collected by Departmental field personnel from successful hunters during the early fall period have been analyzed and the data compiled. It is felt that this number of crops gives a good sample of the food habits of the species in southeastern Colorado for this particular period of the year. In order to secure year--round food habits of the wild turkey it was decided to collect and analyze at least 1000 individual droppings for the winter, spring, and summer periods. This report deals with the first segment of this study with the hope that the remainder of the work can be completed by the end ! . of the next fiscal year. . A total of 540 droppings were collected in the field during the winter period and a total of 630 droppings were collected during the spring period. Table 3 shows the dates and areas of collections. An attempt was made to collect samples from as many different areas as possible and the three main types of wild turkey ranges on the eastern slope e. g. mountain, mesa, and river bottom, are represented. The droppings were analyzed using the dry method in a laboratory with a dissecting binocular being used as an aid inthe identification of food items. Percent frequency of occurrence will be calculated at the conclusion of the study for each food item identified in order to secure food preferences. Winter -.-- Foods. .. A total of thf rty-eix different food items were identified in the 540 separate dropping samples analyzed. A list of the food items identified is shown in Table 4. �-163- Winter food preferences were strong towards green grass leafage, ponderosa pine nuts, cultivated oats, and insects. Green grass leaves began showing up in the samples in good amounts in mid-February. Field checks indicated grass on the warmer sites began to green-up at that time. Spring foods. A total of thirty-three different food items were identified in the 630 separate dropping samples collected during the spring period. A list of the food items identified is shown in Table 5. The spring food preferences of the wild turkey in southeastern Colorado leans strongly toward green grass leafage, green forbs leafage, insects, and dandelion flowers. T.ABLE 3 Period of Year WINTER MERRIAlWSTURKEY FOOD STUDIES FIELD COLLECTIONS- EASTERN SLOPE* Type of Date Area Number of Range Dropping Samples Mountain 1/15/57 S. Hardscrabble 10 Cr. JR:uvri.cl0 :!anyon 1/16/57 10 1/28/57 Mavricio Canyon 20 2/19/57 Mavricio Canyon 50 2/19/57 Santa Clara Cr. 10 2/20/57 Sarcillo Canyon 50 2/27/57 Sarcillo Canyon 40 3/2/57 Sarcillo Canyon 10 3/12/57 Sarcillo Canyon 3/12.57 Mavricio Canyon 20 70 3/13/57 Santa Clara Cr. Total 300 Mesa 2/25/57 Sugarite Canyon 3/16/57 Frisco Canyon 20 80 100 Canyon 12/28/55Alahandra Canyon 10 2/20/57 Pearly Canyon 20 2/25/57 pearly Canyon 40 3/7/57 Pearly Canyon 30 Winter 57 Pinon Ridge _--.;4;,,;0;..... _ 140 �-:164- TABLE 3--continued MERRIAM'STURKEY FOOD STUDIES ..FIELD COLI"ECTION~-. EASTERN SLOPE*' Period of Year SPRING Type of . Range Mountain Number of DroPEing SamEles Date .. Area Spr '51 Saruche 10 Canyon Bear Cr. (LaVeta) 10 Bear Cr. (Salida) 10 Spring Cr. 10 (Howard) Bear Cr. (Salida) 10 Spring Cr. (Howard) 10 Del Aqua Canyon 30 Sarcillo Canyon 10 N. Trujillo Cr. 40 N. Trujillo Cr. 40 lViavricioCanyon 40 100 North Fork 5/3/55 5/9/55 5/10/55 5/16/56 5/16/56 3/28/f>7 4/10/57 4/11/57 4/13/57 5/17/57 5/27/57 Total 320 Mesa 5/13/55 Mesa de Maya 5/23/57 Frisco Canyon 10 140 150 River Pearly Canyon Canyon 4/6/57 4/16/57 Alahandra Canyon 40 120 160 * Field collections made by Donald M. Hoffman except for 10 samples collected in Saruche Canyon by Chester M. Scott. ~. .. �-135TABLE 4 MERRIAM'STURKEY FOOD STUDIES Winter Foods in order of Preferences -- Basis 540 Droppings* Food Item Grass green leafage (Gramineae) . Ponderosa pine 'nuts (Pinus ponderosa) Cultivated oats (Avena sativa) Insects Sand dropseed sptkelets (Sporobolus cryptandrus) Forbs green leafage - chiefly dandelion and clover Scrub oak acorns (Quercus sp.) . Green needlegrass seeds (Stipa viridula) Wild buckwheat seeds (Polygonum.sp.) Staghorn cactus .frutt (Opuntia arborescens) Hawthorne fruit (Crataegus sp.) Snowberry fruit ($vmphoricarpos sp.) Wild rose fruit (Rosa sp. ) Wild sunflower seeds (Helianthus sp.) Kinnikinnick fruit (Arctostaphvlas uva-ursi) Panic grass spikelets (Panicum sp.) Skunkberry fruit (Rhus trilobata) Sideoats grams spikelets (Bouteloua curtipendula) Barnyard grass spikelets (Echinochloa sp. ) Unidentified grass spikelets (Gramineae) Rocky Mountain juniper fruit (Juniperus scopulorum) Blue grama spikelets (Bouteloua gracilis) Cultivated wheat (Triticum aestivum) . Unidentified seeds Dandelion seed heads (Taraxacum officinale) Giant ragweed seeds (AmbroSia trifida) Bluestem spikelets (Andropogon sp. ) Ponderosa pine needle fragments (Pinus ponderosa) Woody stem fragments Alkali sacaton spikelets (Sporobolus airoides) Amaranth seeds (Amaranth~ sp. ) Chokecherry fruit (Prunus virginiana) Golden aster seed heads (Chrysopsis sp.) Pinon pine seeds '(Pinus edulis) Prickly pear cactus fruit LQpuntiasp.) Puccoon seeds (Lithosper.:2'~ sp. ) Sweetclover seeds (Melilotus sp.) Rootlets Number Samples in Which Found 359 197 174 173. 90 75 68 60 53 51 48 46 37 32 30 29 23 22 20 11 U 10 8 6 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 *All samples from eastern slope wild turkey ranges - includes 300 droppings from mountain type ranges; 100 from mesa type ranges; and 140 from river canyon type ranges. Collection and analyses "byDonald M. Hoffman. �-166TABLE 5 MERRIAM's TURKEY FOOP STUDIES Food Item Grass green leafage (gramineae) Forbs green leafage ~ chiefly dandelion,· clover,· and alfalfa· Insects Dandelion flowers (Taraxacum officinale) . Staghorn cactus fruit (Opuntia arborescens) Giant ragweed seeds (Ambrosia trifida) Cultivated oats (Avena sativa) . Wild rose fruit (Rosa sp.) Ponderosa pine seeds (Pinus ponderosa) Kinnikinnick fruit (Arctostaphylas ~-ursi) Scrub oak acorns (Quercus sp.) Snowberry fruit (Symphoricarpos sp.) Hawthorne fruit (Crataegus sp.) Pasque flower leaves (Pulsatilla sp. ) Ponderosa pine needles (Pinus ponderosa) Chokecherry fruit (Prunus virginiana) Green needlegrass seeds (Stipa viridula) Dandelion seed heads {Taraxacum officinale) Skunkberry fruit (Rhus trilobata) Tall drop seed spikelets (Sporobolus as per) Crayfish . Horsetail stem fragments (Equisetum sp. ) Rocky Mountain juniper fruit (Juniperus scopulorum) Sand drop seed spikelets (Sporobolus cryptandrus) Land snails Unidentified grass spikelets (Gramineae)' Bluegrass spikelets (Po~ sp, ) Panic grass spikelets (Panicum sp.)· Wild buckwheat seeds (Polygonum sp.) Unidentified seeds Wild sunflower seeds (Helianthus sp.) Pinon pine seeds (Pinus ei'!l-is) Rocky Mountain juniper leaves (Juniperus scopulorum)· Wood stem fragments . Nightshade fruit (Solanum sp.) 570 389 159 157 59 51 51 50 40 38 22 16 11 10 10 7 --. 7 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 :} -. 1 1<.' "'1 *All samples from eastern slope wild turkey ranges -includes 320 droppings from mountain type ranges; 150 from mesa type ranges; and 160from river canyon type ranges. Collection and analyses by Donald M. Hoffman with exception of 10 dropping samples collected by Chester M. Scott. Submitted: Martin L. Burget Donald M. Hoffman D~e: ~J~ul~y~,~1~9~5~7 _ Approved by:._· _....;L~a.;.;u':'r ......;e.;,,;n...;.·c...;.e_'E __. _R,..;i_o_r...,;d_an.....;·_ .Federal Aid Coordinator �-167- July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS State of. C~O.;;;.;;;;;L~O.;;.R;;;.A;.;;;D;;.;O;._ ;." " Project No.__ ..;.W;..-...;9...;6_-.;;D;....:;....W;.;..;;.;il.;;d_T~u;;.;r;.;k.;.;e;.=:y_D.;.e..;.v.;.;el;.;0~p_m_e;;.;;n; _ Work Plan No. __ --=I;:,I ....;... ..;:;J:.;o:.::::b~N:.:.o;;.;.:....:2=-;...... __ __. ..'.;;... . ,;...!;_" ...;.;..~_ z....; Summary: Western Slope. Heavier snow cover on Western slope turkey ranges make it necessary to select winter food plots with greater care. Cable reel feeders have been used more widely on western slope ranges for this reason. Some stock dam age to the reels presents a problem. Future winter food plots will be set up to inclose reel feeders within the immediate area. In this way ,the turkeys will be cared fo~..even when the winter food plots are snowed in. The three western slope food plots are being used regularly by turkeys. Plots 1 and 3 in Lost Canyon and on the Rogers ranch are both dual purpose plots, being used by turkey and deer. Plot No.2 on Mud Creek near Mancos is a good producer. An adjacent area is used as a trap site and yields from 15 to 22 turkeys per season. Some of the proposed plots for the future are listed. Three of these are to be fenced and seeded this fall if possible. Other plots have not yet been pinpointed but will be shortly. Eastern Slope. Food production checks in the five food plots established prior to the past winter showed two produced good crops of grain, one was hailed out, and two raised little or no food due to drought conditions. Three more plots were established during the spring of 1957 making a total of eight experimental winter food plots now in existence on the eastern slope. Experimentation with dry land maize, hog millet, and oats will be carried out in the drier site plots while the use of oats and barley will be continued in others. The Sarcillo Canyon food plots have proved a valuable management tool in Increastng the wild turkey population. Limited predator control work -and excellent land-owner cooperation have assisted with the rebuilding of the turkey flocks in the area. Th~ area was used as the main base for eastern slope liv.~trapping operations during the past winter. �-168- The Pass Creek food plot has proven valuable in holding the turkey flocks in the general area during the fall and spring periods and is proving to be a favorable nesting area. The value of this plot during the severe winter period is questionable, however. The value of the Huerfano River and Alahandra Canyon plots can not be evaluated . at this time due to very little food being raised the past year. Much better prospects for food production are at hand during the present growing season. Prepared by: Martin L. Burget Approved by: Donald M. Hoffman Date ~~J~ul~y~,_1~9~5~7 ~ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �July, 1957 -169JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ------~~~~~----------- State of COLORADO Project No. Work Plan No. W-96-D II ; Wild Turkey Development Job No. 2 ----------------~--------~--------------------------- Title of Job:._....;;;E;;;xp~e;.;;;r.;;im;;;;;.;e;.;;n;;;;.tal;:;.;....:.W;..:in::::.;.;te:;;:r~F...;:o;.;:o;.;:d:..;P::....;:.;lo;. _ Objectives: To establish experimental winter food plots, fenced against domestic stock, to assist wild turkeys through heavy wintering periods without assistance of hand .. supplemental feeding, To study results obtained in the use of experimental winter food plots. Procedure: Suitable areas are located within important wintering areas on National Forest or private land. 'The size of these plots varies from one acre and larger. The plot is fenced with a four strand barbed wire fence and-small grains and/or shrub species are planted within the plot. Seasonal checks are made to determine food production, and wild turkey useage of the plots. Findings: Eastern Slope. The five experimental winter food plots established in 1956 and earlier have been continued and three additional plots added during the spring of 1957 bringing the total of eastern slope food plots to eight. There is a total of approximately 21. 5 acres under fence with a total of approximately 14. 5 acres in cultivation. There has been approximately 7500 feet of new fence built in conjunction with these plots but existing fence lines have been used when possible to cut down on the cost of these plots. Tabl~ describes all food plots in use on the eastern slope and figure 1 shows the approximate map locations. Food plot costs are shown in table 2. Shrub and tree species planted in conjunction with the food plots in 1957 are shown in table 3. These were secured from the Departmental nursery near Fort Collins, Colorado. �-170Food production, wild turkey useage, and present treatment of the plots which were In existence during the past winter period are discussed below: Plots Number 1 and 2 - Sarcillo Canyon. The Sakariason ranch plot was hailed out during the summer of 1956 and therefore produced only a poor crop of oats. Supplemental feeding was carrted out in the area because of a large population of wild turkeys and the area was used as the main base for eastern slope live-trapping operations to secure transplant stock. The Mac Donald plot again raised a good crap of oats. A total of 150 wild turkeys were counted in the area during the late winter period. These over-wintered on Sakariason's and MacDonald's. The count was made after a total of twenty-five birds had been live-trapped and transplanted from the area. Limited predator control work was continued in the area with emphasis on _.. reducing the coyote population during the past winter. A total of seve~)~?~ot~s and one bobcat were taken during the period with the assistance of rancher Sakariason. . The cooperation received from ranchers been escellent, :~.•.... ~.r.:~J. Sakariason·.and MacDonald Brothers has " .. : 1.•..•• .: j These plots (1 and 2) have been seeded to oats and hog millet for the coming' wintering period. Nitrogen fertilizer has also been added to the soil. '. The following population data taken from actual field counts shows how the flocks have increased in the Sarcillo Canyon area: WINTERING PERIOD 1952-53 1953-54 (1st year Sakarfason plot) 1954-55 (2nd year SakariaSon plot) 1955-56 (3rd year Sakariason plot) (1st year Macnonald plot) 1956-57 (4th year Sakariason plot) (2nd year MacDonald plot) POPULATION COUNT 3 28 62 .. ::. ',."1 91* 150** *Five additional birds killed during open season in atea. Count made before 11 birds were live-trapped and transplanted from area. ** Count made after twenty-five birds Were live-trapped area. and transplanted from .. ,','0 �-171- Plot Number 3 - Pass Creek. A good crop of oats was again raised in this plot during the 1956growing season. Winter field checks could not be made. because the road was again not maintained. Indications are that the flocks were forced to range lower in the canyon during the severe weather aithough flocks were rangirg in the plot vicinity during the fall and spring periods. The food plot has proven to be a valuable aid in holding the flocks in the general area but it is probably located at too high an elevation to assist inholding' the birds during heavy snow periods. The area in the vicinity of the food plot appears to be a favorite wild turkey strut ground and nesting area and has value for this reason. The plot was again planted to oats and barley and nitrogen fertilizer was added to the soil. Plot Number 4 - Huerfano River. An unusually dry growing season in this area during the summer of 1956 resulted in almost no food being produced in this plot. The wild turkey: .population in the general vicinity is increasing and it is felt that this plot will inttime be valuable in assisting the flocks through heavy snow . periods. The wild turkey: flocks in the immediate vicinity over-wintered below the food plot but some field sign was found within the plot. The plot was again planted to oats and barley. Plot Number 5 - Alahandra Canyon. No food was raised in this plot during the 1956growing season due to continued drouth conditions and the fact that unbroken sod was plowed up for this first year's planting, A few bales of baled oat hay wasueed in the plot and indications were found that the wild turkeys utilized this feed during much of the winter. Small flocks were found ranging through the entire length of Alahandra Canyon during early spring field checks. Experimentation with dry land maize, millet, and oats will be carried out in the hopes that a suitable grain will be found that will produce in the-area. �-172Table 1 .,:' " ESTABLISHED WINTER FOOD PLOTS -- EASTERN SLOPE .. . ', ; Plot No. 1. John Sakariasonranch, Sarc illoC anyon, Las. Animas County, approximately in -Sec·. ·14, T. 32 S. ~.R •.67W.• " P. M•• with approximately l.Acre in culttvatton. There are: approximately 1150 feet of 4 strand barbed wire fence. Plot No.2. MacDonald ranch, Sarcillo Canyon, Las-Aiiimas County, approximately in Sec. 22 T. 32 S•• R. 67 W.• 6 P. M. with approximately .2,-Acres under fence and.2. Acres in. cultivation. There are approximately 1100 feet of 4 strand barbed wire fence (Two sides of plot were already fenced) . . Plot No.· 3. Wm. Schmidt ranch, Pass Creek, Huerfano County, approximately in Sec. 3. T. 28 S. R. 70 W•• 6 p~ M., with approximately 1. 5 Acres under fence and..b...2.Acres in cultivation. There are approximately 1000 feet of 4 strand barbed wire fence. Plot No.4. Dept. of Game and Fish property, Hnerfano river, Huerfano County, approximately in Sec•.13, T. 27 S.. R. 72 W., 6 P. M•• with . approximately.2.. Acres underfence and.2. Acres in cultivation. There are approximately .!2Q.. feet of 4 strand barbed wire. fence (Most of this plot was already fenced). Plot No.5. L. Waller ranch, Alahandra Canyon, Las Animas County, approximately in Sec. 11. T. 30 S., R. 57 W., 6 P. M., with approximately 1.5 Acres under fence and..llAcres in cultivation. There are approximately 1150 feet of 4 strand barbed wire fence. Plot No.6. B. Lambuth ranch, St. Charles Creek, Pueblo County, approximately in Sec. 14, T. 23 S., R. 68 W., 6 P. M., with approximately 2.:..§...Acres under fence and 1 Acre in cultivation. There are approximately 875 feet ~ of 4 strand barbed wire fence (One Side of this plot was already fenced). .- Plot No.7. F. Zele ranch, stock Canyon, Las Animas County, approximately in Sec. 33,T. 31 S., R. 65 W., 6 P. M., with approximately 2 Acres under fence arid ! Acrestn culttvatton. There are approximately 1500 feet of 4 strand barbed wire fence, �-173Table L-conttnued, Plot No.8. M. Hudson ranch, Al3handra Canyon. Las Animas County, approximately in Sec. 32. T. 30 S.-,'-R. 56 W.. 6 P. M.. with approximately 4 Acres under fence and 1. 5 Acres in cultivation. There are approximately 325 feet of 4 str;;;d barbed wire fence (Most of this plot was already fenced). - Table 2 COSTS OF EASTERN SLOPE FOOD PLOTS A. Fencing Materials Used: Materi3.1.s Used Year Plot stays Rolls Wire steel Posts No. Fenced ,...."'144 1. 3 1/2 1953 83 (enlarged 1956) 3 1/3 1955 69 2. 65 3 1954 3. 1955 31 12/3 4. 135 65 3 1/2 1956 5. 100 3 1957 57 6. 187 5 1957 91 7. 30 11/3 21 1957 8. TOTAL Average Cost Per Acre - $39.23 B. Costs of Land Preparation and Seeding: (1957) Plot Acres in Cost No. Cultivation 1. 1.0 $30.00 40.00 2. 3.0 1.5 30.00 3. . 4 •. n/c 3.0 1.5 15.00 5. 1.0 30.00 6. 35.00 2.0 7. 1.5 15.00 8. $195.00 TOTALS 14.5 -- . Average Cost Per Acre - $13.45. Cost $102.90 77.01 68.95 35.77 77.12 68.70 111. 34 27.08 $568.87 �-174- C. Costs of Seed and Fertilizer Plot No. Barley Oats 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 100# 200# 100# 200# 50# 200# 200# ··50# ( 1957): Millet Nitrogen Fertilizer 15# 55# 120# 320# 120# 50# 50# 30# 8. TOTALS 1100# :~_ -Maize 50# 50# 100# 100# 560# 100# 1100# oats @ $3.60 .$39.60 100# barley @$3.40 3.40 10& millet @ $6.50 6.50 100# maize @ $6.00 6.00 560 # N. fertilizer @$3. 15 17.64 Total $73.14 Average cost per acre --$5.04. Table 3 SHRUBAND TREE SPECIES PLANTED IN ·CONJUNCTION· WITH EASTERN SLOPE EXPERIMENTAL WINTER FOOD PLOTS - 195.7. ..,.;, Food Plot No. 1 2 5 7 8 Choke- Russian cherrl::: olive 10 20 40 20 10 TOTAL 100 10 40 60 40 50 200 Skunk- berry CrabaEple Caragana Scop. jmiiper 20 40 20 20 100 ·12 5 3 5 25 Ponderosa Ponderosa pine 8 30 30 30 10 100 2 10 15 25 40 Western Slope Findings: Present plans are to set Up winter food plots in conjunction with reel feeders. Both will be inclosed under the same stock-tight fence. So far, deer have not bothered the reel feeders to any extent. However, stock, both cattle and sheep, have worked on the feeders. Sometimes the feeders have been knocked down and the wire broken or torn so that replacement of the wire was necessary. Normally the turkeys will not use the feeders except when the snow depth is excessive at which time the reel feeders prove useful as they can be raised or lowered to provide accessibility. �-175"Present Plots: Plot No. 1. Lost Canyon - Pyle Flat. This plot has always been visited regularly by both turkey and deer, It is inacceesfble by car in winter because of a north facing :;;l<?pEl'that piles up with snow. Turkeys range on south slopes near the area and roost within 300 yards of the plot. Approximately 225 feet of four 'wire fence was needed to close this area to stock. Approximately one acre is inclosed, in the plot. In 1956it was seeded to barley. A very dry year yielded a very poor crop. Some skunkberry, Rhus sp., Roses, ~ sp., and Buffaloberry, Shepherdia sp., within the inclosure produced fruit and were used by the turkeys in conjunction with the grain. The largest flock observed in the area to date was twenty seven birds. Plot No.2. Mud Creek - Hawkins Ranch. This has been the most valuable plot on ,the western slope. It is located about 'four miles northwest of Mancos in a heavy pinon-juniper stand. It is much more isolated than would seem possible being this close to Mancos. The plot comprtses approximately one acre and required about·{)40feet of four wire fence to inclose it. A fair crop of volunteer winter wheat.was on the plot in the spring. It was felt advisable to leave this as the drouth conditions were prevailing at the time. A fair crop resulted and was used regularly by the turkeys. This plot is on a south-facing slope and opens up well in winter. Shrubs in the plot are; Ekunkberry, mountain mahogany, Cercocarpus montanus, and Pinon pine, Pinus edulis. This area has been used as a trapping site and has provided from 15 to 22 trapped turkeys per year for the past several years. After trapping fifteen turkeys in the spring of 1957 a flock of 41 turkeys were counted in the area. Some hunting in this district in 1956broke up the flocks and it was not felt that there were as many birds in the flocks as usual. Plot No.3. Roger's Ranch. This plot is south of Plot No. 1 and at present comprises some ten acres. Two and one half acres is under cultivation. This, too, was subject to drouth in 1956 and a volunteer crop of barley was left standing. It is a dual purpose plot used by both turkey and deer. Fencing costs were shared by Federal Aid and Game Management. A cross fence of some 1600 feet was completed in 1956to close the area against stock. It is located on a rocky slope and is covered with a heavy stand of pinon oak and juniper. Among important shrubs are serviceberry, AIr.elanchier sp., bitterbrush, Purshia sp., ceanothus, Ceanothus sp. , mountain mahogany, and cliff bush, Fendlera sp, These shrubs are healthy and not over-used. A good crop of pinon cones in 1956produced a lot of feed which was used by the turkeys extensively. �-176Future Plot Plans, Plot No. 4 on Granath Mesa near Dolores in Montezuma County. Winter feeding "and.reel feeders have been used extensively here for the past several years. .. Plot No.5 on Confer. Hill in Archuleta County four miles northwest of Cromo. Area has been a feeding station and trapping area for several years. The turkeysfe~ irregular'!}r here in 1956 and 1957. Plot No.6, OraigPcint.iUncompahg re Forest in Montrose County five mtles northeast of Norwood. This is also a feeding station and has been used for the past three years. Matertals are on hand for these last three plots. possibly fall seed them with grain this season. It is planned to fence them and Plans are under consideration for establishment of a plot on the old Hill ranch north of Highway 90 and just east of Cottonwoodcreek in Montrose County. This plot would be in an area that was trapped several years ago. A second plot in this area would be on the Sheets ranch four miles northeast of the Hill ranch. These are both in the Uncompahgre Forest. of Plans are also under way for the establtsr ment of a plot in Divide Creek souh of Silt and one in Elk Creek north of New Castle. There is also a possible plot in Canyon Creek northwest of Glenwood Springs. Normally preparation of soil and seeding of these plots runs in the general cost bracket of from $15 to $25 per season if ranchers owning the plot area or living near will do the work. If this has to be done with state equipment and Department personnel the unit cost would be much higher. Summary: Western Slope. Heavier snow cover on Western slope turkey ranges make it necessary to select winter food plots with greater care. Cable reel feeders have been used more widely on western slope ranges for this reason." Some stock damage to the reels presents a problem. Future winter food plots will be set up to inclose reel feeders within the immediate area. In this way the turkeys will be cared for even when the winter food plots are snowed in. The three western slope food plots are"being used regularly by turkeys. Plots 1 and 3 in Lost Canyon and on the Rogers ranch are both dual purpose plots, being used by turkey and deer. Plot No.2 on Mud Creek near Mancos is a' good producer. An adjacent area is used as a trap site and yields from 15 to 22 turkeys per season. Some of the proposed plots for the future are listed. Three of these are to be fenced and seeded this fall if possible. Other plots have not yet been pinpointed but will be shortly. �--r-----· 't • .; I i ~ to !'> e . i~ j I. i~ :~ I!-.----- �-177Summary: Eastern Slope. Food production checks in the five food plots established prior to the past winter showed to produce. good crops of grain, one was hailed out, and two raised little or no food due to drouth conditions. Three more plots were established durtngthe spring of 1957making a total of eight experimental winter food plots now"ltl"existence on the eastern slope. Experimentation with dry land maize, hog millet" and oats will be carried out in the drier site plots while the use of oats and barley will be continued in others. The Sarcillo Canyon food plots have pro~d a valuable management tool in increasing the wild turkeys population. Limited predator control work and excellent land-owner cooperation have assisted with the rebuilding of the turkey flocks in the area. The area was used as the main base for eastern slope live-trapping operations during the past winter. 'The Pass Creek food plot has proven valuable in holding the turkey flocks in the general area during the fall and spring periods and is proving to be a favorable nesting area. The value of this plot during the severe winter period is questionable, however. The value of the Huerfano River and 'Alahandra Canyon plots can not be evaluated at this time due to very little food being raised the past year, Much better prospects for food production are at hand during the present growing season. Prepared by: Martin L. Burget". Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid coordinator Donald M. Hoffman '--------~~~~~------------- Date: July, 1957 ��-179- July, 1957 JOB C01VlPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of.__ .;:.C.;:O~L:..;:O:..;:R;,;;;A~D::.O~ _ Project No. __ ....;W.;..-_8;;;.8;;;.-....;R;.;.-....;2~_....:..._vv....;a;,;;.t~e •.. if....;o_w_l_Su_rv_e_y~s.;....;.an;.;.;...;.d_In.....;.v..;.e..;.s_ti~g:.;.a.;.. o..;,n.;;.s _ VVorkPlan No. ~I~ Title of JOb:. ·....;'\~. __ ....;J;..;o;.;.b~N;.;.0~.,~~4~· ~' _ w.:..:..;::a:;,;te;.:rf;.:,;:;.ow.:.;.:.l.:,M;,:;l:s;·p"!,;r..::a;:;;ti:,::o..::n;,..;Sfu:;:·;,;;;·"·,;;oie:;:··~'&~ -:- Objectives: To determine the movement of waterfowl species into and through various portions of Colorado during fall migration as an aid to: (1) Gather information for use in determining the best hunting season dates to . choose for each area. J2). Gain data for use in regulating future kill by species if this should ever benecessary. (3) Better Interpret the results of waterfowl kill surveys, of the regulations' on the kill for each area . and thus the effect .Methods: Migration records, by species, were obtained by ground counts on concentration areas using spottibi(scope and tally counters, During the past year, counts were made twice a;week on Empire, Riverside, Jackson Lake, Prewitt, and North Sterling Reservoirs. Daily counts were taken on Jumbo Reservoir. Results: A weekly average was obtained of all ducks from all reservoirs counted during the wtnter! of 1955-56 and 1956-57 in an effort to obtain the most accurate picture possible of waterfowl movement by species through the South Platte Valley. This information is given by weeks in Table 1. Since this table is selfexplanatory, this report will confine itself to a very brief comment on the time of movement of each species through the study area and a comparison with the previous years' findings. 1. The Mallard arrrves in substantial numbers in the South Platte Valley before the first of November and stays throughout the entire winter, The main peak in number's, the past two years, occurred during the first two weeks in December, and seemed to fluctuate somewhat after that time, but remained higher than prepeak counts. Comparing averages from the three reservoirs which were counted both years (Prewitt, North Sterling, and Jumbo), it is obvious that more birds wintered in the valley Juring the 1956;.:'57 than the former year. j L �Table 1. --Weekly Avera es of Waterfowl Counts in the South Platte Valley of Northeastern Colorado. 1955-56. 1956-57 Time ;~Species _ . Month . Week Mallard Pintail Teal Gadwall Scaup Redhead Canvasback 1955 1956 ·1955 1956 1955 1956 1955 1956 1955 1956 1955 1956 1955 1956 Nov. Dec. Jan. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3. 4 1 2 3 49,666 30,000 12,190 52,493 27,350 32,139 38,380 101,955' 36,000 138,147 54,739 142,775 36,038 69,393 33.057 96,141 24,~97' 90,600 22,0'76 79,953 24,495 --- - 51 2 - - - 3000 214 881 94 2000 823 211 18 115 24 20 106 31 6 443 1 .6 205 10 40 2 2 4 1 - - - - 1 - - - - 410 100 - - 9 - - - - - - - - - 500 -370 400 200 ·2 45 ' 20 ·5 - .. 2 - - 100 - - 25 ":" - - - - .- - .- Table 1--Continued. Bufflehead Month' Week 1955 1956 . 1 Nov. 500 2 750 3 342 255" 4 Dec. 1 ..• 2 3 4 Jan. 1 2 3 - - - - Goldeneye "'-1955 1956 - - - - - 1500 72 50 8 7 14 9 4 - - . 2 23 30 10 665 56 38 64 90 68. - Mergansers . 1956 1955 - -110 257 287 575 41 7 4 24 16 708 1960 68 100 101 139 61 41 25 '- - Canada Geese 1955 1956 ~~ 75 30 54 115 97 71 59 110 79 . 31 78 138 79 29 129 128 111 91 18 86 19 . .- I I-' 00 0 I �-181- 2. Pintails seemed to have no regular migration pattern through the state; but instead, their numbers fluctuat.ed up and down, especially during the winter of 1956-57. Pintails were also more numerous the latter year than during 1955-56. 3. The main migration of teals, mainly, green-wings was largely over by the time this study was initiated, This peak probably occurred sometime in midOctober: however, some green-winged teaIs were noted throughout all of the study period. Again, there were in6reteal in 1956-57 than the former year. 4. Gadwall, scaup, redhead, canvasback and bufflehead were observed only during the early part of November arid were entirely gone from the area in December. This suggests that their main movement occurred sometime during October as it does further to the west in north-central Colorado. Because of the scarcity of data no comparison can be drawn between the two years; however, there did appear to be a very good flight of bufflehead during the 1955-56 study, while no birds of this species were observed dur-ing the second year. 5. American goldeneyes and American mergansers arrived in northeast Colorado in mid-November, peaked during the first part of December and stayed as winter residents for the duration of the study. Numbers of these species seemed to be slightly higher in 1956-57 than the former year. Thfs 'eoncludes the migration study ininortheast Colorado, and although counts are not available before the fjrst part of November when the mass of diving ducks and other early migrants comethrough this country, it is believed that sufficient information has been obtained to .acccmpltsh the objectives stated at the beginning of this report. Submitted by: Jack R. Grieb. :",.; ',Approved by: Date: ~J~u~lyw,~19~5~7 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��-183July, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS .cOLORADO -------~~~~~--------- State of Project No.__ .,...-W;.;...._..;;8..;;8 __ ,;;.R:.._-=2:..-_~ __W~a::.;;t..;;e,;;.rf::.;0:..w;.;.1;;...;;SU~r...;.v..;;e:!.y,;;.s....;a;;;;n __ --------~------~~~~~----------------------- Work Plan No. Title of Job: I Job 7 Waterfowl Habitat Improvement Studies Objectives: To improve waterfowl habitat particularly on areas owned or controlled by-the Game and Fish Department. To submit detailed habitat improvement plans for each area. Introduction: The activities of this job during the past fiscal year were again hampe red by a lack of personnel. However, some progress has been made i~ examining habitat and making recommendations for improvement in these, areas aLthe State. These will each be discussed separately in the following writeup. North Park: Work in this area has been concerned mainly with Lake John, located about 10 miles west of Walden. Future plang(jf the Game and Fish Department include the raising of water levels'in the western pool of this lake. While the exact status of these plans are not known ,at this time, it is recommended that if this lake or portions of the lake are made suitable to fishing, the eastern pool, separated from the western one by a long peninsula be set aside as a waterfowl refuge with no trespassing permitted. Also, that fishermen be kept at \ least 50 yards from the peninsula on the eastern shore of the west lake to help preserve this area for waterfowl nesting. Finally, that predator proof fences; be constructed at either end of the peninsula to improve waterfowl nesting conditions on this area. Brown' s Par~: At the present the Game and Fish Department is negotiating for purchase of most of the bottom land along the Green River in Brown's Park. At this date, no agreement has been made with the owner, Mr. Watson of Craig, Colorado, however, it is hoped that an agreement can be reached in the near future. �, -184The following ur i.t.e-orp outlines .t.he habitat situation now exists in Brown's Pc{rk;: and 'g'lves'recommendations future improvement if this land is purchased. as it for Introduction: At present Brown's Park offers some of the final vestiges of relatively undisturbed goose and duck breeding habitat in Colorado. Of course , orie of the prime factors is the isolation of the Park from hwnan disturbance. During the winter, spring,'and summer, there are very few people that come into the Park. During the fall, there are 'a few hunters, mostly for big game. In addition, Brown's Park is used as a \vinter range for cattle and sheep, and ,tl1E!;3e.anfmal.e are in the high country during the spring and summer. \-;aterfowl habitat in Brown's Park consists of 12 to 15 of the Green River, and eight mar-shes or shallow lakes immediately adjacent to the river along its' flood (Figure 1)., During the spring and summer of 1952 and 1953, Hr. John Testor conducted an intensi ve investi,~ation or TrJaterfowl production in this area under t.hevaasp'i.ces of the Colorado Cooperative 1-;ildlife Research Unit. According to Testor's Haster of Science Thesis ,based on this study, total wat.er- acreages of these areas when full, are 920 acres. A rather, unusual situation exists, in that these lakes and marshes are dependent, upon the Gr-een River for their annual water supplies. 'I'nus , when a flood crest occurs on the Green, waters overflow into these old ox-bows, and 1-lith the exceptions of snow runoff, and torrential rains, (these must be exceedingl;;r heavy to have any noticableeffect) this constitutes the entire water supply for these areas. miles lying plain John Testor Vt:3ryaJly stat3S these previously n.ent.Loned Thesis as follows: cond;tions in his IIlvater conditions .--The winter of 1951-1952 was extrmely severe and marked by heavy snowf'al.l. iriBrown's Park. tv-armweather in early April brought about sudden and heavy runoff, 1vhich filled the marshes bordering'the river. Early in Hay, Green River began rising, reaching a peak on Hay 8. The peak, caus2d mainly by melt~vJater from the drainage in souther-n lnJyoming and northwestern Utah, was reported as unusual by local residents. High \~ater lasted only' three days, but the river overflow was sufficient to fill the marshes in the floodplain to capacity for a second time within a month. On June 11, Green River crested from melt-water from its headwaters in the lJind River Hountains in «voming. �,:",,185- This peak, which was similar to the first in height and duration, flooded the marshes for the third time. No moisture fell in Brown's Park from late April until late July, when several heavy cloudbursts brought the water levels of the marshes back to their previous heights. Adequate uat.er'for ducks and geese 'VJaSpresent in all of the lakes throughout the 19.52 breeding season. The later part of the summer was hot and arid, and by mid-September, three of the marshes wer-e completely dry, and the remainder had less than half as much Hater as during the early $ummer.u "During the winter of 1952-19.53, comparatively little snow fell in Brown's Park and the surrounding mountains. Consequently local runoff uas negligible and Green River flooded the marshes adjacent to the river. Previous to this date, three marshes were dry and fO.T were nearly dry. Only Hog Lake, Area Number 6, maintained its .Jater level throughout the season. After the river receded, water levels in all of the lakes except Numb2r 6 dropped rapidly and by August 1, five were completely dry and tl'110 were very low • Although no springs were visible in i;IogLake, it wa s believed that they were respollsihle.:.flor maintaining the water level. No heavy rains fell in Br-cvn's Park in the summer- of,19.53.11 Since the intensive inv€lstigatioriconducted by Testor during 19.52 and 19.53, the waterfowl project has continued waterfowl breeding-pair counts in Brown1s Park during Nay of each year. The results of these observations show that vlith the exception of 19.56, the Green Ri.ver-c ovenflowed its banks last in 19.53. Consequently, water levels decreased yearly in all areas. In 19.54, most marshes and lakes were completely dry with the exception of areas (see Figure 1) .5, 6, 7, and 8. In 19.5.5, water remained only in 2reas .5 and 6, and then in small pools. In May of 19.56, all T-laterareas were bone dry; however, in June the Green River crested and all areas filled to capacity. Brown's Park was last visited in September 19.56, at,which time 'V,aterlevels wer-e good in all marshes. Correlation of our waterfowl counts with yearly iJater levels ShOl-ISa corresponding drop in numbers as levels decreased. This 1,11aS especially true of ducks, and somewhat true of geese, however, since geese could make use of the permanent river 'VJatertheir decreases vlere not so drastic. �-186- It appears that to maintain optimum waterfowl ccn- . ditions, the River must flood into the lakes each year. Now that wor-k has begun on the. Flaming Gorge Dam, and once it has been completed, in the light of .what is now known, this natural breeding ground carrpr-obacl.ybe wri tten off sill:plybecause flood crests on the Green will become non-existent. Recommendations: If this land is purchased, the following are recommended for improving the wat.er-f'owl, breeding potential in this area. 1. All wat.e.rareas should be filled and levels main?, tained throughout the spring and summer. 'everal methods have been discussed for doing this, and these are offered :i.nthe f'o.Ll.owl.ng e a. For those marshes lying immediately adjacent to the River, it may be possible to ditch in from the river, and by use of a headgate, maintain constant water levels. This would not work on all areas, but would probably be satisfactory where applicable. b. Use a portable marine pump, to pump from the river into each marsh or lake. This is, undoubtedly, the most versatile method, and could be used on all of the water areas. hany ranchers use this method to irrigate their fields in the Yampa River Valley. c. Once ,laming Gorge Dam is complete, it may be possible through cooperation "Jith the Bureau of Reclamation to obtain a flood crest run for about 2·4 hours early in the spring before the birds start to nest. This should be further investigated. d. Divert Beaver Creek in its upper portions to empty into one of the lakes. This would be costly, and it is possible that it cannot even be accomplished. Besides not enough areas would benefit for the expenditure of money. It would be better to use this water to replace that which may be taken out of the Green River by other methods. e. Develop existing springs at the base of Cold Springs 110untain to empty into the water areas. Only several areas could possibly benefit, and spring flow would probably depend upon annual precipitation; thus, the springs could not be depended upon. Considering these five methods, the first three have the greatest possibilities, and the use of the marine pump appears the best simply because of its versatility. �-1872. Certain additional improvements should be undertaken on Lake No.6. An attempt was made a few years ago.to completely drain this lake. This attempt was only partially successful in that it will still hold considerable water. By placing a headgate in the drainage ditch, water levels could be maintained throughout the breeding season, and then later Lower-ed to permit the growth of vegetation. This would be of gr.3at benefit to both ducks and geese. 3. It is finally recommended tha,t..nesting structures be constructed in all the lakes and:marshes, and brush and willovJ gr-owth removed from all islands in the Green River to make the Park more attractive for nesting geese. San Luis Valley: 11Jhilecontacting .members of the Saguache Country Club I~ssociation during the fall of 1955 regarding the planting of geese in the Russell Lakes Area, the ~1iaterfowlProject was requested to look over the area controlled by this Club, and make reco~~endations for the improvement of breeding conditions. This was undertaken during the course of banding activities in the San Luis Valley in July, 1956. The Saguache Country Club Association controls slightly over two sections of land containing the majority of the Russell Lakes. This property is located approximately ten miles south of Saguache , Saguache County, Colorado in the San Luis Valley. It is a natural lake area interspersed with sedge meadows, and large areas of gr-easewood of'fer-i.ng vJaterfowl excellent breeding sites. The following report is given in two parts. First, the present land-use practices and condition of the area; and second, recommendations for improvement to increase waterfowl production. Present Practices and Conditions: Despite severe drouth conditions preceeding and during the 1956 waterfowl breeding season, the Russell Lakes offered anexcellent place for waterfowl to nest. This year, the lack of water confined breeding activities to the large, more permanent lakes, and unquestionably resulted in decreased duck production; however, in wet years, wat.er over f'Lowf.ng to the hurnmocIcy, greasewood area creates myrid ponds and puddles for birds to nest, and undoubtedly attracts hundreds of additional birds. Thus, drouth app-ears to be a serious limiting factor over whic;',· there is little control. �-188- At present, the caretaker of this property, Hr. Si Perkins, is runntng about 100 head of cattle on the property during most of the year. These animals, at least during the hay growing period are confined to the eastern half of the property by a fence bisecting the area roughly in half from north to south. This permits hay to be cut from the western half in season. Because ofdrouth conditions resulting in poor forage production this past year, these cattle wer-e forced to graze mainly on cattail and bulrush gr01'11th in and around the two main east lakes. The result vlLS the elimination of cover for use by Haterf01'111 in these areas. Obviously, the range was greatly overstocked this year, and should probably have contained only a fourth the number of animals that it did. Hay cutting activi ties on the wes t side do not appear to be detrimental to nesting birds since cutting usually takes place in mid-July after a majority of nests have hatched. However, t.hisyear, because of water shortages, and consequently decreased hay production, Mr. Perkins cut some of the stands of cattails to supplement the native hay. Fish in the many lakes are now maily carp, and this has resulted in a distinct loss in "later vegetation. Consequently t.he naturc:l attractiveness of this area, especially for divers has been reduced. Finally, there is a vast number- of predators in this area. These include not only untold number-s of vlild predators including skunks and magpies, but also a number- of dogs, and one cat presently kept by Hr. Perkins. All of these undoubtedly playa part in reducing the production potential of nesting t-Jaterfowl in this region. Recormnendations: Even though the Russell Lakes are good duck producers during drouth years, there are quite a number of things that my be done to raise the over-all potential for 1'11aterfo-11I71 breeding in this area. Since the Saguache Country Club Association is primarily interested in Haterfowl, both production and hunting, they should be willing to sacrifice some benefits from this land in order to increase the waterfowl and hunting potential. The following include the things that personnel of the 1Jaterfowl Project feel will increase these benefits. All major land improvements such as Nell drilling and diking have been eliminated since this type of work would involve a great deal of lnoney, even though the benefits to waterfowl would be high. �-189- Instead, these recommendations are confined to manipulation of present land-use pract1ces and dist.r.i.butd.on of va tar in the most beneficial "'Jayfor waterfowl. 1. Examination of range conditions on the Club property reveals that the number- of cattle pe rmi, tted to graze here should be drastically reduced. During drouth years when forage production is almost nil, it is believed that 25 head represents the maximum number which could be grazed in accordaqce with good range management practices. During years with . adequate precipitation, '75 he ad should be the maximum nu..rnber of cattle on this area. If this can not be done, for one reason or another, then wat.er f'owl, production for the eastern half of the property can be written off. In addition, hunting benefits in this eastern portion will be reduced. 2. All gr-azd.ng should be eliminated from the wes ter-n portion of the area during the period April 1 to September 1. 3. Hay cutting should not be undertaken until after July 15, to protect those birds using the meadow for nesting purposes. 4. The number of dogs and cats kept by Mr. PerkiDs should be reduced in number to keep down n~st destruction as much as possible. 5. The lakes should be poisoned to eliminate the rough fish and thus bring back the natural wa t.er vegetation. 6. A system of predator control should be initiated. This matter has been discussed with Mr. C. R. Bryant, Refuge Ivianagerof the Honte Vista National T.lildlife Refuge. Mr. Bryant has offered to cooperate lr?iththis Project in such a program, and VJith the permission of the Saguache Country Club Association, this "Till be undertaken. 7. It is recommended that a haadgate be placed in the Russell Lake seepage, drainage, and overflow ditch approximately 100 yards east of its entrance into the Club property from the west; and that a portion of the water be shunted south of this ditch into a series of natural shallow ponds. �-190l·Ihilethis would take away from irrigation wat.er s for the sedge-meadow we st. of Davy Lake, it would greatly increase the duck producing potential for the area by creation and maintenance of these new vJater areas.. The cost for this Hork would be small, and the benefits high. 8. Lastly, it is recorr~ended that in late 1957 or early 1958, if the 37 geese planted on this property accept this as a natural breeding area, that a series of nesting structures be built in some of the lakes. This wou.l.d be undertaken by the lvat.er-f'owl, Project and woul.d in no way interfer with normal use of the area by the Club or caretaker. In conclusion, it is hoped that the \-JaterfovJl project can spend more time on habitat wor-k during the coming year. Current plans of the Central Fl.yway 'I'echni.cal. Committee call for a state-by-state inventory of wet lands so that a long-range acquisition plan can be established to meet future ';,·,aterfowl needs. Details "Jill be worked up by a commi. ttee and presented at the next meeting so that possibly something can be accomplished during the next fiscal year. This work will be carried on under this job. Prepared by: Jack R. Grieb Date Submitted: July, 1957 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �July, 1957 -191JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO \- Project No. W-95-R-1; Investigations 'bJ':,dfseaseand parasites game animals.' Job No. affecting "p_' ~1~;~St~u~d~y~of~th~e~lu~n~g~n~e~m~a~t~o~d~e~s~o~f~g~am~~e~a=n=im~a=l~s~. _ Periodcovered: ~~~1a~r~c~h~6~,~1~95~6~th=r~o~u~g~h~F~e~b~ru~ary~~2~8~,~1~9~5~7 _ Abstract: Experimental pens were constructed at the Denver Federal Center under an agreement with the Fish and Wildlife Service, Research Laboratory. Laboratory space was also made available at the Wildlife Research Laboratory. It was found that the lungworms, ,Protostrongylus macrotis from the mule deer,_P. sylvilagi from the cottontatl, and..!:: boughtoni from the snowshoe hare, showed the same characteristics of development in some of the same snails as was found for P. stilesi. , - ~ ~ Fresh. lung or lungs were te-covered from' seven bighorn sheep five showed , lungworm tnfection, and one tsetof lungs"trom Ouray yielded three species of lungworm (see table I). -" . Attempts to infect three hybrid sheep with g. stilesi were unsuccessful. A trip was made to Wyoming, where Kenneth Winter had been unsuccessful in infecting the domestic sheep with which he was working. Laboratory tests with metaldehyde and aerosol OT-B show promise of being an effective molluscicide for snails of the genus Pupilla. Objectives: To study the ecology of lungworm development and transmission. 'Infect experimental animals to determine: (1) prepatent period, (2) longevity of adult worms, (3) what constitutes a dangerous level of infection, (4) the best means of evaluating the intensity of infection in a wild population. To find a molluscicidal agent for killing the intermediate host snails. DESIGNOF EXPERIMENTAL PENS The design of the experimental pens, which were-constructed under a cooperative agreement with the Wildlife Research Laboratory of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the Denver Federal Center (formerly a Remington Arms Co. plant), is shown in FfgureL, The covered walks are �-192mostly of concrete with a roof supported by 4 x 4 timbers about 8 feet high and with the upper half of the sides covered. Fencing was only required to cover the lower half of these walks. Between the revetment and an earth mound short walks lead off to small storage sheds originally used for some type explosive storage, and these are designated by capital letters --A, B, C, etc .• Small stalls, pens, or hutches are being constructed in these short, blind branches of the walk. The stalls being constructed in A, C, D, and E will have expanded steel floors which will support experimental animals but allow the fecal pellets to pass through where they may be collected in trays. A series of photographs show the details of constructton, LUNGWORMLIFE CYCLES On page 60 of the Colorado Quarterly Report, April, 1956it was stated that Protostrongylus macrotis larvae obtained from mule deer in Middle Park, in Pupilla and that larvae of1'. boughtoni larvae failed to develop in these snails when exposed. Two lots of snails exposed to P. boughtoni larvae were '. activated and examined for infection only part of the-;nl:1-Uswere sacrificed and many first stage larvae were still living though the dish had had no moisture added in over a month. The dishes still containing some live snails were set . aside. Sometime later these snails were again examined and a few found infected. :It was then known that Pupilla blandi and Vallonia pulchella would serve as hests t to.l'. boughtoni. The infective larvae were characterized by the same dark .-sheath as that for P. stilesi and P. macrotis. A search was then made for -snowehoe hares to repeat these results, but when a snowshoe hare was found ~d~adon U. S. highway 24 between Divide and Florissant it was found infected EWithf· sylvilagi instead of-E: boughtoni as expected. Also a cottontail ,in:about the same locality as the snowshoe hare obtained on November 22, 1955 tn:theBuffalo Peaks area, was shot because it was thought to be a snowshoe hare, was found infected with P. svlvilaat, These rabbits.were obtained on August 27 and 28, 195~,:,'I"e5pectively.)3otll"Pupilla blandi and Vallonia pulchella were exposed to the first stage larvae obt~ined from these lungs and were SUbsequently found infected. The development of infective larvae showed the safue characteristics as found for P. stilesi. The techniques used were the . same as described in earlier reports . - ,', - .... - -=...-....,;~ ••.. - " . ',,;, INCIDENCELUNGWORMINFECTION TABLE 1 Lungs of Bighorn Sheep Examined in 1956 : Age : Locality Lun~orms found 10 Beaver Cr. Fremont Co. g. stilesi but only a few Date Sex 5/26/ F 5/28/ F M 9/2/ 9/3/ 12/5/ .iVI M 1V1 10 10 11 12/19/ 12/19/ F M Y Y broncho-pneumonia present g. stilesi,_P. rushi, and Dictyocaulus filaria Buffalo Pks. Chaffee Co. P. stilesi Pikes Pk. , Teller Co. P. stilesi Georgetown, Clear Cr. Co. P. stilesi Parkdale, FremontCo. None-pneumonia Parkdale. Fremont Co. None-pneumonia Ouray, Ouray Co. �, , , ', Enclosure No.1 .•. Approx. 1.15 Acre '/ I , ... ,' \ ," " , ," ,' ' \ ~ ' " ~ .•. " ~ ~ \ ," (\.~ ••~ 1'lfl,,'i( ~(1; ~e . . , ,, ," , - ,f,< .. ~< - . \ ," , "" \ I , \ \ .•. " Approx. Six foot existing fence extended ..3 Acre two feet No. 2 New fence V-mesh eight fe~t Fence fas tened to exis ting (Covered walks) Scale Approx •• 3 Acre high structure 1/50 inch equals EXPERIMENTAL PENS at Denver Federal 1 foot Center fig. 1 ~ �-193The Beaver Creek ewe was emaciated and barely able to stand when found. the periphry of both lungs and comprising abouthalf of eachof tbe lobes was consolidated with pneumonta which Dr. Anderson aaidfndicated i,':fairly acute pneumonia. There were adhesions but only a light lungworm infection, no lungworms were found in the histological sections. Two rams were seen; the smaller of the two was observed coughing at first steadily for about 5 minutes. then intermittently. and Irequentlyshaking head from side to side. Both rams appeared in good condition and moved off rapidly when approached. Fecal samples from both rams were found to contain lungworm larvae. The Ouray ewe was killed by a car and the two rams taken in September were killed during the hunting season while the Georgetown ram was shot for a museum. The lungs of these four sheep were similar in appearance except that a larger more diffuse area of infection was noted on the lungs from the Buffalo Peaks. Three years have elapsed since epizootic in the Pikes Peak herd; however, the lungs examined show about the same intensity of infection as found on the average in the Buffalo Peaks herd. The Georgetown ram was reported to have had little fat present in the bod y cavity and this lung shows about the same intensity of infection as might be found in the Buffalo Peaks herd. To my knowledge Dictyocaulus filaria, found in the lung from th e Ouray ewe. has not previously been reported from bighorn sheep. The two yearling sheep had nearly complete consolidation of the entire lungs which would just float at the surface of a tub of water. No lungworms could be demonstrated in these lungs when.dissected. and no larvae observed in slices compressed between glass under the stereomicroscope, and finally chopped up and placed in a Baerman for 24 hours. The yearling ram was in fairly good condition with about 1/2 inch of fat present over the brisket and considerable fat in the body cavity. while the ewe was thin and fat absent. Date 8/23/56 8/23/56 8/23/56 1/20/57 TABLE 2 Deer Lungs Examined During 1956 & Jan • 1957 Age Location Lungworrns found Sex IV1 M Roan Cr. Garfield Co. Dictyocaulus viviparous (3) M Y Roan Cr. Garfield Co. None Roan Cr. Garfield Co. ' F Y None F u. s. 50 Monarch Pass Protostrongylus macrotis (light infection) �-194- Date 8/27/56 8/28/56 9/2/56 Kind .Snowshoe 'Cottontail' Cottontail 9/2/56 9/3/56 10/2/56. 10/2/56 10;9/56 10/11/56 10/11/56 10/14/56 10/15/56 10/15/56 11/25/56 11/25/56 11/1/56 Cottontail . Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail .Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail Cottontail TABLE 3 Rabbit Lungs EXamined 1956 . Location Lungworms found W. Divide, Teller Co. .E. sylvilagi Buffalo Pks. Chaffee ~. sylvilagi TwelvemileL. Park Co. . 'None but small discolored area Round Mt. Park Co. None but typical discoloration Fourmile Cr. Chaffee Co. None Music Cr. Custer Co. None Muaic Cr. Custer Co. 1:: sylvilagi Cherry Cr. Arapahoe None .E: sylvilagi N. Divide, Teller Co. N. Divide, Teller Co. P. sylvilagi N. Divide, Teller Co. P. sylvilagi N. Divide, Teller Co. .E. sylviJagi' N. Divide, Teller Co. ~. sylvilagi N. Divide, Teller Co. ~ sylvilagi N. Divide, Teller Co. .E. sylvilagi Platte R. Adams Co. . None EXPERIMENTS IN ARTIFICIAL TRANSiVIISSION OF LUNGWORM On October 16, 1956three hybrid sheep were obtained-from the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo, in Colorado Springs and transported to the experimental pens recently constructed at the Denver Federal Center. All three were females, one was a lamb born to one of the half-breed ewes obtained as a lamb the . preceding year from the Carpenter Ranch near Sapinero, another was a yearling, and thethird an older animal. In the same respective order Jh~se sheep are designated as L, Y, and M. Techniques used: First stage larvae obtained from the lungs obtained during the hunting season from the Pikes Peak and Buffalo Peaks areas, in which only Protostrongylus stilesi could be demonstrated, were reared to a stage of development characterized by the dark brown inner ensheathing cuticles in snails of.the genus Pupilla, and believed to represent the infective stage larvae. The shells were removed from the infected snails and the larvae counted . with the aid of the stereo-microscope while the tissues of the snails were slightly compressed by a cover slip. The infected snail tissues were then administered by means of a pipette in a small amount of water and squirted into the back of the sheeps mouth. Fecal samples were at first taken from the rectum, but later special stalls were constructed with expanded steel floors which supported the sheep but allowed the fecal pellets to pass through. The fecal samples were examined by placing the fecal samples' in a Baerman apparatus for six to seven hours or over night, and examining the material concentrated in the stem of the funnel for larvae. �-195Fecal samples were taken through February 1957 and none were ever found to contain lungworm larvae. Later Land Y werereturned to the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo. , It was decided to retain'M for further checks and eventual slaughter. It was hoped that some bighorn sheep might be obtained, and though three traps were maintained through the winter, none were caught. Clifford Moser had traps on the Poudre River a ad at Georgetown, and I had one at Glen Eyrie. , , 'I MOLLUSCICIDES, This is a continuation of the work with metalde hyde which began and was reported in the Colorado Quarterly for project W-41-R-9. The general techniques used have already been reported, but are repeated with reference to the table (table 1) which summarizes the experimental results.' The experiments were carried out by an assistant on the project, Miss F. R. Johnson. Techniques Used: 1. Snails collected in the field were screened and sorted from debris. After examination for lungworm larval infection part of the live snails were used in testing different treatments with molluscicides. 2. Petri dishes were used for holding the treated filter papers (9 cm. diameter and capable of absorbing about 1 cc. water). Treatments were applied with a spray bottle in a fine mist spray and the bottle being agitated during application. The papers were never saturated but were well moistened during treatments. Filter papers were weighed air dry before and after treatments; but this technique failed to give us the amount of active Ingredients applied. 3. Ten snails were usually used in each dish and were either PupJUa:hlandi or P. muscorum. (A few Vallonia were used in one experiment). -4. After treatment and approximately 24 hours exposure, the experiments were terminated and the survival of snails determined. either by their induced activity by moisture in a clean container or were sacrificed and death determined by removing the shells and examining under the stereo-microscope. Ffndtngar The results separate experiments: Treatment Distilled Water No. Test Snails 170 a-re presented in the table which summarizes ten TABLE 3 Total Dead % Mortality' Snails 9 •05% No. Replications No. (Total) Replications . with Mortality 17 2 Aerosol OT-B (1. 5%). 101 29 .29% 10 6 3% Melaldehyde plus Aerosol 20 20 100% 2 2 ��-199- July, 1957 JOB COiVIPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT S &ateof. Project ~C~O~L~O~RA~D~O~ _ No. __ W;..;....-,;;;,9,;;;,5_-,;;;,R;.,.-..:;1:.-.-l....:In:;;;.,;;:'(;.,;e;,;;;s.;;tI;;;;;· g!..;a;.;.t.;;;.io;.;.n,;;;,s;;....;;.o,;;;,f...;d,;;;,i..;.,s..;.,e;;,;a.;;;.se.;;.s..;.-..;;an. _ affecting game animals. Job No. 2 Title-Study of cysticercosis of mule deer Period Covered:_....;;;;M;;;a:;:r;.;:c;,:h~;...6;:;.J,!-;;,19;;;.5;;;.6;;....:;to.::...;F;..;e;.;.b;.;.r:..:u;.:;a:;:r~y...;2=-8~,~19;;.. _ This job was only to be undertaken if a full time asststant was obtained, on the project. Therefore, no work on this job was undertaken during ,this .segmeat of the project. Objectives: 1. To ascertain the incidence of infection. 2. To ascertain the prevalence of the adult tape worms in wild and domestic carnivores. 3. To determine what the extent of infection is among deer and domestic sheep. 4. To repeat experimental transmission work done by Mr. Jesse Nilliams and confirm his results. Value: Deer harvest by hunters in areas of heavy infection among deer would be affected, and domestic sheep carcasses are condemned as food when cysticercosis infections are noted. Therefore, this problem is potentially one of great economic importance. Knowledge of what carnivores harbour the adult parasites and the conditions that favor the spread of the infection would indicate the best means of controling the parasite. Prepared Date:. by: Richard E. Pillmore ;;;.Ju=1~y~,~1~9~5~7 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��July, 1957 -201JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W-95-R-l; Investi!7ations of diseases and paras:.:,it::;;:e;.:s~ _ affecting game Job No. Period Covered: 3; General Investigations of disease and parasites ~:: .";'" March 6, 1956 to Februarv 28, 1957 Abstract: A report of leptospirosis among deer and cattle was investigated in the vicinity of Newcastle, Colorado. The literature on leptospirosis was reviewed and a brief informational leaflet was prepared for departmental personnel. Fresh and preserved gastrointe stinal tracts, collected from the Buffalo Peaks herd of bighorn sheep, were examined for parasites and the results reported. Autopsy reports are given.for th ree bighorn sheep examined during 1956, all three suffered from pneumonia but qpiy one was infected with lungworm and that a light infection. Cards were prepared for recording ~d'fi1ing information on game diseases in Colorado in order to make this information more readily available in the future. Objectives: To investigate reports of disease outbreaks among game animals and determine the need for further investigations. To assemble information on the parasites and diseases of game animals in Colorado and to inform personnel of their significance in game management. : !,-- LEPTOSPIROSIS Techniques Used: The available literature was reviewed. The area from which the disease was reported was visited, interested persons were contacted, _ and an attempt made to collect additional animals that blood samples might be obtained for dtagnosts, Additional literature was obtained and a leaflet was written. i. �-202Findings: On May 22, 1956, after a short review of the available literature on leptospirosis, I met Paul Gilbert, leader of the deer-elk project, and together we contacted Mr. Dallas Knause, veterinarian practicing in Rifle, Colorado. We learned the results of serum samples obtained by Mr. Knause, which were tested by Dr. Hammarlund, School of Veterinary Medicine, Colorado state University of Ft. Collins, and the extent of the losses experienced by the ranchers affected. We then visited one of the ranches on West Elk Creek north Newcastle and attempted to collect deer in this area but were unsuccessful. A letter was sent to Dr. Baker, who was cited by the Pittman-Moore Co. as the. authority for a statement that deer served as a reservoir for the .leptospirosis organisms, but no an swer was ever received. On August 23, 1956 Ray Boyd and I assisted Harold Hood, trapper, in some control work on Roan Creek and obtained blood serum from six deer which were sent to Dr. Hammarlund. One of the samples was not suitable for examination but the other five were negative. Additional details are given in the leaflet which is here incorporated into this report. LEPTOSPIROSIS This Spring, Ralph Dodo a rancher on West Elk Creek near Newcastle, Colorad 0 lost 80 of an expected calf crop of 160 to abortion or still birth. The herd has been built up by him without introduction of new animals over a period of years. Since he vaccinates for Bang's disease, serum samples were taken from 11 of his cows and sent to Dr. Hammarlund at Ft. Collins to be tested for leptospirosis; of these- 8 gave positive reactions, 1 was classed as a suspect, and 2 gave no reaction. As deer frequent the vicinity of his haystacks, and probably also as a result of a statement on an informational sheet accompanying a Pittman-Moore bacterin or vaccine which stated that deer were a known reservoir for the disease, serum samples were taken from three deer. These all gave positive reactions. The veterinarian at Rifle, Dallas Kanuse, handling this case has so far found only two other herds so infected, and these run on the same summer range as the Dodo cattle on Meadow Creek. At least one of these other ranchers has built his herd through recent acquisition from other areas. The Rocky Mountain Laboratory of the National Institute of Health at Hamilton, Montana was consulted. Dr. stoenner replied in a letter in which he stated that in 1954he had examined 49 serums from deer taken during the hunting season in Montana on a watershed on which there were many herds of cattle infected with Leptospira pomona. He further stated that such animals as the beaver and muskrat would bear investigation as a reservoir for infection. �-203- A year earlier a rancher in the Uncompagre area complained to the game department that deer were responsible for infecting his cattle with leptospirosis, but since he did not vaccinate for Bang's disease and no serological tests were made, the 'comptaint was not taken very seriously. apparently. Leptospirosis is the general name for disease caused by a spirochaeta of the genus Leptospira. Several species of this organism are known which can only be differentiated by their specific antibody reactions in serological , tests. The animals principally affected by this disease are dogs, rodents, and horfed-animala, th ough man is frequently affected also. In 1886, Weil described the symptoms of the disease in humans, but it was not untill916 that the organism responsible for the disease was identified as a Leptospira. In the United States three species of Leptospira are of importance, in that they may infect man. They are: j.. icterohemorrhagiae and..b canicola which are responsible for canine leptospirosis or infectious jaundice, and1:..pomona which is the cause of bovine leptospirosis. Canine leptospirosis was discovered in the United States in 1937 and bovine leptospirosis in 1945. The bovine type was first discovered a few years earlier by Russian .workers in 1935. The occurrence of the disease is world wide though other species of the organism are involved. Although the disease, Weil's disease, has been known for some time, it only recently is receiving much attention, which may account for its seeming increase and importance in this country. The symptoms of 'leptospirosis may be described as acute, chronic, or latent, and may be eastly confused withthoseof some other disease. Diagnosis is therefore difficult probably because areas reporting the most cases do not represent areas of greater incidence but reflect more the interest of workers. Robert Byrne advocates an educational program to bring about public awareness and research aimed at finding better methods for diagnosis therapy, and prevention through vaccines. The Leptospira organism may enter the body through the intact mucous membranes or through wounds. These organism are passed in the urine of the infectedanimal and may also be found in the milk of an infected animal. They can live for several days in water and waterborne infections are known to occur. Infection is most prevalent among slaughter house workers, veterinarians, fishermen, or farmers, in short, those persons having most intimate contact with the animals or materials contaminated with the urine of the infected animals. The disease may occur during any month of the year but has its highest incidence from June through September. In man the incubation period is from 3 to 9 days following which there may be chills, high fever, muscular aches or pains, and some gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea. The fever period may last about 5 days. A second stage after 6 to 13 days is characterized by jaundice and bloody-urine. Convalescence, usually uncomplicated, begins after about 15 days. In some �-204instances the disease terminates fatally. however, According to Rosenberg. 50 percent of all cases attrfbuted to..k canicQla have meningeal symptoms. Two.other workers state that ·.8to 10 percent of,all cases of aseptic meningitis are leptospiral in origin and that half of these are due to~ canicola. Paul Gilbert has mentioned the illness of a department man, Holmes Fullenwider, as possibly being leptospiral in ortgfn.aftezlearntngof paralysis in huskies raised near Ashcroft attributed to leptospirosis. Ill,Jhe literature there is mention of L canicola infection among children swimming in water contaminated by cattle a~d hogs which occurred in Georgia. Ifc~ttle and hogs are infected with L. canicola as well as byL. pomona, then deer might carry this organism . too. - - In cattle the symptoms oG. pomona infection may be severe or mild. The period of inculbation is- reported to be from 1 to 2 weeks and followed bya fever stage. The kidneys; liver, and blood are affected, and mortaltty .,_. associated with failure of these organs may be high. Cows may abort or give birth to dead full term calves. Mild production is reduced and may be permanently affected by the disease. All infected cattle do not show symptoms, _resulting unsuspected cattle being carriers. The symptoms may last for some time or cattle may die suddenly after exhibiting symptoms of bloody urine; and _ jaundice for only a few hours . .' The importance of the disease among sheep is not known, but L. pomona will infect sheep and cause the death of lambs and ewes. The duration of the disease in cattle is only about two months (one author says three months) after which the organism is no longer carried. However, in hogs the disease may be carried for a year and the output of the j.. pomona organisms be even greater thanfrom cattle. . Vaccines for..k pomona have been developed which will protect a cow for about three months following which the immunity imparted by the vaccine falls off rapidly. Apparently the immunity imparted to the animal by having had the disease is not permanent • .In the treatment of the disease in humans antibiotics, aureomysin and terramycin, if administered on the first or second day of the disease are effective and st reptomysin and aureomysin are .reported to elimimte the carrier stage of the disease. In general, though, the antibiotics are not effective in the treatment of the disease. It has been emphatically stated that complete bed rest is the prime essential of treatment. This leaflet has been prepared to give to men in the field the information gleaned from the literature about leptospirosis which we in the game department will undoubtedly hear more of in the future. �-205References Byrne, Robert J. 1955-Canim. leptosptroaia and public health. Pub. Health Repts -. 70. (12):1229 - 1236 Hull, L. G. 1954 Diseases transmitted from animals to man. 4th ed 720 pp. Chas. C. Thomas Pub. Springfield, Ill, McDonald, N. R. 1955 Leptospirosis in domestic animals with special reference to the disease in cattle in Austral ia.. Vet. Rev. and Annot. 1(2}:117-120. INTESTINAL PARASITESOF BIGHORNSHEEP Techniques Used: The collection of gastro-intestinal tracts from bighorn sheep was dependent upon the cooperationof other department personnel and the individual hunters. This cooperation was greatly appreciated. A diagram was prepared illustrating the portions of the viscera desired and each hunter during the 1954 either-sex season was provided with a diagram and a map of the area designating where samples might be deposited. Department personnel assigned made every attempt to get complete samples and assisted the hunters ~llerepos~ible in transporting the samples.. ..... /1-:'" "\",/, ~:"!.~;.:;~::;:X'·::'~·~F·~lr~~~j;" ~::;~,)¥V;:';..V~;::~~ i.':::.:'.,::.-' ". \~';;~:'~:';:;' Samples were tagged with cloth tags and placed in freshformaltn, but unfortunately the,?l()~ tags were not suitable, and many became illegible. Some samples were obtained fresh and were frozen or refrigerated until examined. In examining the preserved samples the intestines were freed from the mesentery and fat. The abomasum, small intestine, and the caecum and large intestine were then separated. These were thenopened with scissors and the contents washed Intoa large pan, and the linings of-':thetract were scrubbed with the thumbs, as the contents were washed into the pan. The contents were then washed by sedimenting and decanting. -, ,.,,,.,; t..: .,.:',1 �-206- Then the volume was increased to a desirable amount and mixed by stirring and pouring from one container to another and an aliquot taken for counting. ' The aliquot was further washed by decanting and by use of fine screenbottomed cans. All nematodes were then counted in the ali<}llotwhich was usually 1/10 of the sample but in some cases 1/8 of the sample was used. The recovered nematodes were then counted and placed in vials in formalin. Later some of the vials were found dry. It was generally possible to determine the kind of worms present, was noted on cards when the counts were made. and this Fresh material was examined in much the same fashion as the preserved material except that the portions of the tract could be stripped of their contents and washed before opening the tract and examining the lining. Many of the parasites recovered were not suitable for identification, being either distorted or immature; therefore the counts were not separated as to species. Findings: Findings are presented in the following tables. �Table 1. Buffalo Peaks Areas Analysis of Parasitic Infection License Number :'317 322 300 Year. Month S~x Age 1954 Sept. F' F F 2 5 4 F L L L L 7 Y 4 2 7 " " " 294 295 311 302? 312 299? 265 286 316 315 293 310 267 ? II " II " " ,." " " " " II " " " " " " " " 1\ II " " " II II II " " " " " " " " 1955 " II 135173 Mus. Col , " " " 253 262 " II Nov. Nov. " II Nov. 1956 Sept. Sept. " !VI - F M M M F lVI F F M M F F - - M M F M M M - 2 8 - 8 4 4 Y 10 10 Total Numbers of Nematodes ....S. Intestine Abomasum: Coinplete(fresh) 980 -'t~:~pplus 'few few Complete(fresh) f Incomplete among unnumbered 50 424 Complete Complete 208 560 20 440 Complete mtsstng Incomplete 434 Complete 260 130 Incomplete 260 plus 120 Incomplete missing 490 Incomplete missing none Incomplete missing 20 160 Incomplete missing Complete 520 370 110 Complete 10 90 Complete 60 Incomplete missing 100 Incomplete missing 40 Incomplete missing none Incomplete missing missing Incomplete missing missing Complete(fresh) 360 60 Complete(F resh) 420 810 Complete(fresh) none none Complete(fresh) 520 550 Complete(fresh) 530 20 Complete(fresh) 530 10 Sample - Present: L. Intestine "None None Remarks. Det. Pillmore " " samples below" "II II 50 II' None "II II 10 II incomplete " 1 Monezia II None None Det. Pillmore None Det. " none Det. PiUmore none Det. II II none "II II 10 II II none II none " II none "II II none none " .11" none 50 "II . J,' None ~:~. "II II 30 II none "II II 40 II none " none " '" " " , ~ 0 ..;J I �Table 2 Incidence of Intestinal Parasites Ostertagia sp, O. marshalli O. occidentalis Nematodirus sp, N. filicollis & other species f 00 o Nematodfrella Small Intestine Abomasum 15 of 16 Large Intestine Occasionally 21 of 24 (largely immatures) Occasionally longispiculata 5 of 24 C'\I I lVIonezia sp, Trichuris 1 of 24 sp, 5 of 25 Skrjabinema sp. 1 of 25 .. (! !. �-209Preserved material is not'i-ait~6-tlYcomparable to fresh material since the collecting tubs were not cove:tbd, and portions of most tracts became dry and brittle. Even in fresh material many of tije larval nematodes embedded in the mucosa may have been miased, Since portions of the tract were not tied off, the presence of Nematodines in the abomasum and of Ostertagia in the small intestine may have resulted from migrations after death of the host. The samples here are too small for any statistical analysis. It is apparent that the higher counts in the nematodes of the small intestine in Septemberkilled animals is the result of Nematodirella longispiculaia. which was most prevalent in the lambs. It also appears that the :N£:}_m.~to-ainus infection increases in November with many of the worms being present asIarvae in September and more likely to be missed. The four samples for 1955 and two (322 and 317) were-reported in the Quarterly for April, 1956, and some information was noted associated with infection of Ostertagia and Nematodinus. In the 1956 samples one abomasum showed a local inflammation of the pyloric portion about the stze of a 50 cent piece associated with Ostertagia occidentalis which were embedded there. It is of interest that only one tape worm was recovered. Most of the fresh carcasses seen by me have had at least one Cystice:rcus ternuicollis in th~-:inesenteries and most frequently about the-credtum. \:" . :. Or(May 26, 1956, I visited Beaver Creek no-rth of Canon City looking for a sick ewe seen: a week earlier by Curt Hammit of the Bureau of Land Management. , ' Later a sick ewe was found along-the creek walking"slowly and unsteadily. I overtook the: ewe without having to run and grasped it by the horn; she collapsed and was soon dead. Shortly after death temperature rectally was 980 F. Several cysticerci was found in the mesenteries. A great deal of mucous was present in the intestinal tract, and the nematodes were as follows: Abomasum: 40 Ostertagia small intestine: 320 Nematodirus large intestine and caecum: 40 Skrjabinemer At least 6 Wyomina were present, three ofwhich were recovered intact from the small intestines while others were present in the ducts of the liver. The uterus contained the decomposing cotyledons of the placenta and was white in color and of doughy consistency. In December, 1956, .two yearlings, one a male and the other a female, were picked up at Parkdale in the Arkansas Canyon west of Canon City. The ewe was quite emaciated while the ram was in good flesh. Both were dead of pneumonia, but no lungworm was found. The gastrointestinal tracts were placed tnformalm, �-210but have not yet been examined for parasites. It seems very. likely that other sheep in this area must also have died, but no reportshave been received of carcass es or sick sheep. The leaflet which follows was written and sent to field personnel. The leaflet shows the form of the file cards which were printed and the method of filling outthecarrs is demonstrated. I have filled out . . .approximately 100 of these cards but there has been no response from the field. . ' HUNTING INFLUENCED OF GAME ANIMALS BY KNOWLEDGE OF DISEASE R. E. Pillmore Few people will eat meat which comes from an animal they know or suspect was diseased, unless thoroughly convinced that the disease was not dangerous and that all infected parts could be detected and discarded. Even then some persons would give the meat away or discard it rather than eat it themselves. Knowledge of disease among game animals may deter a hunter from hunting certain species or certain areas, or as an extreme example even prevent him from hunting altogether. There are many instances which illustrate the reaction of individuals to knowledge of disease in game animals, some of which I shall mention. Certainly, disease is a concern of game managers not only for mortality they cause among game but also as they may affect license sales or hunting pressure. There was an instance where some deer meat heavily infected with cysticerci was taken to a laboratory operated by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. The persons having the meat explained, "We wouldn't eat this meat ourselves but wonder if it is safe to.donate to some charity". Personally I have talked to a number of sportsmen who claimed they wouldn't hunt bighorn sheep because they werediseased .. At least one such person obtained applfcation for a license after I assured him that even though infected with lungworm the bighorns would be in good flesh with the infection confined to the lungs which-are normally discarded anyway. There have been several inquiries from would be rabbit hunters worried about disease in rabbits (Tularemia); or, one man complained that his wife wouldn't let him huntbecause she was worried about tularemia and he wanted us to convince her .A.ccording to figures of the U, S. Public Health Service cited by Yeathe r and Thompson (1952), Colorado has had only 94 cases of human tul aremiadurfng the period from 1924 to 1949 while Il hnois has had 3,044. �-211- Fat, vigorous animals are usually healthy, and their appearance alone will usually dispel any fear of disease. Fortunately hunting seasons are scheduled to occur when the game is usually sleek and vigorous. Occasionally animals in poor flesh are killed during the hunting season and disease may be suspected. In dressing game, hunters encounter evidence of disease which may cause them to abandon a carcass or consult game department personnel, and they mayor may not permit the hunter to take another animal depending on the circumstances. Game. department personnel frequently consult local veterinarians ill regard to such cases. Sometimes material is submitted to state or federal laboratories for the opinion of pathologists but the reports of such examinations go to the men submitfing the material and there is no accumulation of this information in the central ;bffice of the department. It occurs to the writer that a file should be set up fdr the accumulation of such information. Cards are being prepared for such a file and all field personnel must accept the responsibility for seeing to it that all pertinent information gets into this file. Sportsmen should probably be made aware of the facts concerning disease among game animals; yet, a little knowledge is apt to create unnecessary fears. That all sportsmen can be brought to understand the disease of game, precautions to take, and procedure for preserving material for examination and diagnosis seems doubtful. Certainly department personnel should make an effort to recognize disease conditions, know what precautions to take for their own safety, and see to it that diseased anaimal or organs be preserved for examination and diagnosis whenever possible. , , I <. ;SAMPLE CARD AND ENTRIES Locality: Buffalo Peaks Card No. SpOOl~S of animal: Chaffee Co., Colo. 'Bighorn Sheep (Upper east fork of Ovis canadensis canadensis Fourmile Creek) ...... How killed: Age (approx) Sex: Shot for museum group-Natl , yearling Mus. Mexico "C-ollectedby: Portions of animal submitted and type preservation l: used: Lungs. heart, and intestinal tract - fresh. Findings: (Any abnormality, pathology, kind and number of parasttes noted) Lungs: Lesions of lungworm infection on the visceral surface confined to posterior part of diaphragmatic lobe on the parietal surface concentrated on the posterior part of lobe but extending along the surface over the main trunk of the broncus to apical lobe. Only E.:. stilesi could be demonstrated. Heart: normal Intestinal tract: Abomasum 52 x 10 = 52.9_worms Ostertagia occendentalis and.Q: marshalli; Small tnrescme 55 x 10:;:: 550 Nematodirus sp.; Large intestine and caecum 4 x 10 Trichuris sp. Diagnosis: None-- Slight inflamationof upper part of abomasum. Use other side of card fdr additional information. Type examination and by whorn. Date References: Parasites only R. E. Pillmore Quarterly Report, Apr. 1956.pp44 f., = Prepared by: Richard E. Pillmore Date: July, 1957 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July, 1957 -213JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W-73-R-5 ; Introduction of Exotic Game Birds -------~~------~~~~--~----------.~------------- Work Plan No. I Job No. 1 "-. Title of Job:__ Im_E2!'~~onand liberation of Spanish Partridge. Objective: To establish a new game bird In a type of habitat where other game species are scarce or non-existent. ACl1omplis~!E.ents..:.A shipment of 116 live birds was received in Denver by atr rreight and transported immediately to Fort Collins on January 24, 1957 durfng a period of below zero weather. Three birds were dead on arrival and se~eralothers were quite droopy-looking. During the next three days, 36 of the birds died apparently from exposure combined with undernourishment brcught on by the rigors of the trip. Seven b-irds were examined at the School of Veterinary Medicine and all cultures were negative for disease-producing organisms. The remaining 80 birds were held in pens for 4-6days, then moved to a field holding pen on the Eckhardt ranch in Little Thompson Canyon northwest of Longmont. Part of the birds were released on March 20 and the remainder on March 26. All birds had gained weightand were in excellent condition when released. Feed was taken regularly to the pen area and many of the birds came to feed there following an extremely heavy snowstorm on April 2nd. On April 4th, Gurney Crawford and ;Sig Palm sawrnot less than 30 partridges fly away from the feed area and about the same Dumber of birds was seen again on April 9, April 13 and April 14•. After thai; 'the birds apparently spread. out as the weather became warmer. Prepared by: Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Gurney Crawford Date:, ~J~u~1~y~,~l~95~7~ _ � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/d87d593d62aed2984b3f59a322a595dd.pdf 86e139dcc549dafef1492954883bd48e PDF Text Text .... October, 1957 -1- JOB' C01\4:PLETION : ':: INVESTIGATIONS . ~. : , .•.Project-No, . . " '~,' ~ .. ~ . './c·e",W':"90-R-2:",,; __ '. REEORT PROJECTS •.~, " J. , ' .::;':Name:, Evaluation·of the Effects of I' '. ' Abstract: • Twenty-ntne representative plantings on the northeastern Colorado high plains were selected for monthly examination to determine the degree of wildlife -use o;fhabitat Improvement cover Each study area is described and the location, r, : s.ize/ type~,~species composition, class; understory cindadjacent cover are compared. :field'data arepresented as wildlife-use ratings on a five point scale of value '. -forpheasant nesting,' broods; hunting' and winter cover use and rabbit, dove and , small bird uSe~',,' "'1" . ";:. " '..:-:;,:_·Cultivatlon was shown to be the most important factor in determining pheasant .use ratirigs:iri<allperI.ods· except the hunting months ••. Older plantings with .; good adjacent cover 'Were:preferred during the brood and hunting seasons. Cultivation, smaller size and the presence of evergreens exerted about equal .influence on, r'abbtt-use' -ratings ~" In effect 'it' appeared'that through, a combination ··ofthe,threefa.ctors'1t might.be possible tozeduce rabbit damage to young plantiDgs~.;:!Do\Te;;,.use; ratings for plantings were influenced almost entirely by the age of the plantings. Only the older improvements, and particularly those '.C>a. . with overmature species, were rated as important to doves. Small bird use ..... ti&). ':~, ' of plantings :showed .thatvartation in:composition,' age and understory factors . '.""'. influenced the use of plantings by certain: species but that any combination of (): .:i:; ~oody perenntals will be.used by, small birds:':" .. > ........ .~,),:, . 'r~.. ;.; ."-\ -.' :,':~/...:: >:: ~.: . ,::-" ,.' :.... ;. . ': , \)-., .•. The:average pheasant .•.use-rating for nesting was so low (1. 45) that it seems . : probable the plantings can never be considered important as a source of ~dph,easantprod,~gtion~.:,Nesting values could be improved by not cultivating, by fUrnishmg~,wafer'w:ithinplantings and by assuring good adjacent cover; but -it appear~Ii)l:tt,ltresults -would riot .justity expenditures, '.' '. ' :.~. •••.• , ••.• I _", ~ '. : -l' > •• , . '~"':; •. ,t', .. • �-2- -, \ 1.; Pheasant use of plantings was rated highest during the hot summer months, but reasons for the pheasant movement from other cover to habitat improvement cover in this period were somewhat obscure. Non-cultivated, older plantings with good adjacent cover were preferred by hens for brood shelter. The average pheasant-use rating durfngthehunting period was2. 07 and it appeared that pheasant use during the fall may be more important than duri.ng other periods of the year because an increased harvest is indicated. Overmature plantings were slightly preferred during the hunting period, but field data suggestedthat .~llplantings can be expected to playa part in increasing harvest. Use ratings during the winter period indicated a pheasant concentration in woody cover but gave.no .indication of the influence of such cover on survival of birds during blizzards. Non-cultivated areas with good adjacent cover were preferred during the winter', but smce such ground cover would be inundated by heavy snows it seems doubtful that the ratings can be considered a good measure of the actual winter cover value of the plantings. Obje~~ To determine the amount of use of established habitat improvement plantings by wildlife and to determine the age at which plantings become effective •. Techniques Used; Twenty-nine plantings on the northeastern Colorado high plains wheat land were selected for examination. These plantings were considered to be fairly typical of either the habitat plantings being established under the habitat improvement program or of permanent of natural cover which could be duplicated, Each of the areas w 5.6 searched on foot, with the aid of a dog, once a month from June, 1956, through iVIay,1957. All evidence of .wildlife use, such as game flushed, nests, tracks, hair, feathers .and scat, was recorded. Study Areas: In the description of study areas which follow, each planting. is tabulated according to location, size, type species composition, class, understory and adjacent cover. Since some of these terms are not selfexplanatory they will be defined as follows: Location: The legal description, to the nearest quarter Section, of the plots 'of land on which the plantings are located. Size: The approximate outside measurements of the area covered by the plantings. Since plantings, regardless of size, must be considered in their entirety, . no attempt was made to select plantings of comparable size or to evaluate wildlife use on a proportional basts, Type: In general, the plantings examined were classed as typical windbreaks with several rows running lengthwise of the planting. Of the non-windbreak types, timberclaims and natural areas were characterized by generally random arrangement of plants while the esthetic planting and abandoned farmsteads had random arrangements of rows. '~" �-3Species composition: self explanatory term - a list of trees and shrubs growing in the planting named from north to south unless otherwise indicated. Class: Each planting was classified according to age and general species composition or type. The plantings were grouped as YOllng,young-mature. mature or overmature according to their general appearance. These groups cannot be considered equivalent to actual chronological age because an untended planting with slow growing species might remain young-mature for years while a cultivated, chronologically younger planting became mature. In general, a young planting had been just recently established; a youngmature planting consisted of young to mature plants which appeared to be permanently rooted; a mature planting was one in which a few of the plants had reached full expected growth; and an overrnature planting was one in which most plants were mature and decadence was evident in at least part of the planting. Within each age group plantdngs were classified as deciduous, evergreen, mixed, timber claims or natural cover areas.' -_Understory: A generalized description of the ground cover beneath the woody perennial planting. Where no cultivation was done the understory was generally representative of some stage of the normal succession to shortgrass. Adjacent cover: a listing of the crop types of land uses occurring within two to three hundred yards of the planting. -Since a crop could have been planted, harvested and the land plowed during the study period the cover listed is that which was present during the growing season and was represented as crop residue during the fall and winter. Area 1 Location: SE 1/4, S 6, T 8 N., R. 44 W.; Phillips County. Size: 1320 x 65 feet Type: windbreak, 4 rows Species: plum, Ch. elm, P. pine, sandcherry Class: young-deciduous Understory: cultivated Adjacent: wheat, roadway Area 2 Location: SE 1/4, S. 21, T. 8 N., R. 49 W.; Logan County. Size: 1745 x 65 feet Type: windbreak, 5 rows Species: sandcherry, plum, hackberry, P. pine, R. olive Class: young mixed Understory: cultivated Adjacent: wheat, pasture �-4Area 3 Location: NE 1/4, S 1, T. 6 N., R. 44 W.; Phillips County. Size: 800 x 140 feet Type: windbreak, 7 rows Species: 2 sandcherry, 2 plum, C. elm, plum, P. pine Class: young mixed Understory: partially cultivated, annual weeds Adjacent: pasture Area 4 Location: NE 1/4, S. 32, T. 7 N., R. 43 W.; Phillips County. Size: 1320x 75 feet Type: windbreak, 3 rows Species: Caragana, C. elm, R. olive Class: young-mature deciduous Understory: cultivated Adjacent: pasture, fallow Area 5 Location: NW 1/4, S. 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. ; SedgwickCounty Size: 5550 x 160 feet Type: windbreak, 7 rows Species: C. elm, R. olive, 2 hackberry, plum, 2 sandcherry Class: young-mature deciduous Understory: partially cultivated, annual weeds Adjacent: wheat, abandoned field Area 6 Location: NW 1/4, S 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W., SedgwickCounty Size: 500 x 125 feet Type: windbreak, 8 rows Species: sandcherry, C'. elm, 3 locust, 2 C. elm, cottonwood Class: young-mature deciduous Understory: partially cultivated, annual weeds Adjacent: abandoned field, dryland alfalfa Area 7 Location: SE 1/4, S. 3, T. 6 N., R.51 W. ; Logan Size: 415 x 95 feet Type: windbreak, 5 rows Species: 2 C. elm, 3 locust Class: young-mature deciduous Understory: shortgrass and annual weeds Adjacent: pasture, abandoned farmstead ...... �-5Area 8 Location: NE 1/4, S. 21, T. 8 N., R. 49 W.; Size: 300 x 40 feet Type: windbreak, 3 rows Species: C. elm Class: young-mature deeidueus Understory: annual weeds and grasses Adjacent: wheat Logan County. Area 9 Location: NE 1/4, S 2 4, T. 7 N. R. 51 W. : Logan County Size: 500 x 55 feet Type: windbreak, 4 rows Species: alternating juniper and hackberry - latter mostly removed Class: young-mature evergreen Understory: cultivated Adjacent: pasture, farm buildings Area 10 Location: NW 1/4, S 19, T 10 N., R 43 W. ; Sedgwick County Size: 1320 x 110 feet Type: windbreak, 4 rows . p . SpeCles: ~. pme Class: young-mature evergreen Understory: partially cultivated, annual weeds Adjacent: abandoned field, fallow, road Area 11 Location: NW 1/4, S. 5, T. 6 N. R. 49 W.; Size: 1850 x 35 feet Type: Windbreak, 2 rows Species: C. elm, juniper Understory: young-mature mixed Class: cultivated Adjacent: wheat and fallow Logan County Area 12 Location: NW 1/4, S. 29, T. 6 N., R. 48 W.; Logan County Size: 1800 x 75 feet Type: windbreak, 8 rows Species: Caragana, plum, C. elm, 3 P. pine, squawbush, caragana Class: young-mature mixed Understory: annual weeds and perennial grasses Adjacent: pasture �-6Area 13 Location: NW 1/4, S. 13, Size: 1200 x 40 feet Type: windbreak, 2 rows Species: boxelder Class: mature deciduous Understory: cultivated Adjacent: pasture, fallow T. 6 N. R. 51 W. ; Logan County. Area 14 Location: NW 1/4, S. 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. ; SedgwickCounty Size: 520 x 130 feet Type: windbreak, 6 rows Species: 2 cottonwood, 2 plum, 2 cottonwood Class: mature deciduous Understory: partially cultivated annual weeds Adjacent: pasture, abandoned field Area 15 Location: NW 1/4, S. 35, T. 7 N., R. 43 W. ; Phillips County Size: 265 x 125 feet Type: windbreak, 9 rows . Species: C. elm Class: mature deciduous Understory: perennial grasses and annual weeds Adjacent: pasture, alafalfa Area 16 Location: NW 1/4, S. 13, T 6 N., R. 51 W.; Logan County Size: 2370 x 30 feet Type: windbreak, 2 rows Species: E - W P, pine, juniper Class: mature evergreen Understory: cultivated Adjacent: fallow Area 17 Location: SW 1/4, S. 18, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. ; SedgwickCounty Size: 220 x 110 feet Type: windbreak, 5 rows Species: E-W, juniper, P. pine, 3 C. elm Class: mature mixed Underst ory: cultivated Adjacent: sorghum, farm buildings (occupied from Feb. 1957) . �-7Area IS Location: NE,l/4., S 14, ,T. 9N., R. 43.W• .; SedgwickCo. Size: 2100 x 30 feet Type: windbreak, 2 rows Species: hac~berry and juniper', P. pine and elm Class: mature mixed Understory: annual weeds and grasses Adjacent: fallow ' Area 19 Location: SE 1/4, S. 10, T. 9 N., E. 44 W. ; SedgwickCounty Size: 1060 x 1060 ~'.1500"feet (triangular) . , , .. Type: esthetic planting on curve 'Of highway Species: juniper, P. pine, plum.vltlac C. elm Class: mature mixed Understory: annual weeds and grasses Adjacent: highway and secondary Toads, fallow, wheat' , Area 20 Location: SW1/4, S. 16, T. 1,0.N..., cR.. 43 W. ; Sedgwick(~oun~y Size: 350 x 40 feet ' Type: windbreak, 3 rows Species: C. elm Class: mature deciduous Understory: annual weeds Adjacent: fallow, wheat Area 21 Location: NW 1/4, S 19,. T. S'N. R. 44 W~; Phillips Co. Size: 3S0 x 150 x 40 feet (L shaped planting) Type: Windbreak, 4 rows SpeCies: C. elm , Class: mature deciduous Understory: annual weeds Adjacent: fallow Area 22 Location: NW 1/4, S. 22, T. 8 N. R. 44 W. ; Phillips County, Size: 220 x 90 feet Type: windbreak and abandoned farmstead planting . Species: cottonwood, boxelder, juniper, P~ pine, locust, C. elm Class: overmature mixed Understory: partially cultivated, ru.mualand-perennial weeds' ,; ,', Adjacent: fallow, wheat �-8Area 23 Location: NW 1/4, S. i i, T. 8 N., R. 45 W; Phillips County .Size: 1056 x 80 feet Type: timberclaim Species: locust, C. elm Class: young-mature timberclaim Understory: grass and annual weeds Adjacent: corn, fallow Area 24 Location: NW 1/4, S. 22,· T. 7 N., R. 45 W. ; Phillips County. Size: 1725 x 110 feet Type: timberclaim Species: boxelder Class: young-mature timberclaim Understory: grass Adjacent: wheat Area 25 Location: NE 1/4, S. 8, T. 6 N., R. 50 W.; Logan County Size: 275 x 110 feet Type: timberclaim Species: boxelder Class: mature timberclaim Understory: annual weeds Adjacent: fallow Area 26 Location: NE 1/4, S. 13, T. 6 N., R. 51 W. ; Logan County Size: 1850 feet x 200 feet Type: timberclaim Species: boxelder and locust Class: overmature ttmberclalm Understory: perennial grasses and annual weeds Adjacent: fallow, wheat Area 27 Location: NW 1/4, S. 9, T. 7 N., R. 45 \V.; Phillips County Size: 1056 x 255 feet Type: timberclaim . Species: boxelder, cottonwood, plum, locust Clans: overmature timberclaim Understory: 'perennial grasses, annual weeds Adjacent: gravel pit, wheat �-9Area 28 Location: SE 1/4, S. 28, T. 6 N., R. 48 W. ; Logan County Size: 1580 x 200 feet Type: natural cover area on intermittent creek Species: willow, cottonwood, cattails Class: mature natural Understory: annual weeds and perennial grasses .Adjacent: wheat, fallow...·· Area 29 Location: NE 1/4, S. 8, T•. 7 N., R. 45 W.; Phillips County Si.ze: 645 x 150 feet ....'" ... Type: natural cover area on intermittent creek Species: cottonwood, willow Class: mature natural Understory: annual weeds, perennial grasses Adjacent: fallow Rating system for data: Because of variations among plantings in size, shape, age, species composition, understory, adjacent cover and relationship to cultural features it was impossible to assign a numerical value, such as birds or tracks per mile of row, by which evaluation of wildlifeuse could be made. Instead, each planting was rated on a sliding scale compared to an arbitrary standard. The rating system applied has five major classes: 1. No use class 2. Questionable use class: descriptive where game use seemed possible but was felt to be improbable. 3. Possible use class: descriptive where game use was circumstantial . 4. Probable use class: descriptive where game use was fairly conclusive 5. Positive use class: descriptive where game use was conclusive Wildlife use: Evaluation of wildlife use has been separated in the following presentation to show the value to each type of wildlife. Pheasant observations, because pheasants were the major game species being studied, have been subdivided to four major life history periods as follows: Nesting (June 1956, April, May 1957) Primary values during this period are evidence relating to increased production. Highest ratings were asstgned to nests, eggs, hens and very young birds. Broods (July, August, September, 1956) Prima:ry values during this period are for sheltertng; yo~g birds from sun ~d.p~e.da~i0D:'.H.igl?-~st .J:~~~g.swer_:e. assigned to broods and hens. �-10- Table 1. Ratings of wildlife use, Colorado. Study Area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ·29 nesting 0 3 0 2.5 2.5 1 0 2 0 0 0.5 scale 0 to 4, 29 study areas, Jane 1956 to May 1957. Pheasants broods hunting 0 4 0 3.5 4 4 4 2 1 0 1 3 1.5 2 1 1 1 2 2.5 1 3.5 0 1 ~ 1.5 1 1 1 1.5 2 3 1.5 ·0 1 3 1 2.5 3 3 2 2 2.5 2 2 2 3 0 4 4 3 2 0 3 2.5 3 1 2 2 3.5 0 2 2 4 0 1 2 4 2.5 2 4 2 4 1 4 1 4 0 Rabbits Mourn. Doves Small Birds 0 3 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 2 3 1 1 .1 4 0 1 3 0 3 3 winter 0 3 2.5 2.5 2 1 1 northeastern 0 2 1.;) r.: . .L 3 3 2 4 1.5 0 1.5 2 1 2 3 4 3.5 1 4 1 2.5 2.5 1 3 4 3 0 1 2 2 4 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 3· 4 3 3 1 1 1 3 4 3 2 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 4 0 2 0 2 1 1 .L 4 3 1 4 0 4 4 4 3 . �-11- Hunting (dct~i, Nov. Dec. 1956) Primary value~ ~ring this period are for concentrattngbrrds so they can be' harvested, Highest r~tings were assigned to large bird concentrations. ' Winter (January, February, March 1957)Primary vai~es during this period are for winter shelter. Highest ratings were, assigned to roosting sites and bird concentrations. Since the rating system applied is strictly artificial and based on comparison with an arbitrary. undefined standard, it was felt that possibilities for variation we~e'v~ry good, 'F'~r th{~reason, after the areas were rated for pheasant use the first ratings were laid aside and a' second evaluation was .made. Comparison of the two sets of ratings showed 23 changes (19.8 percent) of which 12 were higher and 11 were lower. In the following presentation those areas which were raised or lowered by the second evaluation are rated midway between use-classes; , , -., -_ "" Ratings for wildlife other than pheasants are based on th~ t~tal records of species flushed, _nests located and tracks and other sign noted. In asstgning ratings the total were' arranged in descending order. ":and ,broken into five general groups corresponding to tile five rating classes. This procedure , 'necessarily arranges all data around an 'approximate mean of' .2.00. Obviously, .. the system would be more desirable if it did not pre-set the average, but the variability of the records practically precluded an approach like that used on the pheasant data. '. Analyses: Within each of the plantings searched during this study, a variety offactors have combined to determined the areas' value to wildlife. Generally it was impossible to delim:it the most important factor. For this reason, final analysis of wildlife 'use has been made by comparing mean ratings of plantings within various analysis groups. The following factors were examined: , "Type :- decidiious -10 areas sampled , evergreen - 3 areas sampled ' mixed - 9 areas sampled timberolaims - 5 areas sampled natural cover - 2 areas sampled Age - young - 3 areas sampled young-mature- 11 sampled mature - 10 areas sampled overmature - 5 areas sampled Understory - cultivated - 8 areas sampled ,,"_,Partially cultivated - 6 areas sampled non-cultivated":' 15 a~.eas sampled �-12Area - - 4 areas - 6 areas - 5 areas - 9 areas - 5 areas Adjacent cover - fair to good poor to fair none to poor - 4 areas, sampled -12 areas sampled -13 areas sampled 12:20 thousand square feet 24"':':48 thousand square feet -62-71 thousand square feet -84-189 thousand square feet - 269~888 thousand square feet Table 2. - Means of wildlife use ratings, varfous oombinations, . northeastern Colorado , '.' sampled sampled sampled" sampled sampled 29 plantings, ':;' Pheasants Study Factor Aver.. Rabb. Doves SIn.B. 1.83 1. 33 1. 89 1. 72 1. 95 2.10 0.9£ 1.71 2.11 1.67 1. 89 1. 90 2.00 1.22 2.10 1. 67 1. 78 1.70 1. 90 2.40 2.60 2.70 2.40 3.00 2.60 2.60 2.00 "2.00 2.50 2.50 2.25 2.00 2.50 3.50 1.00 1.33 1. 83 1. 66 1. 46 1.33 0.33 1. 33 1.36 1.40 2.00 2.41 1. 85 2.70 . 1. 68 2.09 2.15 2.00 2.90 "2.20 1. 89 1. 85 2445 2~36 2.10 2.20 1.56 2.40 2.80 1. 91 1. 70 3.20 Understory-cultiv. partly cult. . non-cultiv, 0.89 1.17 1.87 1. 81 2.25 2.30 2.31 1.42 2.20 1. 31 2.00 2.43 1. 58 2.20 1. 63 2•.17 2.40 1.75 1.67 2.13 1. 50 2.17 2.20 Area - 12-20 thousand 24-48 square 62-71 feet 84-189 in. 269-888 area 2.00 0.50 1.20 1. 33 2.60 2.62 1.83 ' 1. 90 1.61 3.40 2.13 2.00 1. 70 1. 78 3.00 2.38 1.75 1.40 2.28 2.30 2.28 1. 52 1.55 1. 75 2.83 1. 00 1.83 2.20 2.22 3.20 2.00 2.50 2.00 1.00 2.8D 2.25 0.83 2.80 1. 78 2.80 Adjac. cover - to good to fair poor 2~25 3.50 1.75 2.50_ 0.92 1.42 2.00 2.50 2.29 2.04 1. 88 1. 88 2.56 2.15 1. 53 2.50 2.08 2408 2.00 2.25 1.62 2.25 2.25 1.69 Type Subsample nest Ever~reen Mixed Deciduous Timber. Claims Natural cover 0.00 0.67 1. 33 1. 89 1. 65 2.75 Age-young youngmature mature overmature brood hunt; wint. 1.71 �-13Di~ssion: Before attempting to discuss the ratings for planting factors shown in Table 2 it is necessary to state the limitations imposed by the study method used. First, and most important, evaluation of plantings on the basis of wildlife use alone cannot be conclusive. The method is desirable because it may help in interpretation of other data, but wildlife use is not, of itself, a valid criterion of cover value. In addition, a very important limitation is placed onthe study by the rating system. The standard used for rating was established arbitrartly and therefore has no meaning relative to known populations. Even when a rating of 4 was assigned for a specific use, as for pheasant nesting, there was no way to relate this rating to production in other cover and determine the importance of the birds produced in the planting. Finally, the method of comparing means lacks validity in a few cases because the plantings searched do not present a random selection within subsample groups. In comparing the mean rating for natural areas for instance, the rating seems quite high until it is shown that the entire sample came from the mature and non-cultivated groups. Obviously, either of these factors might be more important than the type factor. Because of the many similar interactions of factors which tend to influence mean ratings in Table2, the influence of any one factor on ratings may be less important than correlation among subgroup means according to another factor or than variance from the general pattern during certain periods of the year. Pheasant use: The mean of all ratings for pheasant use was 1.91. Ratings were lowest for nesting use (mean 1. 45) and highest for brood cover (mean 2.16). Type: Amongthe five types examined, evergreens rated lowest and timberclaims highest for year aroundpheasant use. Throughout the ratings for type however, it is apparent that values are influenced by the varying degrees of cultivation within subsamples. The evergreen cover type may actually be less -desfrable for pheasants than ofuer types, but the fact that all area.s in the . evergreen subsample were cultivated to some extent is probably the influential factor. . . In those periods when reproduction is a major function of the pheasant population the influences of other factors on type preferences are also notable. During the nesting season, natural areas rated higher than timberclaims even though timberclaims were preferred during the remainder of the year. Correlation with the factors which were measured is not shown, but there is a possibility that water; which was present in both natural areas and in no other type, influences the. cover choice of nesting hens. �-14After the. eggs are hatched a decided pheasantpreference for decidueus ..plots Is-shown in the ratings.·' Since timb.e:{e~aims, which are. also deciduous, did not receive a similar increase in pheasant use, it seems probable that the disproportionate number of small plots in the deciduous subclass was resp onsible for the higher rating.. It is very likely that otter things being equal a brood of pheasants would be less able to escape observation in a small .. plot and that the high' rating for deciduous brood covey is at least partially due to sampling error in field work. Age: Mean ratings for pheasant use of plantings show a possible direct correlation with age although mature-plantings are apparently not quite as desirable as those in the young-mature -claes, Examination d the samples reveals however that both cultivation and area size -eould be influencing means. The young age group samples dispxgpettionately' from cultivated and from larger areas while the overmature group is weighted by non-cultivated and small areas. Young-mature plantings ranked particularly high as shelter for chicks but 'were rated lower than all other age groups during the hunting season. ill both cases the :.rating may have been a function of the adjacent cover factor. The young-mature group contains all the representatives of the good adjacent cover group. Any pheasant preference f9X good nearby cover when plantings are used as brood shelter would influence .the age class ratings and, if the adjacent cover was effective as an escape mechanism, would cause a low . rating during the hunting period. Overmature plantings ranked particularly high during the hunting season. This rating may have been a manifestation of the disproportionate sample from 'large,' non-cultlvated areas: but since young plantings, with a sample weighted by small cultivated areas' ranked higher than the young-mature group with a normal sample it seems probable. that thefactoz-of age does effectpheasant cover 'preterenees.tn the hunting' pertod. . '.' ". .. " .. ; . Understory: Pheasant use ratings show a strong direct correlation with the amount of cultivation practiced within plantings. Examination of the samples shows however that the ratings may be influenced by both planting type and planting age. The non-cultivated group samples disproportionately from both the ovarmature and ttmberclaim-natural area types. Cultivated areas were rated especially low during the nesting period and especially high during the hunting period. The-nesting rating shows no' influence of' other factors, but the high hunting season rate corresponds to a disproportionate sample from' areas with good adjacent cover. �-15Area: Mean ratings of pheasant use based on plot area were quite variable and in general iu.1icated that the size of plantings probably had no influence on pheasant preferences. The group of smallest and the group of largest areas ranked higher than other sizes, but this may have been due to disproportionate sampling fromolder age classes and non-cultivated plots rather than.to area size. ,.. During the nesting per-iod, correlatien of pheasant use with area was higher than at any other period and it seems. possible that Iarger plantings are pretezred for nesting cover. Brood season influences of age are indicated by the low rating in the 84-189 thousand square foot group which samples disproportionately from the younger age classes. Adjacent cover: Year around pheasant use of plantings showed a strong direct correlation with the quality of agricultural cover adjacent to plantings. The relationship was parttcularly strong during the winter season •.. In the hunting period it seemed possible that the influences of age were more important than those of adjacent cover because the poor to fair group, which sampled disproportionately from the olde.r age classes, Jl'Iankedhigher than either . .the good or poor cover groups. Analysis: Throughout the foregoing discussion it was obvious that the interaction of various factors within subsample groups presented a situation in which delimitation· of any on~fa~to.r·a!;hdeterminative of pheasant preferences was virtually impossfble. A Itsttag.of factors which seem to be important in their interaction influences does show however that certain ones asserted control of preference ratings wherever subsamples were not completely;'" \ random. Cultivation, in particular, was demonstrated as an important influence on pheasant use rating s « particularly during the nesting and brood seasons. In the nesting season especially, pheasant production was virtually prohibited where plantings were cultivated while non-culttvated areas showed some possibilities of an influence on production. In no case however did t~e 'ratings indicate that plantings normally serve aft Important role in determining .yea.dy production. . . Fortunately, the influences of cultivation proved to be unimportant during the hunting season. One .ofthe major .pheasant management problems in northeastern Colorado appears to be that of attaining an 'adequate harvest from a pheasant population with few production problems .. · If plantings, irrespective of cultivation , do help to improve the harvest it is quite impor-tant because it means that younger plantlugs, which must be cultivated if they are to survive, can begin the function almost immediately for the benefit of sportsmen. �-16The brood season appeared to be the most sensitive period of the pheasant life cycle in demonstrating influences' of various combinations of planting factors. Agr-icultural cover adjacent to plantings was shown to be quite important during this period, and it appeared that older plantings were preferred for sheltering chicks. During the hunting season the same factozs, adjacent cover and planting age, also exerted an influence in determining pheasant use ratings .• Other sIE:!l1game: The evaluations of rabbit, dove -andsmall bird use of plantings are not as comprehensive as the analysts for pheasants fOI' a number of reasons. Most important is the fact that field work was concentrated on pheasants, and other data was collected incidentally. In addition, a vaziety of lesser- problems tended to confuse the collection of data on small game other than pbeasants. Primary among these were: a. :the fact that since the dog was punished for running rabbits and was not interested in doves or small: birds he 'was completely useless in ioeating these species: b. rabbit ratings are based to some extent on tracks, and the Significance of tracks, since they can be found on almost any road surface or bare field in the study region, is certainly questionable;' c. nests of doves and small birds were not easily located - especially since the primary study methodwas a search of the ground surface for evidence of pheasant use; and, d. . it was impossible to keep 'accurate records of the number of small birds , seen because they tended to leave the plantings only long enough to circle the observer, ' Rabbits: ' Data rating ;'ackrabbit and cottontail use .of plantings is presented in Table 2. Analysis was made by comparing means of various groups as was done for pheasants. The average of all ratings for rabbtt use of plantings was 2.14.: .'; Type: .Mean ratings of .rabbit use showed the same general pattern as the means Icrpheasant use, .Evergreen areas ranked low and timberclaims .. ranked high.' As with pheasant ratings,there was some indication that the ' influence ofculttvatton was more important than that of type. Age: Ratings for rabbit use among age groups indicate possible influences . of both cultivation and t.ype~The young age class was rated j3ignificantly lower than the other three, classes despite th!3 fact that rabbit depredation has been the cause for failure of some northeastern Colorado plantings. Since the young age class includes adisproporttonate sample of evergreen and mixed .: plantings as well as clean cultivated areas, it seems possible that evergreens are less desirable for zabbtts and that cultivation helps keep rabbits out of ; plantinga.. .., .. '.~.-:. . '."j ; �~~q ...,_to . . _"' -17Understory: Rabbit preference ratmgs show a direct correlation with the degree of cultivation in plantings. Interaction of size of planting-Is also indicated by the fact that the partially - and non-cultivated means, : which sample disproportionately froni larger areas, .do not vary as much.from each other as they ~lo;,,(rGIti~'the cultivated mean. .) ::.\ Ar~~~: Ratirig~ of rabbit use show a very .strong direct correlation with planting 'size'), Based on this data it appear's that there is some possibility .for conti'01lfug:1~abbitdamage to young trees through establishing small plantings which will not concentrate rabbits. '" , Adjacent cover: The ratings for rabbits use show no influence of adjacent cover on preferences. Ratings correspond almost exactly with the disproportionate sampling for the cultivation factor - which has already been demonstrated as influential in rabbit preferences .. ~. ; Analysis: Three factors appear to be of importance in determining rabbit-use ratings for plantings. Cultivation in any proportion within a planting causes a . corresponding drop' ill the amount of rabbit use, .larger plantings are used m9fe heavily than small ones and evergreen plantings are avoided by rabbits. It i'\ appears that clean cultivation and the establishment of plantings involving less than about 75,000 'square feet may prove effective as a means of partial control of rabbit damageto young trees, Conversely, if cover is being supplied pr'imarfly as an aid to the rabbit population, lack of cultivation and larger plots are indicated, ,.' in MourtiiAA:doves: Data rating mourning dove use of plantings is presented Tabt~:2_ ,'Analysis was made by comparing means of various groups as was done 'With 'pheasant data. Since doves are only present in the study region from April through September the sample was only half as large as the samples for other wildlife speciesv vThe ave_rage'rattng for dove use of plantings was 1. 93. Ty:pe: Dove ratings for all types except mixed areas were above average, and tlmberclatms and natural areas ranked higher than other types. The low rating for mixed areas, as well as the average rating for other types, correspond strjkingly with the degree of disproportren.among subsamples for age. The mixed group included all the representatives' ~ the young' age group and no over-mature areas while the ttmbarelatms and natural groups averaged mature. Age: What is probably the single most important criterion of dove preference is shown by the comparison of age class means. Young, and to some extent youngmature plantings, are apparently avoided while mature and overmature planting receive heavy use. Coincidentally, within subsamples the degree of cultivation in plantings also correlates with age; and area shows an inverse corr-elation. Both of these factorsmay have 'some effect on dove use, hut age seems to be the most important influence. '.: -. . �-18. . ,.. .. --." '_ .. - :.. .' .. ~ , " , Under'story:, Dove-use ratings indicate a preference Jor non-cultrvated plots, The non-cultivated group. is pr~d~~inate~y sampled from older age :classes : and timberclaim-natural plots boweverx.and these relationships are quite .. _. .. .. ' .... probably the major reasons for thehigh rating in non-cultivated plots. " ", -;. _ ,'. - '. .' . '_ : Area: .Dove ratings based on groupings by area show.no special preference for.Iarge.or, small areas.. The ~.4;":'.48. and269-88~.thousand square feet . .. .' group,~::rated.high,:probablybecause they include disproportionate samples; of timbe rclaim and natural areas while the 84-18.9thousand square feet group rated low because of a disproportionate sample of younger plantings, - r :-,;.:).i.' ": ~ ". : ,_':.; Adjacent cover; .Relationships of dove use rat41gs to quality of adjacent cover demonstrate .again influence of.ag~,and ttmberclatm-natural disproportionate subsamples. In each group ()~p~~ntings making.up the adjacent cover samples the combination of age and type factors is in direct correlation with the degree of . dove preference. ..' . ;:,:' .. , . the . ", . ~ :, : .. '. . .. . ....,', .- ;' . ;.'. ':' " . Analysts.; Dove rattngs, ,~or~ than the ratiI!gs for any other; species of.wildlife, d~moI;lstI'at~the influence of aslngle factor on dove preferences, In anygrouping, the.influence of the older age classes and the Iarge trees Intimberclatms and .....natural ;'<?o~erareas predominated; the data, shows qmteconclustvely .that where doves ,.concentrate in plantings they prefer .old.tr~es and .avoid young:ones. ".'.:. . .. . tree . . . ~ t; . .' " . - ", .. ;.... ': Small birds: Data rating small bird use of planting is presented in Table 2., Because it was impossible to count total numbers of small birds the ratings are based on..the,product of total, species. seen .and total months during which the ;pl;m:ting·.was"used.An~sysis as attempted by comparison ofmeans of vartous groups made'it obvious tha,tn~'si:rig1efactor or group of.factors was sufficiently important to be .constdered a CO'l1t~oiling-factor for all small bird species in . northeastern Colorado. ,Tllei~ was some ..indication that, ~or certatn species, notably those which are fairly rare or appear in the region only during migration, the .Iarger, overrnature plantings and those with water were preferred. For the more common spectes andthose which can he classed as restdents any , ..combination o~itees and shrubs was apparently suitable cover. .A complete breakdo-wnof small bird use wouldprobably show preference and Hmittng, factors for individual species, but .ingeneral it can be assumed thatplanting of any type willbe useful to at least a small group of species at some period ': durmgthe year: ',' " .' '.. '., . . __ .___ '. I - '. , , • • ~ • .i i.': ,.': .' • .. CO_!lcl,!sions:.Analysis of.wildlife use of.plantings assumes as a baste premise ,th?-t the planting aunder eXaIIlina,iio~are, actually an .important partof wildlife .hapitat! " In effect, the, result of asuch ,~ stddy.'is oompartson of segments of a aingle habttat; typ~tc.determine tJ;le rel:,~.ti~equality ,of the segments. An attempt wasmadein this: study however to _remoye .some of the st~icj;ly ','withintype" comparison by rating 'phea~aD.tuse on an' arbitrary, scale rather than by grouping all data on a curve and assuming the median value as the mean. In this way it was possible to allow each phase of pheasant use to establish its own level, and, if the arbitrary standard actually indicates a level at which plantings �-19- become important to the pheasant population; to infer to some .extent the .Importanee of plantings in determining pheasant production and survival. -: { Even though ratings were based on a standard not related to the median however, there was no way to compare habitat improvement cover with. agricultural cover and natural types. Thus, the average pheasant use rating of 1. 91 is only a comparative figure which may indicate a-relatively important, .or -a completely unimportant, role for habitat improvements in . the pheasanta'.Iife cycle. Further Investigations of population levels on study. areas with and without.habitat improvement plantings will demonstrate the. total effect, if any, of Improvements and allow correct evaluation of the standard. The mean rating of 1. 45 for nesting value suggests that pheasant production from habitat improvement plantings probably cannot be expected to do more than assure survival of breeding stock if nests in all other cover types are destroyed, A few plantings were rated high enough to indicate tree claim nesting as a factor in production, - but the qualities which make plantings desirable durtng the nesting season cannot-usually be made available in habitat improvement plantings. i Cultivation appeared to be the most important factor in determining nesting values. Woodyperennial species do not supply 'suitable ground cover, and in order to make nesting areas available it would.be necessary to allow weeds to growbetween shrub rows. Since very few plantings have exhibited satisfactory survival in competition .with weeds, particularly during the first few years, it would be virtually impossible to raise nesting values to a high level without sacr-ificing acceptable survival rates. The presence of water was also demonstrated as a factor which might be used to .attract-nesting hens.· Under the cover and water conditions existing in the study region the establishment of arttficial watering devices could be worth consideration if nesting success were known to be better tn.habitat improvement plantings than in other cover types. Considering the characteristic lack of ground cover in a well maintained planting however." it is doubtful that any mechanical device could be expected to increase pheasant nesting in the types • .Finally, there was some evidence that hens prefer plantings with good adjacent cover during the nesting season. Considering the low number'ofnests actually located in plantings it seems probable that nesting usually .oceurs in nearby cover and the primary function of habitat improvements is to 'f(lrn1sh resting aile}dusting sites. �-20During the hot summer months habitat improvement plantings received the highest mean rating for any 'period of the pheasant life 'cycle. The increased number of birds in the population, and the probability that young pheasants are less able to escape detection may have been partially responsible for the apparent greater use at this time. There seems little doubt however that plantings were important in furnishtng eit!ie.,rshade or protection from' predation;' 'The exact relationship-of habitat plantings to brood survival was not determined. in this study ~ Field data shows that harvest either .disturbs young birds or removes some value from small grain cover so that pheasants are forced to move. In any case, as soon as combines begfn harvesting the grain from a field the majority of birds in the area migrate to the nearest habitat planting. - .. , Three factors were shown to have some influence on the amount of pheasant use recorded during the brood season, The 'cultivation, age and adjacent cover factors seemed to be about -equafly important. Non-cultivated 'plots , .probably have greater value for you~.:birds because insects are more abundant and ground cover is' available. Young plantings seemed to have very little value, probably because-the shrubs and trees were not large enough to furnish shade, but young-mature to overmature areas were considered to be about equal in usefulness. Adjacent cover influences were strongerthan during the nesting season and appeared to be very important to hens with:chicks. It is possible however that good adjacent cover was actually the nesting cover and that greater use of plantings near cover is a manifestation of production where cover was present. During the fall, the average rating for pheasant use of plantings was 2.07. Data from a hunting success: study in 1955indicates that thisIevel may be quite important in increastng the number of pheasants harvested - particularly on the opening day of the season.i Although no intenstve determinations have been made, 'all the' evidence indicates that nesting success and brood survival are " .." not the major problems in northeastern Colorado that they are elsewhere. The ..primacy management problem is in fact the low recorded harvest compared. to the enormous potential. If habitat plantings serve no' other tunettonthan to concentrate birds where hunters are able to take a portion of the yearly surplus . which would otherwise go to waste they may be able to justify the costs of planting and maintenance." Only one factor appeared to have a major: influence on the concentration of pheasants during the hunting season months. A preference was indicated ~. for overmature plantings and the improvements with larger trees. Very few areas however received ratings of zero, and in those cases where no pheasant use was recorded the influence of other factors was very evident. From the standpoint of successful management the most important finding was the lack of correlation between pheasant use and cultivation. Throughout the remainder of the year pheasants preferred non-cultivated plantings, but �. -21during the hunting period there was.little evidence to indicate any preference for one degree of cultivation over another. This relationship could be very important because it indicates that the increased harvest from improvement .plantings will take place regardless of ground cover conditions within' plantings. Winter can.be the critical period for pheasants on the dryland areas. Killing blizzards do not occur often, but enormous mortalities have been suffered because winter cover was not adequate during such storms •. After the. last major blizzard Innortheastern Colorado the pheasant population recovered within two to three years without closed seasons or the release of additional birds. Five to seven years and even longer have been required however to convince some sportsmen and landowners that a declining hunter success ratio, concurrent with an increasing number of hunters, is not indicative of a population which has not.recovered. .'. ." . \ Because of the public relations factors involved, the establishment of winter cover plantings probably has a value somewhat;in excess of the actual value of the cover to pheasants. Where improvement 'cover is available, even in small patches, birds are found concentrated after storms and those representatives of sportsmens groups who can be persuaded to participate in field trips can be shown a more than impressive sample of the'vi rtually extinct" pheasant. In the winter, cultivation was again an important factor in determining the pheasant-use level for improvement plantings. Secondarily, pheasants preferred areas with good adjacent cover, usually in the form of wheat stubble. In evaluating these relationships however it seems likely that neither one is actually important as a consideration of winter cover values. Obviously, a storm involving sncw and wind conditions which could kill birds would also cover any weeds or adjacent wheat stubble and render them useless as shelter. Based on this conclusion it seems probable that winter cover values are not estimated at all by the average rating of 2.03. About the only thing that can be said is that where good ground cover can be maintained, both within and adjacent to the planting, pheasants will be attracted; and if storm does occur they will be in a position to take advantage of the winter cover afforded by the woodyperennial species, a Throughout almost all phases of the evaluation of habitat plantings for rabbit use the factor of cultivation was dominant. Secondarily, smaller plantings and those with evergreens were rated less desirable for rabbits. Since rabbits in the study region assume greater importance as pests than as game the primary value of this data is probably in the fact that it indicates possible methods of reducing rabbit damage to young trees. �, ,,' -22The inescapable conclusions shown by the data oil dove use is that age, to the virtual exclusion' of all other factors, determines the value of plantings to dove.":,Other factors can be expected to influence some-use, but plantings established primarily for doves will not generally be effective during' the early years. No factor or combination: of factors had-any apparent .influence 011' small bird use of plantings. Further analysis of field data could show a more or: less intraspecific relationship for certain groups, but the general concluston suggested by the data is' that any planting will attract small brrds of some .type, " \ '-,' 'f' ': . ... ."".. ,', Prepared by: L. Jack Lyon Approved by: LaUl;'eIice E. Riordan ----------~~------~ Federal Aid Coordinator Date : : Octcbe~r::-J..' __ 1_9_5_7_' _ . " : '" : .. : : ~:.,. .. . ~. :;.. '," .'.- :' .1 .. , ',', '-', • .- ". ~.. : :..: : . ~ ',' ,> . ':: " .;- t . .• ~ . ,::.," " .,'. -', . .'. ',. " _.i: �October, 1957 -23, JOB COMPLETION REPORT/~ INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS':: State of COLORADO ~--~~~~~---------------- on Wildlife. Title of Job:,__,_ _;P=-h=ea::.s::;an=t:...=.P..;:o.p..;;;u=-la::.t;;;;i~o::.n_;St=u..;;;d;;:"ie=-s;;._ -...,. __ ....,...,. _ .',,:. ".. ~;':-.; ,,:.':'"_... ,,-~, ~<.'., Abstract: -Twominute crowing counts were taken at two points on each study . '.area threetimes during thesprtng ofl957 . The lowesf'of th'ese;,wa.s,dfscar(jed an(ffhe~sum o(the othertwo compared to similar counts,frain 1955:and 1956 : '6yth~:hD:31ysls of-variance. .' ,) :<,} , " . ; . :~,.'.~ : '.: " ~.. , The :study a.~eas ()f Project W-90-R were originally selected to allow examination of Density, Type, Location and their interactions. With Yeah'-, as:a.fbtirth variable there were 4 main factors, 6 first order interactions, 4 second order iilteraCtions" and one' third order interaction - all but: one. Otwnich were s'ignificanf aft:i{~:10 level:' The amount of stgniffcance in the test left litili:}doubt that 'fabtor~ other than: habitat improvement were responsible' ,for major vartations in pheas'ant popuraticn Ievels , Because of these influeriC'es'it:was;f~ltlliat only the four major factors' 'involved samples large enough to 'allow'discusston with. out makfn~ adjustment for land-use vartahiltty ~ ."~,, : _L The following conclusions were suggested by examination of the variate means: , ='> '1. 'Areas'witli'9plantmgs supportsignific'aIitryhigher:ph~asaiit .I . " . .'.: population than .areaswtths plantings and these in turn have-more birds 'than cbllt-ror~1as. ' (i':'~' , " :'. :; '~2." 'Th~northern third of the study region has' a s1giiificantlji higher phelisant 'popuia~ibrithan the central third and this in turn ,has Significantly mor-e'birds than the southern third. . . ': -' \"., ;:,'" 3. The pheasant population in the study reg10h has been'sigritlicantly higher each year of the study. , - ~-.,.,'- .~.~. ;-:'~/' --;- ..•. "·'f·_' ,: ." ,',_" .:' .'. : ,. :" v: •.:.., .. , ". .,~',. 4:' ".Excludingthe' possibility that inclusion of.three. control.' are as ', ~ith' ea6b.:grotlppf sj~' phuitedareas. is adding a sigIiifcanf,~~a~~:pheasaiit; P()Phlat'ions are .signific~tly higher where evergreen 'philitmgs: are'present hll<fsigritlicaIitly: l~~ei' where mixed pIantings are 'I(. i ., (]~. :,e' . , C "'.0,·, .' " ,',. , ... ", '. ',.: ,.,' r '', •.••' '.r'", ;, ", •... , ,,' L. ," ~._.-:~". .-,.~-.' •..." "', 'pre-sen:t~ ~: • " ~. ~,~: _ -~, ',' r ~,. .'. " ~.. .. _ z; .: - - , .. ~. . , . '. . S". !o':.~;;.!~. �:'.-, . -24- Aerial counts were conducted on six study areas on the afternoon of April 5, 1957. Snowconditions were suitable for such a census at the beginning of the count period, but by the time counts were completed so much snow had melted that pheasants were hard to see. As a result, the aerial count data was too inconclusive for analysis. Roadside counts were conducted at monthly intervals on all study areas. Data was examined with the analysis of covariance which adjusted pheasant counts for variation in time and mileage and tested Denslty, Location, Type and their interactions for signtftcance. The only significant factor was Density. Examination of the corrected means showed thatmore Pheasants were recorded on areas with 6 plantings than on control areas. Because the data presented in this report is mostly preliminary in:nature and cannot be fully interpreted without adjustment for land-use variatton .' .. · oil study areas, no management recommendations are presented. •Objectives: To determine, for year to year. and area to area comparison, the relative population level of pheasants on the ..study areas.' This data ... will be used as the basic test of the effect of habitat improvement plantings on pheasant populations in the study region. Differences in population levels and mortaltties on planted. and control area pairs will show _theactual value ".-:; of habitat development work. . . .. Techniques Used: The stated objective of this job is to determine pheasant · population levels on all study areas .and establish the influence of habitat .impl'oyement plantings on these .levels , Accordingly, crowing counts and roadside counts. were conducted on ~ach of the 26 study areas involved at appropriate periods during the year and aerial counts were. made on a few areas. A short descr-iption of the tecllI~jques used precedes the presentation of data for each method. : ", In addition to the three :rIleasures of pheasant populations mentioned above, it was planned.to establish curves of crowing intensity, conduct a.nesting and production study, attempt census by the drive method and collect sex ratio .data for individual study areas. For a variety of reasons, work on all but the first of these objectives was either cancelled altogether or curtailed by the requirement of other work to such an extent that data is insufficient for presentation. • 0- • ..FiI'dings, Crowing Counts: Two minute counts were taken from two points on each study area at three different times durmg the spring of 1957. These .counts are comparable to counts taken from the same points during 1955 ..and 1956. F~r the purposes of analysis, the Iowest count fr6m each point has been considered the 'one most likely to represent influences of wind, weather, farm machinery noise and the many other types of disturbance which may affect crowing counts. This count was deleted and the sum �-25of the other two'used a's the count for e'ach point. A single study area is therefore . represented by two counts for each year of the study. . ~ , .- Examination of the data is made with the analysis of variance using a t~ari.domizedblock design and-testing whether countIevel s for various ','. ,',' combmattons df DensitY, 'Location, Type, Year and their interactions vary significantly. ":In order to complete therandomtzed block and facilitate analysis It was necessary to calculate values for the mtssmg " area in the control block. This adds six varfates to the analysis but ,does not change the degrees of freedom; ," o , , , _! .: ~ : The arrangement of field 'routes' for crowing counts is such that control areas are co~nte(r during the daily peak of crowing activitY and areas with plantings are counted 'before and 'after the peak.' EVentually it is ' planned to correct all counts to mean sunrtse to allow greater preCision inthe analysts, At:the present time however, the crowing count curve: data available show such a wide variability that any adjustment of raw dataresults in a bias greater than that caused by the -eelatton of counts to sunrise. The analyststn Table 1 is based onunadjusted data. 0 Table',L Analysis of variance, pheasant crowing counts, 26 study areas in 1955. 1956 and 1957. northeastern Colorado. ' 'M2 ' sSZ' F (. 10) DF 155 128307.6 Source, Total Density Location Type Year' 2 . : . ~. 2 '2 2 DxL DxT DxY LxT LxY TxY Dx Lox T' ,.,'. DxLxY' DxTxY LxTxY DxLxTxY Error (.10)* , 218.0 ' 4725.6 8703.9 2.47*, 269.18*** 53.52*** ' 0 0 98'~ 57***' 11.68*** 20.50*** 6.80**'" 15.72*** 18.45*** 1.40 23768A4 4 4125.6 7241.1 2401.6 5552.1 -:6516.8 4' 495A 1031. 4 1810.2 600.4 'i388~' 0 1629'.2 123.9 8 .'8' 8 8 5198~1 2462.2 . 1852.8 7093.8" ' 649.8 307.8 231.6 886.7 7.36*** 3,49*** 2.62** 10.04*** 16 3911. 9 244.5 '2~77**'" ~< 75 '(.05)** 6624.5 (.01)*** 0' 88.3 " " .' ,J: . .: : 4 4 4 '4 436~0 47536.8 " 9451. 1 17407.8 . ~ ; .' �.:..---..•.' u··< -26TableJ shows.that.of thefour facto rs and.Ll inte..ractions, .onlyone, .the interactton of T-ype and Ye~r,·. isnot--~iiniHcallt atthe 16 'p~.rce.-~{le.vet.' Most ofthe vartables were~-'~i~'fa~t, sigiItlic'ruii to 'th~"oriepe~oont level, ' F'rom.the stM<;ipointof themajor investigation, this high degree of significance is somewhat unf~~~at~ _~~~~~seji',sugg~~ts. that~~#at Pr.~t¥gs •eitb.er, have such a,v~rJ.~p.Je-;~J¥,lll~~ce,pn,pheasants,that no pattern is discernible 9~,that the influence. 6f :p1:antings·ts sp ,subo~d~ated by other,l3,fid-u'se faCt()rs ;thiifit is Inconsequeatdal.-.: fu,.either case, it is imp()SSibie'~., without adjustih~nt for oth~r~ami7u~~ 'izrlJu~n~'es,to J~terp~~t the ~t~~~~tio; ;r,~latio~sl~i~S'~~ it seems highly probable that even the fou~ major.dtvisfons of the 'arialysis'will 'be changed 'to. some extent by adjustment, 'F~~ this'repo;t, ' smce cai~uiation of Iand-useadjustments .have notbeen completed, ._o~,Y;t,~ef()ur r.q~j0f./' ' divisions of:!he.;analys!s ;will be discus seq. These four include _27areas (54 .vartates) ,fQJ:' -.each·-m:ean~ :and .3lthough,Land-use a,dju~trI;.~nt~ill pr()b~Iy change them the change. ~iil- n.~t as. gre~t as it i.li~ybe' for -the: tnteractions., In the,f~U()wipg discusston a:.sjgnificance'ley~iof . 'i(tha~'been usedJode,t~rmin~i',!d".<·;; be .,;:.".:: :.: », ~;'.; ' .:~:: De nSity;Mean;s ;of thethree i .. ' .. -: . .". . var,io~~ _. . - ':, "., .• . .• ' .' , •• , - ",,': ",;~. .D~:r:t.sity groups _w~rt:l:.' <c -Areas withnine , ':" or more; plantingsj- ,41:.26 ". . : . Areas with stx plantings, .. ;, '.. _-39.',74", , d - 3.01 ... .-~- .. _ nc)plantlng-s ,.';..',., ';;:37.28 ,..•. ..... :.' _"""tCQntrofareas .::: "'- .••.., ,'.-...','~c.,...•·._·•.·,~~·.-....,.. .·.r· ...•..~ - _.t· J' .•... ,.,""- : •.. -_- •.,...... ',',.., . , __. ,. '.. •...•..• _,_. ".. ".,-.'_ •.. '.._.' _.. _. __ ._ ..• _........ ,.~ •.._,. .,...., J .' •••.•• ''''' , •••••••••• _. ¥. Despite the probable bias introduced by making crowing counts so that" control 'a.r.e.asare censused during the daily peak ofc rowing activity ..., . the controls.had stgniftcantly.lower counts than areas with 9 pla..')t41g~,~· . The difference between 6-plant.ing and 9 planting areas was smaller than the difference between 6 -p~~~i.ng and control areas, but in neither ~a~~ was it large enough to be stgnificant, .. , .•.. - . Location: '::;Means of the three Location Sp;>upswere:: " ..•. :., .-: \.';', .' .'. Areas in the northern .thi.rd of the region - 61.07 '.' Are,a:s in the centcal thi~d of t~~, r~g;ion -3~. 02 Areas in the southe_rn.third of the region -19.~19 Y:ar: .lV~=~~.,~~_t:l:e. ~~ree year groups were, =>,. .• . •..•••.•.•• " •• ..,........, •••.••..•• ~·H.•.• _•. ·' 'j •••••••• " 'If.•••••~••'-- < ,.,_" ,.''' •••• ~;_ d - 3. O~ t' .•....•...•• <-.-:..::-o.~..•..•......••••.... ~_.-'" ';' ",: .~: 1955 pheasant crowing .counts - 25. 15 1956 pheasant crowing. counts - 43.69 1957 pheasant crowing counts - 49.44 ,.... •••.. -""',. ,_ •._..•.••.•.••. ,." d - 3.01 " �-27Based on the 1955mean crowing count for the .26 study areas of Project. W-9q--H, the pheasant population: in northeastern Colorado has almost doubled in the three .years counts have been made. A .significant increase in pheasant density has been .necorded each year, but the .increase from 1956to 1957 was not as great as the, increase from 1955 to 1956. This may indicate only a leveling off of.the population,': but comparison of the two· winter periods involved.suggests that the.severttyofthe weather may have had an influence on the size of the increases. 'Although no great amount of .... mortality was recorded, the winter or'1~~6~1:957. was much more severe than the winter of 1955-1956. -Atthe level of individual years this observation is not particularly important, but-It does serv~,.;to;indicate the possible importance of the interactions •. After adjustments.for the influence of crop acreages have beenmade, ~the interaction of Density: and Year will show the effect of plantings, if any, in allowing more pheasants to overwinter successfully. Type: The means of the .three Type groups were: . ~, \. \ .. . " .Evergreen ptanted.areas.(plus 3 controls). ',..49.43 . Dectduous .planted areas (Plus 3 controls)' -37 ~96.' , d - 3. 01 Mixed planted areas (Plus 3 controls) ... -30.89" .:- .. _ Interpretation of the pheasant population levels indicated for the Type factor is somewhat, more compltcated than for other factors. In order to complete the analysis of vartaaceIt.was necessary to combine data from three control" areas'with data :~i~ of' each"diif~re~t . . planting type. -The validity of the signif:ie~"is therefore somewhat questionable 'even 'though thE;i>erccntagJ>distr'ibut'ion ~f total '~~~~ts is almost the same whether control areas are inll!lUded -or not. After land-use adjust~,. .. ment factors have been computed itwill be necessary to make a second. analsysis of variance using only' the data from the 18 areas with improvement plantings as a test of planting Type, but at this time the loss of prectston because of the reduced sample size makes such an analysis even less " . reliable than the 'comhined data. ., . _ ". . ." ..' . . . " .. ...,. . . , .. ·a.~ea.s fro.m . ..- .. " " _" . : If it is assumed that the control area data'has no.tendency to demonstrate sfgnificance toz.areas with plantings which would.otherwise not be '. Significant,' the means ·show more pheasants on areas with evergreens than on areas with deciduous species and these in turn have more birds than areas with mixed plantings. • '.' Findings, Ae;:-ialCounts: .Durtng the winter of1956,..l957.two storms resulted in' snow conditions suitable foz aertal. counts of pheasants. ' The first '. snowfall of the winter, .on November l""S" :1956,~ left drifts up.toLs feet deep . in many places and.from: 8-15 inches of snow..over most most fields.' Ground �-28checks on November 4 showed almost all wildlife cover filled with snow and virtually perfect counting conditions throughout the study region. November 4 was the opening day of the pheasant hu~ting season however, and the committments of other work precluded an aerial census attempt. On April. 1-2; 1957, the worst blizzard in several years struck Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas. Northeastern Colorado did not receive the full effect of this storm, but snow conditions were suitable for aerial ·counts because little drifting was experienced. Unfortunately, the project leader was ordered to southeastern Colorado on March 31 and was unable to return to the northeast in time to arrange a flight for April 3. On the 4th, gusty winds and ground blizzards grounded small planes, but on the 5th it was possible-to survey six study areas in Phillips and Sedgwick counties •. The airplane used was a Cessena 180. It was flown at about 80 m. p. h. at an altitude of around 100 feet. Each study area was crossed six times, and in each crossing the pilot and observer surveyed one-quarter · mile to their respective sides of the flight line. When a concentration of birds was sighted the pilot circled until the observer had an accurate count. In general it required 15-20 minutes to complete a count on one study area. Table 2-.,..Pheasants counted in aerial survey, April 5, 1957, northeastern _____________________________ Colorado . '. ~ Study Area G ..·04 .. E2 SD D3: E3 -:- r, Count Time: 2:30 ..:.2:49 P. M. 2.56- 3:14 3:20-3:41 .3:58:,..4:16 4:23-4:42 4:52-5:13 Pheasants Observed 2 -: 11 7 18 7 7 The results of the aerial counts, presented in Table 2, are very inconclusive. Based on theestimatedpopulationIevels derived from crowing count and sex ratio data for the same areas, less than ten percent of the actual pheasant ·population.was counted by the aerial method, Considering how obvious the few pheasants actually recorded seemed to be it is hard to understand how so many could have been missed. Two factors entered into the poor success expertenced with the aerial count-: method. . Most important probably was that April 5 was a very warm day and snow ranging to eight inches deep melted rapidly during the survey. The 90 percent snow cover present early in the flight was reduced to less than �Ie? q:r~ ....•. _ _.._'{_:_ -2930 percent before the counts were completed, :.Tlie other factor-was that the minimum. flying speed for the airplane was 80 m.p.h. At the altitude flown there was little. chance to examine any cover type' thoroughly and 'birds which .did not move wer~ probably not observed.. ,. -:. .~ r' , .~. ..; Findings, Roadside,Counts: During the first year of the evaluation project • . roadside counts were conducted only during the fall brood period. Thedata from these counts .were somewhat .Inconclusive because only three repetitions of the count were made,'. but the analysis suggested that a larger -sample' would provide useable ,data.•'. For: this reason, monthly roadside 'counts were made from July; ·1956 through June, ~1957 using the. standard.roadaidecount technique with some slight modifications to apply to small study areas. Wherever posaible; :the center Section of the nine Section study area was 'circled at an average, speed ()f 25-30 m, pvh, :~::l!l9 'cOll1P~~~C9UIl.t,soraU pp,e~~,a.J),t$ .l?~~.n were Counts: were begun mile . made. _. .... ......•. one-half ... ~ .. .. .... ,_from .... _ ... -•.... a .... random - ., - -".-' ..,", Section....-....corner-and - . ..... .... completed at.the corner or one-half mile from it. In some cases Itwas possible to get a fulL.5 miles of roadside count on a single. area. but where .roads were ,,_notp:rE:l~E:l~! ..or. wer~. i~p:~~~~!~ .th~,sll;lIlp_!~._~a~ smaller •. Jp._~a..cJj:.,9ase.'Jhe total mileage, and the beginning andending times were recordedso that final analysis could include correction for variation in effart. .~-. -, ," "'~'-' ".. -.-.-: " ,'-' -, .. '~ • ;.... :, .... ',.,' '~'.,' ' ... " ,." , .. . . . J. • .• '~V' _"~" .': ~.~ •.• .. , Far the analysis; each study area is represented by the 'total number of' ; pheasants seen during, the year and the .total of.the mOilthly miles x . .-minutes.factora.. Analysis wasmade with the .analysts .of-covariance,' adjusting each total count for the .time-rni les factor andtesting~whether Density, Location, Type and the various interaction means are significantly different. Data is presented in Table 3. .~ A,' • '"; .' '';' Table 3. --Analysis of covartance, .pheasant roadside counts adjusted for' , time and mileage, 26 study areas, 13 repetttions in 1956 and .' '. _ J957 northeastern Colorado, .. ' i :> ,Total·' 25 '.' Density 2 19229.8' Location 2 2552.1 Type .: 2 i.' 2444~2 D x L: '" 4 3875.0. DxT' 4 1690.0··· Lx T -4 .... " 1436.6 Errar 6 2451. 6 (.19)* .". (~:95)**.. (.,01)*** . . ~ .. .: . , .r : 9614.9 1276.1 1222•.1·: ,968~,8, 422.5 359.2 408.6 : ': .;.. ..i 23. 53**-* 3.12 ·2.99; . ; 2.37 T~03 . .88 .----------~--~--------~~~~------~~~------~~-i,' Only one factor. Density, was signific::lllt. l:lt.tl:l;~:JQ:.P~':Q~!l~JeyeJ!_ Tll~" • corrected means for the Density factor are shown in Table 4. Significantly more pheasants were seen on areas with six plantings than an control areas. The mean for 9-planting areas was higher than controls and lawer than 6-plahting areas but not Significantly different from either of them. �-30- At-this writing it is impossible to even suggest why more pheasants were .... recorded on,areas with 6-plantings than on areas with 9 plantings. If it ,, . is assumed that the large difference between 6 - planting "and'control areas is due primarily to the influence of habitat plantings on.pheasant populations then it seems probable that 9-planting areas should have a population at least . equal to that, of the 6-planting areas.' The actual d~e:renc,e ~e~~en the . Awo,densitieswas not significant;: and it is probably not as great as suggested :_;' '.by.the means in Table 4:. It Is.posstble in fact, that differences in land useage among.the 'groups will prove to be responsible for at least part of the difference .and that.df the additional cover values on 9';'planting areas are taken into ;.account no difference between population levels will be shown. :"h . ~. ,. Table- 4'0 --Adjusted means of pheasant roadside counts, data arranged . '-'I'" .', . ,; according to planting density on study areas. Density :'.. ,,<.' x mean. ' .." . Dev, " bx , y mean y-bx .::.,; ,~plantings 5363.9 . 186. 9 ' • 19 . 14;11 . 13.92 6 plantings ., ;' 5,192.2 15.2.02 30.22 , .' 30.20 . -.21 3.44. . 3.65 controls':' 4975.0 .. -202.0 s-is. 72.(. 10) " b - ,;001049 EEMS - 417. 8· "~ " '. . , Recommendati0l!~ The data presented in this report represent only a minimum gross. examination of the pheasant population data collected in the first two segments of the project. For .each set of crowing c01:!-D.t and ., roadside count data there is a series of land-use' influences: which ;must be , evaluated before the total effect .of habitat plantings on pheasants can be determined. " . At this writing, preliminary work on the various covariance tests to adjust both crowing counts and roadside .counts has been iIiitiated, but the volume of data and the amount of research involved in determining. the correct __ ~,!~!~.~~~~~l ..e,r~c.~,d.-u~e,llas s() Iarprevented completion, ,'B~C:atls.t? !:hC? .majorpart, of the analytic. work has not been completed, it is impossible to establish .'thai c'onclu'sions': "'Accordulgly; 'it i~ impossfble to fo~mulate'~,~agem~nt .recommendations .at this time e . , Recommendations for future work include completion of land-use covariance analyses, breakdown of roadside counts into segments comparable to landuse patterns rather than fiscal year segments, and adjustment of all . pheasant population data on the basis of land-use patterns . .. Prepared by: L. Jack Lyon .,,," .-..... ,.. ..... , Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ; October,1957i --~--~~~~~~~~~-- Date , ", ';:,';,'" ; .:.1' :•. : '.~:-. .' ·'.i .: 1 . �IIJ1liiifli~U~il BDOW022208 -31- . ; f ,', ~,-", . JOB COMPLETION' REPORT " -: .•.•• j..:, .,pc.t~ber,:.J9~'t."c. ·C'.- ,:,:-:",.:,-,.;:~"~.~.,~ •• ~,.,,, ••.••. , .• ,.;> • -. ,:'-. I . INVESTI~ATIONS'PROJEC'TS ;t'. ~ '.. . State of-__;._...;C::;..O;;;..L=O.;;,;R;;,;A;.;;:D;,.;:O;..._....;_ __ ....;__ Project No. _...:W.:..-_9:;..O:;..-...:R~-...:2=-.!...; ..;N~am=.:;e:;.:,:...:E=-v.:.;a1=.;;;u~a;;;.;ti:.;o;::n:_o=.;f:_t.;;:h=.;e;;...>.;;:·~;;;;ff=.;··: H;;.;;··;::ab_'·l;;..;~t.;;a._t ...-_":",-_ Improvement. ,_. on Wildlife. ;,; ': ,~_. :..i..•. ~:~~'.~;- Work Pl~ ., '<:(f! ~o.;;,;., .._;;.._;;....;;II;;;;.... __ _;;.._;;.._J.;...o:;..;b~N...;o.;.. ...••• --'"~ ....•.•. _..._.;..;;.._~;_.. ...'__ .• _., " of ,- '~':<' ~-.•. ::~ '.~. ,-, ,..,' •• <- Abstract: .. .Investfg ation the vartous moztalrty factors. aff~ctiIig ph~~aIit§ :' in .nol:'tlleastez:n_.C~lorado was planned, but·the requi~epi'e,~t;pi·;o~~:r Ph;~~~ Q~ .ffeid work preventedtntensive inv~stigation of anyone factor. and r~sl:llted pri~~ily'}n, acomplete reappraisal of the' job heading, : >, :~;:~,~" •• lI~' .:'~~:::.'}.~'.>:'~:;;..::'.;'1{;'. m During the winter of 1956-1957 three major blizzards were recorded. north-' . . .- ~ eastern Colorado. The first, on November 1-3, 1956, brought~he&-vy)tl()WS;'; and strong winds but no dead pheasants were discovered and only a srrial'l numberwere.reported by other field workers. The second bli,z~a:r;d,:on~W~~ch 22-24,19~1, was charactertzed by strong winds and littli Sl;'OW~"O~~:4~.~.ci::<fock was found after this storm, but the mortality did not 'appeart~ b~' du~··to·.:weather. 'I'hefinal storm'oithe Winter, onAprtl 1-3~1957, was qUite.cs~~~~e·iil ¥~as' south of Colorado butdid notappear to be damaging ..~ the stUdY.·regi~ri.·· ;" .... ~, ..:; .. ;.. ~ .;.', '.~' ~•• •.•. ' ', •• in _ •. __ . ;> '<::' :; I,.-,i, .: ~-; .~:j.(.';..., ::.~ :.:' _::L ~i. ,', - .. - _ .' . •..... '~.,._.,'·,:..)·c . _' ':~., : .. l,._~. .-.._ .. -, '0.:. .. ,.... ' .,_ •••••.• Several plantings were searched. at regular. intervals and avian Predators. were watched to help in location of' birds .whieh might nave b~~li_' p'~ried. &i:r~ng storms, but ho'~ase were any dead birds discovere'd.,:-.~.~··;;' , .. ., .... _-, .. ~ ~ () (:) ~" ;-.__ ":._ . -.' :. '-,? ':.'~' _ ~, __ " , __·_'·"~·' __ __ ·""'.'H· . ..,.,J. .::·:f· ::Y)>';',:,:; _'l<;-:'i, ;-\.'," .•. f.~-~~:~. ..I}~ca~se oftheIow level ofpheasant mortality due to. storm c9n<l~tio~~.it , . was :iinpossibie'to evaluatehabitat iillprovement.coverbYihe·,direci .,'",::-.;,;r:.·~~,;:,l'~: .,.~.:..' ,:'~ .• .. _.' '_:. :..... .:._: ': .::.... .~. : .: :' :;:~, .~'..: :.:,1 ~:r.<".~ ,""", ~sp~ction m:e~9d. Fortunately however. the Novernb~J:'. ,an~ ..~pr,iJ stO:n:ns,' . _': which' seemetfmo'st capable of inflicting' mortality, ~~f~)h:ri.e.«(s,q~·that,' .' -:',''. investigation by other methods was possible. After the storm the' hWlting, season cheeks and reported hunter success Indicated Vf~cy.little Joss: suffered, The, bpril blfzz ard mortality should be indic.a,te(:l at ~J:'QW~"count _.,J~v~ls.An.illl,Proved·$d control study areas, but the a?aJY~~s,h~;~:'nofb'e~~: ... ".qqri:J.p~ett3datthe .present time. " .... ,. ,.. , ~.. '. ' .. ":·"·:."i::'··:l;. November: , .. ~" . ' _. ,: ,. :;. : ..•. ~.-,-:.. :,:, ..- " .,·: .• i· .. '..' •. .. , •... ,,;. ". ·,'.9 ~.~ >".' .•.•...... ~,._,:.- •. "' ...• - •." .. ",'-.,. �-32In summarization; it is recognized that fairly large pheasant mortalities must occur on the northeastern Colorado high plains because hunting success is below potential and the population is relatively stable. The relationships of almost an mortality factbrs to habitat improvement cover are however virtually impossible to measure and should in any case be shown through comparison of population levelaon improved and cohtrol areas. In the final analysis it has been concluded that the effects of mortality factors outside of weather and hunting are beyond the scope of the habitat improvement investigation and could not be conducted unlesB~additionai personnel were assigned to the project. Objectives: To compare pheasant mortality due to various factors on improved and control study areas .. One of the primary problems encountered in the 1955-1956 pheasant mortality study was the lack of evidence to show that mortality .actually occurs •. Before Itwtll be possible to compare mortalities' on planted and control areas it will be necessary to determine the mortality factors affecting pheasants in northeastern Colorado. ~" ' . 'I'echnique.Usedi. The outltne Ion.this phase of Project W-90-.R-2 set up avery broad base of study to allow examination of the northeastern Colorado pheasant population: for as many mortality factors as could be discovered. The requirements of other field work however prevented intensive study 'of any suspected factor and resulted primarily in a complete reappraisal of the job heading. As a . result of this examination, only that data which appear to be pertinent will be presented. in this report . . ". '.....::_>_: ':" ,',1 . ~:-; F'Indiriz s: Weather 'Morfalfty: During the winter' of 1956-1957 three ,~~jorbiiZ~iatds . :and several minor storms were recorded. The effectof these storms on the northeastern Colorado pheasant population,' and the relationship of habitat plantings to :pheasarit survival were not clearly defined during any of the field work ...• "primarily because pheasant mortality did not appear to he significant: The first storm of the winter began on the evening of November 1, H)56, and lasted until November 3, i956 •. Heavysnow andatrong winds prevented any' field wor·k until November 4~ 'ahd'many'~f the countcy roads were closed . by snowdrifts for more than a week... On November 4, 5, and 6 about 200 miles were driven in searching for possfblepheasant storm mortality, and none was found. A fewreports of dead pheasants were received, but hi many casesIt appeared that' death had been. due to unscrupulotiE{'hunting·practfc'es on'. the opening " ".,...... day of the pheasant season rather than to weather.' .. . . .' . ..' " a .',. '.' On March 22--24\ 1957;' second storm '6f blizzard proportions was recorded in northeastern Colorado~ strong winds and Iight sno}'V 'charactertzed thi~ .: storm arid no' wildlife mortaltty was recorded. March 25 was' a.-brilliant,' sunny day, but it was possible to drive only 73 miles because melttngsnow and mud made unpaved roads all but impassable. One dead cock was found, but his �-33condition suggested he had been killed by a motor vehicle rather than weather. No reports of pheasant, mortality were received from other sources following this storm. The worst blizzard in several years struck southeastern Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas on April 1, 1957. In northeastern Colorado, blizzard conditions prevailed for two days, but the area was on the edge of the major storm and was not as adversely affected as areas farther south.. The snow was not deep, and no drifting was, recorded until the new snow had stopped falling on April 4. Field checks when .roads were opened revealed no mortality and no reports of,dead birds were received. Throughout the course of the work done on pheasant blizzard mortality, it was apparent that many birds could have succumbed without being discovered if the bodies were covered by drifting snow, ,' Some plantings were searched at regular intervals and avian predators were watched closely during the periods when such bodies should have melted free, but no dead birds were recorded. In the final analysis it can. only be concluded that pheasant mortality during the winter, of 1956-1957 was.not sufffciently important to permit evaluation , of habitat development plantings as winter cover by the direct inspection method. Fortunately, because of the timing of the November and April blizzard,s, the two which seemed most capable of inflicting mortality, it was possible to, infer survival and attempt measurement of habitat improvement ,values by other methods. The November blizzard, which seemed quite violent, " was somewhat tempered by the fact that air temperatures throughout the course of the storm 'were never much below freezing, the fact that the storm lasted ',. less than three days and the fact that the storm was followed by' several days of warm, clearweather, Immediately after this blizzard field cheeks showed almost all cover completely inundated by snowdrtfts, Because of the lack of cover pheasants were easy to locate and the flocks, ,sometimes representing .morethan a hundred birds in a single group, gave no'indication that any major weather ,mortality loss had been suffered. Hunter success ratios, based on check st~tion records for the second weekend of the pheasant season 1956, compare favorably with first weekend kills from other years. While this figure is a very poor test of the pheasant population level it does suggest that mortality, if any was suffered, must have been very light. in The early spring blizzard, which did so much damage in the area around the Oklahoma paDhancUe, not severe iI:i. northeastern Colorado as' it was elsewhere. It does seem possible however that pheasant weakened by previous storms and unable to find good winter cover could have 'been killed by this blizzard. Although no dead birds were found in field searches, the timing of the storm was quite fortunate in that surviving birds, assuming, some were killed, probably, did not move great distances to establish crowing was nearly as �-34... and nesting 'areas. 'Thus, if habitat improvement plantrng s are effective in carrytngpheasants through inclementweather, :~he'cr6Wingcount' levels among areas with and without,established plantings should indicate a' decreased population where plantings were not present. At this time the analyses for the 1!?57 crowing countshave not been completed so further examination of-storm mortalffy COUld-notbemade, .... , . ,". ,' . . ',: Hunting Mortaiity: :Comparisori"of harvest levels' among' improved and .. unimproved stUdy-areas 'onthe iopeIiingday<-6f,the hunting"season is a normally scheduled phase ~f Project W-90-R. :'Indivfdual .surveyeof; study areas were not possible during 1956 however because blfzzard conditions blocked roads and kept most hunters from the field during the first few days of the season. , ·For the same reason; . no check station data are available for the first weekend of the-season. Ustng' check station data from: the-second weekend however -. there is no Indicationof. aaignificant drop iii the pheasant harvest due to blrzzard mortaltty," Table Lieompares the -eheek station' data from the -Fleming station for 1952through 1956 and Indicates atotal harvest ill 1956 'at 'least equal to that of previous years. Recommendatfonsr Eor+two years themortal'ity studyhas been carried as a job heading' with the intent that mortality factors" should 'be' measured and the direct effects of habitat improvement plantings Onthese' factors evaluated. : There seemsItttle doubt; as- evidenced by the fatrly.stablecpheaaant population despite normal yearly production and below potential harvest,· that fairly large pheasant mortaltty losses' must occur.' As the possible sources of mortality have been .discovered' however,' .the relationships' of such factors and'habitat improvement ; -cover-have become' SO' obscure that correlation is' 'constdered to be both potntless and tmposstble,' -'" ...., " -.,·,t· Table l~'!-';;;__Pheasant check station data, Fleming station, birds per hunter . , .;,and birds perhour, -1952 through 1956.' Data-courtesy of the Northeast Regiorral Office, Colorado Game and Fish Dept; Year·. :' "..;.::, Brrds 'p'er hunter ' ... ' "1952 1953' ·''1954 1955 1956 . k'97' ,' ;:.: ..•.•. .'.,_ ...• - ,.14 .15 .61 . .73 s . .. ; .28,' .98' 1. 28 ;.".;;- .. 21 ; ••.. : .. :; . .-' .~~ " .. --~---.~---------.---------.--------._,;,,_,,;,-----.: .... .' ";'" ,_ " ~: ,'. Among 'suggested' mortality factors on which-studies might be conducted' azer:" "1. .'Mortality dueto farming operations and machinery; Inthis case it maybe possible to establish a relationship between mortality and habitat improvement, but in two-years of study time has never been available to "'" .' conduct adequate field studies or landowner interviews. Since comparison of. population levels among study areas will show any difference due to this factor, no further work is being planned. ·.i ,',.- .: / .".' :.,:. �-352. .Mortality on roads and highways. Throughout the course of other fieldwork on the project complete records of all roadside wildlife mortality have been maintained. Analysis of this data may prove to be quite interesting. but any relationship between roadside mortality and cover plantings would certainly be hard to establish. Since correlation was impossible the data were not presented and field work will be discontinued. 3. Mortality due to weather. An analysis of this factor has been presented. 4. Mortality due to predation. Complete counts of all hawks and owls and field records of other predators have been maintained since late in 1955. In no case however has there been sufficient evidence of pheasant mortality by predation to allow selection of a single species or group as important in its effect on pheasant populations. In any case. if improvement plantings do protect pheasants from predation the higher populations on improved areas will be demonstrated by population analyses • . 5. Mortality due to hunting. This phase of pheasant mortality is being investigated under a separate job heading. 6. Other possible mortality factors include agrtcultural insecticides. disease and old age. In each case. the number of birds lost may be quite important. but relationships to improvement cove).'are obscure, virtually impossible to measure and, if present, should be demonstrated by comparison of population levels on improved and control areas. In the final analysis it has been concluded that the effects of mortality factors outside of weather and hunting are beyond the scope of the habitat improvement evaluation study and in any case could not be investigated unless additional personnel were assigned to the project. If various mortality factors are influenced by habitat improvement cover at all, it can be assumed that the effects will be cumulative and that comparison of study area population levels will demonstrate the differences. As management of the northeastern Colorado pheasant population becomes more intensive it may be necessary to delimit various mortality factors and attempt corrective measures.. but under the objectives of Project W-90-R such investigations cannot be continued. Prepared by: L. Jack Lyon Date: Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator October, 1957 --------_...~~~~~~~_..._...--- ��111~llllllij'lil~'llll~iIl1I11[iflijij~~1 ~llfllli~11 ! .' BDOW022209 '.. October; 1957 -37- . , . , : : -. .~: f '-, "-".: ...•..•.. :.. .. ... . .io<*·.i.~~; ~~~":~.r,:, ~:~:'~!;~~-S ~\..".~.;_-~-::~/;~:t::".;;:,~ ':-:._':: ' '. '. . ;L . ,:' _ ..,. JQB COMPLETION REPORT~>; . , . - .' .. j' '~" '_::",.' \ " ~,-r...,.:~~,.~~~;' ..: '-. ," ,'- ••• ~ ,~:- . ."', J'~ INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS . t .',~-_",'-,-" W6ik;Plan ~O~..,.,::. __ .,.,.·-;_':'_' ..__;I=I_· 't:}f:"';~"'" " .',','',: ,... ' 'f > ~J.;;.ob;;...;:N.;.;o;.;., ·_·:_'._f·'_;~5-_-(_;';_:'· .; _:'_::;_'_'( __i~__ "_'__ ;r x:_" '.'\ ",': t:·..···, _ ~.,:._;, .~.. r ;: ,.K,:>:~Abstract: _Trapping and marking of pheasants as a partofa.mobility::sttldy.for '..\.' _.".:p~.oj;e~tW-90:-1;l.~2.were 'conducted during 1956 using ..tl1ej.spotlighting~rn.ethod. (.' Provision had been made for the use of bait-grain methods, drugging; the ..cannoifuet, but spotlighting proved to be effective so noother metllod''Yas used • and . .': . ' :' ~--":_' :.-:~..~ - rl6 . 'Th~ vehicle used for spotlighting was a 1955 1/2 ton Ford pickup ~ith ?;:.~ .: . special modiftcattons other than the mounting of a cigarette lighter' receptacle. A:-Unity No."741 spotlight and a 30" landing net with a four 'foot handle co:tnpleted the necassary equipment .. Captured pheasants were held in burlap bags' iii' the cab of the truck and marked at the completion of fiel~ se~r~~e~. . , . ,'. \" ;, . .. . -. ~.:~::.~'~. -. ' :.: '.' . .;. '.. '\ \ ' .i\ total of twenty 'six.pheasants' were captured" dyed, banded and released. ' The majority were, dyed red and released in Sec. 19, T. 10'N~:_, R. 43 W~,>bllt three 'were dyed green and released in Sec. 7, T.,8 N., R. 43·W. Recapturei' data was , very disappointing' ill that only two birds were harvested and two sight r~cords were reported~' Because of the low number of observatlons it was imp6ssible to .analyse pheasa~fm~vement data. ..,' ·."~,·:.EL<,;,.:,'~ iCfj~;:,,: . The reasons so few-marked birds were ever seen were: riot appareni/'bllf'se'veral possibilities may Be suggested, With only 23 marked birds it is possibl~ to iestithate that an observer would have roughly one chance 'fn 22 of seei'hg such a bird'if nonehadleftthe study area. Selective mortalttyof-marked birds 'was not recorded, buttt' £s:'d~rtainly a possibility; and publfcity regarding tii~ : , project was. 'insufffefent .,... to the extent that observations' ..by''landowner's ahd' . sportsmen were nof;rejli:{Itted.",During 1957 it is hopedthat a much larger: sample canbe.marked.: andYa'better publicity program is being planned; '~"I •.• - Spotlighting techniques during 1956 were much improyed"'ove:r:1955 as ~liown by '~-":'-'--~' -----:thefact- thai~~ome pheasants were captured. It was found that. snowt"fog or::, dust ,in~theair, diffuses the spotlight beam and prevents.pheasants from' being blmded, : Locattngbtrds was a problem, and both systematic ;grid'and:ralidom " , :.' :-'. �-38searches of fields were used - with about equal success. Spotlighting is more successful before pheasants have been hunted but juvenile brrds were no more susceptible to capture than adults; Two birds were killed during spotlighting operations; one with the net and one through handling. Mortalities were thus fairly high, but improved technique in 1957will certainly result in a lower loss factor. an Only one bird was observed long enough after marking to give' estimate of dye persistence. This cock, recorded over four months after capture, was still brilliantly marked beneath the' wlngs although the Rhodamine B extra solution had faded on the bodyuntil it was obscured by the natural feather 0010:."8 •.... _- -' . '. ~" Table f. - Pheasants captured andmarked, ~ . northeastern C'olorado, 19561/ Age Date .Captured Band No. Sex Remarks .13805 M killed 11/3/56 09t. 3, 1956 13808 .. JAg . M Oct. 3, 1956 S 16 T 10 N R 43 W , 13806 F Oct. 4, 1956 . j 13807 Oct. 4,.1956 M ·13809 M. Oct .. 4, 1956.. .found dead at release 13,810 Ad. M. Oct. 4, 1956 site iO/5(56 . 13811 1m. M. Oct. 4, 1956 13812 Ad. M. Oct. 4, 1956 Im, 13813 M. Oct. 4, 1956 partial albino Im, 13814· F. Oct. 10, )956 13815 Im.. . Oct. 10, 1956 F. Im, 13816 M. Oct. 10, 1956. 13817 Im. F. Oct. 10., 1956 . 13818 Ad. M. OGt. 10, 1956 .~ 13819 Im.. M. Oot~_.lO •. 195f? M, Oct, io, 195'6 13820 Ad. M, Im Oct: 11, 1956 ... ,. l,3~21* r Im, 13822* Oct. II, 19S6.' F. Ad. M. 13823'" Oct. H, 1956 .. 13851Ad. M. Oct. 30, 19.56 13852 Ad. oct, 31, 1956 M. 13853 .' Ad. M. Oct. 31, 1956 . killed 1i/3/56 13854 Ad. F. Oct. 31, 1956 S 19 T 10 N R 43 W 13855 Im F Oct. 31,1956, 13856 Ad. M Oct. 31, 1956 'F. 13857 Ad. Oct. 31, 1956 1/ all birds except those marked with * were caught on study area SDand released in S 19, T 10 N, R. 43 W~ These were dyed with Rhodamine B extra •.. * " these three. birds were captured on study area D3 and released in -S7, T 8 N, R. 43 W. They were dyed with Malachite green. ~. " ,~; nn' e . :; " ",-i·: " �-39During the remainder of the winter and early spring, despite repeated checks of the study area and surrounding territory, only one dyed bird was seen. This bird, a cockwa s found a half mtlewestof the release site on March 6, 1957, in company of eight or nine other pheasants. Analysis: Because of the low number of repeat observations made on marked birds it is impossible to' attempt a•. nalysis of pheasant movement. All but, . one of the four birds seen were still on the nine section study area where they were released, but this did not appear to be Significant in view of the fact that so few birds were seen at all.,..: " The reasons so few marked birds were ever seen again were not immediately apparent, but three possibilities may be suggested. First, the sample of, twenty-five dyed birds, reducedtotwenty-three in early November, may have ','cepresented a statistically imposstble sttuattonrrom the beginning. Crowing , counts in the' area of the marking operation were around 50 calls per twominute period in April, 1957. ' If several unproved assumptions are made-about the crowing count method and sex ratio of about 100:190 is used, the twentythree marked birds could have been a part of an estimated population of over 500 pheasants. Under these circumstances, the probability of flushing a marked pheasant, assuming none had left the area, was roughly one in twenty-two. During the next project year plans are being made to conduct a much more intensive study than was done during 1956. 'If at least.Ifio birds can be marked it seems probable that their fate will be much more evident. , :.,' . Second, although there was no evidence to indicate a selective mortality of m:arked birds there is at least a possibility that such mortality did occur, and that very few of the marked' birds survived until the dye had faded. A larger , marked sample in 1957 will help to show this factor, and banded birds recajrured 'or killed in the 1957 season may give some estimate of the 1956 longevity. Finally, publicity concerning the marked birds was considerably less than adequate, and very few sportsmen and landowners were cognizant of too, importance of reporting observations, It is unfortunate, but true, that the average sportsman, despite years of being reminded, does not report a banded bird unless it is very easy to do so. 'This factor, combined with a regrettable lack of newspaper publicity and landowner contacts" may have cost several observations which , would otherwise have added to the data.' Corrective measures which have been planned for 1957 include personal interviews with all landowners within five miles of the study area and contact with local newspapers and sportsmen's clubs. Discussion Technique: The fact that pheasants were captured during 1956 spotlighting oper'ations.indicates that consider-able improvement in technique as compared to 1955 when no birds were handled. Even though the number of pheasants marked was relatively small there were several facets of the operation which require comment. ,",,' �-40I . The major factor affec_tingthe .succesa of spotlighting on anyone night seemed to be complete darkness, In 1955 it was noted that moonlight or any moisture condition practically precluded trapping success. Apparently, moonlight, or the light retlected from snowflakes and fog, prevented the spotlight beam from completely blinding the birds. It was also noted that dust in the air has a stmtlar. diffusing effect on the spotl.lght beam and upwind operations were generally more successful. The biggest problem encountered was that of locating birds ... It was impossible to predict where pheasant concentrations would be found, and experience revealed no pattern in movement or cover preferences although wheat stubble was the only type which could be easily traversed with,a vehicle. In working stubble fields; searches were' made with both.a systematic grid pattern and with random driving. There was probably little actual difference Ineffectiveness although the random method.did seem in some cases to give betterresults. It was impossible to be certain' of complete coverage in searching by the random method, but this loss in efficiency was compensated for by the fact that birds seemed less able to retreat on the ground and escape discovery altogether. Once a pheasant was flushed the immediate area was thoroughly searched, and additional birds were almost invariably found. Field work in 1956 was initiated much _earlier than In 1955, and this may have been an important factor in determining final results.. Juvenile pheasants did not appear to be any more susceptible to capture than adults (see table 1), but the population in.October had-.not been disturbed by the hunting season and birds were not as wild as inNovember and December, Weather conditions before the hunting season were also much more settled, and.in addition to. a ....... . lack of work-hindering·snow .and fog the field orew found outdoortemperatures .much more comfortable. During 1957 it Is hoped thatwork Canbe Initiated as :soon as crops have been harvested and pheasants are out of their molting period • .'.T'rapping mortality: '.•During the course of the spotlighting operations two birds, · .a cock and a hen, were killed. The cock was injured during-handling and · subsequently-died; the hen was hit with the . net .during the capture and died almost instantaneously of.a broken skull. The indicated. mortality 0(7.4 percent · is .somewhat higher than should have been experienced,» but it is not unreasonable with a new·and, for the field crew used, untried technique, During the next trapping season the crew will be more experienced and it is almost certain that ..•.improved techniques will reduce this mortality figure by more than half. Hart (1954) reported that with experienced men and proper precautions in handling, mortality". . . can be held to around 1 percent or less. " Dye perststence.. Although the sample of marked birds seen after the dye had been weathered for several months consisted of only one.pheasant it seems probable that this, observation can be-used as a reliable measure of persistence for the Rhodamine B extra dye. By March 6, 1957, every pheasant marked had been dyed at least four months. On the cock observed the dye had faded enough that the brilliant outer body feathers obscured any color which may have �-41remained. On the undersides of the wings however, there seemed to be no real change in color intensity. When the pbeasant was flushed, the rapidly beating wings showed brilliant carmen beneath and the bird appeared to be flying in a cloud of pink fog•. No observations on the birds dyed with Malachite green were made. Literature Cited Hart, Chester, lVI.1954. Methods and equipment used to livetrap pheasants in California by the spotlighting system. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game: mimeo 6 pp. 9 photos. Summary 1. Provision was made in the mobility study outline for spotlighting, bait trapping, drugging, the cannon net and several other methods for capture or marking of birds, but only the spotlighting technique was used during 1956. 2. The vehicle ..used was a 1955 Ford 1/2 ton pickup and special equipment included a Unity No. 741spotlight and 30 inch landing nets. 3. A total of twenty-six birds was captured and marked during the 1956season. Most of these pheasants were dyed red and released in Sec. 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. 4. Returns were very disappointing in that only twopheasants were shot and two were 'recorded as sight records. Analysis of movement was impossible with the data available. 5. The lack of repeat observations may have been due to the small sample size, to selective mortality on marked birds or to the lack of publicity concerning the project. ,. Corrective measures are planned for 1957. . 6. Factors which.affected spotlighting success during 1956 included weather conditions, the ease with which birds could be located and the time of the year spotlighting operations were attempted. '7. Trapping mortality for the season was 7.4 percent, but the experience gained shoul~ enable the crew to register improvement in 1957. 8. Only one observation was made long enough after marking to serve as a measure of dye persistence, but this observation showed Rhodamine B extra to be quite brilliant on the undersides of the wings at least four months. Report submitted by: Date L. Jack Lyon Approved by: October, 1957 ----------------~~~~~~--- Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��I~AA.~· -':1:_r;._:;;.~.:. 111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111 II~llll BDOW022210 Octobet:,,;:1957' -43JOB COMPLETION REPORT . .'~ INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO: --~--~~~~~~~-------- state of Project No•.. ' .W-90-R-2 ; ;Evaluation of the -Effeets of Habitat~~':;'".2«':' Improvement 0;:1 Wildlife Work~'Plan No~··· II ._v •••• Job 8 .'" _ --~~------------~~~~--~~--------~--~---No, < '.;;iG;" ". ~ _ R, ~ ~', s.: 'Pe-r"iodCovered:_::_' __ "-:'.'_-', r' .;;.Ju;;;;1;;.£y..!. •...;1;.;:9;..;:5;..;:6;_t;;;:;h;;;:;r;..;:o;.::u:Qg:;:h:...;J;:.;u;;:n::.;:e~;.;... ;;.;19;..;:5;,.;7 ·_· ._: ;_.;.:"_ ...'._: _~':_:;_" ';__:_: _ Abstract: Roadsfde counts, which normally find extensive application only . ,- T": <hiring the' pheasant brood season, were conducted at monthly InJ~:l:'V:?:!_S._L~.£i·ough:' -;:''''outthe year on' all' study areas of 'Project W-90-R. - standard roadstde: count _.·:techn'iques were used around the center Section of each .study area andevery '. .wildbfrd and mammal seen during the count period was reeordeds." ;':. ,.<'AriaJ.ysis of data was accomplished by the covariance method and arandomizedblock design which, in one analysis, adjusted means of wildlife counts .for .ttme and mileage' and allowed examination of habttat-Improvement denstty, type, area location and the vartoua interactions. " :,';2:' . .Roadside count data' did not show that habitat improvement plAAt~!lg~ ..~~v~,;~any "~.:':;;significant influence in concentrating mourning doves. It did seem highly' . ,:;' ,", probable however that the lack of Significance was due primarily to an<>:: s . insUfficient sample. .'"" ..:' i.: e: :.::~ .• - .~ -: i' _- :.~For both' cottontails and jackrabbit, analysis data only. included' .ceuats from ,.:'months in::which at least one rabbit was recorded on at least one stUdy area •. 'f1 ; Cottontail counts were limited to four repetitious andjaekrabbtr.counts: to', :~ev~n, ahd in neither case was there any indication that habitat iIi;lprbvement· :_:-:.'. 'planUrigs 'had any important [nfluence en populations. . ,; '. : .J.:;: . .) ~ ~ Small bird roadside: counts were evaluated on the basis of both' ~~~;~::~':.~ . of specfes recorded permonth and the number of individuals seen;;· :·Thefirst ,-, ~.;'analystsshowed that. a Significantly greater variety of small birds are able ~ .... . .. <::) toIrve where habitat improvement plantings are present but thatanincrease ~ -.:'; -i~ir:mii~~ :d<bn~itydoes n?t c~use a corresponding increase in~e. ~~b~rof . .specres recorded •. ' 'Examination of the total number of small btrda recorded demonstrated Significance for the interaction of Density and Type~::but::', interPretation was not 'possible because land-use correction factors:have'iIlot ::f);beeii'~compil~dattae present time. . '<':', ::'_i;:"~"'Y . -'" .. :;.. -. ...,; .... ~,. ~,":,.:'~~:. ~:~~ �.... ...• . ' . ,"r d......•.....'A!·'-'t· " ', -44The influence of habitat improvement plantings on.the total wildlife carrying capacity of land units on the northeastern Colorado high plains was shown by the all-wildlife analyses. Total counts of all wildlife recorded on roadside counts were evaluated by both the number cf species recorded per month and the total number of individuals seen. A significantly greater variety of species was recorded where plantings are present, and in addition a greater number of individuals was also ~e~n. . Total counts of predatory species, recorded on study areas were divided into t;~groups f~r analysis. The first group included those avian live-predators capable, and sometimes suspected, of killing game species While the second i~~i~ded representatives 'of the egg -predator group (Corvidae) , It seemed quite significant that the analysis of hawk population data demonstrated a preference for treeless 'study areas. There was no aignificance rec orded in the Corvidae counts although it. seemed highly probable that a greater amount ..~f data'will show a stgnificantpreference for areas with plantings. Objectives: To determine relative population levels of cottontails, jackrabbtts, . mourning doves, small birds and small mammals on planted and control areas. At.thepresent time, doves and rabbits are not important in the game harvest from the.northeastern Colorado .tablelands, The harvest potential for these species however appears to. be very good, and there is every reason to assume - that hunting pressure will increase in thefuture.· Small birds and mammals, while not of direct importance to. the hunting sportsman, may have a very : .important influence on the environmental controls which tend to limit game populations. Techniques Used: .During the course of the study year, the .roadside count technique, which 'normally finds extensive application only duringthe pheasant brood period. was continued at monthly intervals on each study area. Wherever' possible, the center Section of each area was circled at an average speed of 25-30 m. p. h. Counts were usually begun one-half mile from a corner of the center Section and terminated at a corner or one half mile from it. St?Iting and ending,times were recorded" and total mileage for each count was noted. During the count pertod every wild bfrd and mammal seen.was recorded, From May through September" counts were madebetween sunrise and 7:00 A•..M. October through February they were made in mid-day, and in March and April counts were conducted about mid-morning. Analysis of data was accomplished by the covariance method using, a . r'andomized block design which allows examination of planting denstty, location, type andthevartous interactions, FDr each month the time and mileage factors: were represented by thetr products" and data for Individual ,stlldy areas . consisted of the total of the monthly counts; Twenty-atx study areas were involved in the roadside counts and data for- the misstng area was supplied by computation. Thus, even though twenty-seven blocks completethe . randomized design only 25 total degrees of freedom are available. Since one is lost through covariance the adjusted total is 24. �-45Find!~ The analysis of covariance adjusts the figures for wildlife observed on the basis of the total time x miles factor for each study area. Thus, even though varying amounts of effort wer'eexpended on individual areas, the final sum of squares, meansquare and F are comparable. In .the following presentations of analyses only the adjusted figures will be shown. Where significance is indicated at the 10 percent level the corrected means of significant groups are shown and their relatipnships discussed. Mourning Doves: Because mourning doves are present in the study region only during the summer months the analysis of dove roadside counts is based on seven repetitions. The period involved included the months of ~une through October, 195,6,and May and June, 1957. Table 1. -- Analysis of covariance, dove roadside counts adjusted for time and mileage. twenty-six study areas, seven repetitions in 1956 and 1957, northeastern Colorado. Source Total Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error DF 24 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 SS2 l'v12 F 295.4 147.7 2.23 1.8 .9 .62.4 6.0 30.3 17.5 -. .396.3 31.2 1.5 7.6 4.3 66.1 '--,0" No single factor was recorded as significant in affecting concentration of mourning dove populations in northeastern Colorado. It does seem quite important however that one factor, Density, had an indicated F value more than five times as large as any other factor. That it was not Significant may have been only because the sample size was insufficient. Possibly, data from an additional summer of road. side counts will show that dove populations concentrate where habitat improvement and shelterbelts are present. Cottontails: For both cottontails and jackrabbits the roadside count data includes only those months in which the species was seen on.at least one study area. In the case of cottontails the sample is limited to only four months. Even though me sample for cottontail roadside counts was considerably smaller than for any other wildlife species the data suggests that tree plantings have no important influence on cottontail populations. �-46Table 2. --Analysis of covariance, cottontails roadside counts adjusted for time and mileage, twenty-six study areas, four repetitions in 1956 and 1957, northeastern Colorado. Source Total Density Location Type DxL DxT· LxT Error DF 24 SS2, 2 4 4 4 7.8 5.3 6.4 6.0 4.5' 16.7 6 26.i 2 2 M2 ' . 3.9 2.6 3.2 1.5 1.1 '4.2 4.4' F .96 Jackrabbits: Jackrabbits were recorded only seven months of the year and the roadside count data accordingly is based on a sample of seven repetitions. Roadside count data on jackrabbits indicates to an even greater degree than that .~or cottontails ,that rabblt populations are not materially influenced by woody perennial cover plantings. Table 3. --Analysis of covariance, jackrabbit roads ide counts adjusted for time and mileage, twenty-six study areas, seven repetitions in 1956 and ,1957, northeastern Colorado. Source Total DF 24 SS2 M2 Denstty 2 90.2 67.7 '16.3 56~1 . 68.3 29.3 304.7' .. 30.1 33.9 8.3 14.0 ·17.1 7.3 50.8 Location Type DxL DxT LxT .Er ror .. , .. 2 2 4 4 4 6 F .67 Small birds: Roadside counts of small birds are presented first as an evaluation of the number of species recorded and second as a total count of birds seen. In the fi rst case, a single representative of a species was considered to be just as important as a flock .. In the second case the count consists of a complete total of all small birds recorded with the exception that no single species was counted more than ten times per month. This adjustment was felt to be necessary because those species which are least dependent on trees in any form (lark bunting and horned lark) W8I:e generally found in large flocks. �.. -47- , ~ Table 4. =-Analysts ofcovarfance, -small bird roadside counts" .number of species recorded, adjusted for time and mileage, twenty-stx study areas, thirteen repetitions in 1956 and 1957, northeastern Colorado. Source DF'" '" " Total Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Errcr 24 2 2 2 4 4 4 - ,6, \ '" ss2 M2" , F, 733.1 25.6 12.2 37.6 117.8 91.3 467.5 366.6 12.8 6.1 9.4 29.5 22.8 7.7.9 4.71* This test indicates a slgnificantdiffer-ence in the variety of small birds recorded among study areas grouped according to the number of habitat improvement plantings they include, Iii order to determine the' exact relationship responsible for the significance thewildltfe count means for each of the three 'density groups is adjusted for variation in field effortas shown in Table 5'.' x represents the time-miles factor and y is the sinall bird count. .". .... ". . . ." .:., c:·,.: .'_ . "'Table'':L:.J~Adjustmentof means of'small bird specie's counts; data 'arranged :,' ',.ac~c'ording'to habitat improvement density on stUdy areas~ Density x mean 'Deviation ; bx y mean '. - y - bx 1/ 9 plantings 6 plantings controls . 5363.9 5192.2 4975.0 ':': .. 186.9 15.2 -202.0 .47 .04 ,-.51 !/ b is'the adjustmentfacto'r f6~ time miles. 47.•22 46.11 ,,34.67" 46.75 46.07 35.18 It is d~terniined by: SSXye SSx2 ,e , ." 'J '.: :':.>" . ." ~" Examination' of the corrected means shows without further analysis that a greater ~ariety of small btrdsts found-where habitat plantings are present and that an increase in the number or plantings 'does not Significantly affect the number of species which will be recorded. Calculation of the smallest differencebetween-group means which can be considered Significant proceeds as follows:' ; ," , ' ' - 8.08' : -: .... ', .. ;. .. .. ...... , ' , ' . . ;.~ e .. ,'. ~..~ .. , .) , SS"'x ',' e " . .' n··.:. ·r . �L~ 04 _J!~ . ~ ' .. ~_ -48Table 6. --Analysis of covariance, small bird roadside counts, total number of birds recorded, adjusted for time and mileage, twentysix study areas" thirteen repetitions in 1956and ~957, northeastern Colorado. ";',:' Source DF Total Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error 24 2 2 2 4: 4 4 6 SS2" "lV[2' F 6099.0 4172.4 2545.6 4125.4 21384.8 1898.5 8326.4 3049.5 2086.2 1272.8 1031.3 5346.2 474.6 1387.7 2.20 3.85* What appears to be the most important part of this analysis is the fact that significance is not shown for the density factor; Comparison of the two analyses of small bird data might suggest that most land in northeastern Colorado has a small bird carrying capacity W~9h is nearly saturated, The addition of woodyperennials to the envtronment makes it possible for a greater variety of species to exist in a given area but does not change the basic carrying capacity. Actually however, the size of the means square for Density is ,such that another year's data will probably show a significantly greater number as well as variety of small birds present where habitat plantings are present. In either case, the generalization that woodyperennial cover is not a,s ," effective in increasing total numbers of small birds as it is in permitting a greater variety to exist in the same area is probably true. ' . ....' . ." .. j" - , Amongthe interactions, the factor D x T proved to be significant. Because the design of the randomized block used for analysis combines data from control and planted areas in the Type calculations it is usually necessary to recalculate all Significant interactions involving Type using the data from 18 planted areas only. In this case however, the Type factor has a, smaller mean square than any other factor or interaction and the interactionD x T is such that data from planted and control areas is not combined. For these reasons a second analysts of covariance was not made. Adjusted group means for the' D x T factor, are presented in Table'!. Interpretation of relative significance levels and group relationships ts much more complicated in the interactions than for single factors. Because each mean is based on a much smaller sample, the influences of such outside factors as Land-use percentages andcrop types may be more important in determining wildlife use than the influences of improvement plantings. The three control groups were surprisingly similar (the highest and lowest varied by only 1.5 percent of their mean), and were in general significantly lower than most of the planted areas regardless of type or density. Two planted groups however, were lower than any of the controls and significantly lower than other planted areas. Since these two represent both the medium and heavily planted types and two different Types of plantings it seems probable �:,:"!. -49-: : . ,,' i~: .'_ that influ~:nc~s other than ~provement .plantings were responsible f~~ their low At ~h~·pf.e~(:}ntt~me,c~J:rectio~terms for land-use factors have not been compiled so it is impossible to attempt. further examination of,the: data, .' .'.,..' ' ....., . . . •• '. ..... .. . ." .. . "r~~irlg's. .. : ::: '.'" . . '''; : ~ I . . .• ;' '. . Table 7. -,- Adjusted.means of small bird total counts, data arranged by habitat improvement density and type on study areas. .. , ••.. ,. . .'.1 •••.. ,.... '. .. ' :1'. . ':<,:~ • :. ';'. . 'C,' "." : .' Density and Type' 9 pl'antings - everg reens" .9 plantings =dectduous 9 plantings ":"mixed 6 plantings-evergreens __ ...6-plantings ..,- deciduous· __ 6 plantings-mixed ,:":--:, controls' controls confrols • , • .. ~:'. ,., Adjusted Mean ... '244'~91' -.' ·'-""T6"5".7Q '," .. 242.27 227.21 248..22· . 158.92 - .. IS3,. 96 "'.... 182.21 .. ;', . , d : = 61.11 ,. ,~.. ', .:; ' '., ".:, .: " -..'.~, j -: All wildlife: As a test of the effects of habitat improvement plantings on all Wildlife, .regardless of species or economic value, roadside counts of. all wild birds: 'and mammals have been analysed.' The statistical design tor this analysis is very siirinir to that for small bird~' in that an'!in:aly'sis of the" ; number of species recorded is' 'compared to '3. t'bta.i'~ouilt of" all iridividukls ' seen.' In addition tothe 'species ':iiready examined m separate. analyses,'. the total wildlife counts' include representatives of such 'spe~ie$ :~·shawks',' o~ls, eagles, crows, mallards, pintails, teal, mule deer, badgera.. .skunks, prairie dogs and grotitld squtrrels,' .', .. . . ,. .' ... . " . :.; ;.- .. Table 8.·;_":'Aria(ysisof covariance," all-wildlife roadside counts, number of .........species recorded, ..adjusted-for ttme arid mileage, twenty-six study areas, thirteen repetitions in 1956 and 1957, northeastern Colorado • .' ~._.". ,,:.,~- Source Total Density Location Type Dx L Dx T LxT. ... Error SS2 DF 24 2 '2 2 .. 1231. 6 '113.9 94.5 311. 8 122.6 182.0·· 587.4 4 '. 4 -4,· 6 , . . -. '~ :: " .- ." __ ." l\i2 F~ 615..8 57.0 47.3 78.0 30.7 "··45~5··· 97.9 6.29* . '. ... .r ;. :. -. _.;'. ,-.~~. :" . ; r-: _r ~./. _ .;:. . .... �-50As was noted with the small bird analysis for species, only the factor of Density was significant in determining the variety of individuals seen in .roadsfde counta.: Since small birds make up the major part of the wildlife populations recorded and could be expected to exert' a greater influence on total' counts than any other group'thls relationship is hardly surprising. It is interesting however. that the F value for Density is a third greater t and twice as precise, for all-wildlife than.it was for small birds alone. Adjusted density group means and the least significant difference are shown in Tabie 9. Table 9. --Adjusted means of all-wildlife species counts, data arranged according to habitat development density on study areas. Density Adjusted mean 9 plantings 72~89 6 plantings' 70.95 d= 9. 16 controls .'57~40 .' " .. ".-~. Examination of the meara in Table 9 shows quite conclusively that a greater variety of wildlife can be seen on study areas where habitat improvement plantings are present. Apparently. an increase in planting denstty does ~ot result in an increasmg variety of wildlife beyond a certain point, but a small number of plantings does allow a greater variety of species toexist in the same area. In the total wildlife analysis which follows, all species o(wild birds and . mammals were included, With"the limitation that no single species was represented more than/ten'j.imes in the .countfor anyone month. This. limitation was felt to be n~'c¢ssary to prevent large flock~ of hornedIark, lark~bunting and .chestnut-collaredIongspur from dominating the analysis . .. '. '. . -. . -, -, ". . ,.... Table 10. ':"":Analysisof covartance, all wildlife roadsidecounts, total of individuals recorded, adjusted for time and mileage, twenty-sixstudy areas, thirteen re~etitions in 1956 and 1957, northeastern .Colorado. ,- Source' Total Density , Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error DF 24 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 ,'. M2 SS2 17481.0 113.2 7.119.5 1230.3 18534.5 2937.5 7940.9 F 8740.5 56.6 3559.7 307.6 4633.6 734.4 1323.5 6.60* 2.69 3.50* "In theanalysts of total individuals, twofactors, Density, and the interaction . Density x 'Type wereiound to be' significant:' That Densityfs Significant is doubly important because in addition to indicating a higher number of individuals recorded where plantings are present it also shows that small bird counts are not dominating the total wildlife counts. Table 11 shows the adjusted means for the Density factor and the calculated least Significant difference. _ , ,'.,' J �-51The most important factor shown in Table 11 is thkt areas with no' improvement plantings shelter significantly fewer birds and mammals than areas with plantings. In addition, although the difference is not significant, it is quite interesting that more individuals were noted on areas with stx plantings than on areas with nine or more. ,'Si:nce,this reversal did not appear in any of the previous analyses.a.separaie examination of the wildlife species which may have caused it is suggested. Elimination of pheasants, rabbits, doves and small birds from the all-wfldlffe data shows that, excluding ducks, a few small mammals and an occasional deer, the remaintngspecies are predatory. Therefore, following the ex~ination of the significant interaction D x T, an analysis of predator populations is presented. ' ' The interaction D x T, although found tobe Significant inthe analysis of the all-wildlife counts, cannot be interpreted because the calculations for Type combine data from both planted andcontrol areas.In this analysis the factor Type has a high mean square and it is necessary to recalculate the analysis of covariance using only the figures from ,p~ap.ted ,areas. . ". _. -. ,-. Table 11. --Adjusted means of all-wildlif e individual counts, data arranged according to habitat improvement.denstty on study areas.' . Denaity ",' Adjusted mean , 9 plantings , 6 plantings controls 274.70 ,286.76 '226.99 de 33.70 Table 12.=-Analysts of covariance, all-wildlife roadside counts, total of individuals recorded, adjusted for time and mileage, 18 study areas containing improvement pl antings, thirteen repetitions in 1956 and 1957. northeastern Colorado. Source Total Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error DF 16 1 2 2 2 2 4 4 ss2 M2 626.6 385.3 6615.8 457.6 16509.8 4534.2 5865.9 626.6 192.7 3307.9 228.8 '·8254.9 1133~5 1955.3 F 4.22 The interaction D x T had a higher mean square than any other factor in this analysis, but it was not Significant. It is possible that the Significant F in the total analysis was due to the effects of control area data, or that there actually is a Significant D x T interaction and the loss of one third of the data �-52was sufficient to obscure it. If the latter assumption is true, the additional dat~ from roadside counts in 1957 aIld 1958 shoulddeornonstrate the relationship ;and allow fu.rther examiration. '," " .;'?': . Pr~datory Species: This ®~lys:iS of predator number's recorded is included primartly because the analysts of all-wildlife indicated a strong influence or relationship 'to Density. The' covartance test is the same a's was used for the all-wildltfe 'counts', On the roadside count data sheets the' predatory species recorded include several types of ilia.mIn::Us~' hawks otvartous species, owls, . . . . ,-_ -..' ., ~ . ., . .. eagles, crows and magpies, The summaries show however that hawks make 'uP' over 50 p~rcent of the total and crows account for over 40 percent.' For this reason, the lesser predators were disregarded and two analyses, one for avian egg-predators (Corvidae) and one for avian Iive-predatora (hawks )are presented; '.. ~: '.' : .. '. : . ,. From the standpoint of wildlife management, the major importance of avian iii-edators can be measured in 'the influence they may have on game birds and mammals. In the analysis of hawkpopulations only those species which are physically capable and may be occasionally suspected of killing game have been , included, Three species, sparrow hawks, burrowing owls and short-eared owls, were eliminated from the totals.: ' .. Table 13.--Analysis of covartance, avian live-predator roadside counts, total of all individuals recorded; adjusted for time and mileage, twenty-stx study areas, thirteen repetitions in 1956 and 1957, northeastern Colorado. Source Total Density Location Type _. .~ -, -.~ .. DxL DX,T. LxT Error DF 882" .. '24 .. ·2 .. " 2 2.. 4 4 4 6 453.8' 5.3 .'234'.5 444.0 .179.7 431.2 342.2 ._M2 F 226.9 2.7 117.3 111.0 44.9,' 107.8 57.0 3.98* ·2.06 Only the factor of Density was significant, but the relationship shown is exactly .the opposite of that shown for other wildlife groups. Table 14 presents the corrected means for the Density factor and shows that the hawks recorded, most of which were Roughlegs, Swainson's and Marsh hawks, prefer open country without trees fqr hunting; md~:r;~ctlYItcanbe suggested that such hawks must not be particularly interested in game animals or small birds or they would show a,greater tendency to hunt where such species are congregated. �-53Table 14. Adjusted means of live-predator counts, data arranged according to habitat improvement density on study areas. Density Adjusted mean 9 Plantings 6 Plantings controls 13.45 13.91 22.53 d = 6.99 -,' .:' Since the hawks recorded for this analysis are migratory and move north and south through the study region each year it was not expected that Location would be a Significant factor. It is surprising however that so little variation in the number of hawks seen was noted. The corrected meansfor Location were: north, 17.16; central, 16.77; and south, 15.96. The analysis of Corvidae population counts, which represents total counts of all crows and magpies, is presented in Table 15. Although the means of several factors, particularly Location, show enormous variation, the number of egg-predators was not shown to be Significantly higher in any location or habitat type. Examination of the original data reveals that both crows and magpies were generally recorded in flocks. Because of this tendency, the counts show an enormous fluctuation, and in some cases the total count for a study area was recorded in one month. The standard deviation of this data is quite high, and a larger sample will probably be necessary before stgnlficance can be shown. 'Recommendations: At the time this report is written it is quite obvious that additional data in many phases of the roadside count method will be needed before HrtP.conclusions regarding the effects of habitat plantings on incidental wildlife can be made. Until the final report is submitted therefore no attempt will be made to formulate recommendations. Table 15. --Analysis of covariance, Corvidae roadside counts, total of all individuals recorded, adjusted for time and mileage, twenty-six study areas, thirteen repetitions in 1956 and 1957. northeastern Colorado. Source Total Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error DF 24 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Date: October, 1957 SS2 M2 796.8 2220.1 668.4 1868.4 1212.6 1964.4 3697.1 398.4 1110.1 334.2 467.1 303.2 491.1 616~2 , , F 1.80 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Fe:Cl¢ralAid Coordinator ��October, -55- INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT$·'~·';.: 2: . ~ _...•• :. 1957 '':. , .•'-, :: : ".i .."., ' . '.,' . _, ',J :'.;•. Wor,k.pI.an No._;.._._;IV::....;,_· __ ..!.-..;;C.::h.::uk:.::a::;r:....::;P..:ar:::;;.;;tr;;.;i:.:;d:;;;!g..:;,e:...i'_'_· ..:;,J.:;.ob~·..:~N:.;,.o;..:' .;,;..:·_=-_.,..:2;..,·;_·,: •••· ._.:~_.:._:'._;.:.} Title of Job:.__ __;P;:..=.r,;;;.o.::du.::c,;;;.t;;;:;i;.::;o:;n_;s:.;tu=d:;:,ie:.;s:.;.=-._.._._.~"'='.; Period ,Covered: May I, 1957 - September 3D, 1957·~:.: ,~.- ... ,;: .- ,Sqmmary:" ., ,:; .. ,: 1. Twenty-two chukar broods were observed in 32 areas during the"' period July 25 to August 9, 1957. Accurate counts were made on 14 broods which averaged 8.3 young. 2.. A total of 100 adults and 186 young chukars were-counted c:ltllirig the ·/~tud.y period giving an over-all young-per-adulf ratio of 1. 86~ ·:The:rati(i~::. on areas of established ohukar populations was LSI young per 'adult while it was 1. 87 on new release areas. :.;"_'.: .. 3.. Precipitation for the first eight months of 1957 (11.:78 tnchesjwas ·5.69 inches above normal. During the 1957 nestnigpertod; :AprHp May and June, precipitation was 149 percent above normals" .This' above normal moisture was responsible for excellent chukar food and water conditiona.. ~' ...•. ," ...~; : ".-"" _r" ... .,.r; suc'c'ess was somewhat- ..''.' -:. -: . ~. Objectives: To determine the production by chukars and the factors or conditions responsible for reproductive success .. . 4. .This study indicates chukar reproductive improved in 1957 over the previous two years. , ;. -.'_; . (._ .,'. • 'I'echniques» Field counts were conducted in areas' -Of established ehukaro .partr'idge populations and in areas where birds' have been.released since: ;. the spring of 1955. During these counts; records. were keptofthetotal> ;. number of chukars observed and the number and approximate age of young in' allbroods seen. This information was recorded on a summaryrsheet". " which 'Was prepared for these counts. Interview's with local restdents afded in locating·;cllU~ars in some of the study areas. . : - '. I �-56- The period from July 25 to A\,lgus~.7. was ortgtnally scheduled for production counts. However, due to cool, rainy weather which hampered or delayed the counts in several areas, this period was extended to August 9. Counts were made in the early mornings and late even.ings during this period. ., "", .'! Data on precipitation, temperature, and snowfall for 1956, 1957 and the longtime average (1900-1956) were obtained from the UnIted States Weather Bureau at Walker Field,' Grand Junctlozi.,'Color~d~. These data were compared to det~r~~~~ ~h~~ffe.,?~ _of _ weather on the zeproductive .success ofchukar's, Findings: Results of this study are summarized to show the average size of broods observedandthechukar 'reproductive success as indicated bythe young-per adult ratio. The affect of climatic conditions on chukar reproduction is also discussed •..' Average Brood Size .Atotal, of twenty-two chukar partridge broods were observed during the production count period in.32 study areas. Only-broods on which an accurate count was obtained. are included in the-brood size averages. Counts on . established areas of 5 broods, all in Escalante Canyon, totalled 38 young for an average brood size of 7.6. Nine broods which were observed on recent release sites averaged 8.7 young per brood with a total of 78. The average brood size for all areas studied was 8.3 young. The smallest brood observed contained two young.and the largest 15. It is interesting to note that the largest broods were generally made up of very young brrds while. the brood size decreased in the .older age classes. This may indicate. a high mortality rate among .young chukars within the first few weeks after hatching. Young-per-adult Ratio Counts of young and adult chukars were made where it was possible to distinguish between them. The number of birds counted in established areas as compared to new Telease areas is summarized In table 1. Information.obtained during the production counts shows a total of 21 adults and .38young observed in s.x areas of established chukar populations •.' This gives a young-per-adult ratio of 1. 81. In twelve areas where birds have been released since the spring of 1955. 79 adults and 148 young chukars were observed giving a ratio of 1. 87 young per adult. ';.:.' �-57Observation on all areas included 100 adults and 186 young chukars representing a ratio of 1. 86 young per adult. :.J'~~ll:~:Chukar Part[jdgeS Counted During Production Studies, _ ' .Aagust 9, 1957. _ Date of count County Specific area July 25 to '~iT.ds counted Young' Adults Unclass. -Total Releases Since Spring. 1955 Fremont -- July 26 Four-Mile Creek 2 1 3 Well's Gulch 9 3 Calloway Place Blevin f s Ranch Blevin!s Ranch Bull Canyon 15 2 2 5 7 17 2 25 11 2 2 15 9 Delta August 2 13 25 Moffat August 1 August 1 August"2 August 2 20 4 Rio Blanco August 1 August 3 August 4 Rangely Little Hills Little Hills 6 5 9 4 15 1 5 14 10 48 148 6 9 23 79 Garfield July 30 August 9 Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon 1 12 32 25 20 19 71 252 Mesa July 29 July 30 August 3 Totals stove Canyon Upper Plateau Creek Gateway ~~ 'u 1":'" . . ~ Populations Established Prior to 1955 Delta July 30August 5 Little Peach Valley Escalante Canyon 38 1 11 • • ,j ~~. 1 49 Mesa July 25 Bridgeport 2 2 Rifle 4 4 2 1 21 100 2 1 59 311 Garfield July 31 Montrose July 25 ~u!X~~ -~~ Totals Grand Total <, Bostwick Park Shinn Park -~ 38 186 ! 25 1/ Areas where no birds were observed are not included in this table;" . ~ i.',~ �-58Factors Affecting Reproductive Success Data on Monthly precipitation, temperature, and snowfall for 1956 and the first eight months of 1957 are compared with the long-time averages in table 2. .Table 2. Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Monthly Weather' Reco!'d_sfor Grand Junction, Colorado, 1956 and_1957,_ __ !em~ratu!'ej? F) Snowfall Precipitation l' (Inches) Year Ave. Max. Ave. M:i.n. Ave. Moo (I.D.IJ.!_l_es) 1956 1957 Averagd/ 1956 1957 Average 1956 1957 Average 1956 1957 Average 1956 195rl Average 1956 1957 Average 1956 1957 Average 1956 1957 Average 1956 Average 1956 Average 1956 Average 1956 1. 07 2.46 0.75 0.70 0.63 0.59 0.07 0.73 0.76 0.24 1. 51 0.61 0.26 1. 79 0.54 0.30 0.61 0.42 0.53 0.57 0.79 0 •.04 3.48 1.03 0.01 0.71 0.54 0.74 0.18 0.61 0.47 Ave:::a~_.....2:~~ 1:/The figure in parenthesis 46.2 32.7 36.7 41.4 39.2 41. 6 56.1 53.3 52.1 64.8 59.7 65.1 78.4 68.0 75.4 90,3 84.1 85.4 91. 3 89.1 92.4 87•.3 84.9 88.1 86.2 82.8 69.8 27.2 17.2 17.0 20.4 22.8 20.2 28.5 33.0 28.9 40.0 38.1 39.4 50.6 45.5 48.4 60.5 55.6 56.2 __62. 8 69.0 .. ' 45.4 48.9 35.4 38,3 -~'- 63.0 63.7 59.6 60.8 60.4 54,9 54.1 42.8 41. 9 23.2 27.0 14.3 19.0 36.7 3.2(1.3) 25.0 33.7(7.6) 26.8 9.3(5.3) 30.9 31.0 0.3 30.9 2.5(2.5) 42.3 43.2 2.7(1.6) 40.5 T 52.4 48.9 1. 8(0.8) 52.3 0 64.5 56.8 0 61. 9 0 75.4 69.9 0 70.8 0 0 77.1 76.1 0 78.0 0 73.5 72.9 0 74.3 70.6 0 68.5 1. 8(1. 8) 56.3 55.5 2.3(1.7) 34.3 38.0 24.9 6.4(3.5) 28.7 ------ indicates the depth in inches of the heaviest snowfall during the month. 2/ The long-time average is based on weather records for the period 1900-1956. �-59- The total precipitation ~9r 1956 at Grand Junction was 4.41 inches compared with an average of 7.81 inches. Every month from March through December was below normal in precipitation making 1956 one of the driest years. on . record. This extremely dry weather had an adverse Effect on feed conditions, and was undoubtedly unfavorable for chukar reproduction. However, the drouth conditions of last year aided in ohukar production counts by concentrating the birds around the permanent water supplies. . " . Precipitation for the first eight mOI?;~hs of 1957 totalled 11.78 inches which was 5.69 inches above normal for the J?-~riod.During the 1957 nesting period, April, May and June, precipitation was 1,49percent above normal at Grand Junction. This abundant precipitation resulted in the best food and water conditions in Western Colorado chukar areas in recent years, It is possible that extremely heavy spring rainfall had a detrimental effect on chukar reproduction in some local areas. The excellent feed and water conditions during the summer of 1957caused a wide dispersal of chukars in most areas. For this reason the production counts weren't as successful as conditions indicated they should have been. The actual .Effectof dispersal, such as occurred this year, on the reproductive success of chukars is unknown. The effect of temperature and snowfall on chukar reproductive success could only be determined by careful study over a number of years. One possible indirect effect of extremely heavy snowfall would be a decrease in the breeding population due to winter kill. Analysis and Recommendations: Chukar partridge broods observed during the .summer of 1957 averaged 8.3· young which indicates fair reproduction. The average brood size observed during the summer of 1956 (8.5) was slightly higher. The 1956 figure is probably more accurate as it is based on fifty-three broods while the 1957figure includes only 14 broods •. The young-per-adult ratio for all areas in 1957was 1.86 compared to 1.33, in 1956 and 1. 02 in 1955. These figures indicate chukar partridge reproductive success was considerably improved in 1957 over the previous two years. Excellent feed and water conditions resulting from above normal preetpitatton undoubtedly was a major factor in the improved chukar reproduction during 1957 ~ �...-60- ...The Y~u~g'~per-adJl(ratio·'indica.t~S rep~oductive success w~siabo~t equal .on establtshedand new release .are~S-'jn 1957~'' Reprodu.~tion was muchpoorer -:in area:s .of established chuka.r.p~p:ul~ti~nsthan new release areas in 1~56; .. the cOJltrary appearedto hold. t~~e',~n;1955~. Thi~ ~ncoJlsistericy poillts up the need' of continued studies to obtainmore accurate irifor~ation on chukar ' "'. partridge reproduction. It is re~olnme~ded. that ceftain established chiili:ar areas and new release areas be counted every year during the period July 25 to August; 7 'to give'ftlrtherinfo'rmatiOIl on chukar reproductive success •. in • ... • • ".. .' '.~ -_ •• ,' : - • • • • • : : ,_ w : '. ',. '. ~ :,' • .:. • ;. • ..c ~ RoPier,L. Ev~s·. . Appr9Vedby;~aur~<?e E~ Rlor:.<!..~_ Wayne w~ S::mdfoti_,_·· . Eederal Aid Coordtnetor Pi'ei)a~ed by: _'...... ..... .. ~. , ~.; Date :..,._ .,....._;Octo'!Je:r-. 195_;7_..;... . .....,.__ :. ' _ ,.' _,:. ..... : .. '. : ;'; ... _- •••• ',:, ..•. :.. v, ~. ,,:" ,'. ,- '" .. . ",' -: :' : .,'f '" ,':'::.. , " :'_ �Iiji~lllli'~I~'~ll~lilil~~~m~~il]~illllill BDOW022212 October, 1957 -61 ' JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS . State ()f._· _ _..;.C..;;o..;;.lo~~ .l~.~a;;;.d;;;.o;__........,...,..._ . 'M."·'·'.. .•.... ~._ ' ,' ' . ~-:'."-."-'" ~.Project'No. .'Game Bird Survey ., W-37-R-U - '"-Title of Job: -.:;L;_;o;_;c;_;a;_;t:.:,io.:.;n=-.;o;.:f;_r;:;..e.:.;l:..;e;.:a:;;s:..;e;;_· -=s.:.it:..;es=.•~ .;.,_ ...;.;...;.;;;.;.;;......;...,;;;.',;,;.;";;;;;--,;;..' .;.,_-:-'~- ~ ~.. ~:.::. ".~~ Period Covered: May 1. 1957 - September 30. 1957 Summary: ..--,.~" •. 1;····· Seven-release sites in three general areaswer'e.chosen.fon.thef __ game-farm chukars during the 1957-::-58. fiscal year~:, .' :._~ ... releaseof-Luuu ',.,' .~... • •••• • ••• -.-_ -, •••• ,- • •• -",_" --,. • '. • _'.,.~_ .". _'__ •. ".",~-_." • __ ••• _ •• ~ •••.•• ~_r ••• : .•• ,.: •.•••. __•. _ •..•• .;,. ,_., " •• ..".~ ••• '•• 2.':: The general areas where chukazs are to be released haye.:,,~_h()Wl:l r, good development.Erom previous releasesofgame-farm birc:ls•. '. _ " " 3. Predation is the greatest potential Hmttmgfactor' in.tqe B~OWIl'~ .Park and BookGliffs areas. '.The lower Dolores Riv'erj~-:~:"the urani~. .~ .. .... ..,. . mining. area, and poaching is the. major 'potential limiting facto,;r.,tq;chukar . - ...~ . development. _. '. _. . -, '. . - . _. - '--;, " ' ,.- "_ " '. ' '... ',' "", ' ,- ";'" ". " .. , ," " -, 'I'echrdques-: Workon the location of release sites conststed -- •..-...• .. -, of--.-deter.mining ..... ..... which general areas have provedto be the most sU(l(},~s,~ful, f9J:'the ...developmentof.chukaraIrom the release of game-farm birgs:~.:;]:,l;l,~.~.u_ccess.}?fthe .vartous releases was based on Information gathered _.g~.r:ing :po:pt,lla~ion checks (Job 8) and production studies (Job 2). Environmental, f!lcto~s such.as food ··.Mdwater; conditions, predator populations, and h~~~~disfu.~b~nce we~~ ;Uso considered in selecting the release sites for the spi!pg ·~f)~~~8.·c, ..., .._ -. ,. ,_ _.,.. ~-,.", -- ... ,~- ~ Findi?gs: Three general areas were selected for the:r.e_le~s.~'ofehukars ~ durtng .the Iiscalyear 1957-1958. These areas arer, (1}~t9'wYA!E;park..iIl:< ~ northwesternMoffatCounty, (2) the BookCliffs along:t1J.~;~~;,t:h-§.idg~ of ': ~ Grand-Valley. n9~t,~,and west of Grand Junction, andJ3Ltflel~\VI3.:r;Dolores ~ , •.. _River-in the yiCini;;y of Gateway, The legal deecriptien ap.d!lUIllQI3r. o~,1>il'gs ~ ;to be .released .at the. various 'release sites are givl3~-JIl;ta.bl~__ l~, , ' / �-62Table:L --L ocation of Chukar Partridge Release Sites for the Fiscal Year 1957-1958 Number of birds Name of release site County Legal description to be released ~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~---, Calloway Place Vermillion Creek Total Camp Gulch Debeque .Canyon §_!:o,!"e Canyon Totar '. Gateway Roc Creek Total . Grand Total Brown's Park Moffat Sec. 6, T10N. RI03W Moffat Sec. 35, TlOR RIOlW Book Cliffs ,. Garfield Sec. 11, T8S, RI03W Sec. 6, TlOS; R97W Mesa See.23, T8S, R;_02W Meaa Lower Dolores River Mesa Sec. 16, T5lN, R19W Montrose Sec. 4, T48N, R18W 150 150 300 200 100 100 400 100 200 300 1000 The Gateway area on the lower Dolores River appears to be very favorable for chukar partridge development. A total of 71 chuk~s:were observed in this area on August 3, 1957. The young-per-adult ratio in 1957for this area was 2.09 indicating above average reproduction. The RoeCzeek: release is an attempt to extend the chukar range to the south along the Dolores River. This site is in the uranium mining area, and poaching :1s a potential limiting factor to development. Development of chukar partridge populations has been quite encouraging in Brown's Park since their original introduction in the spring of 1955. The proposed releases at the Calloway Place and Vermillion Creek are aimed at extending the chukar range in the park. This area is sparsely populated, and for this reason poaching probably won't be an important factor. A fairly heavy predator population will probably be the main barrier to chukar development in Brown's Park. The Book Cliffs area shows considerable promise of supporting sizable chukar partridge populations, If this type of country proves to be suitable for chukar development, the amount of chukar range in Colorado will be greatly increased. The releases in Debeque Canyon and Stove Canyon will supplement earlier releases and will probably extend the present ehukar range in these areas. The release in Camp Gulch should pr'ovide-Informatton on the use of a California-type gallinaceous guzzler by chukar s. This plastic guzzler was installed during the summer of 1957. Predation will probably be the primary limiting factor to chukar partridge development in the Book Cliffs area. Prepared by:._.....;.R.;.:o;.lOg!.;;e..;;r-=L.;. ....;E;;;..;..v;;;;.an;;;;.s;;;.__~Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Wayne W. Sandfort Federal Aid Coordinator Date ~O~c~t~o=b~e=r, 19.~5~7 _ �October, '1957 "-63- JQB C01ViPLETIONREPORT , , ,State 'Of " Colorado '--~~~~~~~------~--~ W-37-R~1l Game Bitd'~;W~§L; ~~~~~~~------~--~~~~~"~~~~~~,~-~,~~,~, , Project No. "W,or~ Plan ;No~' IV :::). : '. Reriod Cove,re,d: '],vlayI, 1957 - September 30, 19~7~;:GL:;>Rl' SummarY: . -, c~J ... ~-•.s , z;.. '" " .' . ':." .. . _'. ; ',', ~-:-:. ~"-7 ~'" ,-..~. -':'~ '-'.'(~."" :"_";'; ~:':"'-_:.'~~ ': 1. Ro~tine field surveys were conducted during'tlle' p"e.#i?(:I,1uii(\QAugust 31, 1957 to determine the adaptability and survival of' Ciiuk:ii ,.'... partridges ,in Colorado. ._'. ,. .. ~:. : . .' :', . - .,'-' " .;' '.~;;,_; ,)~'" :,',";~'2. Atotalof'37s'chuka,rs was observed.in"14jjiz:'~~J;·iri,\·!h~J*g¥~~'~~ring. , :tlie,stu.dy period. This figure. is the SUIllof the higllest counts, iIi.e~.ch' duiing-a'si~gl~surveY. ~i~~ -v , • ',," ' ; " "';,::~:;;~~",;: 3. The minimum chukar population in all afeas sri:fv:c;y~d'\t~~';~s~iinated " to be 2,255 birds late in the, summer of 1957. Thfs ~stilll.ate, is ~ decreas,~, of 2~,?lo'tiiz.dsfr~~the estimate for'the, summer ofi~§6~'; ,'; '",; " ," ,,':,~ ; ;;' . . '- . . ., - . '. - ~..:' . .. -. - - . ~.:_; :.. ', I.- c, 4. ,,:The indi~ated decrease of the chukar p~~t~qge: P~p'hi~1;loq':iri p'olorado is believed to be largely due to a wide disper'sal ottJle' bir9,s~~ '.'rhJs di~p~~~aI, :;.~.. '_, :: _', _'';; ',- ',_:.. '._ .:", ;' . .; > :;,--:.}i. ;:'-,: ·1:>: .::.:<~,~t~~.i·.~ L.;' :. _..;·,;.:_,.c, .•... , b}'()Ughtaboutby excellent food and water condtions., waq~ accurate <},~n~u~ of , ~'.cli~ka:rs dU~ing'th'e summer of 1957 almost impossible.' " -;,:" ' .: ' ." :: .,<.;,:L::;:J,_ .... ,~::,~,_.. :.," l,;,._;_.·~ 5. The, main barriers to chukar partridge, ft~Y~loP1J.len.t in we"stern Coloradoare p~1,tching, predation, and winterkilC';"~~) ,;:,:', '"/ :" ,:; .: (, _,- :.~. '-c_~ _._.:;:'.. _:. c: , _,- . i: :::<; , ,_', . ,'_ '; :.,.'," . _.', " J,:,,'",i,C:: t.: t"'~'::<':,,,-< :::,~,~,:-,,;~,_: <, :-,._~ .;-~, "'j~'.,;~~' .~~,"'~;::_~::',(-:f::-~···.~: ..::._.~ __ ~::;~~.\::~'.. Techniques: 'Field surveys were conducted in areas .wJIer~e~ta1:U~s~~d (}.hl:lkar populations ~xlst a,nd in areas 'of recent chukar re1eas.~s.gu.riDg' 'jtir{e 1()-'Augu'~'tSI, 195'7. These surveys were carried'Qqf ~ong around fields, and in other places where a maximum n~be:f oCclulka:rs'could be observed. Interviews with local residents, chukar tracks droppings, calls, and other signs, as well as actual observations, all gav;e clues to themintmum number of birds present in each area. Distribution oVerlay maps were drawn for each area on the basis of these observations, reports, and signs. ' t~~:p~r~~~:( - wate~ways, �-64Attempts were made to determine the factors. responsible for the success or failure of chukar populations in all areas surveyed. Findings: The number of birds .obser:V~dand the estimated total population of chukars in most areas was very low due to a wide dispersal of chukars during the summer of 1957. This dispersal was caused by excellent food and water conditions over all Colorado chukar areas due to above normal precipitation. A group of 40 birds observed near Gateway on August 3 was the, only-large concentration of chukar partridges seen during. the. summer .. Although a total population of only 2, 255 chukars was estunated'for the summer of 1957, the actual population in Colorado could easily be 5, Q~O birds or even more. Natural food conditions in all chukar areas on the western slope were excellent. There was' an abundant supply ofoheatgrass in a-major-ity-of thaar'eas checked. In some of the dryer areas, the stand of cheatgrass was the best i~ has been since intensive surveys were initiated on chukars in Colorado. "Chukar development in most areas should be aided considerably in ,1957 by, the good natural food conditions. .> , Poaching was reported in a number of western COlOr'adochukar 'areas.' The effect of poaching on chukar populations is probably not serious in most areas. :; "'How~\rer,l~ has probably been 'one of the inajor factors causing a general de6rease'of chukars in thevicinityof Montrose. Farmers and ranchers i~ most areas like to have chukars around and they prevent poaching on their land ,whenev~r, it Is possfble, '. snowf~ll was ~ery heavy in western C~lorado durtng the 'past winter, (1956-1957). ItIs probable that therewas a consideriable winte~ kill' of'chukars in s6nie of the higher areas such as Little Hills, Cottonwood Creek west of Delta, and the lower white River are& eaatof Rangely. A deep snow cover remained in 'some of these 'areas fer 'several weeks covering the natural feed. Eastern 'Colorado bhukar 'populations also undoubtedlysuffered losses' frointhe severe early spring blizzards. Predatio~ probably co'nstitutes the major mortality factor on chukar partridge populations in western Colorado. Among the animals which call be classed as potential predators are the .Oobcat, coyote, fox, skunk, eagles, and several . species of hawks ~. The 'actual loss predator's is unknown, but it' may:be con~iderable'iIi Brown's Pafk, McEitno Oanyon, PI:"~irieCanyon and several other ohukar areas. . ..., .. . '.. '. , . to . ," ~ .:; : ,::, ! I'" . �-65- Table 1. Chukar Partridge Populations and Distribution, 1956, and Summer 1957. Spring 1956, Summer Estimated Number Birds Maximum Number of in Area II. ..Birds Observed .~. . . -' (summer, 1957) Spring Summer Summ. County Area '. . er Delta Angel's Ranch (Gunnison River) 45 Black Canyon (portion in Delta Co) 0 Broughton's Orchard (Gunnison River) 0 Escalante Canyon 49 Hargrave's Ranch(Gunilison River) 0 Little Dominguez 0 . .Littla.Peach.Valley .. 1 North Fork of Gunnison River 0 Oak Creek (west of Eckert) 0 Peeplets Orchard (Gunnison River) 0 Red Canycn (tributary of Gunnison R) Smith Fork (tributary of Gunnison R) 1 ·0 Tongue Creek (west of Eckert) West Redlands Mesa Well's Gulch 25 Sub-totals 121 40 75 25 400 20 30 40 15 35 10 15 50 25 25 120 925 175 1725 110 820 50 50 25 100 --'!;.I 100 700 50 50 100 150 100 30 120 50 85 65 15 300 15 25 50 10 35 15 85 10 Fremont Red Rook Canyon 3 Camp Gulch Cottonwood Gulch (east of Grand Valley) East Salt Creek Glenwood Springs(Airport Area) Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon Prince Creek Rifle Creek and Graham Mesa Area Roaring Fork (near Carbondale) 1 Garfield Sub-totals 5 0 45 20 75 80 25 50 10 10 200 100 75 150 50 38 285 610 0 50 0 250 1 32 4 40 60 60 210 . Jefferson Guy Gulch (west of Golden) Las Animas Apishapa River 10 50 10 �-66- Table 1. Chukar Partridge Continued. , Populations and Distribution, andSumme.r 1957. Spring 1956, Summer 1956 .---~~----~------~--------~~~~~~~~~---------------.------. Estimated Number Maxiniu~ Number of Birds Observed County Birds in Area 2/ Spring Summer Summer Area (summer, Bridgeport (Gunnison River) Coon Hollow' (southwest of Debeque) 2 50 100 30 0 10 A.18 iSS 15 10 1-0 7fo 0 160 65 100 60 100 30 100 665' 75 100 100 100 100 875 65 25 25 40 90 510 75 50 50 175 1957) 1956 1956 1957 :Mesa .' RgP~~1e9~~ion~Rut% CaW[. East Creek (U rweep anyo -71 Gateway Area Kannah Creek (lower) 0 Kannah Creek (upper) 0 Plateau Creek 19 Stove Canyon 20 Sub-Totals 131 Moffat Brown's Park (Blevin ~sRanch) Brown's Park (Bull Canyon) . Brown's Park (Calloway Place) 8--lb-totals .''Montezuma MeElmo Canyon 27 11, . 17. 55 150 50 85 75 .200 i60 0 50 25 Montrose Black Canyon (portion of Montrose Co, ) a Dry Creek 0 Duckett's Draw (West Canal 0 . Area) Red. Rocks Ranch Area 0 South Canal Area 0 South Shinn Park Area 1 Sub - Totals 1 Pueblo. .. 150 20 150 20 25 50 25 15 285 25 100 250 30 575 10 30 300 0 0 0 25 25 50 25 25 0 5 5 24 2 26 150 150 300 100 "120 220 30 35 65 150 0 0 llO , , Buelah-Rye Area . Turkey Creek .... Sub-Totals Rio Blanco Little Hills Exp. Sta. (Turman Cr. ) White River (east of Rangely) Sub-totals �!J -:'Q = > "_-f.., -67- Table 1. Chukar Partridge Populations and Distribution, Spring 1956, Summer 1956, and Summer. --Continu::.:e:..:d::.:.:__ ...-..;....._ ~ ~--Estimated Number Maximum Number Bi:rds in Area of Birds Observed Spring Summer Summer County. Area (summer, 1957) 1956 1956 1957 ~~~----------~~~------------~~~~~--~--~ Saguache Totals Curtis Ranch Area Saguache Creek Area Sub-Totals Forty-four Areas 0 0 0 375 100 25 150 175 4,465 50 125 2.255 1'50 --~------------~-----------250 .3,460 1/ Numbers based on observations of birds. tracks and other signs, reports of birds, and general knowledge of chukar populations in the area. ~/ Two dashes indicate no survey was made during the period considered. Analysis and Recommendations: The total number of chukars seen during the summer of 1957 was 375 compared to 936 during the summer of 1956 and 1, 086 during the fall, winter and spring of 1955-56. Wide dispersal caused by excellent food and water conditions is believed to be responsible for the lower count and that it may not indicate a decrease in the total chukar population. It is recommended that surveys be carried out during the fall and winter of 1957-58 to get a better idea of the chukar population •.: The main factors which appear to be detrimental to chukar partridge development in western Colorado are poaching, predation, and winter kill. It is believed that losses from predation and poaching will decrease as game -farm birds become accustomed to the natural environment in the various release areas. The threat of winterkfll is generally limited to the. higher elevations where it may be a limiting factor to development.' " ',. Above average precipitation during the spring and summer of 1957 'has placed Colorado chukar ranges in very good condition. It is recommended that intensive surveys be carried out during the summer of 1958 to determine the effect of improved habitat conditions on chukar partridge development. Prepared by: Roger L. Ey_an . ;.._s ___ W_;~~ W. Sandfort Approved by: October, -------~~~~~----- Date 1957 L_a_u_r_e_n;,..c_e_·· _E...;,.._.· R~lo_r....,d...;.a;...n _ Federal Aid Coordinator ��I~ili~llij'~I~~il~lrlilli[~il~ij~~I~[llilill BDOW022214 -69. . October, . 1957 . (. , ... :~~.~-!t:tr; ::':t2;.-j·-(~~ .;~.~':.:::>~;f~ ~:!~. ::: ~ .. - ",,: :~,' ~..: ;~ . ,-' . JOB COMPLETION REPOJ:t'r::::;,c ;:::;1,: => ,:;:: >",,: " DEVELOPMENT ,....':< <.~:.,;'; ,': .:,', ". -: ~.~::lt~ of· PROJECT '," COLORADO .v-: p;~jeCt'N~.~." __ \_'f./_~_9_6-_D_~_2;;..'_' ..;.__-.,-:.-.W~il_d;_T_u_r_k_e;;.,:y__· _~_'~_·~_~l .•.. O..Ap_m_e_n_t_. ~_"--...•.•..•..•.•..• _ ¥ t, Y'()~k.lllan No._.! ,- '. .. "', ~' ':.' ,~: ••• • • ._~.::;:::\ ~..' ~::~~1::-~ :::;,;(_;,[:. I_ .....;._::;..__,;,.Jo_b .•....•• N_o_._~2_.:_·_:'_· ..•. ~·:_\·:'_: ._c:·_.-:.;_ _ •• ~.-.._....._::. ·:..._; __ ::<-.: ",'~(, ..",' • . Ju.;..1;;:,:y_1,:..,._1.;..95 __7__to__S_e&,pt.;..;e;.;.;m;.;..b_e_r_ .._1..;;,5~t·...;;i_9_57 •....•.. :...'..•. ~ ..~ ..•._.:.,_:_.: ..•.. :_;~:_-::._,::: _ Period Covered: :C!': ,Summary:; ; ,";,._ " .. E~stern "':' ..' ,~A idt~.~f . ". Slope, , .: .. .' . ~'l~:;'~"-~;;",:.' .:~~:: .: :~~.~>:..' ~; fifty":five wild turkEiy brood's' has been recoid.eg.;_jp:r:t;h~ .1957' season .... on t!Ie e~st~r_n·.slope, The o~erall average rof these w.~s· 5;.().~:p_Qults'per hen. ~f; and The ~~~be~~ b~o~ds observed reported and th~ ~~~'~~;~ broo~lsi~'~ ,were far below the average for. the past eight year pe:riodr.i_ndiQating the'; .,reprOcluCtiv~. success for the area was very poor dtirjng.:.th~.l957 nesttng. season .. ' An 'ab~ormally wet spring period undoubtedly- played a major; role . in reducing the average brood size and causing an apparent lateness of hatch~ ~', ~ .. :', ' ...-, " '.,-... ~: Totals ~how th'at '13 distric~s were checked an avet-age, of Jhr.ee_~times. each during the year. A totai of 2~4 poults with 51 heiis showed an average ~f .5::76poults per.brood, Checking was difficult because <?f bad.weatheri-;: c(md~~~op._s p.~ev~iling ove_:rmost of the area.. ' Th~s. cq~si~te~tpf.gol(;Lw~tlate spring ';and. a wet summer; All streams were high in the:~ntire .a.rea-aitd::. -pbnd~,w'~re QverflowiIig up u,n.!il.early September. ";"'~: ..: ',:-.;' !.'; ':_,;'; _,- _,.,' Objectives: (1) To gather data on reproductive counting as many broods .as possible. ;' ... ,~ ..~. f "',,: .: . : .. . (2) To instruct Wildlife Conservation Officers eount data. ..' .. ';.-., ,.... " ,:' ,." .' " ; r. succe~~~by'locating ~d" .' '.:,... :~.\.~,' , ':..... , ',:j in nietb,<?$j>{ $eqUJ;'i.ng,brood r·' t~;:?:·,:.:;,.,· ~.'! /' �-70Actual observation of broods is by far the best method of determining reproductive success. 'The inhabited turkey areas are covered by vehicle, foot, or horseback during the above specified period of year and as many broods as possible are located and counted. Field glasses are an aid in this work since some broods will be seen at a distance. Reports of broods from reliable individuals as U. S. F. S. personnel Departmental personnel, and Interested.ranchers are useful 'and .should be recorded. Reports of broods are combined with actual observations to get as , Iarge .a .sampleas possfble, _An analysis of data. is made to prevent repetitious brood counts and to eliminate reports not thought to be reliable • ..The average number _ofpoultsper hen is determined for.each majorwtld turkey area and then for the turkey area as a whole. Areas checked for broods are generally the same as those in which population status checks are m ade, " ' , ' ...-,." . Brood counts are made when possible with a vehicle' along-roads since more area can be covered in this manner. If field sign of broods is found such -,as tracks of poults -near a watermg site,' 'a careful check of the area is made on foot orhor-seback, Some areas must nececsarily be visited by foot or horseback because of a lack of roads, adverse road conditions, etc • .'. , .;.; ~ Brood counts: can be' secured at any time of day but early morning' and late afternoon observations are most productive since the birds are usually moving and feeding at these times. Usually two drainages are visited each day working one in the morning and a second in the afternoon. The area is gone into using an automobile iif' possible and as many likely places as 'possible are checked for brooda and field sign of broods (usually tracks or shed juvenile feathers). " '" . ~. .' " ..• Some foot -work is usually necessary in order to check for field' sign and to ,- look for broods in areas' in which automobiles cannot' be' used. Often severaltrtps may be necessary into an area since the birds are often very erratic in their movementsbut 'repeated trips into the area willusually , yield the desired data. When a brood or broods are located they are viewed with binoculars and the number of poults and hens are counted separately. Some broods will be Seen that the observerwill be unable to count due to dense cover';' ' wariness of tbe birds, high vegetation, etc • ...As many cooperators as possible are contacted in the areato secure their brood observations. Often these persons- can be helpful telliIig where -. broods have been ranging so that they can be per-sonally counted, , : in �-71The Importance of recording observations and brood reports at the time they are secured or shortly thereafter cannot be over-emphasized stnce it is very easy to forget: numbers Been or reported if this is not done. Findings: Eastern Slope. A total of fifty-five separate broods with a total of 313 poults was observed and reported on the eastern slope d1J:rin~the present report perrod, There was an average of 5.69 poults per hen fC?.P these broods observed and reported. Both the numbers of broods seen and the average brood size were much below the average for thepast eight year period on the eastern slope. An abnormally wet spring period over the area undoubtedly has' an adverse effect on the brood sizes and many "of-the broods observed were small in ... .. physical size indicating many of the hens were forced to renest to hatch any , eggs. very The wet spring season caused the undergrowth to grow much higher than usual over the eastern slope wild turkey ranges making brood observations much more difficult to secure than usual particularly in areas left ungrazed by domestic stock. This abnormally wet spring while detrimental to the production of large broods has, however, favored the production of natural foods for the coming wintering period .. An excellent crop of mast, grasses, weeds, and cultivated grains should carry the flocks through the winter in good condition. There was much less participation by Wildlife Conservation Officers during the past season than before. Only two Wildlife Conservation Officers -- C. M. Scott and Wm. Kent reported broods observed and a third -- W. H. Snuett secured additional brood reports. The numbers of__ broods reported by interested ranchers was near normal but the average' brood size seen by these individuals was far below normal. . ' Fewer than usual broods were counted by the writer during the past season since it was necessary to take two weeks leave during August which is one of the best months for counting broods. Of the fifty-five broods recorded, twelve were observed by the writer (D. M. Hoffman) with an average of 4. 08 poults per hen, seven were observed by participating Wildlife Conservation Officers with an average of 7.71 poults per hen, and thirty-six were observed by interested ranchers with an average of 5~83 poults per hen. The average number of pults per hen for the major eastern slope turkey areas was determined to be as follows: (a) Spanish Peaks and southern Sangre de Cristo Range -- 6.07 poults per hen based on a sample of twentynine broods, (b) Raton .Mesa and Mesa de Maya -- 5.50 poults per hen based on a sample of six broods, (c) lower" Purgatorie River and eastern canyon areas- �-72• • ".. •.• • •• '.: ,_': ; :.~ : ~ ;~.", < .:. 4.53 poults per hen Rased on a sample of fifteen-broods and (d) Greenhorn Range -~ 7.,20 poults per hen based on a sample; of five broods, Data gathered indicates that reproductive success was very poor q~~,r:rnost of the eastern slope wild turkey ranges during the 1957 nesting season. ,'T.able 1 includes all broods observed and reported by areas and-the averages for the major areas. ' TABLE 1 BROOD COUNTS -- EASTERN SLOPE i957 Observed ; , Area' : Drainage .. Spanish Peaks & Southern 'Sangre de Cristo Range Burro Canyon Del Aqua Cany. ' Santa Clara Cr. Santa Clara ct. ,North Fork Whiskey Cr.' Reilly Canyon Del Aqua Cany. Del Aqua Cany. Burro Canyon Sarcillo Cany. Sarcfllo Cany, Sarctllo Cany. Sarcilld Cany; N. Trujillo Cr. N. Trujillo Cr. " '" , ' 'Date , "by Report Secured by Hens Poults ',",' .... '_ R. Dochler C~ M.' Scott S. "Capps 7/29' 8/22 E. Va:aClEwe S. Barron 8/23 S. 'Barron;' '8/23 8/24" • C. Hagen 8/24 F. Zele F. Zele 8/24 8/24 H. Scadden 8/28 F~ Mae Donald J. Sakar'iascn a/28 6/26 7/24 ' 8/28 8/28 M~Macfronald D. Hoffman C~ Nicoli !J/3 9/3· • " c~ Nicoli J. Sakariason 1 .... 3 D~"Hoffman 1 D. Hoffman 1 D. Hoffman: 1 D. Hoffman 3 D. Hoffman 2 '2 D. Hoffman D. Hoffman 2 D. Hoffman 4 D~ Hoffman 1 D. Hoffman" 1 D. Hoffman 2 3 D~ Hoffman 1 D. Hoffman ' 1 Total' 29 ,'0 8 24 12 3 8 15 14 16 5 32 5 1 10 16 2 5 176 AVERAGE 6. 07 poults per hen. Raton MesaMesa de Maya " .- Mesa de Maya Mesa de Maya .Mesa de Maya 8/2 8/2 8/21 E.:~salas b. •Hoffman ,. D. Hoffman . D. Hoffman -- --' AVERAGE'5. 50 poults 'per hen; , .- Total' 2 3 1 6 15 14 4 33 �f."f./1 {~~_ .7. .... -73Table l--continued. Hens Poults Report " Secured by Observed b~ "Date Area Drainage Lower Purgatoire River. & Eastern Canyon Areas." .. - Carrizo Cr.'. 7/23 Black Mesa 7/9 Carrixo Cr. 7/21 Cottonwood Cr. 8/20 Cottonwood Cr. " " 8/20 Carrizo Cr. 8/20 Carrizo Cr. 8/20 Cottonwood Cr. 9/2 r: ..·; Everett boy" W. Dunlap M. lV-lizer R. Dodge R. Dodge F. Mizer . T. Everett D. Hoffman W. H. Shuett 1 W. H. Shuett 1 W. H~ Shuett D. Hoffman 2 1 D. Hoffman D. Hoffman 2 D~ Hoffman Z Total ' ,,-" 1 -', 2 8 9 12 4 14 4 15 5 1.5 ""'"<68 AVERAGE 4. 53 poults per hen. Greenhorn Range" st. Charles Cr. 7/13 7/?5 . S." Hardscrabble :!'-:. , .... .: ,'" .' ,,' . .: .. ;.' .' B. Donley D~ Hoffman' Total 7~~O·;P0':11~~~~e".~ P;~TAL FdR EASTERN SLOPE . i\,VE.~.?~, '., : .W. Kent ." . >:.. - .: _,- ;.~< -: -,-.' :'. ,'{.- • :' :_.: .: _..•• .: ,,-' ,. 4 1 30 }6 5 36 hens 55 3~3 poults OVEAALL AVERAq~ fO~ EASTERtf"S:{;.OPETPRKEY AREAS ~..:~.69 POULTS PEil HEN . , a. •• ',' .: c. '.:. ~~~~ '; -"::~'::, . ; ."", ' , Of 12 broods observed by .' b. ,. '," . I· v :. ;.,.:, ..•.- , , ..: ", . ~: "-', -. ,:,", .' , a. M. Hoffmant:· -,-' Average 4.08 poults/hen ~" :~," ' ,.;',' ". ~ i'l . ,:- . Of 7 broods observed by cooperating " Wildlife Conservations Gfficers--,: . ' ':;'J>~,;,'~. -.' ~ Average 7.71 poults/hen " a 36 b roods observed by inter~sted ". ranchers -- Average s. 83 poults/hen .. -' �-74Western slope. Wild turkey, brood data has b~~!l difficult to gather this season. A late cold 'and wet -spring coupled with a wet-summer caus9ci'unu8uaI' growth. Streams and spring branches have been flowing heavily all summer. Grasses and weeds were from two to five feet high ov.er much of the range. Since water has been present nearly everywhere the turkeys have not vistted usual watertng places and the rains disintegrated droppings and washed out tracks.. Foods too, are so abundant that the turkeys are -:.' . scattered, very ';_' ~. . :,- "': On acomparative basis pheasant andgrouse.broods have also been hard to fmd, ','.It was noted too,' that in many instances deer tracks were scarce around ponds where theywere usually plentiful .. .: , Travei inio turkey range has been hampered because the back roads have been so muddy they could not be traveled. More than normal foot and horseback travel decreased the amount of country that could be reached. In the latter part of August and early September the number of observations increased because of drying weather and better traveling eonditions, . Brood-data volume is doWlland the number of poults per brood are also down. •••• _- -,.--' p- ." . TABLE'2 BtiOOD COUNTS BY DISTRiCTS;' District i pagosa Springs Area. Date July 19 July 30 July 30 July 3D Aug. 20 Aug. 20 Sept. 5 " -.;' 'Area Hells Hip Pocket Navajo River ' Confer Hill Fourmile San'Juan; Navajo River Blanco River Total , " ..if· Hens 2 2 2 1 15 12 1 1 '6 1 ~.' 4' 13 District 2 - Piedra-Chimney Rock Area Date Area Hens July 30 Chris Mtn. 1 July 30 Chris Mtn. 1 1 Aug. 12 Oniel Park Aug. 22 Dudley Mtn. 2 Aug. 26 1 Devils Creek Sept. 4 Turkey Ranch 1 7 Total Reported' by: Bradley Jacobson King and Vavak C. Va.yak P. Chambers Whit Newton ~ing, &, Holc.o~b ".: . ,.Sam Wong Average 5.77 Poults 8 .' ,f . 11 22 75 ,', Poults 8 12 6 6 8 5 45 ReEorted by: Lee Bartholemew Lee Bartholemew Tourist J. Carpenter Bradley Jacobson C. Ford Average for Dist. 6.43 �-75Table 2~'continued. District 3-BayfieldDat~,e~ Aug, 21 Pine River A.:.:r:.;:e:;;a:::._ --~A~r~e~a~- . Beaver Cr. Totals District 4 Durango - Animas Date Aug. 2 ·'Aug.4 Sept. 2 District Area -Florida River' -,_ Thompson Park Junction~C reek TOtals - * .;.._ ~H~en~s 4 P_o~u~-lt-s-----_R~e~rte~d~b~y~:---24 Scotty' Biers 4 24 ,_, Hens Poults I 9 1 2 4 7 7 23 have beeen re-numbered District Area Date July 23 Area Turkey Flat Totals Disfr'ict 6 Norwood - Uncompahgre ~D~a~t~e Aug. 5 ~A~r~e~a~ Tabaguache Reported by: C. Thomas Mason F. -Kroeger Average for Dist. 5.6 r 'A: from last year to liens 2 Poults 8 2 8 Reported by: B. Fischer Average for Dist. 40 Area. Basin ~H~e~n~s~ __ 3 Totals District Aver-age for Dist. 6 * From here on the Districts better designate the areas. 5 Mancos - Dolores _ ~P~o~u~l_t~s ~eportedby: 3 J. Howlett 3 -Average for 'Dist, -I. 7 - Ridgeway Dist.rict "', ~D.;;a;.:.te;::;__ Sept. 11 __:.:A:.=r.;:e~a~ __ ...;._ OWl Creek Totals 1 District 8 - Cedaredge Area No broods observed or reported Dist1:'ict 9 Douglas Pass Ar.ea Date Area JUly:16 - Stove Canyon Totals ....:;H:.;;e;;;n:.::s;._; ..:;Poult_s 1 14 14 up to the reporting R,eported by: H. Cox Average for Dist.14 period. * Hens 2 12 Poults 2 12 Reported by: Dwight Owens Average for Dist. * This is an area, planted last winter and shows first .year development. 6 �a_,5 _.. - ~.':': ~ -76Table 2-continued. ' District 10 Rifle .Area .Date . Aug. 14' ..Area _., _'.. " . Middle Rifle Cr. Aug.. 14 Middle Rifle Cr.' Sept. 1 Parachute Creek Totals . ."Poults .Reported by: Barlow & Dunham ciH9.t16w & Dunham 1 5 . nu:hham. 3 19 Hens 1 Average for Dist, 6.33 District 11 Glenwood Springs .• New Castle Area . Date July 4 July 10 July 10 Aug. 6 Aug. 6 Aug. 6 Aug. 6 -Aug, 6 Aug. 6 Area Cattle Creek Spring Valley _Main Elk Creek Fourmile Creek Fourmile Creek Fourmile Creek Fourmile Creek Storm King Iv.J:tn. Basalt Refuge Totals 1· 1 ··14' 1 4 '. '. Reported by: J. Reser J. Reser ·M. Burget J. Burshenyi W. Jackson W. Jackson ..W. Jackson Mrs. Franklin B. Terrell 11 65 Average for Dist. 5.9 Poults 'Hens 1 5 2 11 2 8 3 ·6 8 1 1 1 6 District 12 Red Dirt Creek Area * Date Aug. 7 Area Red .Dirt Creek Totals Hens Poults 1 6 1 6 Reported by: Mr. Slagle Average for Dist. 6. *This -area planted last winter - shows development first year. The Derby plant still does not show any increase in this second season for the plant. Birds were reported in Derby Canyon but no young turkeys have ...been reported In.the two year.period. .. Recap: Total broods 51 ; total number of :f)oults294;average brood 5•.77. . :Submitted by: .·M~rtin L•. Burget . Approved by: .Donald lVI. Hoffman --~--~--~~~~~~----~ Date October"J957 Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �October, .. . -77- 1957 .;.. . '. ::,',:' ,:; JOB C01'vlPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of:_-___;--"-.;;;:..;;'---;;......_.;;..--~ COLORADO ....••..~..,-:,"":'.y- Project No~.. W-96":D"-:2 ..'> Work Plan No. I ': " . -"; ::-".:; . :..~:. _', .: Job No. '. 3 . '. ..:. ------~~------~___;~~~--~--------------------- .Title of Job:' .:., • Location of'Trarrsp,lanJfug Site~. ";"": Pe riod covered: _____;J~u=1:.L.y_l~,~1~9..;;.5..;.7_t:;.;;0;...·.;;;S..;;.e.&;;p~te;;.;m=b;,..;;e;.;:r;....;;;1..;;.5~, ..,;1;;.;;9.,.;;5:..,;7.,.;;. -'-------_. ',.~ ..' . Summary: : . ,.: :," Eastern Slope: .. . .Areas recommended fof transplants of wild ttirkey~~' iiichide (1)" Squaw Creek in Chaffee County, (2) Mil'Isap Crfbekiu; Eremont c~iin:ty::' G3} , ...Rice .Mountain In F'remout County, (4) Vaohita Cr~'ek in County, and (5YThree rWIUe Creek in Chaffee 'Ccunty. In ·a.'dMtiOn,fl-ve or six hens should be added to. the Buckhorn Creek area in Larimer County to complete a transplant made Iastwinterr' . . ,. ".:.' ... ".. La~A.n~as·· . - . . Areas checked but rejected for transplants of wild turkeya iriCl'i..lde' (1) Buckhorn Mountain in Larimer County, (2) Meadow GJ.lch ill ~Te!l19nt County, (3) Orftohell Area 'In . Douglas County, "(4) :pinon .Ridge iii Las Animas County, and (G) Upper Poudre River in Larimer' ColIhty;, _. . , ; , :.:' ~. ;. '. ~. .' 'Western' Sloper .. . .... . . . Six transplant sites were examined this year as;poi~~i'q'r€'-&jild\urkeypl~nting sites. I-B:rown's- Park> MoffatCounty, rejected as unsBital?l~.h,~~it.at 2., Cold Springs Mountain,' Moffat County; rejected 'as 'ri~su~t'abJe h~b~tat. 3. Pinon Mesa, Mesa County, recommended for twc) releas~s~- '4:" T~ansfer Trail, Roubideau Canyon, Mesa and Delta countiesvrecommend for a atrengthening- plant. . 5.····Sawmill Mesa'and M6'nit6r 'M~~~~' _.'deita'Gounty· recommend a's possible range, . 6> Dominguez 6a!nyb~;:'\\1~'~a ~cbu~ty; '. r'ecommez.d for two releases as being suitable range. .Mostofthe ... recommended raJ)ge is on the i~Ci~tB. endof the U~cohlp~g:fE(Pr'~te~u.c '., These should be filled to ct:r:e:Ll.;:;t};8n the original plants onthe south _ :<end of the: Mesa. 'General food condittons are good arid ille'!predator load is Iight. . ',,'.;, _:'-;:'",_ -, . . . .' s.; • c , .' ; " ,. • ':j '_( .1 .. .)~;. :::.. ~ ;:".: ~ �-78Objectives: To locate suitable sites for transplanting wild turkeys within historical and non-historical areas. Procedure: A Iield investigation 'is made of areas suggested for the release of wild turkeys. The suitability of the area is evaluated by considering (a) types and amounts of foods available (b) extent or size of the area, (c) types and amount of water in the area, (d) kinds and relative abundance of predators, (e) land ownership factors, (f) elevation of the area and amounts of south slopes available, (g) number and suitability of roosting sites, (h) nesting and escape cov~r suitability and (1) weather and moisture factors. Findings: Eastern Slope. Proposed transplant areas checked during the present per'iod and those carried over from the previous year are discussed below: '.AREAS RECOMMENDEDFOR·WILDTURKEY TRANSPLANT 1. SquawCreek, Chaffee County. This area lying along the east slope of Mount Shavano northwest of Salida was recommended for transplanting in October, 1956. An insufficient number of birds were. live trapped to fill this area, however, and it is hoped that a transplant can be made during the coming trapping season. The Ahern ranch property is recommended as the release site. 2. Millsap Creek, Fremont County. This area lying north ofCanon City consisting primarily of the Shumaker ranch property and adjacent Bureau of Land Managernent lands holds definite possibilities for wild turkey development. Vegetation consists chiefly of a ponderosa pine, pinon pine, cedar, grassland type with an understory of scrub oak, wild currants, wild rose, snowber ry, skunkbush, mountain: mahogany, .and . . . miscellaneous grasses. The area is presently producing- a good crop of mast and berries and the range is not overgrazed by domestic stock. : .," Mr. Robert shll:r:naker: owns approximately 7, 000 acres of land in the area andthe re are extE:~nsi"eB. L. M. lands adjacent, most of which he leases. . . . . Water is sufficient in the area in live streams and year around springs. Roosting sites in the area c.~nsist of scattered stancsof large mature ponderosa pines and a few cottonwoods along the creek bottoms. Predators reported to be in the area are bobcats and coyotes. �N ;..,;..'" . U; "''. ~ ~ . ,.;, -79Nesting and escape .cov~r are sufficient -. a It is recommended that trial tr.msplant, to be. made in the area. A suitable release site . is located above the- Shumaker ranch headquarters. . .~ . along Millsap Creek.. .. . _.. . 3. '., .•. - . Rice Mountain, Eremont County, : ,~. . '; Similj ar in habitat tothe Millsap Creek. area discussed earlter, the Rice Mountain 'area northwest of Canon City Is.sufffctently distant to justify consideration as a separate area .. It, too, holds definite possibility as wild turkey habitat. The elevation of the area ranges from 6300 to 850'0 feet.' . . ..' ,., . Vegetation consists primarily of a ponderosa pine, pinon pine, cedar type with an understory of scrub oak, wafer; ash, . snowberry, wild .currants , ohokecher rtes, gooseberries, and miscellaneous g rasses.. The area is not overgrazed by domestic stock and is relatively isolated. Mr. Nate Patton controls approximately 20, 000 acres of land in the areawith his deeded land and leased B. L. M! lands -. He is reported to be a good cooperator and would protect any wild turkeys transplanted on his place. Water is available at permanent springs which have ueyer,dried-up ing to M:i. Patton. .. . .' . accord- Roosting sites conststing of stands of large .mature ~(>nde:rosapines are found scattered. through the' area. . . -Bobcats and coyotes while found in the ar~a are not too plentiful since' control work has been carrted"", out in'-.' recent years. . ". " .;. '. .. '.- - _, .. _.' . ,': "', .. ',' , .... Nesting and escape cover are considered to ~'e suffictens., The. area is very ruggedmoharacter. . . ..' • .. . It is recommended that a trial transplant be made in the area with the release being made in ~ooll Gulch. .'.' 4.. Vachita Creek, Las Animas County. , Vachita Creek. drains into Chacuaco Creek northeast of Branson. The proposed transplant area is entirely within the Box Ranch property. Small scattered flocks of wild turkeys have ranged through the area in the past but these apparently never located. The .Box Ranch,controls approximately .roe, 000' acres 'of land. .' -' ': : ' .; , ' ", J: �-80- The vegetative types are similar to those found in Alhandra and Doss Canyons (Hudson Brothers Ranches) consisting of a pinon pine-cedar type with scattered stands of ponderosa pine and cottonwoods.' Live oak, skunkberry, mock orange,' 'staghorncactUs, prickly pear cactus. mountain mahogany, yucca, and miscellaneous grasses are also found in the area. Water in permanent water holes along the 'canyon bottom is suffi~ient. Predators consisting chiefly-ofbobcats and coyotes are foundinthe area but are not plentifulaccording to reports.' ' , Roosting sites are found both in themain canyon and side canyons. These consist of scattered ponderosa pines and cottonwoods. The landowner, Mr. Harry F.riZzell has agreed to allow hunting if the birds increase and when opened byCommtsston action. He now allows other hunting on his property, ' " '", ' ', , It is recommended that a transplant of wild turkeys be made in the area with a release recommended for the side canyon immediately east of the headquarters ranch which drains iIiti:> Vachita Creek. 5. Three Mile Creek, Chaffee County. This area lying west of Buena Vista consists primarily of the Heckendorf Ranch property and surrounding U. S. F.. S. and R L~ M. lands. The area is extensive in size with Mr. Heckendorf owning approximately 10,000 , acres and there ate large 'acreages of Federal government lands. The area is historical wild turkey range. " ' , . The.vegetative type is ponderosa pine - 'grassland with scattered wild currants, mountain mahogany, kinnikinnick, wild roses, and weed species. The natural food potential for the area is not too high- this is the main drawback to the ar~a;:The landowner is, however, interested in re.-establtshtng the species in the area and is willing to develop small grain patches to compensate for this deficiency. Water is abundant in live streams flowing through the area. Predators have been controlled during the past several winters by trappers. Scattered roosting: sites are found throughout the area conststing of mature ,ponderosa pines. Nesting and escape cover are suff~pient. 'Much of the area is isolated and the birds would not be bothered. �-81.i.: 'This area would afford a good habitat to study the effects of management practices in an area where natural wild turkey foods are limited. A trial transplant is recommended for the area if enough birds are avail-, able. This area should, however" be planted last because of the shortage of natural foods. " 6~ Buckhorn Creek, Larimer County. This area was recommended for a transplant in October, 1956. A total of fifteen wild turkeys including eight toms and seven hens were transplanted to this area on January, 5, 19S7. Five or six more hens should be added to this a rea to complete the transplant if they are available. AREAS CHECKED WHICH.ARE NOT RECOMMENDEDFOR TRANSPLANTS WITH REASONS. 1. Buckhorn Mountain, Larimer County. This area is adjacent to the Buckhorn Creek area which received a transplant of wild turkeys last winter. The area is owned primarily by Mr. John O. Anderson. Some of the wild turkeysIrom.the adjacent area have been ranging on this area regularly. The natural food conditions are better in the Buckhorn Mountain area than at the original release sites. The area is too close to the original transplant area to be considered for another transplant since flocks from Buckhorn Creek should fill in this area, 2. Meadow Gulch, Fremont County. , This area was previously recommended for a transplant of wild turkeys, A .revival of uranium mining and prospectin,g in the vicinity of the proposed transplant site has changed the picture considerably and it is therefore recommended to cancel the transplanting plans. 3. Critchell Area, Douglas County, This area was also previously recommended for a transplant of wild turkeys. A limited water supply was found in the area during the original check (1956) and for this reason a recheck was, made during the present report period. It was' decided that a shortage of watering sites in the proposed transplant area would probably cause the birds to move into the Deer Creek or Waterton areas. Both of these areas are too heavily settled by human populations for good wild turkey development. It is recommended not to transplant birds into this area for this reason. �-824. Pinon Ridge, Las Animas County. This area lying northeast of 'I'rfnchez-a conststing of the Eldrridge Hudson .- ranch property was found to be racking in roostlng 'trees any kind except for three cottonwoods at the ranch headquarters. It is doubtful that any wild turkeys transplanted into the area would stay because of this Iack of roosts. Water in the area is also relatively scarce. It is recommended not to transplant turkeys into this area. of -." ..• 5. Upper Pou dre River; Larfmer' County.. , This area consisting of the old Zimmerman ranch property where .. Game and Fish Department·trout rearing ponds are establ ished is historical range. The only suitable habitat found in the area was the meadow areas along the main river where the last of·the native wild turkeys once ranged. . The restricted amount of habitat available at the present time and the large amount of travel by vehicle and footthrough the area prohIbits consideration for a transplant of wild turkeys. Western Slope. "Theareas on the Western Slope that were not planted last year were the . Elk Head and Baker's Peak areas; bothofwhich located in Moffat County and east and south of Craig. Wring the roughwinter of 1956.;.1957 snow in these areas ranged from 6 to 9 feet. . Snowdrifts -during 'or following blizzards were muchdeepe r, Mr. Glenn Roger's; former Regional Coordinator, suggested that we hold up the transplanting until more could be learned about the wintering conditions in these areas. are Stove Canyon in the Douglas Pass area northwest of Grand Junction was planted. Nearly thirty inches of snow was in this area when a later: reiease of two gobblers was made. However the turkeys survived and at lea~t two hens raised br~)ods this year. .. '. ,. . .. Brown's Park: This was one of the areas suggested for a plant of turkeys but shortness of time prevented making the checks until this 'year. ;, .• , '"I. : The park itself is principally -semt-artd flat l~d with desert type plants. There are a fewcottonwoods along streams and the nearby hills are ' :':.' covered almost entirely with juniper.' . .. .' " .~: �-83- Food Evaluation on Percent age of Cover basis: Type: Sage - Jumper. Sage •..Artimesia tridentata 60%of ground cover '<' "Juniper;';' Juniperus monosperma 75%of hillside cover. Gr~a~'~~ood - Sarcobatus vermiculatus 15%of bottom cover Rabbitbrush - Chyrsothamnus spp. Serviceb e rry- Amelanchier spp. , Native Bluegrass - _!>oaspp. . 'Blue grama grass ',.,',Bouteloua graci1i~_ Forbs - complete, the ground cover picture ,I Cold Springs Mountain.· This area was examined on August 28t1J..There are a.few pinons in Irish Canyon but these were not fruited this year. Below the canyon there are wide, open sage flats broken by small quaking-aspen groves around spring areas. Then near the top-It is almost pure stands .oLlodgepole pine, Pinus contorta. Bottom Food Evaluation: Type: Big Sage - Artemisia tridentata predominates. Blac\k Sage - Artemisi~ ~ Rocky mountain Bee Plant - Cleome serrulata Native blue grass - p~~ spp; ,, .Gr ama grass ...,Bouteloua gracilis ".Forbs From evidences present, snow get deep' in this area in winte r. Thfs. area is definitely not turkey range as most of the valuable plants producing turkey foods are not present." Water is plentiful but this would not offset the lack of staplefoods. ." .Pinon Mesa: This area is in Mesa County, Township 12 South, Ranges 101-102 West. Actually there is. more than this included in the area.' This proposed ~ planting site was visftedon July 12, 1957. Wildlife Conservation Officer Dudley Jei'ome was taken on this inspection trip. 'Requests to checkthe area had been coming. in for two years. This area Iies south and west' of .Grand Junction and south and west of the Colorado National Monument; The area is covered with pinon, juniper and ponderosa pine. The understory is oak, serviceberry, mountain mahogany, bitterbrush, roses etc. The area seldom fails to produce a go~d ?rop of plnon nuts. In spite of heavy pinon cones, last year the re is agood crop this year also. It is in a high plateauarea although the altitude is only 6,000 to 7,000 feet which is ideal for turkey range. This area would stand a large plant of turkeys and should make a good development area. Water is plentiful. Winters are not too severe, Roosting sites are scattered throughout the area. Food evaluation is as follows. Percentages are graded from the most abundent downward. �-84- Type - Pinon juniper - ' Pinon pine - Pinus edulis Juniper: - utahensis rrionosperma and scopulorum - O~ - Quercus gambelli - Serviceberry - Amelanchier spp. - Mountain mahogany - Symphoricarpos montanus - Bitterbrush - Purshia tridentata - Ponderosa pine - Pinus ponderosa - Fir Douglas - Pseudotsuga taxifolia - Roses - Rosa spp. Skunkberry - Rhus trilobata --- Herbaceous species' Native bluegrass - Poa spp. Blue grama grass - Boutelbua gracilis Needle grass - Stipa viridula Also comata Forbs are abundant Recommendation: T;o plants could be made in this area this year if birds are available. There is plenty of south slope. for winter feeding but snow could be a problem if birds are delivered late in the winter. Food evaluation for the area is as follows. Transfer.Trail: Upper Roubideau canyon, Montrose County.' This area is Township 48 north, Range .13 West, was visited with Dwight Owens. :Turkeys were reported on the upper part of this range for several years but .for some reason they have not returned the last two seasons. It is ' felt that a strengthening plant might be beneficial. The original birds in the area came in from Tabaguache Basin. . . The area covered is well isolated. It is cattle range and this year foods were abundant.. Late frosts caused Some damage to oak mast in spots. Pinon nuts are heavy in places.' -Boses are very good. Serviceberry in the area is damaged by the action of cedar rust. Percentages range from the top cover, type downward. ', . Type - Pinon, Juniper, Oak. .,Pinus edulis - Juniperus utahensis and scopUlorum - Oak - Quercus gambelii - Serviceberry - Amelanchier spp. �-85Type.... continued. ..•Skunkberry - Rhus.trilobata - Mountain Mahogany - Cercocarpus montanus - Thornapple '- Crataegus spp. ...:..Snowber'ry .:..Symphoricarpos spp. ..:.Ceanothus - Ceanothus spp. - Grasses and forbs are abundant r a This area should support good development of turkeys. in the canyon and disturbance would be at a: minimum. Water is abundant Recommendation: This area could be 'planted if the birds can be taken into the area early. Some heavy snow might interfere with transportation late in the season. Sawmill Mesa.' Township 48 north, Range 12 west. This area is northwest of the Roubideau area and is similar in character. Foods are abundant, water is plentiful. ." Food types- are identical with the Roubideau area. The lower edge of this mesa borders 'on a desert type. Monitor Mesa lying to the north and west has considerable south-facing slope. This area too, could be planted if birds are available. The Dominguez Area. Township 51 North, Range 16 West. This area lies on the north end of the Uncompahgre Plateau. It is south of Pinon Mesa and separated from that range by a deep and rugged gorge. This area has been suggested as a turkey plant area for a number of years. The lower reaches are on B. L. IVI. land. The upper portion is National Forest land. The trip was made to Blue Spring just under the divide leading into the Little Dominguez. As in other areas checked this season the growth was lush. A lot of good roosting sites have been destroyed by recent logging operations. This area too, shows good possibilities for turkey development. Food evaluation for 1957 Species are set up on a percentage of ground cover. Type - Pinon, Juniper, Oak. Pinon-Pinus edulis Oak - Quercus gambelii Juniper - Juniperus utahensis and scopulorum Roses - Rosa spp. Skunkberry - Rhus trilobata �-86Type-continued. . •. .. . .-Sagebrush:'" Art~misia tridentata .', ..;.Squawapple- ,Peraphyfellum ramosissimum - M91mtainmahogany - Cercocarpus montanus . Bfttert>rush' ":'Pursia tridentata " - Ponderosa Pine ,.. Pinus ponderosa - mostly logged off Herbaceous. species .. - Blue grama grass - Bouteloua gracilis - Introduced. - Native blue grass - Poa spp. .Forbs abundant . . ..., ,,' \, This area too, could be planted this ..season if birds are available. The Little DomingueZ.CahYo~ lying diI~~tly south of this l~ of the ~~e type and could stand a plant of turkeys. .. ", .' Note: Because of heavy growth this season it is very difficult to observe predator sign. Consultation with those who know the areas well indicates that the predator load is light . . r: .... ' . . ., .Sllbmitiedby':. 'Mattin L. Burget' ..•.. Approved; by: .Donald IVI .. Hoffman October, --------~~~~~~~~--~- Date: 1957 '" . ,', .:. , "', . ...•... ... _ .. - ,. L~~rence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �.' . . . ~. . .: .... -87."".: r:.': : ....• INVE:sTiGATiONS PROJECTS .' ~ ~ ~: . • I '.' :.': ..... .i: :~.:. r..; .~. '~.~, _~~·.> .. I..w ; .,., <' '_. •••.• : ,.' ,;, - ~. . \." - . '.: -..!.• -.~ ... _. :_,'" _' ' Project :'_ ..: No. ~:. .' ~.: -. W_'38::'R~10 ". .., ': '., ..,. Work Plrul-No: ,. '.~: -, :. ,; :,:1..: "'_" -.t •. ~ ~.. ; Deer-Elk Investigations .' .. ·:·11 J -~ ••• , _.~" .' Population. sU;:;eys . .. '. ;i~' .:.:>:"< ). ,;;-~'~dy of,C~n~~~ TechniQues Job No~ , Pe~i~~b'o~r~d: ' :juiiLi956t~APri130~·I~~7."'·;:'· ..-,'. , •• ;1. •••• :: .:.; ,.', ~ . .. ... ..', '_. 'J", :. '_.' . .':, "" :.; ' ... = . . Three helicopter counts made inl95.7 for. de~t on c~ci~ Ridge., an area ~. appidjtiiD.ately·~eight.~qua~e a:ve,raged 405"deer; or 54.66 percent "ofilia tot~{number'of 741 pr~:s~iit.: Thre,e counts made from a SUper Clb .avetag~(i':ii6 dee~,' .42,~"64 per~~~t~ ..(E'xtens~ye checks made previously ,incthis:;tte'ciwith a fup~tC,ub'c'ameoui 42.~O·.~rcent) .• .The total number of animals present was'detertliiIu3d by'a groufi:cic'oWiting crew • it~f~s, or , I . . ' .•: •.•.... ,'.\ " .,",., .> " :,"," ... , •.•• ' ..:: ::"'.::' . ,.: ...•. ::;':«,' ' ..' , Two helicoper counts were 'made on Blue Ridge, ...over an area of approximately 30 square miles, where iiD unknown numbe':r'of elk'wintered. These two counts averaged ,302 e_lk. : 9ne 'count made with.a SUper Cub was 216 elk • ....; .. t ~.;.'.~,::.,~ .. ,.:-.':: -: ~ ~ "~.;.,~ s ~,~ " . ~I:.".-. '. ;'c, - ... ' .•...•.•.•. : 'The' airP'iane counted 77.- 9 perce~( as many:dEier as. the helicopter; and 7L':5jlerdeht as.II1;my eik'·a~~t~e,h~i'i9~pter. fue~e fi~res,. it ;woulcHippear ~hat'the'haIicopter is-'bett~r and m~r.e·eff~-~ient in elk ; coluiting~' Ell~i{a~k of 'ii tendency,'to bunch ih'an:deer, ~d' from a "hbvering he'iicopte~'tli~y' canbe ~e;adiiy 'counf~i:l: ' '.' , Fr9m fuore' -.:2L~:',;' r, :'~.;:,-~';~"'. • /. "~to,. . ..... The helicopter. deserves Jurther testing •. especially, on elk. The observer . ~;'-"',:~ (;~~~:~ev~~:i~~~,~~ld v~~~·acc.~rat.~.~~~~~rat_iOas well'~ to ~ ;: ,,':~~~~~:~~~;s.~,~e ?~ qu~sy_on~91~rI.k herds, ':('h~~fflc~ency:of the hehcopter .0 !;.:.,.::.t;n·gd~~'~?~hts \Vi}!~ri~'~e~_~~ as,)h~ pilot b~come~;~ore skilled in game <:) . . ren"~~~i;:-,~ counttng' .. ' . " ",'. ..... .". ,-.' -.".,:'.; _(_~_;,~,~:., ', '_,;·-.'_L;-:,'.J :.,,:_.\. ...• d :."':. . ~,~,~s.~~1~:i?~,a ~. ~r ..' h~'~ .~. .' <, ..' r: •Introduction: A preliminiu"y review of Itterature revealed that three methods offer best possibilities for the accurate determination of big game 'trends or populattons, "These are aerial census, pellet group counts, and .eatimatea based on age and sex ratios. . �-88No detailed review of literature has been made covertng census techniques due to insufficient time. Permanent pellet group plots were installed on the west e.nd of Cedar Ridge in the fall of 1956. At thief time, it Was planned to sample the entire ridge in hopes of getting a pre-season population estimate. It is planned to check these plots again this fall before the wintering herd moves in. Summer use on the ridge was nil. ' "" ,.. ' Additional air-ground compartsons were made on Cedar'Ridge this year. Before the area was counted by a ground crew. it was flown by a SupeI"'Cub and a ,_heltcopte r for a three-way comparison. The same helicopter pflot and observer were tried on a plane-copter comparison. Objective: (1) To determine the comparative value of the Bell 47G~2 .Il€ll~~opt~ron deer iuia elkcensustng,' ,(2) To compare the Bell 47G:":2 "Helicopter against the Super Cub in deer and elk counting, and (3)to compare both against a total count for deer made by a ground crew. " Procedure:' The Helfcopter used was a three-place Bell Model 47 0-2 owned 'and operated-by Helicopters Inc, of Denver, This ship has been better adapted for high altitude work by r'eplaeingthe 200 H. P. Franklin engine with a , 260 H~ P. Lycoming engme, This'shiP appears to work' effictently up i~ 12,000 feet andup to aspeed of 80 milesper hour. ' " ,. ' , . . )' . ." . The same experienced observer, Dwight Owes . " Helicopter arid the Super Cub, ',' was observing .Ior both the a . -Cedar Ridge Was used as 'test area for de~r. One Helicopter count was made the evening of February 26th. Two more Helicopter counts were made Ior deer and one 7:00 A.' IVf. elk countwas made on the Blue Ridgethe fol.lowing day. On' the 29th, the Helicopter made a second elk count.. A total of three deer counts and two elk counts were 'made at periods when weather , .permttted during these' three days, At 'no time was the weather c~nsidered ideal. Much of the flying for' bb~hship~ had to be made between snow squalls. A ground Counting crew of 26, made up 6fstudents fr~m Colorado State College arid local Game Department personnel, 'check~d the 'area for a total count on March' 2. Lookouts were stationed at proper' intervals to count any,deer leaving the area as the Itneof 26 men on a onemile to two mile fl,"~ntmoved slowly over the area counttng everything that broke back through the'line. A '. total of 741deer were counted, , 1 : r. }" �-89- Findings: Table 1 lists details of all deer counts on Cedar Ridge, an area approximately 2 x 4 miles. TABLE I. Date Time Hours Deer Counted Air Light Helicopter 2/26 (3:19-3:55 PM) 36 min. 407 Good Poor 2/27 (12:46-1: 19 PM) 33 min. 376 Good Poor 2/27 (3: 53-4: 26 PM) 33 min. 431 Good Good to Poor Good Good to Poor Good Airplane 2/28 2/28 (1:55-2:35 PM) (4:46-5:30 PM) 40 min. 44 min. 331 326 Good Good 3/1 (2:00-2:40 PM) 40 min. 290 Good 741 Counted on Snowshoes Ground Crew 3/2 26 Man Front Table 2 lists details of all elk counts on Blue Ridge, an area approximately 2 x 15 miles. TABLE 2 Date· Air Light 2/27 (7:07-8:35 AM). Helicopter 1 hour 28 min. 318 Good Poor 2/28 (10:32-11:50 AM) 1 hour 13 min. 286 Good Good to Fair Mild Turb. Good 2/28 Hours Time (3:35-4:34 PM) Submitted by: Date: Elk Airplane 1 hour Paul F. Gilbert 216 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator October, --------~~~~~~-------1957 ��oc~ober~ 1957 -91- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-IO ; Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. III Forage and Range Utilization studies Job No. 14 Fate of Key Browse Species Objectives: Explore the possibility of predicting the fate of a browse ·species, subject to a particular degree of range use, by means of the age composition of the plant, population, and other methods. Procedure: Work on other phases of this project left no time for this job. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator October, 1957 .---------~~~~~~---- Date: ��I~tllllllijllllil' llll~lfI1lll~~il~ij~~I~llillllijll BDOW022218 ._.--- October, 1957 -93- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project ~o. W-38-R-IO Work Plan No. TIl Job No. 15 ; Deer-Elk Investigations Forage and Range Utilization Studies Importance of Pinon-Juniper as a Deer Food and Indicators of De{)leted Range. Objective: Study the food habits of deer in southwestern Colorado to learn how important pinon and juniper are as year-long deer foods. Determine to what extent a diet high in pinon and juniper indicates a depleted, or severely used, The Problem: starvation, range. It is commonly believed that pinon pine and juniper are a or a near starvation, only on depleted ranges. diet of deer being eaten in quantity However, field observations indicate that in southwestern Colorado, pinon and juniper are eaten in important amounts, both summer and winter. on ranges that are not depleted or severely used. An intensive study of the food habits of deer on pinon-juniper ranges of southwestern Colorado is needed to learn to what extent deer are dependent on pinon and juniper in that area. Procedure~ No work done on this project due to other duties. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date: Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator October. 1957 ----------~~~~~~--------- �11111111 ill~'iII{fli"I~illlI11~Il'iij~~~1 ~i~I~'~II BDOW022219 -99- October, 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of.__ Project No. C.;;...;;;;.O.;;:L;..;:;O;.;;.R.;;.;;.A.;;.;D~O=-_ .....;..W_-...;7..;;;2;...-_R;...-..;;;5_...:.....;;E;;.;xp=.;e;,.;r;,.;im~e;,.;n;;.;t.;.;al.;;...;;B;,.;i,§;Zg_G Work Plan No. ---------~.....;..---.;.;...;~~--~--~.....;..~~.....;..~--~~~~--~~.;.;_...;..;;-1 Job No.3; Title; Rodenticide Treatments of Browse Seed and Seedlings. Period Covered:_.....;..J;..;u;;;;;1~y_;1;.?,_1;;.;9;..;5;..;6_t;;.;;0;...J;;_u;;;;;n;;.;e;;...;;;.3..;;.;O ,!-.;.19;;;..5;;_7;;.;; •.....;.. __ ~ .,...._ Objectives: To determine the efficiency of available rodenticides in preventing the depredations of rodents on artifiCially planted browse seed and seedlings. Techniques Used: The laboratory portion of this job has previously in the Colorado Quarterly Report, October, 1956. been reported The field work was done as follows: 1. The rodenticide, Tetramine, was applied to the bitterbrush seed in the following manner. The Tetramine was mixed with a sticky carrier, in this instance dextrose. A level teaspoon of the two powders was-placed in a large jar which has two pounds of seed in it. One ounce of water was added and the whole contents shaken up until all the seeds were coated. Powdered aluminum paint was also added in order to color the-seeds so that birds would not take them. 2. The seeds were allowed to dry and then were planted.gne-half inch deep with a David Bradley hand tractor and seeding attachment. 3. The seeds were planted in rows 60 feet long and were replicated three times at each place. 4~ Atthe same time six boxes were placed at each location. Three of the boxes have untreated seed under them. The boxes were set into the ground about one inch to discourage mice from digging under them. :The germination inside these boxes will be correlated with the germination in the field plots e .,,, Liquid repellents were also tried in an effort to locate om which will keep rabbits and mice from using seedlings during the winter months. Only one repellent was used the first year on the plants. A bone-tat derivative, Neo Chem, was tried first at the Cochetopa Pilot area. The repellent was sprayed on the plants and checks will be made in order to determine if the spray is effective or not. �- 100Findings: Tetzamtne - All of the rodenticide work in the field was conducted at the three Federal Aid browse nurseries at Hot Sulphur Springs, Little Hills and Sapinero, The summer of 1956 was very dry during the entire .growing season. Emergence of seedlings both treated and untreated was very erratic and no real significant differences could be detected in emergence at any of the locations •. Most of the seedlings had died by the time counts were made in September. For this reason no- real useable data ~ Was obtained on the effect of the rodenticide. In order to show the pattern of emergence and survival each. nursery will be summartzed below. .. !."" Table 1 - Hot Sulphur Springs Nursery - Bitterbrush Seed Item Treatment Date Counted Seed .Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed in the Open (free access to rodents) Tetramine Tetramine Tetramine None None None 6-12-56 8-14-56 9-19-56 6-12-56' 8••.14-56 9-19-56 Tetramine Tetramine Tetramine None None None 6-12-56 8-14-56 9-19-56 6-12-56 8-14-56 9-19-56 " " " " " " " tl " " n u ':" " it f'.. •.. Number of Seedlings 114 35 100 230 220 200 662 602 366 371 172 92 Table .2 . - Little Hills . Nursery - Bitterbrush Seed . . . Item Treatment Date Counted Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed in the Open (free access to rodents) Tetramine Tetramine Tetramine None None None 6-12-56 8-13-56 9-18-56 6-12-56 8-13-56 9-18-56 Tetramine Tetramine Tetramine None None None 6-12-56· 8-13-56 9-18-56 6..;.12-56 8-13-56 8-18-56 " " II " " " " " " ·11 " " " " " NUlnberof Seedlings 23 3 0 85 1 1 9 0 0 37 0 0 �-101- Table 3 - Sapinero Nursery - Bitterbrush Seed ~.:.... Item Treatment Date Counted Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed Under Cages Seed in the Open (free access to rodents) Tetramine Tetramine Tetramine None None None 6-14-56 ,6-15-56 :9-23-56 ·6-14-56 8-15-56 9-23-56 'I'etr'amine Tetramihe Tetramine None None None 6-14-56 8-15-56 9-23-56 6-14-56 8··15,-56 9-23-56 II II " " " " " " " " " " " " " ·.Number of Seedlings , ..L 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 120 0 0 All of the treatments at the three nurseries were the same size as th,ey.:were planted with a David Bradley hand 'tractor with the same setting oil theseed metering disk. Thus, all fig,tr-es are comparable. " . Table 1 shows a great diffarenee in the emergence of treated and untreated ,. seeds. However, seeds witll complete protection in this are exhibited an inverse pattern of emergence. :i1'huS'"itis believed that the poor growing conditions masked the differences, 'if any occurred. Neo Ch~m ~_ Seedlings of RUssian- Olive planted at the Cochetopa Pilot Area in Gunnison County were being' extensively damaged by rabbits (mostly whitetailed jackrabbits) during the winter. It was decided to try some .lfqufd-repell ents on the seedlings to see if any effect could be noted upon the amount of browsing the sprayed plants received compared to unsprayed plants. The one repellent tried this year was a water-emulsifiable containing bone tar oil, and is an odor repellent. concentrate The concentrate was mixed in the recommended ratio of 1 :100 and sprayed on the plants with a back pump type of sprayer. Three days after the plants were sprayed there was a general rain in the area which washed off most of the spray. Snowfell almost immediately after this and made travel into the area nearly impossible. �IjjinJIMiiiilm~ BDOW022220 , : I October, '1957 .-103- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS· COLORADO ~--~~~~~~------------ State of Project No. W_-_7_2;;..-_R_-_5;;.._..--::..-E;.;xp~e_r_i_m_e..;;..n_t_al;;.._B_50ig"_"'G __ an_l_e_R_an ..•g~e_._R_e_v_e....!g~e_t_a_tI_· o...;,n.;..._ Work Plan No. _ _;1;;.__~;_...;.J.;;.o.;;.b...;N;.;.0;;.;.;...._4~; __ .;;;T.;;.it;.;;;l.;;.e,;..: _R;.;.;;.e;;.;se.;..e.;..d;.;;;i;.;;;n;J;lgi.....r;.;M;;_;;e..;.;th;;;;_o;;.; _ Period Covered: J_u.,;;.,lY"--1.,!.,_1;.;9..;5_6_t.;..;0 __ .;..Ju.;.;.n;;_e.-..,;;.3_O.!.,, ...• 1_9...;,5...;,7..;.,. _ Objectives: To determine the reseeding methods that will give the best results in artificial reseeding of browse species. This is a continuation of the work previously done under this project and the Game Management Project. The objective will be to test the various methods under field conditions. Techniques Used: The field tests are carried out at the locations listed below: Billy Creek - Seed of the various species will be planted in an area where some of them will receive irrigation water and some of them will not get any water except what might fall as rain or snow. .' These seeds will be planted with a ·l?Ia,netJJ)Jl,ior drill mounted on an Allis Chalmers "G" tractor. ,,(_. ::', At the Elk Creek and Elgin properties near Sapinero the seeds were planted in the bottom of the contour furrows with a modified seeding attachment on the Allis Chalmers tractor. Other seeds, mostly grasses and legumes, were planted between the furrows with a John Deere Van Brunt grain drfll , At the Cochetopa Pilot area the same procedure will be followed, that is, seeds planted in the bottom of the furrows with the modified Planet Junior Drill. Findings: ._ Billy Creek- The cold-wet spring in this area prevented seeding of the small field chosen for the work. It is planned t~try and seedthe fieldIn the late fall of 1957. Elk Creek- Seeds of saltbush and silverberry some of the contour furrows. were planted in the bottom of Emergence was excellent for both species. In-as-much as we have had considerable trouble getting transplants of saltbush to live, _this seems to be a method whereby we can get better stands of saltbush at much less expense. Silverberry, being a new plant to our nursery work, and having experienced rather poor success in the Billy Creek nursery, is another plant which appears to lend itself to direct seeding into the furrows, rather than increasmg costs bv usinz transnlants. �-104The mixture of grasses and legumes that were drilled into the spaces between the contour furrows produced an excellent stand this first year because of ideal moisture conditions during the late spring and early summer. Plants of crested wheat and Russian wild rye have very large crops of seed heads this first growing season. The one legume, Astragalus ctsar, is doing ve,ry well and should help to build up the soil. ' The Cochetopa Pilot Area has not been seeded with the new method. It is planned to try and get some seed into the ground this fall. Recommendations: At Billy Creek the small field should be seeded to saltbush this fall, if at all possible. At the Elk Creek area, counts of seedling survival and rate of growth should be initiated in order to determine how much good the furrows do in increasing survival and also if they increase the available moisture enough to increase the rate of growth. Plots have already been set up to determine the changes in plant composition and denstty both within and outside the contour furrow area. These plots should be checked and measured each year for at least three more years in order to determine if the reseeding is successful in this area. If seed and time is available the contour furrows in the Cochetopa area should be planted and emergence counted in the ,'~Pringof 1958. The main item to determine as of now is to see if the reseeding will cause any permanent change in the amount of available browse. For this reason there should be a series of permanent plots set up to determine what is happening. Twelve of these plots are already set up at the Elk Creek-Elgin area, and more are scheduled to go into the new area to be furrowed this fall, Prepared by: Date: Raymond J. Boyd Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator October, 1957 ------------~--~---------- �Ili~IIIII~'~I~'ljil~imlli[li~ij~~il ~ilill~'~11 Lt~~ ._J,:. ..•. BDOW022221 October, -105JOB COMPLETION 1957 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------~------------- Project No. W_•... 7..;;2_-_R .... -•... 5 ·.:.;__ E=x •p.;;.e.;;.r;;;;im;;;;;...;;e.;;;n;.;.tal;;o;...;.;;;;B . ••• ig~G.;;.a;.;.m__;e;.._.R •... an~g~e_R..;;e ••.. v.;;.e.§i?g.;;.e •••. ta;;;.;t;.;.io.;;..n;;..;_ Work Plan No. Title: __ 1 Job No. 6 ----------------~--;.._.~~~-----------_------------ SU_r_v_iv_al;;..__of_B_r_o_w_s •••. e__.;;.P_lan;.;;;...;t in"-!g~s un_.o-;d_e_r B~ig..._,;;G_am;..·_e.;;..· •.... ~U;..s_e_ •...._ Period Covered:. .;;.Ju.;;;l~y:....;:;lJ.., ..:1;.;;.9.:;.5.:;.6 .... t;.;::0.....;J;_;u;::n::;:e:.....;:;.3..;:,.0z..! ·..:1'..;:,.9-,;:;.57..:....;.... _ ,.--_ Objective: To determine the resistance and survival of artificially produced native and exotic browse seedlings under grazing pressure by deer. Techniques Used: Game Management summer. The brow~e s€€dlillf,S that were-planted at the Billy Creek Area in April, 1956 were irrigattld and weeded during that After growth had ceased in the fall, the heights of all plants that were alive were measured to the near-est 1/2 inch. As soon as it was possible to determine which plants were altve in the spring of 1957; the heights were again measured. The difference in theheight measurements were analyzed statistically to determine if anyuse had occurred on the plants. This same procedure will be followed in the fall of 1957 and the spring of 1958. Findings: of the first year's by species. The results Ae-Skunkbueh measurements are presented (P.hus _tl'ilobata) There were 375 one and one-half year old seedlings alive in September. 1956. In the spring of 1957 there were only 294 plants alive; a survival of 78 percent. Because of the extremely hard winter experienced in the Billy Creek area, it was not possible to determine if the plants had winter killed or if extensive.browstng had killed them'. A few general obeervations seemed to indicate that browsing had little if any effect on the survival, as most of the dead plants showed no use by deer. _::.. �-106Statistical analysis of the two different sets of measurements by student's simple "T" test indicated that there was a significant difference between the spring and fall measurements at both the .05 and. 01 level. From the condition of the plants measured it could be determined that use had occurred very frequently and thus the difference could be attributed to browsing by deer. Table 1 shows a brief summary of the analysis: Table 1. Skunkbush Measurement Data, "T Test, " Billy Creek Utilization Plot 1956 (fall) SX SX2 N ~ x t = 4.22 5699.5 94616.0 375 4.53 15.24 t.05 = 1. 965 1957 (Spring) 4683.0 79825.0 294 4.28 15.93 t.01 = 2.586 with 668 D. F. An examination of Table 1 shows a larger mean for the after-grazing measurements (1957, spring). This can be explained by the fact that the large plants in the fall of 1956had a better chance to survive because of a larger root system and more stored food reserves as a result of a . larger more leafy top. B - RUSSian-Olive (Eleagnus angustifolia) There were 164 live seedlings in the fall of 1956, and only 69 live plants in the spring of 1957; an over-winter survival of 42 percent. As was the case with skunkbush the loss cannot be tied down to anyone factor. Probably a combination of hard winter and browsing by deer caused most of the mortality. Statistical analysis of the measurements by a simple "T" test indicated a Significant difference in the heights at both the. 05 and. 01 level. This difference can probably be blamed on deer use. Table 2 shows a brief summary of the analysis: �-107- Table 2. Russian-OliV"~Mea~~rement Data, "T Test-, " Billy Creek Browse Utilization Plot 1956,(fall) 1661.0 18187.5 164 2.97 10.11 SX SX2 N s x t = 4.22 t .05 = 1. 965 , t.01 = 1957(spring) 751.25 8657.56 69 2.90 10.89 2.586 with 231 D. F. Again the mean of the 1957 data is greater than that of the 1956data. The same explanation might be attached to this as was mentioned in the section on the skunkbush measurements. C - Saltbush (Atriplex canescens) There were 105 live plants in the fall and in the spring only 88 had survived. This gives an over-winter survival of 84 percent. From experience gained in other jobs within this project, a loss such as this is normal. In fact, normally the loss is much greater in this species. Irrigation right after transplanting probably increased the survival of these plantings. An analysis of the measurement data for the saltbush seedlings showed no significant difference between the heights of the plants. Most of the plants were rather short in the first place and did not receive any use to speak of because they were covered with snow. Another reason is the fact that deer do not usually browse the saltbush in this area unless there is no other type of browse available. Table 3 shows a summary of the analysis: Table 3. SX SX2 N s x. t = 1. 08 Saltbush Measurement Data, "T Test, " Billy Creek Browse Utilization Plot 1956 (fall) 1957(spring) 1037.5 833.25 11665.75 8989.56 105 88 3.76 3.41 9.8 9.5 t. 05 -;. 1.972 with 191 D. F. �-108D - Other Species Bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) .~ There, was only one seedling that lived through the summer of 1956arid ifw'as';§~illalive In the spring of 1957. It had not been g razed by deer. . .'. . . Sand buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides) - Only one plant of this species lived through the summer, and it also survived the winter of 1956-57. Two inches had been broken off the top, but was not eaten. Whether' this was caused by browsing or mechanical injury cannot be determined. Recommendations: All of the plants should be measured again in the fall of 195'7. Remeasurement in the spring of 1958will give more information on survival and amount of use each species receives during the winter of 1957-58. Seedltngs now under irrigation at the nursery site at Billy Creek should also be measured this fall and next spring to get additional information on species preference and resistance to browsing. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Date: October. 1957 ---------------~------------ Approved by:__!:au!'en~eE. Riordan;;;_ __ Federal Aid Coordinator �I~~illllij'III~'llil~I~;lli~lillij~~il ~~;llr(~11 BDOW022222 ·-109- October; 1957 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS state of.__ ..;;.C...;;O..;;,L;;..;O;..,;R;.,;;;A;.:,.;D;;;..,O..;;;.... _ Project No. VV~-_7~2~-_R~-_5~~_.~E~~~e~~~~.~en~.t-ru~B-l~·g~v~'am_.-e-"-R-a-n~g~e __R~e-v-eg~.-et-a-t-io-n--- Work Plan NO. Title: l .. ---.:.;_·,....;" J__ o_b_.ti_, .,;..0. 7_· _ E_x~p~e_r_i_m~e_nt_al~_P_r_o_du_c_t_i_o_n_o_f __B_r_o_w_s_e __S_e_ed_l_i_n~g_s Period Covered:. J~u;;;;;l;>!,y....;;..:1,~19.;..5.;..6;;;...;;.to;;,. ..;;J..;;u;;;;;n;.;;e_3~O;..l.~19;.;5~7 _ _ Objective: To determine methods of soil preparation and irrigation practices that will produce the maximum amount of browse seedlings in one growing season. These seedlings to be planted on the contour furrows as one-year-old seedlings. Te~lll~iq~q Used: Seeds of skunkbush @hus.}E~l<f")ll.!.~L Sand buckthorn (Htppophae rh?-.P?j.;l.2~d.e..QL Russian-olive (Elf2..~gnus~~t1.g.!:lE!}i.?1J.a), and sil verberry (Elea~ ~,.u.tata) were planted in rows 48)in;:;hes 8.:93..1't. These seeds were irrigated by flowing water in ~rin:.!Jditches on each side of the rows of seeds. The nur-sery area was fer·tilized with 300 pounds of superphosphate. One complete weeding of the nursery was accomplished during the summer. After the plants have dropped their leaves in the fall, they are to be dug up by a mechanical digger. Then they will be placed in. damp wood. shavings (Shingletoe) and transported to areas where they are to be transplanted. Findings: The very wet and cold spring experienced in the Billy Creek area, did not lead itself to seedling emergence. However, any seedlings that did emerge had excellent growing conditions as abundant moisture in the form of both rain and irrigation water was available through the month of August, 1957. The Sand Buckthorn seed was obtained too late to stratify it, but six rows were planted to see what might come up without treatment, Some emergence was noted, but it is believed that most of the seed will layover and germinate next summer. Seeds of silverberry werenot stratified, but were soaked in water for 12 hours before plaadng, The.re was not too mucl; -emergence from this lot of seed; however, this type of tzeatment had produced good luck for us in the past. �-110- Emergence of the Russian-olive seed was very good as was the emergence of the skunkbush see<;l.· Recommendations: In the past, all of the seedlings produced in nurseries such as the one. at 'Billy Creek were dug up and transplanted-tete areas having contour furrows. From some new results to be reported under job 4 of this project, it now seems possible to do away with nursery plants, and apply direct seeding into the furrows. This will lower the cost per acre considerably for this type of work. It is recommended, therefore,· that the seedlings now growing in the nursery at Billy Creek be left there andbe incorporated into job 6 giving us a greater number of plants to analyze on big game use. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Approved by: --------~~~~~~----- Date: October, 1957 Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �" ':'111. ' '. ,.'.JQBCOMPLETION : r. '.' .~ October, 1957. REPORT ..'.' .'. .~' . : , .~.:_:' Project No. " ..... ~ -. . ~ .:~' W_-_8...;.8_-_R_-3 __ ~...;v;.;."'a_te;.;;.;;;rf.;;.o;;,.w_l;...;;;S.;;;;;..urv.;.;e;.:y:.;;s;;...;;;;an_d;;;..;;:In_ •.' • '. . ~.' \ : .~: . ,.\ ,INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS . ~'.' ,r,'!'" . i, . '··3." ' Title of Job: . ·i· '" . ~.~.. ..,T !, -_"/ v • •: ::,~P~r:iQclCovered» :.April"!;; 1957,to,Octbb~r t . 1, 1957.' ::..~;.'.~,'~'J;; ~'.: ..~':. ~ Abstract: • ~~<"~::.';.;:'~::'<{"'.~:' _.. :. _ .... :;>,c;_, ','_ ··~r·(·:·'I. ".r~·; ", :;. .. . 1. 'the Canada Goose flocks using the Utah-Imperial a severe downward trend since 1952. ' ~.2~:. ~b,~'~~~~.a~~a'comp~ised' il!)\~9ffat C:~uD,ty,.Colorado. •• ,,- ',. t • • • I' , ••• '.'_:. ,_ t::-,_ or;;, ~~:<.:":',.:J ValleY:Flyway'lJt,,~ '~,' shown . ":105 ~;les_'~f ~~~ dreeihm~IYampa;'Rivers ,,--,,_. " '.;: . --. -- , "0'· .•••••• • .: ',:' ,-~. _ '.~. ~p~ T :.'~;:. ~:.,_;:-:} of 'the. study-area. was. viSited' bi-weekly by boat," Counts ., were made of all geese observed and activity was recorded/SYstematic searches of 120 islands were made fOr nests. Information was recorded :'; -;:3. ,:;.Ei:l.~~; seetton . . ': ;?:..::._r~_'r ~'~:" :~'::':'.; _'~".'.'."" . ~" ••.• ." - '_' . -. . ':', -: t, " _- .>.:,:'.:, ~ ., " ';r,' - ,J, ,::~.; :.:i ..:. :.: "~ ';.", 'il. ~ ','. ..,:_, TQ_eadult population observed.totaledfoo birds, of which 64'birds"; ,",~~" '.':we,~~:'pai~e.4.' The, 'remainder was in groups tip' to '14 birds~:"Actiihlnest'ing ,,-~;\v~§ ~Et;~Irlpt,edby 32,geese. At least 29 goslings are known to h.av~,~b~~~.. hatched. . , . 4 •. ., ...•.'.:~..<, '_£ ;~. :.::~. ~". on in ;;~:~;',:~~:.'~~,~~~~ ~~~ts we~~:'~o~a~~~'during the 1957: study. All were the ~~~'~nd <;:),> "', ~~ il?1ll:n4s~l;,Vtsibility is. apparently a very important factor Inthe ,$~nection ~. ·,:,~,9.fa,~ne.st ~ite.: .~;,,;,,:',',' : : :, :' .: .: . .... : . ';':,i'''' '.. ; ' "ii; '.-: ~..: ... _ "'. .; '_:.~) " . ", 4': ", ':- in the hatch of goslings was due mainl~ t? all ~arlr ,~9.od destroyed nearly all the nests and one goose kil.leq 'On e- the, nest by. an unknown predator; believed to of the canine famiiy:~::Ffooding . wasfound to, be the major factor restricting the breeding success cIJriti~ '-, . the.A9l),?, ~Wdy•.:; ~.'.>;'; ; , , .. • ~ :~. ;,;, -. :, J~'::" ~ :' ~ 6. The reduction ',:, E, cF;e~t ill,;May; ;that be -.: ..::: ::_::.f; .f.' .: .' .- :' . : . ~.. "..;., '_ .( �~ .. -112- ~'. : ... : .... •.... , . , " .,' 7. No evidence of rene sting has been found. The' geese apparently leave the study area soon after the nest is destroyed. They are believed to go to the large reservoirs of Wyomingto moult. 8. Protection during the balance ofthe Y~::l.F,~l?,.w~U: as better protection from flooding appears to be in need of further investtgatton, ,.'iC'::9: :~Theh~~ting season o~ g~~se!in Moffat County, Colorado was closed during the 1957,season. Bag limit restricti()~~ were Imposed upon the '-,~,~. balance' ofilia :uf:ih: fmpe'rtarFlyway. " , ' ';:;':':"6bjg~t'i~~~~ "~(i) 1:6 d~t~~m1~e'ih:-size "and;'~~~~' reproduction of ~he Yampa Valley-Brown's Park resident goose flock. -. ~ nesting ~-....•.... . . . -,-_ . ' '". '" r ..' ....• (2) To determine fact,ors ~nflue~Qing.,nesting success and annual status of . "''''''''-·tlilkflock~" ' ,," >,••" "'~""", ., . ',', .., '" '" " , ,,' ." . , ".o,. ' (3) To make recommendations for the improvement of nesting conditions <'",,"'<' ,f9~.,~,is,f~?ck. :..:, ,,' ':;'; ,.',,' .. ' Introduction: The State of Colorado is in danger of losing the last major ','" wild.breedtng ~lo,cIspfthe Greater Basin Canada Geese; located on the " "'Gr~eti and.Yampa Rivers. For the past sever-al years.. the field men of the Game and Fish Department have reported the goose population was , :',:d~clining~cThis problem is, of-great concern to' the Colorado Game -andFish Department, ,. " With these facts in mind, the waterfowl investigation program under the leadership of Jack R. Grieb, instigated a fact finding project to determine whah9,(;n~ld be done to restore the nesting geese to a more stable'status, The ". r~~,eaEqhof t4~,ftr1;t.year wasconducted by Don J., Neff, during the summer o(1~56. The authoc conducted the present investigation the summer of 1957• . .. _.' . The following questions were being investigated: Howmany Canada geese ~,).~r.13there. ,oIlthe breeding. areas of the Yampa and Green Rivers? ','How many ,':'; 'ac1;~gily.nestz. ,H9w.many are successful, in hatching? What factors influence ., 'the nesiing's;cce~s? \Vh~trecommendations can be made to improve the status of the geese and their nesting SUccess? ... i. ;: . ~. , 'the 'fie,id i!.l:v~stig~tiollS consistof bi-weekly boating the 105 miles of fiver s~ar~hing'the l~O lGlands for Hosts and centacting-the residents of :,', :yi:.';: 't~:~ 'stU:dY,are.a 'fo~pa~t,hist0ry:aild present observations of the breeding geese. 'it i;ii~p~d the facts gathered will indicate ways to restore the ' goose population to a more desirable status and methods to improve the nesting success without expensive replanting to restore a vanished wildlife resource. ~an(f �-113';Sincere thanks are expressed for the excellent cooperation received from all concerned. Techniques Used: I" ". Bi-weekly counts of the breeding population OfCanada geese) along the Green and Yampa Rivers and the associated lakes and marshes were made. The geese counted were classified as paired birds (nesting and idle pairs), groups, .sfngles, or juveniles, according to their behavior and frequency of observation on the study areas. Systematic searches of the islands were conducted to locate nests for observation. Follow up visits were made to determine facts about the nests and their fate. , " The counts and nest observations were accomplished by floating the Green and Yampa Rivers in a 14-foot aluminum canoe, powered with a 5 1/2 horse power outboard motor. The location and numbers of geese and goose nests were recorded on maps and checked against the future information gathered. Residents and users, of the river area were contacted to procure further leads on breeding goose information and to obtain permission to experiment on methods 'to increase the nesting success. Findings: The population figures oin'T-$le 1 were compiled from actual observations while navigating the Green' and Yampa Rivers by boat and "walking-out" the adjoining sloughs and lakes. Table 1. --Canada Goose Population, Green and Yampa River Study Area, April to June, 1956 and April .to Julv, 1957. Location Paired Birds Miles "No. in Group 1957 1956 1957 1956 Craig- Wm 's Fork 0 0 2 9.5 2 Wm's Fork-Axial 16 18 26.5 2 16 Axial-Juniper Can. 0 0 8 6 13.0 Juniper- Sunbearp. 8 6 18.2 8 8 0 2 6 Sunbeam-C'roaa Mt. 12.0 3 6 6 Lilly Park 10.5 11 4 ,22 'Brown's Park 10 15.0 27 3 52 64 104.7 48 36 . Table 1. Cont. , Juveniles 1956 1957 0 0 12 11 7 0 0 0 10 0 7 17 53 2 16 29 Total 1957 1956 2 2 30 45 15 6 26 14 9 2 24 23 54 41 153 129 Nesting Pairs 1957 1956 0 0 6 5 2 3 2 1 1 1 2 3 4 4 16 16 �-114- Table rcompares the 1956 and 1957population trendsby section 'of river. The decreased in grouped birds and the increase of paired birds is indictive of the two to three year period before the young geese reach maturi~. The breeding counts in Table 2 have been made in early May. since 1952. The Yampa breeding population estimates were projected from sample areas until this investigation was started in 1956. Since then, the Yampa .population figures have resulted from actual counts over the entire study area. The Green River counts since 1952have been actual observations from the entire study area. Table 2 --Breeding Population of Green and YamEa Rivers, 1952to 1957. River Year No. Birds Pairs Observer Yampa'!/ 52 53 54 55 56 56~/ 57~/ 120 130 110 20 84 21 21 Boeker Boeker Grieb . Grieb Grieb Neff Sheldon Green~/ 52 53 54 55 56 21 12 Tester Tester Grieb Grieb Grieb Neff Sheldon 1/ 8 15 6 56 5 57 6 Projected from sample areas. £:1 Actual count of all the study area. Table 2 compares the breeding population and shows the downward trend of the wild breeders that apparently prevails throughout the Rocky Mountain area. The information in Table 3 indicates the gecsecould Increase their production if the decimattng factors can be controlled. The average number of eggs per nest increased from 4.9 in 1956, to 5. 7 in 1957, but the average number of goslings remained at 4. 8 per nest. Nesting success is compiled in Table 3 for 1956 and 1957. �-115- Table 3. --Nesting Success of Canada Geese, Green and Yampa Rivers, . 1956 and 1957. 195{):-':·· ._ Number of Goslings Number of Unsuccessful Nests Number of Successful Nests Number of Eggs Lost Average Number/Clutch Average Number /Brood 58 .3 13 13 4.9 (1-8) 4.8 (1-8) 1957 29 7 6 40 5~7 (4-7) (2-6) 4.,S· The number of eggs lost and the number of unsuccessful nests increased greatly 'in 1957. This was due to the very early flood crest. The high water normally comes the second week of June, after the peak of hatching has passed, This year, it flooded nearly all nests during the second week of May. Table 4'::::':"Cause of Nest Failure of Canada Geese, Green and Yampa Rivers, ~ ....1956 and 1957. 1956 ."Human disturbance during hard rain squall - - - - - 1 . Collapse of under-cut bank - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 1 Cause unknown - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1957 Unknownpredator, goose killed ~ nest - - - - r> - 1 Flooding _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _l.~._ - _ - _ - _ - _ 6 No evidence of renesting was observed in 1956 or 1957.. The goose population on the Green and Yampa study areas in 1957, dropped drastically after the second week of May. It is believed the geese that were "flooded out" went to the large reservoirs in Wyomingto moult soon after the nest was destroyed. Table 5. --Compositon of the Canada Goose Population, Green and Yampa River Study Area, 1956 and 1957. Percent of total Population Paired Birds Single or groups Juveniles 1956 1957 1956 1957 52 48 53 64 36 29 34.0 31.4 34.6 100.0 49.5 27.9 22.6 100.00 �-116- . Paired birds actually engaged in nesting were found to be 32 percent of the adult populatien in 195~and, 31 •.Z5 percent during the 1957 study . .Juvenile's' increased th~ population ,53 percent in1956 .and 29 percent in 1957. . ... Contacting the local people of the study area produced much information about the geese and one addition possible factor contributing to the downward trend. The decrease of small grains grown in the river-bottom land is believed by many, to have decreased the population, especially in the fall migration period. It is felt by this investigator that this is the period when the large numbers of geese of the past, were 'observed, and not during the breeding season. All of the residents of the study area are greatly concerned about the status of the Greater Basin Goose flock and many stated if the season was not closed by the Department, they would close it themselves by posting, for the good of the resource. in 1957, after several restrictive seasons, the goose season was closed in Moffat County in Coldrado and restricted bag limits were imposed throughout most of the Utah-Imperial Flyway of the Greater Basin Canadian Goose. These factors were very important in obtaining permission from the landowners to exper-iment with methods to increase nesting success. The Wildlife Conservation Officers concerned with the study 'area were extremely helpful during the study and free with past information. Prepared by: Mitchell G. Sheldon. Approved by: October, 1957 ----...--...--~~~~~~------ Date: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/dca2a1aa29c01b809a1170fcdd0cae8b.pdf 752684e6096fd7b16c7c37fadd3c3265 PDF Text Text I~~111111~'lilrirll11~li111\i~~f~ll]ill ]111111\~11 BDOW022227 Janua,ry •. 1958 . -1- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT --~~~~~--~----------- State of Project COLORADO No • \1_"'_-.;.,79,;;,.-_' '/"! ' .- .. ' .• -_ R;;,,;' _";;4,;;,'_, _ _;".,_.·,;;,N;.,;;am=e,;,.:;.,._W.;..;..;;il;;";d;,;l,;;;;if;.,;;e,,.i' ,;.;ab,;,.·' l;;,;·t_3...;.,t ..,;;Im_· .6p••.r..:.:6~v..;;~.;,;m;..,· e;.,;n.;..t_S.;..tu· ••.·;;,,;d~ie_s,;,..;..... 'H;,;" '1:-' -Iob No; ~". ··_.,;;,1_:_. . ..;;T;.:i,;.;tl;;.;;e;.;.: .•••.... Stu;;;.;.,;;;' ;.;;d::ioy....;N;;.;.;.ew.;..·_a;.;;h;;.;d.;.,···_,R_a~:r..;;e~· w.;..;...;o..;;o..;;'d",Y,:"","Sp~· :~e;;.,;·c;..;i;.;;~,;;,:s,;,.. _._ .. '''', \ .;.1', ..... Calender Year 1956 -------------------...---...--~~-~--~---~------...o:__-- Period Covered: , ,," Abstract: Treatment of .seedswith a combination of End:dn 'and Arasan, .as developed.by Mr. 'Don Spencer of the U~ S. Fish and wildlife Service~ <has' , provedto be very efficient as a repellent: againstbirds 'and'mimrnarsas Well as protective against soil-borne diseases. Especially ~~:;tJ:ilstrue for' 'eve~gr~en seeds, those of the Prunus species, and other large seeds so pop1.ilar 'With field mice. More work needs to be done with it on several broadleaf species to determine accurately the' desired dosage to prevent adverse effects often noticed with present methods. . .... ~i .:1 .:, is Delsan, a commercial mixture of Dieldrin and' Arasan, much easier and safer'. to apply, and gave indications of having good repellent arid fu~gicidal propezttea,» , The big-eseeded strain of Russtan olive, New Mexican 'eld~rber:ry, s,everal., ~•. species of crabapples, two lesser-known caraganas, Canadian buffalober ry and the northern squawbush are recommended, for more extenslve use in wildlife plantings. ,. ... "'. " .. , " " El im ination of the Siberian elm (Chinese) in future wtldlife plantiags-c-at l~'~st the drastic curtailment of its use -;;.:~is recommended' 'after:obsEilrving- it du,ting ..five years of drouth. "c. Substitutes suggested are hackberrV'an_d honeylocust,' . :.."f''': :~.~:' ~.. :.:' r : " • :. .••• ,OJ' >,-, Objectives: To devise propagation methods and study the adaptability to eastern Colorado growing conditions. of tree and shrub spectes which offet p()S~ibiiities of improving wildlife habitat. . ,...,. C': .' ... . ,'." ~. . . "t,':: .c,·· , Techniques , ." . .Anattempt was made. i~J956 to consolidate and speed up results. ,; ; Used .,' '.,. '.\ < .. : ,'" all seed treatments . .~, ./' . on 13 species " ..' < " •• '. • ~r ..··.l)o.n·Spencer of the. U. 'S. Fish and Wildlife Servtce' 9:Uer.ed, to. treat, and '~o st1:'atify~.several .species for us after which they were planted at our nursefy, . 'some of them in spee ial plots and some of them in the regular seedbeds. < ':~.. .; '_- . ",; . ....:. - .,":~.:..:.",". :]< ,- .' ;.»" ',. ' ..:_-,~~.: ..~.. :·'.~~f·· .;~ z::-;:r . ';~\;.~, ~.'· .. ";.- �-2- Other species were treated at the old shop -- (1) - either with WLR-2, (2) Delsan, (3) sulfuric acid, .(4)by freezing and thawing, (5) or a combination of one or more of the first four. Stratific ation followed all treatments, -accompanied by' testi~g in the new -:germmatcr and then field or, special testplot planting, .... . In addition, tetrazoleumtests were run on a number of species ofseed, including" some of the 13 '~sed in the spectalbeds." .... .' .... ," . . '. Plot Studies:" . Dr: Frank Fauscett of the ColoFado State University Horticulture Department woo is doing much ofth~ work for. Colorado Exp~riment Statton . in onion and tomato breeding, set up the plots for us . so they Could be. studied statistically. Pour. replications were planned for each' species, making 260 small beds in all. Each row.in each replication for each treatment was 3 feet Icingand was planted with '100 ..seeds •...' . Treatment Treatment Treatment . Treatment Treatment number 1 was WLR~2 or FWS(Spencet) . 2 was Delsan. 3 was acid bath . 4 was freezing and thawing. 5 - check. The arrangement of the different treatments by species in the beds was as shown in table C. Stratification followed most treatments before planting. Germinator tests were run simultaneously to determine dates of planting-for the different species and treatments. Lack of adequate factltties, the necesstty to transport seed, equipment and labor. back and forth plus variable weather greatly complicated thrs work. Two refrigerators .wer~ available so two .sets of temperatures could be used for the first time. . '.. . One gratifying ph~se of this strattftcation work was the discovery of the usefulness of polyethylene bags, Research workers in the east had found them to have moisture-holding qualtties, while at the same time allowing free circulation of atr, They also seem to be impermeable to air-borne bacteria •. Use pf these bags also eliminated the need for any or at least most ,ofthe ordinary media SUChas peatmoss, sand, and other materials formally used to maintain a satisfactory moisture condition. .Plants for Field Testing- As in the past three years, .soil moisture conditions in our potential testplots in eastern Colorado were such that no attempt was' made to make new plantings. All of the stock held over from previous years as well as .that planted last year, was maintained in good growing condition at the nursery. No special attempt was made to increase its growth. �': -3- Part of the available stock of a few.species was dug, and distributed to growers who were willing to hand plant and give it special care. Those species included Caragana pygznea, (Dwarf Garagana), Sliep'herdia ar,..ge_Iit.a::.: (Canadian buffaloberry), one strain of cottonless .cottonwood, two strains of an especially good dryland tamarix, some Malus columbia (A Canadian strain of crabapple), and about one thousand asparagus roots. • ."~.'.~ :-. .i' . .... ~ .-i ~ An estimate of the stock which was ,av~ilable for spring 1956 but very little, of which was.used, includ, -the following: _" . ..' .. ' ..' .... ..... ':. .. " _' ~ "', ',. .'- . -:», <.':.: . ESTIMATE---Stock for' Sp":fing'EXperimental Planting 1956 ' Caragana microphylla Caragana pygmea Caragana aurantiaca, Shepherdia arzentea. Cottonwood-Sargents Cottonwood-s- Torrington Tamarixhispida, T amarix Cheyenne 'I'amartx Loveland Syringa josikea Syringa prestonae Syringa vulgaris .,,' . , ,. Malus baccata Malus columbia " "'~ebshopa Malus rosybloom _' --.:.' ..;..;;.;....._ Nlalus mandshurica Peraphyllum ramocissimum Amorpha fruticosa ';: Prunus, ill andshuric a Prunus teneHa Prun.:!:!2. virg-iniana Jug-lans nigra" Querc,us,macrocarpa ~Corylus' americana' ,Cotoneaster, acutifolia Asparagus j -- __ 0 co,"'. 'Seedbeds' 537 7,751 , Z,300 820' :250 100 \ , '" ,i " c-, -- ' ••• :-, ',' 0 , 0' " 40 10 40 o 13 ,' ,0 13 ' 28 •• Line out Beds 300 540 68 386 " ' \- 0 o o o 950 250 o 1;288 120', '460 '0 ,450 o 236 166 o o :0 0 500 50 0 1,300 2,50.0 200 500 o 2,000 2,500 0 "0 " o 273 o o . :.: . ,::r:. . .' . :.' ~ �_.':'.-4- .:.\ .. ':., •. FINDINGS" 1.' .:ij·, " . ..••. " . , , •.. Treatments. Mr~ Don Spencer's findings, as. the result of his treatment" of a number of species of:seed for' us, 'are given in his- fabular 'rep'ort ' (Game and Cover Plant _S~~ci)'page .. .': .'. : ... :•.'~ . . ',:' ',. ',.: .:-.: :",- '. :. Through the courtesy of the chief chemist of the Shell Ohemtcal Company at the Rocky MolintainArsenal/ a supply Of'Endririwas a.'Vailableto us' , ,.. this year. Several species of seedweretreated with'tllis cheinical'and ' its value verified primarily as a rodent and bird repellent. Its main value seems to be with evergreen seed :w);l~r~.~tt works, very· satisfac~()I'i1y, but with some of the -b:ro~dl~av~s; :if's~~'eDi~:'to 'affecfgerminati~n' adve~sely • These effects. are only observations from working with the seeds and have not been proved·Statistic'ally. .' .,. . _, '.._ ' .. ' : , ;.'-:..... : '. The use of as~halt as an adher~nt for the repellent mustb~ cion~ye_ryi~af~f~lly or the results will be disappointing. If the mixture is to~~thi~~'~~'.90li#pg,~ will keep air and water from entertng the seed and complete stratificatiori~ . ! Some seeds were subjected to freezing and thawing before betngtreated." : and stratified.{ Especially with .hard-coated seeds, this process seemed" ,- . to be beneficial. More work must be done along this line before any defiilit~' recommendations can be made, •. . .'. . . _,- . :",:' .•........•. ." -_ .. ";...... " A methocel slu;r:ry was tried on several species this year f~l:':th~.f!r~tJil:P:'e-~:~: It goes on much easier than the asphalt emulsion and works very. \:VeUit:the' seed does not require too much moisture during stratification. If, .h()weV'er,~Jhe.:~ seed requires :the addition of ext~~ moisture, the methocel is iik~iY t<i be washed away. along with the chemicals used for protection. __." Delsan. - The Delsan treatment was used to testt~~~!:~~(j.Y:."lI!ade::r:n,~ll,re~.:_: Since it is a combination of Dieldrin and Arasan, there seemed to be .a "~;:~~__ possibility that . this easily used-mixture might take the pi~~e the :trl().re,-,.:: ... . ~.- ~i .. .. complicated WLR-2. .~ - ,. .~ '." ; Special Seedplot~ .,..-for 13 species. - When this special test waastarted In... January. species in which it was thought dormancy could.be bJ.:oken::W.ithin:, a reasonable period of time, were selected. By the time they :\Vere:~o:q.:r)t,ed~out and treated, it was the middle of February, when they ~e~ti~~9str.aJ;i;fication. By the time small samples t.ested in. the germinator began to show growth, . or readiness for field planting, the weather became extremely hot and most of the seeds were "cooked" either before or during emergence. �-5Only two species -- Cercocarpus ledifolius and Cercocarpus montanus-· as shown in table B, showed reasonable resistence to the extreme heat and · lateness: of planting, but the results with neither were sufficient for statistic'ru. analysts, 'according to Dr. Fauscett. • • 0' : • As shown in table B, taking the germinator results' as optimum, the seedplot results ranged from practically zero to 100%. It is interesting to riote that · with both speciea the check plots showed much better results than either the WLR-2 Delsan treatments. Since very few of these seedlings Survived the heat any length of time after emergence, it was tmpessfble. to determine whether ,or not the treatments might have aided their survival against soil-borne diseases. 'or Even though this test was practically a complete failure, it does point out the · possibility of getting acceptable results if and when such an experiment can be started in the fall. With the use of indoor germinating beds were conditions can be .mo re readily controlled, seeds could be tested for actual germination · and field planted in the cool of spring. Some of the Seeds were taken from stratification and examined under a (borrowed) mte roscope in an attempt to determine readiness to plant. A definite technique : should be developed ~or studying the cell structure at varying times during · strattftcatton, Perhaps tetrazoleum or some other chemical would "tell the •story." While germinator tests give an accurate indicationof such readiness to plant, must time can be lost with seeds requiring two or three weeks to germinate mten- stratification is completed. That happened in the special beds last spring, throwing some of the planting over into hot weather. It seems certain that no definite length of time can be given for each species as toIts stratification .period. Table E shows the treatments and stratification starting dates for species 'planted in the open field while Table D gives dates of planting. The differences ,in dates do not neeessartly give the recommended lengths of stratification. �-6A. Treatment o .' and Stratification of Seeds (For ~e_cial Seedplots) ,.. ~ WLR 2 Number.of . Freeze .:! . Acid Dels~n '. and Thaw See'ds ... . Name and Number Cotoneaster microphylla ....1000 . Lhr. . :8 mln acutifolia,' tomentosa : 1000 1000' '.' 1000 5504 Cotoneaster Cotoneaster ; ,5425 Crataegus '. doddstt. '5605 ., 1000 500·.': 500 ': 2 hr •. 1000 .I-hr, 1QOO min.·" 500 " 500 .. 1000 500 2/17 to 6/8 (112) 2/+ 7 to 6/8 (il2) 50':J:llin. 500 500 500 2/17 to 6/8 (112) .1 hr, '1000 51 min.. . '1 hrv . 1000. 600 600 2/17 to 6/8 (112) 600 600 2/17 to 6/8 (112) 500 50\) 2/17 to 5/31 (105) 500 .' 500 2/17 to 6/8 (112) . 10,00' 500 500 2/17 to 6/8 (112) iooo 500 10iJO .: 6,)0 2/17 to 5/31 (105) 2/17 to 6/8 (112) . Ribes leptanthum 1500 2/21 to 4/18 (57) 500 2/17 to 4/18 (61) ,,, ':5 1000 .6 min. 500 J hr-.' 1000 .5518 .•.' SylIlPhorickrposocciclentalis ,; alnifolhi " 5440. Sorbus aucup~rhl. '. Cotoneaster multiflora Of:) 1000 . plain ,500 plain 600 .. ,';CercocarpuB mont~n~.s Poudre Canyon: ..' .Cercocarpus ledifolius Grand Jllll(}tion.: 5205 .' 1000 .' 5441. 5504 e . 39 mtn, '5601 Amel~nchier . Length of Stratific ation- Day 3 2/16 to 6/8 (112) :", ';·1'000 Crataegus ambigua . Cheyenne USDA ; Cr~taegus arnoldiana . 500 Check :.:56 min •. : 600· .... .500 plain .' ·1000'· 500 plain' 1000 ';. ." :: 500 �-7- B. Summary--Two Species in Special SeecPlots* Species Cereoearpus ledifolius Replie ation %Germinated -in ~g'erminator I WLR-2 59 59. II WLR-2 III WLR-2 59 59 IV WLR-2 I Del.san II Delsan III Delsan IV Delsan 75 78 78 78 I Cheek 73 Il Check 73 III Check 74 IV Cheek 73 Species Cercocarpus rriontanus I WLR-2 68 II WLR-2 68 III WLR-2 68 IV WLR-2 68 %Germinated in Seedplots 2. 1 1 18 %Field Germination 3.4 1.7 1.7 30.5 .->.~Total % Average % 37.3 9.3 22.9 21 12 10 28 35 •.9 91. 9 55 62 73 48 75.3 84.9 100.0 ··65.7 325.9 33 25 36 32 48.5 36.7 52.9 47.0 28,0 15~·1 i2~6 '. 185.1 ----- ---- 81. 5 46.3 :,/) �-8B. Summary --Two Species in Special Seedplots*--Continued. Species Cercocarpus montanus Replication %Gerrninated .in 'Seedplota %Germinated in ~erminator %Field Germination' Total % . Average '., % . "., I Delsan II Delsan III Delsan IV Delsan 84 84 84 84 46 16 45 52 54.7 19.0 53.6 61.9 I Check II Check III Check IV Check 81 81 81 81 39 40 48 70 48.1 49.4 59.2 86.4 .. " 189.2 47.3:,.. ,. 245.1 61. 3 ,,' "·.'.l ."'--These two species. were the only ones in. the 13 showing enough results to warrant' any totals-s-andthey were not sufficient for statistical analysfs,· according "to Dr. Fauscett .. Notreeztug-thawing or acid treatments were given them so only the two treatments could be compared. Unfortunately they were not available when the tetrazolium tests. were run. (::: . (~f ; , �-9- C- ..•Arrangement of §eecial Seed plots • i REPLICATION I Species 3 4 3 5 a 15 14 13 12 . Species 1 Species 2 1 11 2 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 5 20 Sp. 4 2 1 19 18 4 17 16 2 36 2 35 Sp. 7 1 5 34 33 4 32 3 31 5 51 1 ' 50 Sp. 10 2 3 49 .48 4 5 47 ··46 4 65 Sp. ·13 ',~2 5 64 63 62 1 61 5 70 Sp. 12 4 1 69 68 3 67 2 - 66 1 82 5 81 4 2 96 5 4 .1 10 9 8 7 2 4 22 21 3 1 1 ;. : . Sp. 6 . 3 30 4 1 5 3 29 28 2 27 Sp. 5 1 5 26 25 24 3 45 $p. 9 5 2 44 43 1 42 4 41 5 40 39 3 38 4 37 1 60 .2 59 3 57 5 ,56 3 55 Sp. 11 2 1 54 53 ._ 23 3 , Sp. 8 Sp. 12 4 58 '. -- 1 4 52 5 76 REPLICATION n Sp. 3 4 5 1 3 72 75 74 73 1 92 3 91 1 90 Sp. 9 3 2 89 88 5 87 Sp. 2 2 4 3 5 110 109 108 107 1 106 3 105 -- Sp. 7 1 2 104 103 4 5 102 '101 3 100 Sp. 5 5 4 1 3 125 124 123 122 2 121 2 120 Sp.ll 4 1 119 118 3 5 ,116 117 3 115 5». 1 2 80 3 79 4 95 Sp. 6 5. 2 94 93 4 1 78 .77 2 71 ._ 3 Sp. S 4 86 2 .85 " "% 84 3 83 ,.Sp. 10 4 130 1 99 5 98 Sp•. 13 2 5 114 113 Sp. 4 5 3 129 128 97 1 112 111 2 127 1 126 4 ��-11- D - Field Plantings--1956 Species Prunus spinosa Prunus vir. melanocarpa ~ ........... Eleaanus commutata Pinus, edulis Corvlus caUfornica Prunus truttcosa Pinus ponderosa scopulorum ---.r' Prunus tornentosa Purshia trtdentata Tetrazoleum Test 100-98-95 100-99 .•.. 38 100-95-69 None None 100-100-93 100-91-58 ?jone None May Ifl First Germ ination None Mal 28 Mal 28 Mal 31 None May 24 May 23 May 20 May 20 May 10 ' None Date Planted May 3 Cot. veitchi _,....... ',racem, ..;., None Treatment WLR-2 ' WLR-2 WLR-2' WLR-2 None ' WLR-2 WLR-2 WLR-2 Arasan SFX & Endrin , H2 804 Hr'(2) Cot~ f..~veo. Glossy None ·H2 S04-1 hr. May 1O, None None None 100-89-76 None 100-100-64 100-99-71 None None None None None None WLR-2 'WLR-2 WLR-2 H2S04-2 hr. None None H2S04- 1 hr. 30 min. None WLR-2 . WLR-2 WLR-2 WLR-2 Feb. 3 May 10 May ,10 May 10 May, 10 May 10 May 10 May 10 May 10 May 10 May 10 May 19 'May '19 May 19 May 19 May 19 ---- ;;.. :'.~':~ ,:/'.. . Euonymus turkestanicus nana Picea pungens Amorpha, fruiticos a Eleagnus umbellata Malus manchurica Sorbus aucuparia Amelanchter alnifolia .Bumel ia Genista tinctoria Cot. integerrirna Cot. thymifolia Peraphvllum ramocissilnum'" , Prtnsepia sinensis ,.Eleaznus comutata Ribes lepthanthum Prunus arm. ansu -- None 100-100-32 100-95-71 None 100-98-80 MaY,3 May 3 May 3 May 3 May 10 May 10 May 10 ' Apr il 3 May 28 May 24 May .J8 May as None None None May 25 May 31 Total Garm ination Fair Poor Good Good Excel lent Excel lent Good to Ex. .Burnedup Good Excellent Fair Fair Good Poor None _mne Sept. 15 May 31 None No record Fair Poor Excel. ~ ;- ..• :.)'1 �-12D- Field Plantings (Cont. ):"'-1956 'I'etr azoleum Test Species Prunus armeniaca Prunus teneHa (nan a) Prunus spinos a Prunus pseudoc~rosus . Prunus sub. ascen. ..•....•. -Prunus maximowiczi Malus theifora Malus siebaldi Malus columbia Malus zumi Malus, sargenti Shepherdiaargen. Rhuscanadensts Sorbus decor a -_ "-~--.~ THia mongolica Rosa altaica Lonicera maacki Coto acutifolia Syringa villosa .i . _' 000 •. ~:,~' r..' 1. ~.¥}')' May 31 May 28 None None None None None None No date None Good .' 'WLR-2 None Norte Norte None None May 19 None May 19 None Norte May 19 . Soak-Comp. May 19 '. M,. C. Strat. May 19' )VI,. C. Strat. May 19 May 19 M. C. Strat. May 19' M. C. Strat. M. C. Strat. May 19' H2 S04 -iae. .. May'29 May 29 Me and MW Strat. 5 different :'iYhiy 29 '.' treatments '.,'" " H2 S04 Not conclusive None' None .', 100:"':100-90 None 1' 100-100-90, -,''_ " . ". Symphorioarpos May 19,' May 19 . May 19 None 100-98-94 100-98-96 None None None, 100":'96~q5 Not· conclusive 100 .;100-30 sinensis First Germiuatlon None, ' .- 100-100-81 - ?rinsepia 'I'r'eatment Date . Planted' ':.1 Bact. cuI. May 2 9 MC-1VIW-St.. Me Strat. ; , Poor, . Fair .~'. '"..•... . ,; ':Good.··-,·, , _.,_ June 16 None -·r·' ;.~ .,l . .~, :~. Fair' Sept. 25 (J" :,,,'::;'~:. "1.\. May 29 May 29 . : May 29 None .. ..: .. ) ';': :-,' .:,'! . ~....:. '. .. : : ..'~. ' . ;" ~ ., ... ,.'. )"\ .•...... ";1 .' .;.~ .. ' ,', ~ .. '." . . ,'" ".; • "!' . i,i,. . .,., .,' ", ~.,' ~~.~ " "'{;'.j " None ·Fair r= _: H2S04-1:10 :)'/ ,. ~:,G6odi','. None None None None None' H2 804 - 1 Hr. May 29 MC...;MW-st. May 29 " "I'otal, ': < Germination " ..~ ... ' �-13'! D-Field Plantings (Cont. )-:"1956 Species Lonicera xylosteuql Que'rcus macrocarBa • Sambucus neo.•.. Amorpha canescenS Juniperus utah. .~~.haem. Amelanchier aln. Crataegus altaica Crataegus douglasil Tetrazoleum Test 100-100-10_Q_, None Not conclusive 100-73 •.59 None None, 100-55-16 100-72-0 Date, Planted Treatment MW-MC. -se, ,May 29 MC. Strat. May 29 H~ S04; Me. Strat. H2 SQ1,'and' Bact. cult • Freezing Freezing Freezing Freezing , •••••••• ~ ••• First Ge rm ination May 29 May 29. June 4 None None 'No date None None June 4 June 4 June 4 June 4 None , None, None None _ ••• _ ,.:,' rotal Germination . Good .1 •.•••.•••• r':.Ji, .<~ �-14Name and Number Euonymus nanus tqrkestanica 5424 Crataegus altaica 5610 CrataeguB douglasii ".. E-Stratification Freezing Weight of Seed Put seed in Vita-bands 2/3/56. Soaked in water for 5 days. stratified 3/2/56. No. FWS treatment. 60.5 grams Yes 2/29/56 :fhi:.'. : 30 min, , 2, 06 ~f. ' Yes 2/29/56 ,1 hr. so, 5 grams 2,6 oz. 50 min. , Corylus californica 5401 ~' Prunus armeniaCaT,~ 5606 Pinus edulis 1954 seed of Seeds --- 1955-- ..•1956 .Endrin Acid Arasan - -- - ~ ~----- .---~-------- ---..,--- - -__ 2 lb. T Remarks Stratified without FWS treatment Put in freezer 2/29/56--Strat. withouf'FWS'treat. stratified without FWS treat. 3/2/56 'St:ratified 'without 2 lb. FWS treat',' 3Va/56 69. 4 gran1's--"io~i grams~--ABphalt spreader Mixture' .: 21b. 4 3/4 Stratified 3/6/56 (fL, p.f'PU~p(jnc:j~rososcopulorum .'.' ' 5606 Amelanchier alnifolia 2 hr. and still a thin transparent 85.05 grams 3 oz. Checked-under microscope shell surrounded the embryo. Asphalt spreader Str'atlffed 3/26/56 600 seeds treated with HZ804 for Checked again 3/15/56 and the seed has imbibed water and 2 hr. Stratified 3/2/56 looks as though it is well on its way to stratifying like a seed with no seed coat dormancy. This treatment is to check the extreme amount of acid treatment required before the seed of Amelanchier is burned by the acid. Also, to see if the seed ,will germinate in a reasonable time if the seed coat is broken and the embryo has a chance to imbibe water. a: ~),: i �-15Stratification of Seeds (Cont. )---1955---1956 c: Name and number Freezing .'Acid Sorhus aucuparia . 4347 No. No Ponderosa pine No No PrunuB armeniaca ansu 5423 No No Pi'unus spinosa No; No .-- Weight of Endrin Arasan Seed III grams. .55 gr. 4.09 oz. Endrin 4.44 gr. Arasan EndrinArasan mix. .Endr'inArasan mix. 42.8 grams Endrtn- Prunus ftuticoSa 5602 No No ~ ; Cotoneaster racemiflora 5508' 2 hr. Cotoneaster thymifolia 5509 No· , Cotoneaster integerrima 5427' "-" ! ~T 1 hr. 40 min. 1 hr. No .: ~ . 30 min. 680; 4 grams 1. 5Qlb. Arasan mix," i : 42.8 grams 680.4 grams Endrin1. 50 lb. Arasan mix. Remarks Str atifted 2/20/56 One bag-seed treatment, 12/13/55 Asphalt em. used for carrier. Stratified 2/20/.'5;6' . FWS treatment Stratified 2/29/56 2-1-gal. cans FWS ,Treatu1ent. Methocel Slurry. Stratified 2/24/56 FWS treatment Asphalt slurry-« Stratified 2/24/56 FWS treatment Asphalt slurry--. Stratified without FWS treatment 2/28/56 Stratified without FWS treatment 2/28/56 Stratified without FWS treatment 2/28/56 ... ' • :)i l: ~, ~:;;. '.:;}" <i) �-16stratification of Seeds (Cont. )---1955---56. Freezing Name and Number Endrin Arasan Acid Cotoneaster faveolata No,· 1 hr,: . Euonvmus europaea 12/28/55 NO'-'~~. Weight of Seed. 48 grams 1. 7 oz. .. No'· haematocarpus' Remarks .Stratified without .FWS treat. 2/28/56 Removed from freezing . 2/3/56~ Checked 2/3/56 and found too soft-able to crack with finger nail. Might be due to~the . . fact seed wasImmature . . Collected Falll955. . . Amelanchier 'alilifolia 5440 . Select Chokecherry No 12/28/55 - No No ' .. t Eleagnus' cornmutata . No' No ~~, .~ ...-~4:4-5grams'~' 'Endrin '.. '~:" 47.5 grams Arasan ..... ,4~:3 8 Endrin 47 gr. Ara t, No 'No· 1. 50 gr. .'No' Endrin 12 gr. Arasan 70 gr. Endrin···· 12 gr. .,, Purshia tridentata No ·-~8'91 grams Stratified 2/20/56 ..one.bag seed treat. FWS'12/9/55' Methocel slurry 875 grams 'M¢th~qel slurry 1. 93 lbs, 'Str'at, 2/20/56· One bag-seed treat . . " ..FWS, 14,/9/55" . 299 grams .Sfratified2.126?56 .638 lbs, One bag • 1.96Ibs.· " : " >, 139 gr. Strat. 2/20/56 ~307 lbs,' '.', :One 6'ag~s~ed :treat , '12!i3/5& ". " Arasan Eleagnus limbellata :. 5501 t"'.~ \:.• :;p .' 1"';: \!' • ,.No .' 111 grams .;,. Malus manchudca . ;;:5351 ' 2,,2 gr. Endrin 17.9 gr. Arasan 448 gr. 1 lb. Aluminum coated . 'Metho~celBlurry Stratified 2/20/56 Seed treat. 12/9/56 �-17F.-TETRAZOLIUM TESTS -- 1956 Total No. Total No. Endosperms in Test. 100 98 100 98 Species Prunus spinosa Prunus (nana).,;!enella 100 - 100 Prunus vlrg lniana melanocarpg 100 98 Prunus armeniaca ·100 98 Prunus besseyi 'Prumia fruticosa ,...._- --". ansu ' 100'", Rhus tril()bata ----~91~~ 100 ..... , .. Hours in Results Solution 7 hr. 40 min. 96 viable--2 not viable' , 1 hr. 45 m in.. .94viable-~4 not viable .. 16 hr . 15 min. "84 vtable-vt e without 'embryo 26 hr 15 min." ";35,,yiable,":..'t6 not viahle ; 18 no embryos 22 hr, 15 min. 80 vtable-zu notviable. '--~--~-- 32 6' hr. 15 min. 86 viable-f not viable;: ' 16 hr 15 min 9 no embryos 27 viable- 2 not viable; HZ S,?~ for 1 hr, and soaked in H2 0 for three days Rhus canadensis - ", 3 hr 30,ihin. '~' d :'~":':.:} " o:r: .ree ,~:y~,;- ":': 100 ,',;;<: . 96 "H2 4, for 1 hr., and soaked i~'H 0 f 'th Crataegus doddsii ,~. , S01'( ' ~, ' ,2 :,'100, 56 '. ; 5 hr 30'>inir~! Crataegus amhigus 100 92 16 hr. 30 min. Crataegus altaica 100 55 14 hr. 45 min. Crataegus Douglasii 100 72 16 hr. 10 min. - , 3 no embryos 73 viable';"-23 not viable " 10 viable":'41 not viable 5 no embrvos 42 viable - 33 not viable; 16 no embryo~ 18 viable- 36 not viable: 1 no embryo, 5 viable - this test was not conclusive 32 viable - 4 not viable; 1 no embryo This test was not conclusive I Crataegus Arnoldiana 100 38 15 hr. 45 min. Symphoricarpos oce, 100 98 27 hr. 35 min. I I ! , .J ;.-~ �.. ' , '-'18..,;' ~. ~ .,_ , . 'I'etr azolfum Tests (Cont. :) ..•~ 1956. Species '.'1; Total No. In test. Total No. Endosperms Hours in Solution 100,'. 95 "5' hr 45 min. '. I C()toneaster multiflora , _~ .._. .•.• ,;!Results ", ;'l '. 60' yiable',';' 3~ not, vi~~l~; 4 no embryos Cotoneaster io'mentosa . Cotoneaster midtophylla 11" .- . .. --------------~------- Cotoneaster - acutltolta-: 100 ,,98 , "'10Q 94 23 hr Hj,min.' "38 v.iable;': ,; -----~- '... .'100' .. " ,., !- 50 viable- 5'hr 50 min. , j •.•• , "100 '6hf 4S';mln •. e' 20, not viable".. ~~:; ::".'.: 28: no: embryos . . sinot viable;: ..... __ 5 no embryos .' .. "48 viabie?.i34· hot vi~ble';'; :'_f.~ , ' ...•.. '. .-:i' . . ~~ ::. ~ !:', .. : . .. ,.", ~:.~ " ... :; . •.. ,; , .. ,.,,',- ',_, t:\) (' " " ....• ~..,,' .j' •~~; ,: .. ,:.' . i ~ ", s; �,...19- FWS Treatments of Seed - Remarks. Mr. Don Spencer of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service treated several species of seed for us in the spring of 1956. His treatments were under controlled conditions, more so than we . could hopeto l:iPP1:".9<~~a~e.~:..... _.,... . .' . ,~..' \ .' . :' _" ,_" " of the',. species Juniperus utahensis with ~bacteria a.t roC?~" . His_, treatment . .. .•.... .. ~. temperature and wet daily proved that the seed could be germtnated i.Jll~.ss~ than the time. established fn.most-manuals. When he returned the seed to us 'for"plailting,":s'o~e' of it , beginriirig~~'ge~¢i~t~.·· i~was u:,; ~~~ell~nt. . conditionat the time of planting. The strattticatteapertod was.Tive months or approximately 150 days as compared with the general practice of 240 days. ':'" . '" " '.. -_ ,. " ,_ ,-.. ..'. .,. .~ --,' . . -' wa.s· ,_- , ";; 'j: ,.. Another interesting thing, that .Mr, Spencer showed in his stratifying techniques was that after actd-treating Rhus canadeasas-for 1 hour and l\i,:",C(r;nO!.~t-c.()~d) ··s"fratiftcatio.n for,'foii'r·days,· the. seed imbibed so much water that it had to be split into two containers for further; str'atification; Good g~~minat~o~ w:~s. .. obtained J'i'om this"loi~ ," ~. .-' . . . .. ... -.-- . ~..... .:. ,,"-' " On some' of the other't'reatmeiIts. performed by Mr •. sP'encer, the evidence of a good treatment was shown by tbe fact that some of the seed was germinating in the containers. When the seed was planted, however, poor germination was secured in the field. This was very probably due to the fact tIl.at we. c.ollldIl'-~ .'.get the 's~edinto' 'the g'i~ounde~~y eno~gh.· M~st of that seed was planted after May 19, 195~, 'when the soilwas yery hot.' .' GAME .,'.: ,- AND .cOVER PLANT SEED •. From: " ._..~ri.ng.~ .195.1>_ MC- Moist cold ~':.,~:.\: x", - -, . . Seed Shepherida argentea .. (Buffalobezry) . Prunus nana #5385 .' ..Prunus :,~.:;.(,. -nana ·#5385 Amount •. 3/4 lb. z-cans "'..' .' '1985 gms~'· 2:"'cans' , " ," 101 seed-': ·Sambucus·neo-mexicana 1 can" .' .. . _ ,-- •••. -,_ .~:. -, '. " . ~.£.- -' Treatment ··Date M-C strat, vermiculite -without 2/16/56 chem •...protect. Hold 60-90 days· M-C strat, without chem, protect;. 2/15/56 Hold 90 days Seed hulled &M~C·strat. without 1/5/56 chem, protect. Hold' 60' davs; In cone, H2 ... SO'. '2/1B/56 4 in.. shal'lowtr-ay" .. ." 15 min. under microscope endosperm appeared imbibed. Acid did not penetrate hull. M-C strat. (without ehem, protect.) 60 days • New 1955 seed . ,"'·-1.. Colo; Game and Fish -Dept, .Ft. Collins Nursery .'(Mr. Glenn Kinghorn) •• ,._ " ..• ' .. , .i, �-20. . .:; _. ~ ,'\' ,',' Game :and, Cover. Rlant Seed-continued. . ":: .,';. .:.': ,. ,. ; .~.: ,.' ::.' . ; .. '\ '.:' '., ," .' . ' .. I Treatment .,;: .: . :. D~te Amount Seed Soaking with compost bacteria 2/15/56 Malus sargentii #5'513 1/4 pt. whole fruits· : ;;:,.;.o~" ' begUn'2!15 at' roomtemp •. , ..Soaking with compost bacteria Malus theifora ;:55.05,', 1-qt;« ' , c", :.: be un 2/15 atroomtem ~:. ", whole f'rutta.. ; '''; ... Prunus pseudoce:bisUs ,,70 gms.· . A large percentageofthese :' 56 :-:~;'.:.:.<.4f551:2~... ~ 1·cani.i . ~:":!'.. seeds had cracks or :sagital·;~:~«~:l:".1'·: ~. fractures and therefore i acid ., >. ,.' treatmen t could not be used • ..M...,Cstrat, '(Without'ehem,': ' ; ... _ . .. protectvr-Hold 90 .davs; .: "Malus columbia #534'5 ' 72 gm.. Soak'intap.H20'·24':hrs.2/16" :'2/17/56 .Iclean crabapple seed). ' .' .. , M-C strat; (without ehem, protect): .• As above >.: .: .' ,. " 2/17/56 Malus zumi #5515 'S3 gms. clean seed ,.,.' , " __ ,,,., :.-.: _. .. 2/17/56 Malus..sfeboldi =It~5l4.;:·. 78.gms •. ··· As above' ":J A .very. fine -seed With . . '. . 50%·waste' bracts and . ,... ,.., .":: ~ .....•. .... hrlls . ; ." : .'..~. ." ,.,. ,.",... .- : .. " ;; .. c'." ,:.' .. Juniperus utahensis clean seed . " 60 gms; Prunus subhirtella 66 gms, . •.. .. ~" , .:." ,. ,-~ ,:." . 2/16/56 . .. .vr ~ : .' , ~', •. '''. ~" • '~', • ,__ •••••• "". '••:;", • r~ •• ' .. ..' . " 2/16/56 Began H20 - bacteria culture' 2/16/56 Cone.' ' .. ',' H2 SO4'--70. min. .'.Then' ..•. , moist 25'C atrat. Hold 30 day's Next M-C strat, 3/18/56 Make exper, plantings at monthly Intervals beginning June 1 to 3/18/56 ".~,~' _ _..... _'_, .., .__. ~ h....... ,,' .. ~ , ', ...._ .... ~.' . 11g'iris~ '.' ._ " Coiic~:H2 S04 for 1 hI:'. 10,mtn, M-C strat, (No chem, protect) .•.•. :', '". .. , .2/16/56 . '.~~.,~~,ove..:'< .., _'._,...,_. ..•....•.•...~... . S~.rm>horicarp(:)s.occlderibilis;'. , .:,,::. .. • . .,...:; 115 gma;: .•.. 2/16/56 Room temp. 2/16 Seed naturally fractured " M-C strat, (No ehem, protect) .,-'~ ,Hold 60-90 days ' ". ~." ........ . 2/16/56 (hull 'still sOrlnd)' 'Rinsed' & . M::-C .strat, (NO chem, protect) " . -406;gm:s·i<~·\ Begaii":a~';o-' bacteria cUlture':; Prunus maximowiczii #5511 . ~ .~' . ;- t ." ,."Cone, H2 S04 Jreated 3 hl"s~ 490 grns, clean seed '~'. '. : •..... ·.sept. I _ .. ,~~. .,.' .. _. _'"_'" '._.. .' :~ .. , ... ,. I ". : : .' . ~ .., '-.~' " · ...-r �r.-:- ••.· -21- 'Seed Rhus canadensis ,,Quercus macrocarpa '. Amount 463 gms. . ,'77gms., ~.... -_ " Lonicera xylosteum Prunus spinosa 759 gms, ,'.,Lonicera·maacki #5426 ' . 26 gmsv': Amorpha canescens 1 pt. ..Syringa villosa , 54g~s'.,· F'raxtnus anomala #5517 ,. 103_gins.~, Sorbus deeora # 5346 Sample divided Spergon treated? Treatment Cone. H2 S04 1 hr. then lVI-C strat, (No. chem protect) 2/17/56 Note: So swelled by 2/21/that sample was divided, into 2 cans. Hold minimum 60 days. ;;M-C strat,' (No chem, protect) Hold for 60 days M-warm strat, 10 days M-C strat, (No chern. protect) Hold 60 days Cone. H2 S04 1 hr. 2/20/56 M-C strat, 2/20/56 Hold 90 days M-warm str at, 5 days 2/20/56 M-C strat. 2/25/56 Hold 60 days Soak water 55' C 1/2 hr. M-C strat, 2/20/56 Hold 60 days .M~C strat.: begun 2/21/56 .' Hold.90 days Soaked water 25' C 10 days M-C Strat. .begun 3/2/56 . ,. Hold 60-90 days ' . (1) M-warni strat, 30 days 'M-C strat, begins 3/21/56 Hold 96 days (2) Cone. H2SO4 10 min. then M-C strat, begun 2/21/56 Hold 90 days Date 2/17/56 2/20/56 2/20/56 3/1/56 2/20/56 2/20/56 2/25/56 2/20/56 2/21/56 2/21/56 2/21/56 3/21/56 2/21/56 �"?;:;: ,~_;.,:' .~ Amount 469 g~s. Treatment '. (1) ~()ak H2 0 plus bacteria: .. : ::,' ~;:~':~"";>',:' upto 3'0 days' at room temp:': , , ',~':,:' ;: begun 2/22/56 '' Seed Prinsepia sinensis .' , ".;, ~ ,~_" '" "'_"".' '.~' .' . '. ..,--, ..-: , , " M-C strat. begun 3/23/56 Hold 60 days (2) Boilding water 5 min. followed ," ,,' ",,..by-24 hour.aoakat 'room temp. ~,,'.~ -2/23/56 ' .. , , M-C strate begun 2/23/56,~ H61<f60days. , , ,'-'... ','.' . " (3)' Cone.• H2'S04' 30 min, fol~9~Eld,2/22/56 "" by moi:st cold strat; begun ' 2/22/56 (4) Soaked in 1%thiourea with 2/22/56 .' '.daily' change- of solutions 10 days 2/22/56 '""" ._ , .: :; ; ._~, ... " '- ~, IvI-C strat, 30 days, begun 3/5/56 .:--~' r;': . .. ' '_ . ~,' . '. Date 2/2:2/56 " ,." '_~""k'_''''~' ~:. , ' '~'. . . ~',_"; ':<~ '~' ,. '''Plant-4/5/56::-'', ; (5) , 100 seed opened ondistal .2/23/56 edge (grind stone) M-C cold strat, begfnning' 2/23/56 ;._:',":, _ (first soaked for 24~hrs•. ,,' " ,,' " room temp. H2,O) . ~: ...": ~ .~.-.' .. -.... ..".. .Hold 60 days' ::' , Caragana pekingensis .. 140 No Pre-treatment Slurry'of O. 5-Endrinplu's 4~0 'Arasan applied'; plant without·stratification. " ~" .: "'- ,'.' '. \ ".~ ,. '. , '~',~ " .,' -- ,~._'" •••••••••. ' ,m' , .•.. ' ~_", •••• ,.- •••'_ ;",: . .. ~ .. : :,':- ,:._. '.~ , .: 'j_~:', �':'23FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE' SEED TREATMENT I. Spreaders' Methocel, rhoplex, and asphalt emulsion are "spreaders" or "carriers". Their only purpose is to stick the Endrin and Arasan to the seed coats. Asphalt is the best sticker. It binds the chemicals sothat the rodents can't get the full benefit of the' chemicals on their mucous membranes. It is the most insoluble in water of the three compounds. Rhoplex is next in order as to non- solubility • It can be mixed with methocel to form another more soluble compound. ,. Or in reverse, it can be mixed with methocel to form a less soluble compound. Methocel will dissolve from the seed coat with the application of too much water it is the most water soluble substance of the three compounds. . In combining methocel and rhoplex,' the combination should be 93 parts methocel and 7 parts rhoplex. This gives a mixture of 3% solids, which is a s close to the ideal solid proportion as possible. This also increases the adhesive forces of the methocel. Yellow dextrin also can be used' as a spreader. ' .In using the AE *, it should be nrixed at the rate of 25% A. E. to 75% water • .In the studies made by Spencer of the various A. E., he found that one particular kind had the best qualities -- those of being low in solubility, a good spreader, non-toxic to the seed, and soluble enough to allow air and water to reach the seed coat. This A~ E. is found under the commercial title C-13-HPC Asphalt Emulsion. The Flintkote 'Co., Pioneer Division, Denver; Colorado. 1/4 part per pint asphalt 3/4 part per pint water or 3 to 1 mixture. *A. E.- Asphalt Emulsion �-24.': ".,.i •.•.• II. Coloring Agents ',. The coloring agents used are activated carbon arid aluminum pigment. These two compounds have no known effect as rodenticides or fungfcides, They are used for various seed, lots. .. the purpose, of. rep .eiling. .btrds, or ic\entifying ... '. ' As bird repellents they are excellent. It seems tltat:bi;rds can .recogntze the . fact that the seed is not like it should be -. 'J;'ests with these compounds have proved that birds willpick up untreated seed.from thetreatedand non-treated seeds. In fact, they will not step on the treated seeds if. at all, possible to avoid them. ' ••.• #; '. , CAUTION .:: ..•.. Be very careful with Endrin. It is toxic by touch, eyes, inhaling or swallowing; ..In case it comes in contact with the skin, wash in .cold water for 10 or 15 min. If taken internally, swallow 1 tb, of salt in a glass of warm water. .Repeat. every 5 or 10 min. Keep , the patient Prone .and quiet ..,.-and call a.doctor, Wear rubber gloves, .apron, and mask when ,mixing, the. Arasan SFX and Endrin. Be sure to mix in a well-aerated place. Change clothes when through mixing, and,have them washed before wearing again. -:... :.1 II!., .Rodenticide, . -.: Fungicide ,-: The Endrin in this mixture .is the ;rodenticide., It is _highly toxic, to' all ~mals~' including man. ,It should be handled with the utmost care (see boxed "Caution. ") " , There are two mixtures of Endrin -- 50%wettable powder anda conc'eatr'ated emulsion containing 1. 6 lb. of Endrin per gal. --19 ..5 percent by weight. The wettable powder is the easiest to use. , -. ,,_to f �- -25, . :. '. : ~ ; In using straight Endrin (er g. without the Arasanmtxed of seed equals amount of Endr'in for the seed treatment. of Arasan SFX, the formula is: ' ,_ ',: '. .' ., in) a ~01 Xweight If using a mixture .• :,' ·100 gr. of.seed to 1 gramof , 50 percent wettable Endrin, and 5.3 gram of Arasan SFX• .' - i .";', j ~ ~.. ~ " .t .' " Arasan is the fungicide. It .comes in two forms: '"The plain Arasan,' and a mixture of Arasan and T. M. T~'D., (tetramethylthiuramidsulfide). Arasan SFX is 25 percent Arasan and 75 percent T. M. T. D. In a mixture of Arasan SFX and Endrin 1 x 8 (8 parts of SFX to 1part of Endrin) the formula is: ,'" . Weight of seed X 6',3 percent (6. 3 percent is the mixture QfEndrin .andArasan), , Actually; 6.3 (get rid of percent sign) : . , ,: '.6~3 parts to 100 pads of seed, 100 gr. of seed.to '6. 3 gr. -of mixture. , t. IV. Mixi~g,. First, mix the A. E. in the correct proportions,' (When using these spreaders always pour spreader on seed, not seed.Into the spreader.) +" " . ,,",:. ..> .use just. enough spreader to.wet the seeds. Do not get too much or the spreader.wtll be too thick and not allow the propertransfer of water and air to the seeds •., ,_ ... I ,2. Next, add the wet seeds to the Endrin or the mixture of Endrin and Arasan. Stir thoroughly, to use all the mixture possible. (Try notto stir too long. .) 3. Next, put the seeds in the activated carbon or aluminum pigment, and stir,1:boroughly. B~ sure the seed has a good coat.ofthe pigment. After all the mixtures and stirring, put the seeds out -to dry • . ,CAUTION! Do not put the treated seeds where children or animals can , , , get. at them e. ;1 ,., �-26Observations on Field Plantings: Plantings made in the open field are shown in Table D, with notes as to their estimated performance. Additional observations on individual species includer. : " " " -r • '. -: . ~ . ; Ele.agnus c ommutata (silverberry) - Seedlings did not, stand up well' under the hot sun. After the seed was stratified it was found that stratification is not generally. required: in this species, which may have' affected results. Pinus ponderosa scopulorum (western yellow pine) - This seed showed a remarkable' ahiltty to germinate in the-open without-shade •. Final count. ' after oneof the hottest summers on record here, 'showed excellent .results ~ '-', . >: ~..' .r ....'. Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush) - Evidently the method used to treat and stratify was about right for this year's' results were the best in-four years. Earlier planting may .improve final results. ...., ;,Genista tinctoria (common.woodwaxen):;;...Easily germinated the way it was tried but the seedlings must be protected against- hot sun and drying winds. Since it is a legume some of the seedltngs will be tried in the legume plots and also on dryland testplots. If it proves to be hardy here it should be a distinct addition to the list of 3-foot, "skirting" shrubs. It is reported to be an especially heavy seed bearer. The seeds are about the size of vetch seed. They must yet be tested for, use as wildlife food: ". , t • ',:: Peraphyllum ramocissimum (squawapple) - Only a very small amount of seed of,this species was f~un.QIast f3:.11.,:: Late f.~Q§tEl apparentl)(killed the' crop, and from the poor germination' secured with this' small aample,' it had been injured. This makes two years in a row that this species has failed to ' produce seed on the Western Slope. . .~.. ',',_; .> Prinsepia sinensis (cherry prfrisepia) ;..;This is one of the enigmas' of the horticultural world. It will not germinate in warm weather. Two years ago the seed was taken by mice. Last year it was treated with WLR-2 and . germinated:October l'arid:the'seedlings stayed green all winter-but most of them burned. up .durfng the hot summer. This year the seed was handledthe same way and no results secured at all. ". Ribes ,leptanthum (t~J:J::I.PE:!t g<?"Q,~~l;>~r.rY), '::',_Th~.eeyears, tests. in seedbeds, with different treatments, have brought no appreciable results with this species. However, some seed which was' discarded-into a floor drain while treating a batch, germinated and grew "Iikernad .,n,'·Thl's'leads to the thought that perhaps it should be fall-planted, mulched and kept' shaded during early spring to keep it moist. It is one of the good native shrubs growing on rocky, dry slopes in several parts of Colorado. . . _._ .. , '_'"'' ' , •• •• • •• ' ..•• _ .-. •••• •• _,.. • .1 _, ,~ •• ,,- ,_,~ ••••. ~ _ .' • ••• .'_. Cotoneasters-- All the cotoneasters are on the difficult side to germinate the first year with any degree of certainty. From our last 4 years' work with them it must be concluded that these hard-coated seeds should be treated with sulfuric acid to break the coat resistance • followed by varying lengths of �.strattftcation in moist cold. _W~~ldy tests, should be made under- a microscope after 90 days -- to determine readiness to germinate. year's time can be saved by this method it would prove valuable. If a Prunus species ...;_Results with all varieties of this species have varied , widely from year to year for rio apparent reason. At first it was damsged ' by mice and that was solved with WLR-2. ' Still the variation continued, By accident, while making a tetrozoleum test with some select chokecherry seed , from the Cheyenne USDAHorticulture Field Station, John Ellis rioticed the absence, of radicles in quite a number of the seeds some of Whichdid and some of which did not absorb the stain. Only undezamtcroscope was he able to detect this peculiarity. Since allthe seeds of other varieties had , been in -stratification for several weeks hewas unable to folih~ .•.tp 'with' similar examinations of-them,' " , '- "'~' For several years cutting and floating tests of.prunus seed have shown , high quality-but germination tests varied greatly from lot to lot and year to year. :NQWthe problem is how to"apply this finding. It would appear to mean: excise at least 100 embryos from each lot; soak in stain and 'examine under a microscope, , A commercial nurseryman using several hundred pounds' of one kind of-seed ' could well afford to make such teststo help guarantee a stand of seedltngs, -1'··, . Observations on Plantings in Eastern Colorado: Because much of the project leader's time during the spring and summer, and full time the last three and one-half months of the year; was spent in helping with-changes, 'deaigns, specifications and estimates, ' and finally with the 'supervision of the building -and other developments on Project W-93-D-1, he was able to make but two inspection trips to, some of the test plots and other plantings in eastern. :Colorado•. . , . ... ;',: In practically all plantings established before the drouth started, survival .conttnued to be good and some showeW~r6WHt This was especially noticeable , at the Yount planting east of Platteville where the ponderosa pines made a growth of,16 ,to 24 inches and the Russian thistle between the rows only 8 to' 10 .Inches, It was evident that the pine roots were reachfngfnto the subsoil' for moisture not available to annual weeds. Good growth was also noted orr the Russian olives, native plums and caragana. -.-' ;. Caragana pygmea and C.' microphylla in the testplot at the Greenwood farm south of Vona looked in excellent shape in August in spite of the fact that total precipitation for the previous 10 months had been only 3.4 inches. No doubt "- ' • "J,\ir. ~Greenwood's excellent care in cultivation 'and hoeing (no weeds could he found in the plot) contributed greatly to the planting's survival, . ., . "t, ... -~.' .' -.",Other observations will be mentioned in connection with illustrations at the end of this report.. ' .. - �, :-28- Recommendations ;.~ ... .• ... , . '; ~_.:~.~ ' ; , :.' For Man!li1jement:To make changes in long-accepted customs .and procedures is always difffcult but if there is to be progress, change s must be made. To "stick onetsneek.cut't.and recommendthe.eltmmatton of certainpl ants in favor of others is dangerous anytime, put especially when such a favorite as Siberian elm (often ci:ille'dChinese in error)' is involved •. Mother' nature has, a-way of tellmg her' story if we will but "read and l isten; " Sometimes It takes a great calamitysueh as..a flood, or .a blizzard, or a drouth to "wa1feUS up" ;10 the lessons being portrayed, , Thas has happened in this' case, fon.the Siberian elm has shown its. true colors in many places during the past two o,r·three 'years of .drouth, " II1 their rightful places -two other trees have withstood lh~ ravagEiis-of extremely low moisture. supply ~;the' hackberry and the honeylooust, . ~~ .' ::- .. _"Oneneeds only t"Qgo to,the ~bn planting at the. Milton ;Shule!, farm half a mile :south of ,San9 _grawto see the evidence. 'Those rrees were planted-on -16 foot centlexs ",:12yeat:s ago', };i:'h.ey,~e:r,e ,psheared" almosttothe ground by the blizzard 'of 194'9" later _pruned'to -re,mqYe all injured wood, and given extraordinary care. They recovered v:~ry,'Well'until the. drouth htt.. Lack of sufficient moisture weakened them, ~... phloem necrosis got a foothold, followed by borers. Anyone can read the ... ~< results •. ':' _.,;: . . :' .. :... .. " . .... t ,~;. . -. ;. . . • .. '_' ,-~ ' " ., 'Ii'*eJ~~pa~inerit;~~{s1:les fairly permanent .plantings, either the Siberian-elm shoul~;6e e't~~irifu:ed;:entirely or none planted closer than 25 to 30 feet from eac~ ,~~he~:()r adjoining plants, Hackberry-and honey-locust have proved.their' abtltty.to withstanddrouth at 20.,.footspacings; live to much longer life, and produce 'an abundance of wildlife food. , ~.- Ifta~l_,t;-ee's are 'to_'be,us~d.in wildlife plantings to meet the desires of farmers and ranchers (surely. there is little other reason) then cottonwoods are entitled to thei,..-:·pl:acewhere' moisture condttions are favorable to their growth.' -.Cotton-w~od 's;e.e'c:ij.i1ig's '.should. not be...used for their profuse seeding only complicates their . : sur*iYal pr9t>le~ and started, in their production. Seeds of the caraganas, big'. seeded Russfan-ol lve, elderber ry.; squawbush, andcuttings of the two cottonless cottonwoods can be' made available by the Department Experimental Nursery to ," those ~ish~ng:to produce: stock for _-wildlife plantings. , .',. . .. '. . - .. .e-' ,'.. " : . ":' . ~ -: ': . llecommendatioris for F~ture .of the: Proje_ct--- .Moze work should be donewith the use ofthe _WLR.,2trelltIni~l?:tofbroadleaf seeds.. especially since a small laboratory 'will available at headquarterswhen the new nursery building is completed. An indoor germination bench, with accurate measuring devices and a good .microscope, should enable a.qualified .worken to· break through the mysteries of the . dorinaiicy many species so far defying present methods. be of �Plenty of space between rows and outstanding care combined to bring this wildlife planting through the drouth without a loss. Species under test at the Greenwood farm south of Vona withstood the extended drouth because of good care. �Three-year-old dwarf caragana at the Department Nursery begins to show the density so characteristic of it. E-leagnusumbeUata, the autumn olive appears to be much more dense at the base and with finer branching and foliage than the common Russian olive. These specimens are three years old at the Nursery. �<J. '~. Five-year-old New Mexican elderberry at the Nursery, without irrigation, is 10 to 12 feet high, and produces great clusters of fruit. The big-seed Russian olive (left) and Caragana microspina (right) show the qualities that will make them outstanding in wildlife plantings of the the future. .t; •• ."7'•• ,_ �-29The use of Delsan as a more economical repellent and fungicide should also be followed uP,. and the practical applications of the sulfuric-acid and freezingthawing methods determined. An all-out effort must be made to get more of the test species into testplots all over the state. Since "drives" or campaigns for more reforestation seem to come in cycles of 12 to 15 years in these United states, wildlife interests should be ready to recommend, if not force, the use of better wildlife plants in the next giant project. By having well-cared for and well-planned testplots in several regions of the state, with fairly mature specimens of the desirable trees and shrubs "on parade, " nine-tenths of the arguments will be won. Seering , truth makes believers. Extra Activities--- During the spring and summer the project leader spent much time with plans, specifications and estimates for .the Development Project .W-93-D-1. On September :n he was authorized 9Y the Director and F. A. ,Coordinator to "go ahead on force account. " 'fh,at day marked the commencement of the realization of. a nine-year-dream for the cause of better wildlife habitat development for Colorado, at least better facilities for the workers in that field and those associated in other Departmental activities. Many obstacles arose from the start. Budgetary limitations, rises in prices of labor and materials since estim ates were made, weather conditions during an extremely wet fall and winter--all contributed to a lot of headaches, long hours of "figuring and planning" and a long list of changes in original plans and designs. But--~~~the project was started, It will be finished on schedule, and within the financial limitations set up, if humanly possible. Prepared by: Glenn Kinghorn John C. Ellis Date: J..• an •..•... u_a_r""y,:.., ..• 1..;.,9.;;.5.;;.8_ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��I~illllll~lijl~lllll]irlil~~~fl~ij]~1 ]flil~fijll BDOW022228 . -31- .January, 1958 \. :I -;',:-", i,'" JOB COMPLETION REPORT .' .: ~.' " ....~. ._. ;,.', ::., .'_. INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT Project No. _ _,;.W:... •..:7~9;_-..::;R.:..-...:4:...... ....;.;N:.:::am::;;;.;e;_W~il:.:d:;;;1:.;:if;.;;e~H;;;a;;;.b.;;,;it;;.;;a;..;.t.,;;Im=p __Stu~d;;;i_e;.;..s_ .. .~ ". :~' _'. -: ... ,.-;.,.-,_,',' . .. .,., .. .. .~.. ,.,.,._ .. Job No. __ ..0.,;..",;'.;,.;,' :..:2:.,_._..;.._..;. __;T:.;it.;;:l:.;;e;.;.:_: ~H:.;e;.:r:.;:b:.::a:.:;;c..;;;.e~ou;;;.s~,'Sp;;&.;;e~c..;;;.ie;;.;:~ :s;;;,.' _"._. .",,-io _ -:' '. . :i: ~'. .,:;-.,,' , -: ~. ' " ....."" ~.:, : ( ." "'~ '(~,l:: ..... ;-<.) ... Pertod. Covered: . ..;.,;_:.:::C..:;al:::;e:.:n;:;d:;;;a:;;;r;_ ..;:y...;;e.;:a;;;,r_·...,;1:,;;9.,;;5.,;;6,..;._. ---:"_._,_.: _'_'-~"'-_' ':_'_:' _"'_'_" ....•... _'_~ ','_ ..... :~.~~.<~ ,j: ~;-:, -':.:}.•.. Abstract: Good nesting cover is becoming more and more iinportant each. year as farmers continue to eliminate weedy fence rows arid waste areas. :Talle.r, coarser and less palatable grasses such. as Volga rye, pampas grass and .elephant grass are being .tested.. aiollg;·with several herbaceous.Iegumesj:" including alfalfas from many foreign lal\d$.· , ' . : ": ..' ; > . ".... ~ . . ~.:. MiIkvetch' •.·some strains of Wild, rye and c.ommon asparagus are .recommended ·fQrmore extenstvense in wfldl ifeplaatiegs, ;:;"" '..-.' r:: "C~;'-:-'::;' ..... '. . ,. ,-: Objectives: Study Propagation Methods and test adaptability of promising species for eastern Colorado, . espec.ially their values for wildlife food, cover and nesting, "Techniques Used' " .",: ",.::: ': _,.-' • < :_ :~~;~ • .'•• -', -', _ • tr: The plots set aside last year to start. the grass and legume tests were planted 'in early spring.' They were arranged in 5 rows east arid west;"-each row:.:. : consisting of 15 plots 12 x 20 feet, allowing four rows plants tothe plot, : 'I'hat.permtts.culttvatton with a tractor. ... ':.~ ' .. of :.. : .. ,' ". ..•.. ,,' ::-.,'''';, .. :: '. :.l'. of In .a1175 plots were laid out but only part of them planted: "'31:ki~ds alfalfa, ALgrasses and 10 other legumes. Al]. four rows in each plot-we're planted to the same species except the alfalfas, which were planted one kindtothe row, or four kinds to the plot. .' , " -, ""'.;. :; Since.the. soil was "powder dry" when plant~"d,. 1. 2 in~<o{:irrigation water 'was applied with the sprinkler system, followed by another ~2 inch: 10 days"later tobreak.thetcrust,'. : ._r. :.>,::' ', ..: .-.,.:~~: . ", -t...,,";: ~Ji:' _.... . ~. .."._ ". :~ • ." J. ••• .._. '.~, Several kinds of grass seed used in these plots were gathered 'from specimen plants growing at the nursery which were secured from the SCS two years ago • .:,~.:.,- :;Others-were obtained from the State College Extension agronomist' fronl saplPles -~~';,;:,::'.:: ~~~tto.him in: his' seed registration' Work for the State," He' also:furnishe,(:L.~:ey:eral ...•.. kinds of-alfalfa seed. :-Sixteen. strains were also secured from :the 'BPlf :2 from Iran, 1 from Spain; .•6 from Turkey; 1 from illinois andB Ii-om Afghantstan~' Legumes came from various sources, including the USDA Field Station at Mandan, North Dakota. �_--32- No. attempts were made to make plantings other than at the nursery because of the extreme dryness .of the sotl. , ' , Ffndtnas .' .": Actually there were no observations madeworthy of ~e:terIll "ffndingvbut several interesting developments took place in the testplots . . . : .... -'.. ~- '" ',.'.- .. ' Grasses-- Several grasses were started which must soon be removed for they give Itttleor llo,prospect ,o~being ofvalue to wildli!e, in~;!b:e way's.they are being judged--good, spreading cover from the ground to a height of at least 2 or 3 feet, a spreading habit: rather' than clump-forming, sturdiness and _ up-standing; against storms, good seed pr~~cer, '~d eariiness in spring 'growth. ' It is believed those qualifications are about the minimum whtch a -plant should.have for food, cover, 'nesting and escape use by wildlife. Three strains of wild rye, the elephant grass, and pampasgrass attracted the most attention the first year. They -all' grew very well in spite of the dry conditions. produced a little .seed, and gave promise of being something near what is being:sought. Another year or two without Irrtgatton; and further testing in various sections of the state, .subjected to more rigorous soil and climatic conditions, should give interesting results. :. . ",;1'" All five plots, at the extreme north end of the plantings were practically complete failures. Careful examination showed.that field mice had been there in droves and had worked partly into adjoining plots. There may have been other factors involvednot yet determined. Alfalfas-- Wide variation in hab its of-growth, foliage and season of growth is shown by the 31 kinds of alfalfas growing in the old and new plots •. It is ' too early to judge the new plantings but in the older ones Sevelra and Rhtzoma are standouts. The same is true at the Sand Draw plots. Cossack was doing so poorly out there that it was plowed up and the ground summer fallowed in r eadtness for other plantings next sprang, .The Sand Draw alfalfa plots were , cultivated and cross-cultivated twice during the summer-- after the nesting season-- to control weed competition . Othe.rIegumes-e- Of course Astragulus cicer, rnilkveteh, continues to look the best of all the herbaceous legumes at the nursery. The 1 acre seed-plot started last spring produced 43. 7 lb. of seed. It had to be hand-picked for lack of a better method of collecting. The cost was approximately $3.30 per pound .for clean seed. ' ', . Griffin's vetch and a new plant secured- from the college agronomist -- Sanguisorba '" minor 7-: commonly called small bumet=-are showing qualities' of being, evergreen and starting growth early ,in the spring~' Ifthosecharacterastlcs are permanent they might be good replacements for alfalfa in the drylands • . ':'::, �-33- Recommendations For Management-- Since farmers and ranchers consider grasses and legumes from .the standpoint of livestock forage, it may not be possible to get many to plant: for wildlife use unless some species can be found which will have a high seed-value and can be harvested late. Volga and other strains of wild rye may fit into this picture for they are reported to be of low palatability, yet the seed cr()p.is on stems high above the' foliage and can be harvested without distu.rbing the main body of the plant. Certainly this plant is worth more extensive ~~e on--~1;e,p.J"opertieswhere it can be left undisturbed. --Unless alfalfa is geown for seed, the crop is only a detrrment to wildlife, particularly pheasants. Thus it is hoped that a new st:(din particularly well adapted to the drylands can be found so that a ready _d~mandwill be created for the seed for a number of years. Astragalus cicer has proved itself at the nursery .and also at the Akron Experiment . Station, as .a good dryland plant,' and a good seed producer. It should be used , sparingly in or near wildlife plantings to get acceptance from private landowners. - Plant only - -- lnot over 2 -lbs;--per acre so the -plants will be spaced 6 to 8 inches . apart in 3 or 4-foot rows. It is a vigorous feeders so that excessive competition .wttl only work against the good growth that is needed for best wildlife use. One plant which seems to have been neglected in wildlife plantings is the common variety of asparagus. It has been used tnzows between trees and found to do very well. After getting established (in 2 or' 3 years) ''if will grow to a height of 4 to 5 . feet and produce an abundance of seed. Value of the .seed for wildlife is not mentioned in the literature but the fact that birds ~e known to deposit it along fence rows where the early, tender growth is hunted every spring by hungry housewives in good evidence that the berries aze-eeltshed by some species of ''-'''':''.;. :'l._. wildlife. It helps trap the early snows and conserve winter moisture for the trees and shrubs. It might be argued that weeds will do the same thing. They will. But the good farmer who is trying to eliminate all sources of weed seed on his farm might leave and care for the asparagus which would help "shade out" the weeds. For the Project-- Since nesting cover is so important, this phase of the project probably should be stepped up. More testplots should be planted in more communities, even if root clumps or ciones have to be used. This applies especially- to the elephant grass, pampas grass, the hybrid crested wheatgrass and some .of the legumes. �" ·-34- '. Alfalfa Planted Plot 6 6 6 6.~~ 2'1 21 21 f"""\ r-: .~ <, --:1956 (First Year of Test) April 19th Row ,.1 2 3 '.4 1 2 .3 ~1 '4 36 36 36 36 51 51 51 51 66 66~ .1 :., 66 ~r-;,> i Plot Plantings 2 ' 3 ,4 1 2 3 4 .~ 3 4 .: Name 5438 Grimm Alfalfa 5305 Virginia C'lone 10 5304 Semi Palatlnsk alfalfa F. C. 24050 High Alt; 5307 Williamsburg' . DuPuis 5303 .: 5308 F. C. 23669 Artzona Chilean. 5434 Vernal Vernal Alf. Wise. Int. .. (leafspot and wild resistant) ,_ 5436 Ladak 474-1953 5301 Ranger .Alf. 5309 Buffalo AlL Hardistan- Lartmer Co. Sample 134-1942 Rhizoma.-Montrose Co, Sample 55:- Yr. 1950 , 'Sevelra 5435 Meeker Baltic Rio Blanco 260-1951 5437 Nem astan ~~U2a&.a~~e!t .5306A 5439 AlfanPic . ------------~-------- Germination 100% .100% 50% 100 % 100% 100% 100% 100% :1QO% \0'0%: 100%~ 100% 100% 100% 100% 70% 85% ~g~ 95% Remarks Good growth Good growth' Fair growth Good growth Good growth' Good growth . Good growth Good.growth Good growth Good growth Good growth Good growth Good growth Good growth. Good growth. slow g-rowth '. Good rrrowth . Goon Growth . Gooa growtn Good growth �-35- Alfalfa Plot Plantings (Cont.) : n; Plot 7 7 7 7 4~ ~2 22 22 37 37 37 37 52 52 52 52 67 67 67 67 8 8 8 Name G'~rrn ination Remarks 3 4 .1 2 3 Medicago Sativa PI. 175788 (Origin Turkey) Medicago Sativa PI. 172985 (Origin Turkey) ArgentiIle--qolo. Fr. No. 11 OF,C23.189 Colo. Comm Colo. Fr. No. 133 W. H. Herzog, Nomad No. 61 ~OO% 100% . . 90% 100% 40% 35% 35% 25% 85% 60% ,15% 100% 25% 15% 10% ' 2% 10% 5% No. ger , Good growth Good growth Good growth Good growth Slow growth Slow g rowth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Slow growth Good growth 2 5210 (NDL-50) Medicago media (Siberian .Alf. ) 5211 (NDL-9G) Medlcago sativa 5212 (NDL-94) Medicago Falcata 5213 (NDL-70-6) Medicago Falcatus PI 210763 Medicago Sativa (Origin Spain) PI 217648 Medicago Sativa (Origin 111.;",) PI 212861 Medicago Sativa (Origin Afghanistan) : PI 212860 Medicago Sativa (Origin Afghanistan) PI 212858 Medicago Sativa (Origin Afghanistan) PI 212104 Medicago Sativa (Origin Afghanistan) PI 211608 Medicago Sativa (Origin Afghanistan) PI 212859 Medicago Sativa (Origin Afghanistan) Medicago Sativa PI 223387 (Origin Iran) Medicago Sativa PI. 222999 (Origin Iran) Medicago Sativa Pl. 173728 (Origin Turkey) Niedicago Sativa PI. 182229 (Origin Turkey) J.Vieoicago Sativa PI. 175789 (Origin Turkey) Medicago Sativa Pl.. 177012 (Origin Turkey) Row ·,·i ' :2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 '4 1 2; 3 4 1 , ..·.i , . ',. '1% 90% Eads 100% Colo. 10.9% Good growth Good g~owth Good growth Good growth Good growth Good growth ---- " <, " '~~I ;,-"\ �-36Legumes Plot Plantings--Spring 1956 . ;." Planted April 30 Plot Row' Name 5 5406 Astragulus cicer ,1 .. .. ' Germination , 100% ' , '..2, 5403 Onobryohts Viciafolia Sanfoin 5 3 5214 Lathrus 5 4 5215 Petalosteman 5 ;', ,', ,,',1\:, 5218 Lotus corntculatus' 20 ','2~ 5219 Casia fasiculata , 20 20 5220 3 ,,4,' , Douglas strain-birdsfoot Good growth One plant 30% Slow growth '100% Very good growth 5% ~ ,I ; ' ..j , 10% -------'- ~ ... ~..... 1% ." ;: ~. , 100%' canadidus 20 ; ' Remarks Good g'rowth Very good growth " . ' Slow growing v • -: f 100%' ' t refoil: ' Very good growth "': 35 35 1 2 'No germin~tiori 5223 ,', , Griffins vetch 35 3 , 5429 Petalosteman Palmeri :,,' 35 CV !i.':',': 4 No ge'r~inatiori' . :.~ . . No germination " , !' j: , " '.1 : . ~. No germination �Alfalfa plots 2 months after seeding in early May at Harry Andrews farm north of Ft. Collins. Planted on summer-fallowed land with no irrigation. Alfalfa plots at Sand Draw, July, second year after planting. stand for drylands. Popular with pheasants. Very good �-3'l;.;,_ Some way must be found ii;;.~~~ase pampas grass from seed, To date no viable seed seems to have been p~tid:UC?~d at the nursery. A Id#ger growing season, such as at Rocky Ford or Llllnar, might permit the seedto mature. Plantings will be made in those areas' a's soon as possible. A search should be made, particularly to the north of Oolorado for wild, coarse grasses and legumes not commonly accepted as forage plants, which offer possibilities for wildlife use. Prepared by: Glenn Kinghorn John C. Ellis Date Approvedby J_an __u_a_ry~~_1_9~5-8------- -L_a_u_re_n_c_e--E-.--Fti-·o-rd--an ~_ Federal Aid Coordinator ��January, 1958 - ';;'39- /' JOB 'COMPLETION' REPORT:' ). ',.; .", .: . :,,-:,.-,._ ... ~, , . , INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT -OJ:. :.,-t· : ~.. t: State of ,:' ';_'.- COLORADO .," Name Wildlife 'Hdi)ii~t :unpro~~hient' ~dies •. • r ': ~••' '.;...~ ': . r: .~ ",' >- .' 1 :.: ~,~.'. _,,' ,_, Mail;ltc:_in and process planting materials . . ~ PertodCovered. <.' . ~t :;. ;', ' .~ J.. ': ,.. Calender Year 1956 • ... ....: _;', ::::_ ... " . Abstract: A total of 74,290 evergreens went into pots o! yarious'sfzes ~rilwere established during the summer and fall for, field planting in the _,spriI:!gbf.19.57. " ,.',-LoSses we're quite heavybecause of too large stock whidh'~e~hited~s'~vere~i-oot ~'.' '-{" _' " ::'t;' U' ." -: ::~; ',:':i "l';~;'" ~:.; .:'';..." '.~prumng •., , '"<.;:':;~;'~~''' 2:> '., i .~, '~:>.: r ;.~-: .. ~~ , " Costs of potting 'were reduced to 6. 92~ per plant, nottricl~diiig'~ost f}i ih;~:plant-a 'saving of 1:22¢' per pot over 1955. . . 'i, ",:' '.' .;~ ; ,:.''<',> '- ,; ", ,';' . ..:<-~ .~'f~::~ •..:: .~.::0., A fertilizer test had to be abandoned because of too heavy Iosses when plants were' ~:..7:.·.,,··:.f7· :~:\,. :~(.¥ '.;'.:'.' ....... moved in early summer," Moving potted evergreens 'exc_ept':wheIi th~y:.ar~,c_pmpletely . , ,.. •. , . ~':i;:' :~"".: > '.:' ..:.:: .,~; ,.'dormant: or :ili early-sprtug bloomseems to take a heavy ~oU~::'. -~': .~ .. -" ',-, . '. . . .' ." . . _ :.:-..",',' -, ~~'.~'!':' t, c,·.' _" .' ~':':; :f.',!:.~.': ~\:, . , ' ' . , of" ;-. _ .. : .•.. ; ;-~;~.,~:.·._·,;,~:·1{~:::~·;'..:::~: __~~~_'" :::':.'.")., .-: ~bjectives:-- ':Topreserve, grow 'out, or ~therwis~ esfdbHsh··'w~~dY~\fud/6r·r: herbaceous stock for the use 'of other projects within the Department, (T.~sting methods of potting and evergreen seedlings for field {ls~'has beeh niairi work.) Techniques Used: 1. Potting machines, patternedafter th~ ~~hcieh'i6h~s''ti--ied out last season, were butlt of steel during the winter iln~ adapted to the old benches. Four sizes were built: . ": t- " ". .' ~ _. .. ',,:,~~ ;'.'~"".~ 12 --- for 2'::inch-.pots10 inches deep 12--- for 2 1/2 inch pots 10.inches deep .<.;;.,' .6.-~- for 3 inch pots 10 iiic1:i~'s:d~~p:': ,~:. - '2-;"'-for 4 inch pots 10 inch~s~:'d~ep;--' Near the :end of the potting run 2 of the 2-inch "machin~s"w~~~ih~diiie<fto -~!~e 1 1/2 inch pots for a test run of the smaller size. ., .! .: : ,~- ". :. . .. <- .~;- .~:. ~~.c,~)'-~ " 2. Since the labor of handling potted stock so many ~ime~Jrop\:IDa~hine to, > ,'-- - .. " shadehouse seemed very costly, metal-' , 'trays were built with ootlorns which '., " ... ,.', 'f r' ~,' : f ? ;:' slide out from under a tr ayload of potted plants •. They ,were 'made 13 x 13.inches (inside clearance) sci theywil l hold 36 2' filch pots," 25'l({I:tlh~~; 16 3-inch and 94 inch pots. Two (sirap'~handles were weld~d oritd:!b~pc;~WE{sides so that each:tbiyload 'may be moved as. a unit to the Irames.: the))(J~.tql1l,t;removedwhen all is in place, after which just aItttl'e "stridghtening .the-plants in regular ,. . ~.. ·... ,.,c~··~~·'~···.lt ••··!"4. ' rows and square in the.fr-amea, . .'"" "'-. .. ., •• ; " '. '. : '. '.' ••• , .,;.' '.-, , "" -! ~ ~ ~ " j;": up"'~~e_ep~ _;.:- ~ , . .>. '.' ), �~40- 3. The Juniper scopulor,u~ seedlings, purchased by Project 59-D, were heeledin in shingle tow in the south end of.the shadehouse, for lack of a better storage place. Ponderosa pines-were. dug from the fields as they were potted. They had been lined out as surplus (bargain purchase ;...:.2 - 2's at $7 per thousand) two years ago. 4. Potting was started and completed one month earlier than in 1955" due to favorable weather for outside work, . ., '-, .5.. After fhe evergreens are potted and placed in frames in the' shadehouse, how ~es(tb'Jjahdle them for'establishzhent in ~he,year involves several things:' .',,','. , "~~rigation, "fertilization, Insect and disease control. preparation for field :Ii!anting" etc. ' c,: /;, , , In an attempt to test several different f6i'tilizers, a few hundred of the junipers , 'w~re removed from their original Irames, measured carefully, and placed in new frames about June 1 -- approximately sbc\veeks after their original place.ment in f ramea.. Four repltcattons and.a check were planned with 25 plants per "lot to compare Ammo-pho~' Rapidgro and Gro..,Green on the basts of their, nitrogen content. Twodays after they weremoved some of the plants began to show tip-d,rying in , spite' of reasonable irrigatim~., Within. a week many ~f them were turning brown. The test was abandoned atter the second week because it was e;:vident that moving them before, they were well establtshed had greatly reduced their survival. ' Findings: 1." ~ollow:ing are thecost I--:--Tarpaper Pots , ,16.boxes staples L'ab~r- 'cutting pots 207 rolls tarpaper . Total. records for the 1956 season: ;, $42.'40 ' 476/00 859~05 $1377,;45 ,', Unit cost of.cutting Unit cost ,per pot 0.64~ 1. 854¢ II. ---CO$t of peat moss .andsotl $ 220~OO III. -- Cost of power for pumping water $ 48.03 :.," IV.---Cost " ,. ~,'. ; ofLabor-c-Potttng' ~~d f~aming. Hauling soil-c-man and truck Mixing SOil" tending' machines Potting and supervision . 'TotaJ. .' . $47.02 717..50 . ,.1870.75 Unit cost oflabor, based, on 74,,290'. .evergreens potted ". .' 3.55¢ ,$2635•.27. ~: . . .. '('-"_ �Potting tables were set up in shadehouse, with tarpaulins over head for protection from wind and showers. Note metal trays for carrying potted plants. Women potted from 300 to over 400 each per day. New metal machines aided greatly in speed-up. �Special pot-cutting table was arranged with metal guides for cuts. Removing slide-bottom from tray after placing pots in place. Greatly reduces amount of handling. �/iq ... _"._l After packing tightly into frames, plants are protected from drying air by shingletow between frames and in loose spots. �-41- SUMMARY:1956Evergreen Potting Campaign. Use of equipment--Annual charge Pots and labor cutting Potting material - peatmoss and soil Power--pumping water Labor--mixing, tending and framing $904.00 1377.45 220.00 48.,03 2635.27 " Total cost, except for plants $5184.75 Unit cost 1955 $.0814 Unit cost 1956 .0692 Difference-e-e-saving 1. 22¢ per potted plant' (attributed to improvements in potting machines, trays for speeding up handling, and to greater efficiency of all workers and equipment.) '. During the.Iate summer (August and early Sept.) of 1955allthe dead plants were removed from the frames, The losses totalled 14.91%. Considering , that loss, and.the average cost of the plants which was 2. 62~, each potted plant, 'ready for the field in the spring of 1956, ;was12. 64~. A large percentage of' the plants had established roots a few inches into the sand and soil below the pots when moved and it is possible that the loss was increased another 10%by that late-summer moving. No attempt to check losses was made in the fall ofJ956. They will be quite high because too-large plants had to be used which required trimming the roots from athi rd to ahalf to get them into the pots. ' " Most of the pots were moved in the late fall into boxes in preparation for spring planting, Whichmay prove to be a mistake. , All our, experience, indicates that it is poor policy to move the.plants either during the growing season or after, until ,tlley are readyfor fi~id planting. �-42Plans for 1957. Many of the"bugs" have been eliminated fromthe potting machines during the past two seasons, although there are doubtless many improvements .which.can and will ultimately. be made. .One change which we are making in them for the 1957 potting program" is to cut the length. of the pots down to 9 inches instead ~f 10. Blocks are being:Inserted in the metal forms and-the plunger blocks cut down to 9 inches. This will eliminate all waste in cutting, the pots from 36 inch roofingpaper', and reduce unit cost per pot by rsee 20 percent, depending upon size. ' Metal trays with bottoms which slide out from under a trayload of potted plants greatly reduced the cost of handling last spring. It is possible. that the wooden boxes, each holding 25 or more pots, mayprovebetter than the metal trays. The main question in our minds is what effect wood may have on the tiny roots when they outgrow the pots and seek to. reach the sand arid graver"below, if left over winter in the boxes. !', •r • ' .: Drouth which has' plagued most of Colorado for the 'past five years has emphasized the importance of the premise that "you must get the plant established in the first .few days after transplanting or if is Iostv.: All through our plantings on the high plains of eastern Colorado, where 'plants became established shortly after planting, they have continued to "h.bld'on." In numerous instances, 'especially in some of the older plantings" we have observed almostnormal growth on both broadleafs and evergreens while annual plants such as thistles, have shown only 4 to 6 'inches of grb'wth~"This 'has encouraged us to try potting and establishing a few of the harder-to-establish' hroadleaf species for field planting in 1958. Russian Soil mixtures undoubtedly have ari effect on plants; One-third 'peatmoss and two-thirds ordinary topsoil have been used in the past to guarantee a.sound' . pot for handlfng.: A little sand will be added to some of the miXtures 'next year to test root development in looser 'growing media, . ," , Another attempt win be madeto test the effect of fertiliiers their f1'rst and second years in pots: . _.'' on junipers during' ' .. Recommendatioris: -Eor-the greatest effictency in potting andthe highest s~rvival in the pots; all 'evergreens should be Iarge r than 6 or7 inches in height. Tliat will eliminate "cropping" roots and the necessity for trtmming tops to match .. root systems. no <., -. '. \ "', i Pottedjunipe rs should not be moved in the spring untU:they show'signs 'bf . " ., "coming into bloom, " which' is usuallybetween March ts and April i in this' . climate. Pines seem to be able to take rougher treatment than junipers,:':which in_dicates they may be moved more successfully during late winter and early spring. Prepared by: Glenn Kinghorn Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator January, ------------~~~~~~~------~ Date: 1958 �111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022230 January, -43- 1958 , JOB COll/[PLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------------------ Project. No. W __-_3_8_-_R_-_1_O __-'-_D __e_er_-_E_ll_\: _I;;;;;Il\_'e.,..s_t_,ig""'a_t_i_o_n_s _ Work Plan No. 43.: ; - Review pf Literature --------~--~~------~-----'-------------------- Period Covered: Objectives: July 1, to April 30, ------~~~~~~~~~~~~~----------------1956 1957 To determine the various methods that have been used to census big game animals and the success of each. To determine how the investigation should be conducted on each method ultimately selected for trial. Procedure: Review all available literature and compile a comprehensive report. on big game census techniques This is strictly a library problem. It is the intent that this phase of the problem to ascertain all the different methods that have been tried and their relative success. Also to find out the best way to conduct the experiment on the methods finally selected based on the recommendations of previous investigators. Findings: No work was accomplished on this job as personnel could not be found to do the literature review. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Approved by: January, ------~~~~~~~----- Date: 1958 Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��I~m~I~'~I~'ijil~\r~I~~~m~~flll[~lli\ ill BDOW022231 January, -45- 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~~~~-------- Project No. W-38-R-IO Deer- Elk Investigations VVorkPlan No. ~I~I Job No. 4c Period Govered: J.;;..ul~y~I~,~19;..;5;..;6~to;.....;;.A;.£p:..;;r~il;.....;;.3..;.,O.!.., • ..,;;1..;.,9.,;;.5.;,.7 _ Objectives: (1) ~~P~o~p~u~l~at~i~o~n~SU~r~v~e~y~s~· _ Pellet Group Count Technique To field test this technique on Cedar Ridge in Middle Park to determine its applicability as a method in determi rg trends and/or population of deer using winter concentration proves successful, areas. (2) If this trial then the mechanics of such a method can be set up for trial in other areas of the state where aerial trend counts are not feasible. Procedure: A pre-determined number of 1/100 plots (450) were established on Cedar Ridge, with the use of student help. These plots were cleared at the time they were established, and will be read next spring (1958) after the snow melts and deer leave. Findings: None as yet. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date: Approved by: ~J;..;an~u~a~ry~.~1.;;..95~8~ _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��January, -47- State of Project JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO No~ W-38-R-10 Work Plan No. Job No. __ .:.......;p;;....;;.op!:;"u;;;;l~a;;;.t;.;;.io;;.;n;;;.·...;,;&;.;;.l;.;;;r..;.v...;;e.:!..y..;;.s _ J;;.;u;.;;;1~y~1~'...;;l.;;.9.;;.5.;;.6..;.t;.;;.0_A;;.;&p..;;.r;;;;il;;.;.;;.3.;;.O~,...;;1.;;.9.;;.5.;;.7 _ To determine deer population Procedure: based the applicability Make sex ratio which deer were to be kept. by series of the variations concentrate between An estimate counts before the hunting into the Cedar of 100 animals areas after Ridge of estimating season country. a the hunting of deer season, in the areas All counts so that a comparison can thus be obtained can be made and by use of kill population for the area. Due to a reduction in this herd to try to get a sample count Prepared F. Gilbert Date: and accuracy on age and sex ratios. from Findings: Investigations 4_d_....:..._P_o-'p •..u_l_;,a_t_io_n-'--E_s_t_im_...;.at._e_s_B_;,a_s_e_d_o_n_A_,fJ' .•.. _e_an_d_S_e_x_R_a_t_i_o_s_. Objectives: general Deer=Elk ;;;;ll;;.._ .....•... PenodCovered: figures. 1958 by: Paul it was found to be too time on the summer Approved range, by; consuming so no work was accomplished. Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator J;;.;a;.;;;n;;;.u;;;.;a;;;.;r;;."y~,:.....;;.19;;.;5;;.;8;;.;_ _ ��55 Iiillllllij'BDOW022234 ~I~'llil~lrlilli~ifliij]~l1i]illil'~11 January. -49- 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS COLORADO ----~~~--~---------- State of Deer - Elk Investigations Project No. W-38-R-IO Work Plan No. ill ; Job No. 7 ------~--------~~~~~--------------------- Title of J ob:_ _.:.;M;.;e:;.:s;.::a:;...V..;..::;.e=-rd::;e~C;.:;I~ip;...-:.P.:.lo;:;,;t;_;;;;St:;.:u:.;::d:.l..y ~ __ :-_ Period Covered: --~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----------------July 1. 1956to April 30, 1957 Summary: . The Clipping of annual-growth stems has induced the growth of longer stems for all browse species in the study except mountain mahogany. Generally speaking. the heaviest clips produced the longest stems • . - Based on 1956 data, clipping intensities of 20, 40, 60,. and 80 percent have not Significantly affected the weight of forage produced by mountain . mahogany; serviceberry, and sagebrush. For bitterbrush the air-dry weight of stems and leaves combined was :Significantly heavier for plants clipped 80 percent than for all other intensities of clip. For oakbrush, at the f. 10 level, the air-dry weight of leaves produced by the plants clipped 80 percent is Significantly lighter than that for plants receiving other clips. At the end of seven years the yearly removal of 80 percent of the annualgrowth stems from the five browse species in the study had no Significant ",effect. on their protein. ash. calcium, and phosphorus content • .",Asmight be expected, bitterb rush , sagebrush, and oakbrush plants ':,:producedless weight of forage in 1956, a dry year, than in the previous 'year when precipitation was greater. Mountain mahogany and service. ~rry, on the other hand, produced greater weights. of forage during the. dry year of 1956 than during the wet year preceeding, . " .Objective: For sound winter game range management it is necessary to. kIlpw the percentage of annual growth game may be permitted to remove. ye~dy ';from key browse plants without injury to the plants. Also, it is . impprtant to know the effect of different intensities of use on the amount of forage produced. �-50The Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study is a long-term clipping experiment simulating different intensities of game use on five key species of browse plants: big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, serviceberry, and oakbrush. The purpose of the study is to attempt to learn how the yearly removal of certain percentages of the annual growth sterns and of old stems affects the plants and their for-age production. Procedure:, Work methods have been described in previous reports on this job, · but they-will be repeated for the convenience of the reader. 1. Twenty-four' ten-foot square plots have been established for each plant species, and these have been fenced from game as required. 2. Plots wer'ejrandomly selected to receive specific treatments. 3. Three.eepfieations were provided for each treatment. 4. Plantstn the three plots of a replication have been subjected to the · following treatments: (a) Y~arly, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 percent of the annual growth stems have bee,n,.,removedin random fashion. . (b) Threeylots for each plant species serve as controls, receiving no treatment.' (c) Twoyear s ' stem growth was removed from each plant one year; ·'jr~ar:JYthereafter, .all stems falling within a maximum diameter were · removed to simulate destructive use. . {d) From tagged branches two year s' stem growth was removed from a.portion of each.plasit during late summer of 1956. Yearly thereafter, all stems falling withina maximum diameter are to be removed to produce the effect of destructive use on a portion of a plant. 5. The following records are collected yearly: ',;(a) Total number, of annual stems removed from each plot. (l) 'l1:ielengths .of 100 annual stems removed from each plot. (0) The total green and air-dry weight of stems and leaves removed froin each plbt. ' . '. (d) ,The:number of annual stems produced and the lengths of 1O0 randomly selected anmialstems for each control plot. (e) The number of live and dead plants in each plot. (f) Photographs ofJhe plots taken from established photo hubs. (g) Observations general plant vigor, disease, seed production, etc. 6. A chemical analysis of clippings from selected plots was made to determine the effect of .treatnient on tIi~ nutritive content of forage. 7. The separate' weight of 's'~ms and leaves of clippings from past years have been determined -"Oy separating leaves and sterns of old clippings. In future years. stern and leaf -'~eparationwill be made at time of clipping. , . on �-51ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer is indebted to Jack R. Grieb, Wildlife Statistician, for making statistical tests for significance; to Donald Dietz, who ran nutritive analyses; and to Bertrum Baker, for the separation of stems and leaves from some old clippings. INTRODUCTION Each year since the beginning of this study in 1948 a report of the data and findings has been published in a (~arterly Report of the Federal Aid Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. Early reports were little more than an enumeration of data. When accumulated data began to show the reaction of plants to treatment, reports approaching final ones in detail were published, comparing and summarizing the data for past years. That type of reporting was begun tn the Quarterly Report for October, 1954, and continued in the same publication for July, 1955 and July, 1956. The reader is referred to the three latest reports. For this report on the 1956 data the writer has thought it advisable not to repeat data and findings of previous years. Detailed year-to-year comparisons and summarizations will be left for a final report on the study. Field work for 1956was begun July 16 with the repairing of plot fences, weighing of sacks, printing of tags, and photographing of bitterbrush plots. Field work ended with the clipping of mountain mahogany plots, September 19. The clipping crew was comprised of M•. J. stefan, Jede Ellis, Jess Vague, Charles Yellowhorse, and Donald Zufelt. FINDrnGS: ANALYSISOF 1956 FORAGE PRODUCTION Table 1 through 5 show for each species of plant and each plot the air-dry weight of forage produced and the length and number of stems. The adjusted mean air-dry weights by clipping intensity and species are shown in table 6. Table 7 lists the stem-length means by treatment and species. The precipitation record for Mesa Verde for the period 1948-56 is presented in table 8. Mountain mahoganv-« Stem length means between the six treatments show significance between several. For example. the stem length mean for the control is significantly shorter than for the 100 percent and 60 percent clips. However, the control is significantly longer than the 20, 40, and 80 percent clips. So, there is no definite trend evident in the stem-length response to intensity of clip. There are no significant differences between the weights of forage produced as the result of any of the treatments, including leaves only, stems only, and leaves and stems combined. However, the plants clipped 60 percent came very close to producing Significantly heavier growths of stems only and stems and leaves combined. �t;p ;'.:!~ -53- Table l. Mountain Mahogany Clip Date Plot No. stem Clip Production Data 1956 Total No. Stems Air-D!:l:Weight Leaves Stems Total stem Lgth. Ave. (gr.) (gr.) (gr.) (em, ) No. Stems Clip or Count 8.3 4.9 3.3 7.3 4.1 5.2 43 27 15 215 135 75 - (%) ~/ lA 2A 3A 9-18 9-19 9-19 20 20 20 4.3 1.6 4.0 2.3 1.7 IB 2B 3B 9-18 9-19 9-19 40 40 40 9.8 6,9 27.3 10.0 12.0 30.6 19.8 18.9 57.9. 5.1 4.1 9.2 85 82 219 212 205 547 lC 2C 3C 9-18 9-18 9-17 60 60 60 30.1 56.7 15.7 21. 2 35.1 12.9 51. 3 91.8 28.6 8.8 10.7 8.3 230 287 138 383 478 230 lD 3D 9-18 9-19 9-18 80 80 80 39.1 21. 8 3.5 42.4 17.1 7.1 81. 5 38.9 10.6 6.6 6.3 3.2 376 212 74 -4'10 265 92 IF '2f 'SF 9-17 9-17 9-19 100 100 100 59.0 64.0 24.2 . 69.8 55.8 21. 7 128'."'8 119.8 45.9 7.4 12.0 7.6 480 248 142 480 248 142 JG 3G,t 9-14 9-14 9-14 100 100 100 52.2 31. 9 48.9 62.7 32.9 72 •. 4 114.9 64.8 121.3 9.5 7.9 -7.1 464 188 340 464 188 340 IE 9-18 1.1 controls not clipped 8.5 174 174 2E 9-19 9-19 1/ controls not clipped controls not clipped 8.5 6.4 224 261 ,-2~4 261 2D 2G 3E 1.1 2.6 11· E plots are control plots; they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. ~I _Computed plots. totalnumber of stems for clip plots and actual number for control. �-54Table 2. Serviceberry Production Data 1956 1A 2A 3A 9-3 8-20 8-20 20 20 20 16.0 14.3 19.1 90.4 53.8 54.6 106.4 68.1 73.7 2.9 2.5 3.1 1B 2B 3B 8-27 8-15 8.::-17 40 40 40 10.3 22.6 21.3 63.6 77.0 115.9 73.9 99.6 137.2 3.1 3.7 2.8 219 437 735 547 1092 1837 1C 2C 3C 8-29 8-31 8-2~ 60 60 60 125.7 11.2 61.6 459.2 69.3 302.8 584.9 80.5 364.4 4.1 2.7 2.5 2201 380 1273 3668 633 2121 1D 2D 3D 8-30 8-27 8-23 80 80 80 110.3 37.9 52.9 257.6 88.4 160.5 ~367.9 126.3 213.4 3.4 5.6 4.5 1502 384 815 1877 480 1018 IF 2F 3F 8-14 8-27 8-24 100 100 100 40.6 66.2 122.0 188.1 218.3 336.7 228.7 284.5 458.7 4.1 4.9 6.3 656 877 1108 656 877 1108 1G 2G 3G 8-28 8-29 8-22 100 100 100 192.2 98.5 116.0 459.5 386.8 350.1 651.7 485.3 466.1 6.1 5.5 8.3 1068 1504 1176 1068 1504 1176 IE 2E 3E . 8-28 8-14 8-23 II controls not clipped controls not clipped controls not clipped 2.7 2.1 2.0 432 930 1759 432 930 1759 Clip Date Stem Clip 1/ 1/ ... Air-Dry Weight stems Leaves (gr.) (gr.) (gr.) stem Lgth. Ave. (em. ) Total No. stems No. stems Clip or Count 395 287 353 Plot No. Total ~I 1975 1435 1765 _1/ E Plots are control plots;they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. ~/Computed totalnumber of stems for clipplots and actual number for control plots. �·.....,0 t<- •• v' .. -55Table 3. Bitterbrush Production Data 1956. Plot. No. Clip Date Stem Clip (gr.) (gr.) (gr.) (em, ) No. stems Clip or Count Air-Dry Weight Stems Leaves stem Total Lgth. Ave. (%) Total No. stems J/ 1A 2A 3A 7-18 7-17 7-24 20 20 20 4.0 1.1 1.6 9.1 1.9 3.1 13.1 30 4.7 3.1 1.8 1.9 ll3 50 ll9 565 250 595 1B 2B 3B 7-20 7-24 7-23 40 40 40 549 .6.3 10.4 3.4 10.2 16.3 5.6 16.5 3.5 2.5 3.2 260 102 325 650 255 B12 Ie 7-20 7-24 7-23 60 60 60 5.7 7.6 4.1 10.4 12.B 8.2 16 1 20.4 :~ 12.3 3.B 2.7 2 ? .OJ 225 453 256 375 755 426 2D 3D 7-20 7-23 7-23 80 80 80 15.6 31.9 7.5 26.8 54.1 13.8 '42.4 86.0 21.3 3.0 4.0 3.2 798 1593 360 997 1991 450 IF 2F 3F 7-19 7-19 7-18 100 100 100 55.5 50.6 63.5 86.6 100.3. 112.8 142.1 150•. 9 176.3 5.5 5.7 5.7 1858 1736 1800 1858 1736 1800 1G 2G 3G 8- 6 8- 6 8- 6 100 100 100 14.7 4.2 9.8 12.4 3.8 11.0 27.1 8.0 20.8 6.9 6.9 6.4 195 55 138 195 55 138 IE 2E 3E 7-20 7-17 7-23 1./ controls not clipped controls not clipped controls not clipped 2.0 1.8 1.4 200 267 100 200 267 100 2C 3C 10 . - II II 2.2 9 0 .!/ E plots are control plots, they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. ~I Computed plots. totalnumber of stems for clipplots and actual number for control ',. �-56Table 4. Oakbrush Production Data 1956 Clip .....Stem: Date Clip Air..;.Dr;t Weight stem's' Leaves stem Total No. Stems 1A 2A 3A 9-10 9- 6 9- 7 20 20 20 49.2 54.4 67.4 304.3 350.9 322.0 353.5 4;05.3 389.4 3.8 5.6 6.0 No. stems Clip or Count 493 541 658 1B 2B 3B 9- 7 9- 6 9-10 40 40 40 141.0 110.7 136~2 743.5 642.6 886.6 884.5 753.3 1022.8 5.7 6.7 4.3 1280 1097 1599 3200 2742 3997 1C 2C 3C 9-11 9- 7 9- 5 60 60 60 165.7 130.4 273.3 799.3 738.9 1360.5 965.0 869.3 1633.8 5.9 68 8.3 1448 1197 2211 2413 1995 3685 ID 2D 3D 9- 4 9- 4 9- 6 80 80 80 166.1 119.5 153.7 765.6 457.6 645.3 931.7 577.1 799.0 7.7 8.4 7.3 1153 660 931 1441 825 1163 IF 2F 3F 9-13 9-12 9-12 100 100 100 553.0 478.4 34,8.2 1119.0 1672.0 1154.7 1633.1 ~_.,846.,1 1194.3 15.7. 8.0 9.6 1048 1272 1177 1048 1272 1177 IG 2G 3G 9-13 9-13 9-14 100 100 100 452.6 638.5 552.7 1005.6 1397.1 1313.5 9.9 12.0 11.4 1732 2540 2301 1732 2540 2301 IE 2E 3E 9- 6 9-10 9-11 2/ 1/ 1/ controls not clipped controls not clipped controls not clipped 4.9 5.2 7.6 4313 2220 3938 4313 '2220 3938 Plot No. Total Lgth. Ave. ., (%) " (gr.) (gr.) (gr.) (em, ) 1458.2 2035.6 l8pS.2 0 '1:./ 2465, 2705 3290 1/ E plots are control plots; they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. '1:./ Computed plots. totalnumber of stems for clip plots and actual number for control �-57Table 5. Sagebrush Production Data 1956· Plot Clip No. Date Stem A ir-Dry Clip Weight Stems (%) Leaves ·(gr.) Stem Lgth, Ave. No. Stems Clip (cm.) .. or Count Total No. Stems ~/ (em, ) Total No. st alks No. Stalks Clip or· ~/ Count Seed stalk Lgth. Ave. 1A 2A 3A 7-27 7-27 7-30 20 20 20 23.1 29.6 71. 5 2.0 2.3. 2.8 391 443 902 1955 2215 4510 6.1 6.9 8.1 101 115 259 505 575 1295 IB 2B 3B 8-13 8-10 7-31 40 40 40 72.8 102.6 70.7 1.6 2.7 2.5 1448 1921 1104 3620 4805 2760 6.2 7.5 7.7 292 430 187 730 1075 467 1C 2C 3C 8- 1 7.•26 7-24 60 60 60 104.2 73.1 98.8 3.3 2.1 3.9 1327 1534 1347 2211 2571 2245 10.4 7.2 8.3 240 274 292· 400 456 486 ID 8- 1 8-. 2 8- 7 80 80 80 88.0 174.9 129.4 2.1 2.9 2.9 1689 275§_ 255~_ 2111 3443 3191 7.2 H.2 7.6 197 258 117 245 322 146 100 287.1 100 171.7 100 151.9 2.9 2.7 3.7 484~ -2810 3F 8- 9 8- 9. 8- 8 2382 4842 2810 2382 7.9 9.5 8.3 849 214 250 849 214 250 IG 2G 3G 8-13 8-13 8-13 100 100 100 IE 2E 3E 7-26 7-30 8- 7 ]j 2314 1978 3769 2314 1978 3769 7.6 6.4 7.9 333 882 1133 333 882 1133 !./ E plots are control plots; they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. 2D 3D IF 2F All plants are dead All plants are dead All plants are dead 1/ 1/ 2.6 2.0 2.3 ~/ Computed totalnumber of stems for clipplots and actual number for control plots. . . �-58Table 6. Adjusted Mean Air Dry Weights by Clipping Intensity and Species, .1956 1/ Clipping Intensity Percent 20 40 60 80 Sig. Diff. between two or more treatments F values f. 05 - 4~35 ~& 7 d.f.) Mountain Mahogany Grams Leaves Only Stems Cn ly 13.56 14.48 26.21 17.56 65.59 45.08 36.98 35.28 No No, but close .117 3.050 Clipping Serviceberry Intensity Grams Percent ______ _;.L;.,.e;;..caves Q.nl~y _ __;;.Stem s Q~n;;..lY"__ 20 280.27 68.54 40 274.29 61.52 60 448.55 106.66 ;;,.80;;.........;;;215.77 85.08 Sig. Diff. No No between two or more treatments F values f. 05 = 4.35 (3 & 7 d. f. L 67 .621 Leaves and Stems 32.83 50.73 HO.61 71.54 2.20 ,_;L;;;.e.;..a;.;.v;._e;_;.;s~a;;;;;nd.;;;_.St;..;;.; 349.30 343.82 549.78 300.80 No 1.308 ---------==:::::-::::-_--::=.:_::===================== Clipping B::'i:l<~;:-brush Intensity Percent ________________ -=L~~v~~9nl~y 20 20.'iJ' 40 20.40 60 21.00 80 38,_2_7 Sig. Diff. No between two or more treatments F values f. 05 = 4.35 Czams ~~;_~e~m;;..s~O~ru~y 9.59 12.23 11.72 2_2;,;.>_24;.;._ No ~L~e~a;.;.v~e;;,.s~a~n~d~St~e;;..m;;..s;;.._ 30.51 32.59 33.40 ...__ _,_;60 9,_;0 _ Yes 80% Sig. larger than the rest ------------------------~-----------~------------------ (3 & 7 d. f.) (1 1.05 4.903 �-59Table 6. (Continued) Clipping Intensity Percent Sagebrush Grams Leaves Only 20 ~/ Stems Only !:_/ 40 60 80 Leaves and Sterns 201. 61 154.80 149.85 228.98 Big. Diff. between two or more treatments F values f. 05 = 4.35 (3 & 7 d. f.) 1.343 Clipping Intensity Percent Oakbrush Grams Leaves Only 1678.93 1687.89 1605.01 80 942.91 Sig. Diff. Yes, on about between two I. 10 level 80% or more Sig. smaller treatments than rest F values f. 05 = 4.35 (3 & 7 d. f. ) 4.13 Sterns Only 293.00 290.49 315.60 209.21 No Diff. need for Sig. at 95% levele 173.04 20 40 60 1. 26 Leaves and Stems 1970.53 1984.09 1950.51 1147.54 2.521 1/ Adjusted means obtained by analysis of covariance, 1949 data base. �Table 7. Clipping lnte nsity Percent 20 40 60 80 100 Control Stem Means Based on 300 Measurements f 0 I I If"- AJ ": (1:'. by TreaLnent Bitterbrush cm. and Species, 1956 Sagebrush cm. Oakbrush cm. Mountain Mahogany cm. Serviceberry cm. 4.78 6.17 9.25 5.39 9.00 7.79 2.84 3.18 3.10 4.61 5.09 2.28 2.25 3.05 2.90 3.41 5.63 1. 74 2.36 2.28 3.08 2.64 3.18 2.32 5. 12 5.57 7.00 7.79 11. 09 5.92 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Sig. Diff. between two or more treatments so Each Average, Diff. needed for Sig. .86 .644 1. 22 .15 1. 30 2.21, with F. 05 = (5&1782d.f.) F= 37.03 22.09 9.36 291. 5 21. 85 �. Table 8. Precipitation Mesa Verde National Park 1948-1956 Year Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. June July Aug. Total 1948-49 1. 16 2.73 . 0.25 1. 99 4.19 2.11 1. 44 1. 14 1. 77 2.80 2.04 0.56 22.18 1949-50 O~ 82 1.52 0.80 1.44 1. 34 1. 84 0.97 0.31 0.55 0.58 1.18 0.09 11.44 1950-51 1. 76 T 0.52 0.32 1. 76 0.83 0.59 1.06 0.60 0.60 0.43 1. 93 9.85 1951-52 0.91 2.00 2.03 4.76 2.66 0.91 1. 29 2.40 0.33 1.16 1. 58 0.95 20.98 1952-53 0.96 1.14 Q. '77J ~,55 6.40 1.82 2.42 0.22 0.17 3.93 2.40 15.,78 1953-54 -- 3.23 0.90 0.80 1. 18 0.26 2.12 0.38 1. 97 0.75 3.38 2.90 17.87 1954-55 2.82 0.90 0.52 1. 63 1. 51 2.26 0.05 1.55 1.91 0.26 3.09 . 4.76 21.26 1955-56 0.26 -- 1. 15 1. 91 3.40 0.55 0.46 0.32 0.43 0.20 1.11 1. 56 11. 35 Totals 8.69 10.38 7.31 13.62 17.59 9.16 8.74 9.58 7.78 5.97 16.74 15.15 130.71 Average 1. 87 1. 29 0.91 1.70 2.19 1.14 1. 09 1. 19 0.97 0.74 2.09 1. 89 16.33 , May I O'l to-" I :'} 'r",) �I:-~r? . , -62NUTRITIVEANALYSISOF BROWSESAMPLES Samples of clippings from the 20 and 80 percent clipping treatments for the years 1949and 1955have been chemically analyzed for protein, ash, calcium, and phosphorus by Donald R. Dietz. The analysis is reported upon in detail in the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit Quarterly Report, JulySept. 1957, Vol. 11, No. 1. Dietz found no significant differences due to clipping treatments in the protein, ash, calcium, and phosphorus content of the five browse species tested. For all nutrients tested he found highly Significant differences between browse species. The reader is referred to the Dietz report for details of the nutritive analysis. LITERATURECITED 1. Aldous, Shaler E. 1952. Deer browse clipping study in the Lake States Region. Jour. Wildlife Mngt. 16 (4) : 401-409. 2. Dietz, Donald R., 1957. Nutritive composition of key species of mule deer browse in Colorado. Colo. Coop. Wildlife Research Unit Quarterly Report, 11 (1): 10-14. 3. Garrison, George A. 1953. Effects of clipping on some range shrubs. Jour. Range Mngt. 6 (5): 309-317. 4. Johnson, H. G. 1945. Clipping studies to determine a utilization standard for the key species (Cowania stansburiana). Unpublished material. Book of Grazing facts U. S. Forest Se.rvice, Region 4, . 1945, pp. 173. 5. Shepherd, Harold R. 1949-1956. Quarterly Report, Federal Aid Division, Colo. Game and Fish Department, July numbers. 6. Young, V. A. and G. F. Payne, 1948. UtiliZation of key browse species in relation to proper grazing practices in cut-over western white pine lands in northern Idaho. Journal of Forestry. 46 (1) :35-:-40. Prepared by: Harold R. Shepherd Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date: J_a~n~u_ar~y~,~l~9~5~8 _ �l1mm~lii~i~~I~i~1 BDOW022235 -133- January, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS' State of ----~~~~~~---__ ----COLORADO Project No.__ W_-..;;.3..;;.8_-_R_-_1;,_1 __ -.:..; ...;D~ee.;;.r;;;..-_E~lk~I;;;;nv..;..e.;;.s;;..t.;i.SO!g..;;;ao..;ti;._o_n.;s _ Work Plan No. ..' . Job No. IT_I_.•.• ; _F;;....;.o_r..;..ag~e...;a;;..n...;d.;.._R..;.a_n~g..;.e_U.;;...,;ti;._l;;;..iz;;;.;a;;..t_io; e;,_s ---- 5b; study of soil and site factors in relation to -------_...;~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------controlled grazing in the experimental pastures. Abstract: Some related site-factor data were recorded in addition to data on litter, erosion and soil 1tabilization. Browse density was found to differ sharply in the different directions of exposure. Percentage figures varied from a mean of 30. 14 on north-slopes, to a mean of 7.31 on southwest-facing slopes. "No Significant differences were found in relating browse density to gradient. Density of browse significantly influenced soil stabilization. .The chief influence of vegetation on erosion is seen in its ability to obstruct runoff, produce a litter cover, and cause the tiny rivulets that may form to drop included soil materials. Thus, it is reasonable to expect that the more dense the vegetation, the greater the effectiveness it will have in preventing erosion • .. Although statistically significant differences were found to exist between pastures in the amount of both litter and erosion pavement, close examination of the results indicates that these differences seem to be in no way related to the use given the pastures. It is felt, rather, that these differences were existent upon construction of the pastures. In considering soil stabilization classifications, a V~ry slight trend may be detected with the poorer soil stability being asaoctated with the pastures receiving the heaviest use. This ~ again, however, may be rntaleading because the pastures receiving the lightest use have been unde;ftreatment for only a short time. . Objectives: Under the different grazing and browsing treatments that have been 'applied to various p~tures and outside areas at Little Hills, to determine if , '. there extsts significant differences between pastures in the following criteria: water infiltration rates, sotl depths, litter accumulation, and erosion; if significant differences exist, to determine where and the probable causes ther~f()r .. �~~Q ,'.. -" -64Background: At the Little Hills Game Experiment station in Rio Blanco County, Colorado, nine experimental pastures have been fenced with deer-proof fences to control grazing, both as to numbers of animals and length of time, by cattle, sheep, and mule deer ; .The pastures rang~ in area from 77 acres to 206 acres with the entire enclosed area equalling 1192 acres. In addition to the fenced pastures, which are grtdded into square blocks, each five chains on a side to facilitate sampling, there are two comparable areas that have been laid out and gridded in the same manner, but which are.not enclosed by fence and thus are subjected to very heavy deer browsing and to limited livestock grazing. ·T.ab:l!~.l':-.; " :. gives a generalized picture of the pasture treatments with which the study is concerned. : ; /' . Methods: Certain site-factor data were measured and recorded in conjunction with a browse composition-density study. The area under study is part of the pinon-juniper climax type characteristic of many of the~dtier foothills' areas of the southern Rocky Mountain region. Serviceberry (Amelanchier utahensis), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus), big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), and oak-brush (Quercus gambelli) are the prmcipal browse species. ln Line interception transects (Canfield, L941), randomly located i the.nine experimental pastures, were used in evaluating browse composition, density, and reproduction. A total of 192. transects, were established, each ;being permanently marked with painted wooden stakes. Specific srte-Iactor data were gathered on each transect at the time of installation and measurement. Factors determined and methods of measurements were as follows: , ~. I • ;. Aspect. -- A hand compass was used to record, to the nearest degree, the exposure on which each transect was established. "', . Gradient. -- An abney level was used to measure the percent of slope in each case. ' Litter.-- Litter was recorded as intercepted by the line transece.voverstory intercepts of pinon or juniper were included in the litter claSsification since it was observed that the areas directly beneath these tree species were almost invariably litter covered. Erosion pavement. -- Erosion pavement was recorded as intercepted by the line transect. In this study erosion pavement is defined as the residue of coarse soil particles remaining on the soil surface after sheet erosion or rill erosion has removed the finer particles, thus leaving the surface "paved" or "cobbled. " �i-:..Jfl. : " ~\ ..•. _."fr. -65Soil stabil ization.-« The immediate area surrounding each transect was classified according 'to,four easily recognizable degrees of soil stablization. The classifications were taken, in part, from U. S. Forest Service Range Analysis Handbook, Region 2, as follows: No evidence of soil movement. Plant and litter cover are effective in protecting the soil. Thereare no signs of past or present erosion; runoff is clear -----..,----...;":'--.----~-----------------"'"'"'...;:...'Excellent. Soil movement slight. Soil movement may be difficult to recognize. There may be evidence of past accelerated erosion, but it is now stabilized; plant and litter cover appear effective in protecting the soil; plant pedestals are few or sloping sided. Rills, alluvial deposits and gullies are absent or completely healed. On sloping lands, some litter may be dammed against vegetation, forming miniature alluvial fans; trampling displacement is slight.--------------------------------------------------------Good. Soil movement moderate. Plant and litter cover are not effectively protecting the soil. Many bunch grasses in openings are pedestaled; pedestals have steep sides; erosion pavement is forming in openings. On sloping lands, occasional rills and alluvial deposits are present. Gullies, if present, are not steep sided. --------------------------------!.&!:. Soil movement advanced. 'Herbaceous plant cover and litter are completely ineffective in preventing soil movement. Openings between sagebrush are almost completely bare, with well formed erosion pavement; pedestals beneath sagebrush, and plant pedestals in openings; are 4 to 6 inches higher than surrounding bare soil. Rills are common i on sloping land; gullies, if present, have steep raw sides. ----------Poor. Soil movement severe. Plant cover and litter are completely inadequate; subsoils are exposed in places, pedestals of stronger perennials in openings are almost completelyeroded away; erosion pavement in openings is complete; rills and alluvial deposits are numerous; gullies on slopipg lands have steep, raw sides; runoff from summer storms is flashy and, muddy, often causing mud flows. ------------------------Very poor. �. ·•.66- Table 1. -- SUmmary of Little Hills Experfment.Station experimental pastures showing pasture acreegesj date of establishment, and deer-livestock use records from 1948through 1957. Pasture no. 1/ Date '1:..1 established 1949 1949 1950 3 Acreage 77.4 167.3 162.8 4 5 144.6 86.4 1948 1950 6&7 190.6 99.9 90.7 206.4 156.6 1950 1952 ·1952 1954 1954 1 2 6 7 8 9 Pertod Species of Intensity ~./ of use animal of use .Sheep Heavy rate Sp.-fall Sp.-fall Cattle .Heavy rate Sp.-fall Cattle Mod. rate Winter Deer .Heavy rate . Deer Winter Mod. rate Winter' Deer Heavy rate Sheep Mod. rate Sp.-fall Deer Winter· Winter Winter Winter Sp.-fall Sp.-fall Deer Deer Deer Cattle Sheep Light rate Mod. rate Light rate Mod. rate Mod. rate Duration 1949-date 1949-date 1950-date 1950-only 1954-date 1948-date 1950-date 1950 and 1954-date 1950-1951 1952-date 1952-date 1954-date 1954-date 1/ The figure given represents ov-erall acreage. Some pastures contain oneacre exclosures which are included in the acreage figure given, but are not available for grazing . . :?:_I The date given represents the first year that the pastures-concerned .were grazed through a complete cycle with the animals under reasonable contro1. ~I The approximate rates of stocking implied by the terms -Iight, moderate and heavy are as follows for the different species of animals (actual stocking rates for each pasture are available). Classification Light Moderate Moderate Moderate Heavy Heavy Heavy Species Deer Deer Sheep Cattle Deer Sheep Cattle Acres per .animal per month.. 3.00 2.00 3.00 20.00 0.75 1. 50 10.00 �-f>7- . ; . '. . Results: Findings are .Hsted below in rtlbre--Or iess tabular form along with statistical techniques used in interpreting the data. _" .,'.i' . .: " '. ",..' "', i Litte~ .-- A signtttcant difference was seen in the amounts _of litter in the nine experimental pastures (table 2). Table 2. --Litter occuring in nine experimental intercept transects. pastures occuring as indicated by line 1/ I ~ :3 13 26 433.16 33.32 Pastures 4 5 30 25 687.09 1,093.13 26.43 36.44 ,.. 6 '7 l::I 9 17 13 12 35 21 643.90 476.64 495.84 384.92 920.99 877.05 25.76 28.04 38.14 31. 91 26.31 41. 76 No.. of transects Total feet of _ _ int€rcept Mean percent of intercept 1/ - _ Transects 100 feet long. Analysis of variance 1/ Mean _" i Source of variation df ss square Total Between pastures Within pastures 191 8 183 62,835.27 6, 194.31 56,640.96 774.29 309.51 F 1/ __ All analyses from Snedecor, George W., 1946. statistical Ames, Iowa, Iowa state College Press, 485 pp. 'l:_l _Significant at ; 05 level. Sig.-nulcant-at O. 9-5-level, methods; 4th Ed. ,! *_ Erosion pavement. -- A Significant difference-was erosion pavement occurring in the nine experimental seen in the amounts of pastures (table 3). �-68Table 3. --Erosion pavement occurrtng m uine.expertmental by line intercept transects. Pastures 6 1 5 2 4 3 No. of transects 13 17 13 30 25 26 Total feet of intercept Mean percent inter- cept 238.91 pastures as indicated 7 8 9 12 35 21 471.10 72.36 533.28 150.05 517.29 92.92 118.56 168.66 20.51 5.00 20.69 5.46 9.12 14.,05) of 18.38 3.45 13.46 Analysis of variance Mean square F Source of variation elf ss Total 191 69,750.86 II 1,030.92 Between pastures 8 8, 247. 34 - 3.07** Within pastures 183 61,503.52 336.08 II Sigtiif-i-c-a-nt~>-a-t-.-O-1-1-e-v-e-l.~--------~--------------------------------------l ** Significant at 0.99 level. Soil stahil ization-» Data recorded on each line intercept ~ is presented in the following table (table 4). concerning soil stability Table 4. --Soil stabilization classes in nine experimental pastures as recorded _____ ..;;1.;;,.9,,;;.5:2 Iine }utc~r02.;:;t tl'a:1sec:;.,;t,;;;,s.;.,' Soil stabilization Pasture class 1 2 3 6 7 4 5 8 No. :No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Excellent0 0 0 ent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Good 5 0 0 2 1 4 Fair 5 4 9 7 7 4 5 10 Poor 4 11 11 8 6 6 2 10 Very 10 4 11 5 _poor 1 4 4 11 .. ~:; 30 Totals 13 ~~5 17 13 12 35 _" .. _----- ---_. _----- ---.---.~ , Literature cited: CH.'.tli-qld, R. H. 1941. Application of the line interception ..•... in sampling range vegetation, Jour. Forestry 39(4) : 388-394. Submitted by:____Q~_~~ E. Medi_n Date: January, -------------- on _ 9 No. 0 5 4 8 4 21 method A-'pprovedby: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator --~-------- 1958 ( �I~~II~lli'ijl~'llil~lrlilli~~il~ij]~ll~i I[!ijll BDOW022236 -69- January, 1958 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~~~~-------------------- ProjectNo. VVorkPlan No. ~VV~-4~1~-~R~-~10~~~N~am~~e~~B~i~g~h~o~rn~Sh~e~e~p~SU~r~v~e~y _ I ; Job No. 6 --------~------------~~~~~---------------------------- Title of Job. Period Covered: Trapping of Bighorn Sheep January 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Abstract: Trapping procedures for bighorn sheep were ineffective during the winter of 1956'-195Uapparently due to lack of deep snows in areas frequented by the sheep. The sheep were not attracted to alfalfa bait when their normal food was available. Ten deer were trapped and tagged as an incidental part of the sheep trapping. Objectives: 1. To continue winter trapping operations in order to ear-tag and paint the horns of all trapped animals for distribution studies. . 2. To improve and refine trapping techniques with Clover-type individual traps in order to test their feasibility in large scale trapping for transplanting purposes. 3. To provide experimental animals for Project W-95-R. Procedure: Four Clover-type portable traps were put into operation at Cache La Poudre and Georgetown Triangle. The bait used was block salt and alfalfa hay. All trapped animals were to be ear tagged and the horns painted with paint of a lasting nature to insure observation at a distance. Different colored paints were to be used on separate herds occupying the same range in order to determine possible intermingling of the herds. Animals used for experimental purposes were to be transported to the enclosure at the Denver Federal Center. Findings: Cache La Poudre. The two traps in this area were operated by Herman Schultz, Ervin Hinshaw and Harold Gresh, department personnel at the Poudre Trout Rearing Unit. 48 the time involved in the operation of these two traps was of a voluntary nature, . and the alfalfa was obtained at the departmentnuraery, there was no expense involved. �-70- One trap was put into operation at the gravel dump below Sleeping Elephant Campground. When the sheep moved out of this area the trap was then setup at Washout Gulch where there were a number of sheep occupying the range. Salt was put out by the trap with hopes that it would entice the sheep to the trap locality. The sheep would visit the salt but would not enter the trap, whereas, deer were relatively easy to trap. Table 1. Deer trapped at Cache La Poudre in SheepTraps. Tag Number A-1226 A-1227 A-1228* Sex F F F Age two one four A-1229 A-123O A-1231 M M M two three three A-1232 F fawn Date 12-29-56 1-1-57 11-26-56 (died, cause undetermined) 12-28-56 1-i-57 2-14-57 (had shed antlers) 2-19-57 * indicated number of times fecaptured. ( Georgetown. Trapping operations were started in mid-November, 1956, and ended on March 5, 1957. One trap was left' at the original location at the bottom of the Empire Pass road for the entire period because of the continual sheep movement in that area. The other trap was moved to three different locations on Douglas Mountain, contingent upon sheep concentrations and movements. On the morning of November 23, 1956, a large doe deer was in the trap on the road-she was tagged in the left ear with the number A-1298. On February 8, 1957, a doe andfawn were in the second trap. The doe was tagged A-1277 and the fawn A-1276. This same doe was recaptured five times on the following dates: 2-11, 2-16, 2-20, 2-27 and 2-28. Considerable trouble was experienced with rabbits tripping the traps and cutting the netting. At one location a packrat was trapped with a muskrat trap, and at another location a rabbit was shot. At all trap .locations the sheep would come around the traps and pass by without entering. At one location many sheep visited the salt lick after the trap had been moved to another location. On only one occasion was it noticed that the sheep actually ate a considerable amount of alfalfa, and that was during a heavy snowfall when the ground was completely covered. �-71- Table 2. Deer trapped at Georgetown in sheep traps. Tag Number A-1298 A-1276 A-1277***** Sex ~ F F F mature fawn mature Date 11-23-56 2-8-57 2-8-57 * indicated number of times recaptured. Analysis and Recommendations: On the south-facing slopes where the sheep wintered, the snow conditions were normal. At no time did the snow lay on the ground for any length of time. Within two days, even after heavy snowfalls, there would be a considerable amount of bare ground. At no time was there a lack of native forage. Trapping success of bighorn sheep with individual-type traps apparently is contingent upon heavy snowfall which will cover the available forage and make the sheep dependent upon alfalfa bait. Prepared by: Date: Clifford A. Moser ~J~a=nu=a=r~y~,~19~5~8~ Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��1~~Illlllrllllill ~j? ~ 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022237 January, -73JOB COMPLETION 1955 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS S~teof~ ~C~O~L~O~RA~D~O~ ProjectNo. VV~-~4~1_-_R~-~1~O VVork Plan No. _ ~;~Na~.~Jn~e~:~B~i.g~h~o~r~n~Sh~e~e~p~SU~r~v~e~y~ _ I Job No. 9 --------~------------~--~~~------~-------------------- Title of Job. ...;;D;;;,;l;;,;;· s;;.;;t..;;;.r.;;;ib;;;.;u;;;t;,;;;io..;;;.n~st=u~d..;;;.ie;.;s;...._ _ Period Covered :..•.. __ ....;;.J.;;;a.;,;;n.;,;;u~ary;;;..L..~l., ...;1;.;9...;;5~7_t;.;o;...;;;;D....;;e_c_e.;,;;m..;;;.b;..;;e;..;;r~3..;;;.1i-' ....;;1.;;..9.;;..57~. _ Objectives: 1. To make intensive Buffalo Peaks, 2. studies of distribution and seasonal movements at Pike I s Peak and Georgetown. To map sheep ranges winter concentrations on above areas. points, seasonal Map to include suminer distribution range, winter range, of rams and location of lambing grounds. Procedure: Monthly field surveys Buffalo Peaks to work out seasonal except during January Findings: data which was gathered into maps (with accompanying entitled Management established distribution. Studies. trend routes, as completed, at Georgetown, Pike's Peak and Herd locations were checked monthly in connection with this job have been and February. All pertinent incorporated were conducted text) as outlined in.Work Plan No. I, Job 11 They show the range, or areas of the various both winter and summer, bighorn sheep ranges. were turned over to the Denver Office for distribution and These maps, to management personnel. Prepared Date : by: Clifford A. Moser J~a~nu~a..;;;.r~y •..• ,:.....;;;.19~5.;;..8.;;.._ _ Approved by: Laurence E .. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��Jan uary, -75JOB COMPLETION 1958 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Strate of COLORADO --------~--~--~~-------------- Proj ect No. Work Plan No. W,;.:_--=4~1_-.=;R:...-_=1..;;.0 __Z.__=N:..:.a::;:m=e;.;.:__=B;.;;ig;gh;;;;.o;;;.;r;;.;n=__=Sh=e.;;,e.&::;p ;;,;;rv;..;..,;;e;,o.y _ I Job No. 10 ----------~------------~~~~~----------~----------------- Title of Job :. Period Covered: ....;I::;:m;;;;.p!;;.r=_o=_v,;.;e:;.:m=e;,::n:;;t....;o:;,::f~C=e::n:::.su=s...:T=_e;:;.;c:;.:h:::n:::i:.,;:q!l::u:, _ .;;..Ja.;;.;;n;;;;_u;,;,;a;;;.;r;;..jy.....,;;l""', _1;.;;.9..;;.5..;..7....;to;..;;;....;De;;;..;;..c.;;..e.;;.;m=b..;;e..;;.r_3;;..1.;;.;,~1 _ Abstract: Sheep counts made by one individual on three comparatively large (for foot coverage) areas has still proven ineffective in obtaining statistically reliable population data. The best counts were obtained in the Georgetown area. Objectives: 1. To determine the herd composition (age and sex ratios) herds at Pike's Peak, Buffalo Peaks and Georgetown. of sheep 2. To obtain on an intensive basis maximum herd composition counts in order to determine the rate of productivity, survival of the annual lamb crop and survival of lambs .to yearling age class. Also, more intensive effort was proposed to locate rams and/or secure better annual counts of mature rams. Procedure: Prior studies of census methods have led to the conclusion that information on rate of increase, the effects of differences in sex-age ratios, effects of hunter harvest, disease, etc. is practically impossible to obtain directly for many herds because of the isolation and rugged inaccessibility of their habitat. As the best substitute for direct observation of such herds, it was proposed to study intensively three representative herds to get basic data which could. be applied in a general way to all herds. The herds chosen for study were pike's Peak where the sheep suffered a severe lungworm disease dieoff in 1952; Buffalo Peaks where the herd is not at a high population level and could possibly be approaching the critical point at which lungworm infection becomes excessive, resulting in secondary epidemic infections; and Georgetown where the herd is assumed to be relatively stable. Findings: It was hoped that statistical analysis could be made of the population counts obtained during this study. However, nothing could be accomplished with the counts obtained from the Pike's Peak and Buffalo Peaks (including counts made in 1955) areas because not enought sheep were counted. This was a result of two factors: 1. Too large an area for one person to cover adequately, 2. A small population of sheep in �-76relation to the large size of the inhabited range. A Chi-Square test was tried on the counts made at Georgetown, but no conclusions could be drawn because of the erratic nature of the counts. On December 20, 21, 1956, a total of 87 sheep were counted in the Georgetown Triangle. These were: 17 rams, 42 ewes, 18 lambs and 10 yearlings. This wouldindicate a 1956: ram: ewe ratio of 40:100 and a lamb-ewe r.atio of 43:100 with a lamb survival of 63 percent based on a count of 16 lambs counted on September 22, 1955. As of this writing no suitable counts have been made during-,:::'l9...57 with wp,iphto determine relative sex ratios. Inthe following classified counts the numbers in parenthesis indicate the age of the various rams seen--sometimes nothing more than a good estimate, but better than no indication of age at all. The 'U' indicates unclassified sheep and the asterisk denotes that trips were made into the various areas but no sheep were seen. GEORGETOWN December 20, 1956 Empire Pass. E-4 L-2 Lupton Mill. R-5 (4, 6, 10, 10, 12) E-19 L-7 Y-6 Clear Creek Ranch. R-3 (6, 5, 8) Empire Pass. R-1 (3) E-1 Douglas Point. R-1 (8) E-4 L-4 Y-2 Gravel Pit. E-4 Y-2 December 21, 1956 Douglas Point. E-2 L-1 Lupton Mill. R-1 (3) E-2 L-1 ) * Transect #2. R-2 (4.4) E-5 L-1 U-1 Silverplume. R-5 (2, 5, 5, 7,4) E-6 L-2 Georgetown, R-2 (6,3) E-2 L-2 *possible duplication and not used for computing ram:ewe and lamb: ewe ratios December 10, 1956 Douglas Mountain. R-4 (12, 8, 3, 4) E-5 L-2 Y-1 December 12, 1956 Doulgas Point. R-1 (4) E-2 L-2 Douglas Mountain. R-1 (6) E-2 L-1 Y-1 December 13, 1956 Lupton Mill. R-3 (9,4,4) E-10 L-4 �1'00 ~ .•.... -77January 2, 1957 Douglas Point. E~2 L-2 Lupton Mill, R-4 (8,2,3, 3) E-5 January 11, 1957 Georgetown Dump. R-2(4, 2, ) January 14, 1957 Oeorgetown. R-4 (6, 3, 2, 8) January 16, 1957 Douglas Point. E-2 L-1 L-4 E-4 E-6 L-2 Y-1 Y-1 January 17, 1957 Lupton Mill. R-:1 (8) January 18, 1957 Empire Pass. R-1 (4) E-3 L-1 Clear Creek Ranch. E-3 L-3 Y-1 January 24, 1957 Silverplume Slide. R-6 (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4) January 28, 1957 Lupton Mill. R-3 (2, 4, 6) E-5 L-2 E-18 L-7 Y-3 Y-1 January 29, 1957 Douglas Point. R-2 (2,2) E-5 L-4 Y-2 Empire Pass. R-1 (2) E-3 L-2 Y-1 February 18, 1957 Douglas Point. E-1 L-1 Clear Creek Ranch. E-2 L-3 U-1 (probably a ewe) Empire Pass. E-1 L-1 Y-1 February 20, 1957 Georgetown Loop. E-2 L-2 U-1 Silverplume. R-2 (2,2) E-4 L-3 North side of Douglas Mountain in Aspen grove. March 4, 1957 Douglas Point. E-3 L-2 E-9 L-5 Y-2 t.r-1 ", .-" �GJ_ -78March 6, 1957 Clear Creek Ranch. R_;_1(2)E-9- L-2 Empire Pas s.: R-2 (2,3) E-4 U-3 Douglas Point. E-3 L-l March 25, 1957 Empire Pass. R-2 (2, 3) E-4 April 23, 1957 Clear Creek Ranch. E-8 April 24, 1957 Georgetown R-l(3) L-3 L-3 E-l May 20, 1957 Broadway Mine. E-4 Y-3 (one a ram) Clear Creek Ranch. E-2 May 27, 1957 Luptgn Mill. R-l(3) E-6 Y-5 June 7, 1957 Transect #2. E-3 Y-2 July 8, 1957 Mt. Silverplume. E-2 July 11, 1957 Englemann Peak. :a-8 (unable to age but all over 1/2 curl) PIKE'S PEAK August 27-28, 1956 Bison Creek. R-ll (smature, 2 young) E-16 January, February and March, 1957 * unable to get into area due to snow conditions. July 24, 25, 1957 * June, 1957 Bis-on.. Creek. U-11 L-9 Y-7 �-79BUFFALO PEAK: ~ March 30, 1955· R-1 (3) E-7 U-1 July 1~4,1955 E-3 Y-4 July 19, 1955 April 11 1955 Hallock Meadows. U-21 Above timberline. U-8 July 20, 1955 R-1(3) E-1 L-1 May 25, 1955 July 25, 1955 * May 26, 1955 Fourmile. U-5 Little Fourmile. * July 26, 1955 E-50- L-26 U-21 E-9 1.-9 July 29, 1955 East Peak. U~85 June 1, 1955 E-2 L-1 or 2 August 10, 1955 Ju,ne 2, 1955 n-i E-4 L~l Y-5 U-2 * August 13, 1955 June 3, 1955 E-2 L-2 R-2 E-2 August 14, 1955 June 9, 1955 >Ii. * .Tune15, 1955 September 3, 1955 R-1 E-1 * June 17, 1955 * June 21, 1955 * .Tune2~, 1955 E":'40 L-17 September 5, 1955 E-5 L-4 October 1, 1955 * Oct ober 2, 1955 U-45 October 10, 1955 R-30 E-4 L-3 U-14 .Tune23, 1955 October 111 1955 July 6, 1955 * * October 121 1955 L":'7 U-19 .July 7, 1955 October 141 1955 * * July 13, 1955 * �~:{ ~'., ',. __:1 -80October 15, 1955 U-1 r " October 22, 1955 * October 23, 1955 R-12 U-34 November 26, 1955 R-3 E-2 U-40 November 27, 1955 * March 6, 1956 Fourmile Greek. R-14 E-32 L-12 U-8 June 21, 1956 Between East and West Peaks. E-2l L-12 June 20, 1956 Cirque. U-20 March 1, 1957 Fourmile Creek. U-16 (ewes and lambs) March 25, 1957 Marmot Peak. R- 5 June 12, 1957 Fourmile Creek. May 1, 1955 R-3 (3,3,2) p--17 (ewes and yearlings) * - July 16, 17, IS, 19, 1957 * Prepared Date: by: Clifford A. Moser ...;J;..;;a,;,;;;n;,;;u~ary;;;;..."o.. •... , ..,;;;1.;;,.95.;;,.8;;...._ __ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Atd Coordinator: �January, -81JOB COMPLETION 195& REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO ~----~~~~~~----------------- state of Project No. W~-..;;4.;.;.;1_-..;.R;...-_1..;.O __;;;N.;.;a.;.;m=e.;...: _;B=ig.h;;;.;o;...rn~..;.Sh..;.e.;...e"""p~Su~r..;.v..;;..ey,,_ Work Plan No. ....:I;;..._ Title of Job : Period .....:..._.;:.J,;;,;ob::....:,N,;,:o;.:,.._.;;.l1:;._ _ -..;;M=a;;;n;;;ag=em=e;.;;n;;.;;t.;.;.;St=.;;u;.;;di;;;;.· e.;;_s;;;_ Covered: __ _ _;;.J;;;an;;;;.u::::a::::ry:.M-..::l~, ....;1:.;9;.;;5;;..:7_t.:.;0:;"...=De:;.;;.::c..::e;::m:::b:.;e:,:r:......:::3-=1.z..' ..:1:.:,9.:;5..:,.7 _ Summary: 1. The total number of bighorn sheep permits 1957 were 982. 2. The statewide issued in Colorado from 1953 through hunter success ratio for 5 years for rams only was 23. 7 percent. 3. The statewide hunter 1957) was 28. 0 percent. success ratio including either sex (Buffalo Peaks, 4. Hunting seasons have had little effect on either the distribution of the various bighorn sheep herds. or general 1954 and behavior Objectives: 1. To make a complete analysis of all available kill records by areas years with each individual kill being located on maps as nearly as possible. 2. To evaluate the effect of the hunting season on sheep distribution and and behavior. 3, . To continue plotting sheep trend areas on maps for distribution to Wildlife Conservation Officers so that they will be able to take over the annual census of bighorn sheep herds and make proper recommendations for the issuance of hunting permits. Procedure: 1. All available kill records sources were evaluated with the resulting tables. from the game department files and other information being compiled on maps and in 2. Maps were prepared with the aid of aerial photographs to show areas use and areas of intensive use along with the established trend areas. of seasonal �-82- 3 . The maps, as completed were turned over to game management, Findings: Sheep Trends. Completed trend maps forthe Eastern Slope of Colorado include the Poudre, Georgetown, Mt. Evans, .Rampart Range, Pikes Peak and Sangre de Cristo areas. All of the field work for Buffalo Peaks, Arkansas Canyon and the Collegiate range has been completed, and the maps will be prepared, as soon as the final prints are received from the United States -Geological Survey. Advance maps for Buffalo Peaks and part of the Collegiate Range are available in o;za,lid print with the finished map to be available in January, 1958. The completion of these three areas will be incorporated in the 1~58 work schedule. Hunting Effect. As well as can be determined at present the hunting seasons have had little effect on either the distribution or general behavior of the various bighorn sheep herds. The rams can still be found in the same localities which they favored prior to the sheep seasons. Six rams have been killed in the Empire area during the past five sheep seasons: by actual measurement (pacing) all six have been killed within an area of approximately one-half square mile. From observations made by department personnel and repeat hunters the sheep seem to be more wary during the season, and will immediately seek out broken terrain and heavy timber much more readily than they used to. Some areas have shown an erratic distributional expansion (both during the summer and winter) but it is difficult to ascertain whether this is due to hunting pressure or to the nature of the sheep themselves. Table 1. SheeEkill b;£:area -- Northwest Region. Area Eermits Mt. Sopris 5 Glenwood Canyon 7 Snowmass Clinetop Rifle Hogback 10 Gore Range Rille & Glenwood Total 22 ' 1955- 1954 1953 kill Eermits kill 1956 1957 Eermits kill permits kill permits kill 0 2 0 2 6 5 5 5 21 2 3 0 0 5 6 10 8 10 34 1 3 0 0 4 10 8 1 3 10 0 12 0 9 0 6 1 1 30 4 25 �-83- Table 2. SheeE kill b~ area -- Northeast Region. 1954 1953 Area Eermits kill Poudre River 5 Clark's Peak 5 (Poudre R. (Clark's Peak 10 Georgetown (Georgetown (Mt. Evans Mt. Evans 5 Empire Waterton Total 25 2 3 Eermits kill 0 0 5 5 1955 Eermits kill 5 5 2 0 1956 1957 kill Eermits 5 3 10 3 5 8 4 1 8 10 5 35 5 4 14 10 10 1 4 10 5 8 43 2 1 3 11 0 0 10 5 35 kill 2 3 10 Eermits 5 8 23 2 4 8 Table 3. SheeE kill by area -- Southeast Region. 1953 1954 ,5,rea Eermits kill S. Sangre de Cristo N. Sangre de Cristo . Collegiate Range Poncha Pass Lower Arkansas 10 8 (Arkansas ( Texas Creek .Cottonwood Creek 10 Buffalo Peaks 10 Creston e NeedlesLu Grant 5 Independence Pass 10 Pike's Peak Kenosha R. 15 Tarryall R. 2.5 Rampart R. Total 95 * either sex 3 9. 5 1 6 7 1 40 Eermits kill 1955 1956 :eermits kill Eermits kill Eermits 10 5 1 ( 2 4 1957 0 0 3 8 30 10 0 0 2 ( 10 { 30 5 ~ll 14 10 2 2 10 30 15 8 6 15 11 10 6 10 2 70 10, 33* 7 10 1 20 4 60 32* 5 6 0 1 7 . ·5 1 1 7 5 3 0 5 3 123 . 51 102 21 95 19 5 125 2 44 3 0 �-84Shee:ekill bl area--Sotthwest Region. 1953 1954 1955 Permits kill l2ermits kill l2ermits kill Area Taylor River 7 4 Gunnison 20 10 4 8 Pole Mtn. 10 10 1 15 4 2 {Sheep·Mtn. (Cimarron 10 0 Peak Sheep Mtn. 10 10 0 3 Cimarron P. 10 2 Silverton 11 1 (Rio Grande (Saguache 15 0 15 27 8 76 35 6 Table 4. 1956 l2ermits kill 5 20 2 1 10 0 40 3 1957 l2ermits kill 15 10 2 1 5* 25 3 * no licenses sold Table 5. Statewide b!ghorn sheel2 kill. permits permits available sold y:ear 1953 169 169 1954 255 239 1955 206 179 1956 177 188 1957 218 240 Total 1058 982 kill 58 79 45 34 59 275 rams 58 58 45 34 38 233 ewes lambs 18 3 15 33 2 5 unknown 4 4 Analysis and Recommendations: The total number of bighorn sheep permits issued in Colorado for the. pe'riod from 1953 1957 was 982. The kill for rams only was 233 with the hunter success ratio being 23.7 percent. Including Buffalo Peaks which had two either sex seasons (1954and 1957)the kill was 275 which resulted in a hunter success ratio of 28.0 percent. Apparently the Northeast Region of Colorado has come close to what might be considered as desirable management of bighorn sheep. While having approximately 15 percent of the state population the region has issued 16.3 percent of the total number of available permits for the five year period. This resulted in a hunter success ratio of 30.4 percent2. 4 percent above the state average. "'-:-' �N~ '" o o F;;muTS KILL ;:;I1T,1XTER SUCCESS COLCRADO v'fiOMING Perml t.s Y.i11 194* % Success ~5.3 .;~Rams Only 764 Permits Kitl .% Success 360 188 52.2 •• •.•.•• or �-85- The low hunter success for both the Northwest and Southwest-Regions can probably be attributed to the inaccessibility of the areas inhabited by the sheep. A good illustration of this is the Gore Range where during the five year period of sheep hunting a total of 46 permits has been issued but no rams have been killed. At first glance this would seem to indicate that permits .were being issued in an area that had few or no sheep, but such is not the case. The lack of success can be attributed to one fact only -- inaccessibility. It is almost impossible to use a horse in this area and a person on foot just does not possess the physical stamina to cover the area adequately. A reduction of the total number of permits issued in some areas could very likely result in an increase in the hunter success ratio. For example, a number of permits comparable to the 1953 season seems to be more in line with the status of the various sheep herds in the Southeast Region. Also, a closer evaluation of herd status on the part of persons responsible for making recommendations for the number of permits issued might possibly lead to a reduction in the total number of permits issued for a given area. The Arkansas Canyon herd is possibly a good illustration. Although it shows a 62. 3 percent average success for a five year period the yearly hunter success has dropped from 80 percent in 1953 to 20 percent in 1957. This might indicate greater wariness by rams due to hunting or it might be indicative of the fact that the annual increase of legal rams has not been able to keep up with the hunting pressure. Current plans for 1958 will include obtaining the actual number of permits sold for each hunting area so that hunter success ratios can be computed for each individual herd. Prepared by: Clifford A. Moser Date: J_a_n_u_a_r ...•• y...• ,~19;..;5;..;8;...__ Approved by: Laurence·E. Riordan Federal Aid·Coordinator ��q{"J, •..... ' -87JOB COMPLETION January, 1958 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of__ Project .....;:;C.,;;O;.::;L;;.,;:O;;.,;:RA:.=.;;,:D:;;,.O.;;._ _ No. ~VV~-_4~1~-~R~-_1~O~ ~;~N~a~m~e~:~B~~~h~o~r~n~Sh~e~e~p_.~SU~r~v~ey~ _ Work Plan No. -=ll:.;,. Title of Job. M=o;.;u~n~ta;;;.:l:;;;:·n=-Go=,;;;:a,;:.,t ..;;;SU=r..:.,v.;;.ey"-- Period z......;J;;,,:o:,::b;,..N:..:.;:,o,;:.,o _~1~ _ ------- Covered:--,-_~J:,:a=n::u:.::a:;;;:ry~_l ,!..,.;:,1.:;,,95.:;,,7.:.,_t.:,;o;,..=D;,:e;,::c..;;;e,;;;:m::;b:,:e:;,:;r:....;;,3,;;;:1.z.., • ..:1;,;;9,;;;;5..:.,7,:". _ Objective: To determine the increase or decrease of fourteen head of mountain goats, released at Mt. Shavano and Cottonwood Creek, for possible future management, and to determine if this small band of goats might possibly be developed into a huntable population in Colorado. Procedure: Observations were to be made throughout the year, contingent upon other more important work, to determine whether the goats, which were transplanted from Montana, survived and are becoming acclimated to the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Findings: No field work was devoted to this job during 1957. However, sightings Iliade by bighorn sheep hunters and department personnel during the year seem to indicate an increase in .this goat herd. On July 29, 1957, a game department pilot reported sighting seven goats on Antero Peak in the Collegiate Range. He identified them as one billy, five nannies and one kid. Recommendations: On the basis of the above information a total of 44 days will be devoted to work on this goat herd during 1958. This work will include the compilation of a density and distribution map of the goat range, and -aasembly of all available information of the present status of the fourteen originally planted goats. Prepared Date by: Clifford A. Moser ~J:.:an~u~~:.::ry~ ..~,~1~~5:.:8=--~ __ Approved by: - Laurence E. ~.iordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��tQ'~ "'._ -89- January, .. ~.:.;- 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of. ProjectNo. Work Plan No. ...;:C:...;O::..:L=-O=-R=A=D:...;O~_ ~VV~-~5~9~-~D~-~9~ ~VV~i~ld=1~li~e~H~a=b~it~a~t~lln~p~r::..:o::..:v~e=m~e~n~t~ _ ~I ....__J::..o:;:.:b::..'.:..N:..::o:..::.._--=I Title of Job: Establishment of Food, Nesting and Cover Plots Period Covered: January 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Abstract: Trees and shrubs planted in 1957 included Rocky Mountain juniper, ponderosa pine, spruce, Russian olive, squawbush, Siberian elm, hackberry, and plum. _ caragana Individual cooperators planted 8,223 seedlings, Soil Conservation Districts planted 149,718 seedlings and project personnel planted 9,585 seedlings on state-owned property making a total of 167, 526. Tables in the report list the locations of plantings and the numbers planted by species. Herbaceous plantings were made at Cobb Lake and-Sedgwick Bar using crested wheat, blue grama, bluestem wheatgrass, barnyard grass, yellow-blossom sweet clover, safflower, corn, milo, and Stafford's alfalfa. Objectives: To plant or supervise the planting, secure the maintenance and protection of approximately 25 new wildlife plantings in eastern Colorado on which commitments were previously made as well as on a few areas on which replants were requested; t~ plan advance work on plantings on state-owned lands in 1958; to plant or supervise planting, secure the maintenance and protection on eight state-owned properties in eastern Colorado. To supervise the purchase, designing, distribution and planting of approximately 150,000 seedlings with approximately 35 Soil Conservation Districts, mainly in eastern Colorado. To assist VV-37-Rand W-90-R technicians and/or any other project in an intensive study of nesting, food and cover plantings over a period of years; to plan and carry out rehabilitation of older plantings for 1957; to cooperate with project personnel in W-79-R in obtaining seedlings, potting evergreens, tree grading and other phases of tree procurement. �-90- Procedures and Results:, Eleven plantings were made on land owned by private cooperators. These were small plantings made mainly to rehabilitate older plantings made by the department in former years. This type planting was again held to a minimum in 1957. Approximately 175 plantings were made through cooperation with 28 Soil Conservation Districts in Colorado. These plantings were mainly farmstead - windbreak type: five rows, with shrubs on one side and evergreen species on the other, the remainder of the planting comprised of taller trees. Spot checks were made and the plantings, in most instances, complied with project specifications. The plantings were designed so that wildlife could derive the maximum in food and cover. In some cases it was observed that hunting results were better in plantings and in all cases, hunting pressure was increased on the planted areas. All plans submitted to project technicians by Soil Conservation Service personnel were inspected to insure proper design of said plantings. Five State-owned properties were planted in 1957. Two of these properties received trees and shrubs, herbaceous plantings and small grains for feed. Three were planted to woody cover and feed. It was felt that more could be accomplished by putting forth a maximum effort on one or two properties a year than by attempting to do a little on all every year. The drouth was broken in 1957 and the high plains received much needed moisture. Most of the planting showed the results of adequate moisture. Many of the older plantings were badly in need of moisture and thus received a much needed "shot in the arm". State-owned properties planted were: . Cobb Lake, near Wellington; Smith Place, near Crook; Sedgwick Bar, near Sedgwick; Billy Creek; Wray Fish Hatchery. Land was fallowed on the Cobb Lake and Smith properties in preparation for continued development in 1958. Seedlings were purchased from private nurseries and were received in early March. Most planting was completed by May 1 by department personnel as well as by the Soil Conservation District members. Soil bank plantings under the Conservation Reserve phase of that program were at a. minimum. Department personnel, however, worked closely with the Extension Forester and his staff in trying to obtain well designed plantings under this program. �a 01") ,'._-:~..ji -91- Table I. Seedlings Species Purchased, Purchased 40,000 35,000 50,000 7,000 14,000 4 000 Total 150,000 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. II. 12. Planted Surplus 3,600 2,200 800 23,516 15,508 2,670 30,310 27,685 46,547 6,100 13,000 2 190 6,090 5,115 2,653 900 1,000 1 810 41,694 6,600 167,526 17,568 Table 2. Individual Cooperators. On Hand .Given to W-79-R 23,516 15,508 2,670 J. scopulorum P. pine Spruce Olive Squawbush S. elm Hackberry Caragana arb. Plum Code ·No. I. 2. on Hand and Total Used by Species. Name Akency, Glen Buol, K. Cherry Creek Res. Duell, H. Duncan, E. Fletcher, W. Hochstrasser (Ft. Morgan) Karg, Alec Kinnison, D. Penny, G. Sherman, H. Swanson, G. . County Weld Kit Carson Adams Weld Logan Larimer Morgan Logan Weld Kit Carson Kit Carson Weld �i,/{) },~~~ Coue Table 3. Seedlings Planted by Individual Pine b! ..rr-uce Cooperators h No-. • 2~ - Juniper P. 50 1000 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. ~.--..~ Totals 200 Squaw - um P.1.. 100 100 50 400 200 3000 60 36 25 500 707 Elm Spruce Plum Total 150 50 500 200 1000 70 23 32 20 50 100 50 ..255 ... , 20 ' . 4760 150 1420 Name County Juniper Ouray 50 32 50 25 Seedlings Planted on State-Owned Land P. Pine Olive Garagana Squawbush 50 300 I 1:0 Larimer Logan yuma 740 790 725 ... . 725 - 300 3125 " ..500 ..3975 . 250 250 100 2365 100 890 241)5 1140 50 Herbaceous plantings Sedgwi ck Bar Cobb Lake. -, 300 100 ..... ._.-411 1 200 1000 100 1600 600 4000 162 75 268 68 25 8223 25 Billy Cr. Cobb' take Caragana 100 200 100 Table 4. Smith. viray-.· Total U..live ---- 20 Lbs, milo" 20 Lbs, corn 40 lbs. Barnyard Grass - 10 Lbs, yellow Blossom Sweet Clover 40 Lbs, Milo - 40"lbs. Cern -·5 'Lbs , Staffords Alfalfa - 10 Lbs• .Safflo;,ve:r-,10 Lbs~ Bl.ueet.em Wheatgras~ and Blue_grama and Crested wheat mixture. ,~ 190 190 500 7845 940 9585 t-:> I �District l.. Agate 2. Akron 3. Bessemer 4. Big Thompson 5. BransonTrinchera 6. Cope 7. Dove Creek B. East Adams 9. East 9tero 10. East Routt 11. Hale 12. Haxtun 13 • Longmont 14. Meeker 15. Northeast yuma 16. Padroni 17. Peetz 18. Platte Valley 19. Pueblo 20. Rock Creek 21. Sedg'lnck 22. Southeast Weld 23. S6uthP1atte 24. Spanish Peaks 25. Vpper Ar~ansas 26. Yvest Adams 27. ~est Greeley 28. West Routt Hackber 100 500 4.00 1100 35 600 900 100 Table 5. Seedlings Pl.arrred in Soil Conservation Districts Carap'ana Olive Juniner Spruce P. Pine .Squaw Elm 100 100 00 00 1000 2000 2000 1000 5500 3500 600 900 500 1800 200 1000 500 300 500 500 100 2300 2700 100 1000 200 400 2400 200 300 400 200 150 ::' 1000 1350 1500 1550 2,0 800 1800 200 200 1000 300 hoo 500 800 1000 700 700 700 100 200 1000 300 220 750 36, 150 12,600 21, 5_?5 300 200 200 300 100 750 1350 370 1400 2650 400 1300 19400 1000 Boo 1500 2000 300 500 3000 100 900 1500 1700 1300 200 1000 1500 1500 200 200 200 Bo 1200 1300 1400 300 300 1500 1100 200 Ie; 1500 200 1500 1400 800 600 100 300 300 300 500 2000 825 2200 100 350 . Plum 250 100 750 50 50 25 50 150 50 175 1250 75 958 1200 900 750 1000 400 1500 1250 225 1000 300 1500 500 200 1000 600 ···50 750 450 200 500 500 3000 800 Total . 2,200 14,000 2,000 5,500 1,500 8,750 25,945 10,150 180 985 5,200 11,150 1,475 6,708 7,050 6,550 5,975 1,050 300 8,000 4,150 100 1,925 7,000 2,000 2,070 3,750 2,615 1,540 1,500 149,718 2200 300 400 300 300 i ~ c..!) I -.- Total 6,;1.00 22_,311)2,600 14,528 23,BOO 44,700 <0 ~~ �-94- The surplus of almost 18 thousand seedlings was due to the fact that several Soil Conservation Districts decided not to plant in 1957. Their orders were placed in the fall of 1956 and were cancelled in the late winter months due to poor moisture conditions. The areas which cancelled out were in the southeastern part of the state where moisture was .lacking due to the four year drouth. Even with the rain that subsequently fell the soil moisture was too poor to risk planting. Department personnel concurred with this. Rather than plant and make a bad impression in later years, it was felt that the sacrifice of a few seedling s would be offset by the ~ain future years to the department by satisfded farmers. in Planting plans for cooperators for all the Soil Conservation Districts are on file at the Fort Collins Project office. Submitted by: F. A. Metsger Riehar'd T. Takes Date: Approved by: ...::J:...:a;,;;;n;,;;;u;,;;;a;;;.,r""y.l.., ..;;1;,.;;.9.,;.5.,;.8 _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �January, -95- 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of COLORADO -----~~~~~~----------------- Project No. VV~-~5~9_-~D_-~9 VVork Plan No. ----~--------------~~~~~------------------------------ Title of Job:. Period 1 Job No. Evaluafjon of Plantings Covered: - Abstract: survival. January Seedlings planted The following tabulation Species Cottonwood Squawbush Hackberry S. Elm Olive Juniper C~ragana I?ul9ine Honeysuckle Sandcherry Apricot Willow Crabapple Hawthorn 1, 1957 to December 31, 1957. in 1955 were counted to compile Total PlaIted 50 3157 460 2660 1530 1740 information on by species. Total Alive 38 1749 184 977 447 368 !8~ 1~~~ 100 825 To determine 2 (Survival). shows the survival Total Objectives: ~~VV~il~d~li~f~e~H~a~b~i~ta~t~hn~p~r~o~v~em~e~n~t ~---- 9 0 % Overall \)~ 0 25 0 0 100 0 0 13157 4234 survival of seedlings planted Survival 76% 55% 40% 37% 29% 21% 17% 32% in the spring of 1955. Procedures and Results: This report is concerned with plantings made in 1955. It is _ felt that a two year interval of growing seasons should be maintained to secure __ a more-accurate figure. Five years after a planting has been made it will be rechecked to see if it is maintaining its survival and quality. Thus, a recheck will be made on the plantings made in 1949 through 1953, in 1958. The figures obtained at this time will be checked - �-96- with the survival figures, by groups and by species, that were obtained in 1955 on the same plantings by years. In this manner a staggered method of computing will be followed in order to even out the work load. Since each planting is visited and a total count of seedlings on the area counted, it is clear that a total count each year would pyramid until the task would be impossible. Plantings made in 1955 were visited and the seedlings on the area counted. A classification of six groups was established and all plantings (1955) were included. The six classifications are listed below: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Good growth with clean cultivation between rows and seedlings. Good growth with clean cultivation between rows. Cultivation between rows, but they are suppressed due to poor care and drouth. No Cultivation, little care, suppressed seedlings. No seedlings left but plot has not been returned to regular farm practices. No seedlings left. Plot returned to regular farm practices. It should be remembered that 1955 was the first year that plantings were made through the Soil Conservation Districts. Therefore, the number of seedlings used on individual cooperator sites and state-owned property is smaller than in the past. Table 1. Summary of plantings by classification groups for all plantings made in 1955. 5 Cooperators 5 Cooperators 4 Cooperators 2 Cooperators 5 Cooperators 4 Cooperators 25 Cooperators Group I Group n Group III Group IV Group V Group VI .Totals Table 2. 20%of Total 20% of Total 16%of Total 8% of Total 20% of Total 16%of Total 100% Survival by Species and Group. Species. Juniper Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum s. Elm Hackberry T()tal Seedlings Planted 315 265 H35 90 465 280 100 1,700 415 Percentage ..Survival 76% 40% 70% 78% 89% 244 77 1,279 87% 77% 75% Group I. Seedlings Alive 239 105 129 70 �QQ ~._r rI_ -. -97- Table 2. continued. Seedlings Planted. Seedli!!S:sAlive Percentage Survival 750 250 365 117 71 113 14% 29% 28% 550 357 65% 320 120 2 355 206 3 867 65% 2% 37% 143 369 350 1052 120 260 935 150 50 12 28 205 828 79 109 503 104 38 1_% 8% 59% 79% 66% 42% 54% 69% 76% 23 9 39% 25 0 0 3 477 1 915 55% 60 100 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 149 53% 210 705 24 173 11% 24% Group II Sl2ecies Juniper Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum S. Elm Hackber!:y: Total Group III Juniper Pine Olive Squawbush Caragana Plum S. Elm H;ackberry Cottonwood Sand Cherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow CrabaEEle Total Group IV Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum Elm Total �-98- Groups V & VI Species Juniper P. Pine Olive Caragana Squawbush Plum S. Elm Hackberry Cottonwood Sandcherry Honeysuckle Apricot Willow Crabapple Hawthorn Total Seedlings Planted 472 300 495 50 890 450 915 90 825 77 100 4,664 It is evident that with the more selective manner of choosing cooperators the survival of seedlings is improving. However, the drouth was still a big factor on these plantings, as 1955 was one of the drier years. Listed below is a comparison of 1955percentages of cooperators in each group compared with the 1954 cooperators in each group. Group I II III IV V VI 1954 16% 6% 50% 20% 6% 2% 1955 20% 20% 16% 8% 20% 16% By the above comparison one can see that I and II have increased. Groups V and VI have increased because of the drouth and rabbit damage which go hand in hand. Prepared by: F. A. Metsger Richard T. Takes Dare: J~a~n_u_a_r~y~,_1_9~5~8~~ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �-99- January, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of COLORADO Project No. Work Plan No. W-59-D-9 Wildlife Habitat Improvement =-I --'~...:J:;.;o:;.:b;_;:,,:N~o..:... _..;;3--' _ Title of Job :. C.;;...;;a~r..;:;e-o;;.;f;....;;;St.;;.;;a;;.;t;.;;e--..;:;o...;.;w...;;;n:.;;e...;;;d;...p~r=-o;;,jpl;;.,e;; _ PeriodCovered: J=-an~u;;.;a=-ry~...;.;1~'...;;;1...;.;9...;.;5..:..7...;.;t...;.;o...;.;De;;;.·=-c;;..e=-m~b...;;;e.; __19...;.;5...;.;7...;.;_ _ Objectives: To improve habitat on state-owned lands which are too small to economically warrant a private .landowner cooperative agreement. This includes cultivation between seedlings of woody plants on larger properties. Procedures and Results: Five state-owned properties received some phases of habitat development. The Smith place near Crook and the Cobb Lake property were extensively worked. The properties at Sedgwick Bar, Wray Hatchery and Billy Creek were planted less extensively. On the Smith Place (See Fig. 1), the plans were followed. The lessee cultivated between the rows and project personnel cultivated between the seedlings. This care involved the use of an Allis-Chalmers JIG" tractor with a hydraulic sweep cultivator. The seedlings were cultivated four times during the summer of 1957. Approximately two and one-half days were spent on .each cultivation. By keeping the weeds out of the seedlings better growth and survival was obtained. The Cobb Lake property was replanted with approximately 500 seedlings. Milo and corn were planted in strips on the property for feed. Mixtures of wheatgrass, safflower, yellow blossom sweet clover, Stafford's alfalfa and barnyard grass were planted in strips on the tillable land. Thus, one third was in feed and one third in annual weeds such as pig weed and Russian thistle. An irrigation ditch was dug to flood some of the low areas in a better fashion and to keep the seedlings from being fiooded. The seedlings were cultivated three times. An area compos.ed of about ia acres was f:¥,lowed In strips for perennial grass planting in 1958. The barnyard grass planted, although an annual, furnished a good seed crop and it was thought that it would reseed itself on the area. All blowing on the area was controlled again in 1957, with the lister type farming practices being followed in.the planting of milo and corn. Due to the low ground temperaturethe milo and corn did not germinate too well. However, adequate feed was produced for about 120 pheasants which were counted on the area in August of 1957. Due to adequate moisture, in the form of rainfall, the area provided good duck hunting on the three small ponds of water. The property is located about one half mile north of Cobb Lake, a reservoir which was filled for the first time in five years in 1957. Many ducks rested on .this reservoir, which no doubt increased the use of Cobb Lake property. �-100- Sedgwick Bar, near Sedgwick, wasplanted by lister with a corn and milo mixture. Conditions were good for planting but the corn and milo did not make much feed.: It was felt that the soil was teo alkaline and that the texture was such that growing a . row crop is not feasible. The Wray Fish Hatchery personnel planted seedlings and took care of them. These seedlings were watered and good survival was obtained. Other than furnishing and distributing the seedlings, project personnel were not connected with this planting. Seedlings were furnished to the custodian at Billy Creek and were planted by him. Submitted by: F. A. Metsger Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Richard T. Takes Date : .;:;J..::;:a.::::;nu;:;a;:;ry;:..l...l.,....::.:19;..;;5;.;:8~_ ( �I~m~I[lijl~lijl~l\ril~~~rl~~]~1 ilIlrllli~11 BDOW022244 -101- January, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------------------------------ ProjectNo. ~VV~-~8~8~-~R~-~3~ ~~VV~at~e~rf~ow~1~SU~r~v~e~y~s~a=n=d~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a= VVorkPlan No. Title of Job : Period Covered:. ;;;..I ..l....-~J...;;0.;;;.b~N;.;.0;;;...;....... __ 8;;;.._ _ C;..;o;..;o ••p;..;e;..;r;.;.a;.;.t;;;..iv;..;e;;..·...;.W.;..a;,;.t_e.;;rf..;;..;.ow~l...;B;;;..a_n;;;.d;;;.i_n •• gr.....;;;.P...;;r..;;,o ••. je;;;..c;;..t;.;.. _ ~J:..;u=n=e~2~7~t~0...:A:.::.u;;:igu=s~t;..;2=_,L_...:.l;;..95;;..7.:..;"~_ Objectives: To band a sample of waterfowl for the purpose of determining the annual mortality rates, the hunting pressure, so that a comparison can be made with previous years, and the distribution of birds from the breeding grounds and the routes they trav;el through the flyways. Personnel: A. J. Robinson - Fish and Wildlife Service - Colorado John Eadie Fish and Wildlife Service - Tennesse Jim Johnson Fish and Wildlife Service - California Jack HogueState Game and Fish - Colorado Leader INTRODUCT ION Dogs were selected at central locations throughout the United States. Crews and dogs assembled in Regina, Saskatchewan on June 27, 1957. A meeting was held for the purpose of instructions and questions. Fred Glover, United states Fish and Wildlife Service, was the principal speaker. A series of slides were shown to help all personnel .of ducks, especially the young birds. to distinguish the different species Techniques used: Equipment used was bands, pliers, spreaders and dip nets. A variety of foot gear was worn, depending on the individual. Boots and waders were used, but on most occasions just a light pair of tennis shoes was worn to assure fast movement. Unlike a drive trap crew, small ponds were chosen where the ducks were easily driven to the cover on.the shore. �-102. l As soon as. the ducks left the water, file dogs were released and the job ofretrteving began. Most of the species would hide at the first cover; however, the mallards, on occasions, would run a mile or more. The dog handlers had to move fast, and keep up with the dogs as it was necessary to try to flush the old bird. This usually stopped most of the young, and the dogs would soon find them if they had not gone too far. Often the dogswould track down and retrieve them a niile or more from the shore. On occaaionrs , a brood of mallards would dive instead of going ashore. When this happened, very little time was spent, for the ducks were found to be almost impossible to catch without tiring them out, and this usually took several hours. The crew left Regina on June 30, and banding operations started in the Swift Current area on July 1 and moved south over to Maple Creek. A severe drouth in this area had dried up many of the pot holes that were suitable for mallard hatches. Several days were spent searching for water in these areas. A hard rain kept us .on the main roads for two days. More water and cluckswere found north of Maple Creek and back to Swift Current. On July 10th, we left Swift Current and worked north to Lucky Lake and over to Moose Jaw. Ponds were found west and south of here suitable for working the dogs. One week was spent in the Saskatoon area and another week in the North Battleford area. In this latter area temperaturesreached 107 degrees. The dogs tired easily and the clucks were hard to find as theystayed in the shelter along the sloughs. Near Prince Albert the ducks were more difficult to catch due to the trees and cover growing in the water. On July 31, the crew turned south and picked up quite a few birds in areas we had missed. It was found that several pot holes we had banded earlier were now dry and the birds had disappeared. The banding operation was called off on August 2, because most of the birds were flying due to the early hatch. �~ n·p-. ,"..._" A " .. ~·._·.:.15 -103- Findings: Species Mallard Pintail Blue -wing Teal American Widgeon Shoveler Coot Green-wing teal ""Canvasback Franklin Gull Gadwall Redhead Totals SUMMARYOF WATERFOWL BANDED Female Male 396 403 75 86 54 40 24 20 20 13 7 4 14 4 5 1 1 1 Total 799 161 94 44 33 33 21 8 7 6 2 587 582 *1,209 *Total birds released. Casualties were not included in the totals. Less than 2% of the total birds Caught were casualties. At least half of the casualties were from the dip nets, and the remainder from dog handling, usually from long retrieves. Recommendations: Many worth while recommendations came from 1his year's banding operations. All crews were unanimous in asking for a finer mesh on the dip nets. All agreed that the mortality rate of the young birds captured was higher for getting caught in the dip nets, than from the dogs. Also, most agreed that valuable time would be saved by having crews work the areas that they had worked in previous years. An earlier starting date was recommended for next year's program. Prepared by: Date: J. E. Hogue Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Wildlife Conservation Officer Federal Aid Coordinator January, 1958 ��January, -105- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS --~~~~~ 1958 PROJECT State of -- Project No. Work Plan No. Title of Job :__ ......;E::;;x:.:.p!:,e;;,r::.;l:;· m::..;::;e:;nt.:;:a::::l;...St::;.:;.:u:.;:di::.·.;;;.e;;,s.....;o:;.;;n:.;. ..::;Im:.::.tp;.::r;.::o;..:.v..:;in::lgQ....:t;;.:h.;;;.e.....;S::;t;.::a;.:.tu=s ...,;o;.::f __C=a=n=ad.;::;.a;;:,.....;G=.o;;;,.o:;,.:s;;,e;;._ __ COLORADO ......;W.;._-.;;;.8.;;;.8-_R;;;;....-.;;;.3-I...-.....;W.;..;;;;at,;.;e;;.;;r;.;;f;.;;;o...;.;w~1.....;SU=r~v;..;e;;..y..;s;;.....;;;a;;;;n g;z.;a::;t;.:;.io~n::.s=-.....;I;;;;;I Populations Period --- ~ Covered: __ _.__..;;.J.;;;.ob~N...;.;o;...;. in Colorado __..;;2;...._ _ . A;.,.;:,jO,p.;;;.r;;;;;il;...1~,r....;;;.19~5~7.;....;.to.;.....;;;;D;...;e;...;c;..;e;.;;m_b;.;;.e.;;;.;r;;....;;;3~1., .....;1;;.,;;9..,;;;5..,.;.7...;.;. _ Abstract: 1. Sixteen goslings were released on the Rio Grande River near Monte , Vista in June, 1955. One of these was bagged in Saskatchewan in 1956, and two were identified in the spring of 1956 at Bowles Lake. 2. Thtrty-seven geese were released at Russell Lakes north of Monte Vista in 1956. It is believed that most or all of these birds wintered in the Valley and stayed into the summer of 1957. 3. Sixteen birds were released on Lake John, Jackson County, in 1956. It is believed that four of these returned to North Park in the spring of 1957 and one pair apparently remained during the summer. 4. Twenty-eight goslings were released apparently remained through the summer October 10, 1957. on Lake John, June 27, 1957. These birds and 18 were observed at Lake John on 5. Forty geese were released main as of January 4, 1958. Collins near Fort in June, Objectives: (1) Development and evaluation of techniques for initial of goose populations on all major drainages in the State. 1957. Thirty-one establishment now re- and/or increase (2) Permanent establishment of resident goose flocks on all large and major river systems as determined by the preliminary survey areas in the State. water impoundments of goose nesting (3) Retention State. of resident and migrant goose flocks wintering in.the �-106- Procedure: (1) Experimental releases of Canada goose goslings as nuclei for the establishement of resident breeding flocks on streams and lakes of suitable habitat. (2) Establishment of captive flocks as a source of gosling supply; and where possible, artificial propagation and liberation experiments utilizing eggs collected from wild goose nests. (3) Formulation of measures designed to regulate fishing pressures affording maximum protection for geese during the nesting season. as an aid iii (4) Recommendations for closure of restoration areas to goose hunting, where applicable, for a minimum period of two years following initial releases. Results: This report briefly summarizes the activities of project personnel for 1957 in this phase of work. It is broken down into three portions for presentation; (1) Status of past goose releases; (2) Release activities for 1957; and (3) Recommendations. Status of Past Goose Releases . .San Luis Valley.-- Sixteen young were released on the Rio Grande Management Area near Monte Vista in June, 1955. Of these, one bird was reported bagged in Saskatchewan the following year, and two were observed by means of neck bands the following spring (1956) at Bowles Lake, where they had been originally trapped. At least one of the two remained on Bowles Lake during 1957, since it was observed there in May of that year. Undoubtedly the other also remained, but had lost its neck-band . . Thirty-seven geese were released on the Russell Lakes in 1956. These remained all summer, on or near their release site. There is good reason to believe that they not only wintered in the San Luis Valley, but that they stayed during the spring and summer of 1957. This is based on reliable sight records by local Conservation Officers, which indicated that about 25 birds wintered in one spot along the Rio Grande River, and were there as late as the second week in June. North Park.-- Sixteen birds were released on Lake John in 1956, and four of these geese were killed the following fall near Walsenburg in south-central Colorado. Another four were observed on the Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge in New Mexico, during the winter of 1956-1957, and these remained throughout the summer of 1957. It is believed that four birds returned to North Park the spring of 1957. At least two (apparently a pair) remained during the summer, since a rancher observed them repeatedly on his property along the river, and tracks and sign were found by the writer to substantiate his observations. �- ,-ar>.", ¢ >: - c)lii .. ...- ..•. 107. Release Activities for 1957. North Park. -- A release of 2.8, four to seven week old goslings, was made on Lake John, June 27, 1957. These birds were purchased from Mr. Carl Strutz, of Jamestown, North Dakota, and neck-banded with plastic collars, yellow stripe on red, the colors assigned to North Park. They were also leg-banded with the following bands. Number 508-27701 27702 27703 27704 27705 27706 27707 27708 27709 27710 27711 27712 27713 27714 Age loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc Sex M M M F M M M F M F M F M M Number 508-27715 27716 27717 27718 27719 27720 27721 27722 27723 27724 27725 27726 27727 27728 Age loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc loc Sex F M F F M F M F M M M F F F .These birds were observed repeatedly, on or near the release site thmigh mid-August, when summer duck banding took place. At that time, 25 birds were counted, but it seemed probable that the other three were still in the vicinity. After this time, reports were received from ranchers and Department personnel that the birds were using adjacent meadow lands, .river bottom, and near-by lakes as they did last year. On October 10, 1957, Don Lingle, WCO in North Park, reported seeing 18 geese at Lake John. Three of these were missing neck-bands, and one was minus a leg-band. He further reported that one bird was crippled and in bad shape. Jim Hogue, WCO in North Park, reported that these birds stayed until about the last week in October, when waters froze. Exact date of their departure is unknown. . Cache la Poudre Valley. -- A release of 40 birds was made on College Lake, about three miles west of Fort Collins, in mid-June, 1957. These birds came from a multitude of sources as follows: 13 geese from a flock at Greeley, Colorado city park; 17 geese purchased from Mr. C.. E. Brown, Julesburg, Colorado; 4 birds from the Bonny Reservoir captive flock; and 6 from eggs taken from the Bowles Lake flock and hatched by Gurney Crawford, WCO, Fort Collins, These birds were neck-banded with plastic collars, yellow stripe on blue, the color assigned to the eastern slope, and legbanded with the following numbers. �-108- Original Location Greeley City Park Bowles Lake Number Age 508-27755 I 27756 I 27757 I 27761 A 2.7762 I 27763 I 2.7767 I 27773 I 27776loc 27778loc 27781loc 27782loc 27783loc 508-27746 loc 27747loc 27748loc 27749*10c 27750* loc 2.7751loc 27752* loc Sex M M M M M M M M M M F M M ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Original Location Bonny Reservoir C. E. Brown, Julesburg Number Age 508-27784 loc 27785 loc 27786 loc 27787 loc 508-27729 A 27730 A 27731 A 27732 A 2.7733 A 27734 A 27735 A 27736 A 27737 A 27738 A 27739 A 27740 A 27741 A 27742 A 27743 loc 27744 loc 27745loc Sex M F M M ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? * Band 508-27752 was used to replace 27749 or 27750, one of which was lost. From the original release of 40 birds, 31 now remain at the date of this writing (January 4, 1958). Of the nine birds lost, a coon apparently took one, another disappeared due to reasons not known, and seven were lost during a high wind storm. It is believed that the seven were not killed, but rather flew to another reservoir in this vicinity; although search efforts have failed to locate them e . The College Lake geese have now gone thrrugh one hunting season without a single loss due to hunting, and will apparently winter on the release area. Every effort has been. made to keep these bi.rds on the areathroughout the fall and winter. Feed has been made available, . ..-_. and a tank heater has been placed fn the lake to keep a spot of open water, mainly for drinking purposes. However, one of the main reasons that this flock has probably remained on the reservoir is that two of the adult geese purchased from C. E. Brown w.ere pinioned. These two are a mated pair which raised three goslings in 1957. When the rest of the geese take off for their daily swing around the lake, the two pinioned birds flap their wings on .the water and call continuously to the flying flock. This probably has been the reason that the fliers have confined their aerial activity to the near vicinity of College Lake. . f ( �-109Even though it was not known that pinioned geese were being purchased before the birds were picked up, it is believed that much has been learned about flock management from observations of this situation. Thus, in areas similar to College Lake, where winters are not too severe, and where attention can be given the flock, the ultimate success of establishing a breeding flock can be greatly enhanced by the inclusion of a pinioned mated pair (this of course, would not work in an area such as North Park). Thus, it may be possible to establish a breeding flock similar to that found on Bowles Lake, near Littleton, Colorado, which will ultimately spread to other suitable reservoirs in the vicinity. The writer believes that this may prove to be one of the most significant advancements in the establishment of a Canada goose breeding flock yet attempted by the State. Full credit should be given to ·Wildlife Conservation Officer, Gurney I. Crawford of Fort Collins, for his untiring efforts with this flock. Band returns for the 1957hunting season have not been analyzed at this time, since there are still many coming in. Undoubtedly some. of the released birds were taken this reason, and it will be 'mteresting to determine in which areas kills were made. It should be pointed out that the hunting season was closed by Commission regulation in the San Luis Valley, North Park, and in the area immediately surrounding College Lake. This will undoubtedly affect the kill information if the released birds remained in these closed area. Recommendations: A more complete search should be made in the San Luis Valley and North Park next spring, to determine whether the released geese return. Because of conflicting investigations during the past year, only a few days were spent in this activity. It is hoped that more time will be available this coming spring. If the birds return to either North Park or the San Luis Valley, additional releases should be undertaken in these areas to bolster returning flocks. In addition, more birds should be released at College Lake, to hasten the fulfillment of the ultiinate objectives there .. All Ofthis, of course, will depend on the availability of goslings this year. It is hoped that the captive flock at Bonny Reservoir will produce more birds, also that~~~ng.s. can be obtained from Bowles Lake. It is not planned to purchase goslings from Carl Strutz, Jamestown, North Dakota this year; thus, there may be a shortage of release stock. Submitted by: Jack R. Grieb Date: J_a_n_u_a_ry~,_l_9_5_8 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��1A!!-1l -.-~ ... ' -- •.:,.!.~ I~~II~,[,~,~(n~l\ml~~~f~~~~1 ilili'~(~'I BDOW022246 -111- JOB COMPLETION January, 1958 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ----~~~~~~-------------------- Project No. Work Plan No. Waterfowl W-88-R-3 __;II==- Surveys and Investigations -L_....:J:.:o;,:;b;...:.;N~o.:... --=5 _ Title of Job :_~A;.;;.n;;;;...;E;:;.v~a;;;;;l;;.;u;;.;a;;.;t;;.;io;;.;n;;;...;;o.;;.f...;;M=e.;;;;th;;.;o;..;d;;;s;...;;.fo;;.;r;;...;;Im=p;;. G;;;..;.o.;;.o.;;.s.;;.e...;N_e~st.;.;;i.;;;;n;jOlg_S.;.. Colorado Period Breeding Grounds. Covered: _ __.;A;.;;.pl;,;r;;.;i;.;;.1...;1~'....;1;;.;9;.;;5;..;.7....;t:.:o;...D=e,;;.ce;:;.;m=b.;;;.e;:;.r...;:3;..;;1~'....;1; _ . Summary: 1. Plans for construction of nesting sites in the spring of 1957, in Brown's Park, had to be revised when Mr. Lee Watson withdrew his permission to place them on his land. 2. Ten nesting structures were constructed at Bowles Lake, from the materials for the Brown's Park structures. Littleton, Colorado, 3. New Sites were selected and permission was obtained from the landowners, the Yampa River, during the nesting goose flock studies. 4. Sixty nesting site platforms were constructed and vegetation thirteen islands to improve ground nesting areas. was cleared 5. Nine nests were produced on eight of the ten nesting platforms, Bowles Lake, with no loss of nests. 6. High water destroyed Lake. ten of twenty-one on on constructed ground nests under observation at at Bowles 7. The ground nests produced 34 goslings from 69 incubated eggs and the platform nests yielded 35 goslings from 41 eggs. Protection from molestation is the apparent reason for the difference in hatching success. 8. Nesting geese incubated atotal 62.7 percent hatching success. 9. Nesting site platforms of 110 eggs, and produced proved to be quite effective 69 goslings for a at Bowles Lake. 10. Evaluation of the nesting structures in 1958 will produce of the value of increasing better nest sites. a more complete picture �-112- Objectives: (I) To determine the effect of nesting structures and the clearing of islands, where practical, on the nesting success of the geese. (2) To determine the best type of nesting structure, most desirable location for a structure, and the best method for the clearing of the islands of brush and willow growth. (3) To determine whether the geese will use the nesting structures and cleared areas of the islands. Procedures: The original plans called for 25 nesting structures to be constructed in Brown's Park, on the Green River. The plans were changed because Mr. Lee Watson, Watson Land and Cattle Co., who controls the private land in the Brown's Park area, withdrew his permission. The reason given by Mr. Watson was, "It may affect my dealing with the Colorado Game and Fish Department, or any other prospective buyer of my Brown's Park lands that are up for sale. tt Materials for ten structures were then transportedfrom the Craig, Colorado area to Bowles Lake, near Littleton, Colorado. This change was made to complete some structures before the 1957nesting season began. These ten were constructed and the balance of the material was left in the Yampa-Green River area until new areas on the Yampa River would be accessible in the fall. Permission was obtained from the landowners on the Yampa River. Materials were located at strategic points for construction of sites in the fall, where areas were accessible. This phase was conducted along with the nesting goose flock study, during the summer months. The project (segment 3) budgeted $500.00 for the nesting sites. This allowed the construction of 35 nesting platforms and the clearing of vegetation from 13 prospective ground nesting sites. Construction of 25 nesting sites was completed on the East Hlope \~rid25 on the Yampa River, including the 15 held-over from segment 2. The completion of the 50 nesting site structures made a total of 60 new nesting site platforms for the two years. Site improvement on 13 islands was also completed from the same funds. The nesting platforms are constructed as follows: Materials for one structure consist of: 4- 6 1/2' -steel posts 2- 21t X 4 " by 6' rough native lumber 7- i" x 6" by 6 ' rough native lumber 4- 1/4" by 3 1/2" carriage bolts and 1/4" flat washers 30 - 16 d. C. C. box nails 4 1/2 - wire tied baled straw Galvanized wire. �11.~ .. ,~",.' -113- Locatioris for the nesting sites were selected to provide protection from ice, high water, debris, and be acceptable to the geese. Actual construction begins by driving four steel posts into the ground, five feet apart, forming a square. On opposite sides the 2 x 4'sare bolted, the 1 x 6's are nailed to the 2 x 4's, forming the platform for the bales of straw. The steel posts are cross-braced with galvanized wire. The 4 1/2 bale platform is bound with galvanized wire, andtied to the steel posts to prevent shifting, completing the structure. Sites for the vegetation removal were selected on islands appearing to be acceptable to the nesting geese. These were selected for visibility for the nesting goose, past flood crest indications, distance above low water, type of vegetation cover, and the apparent stability of the island. Thirteen sites were improved to increase the possible nesting areas. Findings: The only evaluation of the job possible at this time are the ten nesting structures at Bowles Lake, Littleton, Colorado. These structures were the only ones completed before the goose nesting started and are compared to 21 ground nests that were observed. The ten structures at Bowles Lake proved to be quite effective. The nesting geese used eight structures, producing nine nests. One structure produced two broods. Ten of the ground nests were destroyed by rising water, due in part to the exceptionally wet spring this year. Nesting geese incubated 110 eggs, to produce 69 goslings with 62. 7 percent hatching success. Geese on the nesting platforms incubated 41 eggs that yielded 35 goslings, for a hatching success of 85.4 percent. The 69 eggs incubated on the ground, with a hatching success of 49.3 percent, produced 34 goslings. The difference in hatching success between the platform and ground nesters at the present can be explained only by the additional protection from molestation, provided by the nesting structure. The greater nesting success of the platform nesting geese can be attributed to the protection of the elevated nesting site. Submitted by: Mitchell G. Sheldon Date: Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _;J.;...a ..•. -n_u_a.;...ry""""",.....;.;..;19_5_8 _ ��I~~lillllij' ijl~'llmrlilli[~flijij~~1 ~~~IJI'ijll BDOW022247 =115= January, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~teof~ __C~O~L~O~RA~D~O~ Project No. W-83-R-4 Work PlanNo. IT~ Job No. _ Beaver Investigations ~ __E __x~p_e_r_im~e_n_ta_l __B~e_a~v~e_r __ T_r~a.p.p~in~g~a~n~d~R~e~s~to~c~k~ 1 ------------~----------------------- Title of J ob:, --=L::.o::..c::..a::.t~i~o::n....;o~f:...E=x;l:.p.;;.e::..r~im=e;.::n~ta::.l:....:::;S;.::tr;.,;e::,.:a:::m=s _ PeriodCovered: __~--~A.p.;;.r;.::il:....:::;1~,~1~9.;;.5~7....;t.;;.0....;D::.e::..c::..e::.:m=b~e::..r....;3::,.:1~,~19;.,;5::..7 _ Objectives: To locate streams having saturated populations of beavers, which can be trapped and controlled as a basis for setting up harvest studies aimed at proper management. Findings: At the time the job description for this job was submitted, the purpose in locating experimental streams was to enable project personnel to set up experimental harvest study areas on a limited basis, with all phases of harvest and management being confined to the project. One stream, Haypark Creek in Grand County, had been previously selected, and it was planned that a companion stream for this creek would be selected this year. As a result of the detailed beaver management recommendations which were subsequently submitted to the Department by project personnel, the Director instructed each Regional Coordinator to establish beaver management "pilot areas" in the respective regions. ,The function of these would entirely overlap the function of the original project study areas; therefore, it was decided that project personnel should work directly with Regional personnel in establishing and maintaining these pilot areas. Accordingly, all efforts at locating experimental streams were directed toward assisting Regional Fur Managers in finding suitable streams for these pilot areas. Following is a list, by regions, of the streams which were finally selected: Northeast Region: Big Willow Creek, Jackson County. Southeast Region: Two-bit Creek, Lake County; South Cottonwood Creek, Chaffee County. Southwest Reg ion.: Cebolla Creek, Hinsdale County; Henderson Creek, Gunnison' County. Northwest Region: Oak Creek, Routt and Rio Blanco Counties; Castle Creek, Pitkin County. Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Date: J_a_n_u_a~ry~,~l_9_5_8 Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��1rf; S Iij~ll~I~I~I~'~ll]\ml~~~il~ij]~1 ililll~!~11 _._oL. •..•.• ' BDOW022248 -117JOB COMPLETION January, 1958 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS &ateof. Project ~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O~ No. .Work Plan No. __ Job No. _ Beaver Investigations W-83-R-4 ---=I=I~ ....l-...;;E;;;,;x;,;;jpo;..e;;;,;r;;;,;i=m=e,;;,;n=t;.;;a=l....;B=e.;;;;av~e,;;,;:r;;.....;T~r~ ••• po.;i=ng •••.... a;;.;;.n=d.;;...R;..;;.e~s;;..;t;..;;o...;;c.,;; 5 -----------~---------------------- Title of Job :~ E=xp=e.:;.r.::.:im:;.=;::e;.;:;n=ta;;;:l:....::;H:.;;a=r...;;v..;::e;,;:s...;;.t...;;st:.;; ...;;;u;,;:d.::.:ie;;;,;s;,,_ ~----- PeriodCovered:. _,;;,;A.p...;;r;.;:;il:....::;I~,...;;1...;;.9...;;.5...;;.7....;t...;;.0....;D=ec;;..;e;;;,;m~b...;;e...;;.r_3;;..;1~, _ Objectives: To determine the optimum number of beavers that can be harvested according to habitat quality in order to maintain beaver colonies in balance with growth of food plants. Findings: As explained in the report for Job No. 1 of this work plan, efforts of project personnel are now being directed toward experimental harvest and management studies on'pilot areas", in cooperation with Regional fur management personnel. This report, therefore, will summarize the accomplishments to date, and plans for future work along this line. Of the total of 7 pilot areas which have been selected (see Job No.1), three were selected and surveyed early enough in.the year that population inventory studies could be initiated before winter weather set in. The following population data, based on number of winter food caches, were obtained for these-three streams . . Cebolla. Creek: Henderson Creek: ..Castle Creek: 8 colonies, 4 colonies, 4 colonies, 30 beavers. 10 beavers . 18 beavers. Two other streams, Cottonwood Creek and Big Willow Creek, were visited during the summer, before beavers had started building food caches; and were found to have a very low population level. Further population studies were not made this fall, but it is planned to use these streams next year. The remaining two streams, Two-bit Creek and Oak Creek, were not visited this year. �=118= The present-plans call for the construction of base maps of the pilot streams, on a scale 'of 2 inche-s to 1 mile, by project personnel. . These maps are now in the process of being prepared. The maps will be distributed to the Regional Coordinators for use by Fur Managers and Wildlife Conservation Officers. Regional personnel are to be responsible for determining habitat suitability classifications, food supply and population inventories, recommended harvests, and for accomplishing the harvest. All information is to be recorded on the base maps and on forms which have been supplied. The studies are to be conducted annually, and any population or habitat changes noted. Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Date:. ~J~an~u~a~ry~l~l~9~5~8 __------ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �1 -4 ..;""j . ~~,:: =119- January, ' 1958 ";;--." ) JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. Work Plan No. Job No. W-83-R-4 ~I~I Beaver Investigations. ~~~E~xp~e~r~im~e~n~t~a~I~B~e~a~v~e~r~T~r~a.p.p~i~ng~a~n~d~R~e 6 --------------~--------------------- Title of J ob: PeriodCovered: -=B~e;,:;a~v;,:;e~r..:.R=e::.st.:..;o;;,;;c;.:k;.:i;.:n;c,g..:.o;;,;;n::.....:U;.:n;.:i;::nh=a.::: ..:::.St;.:r~e;;,;;a;.:m=.::.... _ ~A.p~r~il~1~,~1~9~5~7~t~0~D~e~c:...e~m~b~e~r..:.3:...1~,~19~5:...7~. ~--------------- Objectives: To determine the ecological changes resulting from beaver introduction on a previously uninhabited stream. Findings: The stream selected for beaver transplanting was Missouri Gulch, in Summit County. At the time the appratsal of the stream was made, it was recognized that the habitat was marginal with respect to food quality and quantity. However, this was the only stream which had been located as a possfble study area for this job, and it was decided to attempt a transplant to see if beavers would remain. In August, 1957, a small impoundment was built to serve as an inducement for transplanted beavers to remain on the stream, and a mated pair of beavers was livetrapped and transplanted. These beavers were not ear-tagged. An observation period starting in late afternoon and terminating at the time it became too dark to see showed that the beavers remained in the vicinity of the impoundment immediately following the transplant. An overnight camp was made to enable the observer to be near the scene for further observations. No indication of the presence of the pair of beavers could be found on the following day, and two trips to the area later in the month confirmed the belief that the beavers had not remained. At the time of the second trip, water flow had breached the small darn. and no indications of attempted repair by beavers could be found. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be dropped. Missouri Gulch, the study area used this year. is the only stream found in 3 years which offered any possibilities. and it was apparent at the time it was selected for tr'ial that thebeaver habitat was poor. The experience of the past summer has shown that beavers will not stay on such a stream, and the experience of the last 3 years has shown that streams having good to excellent beaver habitat invariably have beaver populations already present. Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Date : J.;;..an=u_a:...r;..<y •.•• __;;"l9:...5:...8~ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan .Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��1""1. Q..,. COLO DIV WILDLIFE RESEARCH CTR LIB ...~. 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022250 -121= January, 1958 JOB COMPLETfONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of._....;.;.;:C:;..;O::;_:L=.,O;;;;;..;;;.;RA:.;.=D;_;;O;..._--------ProjectNo. VV~-~8~3_-~R~-~4~ VVorkPlan No. ~llI~ ~~B~e~a~v~e~r~Jn~v~e~s~t~ig~at~i~o~n~s ~i ~. ~~B~ea~v~e~r~P~r~o~d~u~c~tl~·Vl_·_ty~: __ J~ob~N_o~. __2 _ _ Title of Job: Embt.y.o Counts from Pregnant Beavers. Period Covered: April 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Summary: Reproduction data was collected during April, May, and June, 1957, from 63 female beavers, bringing the total number in the sample to 457. All information is presented in tabular form as Tables 1 and 2. 2. Estimat.ed ages of beavers collected were again based on the arbitrary carcass weight classes which have previously been established. 3. Differences in productivity rates between the Gunnison area and northern Colorado are indicated by the data; however, the Gunnison sample is so small as to preclude any direct comparisons. Further sampling of the Gunnison area is needed. Objectives: To determine the reproductive rate of beavers in Colorado. Procedure: Collect reproductIve tracts from female beavers taken by State trajpers in as many areas of the state as possible. Record and compile pregnancy and reproduction data for all samples collected. Findings: Reproduction data were gathered from 63 female beavers during April, May, and June, 1~57, to bring the total number in the sample to 457. The collections this spring were all from the Gunnison River d :t;~inage,'at altitudes of 7, 000 to 11,000 feet. No samples were taken this year from below 5, 000 feet elevation, because the samples .from the two previous years are considered adequate. Table 1 presents the information gained from all samples from above 5,000 feet to date. Age and sex ratio data were gathered only from that portion of the total catch for which Project VV-83-Rpersonnel were personally responsible. lInformationfrom trappers with whom the project leader did not work consists only of number of embryos per pregnant female examined, with no data from other beavers in the catch. The females examined by these trappers are included only as an additional productivity sample. Table 2 presents the data on age composition and sex ratio, from only that part of the catch examined by the project leader. Tables The estimated ages of the beavers shown in/L and 2, as in previous years, were again based on arbitrary carcass weight classes of 10-18 pounds for yearlings, 19-29 pounds for 2 year olds, and 30 pounds and up for mature animals. Some individuals do not follow this pattern; therefore, any sexually mature animal weighing less than 30 pounds will be placed in the mature class. - I, �-.122Table 1. --Reproduction Data from 344 Female Beavers Taken in Colorado Item Total no. of females Estimated ages of females Mature (carcass wt. 30 lb. or more) Two-years (carcass wt. 19-29 lb. ) One-year (carcass .wt. 10-18 lb.) No. of definitely pregnant females % of definitely pregnant females No. of post-partum females % of all females definitely pregnant or post-partum % of mature females definitely pregnant or post-partum No. of possibly pregnant females % of definitely pregnant, plus post-partum, plus possibly pregnant females No. of embryos in all definitely pregnant females No. of placental scars in post-partum females Average no. of embryos (pregnant and post-partum females) No. of embryos in pregnant females with data on corpora .lutea No. of corpora lutea in definitely pregnant females No. of corpora lutea in post-partum females No. of corpora lutea in definitely pregnant, plus post-partum females Resorption rate(definitely pregnant plus post-partum females 1/ 1954, 1955, and 1956 above 5000 feet .1957 above 5000 feet examined examined by by project trappers leader Totals for above 5000 feet 281 34 29 344 116 116 48 71 25% 16 13 14 7 8 24% 3 29 None None 20 158 130 55 99 25% 19 31% 32% 75% 14 84% 1 36% 35% 188 14 53 255 47 5 .None 52 2.7 1.7 2.6 Av. 2.3 182 14 220 16 236 51 9 60 271 25 296 15% 24% 16% None 31% Unknown 76% 15 36% None 2.6 196 �=123= Table l--Reproduction Data from 344 Female Beavers Taken in Colorado 1/-Continued. 1954, 1955, Item and 1956 above 5000 1957 above 5000 feet examined examined by by project trappers leader Totals for above 5000 feet feet Rate of population increase, assuming 100:100 sex ratio 1/ 42% No data on beavers other than pregnant females 28% 40% All samples (344) taken from above 5, 000 feet to date are listed for ease of comparison. The 113 samples from below 5,000 feet are not listed, since none were collected this year. These data can be found in the October, 1956, Quarterly Report. Table 2. --Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch, Spring, 1957. Mature 16 Males 2 yrs. old 1 yr. old 9 Sex Ratio (No. of males: 5 Total 30 100 females) 88.2" Mature Females 2 yrs. old "13 14 1 yr. old -,7 Total 34 �i,,"- n'1i ,. . }._ -124The sample from this spring's beaver catch is the smallest recorded during the four years of this investigation. A cold and wet spring coupled with a heavy and latemelting winter snowpack materially reduced the normal beaver catch throughout the state. The resulting sample, therefore, is considered inadequate for interpretation on the same basis as that of previous years' samples. However, some gross comparisons can be made. The pregnancy rate based on all females in the catch remained approximately the same this year, but the pregnancy rate based on mature females only was considerably higher (84%compared with 75%in previous years). In view of the snall sample, this difference can only be explained by attributing it to the chances inherent in trapping. As in previous years, the sex ratio of the catch showed a preponderance of females. It still cannot be shown whether this is due to chance or to actual status of the population. Therefore, a sex ratio of 100 : 100 will continue to be used as .the basis for calculating annual increase. The average number of embryos per pregnant or post-partum female in the Gunnison sample was 2. 3, as compared with an average of 2. 7for similar elevations in northern Colorado. The rate of resorption of embryos in the Gunnison sample was 24%, compared with 15%in northern Colorado. A direct comparison of the Gunnison sample with the northern Colorado sample cannot-be made, as the Gunnison sample is much smaller. However, the aforementioned differences do indicate that habitat quality is the key to productivity, since food deficiency was much more apparent in the Gunnison area. The smaller average number of embryos and the greater rate of embryo resorption in the Gunnison sample is reflected in the lower rate of population increase; 28%, as compared with 42%for northern Colorado. It is apparent that further sampling of the high elevations in southern Colorado is in order. It is planned that this work will be continued next year in the same areas which were sampled this year. Acknowledgements: For assistance in the collection of this iIlformation, appreciation is extended to J. F. Andrews, Regional Fur Manager; James Houston and Don Benson, Wildlife Conservation Officers; Lester Evans and John Betz, Trappers; M. C. Coghill, Refuge Custodian; and Robert N. Ridings, District Ranger, U. S. forest Service. Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Date: ..;;J..;;a;;.;;;n;;.;;;u;.;.;a...;.r""'y .•.. , ...;.1._9._5.;;.8 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal A~dCoordinator �I"""I "'BDOW022251 " """ 1111~"'lll'~'1fllili~iillllfr"ri~" January, -125- 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Smteof. ~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O~· ProjectNo. ~VV~-_8~3~-~R~-4~ VVorkPlanNo. ~I~I~I Title of J ob:. _ ~~B~e~a~v~e~r~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t~i~o=n~s _ ~~B~e~a~v~e~r~P~r~o~d~uc~t~i~v~ity~~J~0~b~,~N~0~. __~4~ __ ...;C;...o;..;;n;;;..;t..;.r..;.o;;;;;ll;.;.e..;.d...;st~u..;.d ••. y_o...;f...;P~r..;.o_du..;.c'_t...;iv..;.l...;·t ••. y...;. Period Covered:. _ -=.:A;,I;;p.::.r=il;...1;;.i,=--::..19~5:;..;7:....;;.;to;._;;;;De=c.::.e=m=b;.;;e;.;;;r....;3:;..;1:;;J,:... _ Objectives: To determine the rate of population build-up from a known number of resident beavers. Findings: During the summer of 1955, the entire beaver population of Lost Creek, a tributary of the VVilliams Fork River in Grand County, was removed. A 'DJirrier against beaver ingress and egress was constructed, and 5 beavers were live-trapped, ear-tagged, and released above the barrier. It is planned that a complete trap-out will again be made in the fall of 1958, to evaluate the productivity of the beaver population during the 3 years since the transplant. . Work during the summer of 1957 consisted of maintenance on the barrier. The unusually large volume of spring run-off water carried debris downstream and lodged it against the grating, causing the water to rise almost to the top of the earth dike. The debris was removed, and several loads of earth were hauled to fill the dike where the water had begun to undermine and seep through. Thes-e~temp()"rary'repairs'held until the water volume flow had decreased considerably, at which time permanent repairs were made by tamping rocks and putting more earth fill into the dike. The fence has remained in good repair since the summer of 1956. During the summer, beaver feed beds and freshly cut willows were found in several places, indicating that beaver activity was not confined to the two colony centers which had been occupied duringthe winter of 1956-57. A trip to Lost Creek in October, 1957, disclosed that only one colony center was active, with beavers repairing the dam and making a food cache. Further trips through. October and November failed to show the presence of more than one active colony. What has caused the loss of the other colony is not known. It may be that the two colonies have doubled up, or it may be that one colony of beavers has died or moved out. The population status will not be known until the scheduled trapping is done next fall. Prepared Date : by: . William H. Rutherford Approved by: ......;;J..;.a;_;;;n;_;;;u;_;;;a.;;_;ry"-l.., ~1.;..9.;..58~_ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��\~~~~\[\~\i(~\~\\m\~~~r~i\\\\\l~\i \~\~\\ BDOW022252 January, -127= 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT '" r n ,'\,,' n')",.-.··., INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS S~teof~ ~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~O~ ProjectNo. Work Plan No. Title of Job : Period covered: '·1 ;';;'"\} v oJ "" _ VV~-~8~3~-~R~-~4~ ~;~B~e~a~v~e~r~I~n~v~e~s~ti.g~a_t_io_n_s_. _ V~I __---'i~B~e.;;..a_v.;...e_r~C;..;e;.;;n_s;.;;u_s;.....,;;T_e_c.;;;;h~n~iq""u_e_s~.._.;;.Jo. __N;.;.o~. __...;7 _ ~A~e_r_l;.;;· a;.;;l...;B=ea;;;.v.;..e_r;;..;...;C;...o;.;;l_o.;;;;n"",y_C~o.;;;;u;;;;n~ts _ April 1, 1957 to December 3i 1957 ------------~---------------------------s Summary: The aerial beaver colony trend counts on routes established in 1955 were again flown this year to continue the collection of aerial trend data. Information recorded for each route consisted of the number of fresh beaver food caches, plus incidental information on beaver activity. 2. The .flights were terminated by weather conditions before completion. Data recorded on the routes which were flown are presented in Table 1, and compared with corresponding 1956 data. 3. The trend.in beaver populations this year is generally down. This is attributed to a die-off partially diagnosed as tularemia, plus the disruptive effects of the unusually heavy spring' run-off of flood waters. Objectives: .To continue the year-to-year aerial beaver colony counts over the routes previously established, as a basis for estimating the annual trend in beaver numbers. Procedure: The a.ertal trend routes which were established in 1955 were flown this year for the third time; to continue the collection of aerial beaver colony trend count data. The flying this year was done by Department Pilot Sam Clifford in a Piper Super Cub plane, with William Rutherford as observer. The plane was flown between 500 and 800 feet above the streams, at an air speed of 90-100 miles per hour. Data were recorded on standardized forms. The flying was started on October 10, the earliest date on which the plane was available. Flying was done on that day and on October 11. On the morning of October 12, heavy overcast at Fort Collins made it impossible to take off, and it was decided that the remaining routes would be flown at a later date when weather was better. There were very few breaks in the general weather pattern throughout October and early November, and these breaks did not coincide with availability of the plane, ,By midNovember there was enough snow to obliterate beaver food caches, and at that time plans for completing the trend counts were abandoned. As a result, streams in North Park, part of MJiddlePark, and the Yamp and White River drainages were not flown this year. Streams which were not flown are so indicated in Table 1. �~~ ~--::-~ /i .(~;' "h =128= Table 1--Aerial Stream Big Grizzly Cr. &-N. Platte R. Jack Creek & illinois R. Laramie River Blue River ·Williams -Fork R. ·Troublesome Cr. Big Muddy Cr. Rio Grande R. South Fork of Rio Grande R. San Juan River Los Pinos River Bear .& Yampa It. White .River ·S. Fork White R. ;Cochetopa Cr. Tomichi Cr. East River Taylor River West Mancos R. . Dolores River S. Fork South Platte River Michigan Creek Jefferson Cr. Arkansas River Totals Beaver Colony Counts on Sample Stream Sections, 1956 and 1957.. Route Percent of 1956 1957 miles-per colonies colonies miles per increase or miles decrease colony colony 37 19 1. 95 Not flown 33 1/2 31 35 1/2 19 20 30 37 1/2 11 9 3 7 7 14 6 3.05 3.44 11. 83 2.71 2.86 2.14 6.25 Not flown 3.87 4.44 Not flown 3.33 Not flown 12.50 12 1/4 20 1/2 13 86 2(> 15 34 37 1/2 30 18 1/2 14 44 1/2 9 2 5 15 4 2 29 4 7 10 7 5 1. 36 10.25 2.60 5.73 6.50 7.50 1. 17 9.37 4.29 1. 85 2.00 8.90 33 9 10 19 4 6 "3 3 7 10 8.25 1. 50 3.33 1. 90 671 '3/4 202 3.32 8 8 6 3 6 4 0 19 0 3 8 1 4 2.04 5.12 Not flown Not flown Not flown 1. 79 10.00 2.31 14.00 11.12 -11.1 7'-166. 7 -14.3 -50.0 -33.;3 /100.0 ~'lOO. 0 -34.5 -100.00 -57.1 -20.0 -85.7 .-20.0 -25.0 /16.7 3 11. 00 1. 29 2.00 6.33 88 4.76 -30.2 5 166.7 -70.0 �~129The most important information recorded for each route was the number of fresh food caches, since these are used as the criterion for colony centers. Other incidental information on beaver activity was also recorded. Findings: Total stream miles covered was 419 1/4, on which 88 beaver colonies were recorded. The data are summarized by individual streams and compared with 1956 data in Table 1. The landmarks used for beginning and ending points on the trend routes are not noted in table 1, since the routes remain unchanged from last year. This information can be found on page 28 of the January 1957 Quarterly Report. The trend in beaver populations this year is generally down. A few streams had higher populations this year than last year, but this effect was more than compensated by the majority of streams on which .lower populations were recorded this year. It is known that beaver die-offs occurred in many areas of the state during last spring and early summer. Trappers found dead beavers in ponds after the ice had thawed, and continued to find them throughout the summer. One, found during August on Big Willow Creek in North Park by Wildlife Conservation Officer Donald.Gore and Regional Fur Manager Wayne Nash, was.a.sufftcfently-f'resh specimen to be autopsied. The carcass was sent to the College of V~terimiry 'Medictne at Colorado State University, where a positive diagnosis of tularemia was made. This die-off must certainly be responsible for some of the population decrease. It is believed that of equal or perhaps even greater importance in this general downward population trend, however, is the exceedingly heavy spring run-off of flood waters during 1957. Nearly every stream which the project leader had occasion to visit through the summer showed evidence of heavy damage to beaver dams and disruption of resident beaver populations. On many streams, complete wash-out of every dam and pond had occurred. Fresh feed beds along the banks attested to the presence of a few beavers, but all evidence pointed to the conclusion .that the greater part of the beaver populations had disappeared. Perhaps a few beavers were actually killed by the flood waters; probably most of themaimply drifted downstream and established residence elsewhere. Prepared by: . William H. Rutherford Date: __,;J;..;;a,;",;n,;",;u;;..,a...;;;r .••. yJ..,-'l;;..;9.....;5.....;8~ _ Approved by': Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��January, =131= 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of.__ ...•. .;::c;.::o:..:.lo,:;;.r:..;a::;d::.;o;;._ ProjectNo. VV~-~8~3~-~R~-~4~ ~~~B_e_a~v_e_r_In~v_e_s_t~ig.a_t_io_n_s ·VVorkPlan No. V_I~ Job No. 8 Title of Job: _ ~_B~e~a~v~e~r~C_e_n_s_u_s~._T_e_c_h_n_iq.u_e~s _ Refinement of Census Techniques. Period Covered: Objectives: _ April 1, 1957 to December 31, 1957.· To determine the number of beavers occupying winter colonies. Findings: This job was set up for the purpose of obtaining samples from many ecological types which could be analyzed as a basis for determining the average number of beavers per winter colony over the state. Data were to be gathered by completely trapping out sample colonies during the fall trapping seasons. Work was done on this job during 1954, 1955 and 1956, (Colorado Quarterly Report, January, 1957). During the fall of 1957, project personnel were engaged in asststtng Regional Fur Managers.in establishing beaver management pilot areas, as reported under Work Plan II of this segment. This job, therefore, was inactive during the report period, as no time was spent in trapping beaver colonies. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be continued, as the existing sample is too small for statistical analysis, and a considerably larger sample is needed. Prepared by:·. William H. Rutherford Date: Approved by: J~a=n=u~a~ry~,_1~9~58~ _ ·/llj,ijiillifi BDOW021613 Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/f2f185280529d3b04ab91a00a3ba16a4.pdf 3ea41522ddfece5f0d9530de91d8b675 PDF Text Text -1- April, JOB COMPLETION 1958 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~----~------------------- Project No. __ Work Plan No. W.:..:...-..;:;3..;:;8_-R;:.;,..-.::.I.::.I -I---=D;.:e;.=e.::.r_-:;;;E~lk;.:....;;;In;::;.v.;..;e;.;s;.;t.;;!;ig;z.;a;;.;t;. _ .::.I ...I........;J;..;o;.;b~N;.=o..;... _....;4;;...._ _ Title of J ob :._ __,;L;;;;.;;..oc.;;..a;.;.t;.;i.;;..on;;;;...;;a;.;;n;.;;d;_;E=x_te;;.;n;.;t_o;;;.;f;_;W..;.;..;;i;;;.;n_te;;;.;r __E;.;lk=-R..;.a;.;;.;n;;;.t;g6,;e;..;..;.o.;;;;n __ tho=.;;e_So.;;...;;..;u;.;;.;t..;.h_F~o..;.rk=-o;.;;f_ White River. Period. Covered: May 1, 1957 to December 31, 1957. Introduction: This investigation was initiated in June, 1956 for the purpose of evaluating elk winter-range conditions on the South Fork of the White River, White River National Forest, in northwestern Colorado. The primary study area was delimited by a preliminary range reconnaissance. included the lower 20 miles of southern-exposed slopes, considered the most critical, or the key, portion of the South Fork winter range. Objectives: 1. To determine Fork elk herd. the overall limits It of the winter range used by the South 2. To provide a working map of winter range as an aid to more intensive elk-range management. and progressive Results: Quantitative data collected during various phases of the work were used to supplement the findings of the initial ocular range survey. Information on site factors and various general observations, although not essential to interpretation of the browse-data proper, provided a basis for further assessment of the area as a winter elk habitat. Using these observations as a guide, the range was classified according to its forage value and availability to elk during the winter season. A map delimiting such winter-range classifications was.then prepared as an aid to more ilntensive elk-range management on the South Fork (Figure 1). Prepared Date:. by:_,......;;J..;;o..;.h_n~H;.;;.;a_r..;.r,;;;,;is _ Approved by: A~p~rl~·l~,~l~95~8;;....__ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��-3- April, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIO~SPROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~--------------------------- Project No. ~VV~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~1~ ~D~ee~r-~-~E~1~k~fu~v~e~s~tl~·g~a~t~io~n~s~. _ VVorkPlan No. II Job No. 6a --~~--------------~~~~~~--------------------------------- Title of Job: Collection of data on elk and mule deer enroute from winter to summer range. Period Covered: May 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Abstract: Observations of movements and migration of elk and mule deer in South Fork canyon, during the spring of 1957, disclosed the following: Most elk were observed along the lower 7 miles of South Fork Canyon from Buford to Peltier Creek. The total number of animals observed was 674 from 164 observations. The greatest number of elk seen in one day was 85; the greatest number seen in one group was 30, with the average being 6.0 (group). Most of the animals appeared to be in good to fair condition. Varying weather conditions caused observational difficulties, especially as regard to sex and condition determinations. No definite elk migration pattern was observed, Temperatures behind seasonal. and vegetational development, in 1957, were approximately 3 weeks . The 1957 deer migration was also delayed by the unusually cold weather. Only 28 deer had been observed in South Fork canyon by June 1st. A total of 23 dead elk were found on the study area. Objectives: To obtain information principally on elk, but as the opportunity presents itself on mule deer to the following points: 1. Routes and rate of movement from winter range to summer range. 2. Effects of receding snow line upon such movement. 3. Movement of animals with relation to snow line above or behind, etc. �_ 1> p....:")' ... -4- 4. What are the principal foods and feeding habits during migration? 5. Sex segregation of the herd enroute; rate of pregnancy females. 6. Calving and fawning range for each species in the study area. 7. What is the rate of calf and fawn mortality during the calving and fawning period? Procedure: Field observations were begun on April 4th and continued, as weather permitted, until June 10, 1957. Early observations were principally on elk as there were no deer in the vicinity of the South Fork at this time (early April). Buford was used as headquarters during the early portion of the study since snow conditions would not permit access to the South Fork Camp Ground, except by snow-cat or snowshoes. Early observations were made on foot, on snowshoes, and by vehicle (road counts) as weather permitted. Later, more extensive checks were conducted on horseback. Animals were identified and observed with binoculars and a 20X spotting scope. Foods being eaten were determined by spot checking areas where animals had recently been observed feeding. Supplementary information was obtained by observing tracks, bedding places, influence of weather, daily movements and reaction to other animals and man. Intermittent trips were made during May to the Piceance Creek, Rifle Creek and Flag Creek areas to observe deer concentrations and migrations. Description of Study Area The South Fork of the White River is one of the major drainages of the White River Plateau, the summer range of the White River elk herd. Altitude in the canyon varies from approximately 7, 000 feet at Buford to over 11, 000 feet where it originates on the plateau. The lower 20 miles of the canyon, from Buford to Park Creek is the principal wintering area used by the elk. Deer use this area during the summer and early fall. The South Fork from Park Creek: to the camp ground flows almost due west; and from the camp ground to Buford flows in a general northwesterly direction. Vegetation in this region consists of shrubs on the south slopes, with aspen and coniferous forest on the north slopes. The prtucipal shrub species, from the standpoint of abundance, are oak (Quercus gambelL), serviceberry (Amelanchier utahensis), snowberry (Symphori carnos., spp. ), chokecherry (Prunus melanocaryus), and big sagebrush (Artemtsia tridentata). �-5- Approximately 15 sections of the lower river valley is privately owned. Present land use is irrigated meadow in the river bottom and summer cattle pasture on the slopes. The average snowfall Y for the area is 175.1 inches. The total snowfall as of April 15, 1957was 161 inches. The temperature during the study ranged from 50 to 500. Spring was delayed this year due to late and heavy snows. Temperatures averaged 100 to 150 below seasonal. Results. Observations: The majority of the observations on elk were made along the lower seven miles of the South _Fork from Buford to Peltier Creek. Almost all of these animals were seen on southwest slopes which remained relatively free of deep snow. No elk were seen in the lower meadows or near haystacks, although, they had reportedly used these areas quite frequently earlier in the winter. Frequent snow and rain prevented consecutive daily road reconnaissances up the South Fork. Three fawn deer (does) were observed on the Roosevelt Ranch near Buford on April 17th. ; however, they had reportedly wintered in this area. They were in poor condition when seen and died a short time later. The first migratory deer was not seen in South Fork canyon until May 15th. Analysis of Counts. Total number of observations - 164. Total numbar animals seen (deer and elk) - 674. Number of elk seen - 646. _ Number of deer seen -,;28(as of June 1st.) Greatest number elk seen in one day - 85. Greatest number elk seen in one group - 30. Average number elk seen in one group - 6.0*. Average number elk seen per observation - 4.1. Age Ratios Elk Adults - 226 Calves 69 Unid. 351 646 Deer Adults - 10 Fawns 9 Unid. 9 28(Total no. seen as of June 10)- *Singles not included in this average. No attempt was made to determine the actual number of elk in the vicinity. The above figure undoubtedly includes numerous duplications. �-6- The general condition of the elk was noted when weather conditions permitted. Most of the animals appeared to be in good to fair condition. Only two animals were seen which showed signs of malnutrition or some other deciminating factor. The unusually wet weather caused difficulty in aging and sexing the animals as the poor light and wet coats made correct identification difficult to impossible at any distance. Instances also occurred where animals could not be identified due to sun's glare or . concealing vegetation. Thus, almost no attemp1s were made to sex the elk since most bulls had shed their horns. Age classes were identified as to adults and young only. Three different bulls were observed which had retained their antlers through the second week of May. Feeding Habits. Most elk were seen feeding in the mornings from daylight until about 8 A. M., depending upon the weather. The evening feeding period began about 5 P. M. The extent of nocturnal feeding was not determined. The elk did not cover great distances while feeding and they usually fed in small groups or singly. Most feeding groups were composed of cows and calves. Blflls were usually seen alone or occasionally in small groups. Light snow or rain did not appear to inhibit elk feeding activity. The effect of heavy snow or rain upon feeding was not determined due to observational difficulties. Large numbers of elk, however, Were usually seen following bad weather. Almost all feeding was restricted to the open shrub slopes where they utilized the young spring grasses and shrubs. Trampling of the grass and young shrubs appeared to be excessive onsome sites, especially those which they utilized during the late spring imma:iiately before upward migration. Elk were seen feeding in close. association with horses on numerous occasions. Neither appeared to beconcerned over thepresence of the other. Elk occasionally fed near cattle and often with deer durtng the latter part of the spring. In one instance, the writer observed 13 elk feeding in the Buford area that hastily departed when they discovered sheep on the same slope. No systematic observations were made relative to calving and fawning. The first elk calf was seen on May 31st. Since most calves were born near the high summer range very few were observed in the canyon. The first deer fawn was seen on June 22nd and they were common after July Ist. �-7- Migration and Movements. Due to the close proximity of the summer range, no extensive migration was necessary for the elk which wintered in South Fork canyon. They merely "moved-up" to the Flat-Tops as snow conditions and vegetational development permitted. No definite migration routes were observed. The numerous drainages on the eastern slopes of the lower South Fork appeared to be used most frequently. Preceding migration, there was considerable altitudinal (up and down) movements which possibly lasted longer than usual this year due to the late snows and cool weather 0 The snowline appeared to have little effect upon movement. Elk were feeding on the extreme lower slopes long after the snow had left; and conversely, they were seen . foraging in two to three feet of snow when bare ground was only a few hundred yards distance. Vegetational development, especially the young grass shoots, seemed to be more closely correlated with upward migration than the presence of deep snow. Elk began moving out of the canyon the third week of May; however, they did not move completely to the top because of the snow-pack. No elk were observed on the FlatTops until the third week of July. The 1957deer migration was also delayed by the unusually cold weather. Only 28 deer had been observed in South Fork canyon by June 1st. "I'o, supplement these data, spot checks were made in the Piceance Creek area where annual meadow counts preceding migration are made. The meadow concentrations were two to three weeks later than usual. Also the Rifle Creek and Flag Creek migration routes were checked periodically for tracks, road kills, sight records, and concentrations. Past studies of deer migration in the Flag Creek area showed the peaks to be as follows: 1940- May 12, 1941- May 23, and 1950- May 17. Systematic track counts were not made this year but frequently trips to the area showed that almost no deer had crossed as of May 15th. It was snowing hard in this area on May 16th. Frequent rains prohibited track counts the latter two weeks of May. Mortality. Elk winter range mortality was observed incidental to this and other studies being carried on in South Fork canyon through the summer. A total of 23 dead elk were found on the study area. They included: 2 calves (females) 2 yearlings (females) 17 adult, cows 1 adult bull 1 unidentified �-8- Inspection of the teeth indicated that 14 of the adult cows were extremely old ( 9 years and over). Most of them had died with full paunches indicating possibly old age and malnutrition as the cause of death. One had become entangled in a fence-line and died. The three remaining cows were judged to be two to three years old. The hind leg of one had been shattered by a bullet. The only observed bull mortality was a five point bull which had been seen on the lower ranches around haystacks for about two weeks prior to its death. It was reportedly in a weakened condition prior to death. Tooth inspection indicated very old age. Five dead elk. foul' calves and one adult cow, were found on the Flat Tops Wilderness Area. Three adult does were the only deer mortalities able. observed. Cause of death was undezermtn- Conclusions. The 1957 unseasonable weather undoubtedly caused fluctuations in the normal deer and elk migration pattern. The migration was delayed two to three weeks.: as might be expected, due to the delayed spring. Vecy little information, with regard to elk migration routes or extensive seasonal movements, was obtained since they winter only a short distance from their summer range. An extenstve tagging and marking program could possibly be a valuable supplement to tp,e mi~ration studies now in progress. .; SWmited by: Date: --~~~~~~---------John Harris .~A.p.r-il.,-1~9~58~ Approved by: ----- Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �Ili~lllllij' ijl~'llil~irlilli~illijij~~1 i~fl~iijll BDOW022256 -9- April, 1958 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-ll Work Plan No. Job No. Deer - Elk Investigations ~ll~I~ 5a _.~F~o_r_a~g~e_a_n~d~Ra~ng~e~U~t_il_i_z_at_i_o_n~~ __u_d_i_e_s _ study of Browse Reproduction in Relation to Controlled Grazing in Experimental Pastures. Period Covered: May 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Summary: 1. A study was initiated in June, 1957for the purpose of investigating browse reproduction in relation to controlled grazing in experimental pastures. The experimental pastures vary in area from 77 to 206 acres, and are located at the Little Hills Game Experiment Station near Meeker, Colorado. 2. A total of 192 line-intercept transects were run and the following measurements taken from them: browse composition and density, age classes, grass and forb density, litter, bare ground, erosion pavement, browse height, overstory, and the percent of slope of each transect. 3. The experimental pastures are gridded into blocks five chains square. chosen at random to be sampled using the line-intercept method. Blocks were 4. Data obtained concerning browse density were analyzed statistically and the following was revealed. a. Browse density rangedfrom 14.22 to 26.14 percent. This difference was not statistically significant when the F-test was used, but a difference between Pasture 1 (sheep -- heavy stocking rate) and Pasture 8 (cattle -- moderate stocking rate) was made apparent when a graph plotting x 2 standard errors was made. i. b. When the individual key browse species data were analyzed only bitterbrush density was found to be significantly different. This difference was between Pasture 2 (cattle -.;_heavy stocking rate), and Pasture 7 (deer-light stocking rate). No bitterbrush was encountered on transects located in Pasture 1 (sheep -- heavy stocking rate). �i.. /[1 ..... ,~ -10- c. Serviceberry density approached significance. Future tests will be made to disclose where, if they exist, these differences are located. 5. Data on browse reproduction w~e analyzed and the following was revealed: a. Pasture 1 (Sheep--heavy stocking rate), and Pasture 4 (deer--heavy stocking rate) were significantly different from the remainder of the pastures when..!!!_ species of browse reproduction were considered. h. When only the reproduction of the five key browse species was considered Pasture 2 (cattle -- heavy stocking rate) was significantly different from the remaining experimental pastures. Pasture 9 (sheep -- moderate stocking rate) was very close to being significantly different. 6. The percentage of plant measurements occurring in each of the various age classes are summarized for each of the experimental pastures in Table 19. 7. Computations indicate that an inadequate sample was obtained of the browse reproduction. Future field work is planned to rectify this situation. 8. Plans for future study are as follows: a. Analysis of chart-quadrat .pastures. data to determine browse trends in the experimental b. Deer stomach sample analyses are tentatively planned to aid further in determining the key browse species of the mule deer winter range represented by the Little Hills area. c. Data for the 1958 field season will be taken Irom plots of an area type which should give a more adequate sample of browse reproduction as it has occurred in the experimental pastures. Introduction: A study of browse reproduction in relation to controlled grazing was initiated in June, 1957. The study site, located at the Colorado Game and Fish Department's Little Hills Game Experimental station near Meeker, Colorado, consists of nine experimental pastures varying in area from 77 to 206 acres. The expei:imental pastures have been stocked with sheep, cattle, deer, and combination of these species at rates designed to simulate as closely as possible those practiced by ranchers .outaide of the experimental area. stocking rates are designated as being light, moderate, or heavy. Table 1 shows the treatment, as to stocking rate and species, each pasture has received since its origin. , �Welded steel Nut Swivel Flat Surface 6" Clothesline 4' 4' 1/2" steel Rod 1/4" cut 3/4" Hardwood Dowling 20-Penny Spike A B Figure 1. -- Apparatus used in sampling line transects; (B}.Materials used to secuze , and to torm line • .. "-':" (A) Plumb rod, �All Pastures I I I (MeanAll Pastures) 20 22 24 26 line transect data, 9 8 7 6 ~ p +' rtl '" 5 p.. 4 3 2 1 10 12 14 16 18 28 30 32 Density in Feet P'igure 2. -- Meantotal browse density" in feet" ± 2 standard errors" Little Hills GameExperimental Station" Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Pasture 1 through 9, r"~ ':,.) <0 �-11- Value oft he Study: The study site is located on the winter range of the White River mule deer herd in northwest Colorado. 'I'hrough a program of land acquisition, the Game and Fish Department has purchased land in the Little Hills- Piceance Creek-Yellow Creek area. This area is extremely important as mule deer winter range and must be managed accordingly so that browse production, of desirable species, can be maintained at the highest possible level. To attain this end and it was deemed necessary to determine the effect, if any, of various degrees of use by the species stocked upon the reproductive potentialities of the more desirable browse species. Table 1. --Summary of the Little Hills Game Experimental station Experimental Pastures showing Acreage, Period of Use, Species Stocked, Stocking Rate and Duration. Species Stocking Pasture Period .Number Stocked . Rate of Use •Duration Acreage 1 2 3 77.4 167.3 162.8 4 5 146.6 86.4 6 7 8 9 99.9 90.7 206.4 156.6 Sp-Fall Sp-FaU Sp-Fall .Winter Winter Sp-Fall .Winter Winter Winter Sp-Fall Sp-Fall Sheep Cattle Cattle Deer Deer Sheep Deer Deer Deer Cattle Sheep Heavy Heavy Moderate 1949-date 1949-date 1954-date Heavy Moderate 1948-date 1950-date Moderate Light· Moderate Moderate 1952-date 1952-date 1954-date 1954-date Objectives: 1. Determine composition and density of browse on samples of mule deer winter range in western Colorado. 2. Correlate age class and plant vigor, by browse species, under varying kinds and degrees of utilization. 3. Determine the rate and amount of browse reproduction, by species, under varying kinds and degrees of utilization. 4. Determine the relative importance of seedlings and/or root sprouts, by species, in browse maintenance and reproduction under varying kinds and degrees of utilization. �-12- 5. Make available the information obtained for use in improved winter-range ment. manage- Methods and Procedures: Each of the experimental pastures has been gridded into blocks five chains square (Riordan, 1956). Blocks were chosen at random to serve as the sampling units in this study. A point-of-origin was further selected at random within each of the blocks chosen. This point - of- origin functioned as the point from which a line transect was run to sample the block. The line transect method, as suggested by Canfield (1941), was used in this study. The transect consisted of a line, 100 feet in length, placed so that it bisected as closely as possible the contour of the area being sampled. This line was projected, either upslope or downslope, from the point-of -origin; the direction of which was also randomly predetermined. A total of 192line transects were run in the nine experimental pastures. The primary purpose of the line transect was to serve as a means of sampling the browse and thus to determine its composition and density. While recording this information, other measurements and data were also taken: litter, bare ground, erosion pavement, browse age classes, browse height, overstory, and.the percent of a slope of each transect. A 3/16-inch plastic covered clothesline served as the line. This material proved to be very satisfactory because of its non-kinking qualities and lack of stretch. This line was .tied securely to swivels at each end into which 4-foot steel rods were inserted and driven into the ground to secure the line (Figure 1). Two methods are commonly employed by researchers to determine the point-ofinterception between the plant and the line: the ocular method, in which the measurer simply estimates the point; and the use of a plumb bob to determine this point. The ocular method, in the wrtterfs opinion, is subject to much error; this is especially true on line transectswhich are located on terrain with appreciable slope. The plumb bob, the most accurate method, is slow and time consuming. A device, called the plumb rod, was devised for this study and seemed to work very well. It has the speed of the ocular method and much of the accuracy of the plumb bob method of determining the point-of-interception. . It was made of hardwood dowling, 4-feet long and 3/4 inch in diameter. Along one side a .strip 3.5 feet long and about 1/4 inch wide was removed thus leaving a flat surface. The end which was left round was bored and a 20 penny spike was inserted to act as a weight. �r.. ~ .1 ,'. :?~ ~;: 30 •.. ·.. . , 251- ., . o . · Mean ..' , ·. · '.. .·,...... 201· ..... , ... •. "., ... · • .. ·•... of.. .& ·'.·.• ... •' •.•., ~ .. ... ·,. .,;, , 151·· ...III" · . .. ." . .• "'~, .. " .. . ·..· . · ,' . .: •. , . , ~ , ., · ." ·" . ..· -.: ...•" t... ,.., , . .. . · . ." ,, · ..... '" 101- t.· .. · . ... " . ,. · , .' " • • ,. . · ,.. ., • ·. ·.'...,. • ,•. •• •. .·-.'... ,'. ", ,,' · " .' . " ." '. '. . • 51- ..:..~. I,' .', • ., .. • · . ~ . '. , · · ..."'.'. , · ..· ·. ... . .·., ..... '"· •.. ... ,t .,_~:.... ··•.'.·':.'.:.:"... .: ·.. ~.'.'... -,' o' , ', ' • ' ', ' " " t ' ' ' to ; 0 ' , , " ,' "'II , t, , ' ,, 'M Q) A Q) ., " • f:Q ',' , -- o , •• ., t ' 0, .; o • • .':, t.: .', ,'. , ' " , •• , •0' , t t o • " , o 0 \. • , • • 0 o •, t " , , I'. I , , o , '\ • , • ". • 0 • • • ' ,t, ' ' , .' # • 2 1 : ••• " f '." , • '* " • t, ' ' ·t' • , " 3 ,, ··..· ., '.. \ ,. '. ' • " o " 'C ' o 0 , ~ •. , ," , • •. ' ' to, : ., t, oo "I. • , \ , •• • • , , o o o , '. .' '.· •.. " • ··'.,..,.'.,", ·'.·.....,..,,,. , '0 " o • , ••• f/ , " , .. -t " , .", . , ··· .',..... ,.· .,. . . ...'... '., ... · .' ·· .....,. . " :,,': .. ' .>: • .' . .:.' • o '0 t '" 00 ·...·.'''... . . .' ·.·.....'. ·• ,"... , • • " ~. ··.,.. : '. ·...• ." . · ..... · o. ·. ' ., 0 ·0" ..'• o .• ".' '. '. ·:.~ . ·· , _...' . .: <>. • '. " '" I. , • ' \ • ., •• ' ,, , t t , , 0 0 . · . .,. o · • 0 • , ~ \ , '0 • 0 • • • o • It • • • . ··...., •• • , t •• ·. " ,• ...,, ·,•.',. .,-'...'... ··," .'.... ·,,..•• · .· · · ,, " . · ..,, ..:. • . · .... , ·• ·• , .'....... •. .' -'.'. " · ..'.... . , • • ., ., '. ,, .', •. ,'. , " .. •· .... .. • .., .. . '.... • • " .".. .. " .. ... . . , .., ..,·'"......:" I...•· • '. ·.'...'.,' .0. ·.,. ··.~..... ·. ..... . .. • ·.' . " , .. '. . ., . , ...., -, . · .. , , .',. ·,,.. ' .'... .,.• , ,•.., ..-~ • •• .. .. ' ·"I .. , , . · . .. . : .:'. ".' . . ., . .• ·· ,. ... .'.· I': , •... .' .... " ., . • , .. •• ,· ., . . · ,... . , '. .•.', ..," · '.... .o._. . · ... .-'·,...... .· ." ·. ·.. :.. , ..": . .. ... ," .... ... " • 0 ,~ O. 0 , to • pO • 0 O. • • 1 •• " • • , t I 'III' , t 0 , '. • ,t • , to ~ ';.' ", I, •• 0 . t. • 0 • ••• • ,"r 0 . .f \ .: 4 '" • 0 , t , r , t r,» • • , 0, • • , • • 't , " , 0 o II " 0' ", ,, ••• -., i • I,'': ••. , ' ' 6 _. '. t , • , 0 I' ,• o I, o , II' • , ,\ 0 7 8 , t ' 0 , , , 0 , • , , , , ., • t t .-. • 5 ,', t "'" , , - , 0 • 1 • o 0 ' •• ., o ~-_ I • , ' . " , , ' ,o , \ ' , ,t .. • o , ' , o •• o , It ~ , , t , • , • o 0 , • ; • o • 0 , '. ,0 ~ I" • , r , o ". o e o 0 .. ' ,' • . 0 " o , v , • , '" , " " \ ., 0 •• o o o '..' " " 9 , I , ~ All Pastures Pastures . " Figtire 3. -- Total brows'e density' (pe rcent of area covered), line transect , Little Hills GameExperimental" Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. data, Pasture 1 through 9, �I I All Pastures 9 ( an All Pastures) 8 I 7 6 e 5 ::s ,..., CIl If 4 3 H-+ H-; 2 1 -1 o 1 2 4 3 5 6 Density in Fnt Figure 4.";'- Meanbitterbrush density, in feet, ± 2 standard errors, line transect data, Pasture 1 through 9, Little HiUs Game Experimental Station, Meeker" Colorado" 1957.; ;.', ..... : '. : .... :.: �-13- Field use of this device is simple. The measurer simply runs the flat surface along the line until a browse plant intercepts the line. This point-of-interception is then marked by the scribe and the measurer approaches the bush from the opposite side to determine the point-of-interception. The total intercept of the plant is the distance between the two points-of-interception. Figure 1 inchdes a drawing of this device. All measurements of intercept were taken in the manner described. The vertical height of each browse measurement was taken using the rule. Vertical height of the overstory species was estimated. Each browse measurement was placed in an age class category. These classes were based on physical characteristics of the browse measurement. Age classes were as follows: seedlings, young, mature, and decandent (Parker, 1951). The percent of slope along each transect was determined by use of an Abney level. Transect bearing and exposure were determined by use of a Leupold hand compass. Permanent wooden stakes were used .to delimit each transect line so that relocation at a future date will be possible. A two-man field team was used in the study: one acted as the scribe and the other as the measurer. statistical analysis, where applicable, has, or will be, applied to the data . .!/ Results: Composition and Density: Table 2 through 11 are included to show the composition and density of each browse species encountered on the transects in each of the experimental pastures. The figures give total percentages, as determined from the data obtained from all transects in each of the experimental pastures, and show the percentage of the total area covered in each of the pastures for the following: erosion pavement, bare ground, litter, browse, grass and forbs, and overs tory . Also shown is the percentage of the total browse comprised by each of the browse species represented in each pasture. The total percentage of browse cover in the experimental pastures, when all browse species are included ranged from 14.22 to 26.14 percent. statistical analysis, however, did not show that significant differences existed between the pastures. Table 12 shows results of the analysis of variance test on the total browse . .!/ According to Snedecor, 1956. �"~ .<::.~~, : •.~f- -14- Table .13 and Figures 2 and 3 are included to show the variations between pastures when the total browse density is considered. The data indicates that there is more variation within pastures than between pastures. This is especially evident when all of the pastures are lumped together and treated as one. This extreme variation is made apparent by the statistical computation of the sample aize whichIs needed to sample the vegetation in individual pastures if the researcher wishes to obtain information which is Significant at the . 10 level. It will be noted that more samples are needed for certain pastures than would be required for the same level of significance if the study area could be considered as a unity, i. e., with no pasture divisions. Table 2. --Summation Values. from 13 lines Transects, 1300 feet, Pasture 1, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Percent Measurement Total Area* Total Browse Overstory .Erosion Pavement ." Bare Ground Litter Amelanchier utahensis .Cercocarpus montanus SXmphorocarpos tetonensis Artemisia tridentata -Chrysothamnus spp. Juniper spp. Pinus edulis Quercus gambelli Tetradymia c;anescens Artemisia Jrigida Mahonia repens 18.38 30.10 33.32 5.60 3.87 2.43 .58 .51 .37 .36 .31 .14 .04 .01 Total 14.22 .Grass and Forbs 3.98 Total Overstory * Exclusive of overstory. 39.42 27.22 17.09 4.02 3.59 2.60 2.51 2.20 .98 '.28 .07 3.86 13.13 16.99 -. ,I �-15- Table 3.--Summation Values from 26 Line 'I'ransects , 2600 feet, Pasture 2, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Percent Total Browse Measurement Total Area* Erosion 20.51 Bare Ground 28.76 Litter 26.45 Amelanchier utahensis 10.85 47.37 .Cercocarpus 5.49 23.97 Quercus gambeli:'. 2.53 11.05 Artemisia tridentata 1. 72 7.52 , Symphorocarpos tetonensis 1. 32 5.76 .Chrysothamnus §E£: .30 1. 31 Ribes s~ .17 .74 Purshia tridentata .14 .61 Juniper_spp. .09 .39 Mahonia rep ens .07 .30 Pinus edulis .06 .26 Prunus sp, .06 .26 Tetradymia canescens .04 .17 Artemisia frigida .03 .13 m'ontanus Ephedra .sp'P .. Tr. Tr. Pachistima myrsinites Tr. Tr. Total Browse Grass and Forbs -Total Overs tory * Exclusive of overstory 22.92 1.36 Overstory 1. 08 8.52 9.60 �-16'fable 4. --Summation Values from 30 Line Transects, 3,000 Feet; Pasture 3, Little Hills.Game Experimental station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Percent .·'Measurement Total Browse Total Area* Overstory 5.00 i:r.osioi1 Pavement Bare 'Ground 35.18 Litter 36.44 Amelanchier utahensis 8.24 37.35 ..Cercocarpus montanus 4.16 18.85 Quercus gambel1~ 3.59 16.27 · Symphorocarpos tetonensis 2.18 9.88 Artemisia tridentata 1.98 .8.99 ..Chrysothamnus -spp~ .77 3.49 Rhus.trtlobata .31 1.40 Purshia tridentata .30 1. 39 · .Eurotia lanata .21 .95 Pinus edulis .10 .45 Tetradymia canescens .09 .41 Juniper spp, .06 .27 Mahonia repens .04 .18 Artemisia frigida .01 .04 Opuntia spp, .01 .04 Pachistima myrsinites .01 .04 Total Browse ·Grass and Forbs Total Overstory * Exclusive of overstory 10.06 2.42 22.00 1.32 ~2048 �1"'""; ~r\.· C' Figure 1 ".f'",~ SOUTH RI.O FORK, BLANCO SIXTH ,. WHITE COUNTY, PRINCIPAL N RIVER COLORADO MERIOI 5 CAL E: 112":. I MIL E ...." ia m~ Co:. ,,"::, "'=' o ~ :: ..• •. en -.... ... -•...-. Co =. ': -4 .•• ~ C\! •••• 'iiil ':. ••• -:- .,/ ~ '11/111 LEGEND ____ RIVER ~CREEK ~I;.AKE j",/ll': PEAt< "',\\UI\' . {/III7RIDGE TOP r:.IJ,';J"A PRIMARY WIN TE R-RANG E i$.-~-r.:»SEC 0 N DAR Y WIN T E R,..R AN G E m.~L~RGELV ~~ lHH.lSPdH.1! P A! VA 1 ~ l Y 0 WN fED f1 SOW ~ ~S VI R Q 8 �-17Table 5.:--Sumll'l:ation'Values from 2·5Line Transects, 2500 feet, Pasture 4, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker" Colorado, 1957. Percent .Measurement Total Area* Total Browse Overstory 20.6'9 Erosion Pavement Bare Ground 30.45 Litter 25.78 ·Amelanchier utahensis 7.29 33.92 Cercocarpus 3.99 18.58 Quercus gambeLi 3.16 14.67 · Artemisia tridentata 1.80 8.36 ·Chrysothamnus spp. 1. 44 6.70 Symphorocarpos tetonemis 1. 34 6.23 Eurotia .lanata .76 3.53 Purshia tridentata .66 3.02 Rhus trilobata .30 1.40 Rosa spp, .23 1. 07 Juniper spp. .22 1.02 Artemisia frigida .12 .56 Opuntia spp. .06 .28 Tetradymia canescens .03 .14 Mahonia rep ens .02 .09 Pinus edulis .01 .05 montanus Total Browse Grass and Forbs Total Overs tory * Exclusive of overstory 1.13 6.31 21. 50 1. 65 7.44 �-18- Table 6. --Summation Values from 17 Line Transects, 1700 Feet, Pasture 5, Little Hills ..... Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, -1957. Percent Total Browse Measurement Total Area* Overstory Erosion Pavement 5.47 . -_._.. _ .. Bare Ground 42.84 Litter 28.03 Amelanchier utahensis 5.93 26.33 Artemisia tridentata 4.39 19.45 Cercocarpus montanus 3.08 13.71 Symphorocarpos tetonensis 2.83 12.57 Chrysothmnus spp. 2.78 12.35 Purshia tridentata 1. 95 8.67 Quercus gambelL .63 2.82 .Juniper spp. .4.9 2.18 .51 Pinus. edulis .12 .53 8.00 Ephedra spp. .09 .40 Opuntia spp. .06 .27 Rhus trilobata .06 .27 Mahonia repens .04 .18 Artemisia frigida • 03 .13 Tetradymia. cjlnescens .. 03 .13 .Eurotia lanata Tr. Total Browse Grass and Forbs Total Overstory *Ex elusive of overstory 22.51 1. 15 . Tr . 8.51 �-19- Table 7. Summation Values from 13 Line Transects, 1300 Feet, Pasture 6, Little Hills Game Experimental station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Percent Measurement Total Area* Total Browse Overstory Erosion Pavement 9.12 Bare Ground 26.87 Litter 38.14 Amelanchier utahensis 8.16 32.79 Quercus gambelL 3.81 15.30 Artemisia tridentata 3.42 13.72 Cercocarpus montanus 2.70 10.84 Symphorocarpos tetonensis 2.40 9.64 Purshia tridentata 1. 73 6.95 Chrysothomnus spp. 1. 62 6.51 Tetradymia canescens .59 2.37 Juniper spp. .20 .80 Artemisia frigida .16 .64 Pinus edulis .10 .40 Total Browse 24.89 Grass and Forbs Total Overs tory * Exclusive of overstory 2.09 7.35 .98 9.44 �-20- Table 8. Summation Values fro_m12 Line Transects, 1200 feet, Pasture 7, Little Hflf.s Game Experimental station, Meeker,- Colorado, -1957. Bare Ground 34.68 Litter 31. 90 ·Amelanchier utahensis 7.76 41. 36 ·Cercocarpus montanus 3.19 17.00 Purshia tridentata 2.72 14.48 Quercus gambelL 2.19 11.70 ·§ymphorocarpos tetonensis 1.36 7.25 Artemisia tridentata .74 3.94 'Chrysothomnus spp. .24 1.28 Pinus edulis .16 .S5 Artemisia frigida .13 .69 ·Ephedra spp. .12 .64 .:Eurotia lanata .07 .37 Juniper spp. .06 .32 .Tetzadymta canescens .02 .11 Total Browse lS.76 ,Grass and Forbs .60 Total Overstory * Exclusive of overstory 8.S8 2.73 11,.61 �,._." 1. ".~ ',; j •. -21Table 9. -- Summation Values from 35 Line Transects; 3500 Feet, Pasture 8, Little Hills Game Experiment Station, Meeker; Colorado, 1957. Percent Measurement, Total Area* Total Browse Overstory ,Erosion Pavement 13.46 Bare Ground 33.12 Litter 26.32 Amelanchier utahensis 11.33 43.36 Cercocarpus montanus 5.30 20.27 Symphorocarpus tetonensis 3.24 12.39 Quercus gambelL 2.44 9.34 Artemisia tridentata 1.90 7.28 Purshia tridentata .73 2.80 -Chrvsothomnus spp. .66 2.52 Pinus edulis .21 .80 Tetradymia canescens .10 .38 Ribes spp. .07 .27 Juniper spp. .05 .19 Artemisia frigida .03 .11 Mahonia repens .03 .11 ,:J;>aohistimamyrsinites .02 .08 Prunus sp. .01 .04 Opuntia spp, Tr~, Total Browse 'Grass and.Forbs Total Overstory * Exclusive of overstory. 26.14 .97 5.86 1. 33 Tr. 7.19 -2.. ,,',' �-22- Table 10. -- Summation Values from 21 Line Transects,· 2100 Feet, Pasture 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Percent . Total Area* Total Browse Overstory Measurement 3.44 .Erosion Pavement Bare Ground 30.63 Litter 41. 75 Symphorocarpos tetonensis 6.85 29.63 .Amelanchier utahensis 5.60 24.24 Artemisia. tridentata. 3.43 14.84 Chrysothomnus spp. 2.28 9.86 . Cercocarpus montanus 1. 97 8.46 Purshia tridentata 1. 09 4.70 Quercus gambell. .65. 2.82 Juniper spp. . 43 1. 86 3.95 Pinus edulis .43 1. 86 12.70 ~spp. .16 .69 Eurotia lanata .12 .52 Artemisia frigida .06 .26 Opuntia spp. .05 .22 .Ephedra spp. .01 .04 Total Browse 'Grass and Forbs Total Overs tory *Exclusive of overstory 23.12 1. 05 16.65 �V~ L ~1 TABLE 11.-- SUMMATION VALUES FROM 192 LINE TRANSECTS, 19,200 FEET, LOCATED IN PASTURES 1 TIDWUGH ~ GAME EXPERIMENTAL STATION MEEKER, COLORADO, 1957. (ALL FIGURES ARE PERCENT OF TOTAL AREA EXCE NUMBER OF 100 FOOT LINE ThNSECTS.) LITTLE HILLS PASTURE AND ~---...•. Pasture 1 2 3 4 5 6 Z 8 2 Number Transects 13 26 30 25 17 13 12 3, Erosion Pavement 18.38 20.5'1 5'.00 20.69 5.47 9.12 14.06 Bare Ground 30.10 28.76 35.18 42.84 26.87 Litter 33.32 26.45 36.4-4 25'.78 28.03 Grass and Forbs 3.98 1.36 1.32 1.6, Ame1anchier utahensis 5'.60 10.85' 8.24 Cercocarpus mont anus 3.87 5'.49 Artemisia tridentata .58 Symphorocarpos tetonensis 2.43 Purshia tridentata Mean Percent 21 Total 192 13.46 3.44 110.13 12.24 34.68 33.12 30.63 292.63 32.5'1 38.14 31.90 26.32 41.7, 288.13 32.01 1.1, .98 .60 .97 1.0, 13.06 1.4, 7.29 ,.93 8.16 7.76 11.33 5'.60 70.76 7.86 4.16 3.99 3.08 2.70 3.19 5.30 1.97 33.75 3.75 1.72 1.98 1.80 4.39 3.42 .74 1.90 3.43 19.96 2.22 1.32 2.18 1.34 2.83 2.40 1.36 3.24 6.8, 23.95' 2.66 .14 .30 .66 1.9, 1.73 2.72 .73 1.09 9.32 1.04 30.45 Quercus gambeli .31 2.53 3. ,9 3.16 .63 3.81 2.19 2.44 .6, 19.31 2.14 Chrysothamnus sPp. .51 .30 .77 1.44 2.78 1.62 .24 .66 2.28 10.60 1.18 Pinus edulis· .36 .06 .10 .01 .12 .10 .16 .21 .43 1.5, .17 Juniper spp. .37 .09 .06 .22 .49 .20 .06 .05' .43 1.97 .22 Tetradymia canescens .14 .04 .09 .03 .03 •,9 .02 .10 1.04 .12 Mahonia repens .01 .07 .04 .02 .04 .03 .21 .02 .07 .24 ~03 . •61 .07 .03 Tr • .•01 •24 .03 .0, .18 .02 .07 .01 .67 .07 .12 1.16 .13 .16 .39 .04 Ribes spp , Artemisia frigida .17 .03 .01 Pachistima myrsinites Tr. .01 Ephedra spp. .02 Opuntia spp. Tr. Prunus sp. .06 .04 .12 .03 .16 .03 .06 .02 .12 .09 .01 .13 .06 .06 Tr. .01 Rhus trilobata .31 .30 .06 Eurotia 1anata .21 .76 Tr. Rosa spp. .07 .23 Total Browse 14.22 22.92 22.06 21.50 22.51 24.89 18.76 26.14 23.12 196.12 21.79 Percent of total area covered by overs tory 16.99 9.5'9 12.48 7.44 1 9.44 11.61 7.i9 16.6, 11.10 99.90 �-23- Table 12. --Analysis of Variance,. Total Browse Line Transect Data, In Feet, Pasture 1 Through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Source of Variation .Degrees of Freedom Total Sum of Squares Mean Square 191 33,568.35 Among pasture means 8 1,640.67 205.08 Within transect means 183 31,927.68 174.47 F= 205.08/174.47= 1.18, F.05 = 1.94 �r.~ ".It ~~< Table 13.-- Computations Based on Line Transect Data, on Total Browse, In Feet, Pastures 1 Through 9,_ ;L?,.:~:tJ~.Jl~:J..;:L~t ~G~!'l~,. g.P~!':}!ll~!l.:t~.;L~:t!t,t~.<'p..J. M!3,~lc~!",. ,.9pJ~~?9-9.,_J9?}.o -- ----------- --~ Pasture Mean .' ., Standard Deviation percent goefficient of Variation 1 14.22 7.32 ' 51.4 2.03 10.16-18.28 83 12 13 2 22.92 12.34 53.9 2.42 18.08-27.76 85 13 26 3 22.06 11.83 53.6 2.16 17.74-26.38 84 12 30 4 21.50 13.62 63.3 2.72 16.06-26.94 118 17 25 5 22.51 11.20 49.7 2.72 17.07-27.95 76 12 17 6 24.89 12.70 51.0 3.53 17.83-31.95 83 12 13 7 .18.76 1-4.86 79.2 4.29 10.18-27.34 201 29 12 8 26.14 13.89 53.1 2.35 21.44-30.84 82 12 35 9 23.13 15.12 65.3 3.30 16.52-29.72 127 19 21 21.79 13.32 61.1 .98 19.87-23.71 101 15 192 Standard Error Mean} 2 Standard Errors & Level of Accuracy Transects Required Transects Taken .p.. I All Pastures I).J �-25- The great variation within pastures requires that a large sample be taken if the researcher is to obtain results accurate to the. 10 level of significance. Sample size, in the case of this study, is controlled, however, by the time element which prohibited the taking of a larger sample. The primary merit of this study will become apparent when the transects are remeasured .and the data, obtained from remeasurement, are compared with present findings. This remeasurement should be made in five to ten years. Five browse species; serviceberry, mountain mahogany, big sagebrush, bitte:rbrush, and oak, were chosen on the basis of abundance and preference to be further analyzed statistically. ~/ Tables 14 through 18 show the results of analysis of variance tests on the above species. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in these species between pastures, with the exception of bitterbrush. This species was significantly different at the .05 level of significance. Figure 4 was designed to illustrate where these differences exist. This is indicated by a line graph on which each line represents the mean (X) two standard errors. Those lines which do not overlap indicate the pastures which are Significantly different. i It was found that ::significant differences exist between Pasture 2 (cattle--heavy stocking rate) and Pastu:re '7 (deer--light stocking rate). No bitterbrush was encountered on the samples from Pasture 1 (sheep -- heavy stocking rate); therefore, this pasture could not be included when total bitte:rbrush density was analyzed statistically. The analysis of variance test indicates that serviceberry, the most common and plentiful browse species on the study site, approaches closely to being significantly different at the .05 level. An F value of 1. cB8 was obtained and an F value of 1. 94 is needed for significance at the . 05 level. Future studies will probably show increasing significant differences occurring between the pastures. Bitterbrush, on the other hand, while showing significant differences, comprises only a very small percentage of the browse found on the study area; and due to this lack of abundance it is also doubtful if it is of major importance in the diet of the animal species present. ~/ An analysis of deer stomach samples is planned to determine further which browse species are utilized to the greatest extent by deer on winter range. �-26- Table 14. --Analysis of Variance, Serviceberry, Line Transect Data, in Feet, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Source of Variation Degrees of . Freedom Sum of Squares 191 11,366.63 8 864.13 108.02 183 1p,502.50 57.39 Total Among Pasture Means Within Transect Means F:; 108.02/57.39:;:: 1.88, F.05", Mean Square 1.94 Table 15. --Analysis of Variance, Mountain Mahogany, Line Transect Data, in Feet, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker,· Colorado, 1957. .Source of Variation Total Degree_s-of Freedom '. Sum of Squares Mean Square 191 5,620.49 Means 8 249.86 31. 23 Within-Txansect Means 183 5,370.63 29.35 Among Pasture F", 31. 23/29. 35 = 1. 06, F. 05 '" 1. 94 �-27-- Table 16. --Analysis of Variance, Big Sagebrush, Line Transect Data, in Feet, Pasture "1through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, "Colorado, 1957. Mean" Square Source of Variation Degrees of Freedom Sum of Squares Total 191 4,310.05 Amorg Pasture Means 8 206.10 25.76 Within Transect Means 183 4,103.95 22.42 F= 25.76 /22.42 = 1.15, F. 05"" 1. 94 Table 17. --Analysis of Variance, Gambell s Oak, Line Transect Data, in Feet, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Source of Variation Total Among Pasture Means Wtthln.T'ransect Means F -= 31. 93/38.49 Mean "Square Degrees of Freedom Sum of Squares 191 7,298.91 8 255.42 31. 93 7,043.49 38,49 = .83, F. 05:111 1. 94 �-28 - Table 18. --Analysis of Variance, Bitterbrush, Line Trmnsect Data, in Feet, Pasture 1 through 9, . Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Degrees of Freedom Sum of . Squares 191 1,086.73 Among Pasture Means 8 106.79 13.35 Within.'I'ransect Means 183 979.94 5.35 Source of Variation Total F = 13.35/ 5.35 ~ 2.50, Mean Square F.05 = 1.94 Age Classes: Browse measurements were placed into the following categories, or age classes: seedling? young, mature, 01' decadent. Table 19 shows the percentage of measurements occurzing in each age class for each pasture, and for the sum of all browse measurements when the pastures are treated as a unity. Figure 5 indicates the same idea, and enables the reader to see and compare these percentages. It was assumed by the writer, at the onset of this study, that plant vigor was directly reiated to plant age, utilizing animal species and the rate of stocking. Data gathered during the study, however, indicates that this assumption may have to be altered OlI' explained. Data from the line transects show that in all instances the percentage of seedlings is greater in those pastures which are heavily stocked than in those pastures stocked at rates other than heavy. Tho1'Epastures, with the exception of Pasture 4 (deer-heavy stocking rate) also have a percentage of decadent plants higher than the mean percentage for all pastures. It is the writer's contention, based on the evidence now available, that this greater percentage of plant measurements categorized in the seedling age class may be the result of two conditions: (1) with a large percentage of the plant measurements found to be decadent there may be a partial release from competition which enables the seedlings to survive, or (2) Parker (1951)does not recommend use of the line transect in plant reproduction studies and he states: �:1 """C)} !<.• ~ ../, 100 90 80 ,70 50 +-' d OJ e 50 ~ 40 30 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 9 Mean Pasture 100 , 90, 80", " .':. 70,' " " 60 .. ',p , 'd," OJ a 50Q) fl..t ,.,40 30 20 10 0 7 Pasture Figure 5. -- Percentage of browse measurements occurring in each age class; line transect data, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game Experi.mentai Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. (5 -- seedling, Y -- young, M -- mature., and D'- decadent) " : .••t- .~v �i.r'&' :/:1 '-J 110 J 't'!,~ .• All Pastures I I I I 9 7 I I I 8 I (Mean All Pastures) I I I 6 I I I I G) ~ ~ I I 5 If I I 4 I I I I 3 I I 2 t I 1 -1 o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Density in Feet Figure 6. -- Browse-reproduotion meanst2 standard errors, line transeot data, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. �-29- Table 19. --Percentage of Plant Measurements Occurring in Each Age Class, Line Transect Data, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game . Experimental station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Pasture Seedling Age Class Young 1 10. 10 27.27 46.97 15.66 2 4.66 12.69 71. 26 11. 39 3 2.27 10.59 76.38 10. 76 4 2.42 8.26 8l. 80 7.52 5 2.20 5.78 82.64 9.38 6 l. 25 4.17 87.50 7.08 7 2.30 6.32 80.46 10.92 8 2.09 4.78 87.01 6. 12 9 l. 72 3.88 87.07 7.33 Mean Percent 2.82 8.30 79.92 8.96 Mature Decadent Where vegetation is sparse, the line transect may not give an adequate picture of the shrub population, particularly on well established seedlings. ~/ No statistical tests were made which included all of the different age classes. statistical analysis was made, however, on the basis of absence or presence of reproduction, on all browse species, and on the five major browse species referred to previously. Seedlings and young plants were added together and are hereafter referred to as reproduction. This was done for two reasons: (1) numbers found in the separate age -3/· Plots for the 1958 field season will be of an area type which will allow a oomparison -"'.. . to be made of the results obtained when a line transect, used. '. and a plot possessfng area are ' ' �-30- classes were too few, and adding them together aided in the statistical analysis; and (2) the primary purpose of this study is to gain insight into the browse reproduction picture as it has occurred since the experimental pastures were inaugurated; it is assumed by the writer that both the seedling and young age classes include plants which have come in since the pastures were originated. Table 2.0 gives the results of the statistical analysis for reproduction, of all browse species, as determined by Chi-square tests. Two pastures were found to be significantly different from the remainder at the . 10 level of significance. These pastures were Pasture 1 (sheep -- heavy stocking rate), and Pasture 4 (deer-- heavy stocking rate). Table 21 shows the results of the statistical analysis on browse reproduction of the five major browse species. Pasture 2 (cattle -- heavy stocking rate) was found to be significantly different from the rest of the pasture at the . 05 level of significance. Pasture 9 (sheep -- moderate rate of stocking) was very close to being significantly different at the . 10 level of significance. Table 22 and Figure 6 are included to give a summary of the data gathered to date on browse reproduction in the experimental pastures. To be. especially noted is the great amount of variation which was found to exist in each pasture. The variation among the transects l!!!. given pasture is glreater than the variation between the I>astures. This points up the extreme differences found to exist among the transects ineach pasture due to the variations.in exposure, slope, and the many site factors having influence on the occurrence and growth of browse plants. It will be noted that all of the objectives set down for this study have not been reported on, and that certain others have received only a partial treatment at this time. This is due to the lack, or insufficiency, of the data at the time of report preparation. Future field work will rectify this present shortcoming. Plans for Future Study:. 1. An analysis of deer stomach samples is planned to aid further in determining which browse species are utilized to the greatest extent on the winter range surrounding the study area. 2. Plots for the 1958 field season will be of an area type which may, or may not, disclose weaknesses of line intercept transects as used in browse reproduction studies. �-31- Table 20. --Chi-Square Analysis, Based on Presence a: Absence, or All Browse Reproduction * Found on Line Transects, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game .Exper'imental Station, Meeker, Colorado, 1957. Re,Eroduction on Line Transects Pasture Occurrrence Absent Present Observed 1.00 12.00 1 E~ected Observed 4.88 7.00 8,12 19.00 EX,Eected Observed 9.75 13.00 16.25 17.00 Expected Observed 11.25 5.00 18.75 20.00 2 3 4 EX,Eected Observed 9.38 8.00 Chi-Square Values ** Absent Present Individual Chi-Square 3.08 1.85 4.93 .78 ,47 1.25 .27 .16 .43 2.04 1.23 3.27 .41 ,25 .66 .00 .00 .00 1.39 .83 2.22 ,63 ,38 1.01 .57 .34 .91 15.62 9.00 5 E~ected Observed 6.38 5.00 10.62 8,00 EX,Eected Observed 4.88 7,00 8.12 5.00 6 7 ,E~ected Observed 4.50 16.00 7.50 19.00 E~ected, Observed 13,12 10.00 21. 88 11.00 Expected 7.88 13.12 8 9 * Reproduction here includes all members of seedling and young age classes. ** Chi-square value for. 10 level of significance, with 1 degree of freedom = 2.70. �-32- Table 21. -- Chi-Square Analysis Based on Presence or Absence of Serviceberry, Mountain Mahogany, Gambel' sOak, Bitterbrush, and Big-Sagebrush Reproduction * Found in Line Transects, Pasture 1 through 9, Little Hills Game Experimental Station, Meeker, _Colorado, 1957. ReEroduction on Line Transects Chf-Square Values** i Pasture Occurrence Absent Present Observed 5.00 8.00 E!Eected Observed 6.97 8.00 6.03 18.00 EXEected Observed 13.95 15.00 12.05 15.00 1 2 .3 E!Eected Observed 16.09 11.00 13.91 14.00 EXEected Observed 13;41 12.00 11.59 5.00 E!Eected' Observed 9.12 9.00 7.88 4.00 4 5 6 Ex:eected Observed 6.97 8.00 6.03 4.00 EXEected Observed 6.44 20.00 5.56 15.00 E!Eected Observed 18.78 15.00 16.22 6.00 7 8 9 Expected 11.26 Absent Present Individual Chi-Square .56 .64 1.20 2.54 2.94 5.48 .07 .08 .15 .43 .50 .93 .91 1.05 1.96 .59 .68 1.27 .38 .44 .82 .08 .09 .17 1.24 1.44 2.68 9.74 * Reproduction here includes all members of seedling and young age classes. ** Chi-square value for. 10 level of significance, with 1 degree of freedom = 2.70. �-33- Table 22. --Computations Based on Numbers of Browse Reproduction * Found on Line Transects, Pastures 1 through 9, Little Hills ·Game Experimental station, Meeker,. Colorado, 1957. Pasture Mean standard Deviation Percent Coefficient of Variation 1 5,69 5.31 2 2.57 3 Standard Error Meani 2 standard Errors 93.3 1.48 2.73-8.65 2.68 104.2 ,52 L 53-3.61 2.27 2.86 125.9 .52 1. 23-3. 31 4 1. 76 1. 66 94,3 .33 1.10 -2. 42 5 1. 70 2.86 168.2 .69 .32-3,08 6 1. 00 1. 04 104.0 .29 .42-1. 53 7 1. 25 2.20 176.0 .64 -.03-2.53 8 1. 31 1. 51 115.2 .26 .79-1. 83 9 1. 24 .1. 90 153.2 .41 .42-2.06 All Pastures 2,00 2.76 138.0 .20 1, 60-2. 40 * Reproduction here includes all members of seedling and young age classes. �-34- 3. - Determine the relative importance of seedlings and/or root sprouts, by species, in browse maintenance and reproduction under varying kinds and dtegrees of utilization. 4. To investigate further the relationship, if any, that stocking rates and animal species have upon browse reproduction potentialtties. Literature Cited: Canfield, R. H. 1941. Application of the line interception method in sampling range vegetation. J. of For. 39 ~4) : 388 - 394. Parker, K. W. 1951. A method for measuring trend in range condition on national forest ranges: with supplemental instructions for measurements and observation of vigor, composition, and browse. USDA (For. Ser.). 22 pp with 10 pp. supplement . . Riordan, L. E. 1956. Selectivity and utilization of three key species of range forage by cattle, sheep, and deer in western Colorado. M. S. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo. 196 pp. Snedecor, G. W. 1956. Statistical methods (5th ed.). Iowa. 534 pp. The Iowa State Press. Ames, Submitted by:_ _..;;E;;.;;;l.;;;d~ie:;......;.W.;...;';"'· .;;;M;;;.u;;;;;s;;.;t;.;;;a;;;.r.;;;d~,_.;;.;Jr;;.;.;..._ __ ~Approvedby: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date: ~A~p~r~i~1,~19;...5~8;..._ __ ~----------- �I~~11111Iij'lllii(~11~IIl1I~nl~~]~lllilrllll~11 RESEARCH CENTER LlBR..0..RY DIVIS!ON Of WILDLIFE P O. BOX 2287 FORT COLLINS. CO, 80521 BDOW022257 -35- April, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of;...._ _ _..;:C;.,.;O;.,:L::;,.O=RA=D;.,.;O;___ ProjectNo. ~VV~-_3~8~-_R~-_1~1~ __~_De~~e~r_-E~lk~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t_i_on~s~ _ VVorkPlan No. ill Job No. 19 ----~~----------------~--~~~~--~~------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Identification of key browse species on elk winter range. May 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Abstract: The key species were analyzed by means of 47 production-utilization transects employed on key sites at sample intervals, which covered the key-plant distribution on the primary study area. The production-utilization technique involved the tagging and measuring current annual growth on 10 branches of selected browse plants along a 10-chain transect in the fall, from which production was determined; and remeasuring them in the spring to determine utilization. Each tagged plant was assigned an age and hedging classification. Pellet-count samples, each on an area of 1/100 acre, were taken at each one-chain interval. The average annual growth of all species was 1. 72 inches in 1956 and 1. 99.inches in 1957. statistical analysis showed significant differences in production between species. Hedging claasifications for the 470 tagged plants were: light, 3 percent, moderate, 35 percent, and heavy, 62 percent. Serviceberry showed the heaviest past use. Objectives: 1. To identify the key browse species on winter range. 2. To determine condition of key browse species on winter range. 3. To provide a factual, quantitative appraisal of key browse conditions as an aid to more effective winter-range management. Methods: The key species were analyzed by means of 47 production - utilization transects employed on key sites at sample intervals, which covered the key-plant distribution on 111e primary study area. �-36- The production-utilization technique involved the tagging and measuring 10 branches of selected browse plants along a 10- chain transect in the fall, from which production was determined; and remeasuring them in the spring to determine utilization. Each tagged plant was assigned an age and hedging classification. Pellet-count samples, each on an area of 1/100 acre, were taken at one-chain interval. Number of elk-day use. Use .in terms of "elk days" was ascertained by pellet-group counts made in conjunction with browse-uttltzation studies .. Circular plots rather than strip plots were used, since no actual transect center line was established. The rock piles marking one-chain intervals were employed as centers of the 1/100th acre plots (ll-foot, 9 - inch radius) constituting the sample areas. A string of the proper radius was used to circumscribe the perimeters of the circular plots. Thus, 470 plots were established, representirg, of course, all areas covered by the browse studies. When the transects were established in .the fall of 1956, pellet groups and droppings were either removed or 'cnshed so that when utilization .measurernents were taken the following spring only those groups deposited during the winter were counted. Pellet . \ groups and droppings, counted .inthe spring of 1957, indicated the intensity of winter use by elk and other-animals. The pellet groups were counted separately, by animal species, for each plot, and these data were recorded on the reverse side of the 10point transect form. .' - In accordance with ..Forest Setvice(1954) standards, 13 pelletg roups pe:rday for deer . and elk, and 12 dropping groups per day for cattle and horses, were used in determining the respective number of days of use by each 'of thgse animal gfuups. The number of elk days of use on the area constituted a valuable supplement to the utilization data, highly useful in interpreting browsing tntensities on each utilization transect. Extensive Utilization Check. An extreme coverage of both the north and south exposures, made during the summer of 1957, provided information of a supplementary nature for the more quantitative comparison with transect data. This survey, designed to sample a much larger portion of the winter range, provided an excellent check on the measured transects, revealing whether or not they were representative ·of general use. It also helped to account for the variation in use, to be expected from year to year depending upon snow conditions. The technique employed in executing these checks was essentially a walked-line transect, along which the average percent of utilization of the key species was ocularly estimated and recorded. Concurrently with utilization estimates, age and form classifications were assigned to 10 plants of each key browse species present on the transect site. These classifications were made at 100-step intervals, totaling �Ai t""';'? _1. . ."=.' -37- about 1, 000 yards for each transect. Only one observer, using the proper field forms, was necessary to carry out this part of the study. A simple procedure was used to insure uniformity in the extensive survey. Each check was confined to one vegetative type, and a straight line was maintained where possible. Actual measurements of the permanent transects served as a guide for the utilization estimates, and the predetermined sample intervals aided in systematic application of the checks. A total of 121 checks were made, covering all exposures, cover types, and altitudes. Since no actual transect line was established, it is possible that personal bias may have resulted from unconscious avoidance of difficult terrain and vegetative cover. Thus, after 90 steps were taken in a general direction, the observer made alternating 900 turns and deltberately took the last 10 measured paces in a straight line. Upon completion of the final step, the bush nearest his toe was selected and classified. Age classifications were the same as those used in conjunction with "themeasured transects. Form classifications of browse plants were according to Dasmann (1951): Form class 1: All available, little orno hedging, Form class 2: All available, moderately hedged, Form class 3: All available, tightly hedged. Form class 4: Largely available, little or no hedging. Form class 5: Largely available, moderately hedged. Form class 6: Largely available, tightly hedged. Form class 7: Mostly unavailable. Form class 8: Unavailable. Results The general condition of key species was based on the following criteria: 1. Age and hedging classifications -- assigned to each of 470 tagged plants on the measured transects. 2. Present vigor--as indicated by 1956 and 1957 browse production measurements from over 4, 500 shoots each year, 3. Supplementary age and form - class data -- assigned to 1,470 plants during the extensive range check. Of the 47 transects established in key--species areas, 24 were in oakbrush, 17 in serviceberry, and 6 in chokecherry. All were on southern, southeastern, or southwestern exposures. The estimated pe:rcentage of slope on these sample sites varied from 15 to 70, with the mean being 46.2 I 3.8 .parcent. �-38- The age and hedging classifications in Tables 1 and 2 as follows: assigned to each of the tagged plants are given . Table 1. --Key Species Hedging Classification for 470 Tagged Plants, .South'Fork Winter Elk-Range, Summer, 1956. Light Species No. .Oakbrush Serviceberry Chokecherry Total Average'% 8 4 5 17 Degree of Hedgi!!S: Moderate No. % % No. % 105 32 26 163 127 134 29 290 53 79 49 3 2 8 44 19 43 Heavy 62 35 3 Table 2--Key Species Age Classifications tor 470 Tagged Plants, South ForkWinte r Elk Range, Summer, 19560 Species Oakbrush Serviceberry .Chokecherry Total Average % Degree of Hedging Mature You!!S: No. No. % % 64 27 25 116 27 16 29 25 141 85 29 255 58 50 49 54 .Decadent No. % 35 58 6 99 15 34 9 21 The 'age classifications of key shrubs did not include seedlings, as they were largely unavailable rlllririgwinter and, consequently, were not tagged for measurement. Seedlings were, however, included in the age and form classifications assigned to key shrubs during the extensive range survey. This provided supplemental information relative to browse reproduction and trend, all necessary to an evaluation of the condition of game-range forage, Form classifications, since they were a composite rating of past utilization and present availability, provided additional information relative to condition of the key shrubs. �···~ .~ 1 ..~4... . ~ / -39- Table 3 shows percentages, based on total count, of the age, hedging, and availability classification for all shrubs. Form classes are broken down to show availability and degree of hedging separately. These data probably give a better picture of the overall condition of the key shrubs than the measured transect data, because they include all age classes, vegetative types, and exposures. Table 3--Key Species: Age, Hedging, and Availability Classifications for 1,470 . plants, extensive utilization survey, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer, 1957: Age .Classifications, % Hedging Classifications , Seedlings Young 8.2 42.3 Light Moderate Mature Decadent Dead 26.8 Heavy % 24.5 43.0 32.5 20.5 2.2 Availability Availability % All available Largely available Largely unavailable Unavailable Dead 82.7 .9.5 4.3 1.3 2.2 These classifcations were further analyzed by key species to indicate their relative forage value '(Table 4 and 5). Table 4--Age Classifications for Key Browse Species: 1,470 plants, Extensive Utilization Survey, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer 1957. Age _Classification Oakbrush No. % Seedlings Young Mature Decadent Dead Totals 73 230 137 59 21 520 14.0 44.2 26.4 11. 4 4.0 100.0 Serviceberry %' , No. Chokecherry No. % 21 267 190 215 7 700 27 124 67 27 5 250 3.0 38.1 27.2 30.7 1.0 100.0 10.8 49.6 26.8 10.8 2.0 100.0 ft �-40- Table 5. --Form Classifications for Key Browse Species: 1,470 Plants, Extens.ive Utilization Survey, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer, 1957. Form Class Oakbrush No. % .Serviceberry No. % Chokeche:r.ry No. .% 1-All avail. , light 2.-All avail. , mod. 3-All avail., deca. 4-Lgly. avail., light 5-Lgly. avail. , mod. 6-Lgly. avail., deca. 7-Lgly. unavailable 8- Unavailable 9-Dead Totals 156 139 97 10 35 9 36 16 22 520 135 268 187 1 45 29 27 1 7 700 72 111 52 0 9 11 0 0 5 250 30.0 26.7 18.6 2.0 6.7 1.9 6.9 3.0 4.2 100.0 19.3 38.3 26.7 0.2 6.4 4.1 3.8 0.2 1.0 100.0 28.8 44.4 20.8 0.0 3.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 100.0 Of the 147 (100-step) transects employed, 116 were in shrub types and 31 were in aspen types; 121 were on general southern exposures and 26 were on general northern exposures. Tables 6, 7, and 8 compare age and form classifications by exposure and vegetative type, indicating the relative forage value of a given area. Percentages were used for comparison because the number of transects for different types and exposures was unequal. Table 6-...;Comparisonof Age Classes in Aspen andShrub Types, 1,470 Shrubs, South .Fork ,Winter ElkRange, Summer, 1957. Age Class Aspen Type, % Seedlings Young Mature Decadent Dead· Totals 3.9 55.1 28.1 11.0 1.9 100.0 Shrub-Type, % 9.4 38.8 26.5 23.0 2.3 100.0 �-41- Table 7--Comparison of Age Classes on Northern and Southern Exposures, 1,470 Plants, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer, 1957. Age Class Seedling Young Mature Decadent Dead Total Northern Exposure, % Southern Exposure, % S,.8 33.4 28.5 28.8 3.5 100.0 8.8 44.1 26.4 18.7 2.0 100.0 Production measurements obtained during the two years were analyzed, supplying an index to present vigor in key shrubs. The total annual growth in inches was computed for each tagged branch and for each transect. Table 9 shows the gross data collected for 1956 and 1957. Table 9--Browse Production for Key Species, 470 Tagged Branches, South Fork Winter Elk-Range, Summer, 1956and 1957. Inches Production Measurements 1956 1957 Total number shoots measured Total length of annual growth Growth index* Average length available Amount utilized in summer Percent summer utilization 4,764 6,151 1. 72 1. 21 349 5.7% 4,955 7,430 1. 99 1. 47 105 1.4% _*Average length of the ung:razed current annual growth. Forage production data were further evaluated by an analysis of variance to ascertain the range in current annual growth due to age, species, year, and/or utilization. The number of twigs per branch were systematically listed according to this four-factor classification. To avoid unequal sub-classes, the data were sub-totaled and means were computed for each category. The light hedging classification was omitted from the final analysis to avoid non-data, since there were several instances where mature and decadent age classes did not show light utilization. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 10. �t...J) :<~ 7."'~ Table 8.--Comparison "OfForm Classes of 1,470 Key Shrubs in Aspen ani Brush Types, Northern and ~9]l;t!1!3!!1_ ~po,~:u!,.e.~", ~?:u:th,¥_O!~.Wj.nter ~~.k.!tang~",~u:m!l1e!.,: 19$7." ..- ¥O!'!ll C;t.ass ... ~..-_'.., l..--All available, little 2-All available, 3-All available," 4--Largely Vegetative Type, % Number Aspen % Shrub EXposure % Northern Southern -, 363 24.7 31.0 23.0 29.2 23.7 moderately hedged 518 35.2 41.3 33.6 44.6 3;.2 destructively 336 22.8 1.3.2 25.4 6.9 26.3 11 .7 .3 ' .9 2.3 .4 89 6.1 4.5 6.5 1.3 5.8 available, or no hedging little -hedge'd or no hedgi~ 5--Large1y a-vailable> moderate'lY'''hedged I ~ . 6--Largely available, ~' destructively hedged I 39 2.1 1.3 3.0 .4 3.1 7--Mostly unavailable 6-3 4.3 6.1 3.8 5.1 4.0 8--Unavailable 17 1.2 .3 1.4 0.0 1.4 9--Dead 34 2.3 2.0 2.4 3.6 2.0 1,410 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Totals ' ..••.-1. �-43- Table 10--Analysis of Variance in Forage Production in Key Species, 1956 and 1957, South Fork 'Winter Elk Range (Comparison of Variation in Production Due to Year, Species, Age and Utilization). ' Source of Variation Age Hedging Species Years Age and hedging Age and species Age and years Hedging and species Hedging and years Species and years Error !I Degrees of Freedom 2 1 2 1 2 4 2 2 2 2 16 Means Squared F Value .22 1. 08 3.33 .75 .48 .34 .23 .25 .42 .28 .31 .71 3.48 10. 74!/ 2.42 1. 55 1. 09 .74 .80 1. 35 .90 ,F Table Value .01 .05 6.23 3.63 8.53 4.49 6.23 3.63 4.49 8.53 6.23 3.63 3.01 4.77 6.23 3.63 6.23 3.63 6.23 3.63 3.63 6.23 1/ All three-way and the four-w~y interaction were lumped, and used as the error since averages were used in this .analysts, !/ Highly Significant (.01 level). The analysis of variance showed a highly significant difference (.01 level of significance) in average annual growth between species. The computed F-value for hedging, although not significant at the. 05 level, was significant at the. 10 level, indicating a considerable degree of variation in production due to utilization. The other main effects -- age and year -- did not approach significance, as was likewise true of all two-way interactions tested. In order to compammore easily the differences by species, Table 11 shows the mean, range, .and standard deviation of the current annual growth (twig length) for 1957. Table l1--Average Annual Twig Length (Growth Index) of Key Browse Species, 470 Tagged Plants, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer, 1957. Species Oakbrush Serviceberry Chokecherry Mean 1. 60 2.79 2.26 Current annual growth, inches. Range Std. Deviation .66-2.09 .93 1. 10-3.88 1. 03 1. 46-2. 73 .44 �-44- Browse production for 1957was measured on the same branches, for which the percentage of previous winter utilization was known. Thus, a statistical correlation coefficient was computed to ascertain the effect of varying degrees of utilization on production, and to supplement data relative to the vigor of key shrubs. The percentage of utilization for the winter of 19.56-1957, and the subsequent average twig growth (1957~productionmeasurements) , for each of the 47 transects were used in this computation, Results showed a positive correlation coefficient of .33, significant at the .05 level of accuracy (45 degrees of freedom). Although this is a weak correlation, it indicates an increase in production due to heavier utilization. This phenomena ..has also been observed in various clipping studies in the past (Garrison, 1953), and appears to be characteristic of some of tle shrub species. Similar correlations for the individual browse species showed that this charactertstic was most prevalent in oakbrush, which had a correlation coefficient of . 42 (22 degrees of freedom), significant at the . 05 level. The correlation coefftcients of .35 for serviceberry, and. 05 for chokecherry, were not significant. The implications of these findings, with regard to vigor, will have more meaning when discussed in conjunction with the data on utilization. A total of 56 (11.9 percent) of the 470 branches tagged the previous year (1956)were. dead at the time of the 1957 production readings. Where this occurred, a similar. branch, having the same age and hedging classification (usually on the same shrub), was selected and measured. Elk Days of Use These data were analyzed to ascertain, for key areas, the number ci. elk days of use, the relative degree of utilization by elk, deer, cattle, and horses, and to some extent, the season of use for all species. Pellet counts were not comparable by key browse species since two or more such species were usually present on each sample area. The first step in this analysis was correlation of the number of elk droppings and the degree of utilization per transect, necessary to an appraisal of the value of pellet counts as a supplementary index to browsing .mtenstty. The total count of pellet groups and the percentage of utilization were used in this computation. Results showed a positive correlation coefficient of .29, significant at the .05 level (45 degrees of freedom) thus giving a weak confirmation of the hypothesis that. where utilization is high there is a correspondingly high pellet count. Table 12 shows the average number of pellet groups per transect for the four principal animal species utilizing the South Fork range. Most of the horse and cattle droppings were observed on the lower 'South'Fork on 1heprivately-owned land. Actual field observations indicated that a large percentage of the horse and cattle use, as indicated by the pellet counts, represents utilization of herbaceous species rather than shrubs. �-45- Table 12. -- Average Number of Pellet Groups and Droppings Per Transect (1/10th Acre Sample) By Animal Species for 47 Transects, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer, 1957.· Pellet Groups per Transect Range Standard Deviation Animal . Mean Elk 24.49 5 - 44 11.1 0- 18 2.5 Deer 2.00 0- 11 2,2 Horse .93 Cattle .53 0- 7 1.5 The average number of days-of-use per acre was computed for elk, deer, horses, and cattle. In the case of elk and deer, it was possible to separate total use, as based on pellet groups.: into winter and spring origin, since pellet groups had been recorded under these two categories. Table 13 shows the total days-of-use per acre for all four animals, and the number and percentage of days-rf.-use for both deer and elk and for both winter and spring. Table 13; -- Comparison of nays-of-use Per acre for Elk, Deer, Itqrses; and Cattle (Average of 470 Sample Plots), South Fork Winter Elk,;Range, Summer, 1957. Comparison Total days of use/acre Winter days of use/acre Spring days of use/acre Percent use, winter Percent use, .spring .Elk 16.03 14.52 1. 15 90.6 9.4 Deer 1. 50 .23 1. 31 14.9 85.1 Horse* .67 Cattle* .44 *Cattle and horse droppings were not recorded according to season of use. The greatest proportion of elk droppings were of the winter type, whereas most of the deer droppings were of the spring type. The seasonal types are characteristically different as a result of differences in the food consumed. Consequently, spring-type droppings were indicative of a herbaceous diet, and winter-type droppings indicated a predominantly browse diet. Deer droppings classed as winter-type (14. 9 percent) probably were deposited during the early fall, previous to migration to' winter range in the lower White River drainage, about 70 miles southwest of the South.Fork .. Few, if any, deer winter in South.Fork canyon proper. �-46- Analysis of Key Species Condition. -- Density, floristic composition, and vigor should be considered in judging vegetation condition. Using the key area-key species management concept, condition of big-game ranges is based on the condition of these critical factors. Indices to elk winter-range conditions on the South Fork, as assembled in this study, are browse density; the relative number of desirable and non-desirable species; vigor of browse plants as indicated by growth form, length of annual growth, abundance of flowers and seed stalks, and age classes; and observations of soil condition, erosion, run-off, litter, etc .. Some of these indices are also indicative of the present range trend, another important and closely related management corstderatton. The condition of a given unit of range is relative to the productive potential of the various sites involved and to the animal species concerned. Thus, an evaluation of the condition of any range would require species standards or criteria. In the case of livestock range, criteria have been developed to evaluate condition on various range types; and some land management agencies have developed local criteria for determining condition of big-game ranges. No criteria were available, however, for specific application to the present study area. Therefore, information such as could be obtained from the literature, supplemented by various improvisions, were used in the appraisal of elk-range conditions of the South Fork. Generally, the vegetation on key portions .of the South Fork winter range is subclimax in type, resulting mainly from fires but also from livestock and elk grazing. This range type is considered to be th.f;l~t productive for big game (Hill, 1956). . ~:.--::., - -." : '. . The shrub-density Irdex of available browse on the primary study area was approximately 21 percent. As related to elk management, it is important to know what percentage of the composition is of desirable and of undesirable species. The U. S. Forest Service, Region.4 (1954)has classified trees and shrubs on mountain-brush-type ranges into desirable, intermediate, and least desirable categories for big game, based on the following factors; (a) their place in succession within the plant community, (b) value as watershed cover, and (c) value for forage. When applied to the South Fork, this classification would raise the shrub composition as follows: 22.6 percent desirable, 68. 1 percent intermediate, and 1. 5 percent least desirable; the remainder would be unclassified. Oakbrush and chokecherry were classed as intermediate shrubs for Region 4; however, on the South Fork there is little doubt that they would be classed as desirable, both from the standpoint of successional position and value as forage. Thus, after adjusting the classification of these two shrubs, the rating would be as follows; desirable --57.2 percent, intermediate -- 33.5 percent, and least desirable--1. 5 percent. Snowberry, common but not preferred on this range, may have value as a secondary indicator of overuse. This shrub is a preferred species on some ranges (Reid, 1942). �-47- Sagebrush, although not classed as a .priimary forage species, is relatively abundant and moderately utilized. Various studies have shown that this shrub has a high nutritional content, which is retained through the winter months. For this reason it can be considered as a valuable component of the winter range vegetation. This species is a very important winter forage for deer in the intermountain region (Smith, 1950). Range condition should consider soil as well as vegetation. However, since soil condition, erosion, runoff, etc., were only casually observed, only general comments can be made here. The overall condition of the soil should be classed as high-poor' to low-fair .!/ . Accelerated erosion was noted only on the steeper slopes and rocky soils. A few active gullies of local origin were present on such sites. Very heavy runoff during the spring of 1957resulted in material displacement of soil and rock along the lower reaches of Lost Solar Creek, and on certain other areas. The small accumulations of plant litter, restricted mainly to areas protected by shrubs or tree growth, are generally insufficient to protect the soil. Much of the space between plants consists of bare ground. Trampling by cattle appeared to be preventing litter accumulation on some of the lower sagebrush flats, and heavy trampling was noted on some much used grazing areas. In regard to vigor, the most palatable shrubs on this range, especially in the younger age classes, showed fairly open growth form 'with abundant production of foliage. Some of the older oak and serviceberry stems showed evidences of extremely heavy use, but good growth and recovery at present. The present degree of utilization, 55.2 percent, does not appear to be excessive and, in general, appears to be stimulating growth, except on a few of the more heavy utilized sites. However, this situation should bear close observation, for past studies have shown that, despite the stimulating effect of terminal twig removal, twig harvesting can become a devitalizing process if carried on at too great an intensity for too long a time (Garrison, 1953). All age classes are represented in the key species present, and the occurrence of dead plants was low, less ·then 5 percent in all species. Seedlings were relatively abundant, especially on some sites. The highest incidence of decadent plants was in serviceberry (30.7 percent); oak and chokecherry showed less thant 12 percent. Serviceberry appeared to be the least vigorous of the three key shrubs, as indicated by the higher percentage of decadent plants, fewer seedlings, and fewer young age-classes .. Form classifications showed that 92.2 percent of the key shrubs were largely to fully available. This appears to be a desirable Situation, provided elk herd numbers can be held in check. Passmore and Hepqurn.(1955), in speaking of deer, stated that the quality of winter range is dependent on the absolute quantity of twigs of palatable species produced within reach of browsing animals. It should be pointed out here, that the percentage of available browse, as indicated by these classifications, would vary according to the severity of the winter. It is the conditions during the most severe, rather than during the average, winter that determine carrying capacity of winter range (Grim, 1938; Murie, 1951. McCulloch (1955)in a study of winter-range browse in Idaho, estimated 1/ u. S. Forest Service, 1954, Vegetation Condition Guide. �i q~ ~__ ·.r ':, .,:f -48- 40 to 50 percent of tagged twigs .to be unavailable during winter due to snow burial. The 1957 average annual growth (growth index) of 1. 60 inches for oakbrush, 2. 79 inches for serviceberry, and 2. 2~ inches for chokecherry, although significantly different between species, was not significantly different from the 1956 average annual growth. Although ~ecipitation was considerably higher in 1957, than in 1956, the short growing season due to elevation probably minimized the beneficial effects of added moisture. Garrison (1953), working in eastern Oregon and Washington, found that production may vary as much as 300 percent in different years as a result of changes in precipitation, rodent damage, and other factors. In summary, vegetation and soil condition on key areas of the South Fork range appear to be fair to good, as related. to the various site factors and overall value of the range to elk, There is a variety of desirable plants, involving over 50 percent of the available shrub species; plants of secondary value are relatively abundant; and plants of low value are scarce. The vigor of key shrubs is fair under present use, and all age classes are represented, with a relatively small number of dead and decadent plants. The more preferred shrubs are available, for the most part, to elk during winter. In view of the present condition of the range, the basic and primary objective in management is: maintaining the stability of the soils not presently eroding and stablize, through use control, the soils now in deteriorating status. The secondary, and more immediate objective, is to adjust animal numbers so as to maintain or increase the combination of species which, within the productive potential of the site, is most desirable. Proper use, involvingthe maintenance of both soil and vegetation on key areas must be employed to accomplish these objectives. Trend. -- Most of the criteria used in determining range trend have been discussed in regard to range condition. Generally, such factors as normal shrub form, degree of utilization, improvement of palatable as well as unpalatable species, soil condition, age classes, and the amount of dead and dying {decadent}plants, reflect the trend of the range .. Trend for the South Fork winter range, .as related to its present condition rating on key areas, was evaluated according to the Vegetative Trend Guide developed by Region 4, U. S. Forest Service (1954), This comparison Indicated an upward trend for the. range in question. The management value of such information, however, has more meaning when correlated with utilization over a period ofyears. Animal Days of Use Pellet-group counts and days-of use per acre projections indicated that elk were by far the most numerous, if not the only, animals using the range during winter. Since all pellet groups had been removed whenthe pellet plots were established, the days-of-use/ acre projections indicate animal abundance for the 195q-1957 winter utilization period only. �-49- Under present range use, there appears to be little or no competition between elk and domestic livestock for the key species forage. There is some competition between deer and elk for these species, especially in late summer and fall. However, the average summer utilization of 5.7 percent and the low average deer days-of use/ acre (l. 5) indicate that such competition is very light. Summer utilization figures showed that deer utilized serviceberry (10.2 percent) heavier than oakbrush (2.0 percent) or chokecherry (9. 6 percent). A correlation analysis sus-tained the hypothesis that where utilization is high, there is a correspondingly high pellet count.. Although such -a result was not surprising, it points out the value of pellet counts, not only as census methods, but as a supplementary indicator of the degree of use by game and/or other animals. Forage removal can be correlated with the specific big-game or domestic animal using the key area. If made in both the fall and spring, these counts would then indicate winter and summer game use, respectively, on key areas. The average elk days-of-use/acre, 16.03 days, when correlated with winter utilization of 55. 2 percent of the annual growth, has little value as a basis for immediate mangement recommendations. Such data, however, have more meaning when correlated over a period of years. Annual pellet counts and utilization determination show yearly fluctuations in game use on key areas, and shifts in game populations between areas. Thus, with a better interpretation of the relationship of herd size and utilization on key areas, animal numbers could be adjusted to effect proper use of the key shrubs. The actual number of big-game animals present is not as important as the relationship these numbers bear to range condition and big-game carrying capacity (Hunter, 1945). LITERATURE CITED Dasmann, W. P. 1951. Some deer range survey methods. Calif. F. & G. 37(1): 43-52. Garrison, G. A. 1953. Annual Fluctuations in production of some eastern Oregon and Washington shrubs. Jour. Range Mgt. 6(2): 117-121. Grimm, R. L. 1939. Northern Yellowstone winter range studies. Mgt. 3(4): 295-306. Jour. Wldf. Hill, Ralph R. in Taylor, W. P. 1956. The deer of North America. Stockpole Co. penn., and-Wldf. Mgt. Inst. Wash. D. C. 668 pp. (393-414) Hunter, Gilbert N. 1945. Methods of determining trends in big game numbers and range conditions. Trans. N. Amer. Wldf. Conf. 10: 234-241. \ �-50- Literature Cited-Continued. McCulloch, Clay Y. Jr. 1955. Utilization of winter browse on wilderness big game range. Jour. Wldf. Mgt. 19(2): 206-215. Murie, Olaus J. 1951. The Elk of North America. Stackpole Co. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: 376 pp. Passmore, R. C. and R. S. Hepburn. 1955. A method for appraisal of winter range of deer. Onto Dept. of lands and Forests Res. Report No. 29: 7 pp, Reid, E. H. and G. D. Pickford 1941. An appraisal of range survey methods from the standpoint of effective range management. U. S. D. A. For. Ser. Bulletin Res. Report No.2: 66 pp, Smith Glenn A. 1930. The Sun River Elk Herd. Jour. For. 2S(5): 644-647. U. S. Forest Service. 1954. BigGame Range Analysis .(Region 4). Intermountain Region. For. Serv .• U. S. Dept. Agr. Pub.; 24 pp, Submitted by: ..JohnT. Harris Date: A..•• p...;.r_il ...•. ,_1_9_5_S Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ �\..ULU LJIV "1L ••LJLlrc. n~vL..l"\n\"11 \" I n ~IU 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022258 -51- April, 1958 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATION S PROJECTS State of;....._ __ =C-=O;.:L::.:O::.:R:.::A~D::;.O;::;_ _ ProjectNo. ~VV~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~1~~D~ee~r~-~E~lk~1ri~v~e~st~iQg~a~ti~o~n~s_ VVorkPlan No._--=m~. --~--=.I:;:;Q::::b...::N::.:.o;:.:.;.....;;;2..;;.0------------ Title of Job. Stand Composition and Density of Major Elk Foods. Period Covered: May 1, 1957to December 31, 1957. Abstract: Nineteen sample localities were predetermined at one-mile intervals along the South Fork of the White river. Vegetation, f6r sampling purposes, was classified into three major types; shrubs, aspen, and coniferous forest; and seven subtypes, based on association and dominate species, allowed for further flexibility in classification. Composition, density, and past utilization of available shrub species, and pelletgroup frequencies were sampled by means of 137 100-foot line transects. These sample units, located at each predetermined sample interval, were aligned at approximately right angles to the river and were employed directly upslope to the upper limits of the elk winter range. Shrub forage available to elk was intersected approximately 21 percent (available shrub-density index) of the total transect distance. Of the available shrub composition, oakbrush comprised 27.0 percent, snowberry, 25.0 percent, servtceberry, 20.0 percent, chokecherry, 7.6 percent, big sagebrush, 6.3 percent and all other shrubs, 12. 9 percent. Oakbrush, serviceberry and chokecherry all showed heavy (over 75 percent of plants classified) utilization. They were thus identified as the key browse species on the South Fork. Age classifications for the key shrubs were: young, 25.percent, mature, 54 percent, and decadent, 21 percent. Pellet counts on the 470 sample plots were projected to average days-of-use/acre, as follows: elk, 16.03, deer, 1. 50, horses, 0.67, and cattle, O. 44~ Over 90 percent of the elk droppings were winter type, whereas over 85 percent of the deer droppings were spring and/or summer type. Objectives: -1. area of each. to determine the major species of elk food on winter range and the 2. To provide a quantitative basis for ultimate determination of carrying capacity of this elk winter range as an aid to more effective management. �-52- An extensive utilization survey was made in 1957 to supplement utilization data from measured transects. Utilization was estimated ocularly and supplemental age and form classifications were assigned to 1,470 key browse plants. A total of 147 100-step transects were involved in this survey, covering all vegetative types and exposures. The pre-sent eondttion of'thcf;yegetation and soil on key areas was judged to be fair to good. K-ey-ra-n~e~areas wer~ classified as being in uptrend status under present use. Desirable plants comprised over 55 percent of the available shrub composition. Extremely heavy utilization of the current annual growth, and over-utilization, should be avoided on this range so as to maintain the upward trend. ~ .. 0 .' :," :._ The vigor of the key plants was judged to be fair. Most of the growth of preferred browse was unavailable, with a variety of age classes and relatively few dead and dying plants. Pellet counts, as related to abundance and season of use, indicated little or no competition between elk and horses and/or cattle, and only light competition with deer. Summer utilization data confirmed these findings. Methods Nineteen sample localtties ware predetermined at one-mile intervals along the river. Vegetation, for sampling purposes, was classified into three major types, shrub, aspen, and coniferous forest; and seven subtypes, based on association and dominant species, allowed for further flexibility in classification. Composition, density, and past utilization of available shrub species, and pellet-group frequencies were sampled by means of 137 line transects, 100 feet in length. These sample units, located at each predetermined sample interval, were aligned at approximately right angles to the river and were employed directly upslope to the upper limits of the elk winter range. Results No further field work was done relative to this phase of the investigation. However, the composition-density transect data was further analyzed relative to the selection of the key browse speciess. ..Although the .data.were found to be too variable for a comprehensive statistical analysts, statisticswere applied where possible .. Oak {Quercus ganibell~., serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.}, and chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) were found to be t11~most common andpreferred species on the South Fork. Consequently, they were selected as the key species for this winter range. A bar graph was constructed (Figu~e 1) whi'9h:9~~arly illustrates these relationships. Figure 2 of the same plate Illustrates thepercentage of the total range composition comprised by the main shrub species. SinCe ~OO:-footline transects were used, the average number of feet per transect is synon1'inous with the percentage of composition. Confidence limits at the. 05 level of accuracy were computedfor these means, and bracket them in the graph (Figure 2). ! " "' .' . �30 Degree of Hedging ~ 2, I o 26 0% o (J Light- D· oderate - ~ -e 20 Heavy-II .s:: III dl' CD r-fO .0..-4 . t\1 +-l . ~~10 a.1 p t\1 5 +-l s:: CI) (J r.. (I) p.. Serviee- Chokeberry cherry Figure 1. -- Relative abundance and degree of hedging of the ma:tn South Fork winter range shrubs • • +-l 0 CI) Ul s:: t\1 H 9 +-l 8 r..CI) P'0- Oak Snowberry 7 CI)+-l ..,S:: P-<I> ()r.. H<D (I)() .., Q) 0., 6 i Serviceberry 5 S::r-f orl II 4 <I> ().., . s:: 0 a.10 3 ~r-f '0_ 2 Q) 1 "''H til .. IlO a.1 H Q) Chokecherry Big Sage +x e- ~ Figure 2. -- Composition percentage of the five most common shrubs on tho South Fork winter range -(mean i 2 standard e~rors). �l' QO _. -53- Pellet and dropping count data from the 137 samples were totaled by animal species and converted to percentages to indicate the relative amount of use by each species (Table 1). The mean number of pellet groups per 100-foot strip, and the total number of groups per species, is given for each animal group involved. Table 1. --Frequency of Occurrence of Pellet Groups and Droppings on 137 Composition-Density Transects, South ForkWinteJr' Elk Rge, Summer, 1956. . Total Groups Average Per Species Counted 100-Foot Strip Percent Elk Deer Cattle Horse .!I Standard error 667 242 161 81 4.87 I 1. 777 1.177 .73£ .85:11 .64 .67 .47 58 21 14 7 of the mean. These counts were further analyzed according to vegetative type since the utilization transects were located in the types receiving the most elk use. Table 2 in presentation of these findings, shows the percentage {based on total count) of the pellet groups and droppings occurring in aspen and shrubtgpes, Table 2. --Comparison of Percentages of Pellet and Dropping Groups Occureing in Aspen and Shrub Types, 137 100 ~X6..,Foot Sample Strips~ South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer,· 1956. Species Elk Deer Cattle Horse Total Groups .Counted 667 242 161 81 Vegetative !lpe Shrub Type, % Aspen Type, % 65.2 86.8 56.5 76.5 34.8 13.2 43.5 23.5 Elk droppings occurred more frequently than those of deer, cattle, orhorses, irrespective of exposure, vegetative type, slope, or altitude. They comprised over 50 percent of all droppings; counted (Table 1), and were twi_ch as common in shrub types as in aspen stands (Table 2). Slope did not appear to limit elk movements or feeding, as indicated by pellet groups. Evidence of winter utiltzation," as determined by the amount and type of pellets and past utilization of the browse, terminated in the coniferous belt which extended below the rim of the Flat Tops at elevations varying between 9, 500 and 10, 000 feet. ." • }'" '(,; \ .• ,v �-54- Most of the cattle and horse droppings were seen on the lower meadows, along trails, and around watering places. They were most abundant on the privately-owned meadows and adjoining slopes of the lower South Fork. Of the 1, 151 pellet and dropping groups recorded, 69.3 percent were in shrub types and 30.7 percent were in aspen types. In aspen, 18.8 percent occurred in the aspenshrub subtype and 11. 9 percent in the aspen-herb subtype. Since pellet groups were not separated according to year deposition, projections for animal-days of use were not made. In the aspen stands sampled, an estimated 80 percent of all trees had been "barked" by elk. Classification of barked aspens was as follows: light--31. 9 percent; moderate-39.6 percent; and heavy -- 28.5 percent. The tree-trunk scars ranged from approximately one and one-half to six foot in height. Although many trees were almost completely girdled, few appeared to be seriously affected, possibly because the barking had been done over a period of years, allowing sufficient recovery between years. The amount of barking during the winters of 1955-56 and 1956-57was relatively small. Sample size Determination of proper sample size, not a primary objective of the study, was nevertheless necessary to its execution. This factor is, of course, a major consideration in big-game range analysis, especially where intensive work is necessary, and where quantitative data are to be assembled. Since the composition-density and production utilization data provided a measure of variability from which sample-size projections could be made, they were considered as worthwhile additions to the analysis. Furthermore, the results of such calculations indicated the relative accuracy of the samples, giving confidence to the procedure employed. Standard deviations, used in the sample-size formulas, were computed on a transect basis; consequently, the projected samples are in the same units. These computions were made for each of the key species since these were significant differences in forage production by species. Sample-size projections from composition - density data indicated that adequate samples of average density for key shrubs, to the. 10 level, would require 433 transects in oakbrush, 258 in serviceberry, and 5,164 in chokecherry. However, this does not mean that the key species were wrongly chosen since abundance was not the only criterion used in their selection. �-55- These data were quite variable since all vegetative types were represented. In some of the aspen-herb subtypes, none of the key species were present whereas in shrub types, .they were almost always present. Thus, by restricting samplingto shrub types, a considerable portion of the variability could be eliminated. The estimated number of transects necessary to measure the average density of oakbrush in shrub types was found to be 200 (. 10 level of significance), less than 50 percent of the number required to sample oakbrush in all types. It should be pointed out that these sample-size computations have been made for the more abundant shrubs on the :range. Thus, the less abundant species would probably vary more between transects; consequently, hey would require a larger sample. This is indicated by the great difference in the sample size needed for oakbrush and chokecherry. The relatively small sample size computed for serviceberry indicates that the average density pel' transect of this shrub was less variable than oakbrush, even though it was not as abundant as the oak. Approved by: Laurence E. Rioll'dan Submitted by:_ _..;:;.J.,;;;oh:;;;;n;;.,.;:T;.,;._,::H:;;;;a;::,ll'.::,.rI::,;;· s;._ _ Federal Aid Coordinator Date: ;;.;A.p.;;;.r::;;il~! ..,;1;,;.9..;;,5.;;;,8 _ ��COLORADO DlV. WILDUF't Research Center Library 317 W. Prospect Ft. Collins, CO 20526 -57- A'pril, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of,__ Project -=C;..:O:.,:L::.;:O::.;:RA:.=::.:,:D:::;..::;O_ No. __ ...:W.:..-....:3::.;:8:...-..:R;:.-..::1::.::1~.l._=D;.::::;e.=.er=_-..::E:.;l=k:..In==_v:.;e:;.:s;.:t~ig:z.:a:;.:t _ Work Plan No. __ ._::m=- ...l-...;J:;.:o:;.;:;b;..:N:.:.o;;.;.;..._....;2::.;1~---------- Title of Job::.___.....;..;:C:.;o:;.:n:::;d:::;i.;;ti;.;;o=n:...;o:::;f:..W~i.::;;n.;;te:::;r:...::;;E;.;;;lk;;;;....;;F:..oo;..=d.::;;s;.;.._ Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to December 31, 1957. Abstract: Winter (1956-1957) utilization was determined by measuring the remaining current twig growth on tagged branches in the spring of 1957. Total average utilization of the annual growth for all species was 55.2 percent; 5.7 percent was summer utilization, and 49.5 percent was winter use. Utilization varied from 17.2 to 86.4 percent on the transects. Over-utilization (beyond current-annual growth) occurred on 39.9 percent of the tagged branches. Analysis of variance of the 1956-1957 utilization data for key species showed no significant variation in utilization due to age, part use, or species. The average estimated utilization of 55. 1 percent compared very closely with .the average of 55.2 percent utilization actually measured .on the transects. By species, the averages' were within 5 percent of each other. Shrub types on southern exposures were utilized 55. 1 percent whereas shrub types on northern exposures were utilized only 15.6 percent. Key shrubs in aspen stands on southern exposures were utilized 29. 9 percent. Shrubs in aspen stands on northern exposures were generally unavailable, due to deep snow. The 1956-1957 utilization (55.2 percent) of the current-annual growth of key-browse species was judged to be slightly more than moderate, as related to the present condition of the range and according to the findings of other workers. The major problem on the South Fork, as indicated by this analysis, appears to be that of maintaining and slowly improving the present condition of the vegetation and soil through proper use of the key-browse species. �-58- Objectives: 1. To determine the general health, vigor, and degree of utilization of elk foods on winter range. 2. To provide a quantitative basis for ultimate determination of carrying capacity of this elk winter range as an aid to more effective management. Methods. Since health and vigor were discussed relative to other phases of this investigation, only utilization will be dealt'. with here. Utilization of key speCies. These values were ascertained by measurements made in the spring after the time elk left the area and before new growth had started. The essential step in this work consisted of measuring the remaining current twig growth on the tagged branches. The frequency with which over-utilization (beyond current annual growth) occurred was recorded concurrently with measurement data. Examination of leaders out of reach or protected from browsing aided in the separation of current growth from the previous years growth. Winter utilization was determined by subtracting the total length of the current growth remaining in the spring from the total length of current growth measured in the fall. The remainder was divided by the total year's current growth (fall measurements plus estimated inches removed, if any, at time of fall measurements), The quotient, multiplied by 100, gave the percent of current annual growth utilization during the winter. Results. Utilization of Key species These data were analyzed to indicate the intensity of current utilization of key shrubs. The resulting information, correlated with shrub form and age-class, indicates the current condition and trend of the range. In addition, utilization data were analyzed by vegetative types and exposure as a .means of determining the relative importance of such factors in evaluating a given unit of the winter range. Utilization measurements were begun on May 15, 1957, and completed July 5, 1957. It was necessary to measure some of the transects on the lower South Fork earlier than originally planned since cattle were turned onto these lands the first week in June. Snowconditions prevented easy access to the upper South Fork until late May. Utilization and production measurements were taken on the same branches; therefore, all of the production data pertaining to number of shoots, age, and hedging classifications apply also to utilization. �-59- Of the 470 tagged branches, three had been broken off and were found nearby with tags still attached, one tagged shrub had been cut (probably by hunters) and was not found, and one tag could not be relocated. Four tags had been chewed on by animals, one severely. The remaining 458 tags were relocated without difficulty, and were found to be in good condition. The missing data were calculated, using the average utilization of the other branches on 111esame transect as a basis. Table 1 presents a comparative measurement of tagged key browse plants on all transects before and after browsing, and gives the percentage of utilization during summer and winter. Table .1. --Before - and.after - Browsing Comparisons of the Total Number:I.·~'. :~'::- and Total Length of Shoots, 470 Plants, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer 1956 and 1957. Summer Winter of Shoots Length of Shoots Number Use, % Before Use, % Species Before After After Oakbrush Serviceberry Chokecherry Totals Averages 2,631 1,606 527 4,764 1,648 1,256 346 3,250 Inches 3,329 1,518 1,852 734 970 543 6,151 2,795 2.0 10.2 9.6 52.6 50.2 37.6 5.7 49.5 The average utilization of annual growth for all species, both winter and summer, was 55.2 percent. Utilization varied from 17.2 to 86.4 percent on the transects. Table 2 shows the mean, range and standard deviation of the percent utilization by species. Table 2.--Average Percentage of Utilization of Current Annual (1956)Growth of the Key Browse Species, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Measured in Summer of 1957. Species Mean Oakbrush Serviceberry Chokecherry 54.6 60.4 47.2 Range Percentage 17.2-76.7 19.5-86.4 28.0-71. 1 standard Deviation 15.7 19.5 15.5 Inspection of the browsed shoots, and stem counts taken before and after utilization, indicated that 169 of the tagged branches, or 3~}.9 percent, were utilized beyond the current annual growth node. In most cases, this over-utilization was slight and appeared to be incidental rather than purposeful to normal elk browsing. �-60- An analysis of variance of these data tested the variation in utilization due to age, hedging, and/or species. Years could not be included since only one year of utilization measurements was taken. The average percentage of utilization was computed for the 470 branches and systematically listed under this three-factor classification. Similar to the analysis of variance used for forage production data, these items were sub-totaled and averaged for each category to avoid unequal subclasses, and again, the light hedging classification was omitted to avoid missing data. Resul ts are given in Table 3. Table 3. -- Analysis of Variance in Utilization of Key Browse Plants Due to Species, Age, and Hedging, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Winter, 1956-1957. Degrees of Means F F Table Values, Source of Variation Freedom Squared Value . 05 Level Age Hedging Species Age and hedging Age and species Hedging and species Age and hedging and species Error ..!/ 2 1 2 2 2 4 4 418 34.2 1.5 5.2 105.5 35.3 76.4 41. 5 .18 .008 .02 .56 .19 .40 .22 3.59 4.45 3.59 3.59 2.96 3.59 2.96 1/ Error calculated from the original utilization figures and adjusted with the harmonic mean. None of the F values for the main effects or interactions approached significance, indicating that there were no measured differences in utilization between age classes, species, hedging classes, and/or their various interactions. The 147 utilization estimates from the extensive range 'survey were used to supplement the measured transect data. Since this coverage was for all types and exposures, whereas tagged shrubs were only on slopes with southern exposure, the utilization figures are not comparable for north slopes. Table 4 gives this comparison of utilization of key shrubs by vegetative type and exposure. Estimated utilization was not comparable by age and/or form classes because it was estimated on a transect basis rather than for individual shrubs. �-61- Table 4. -- Comparison of Average Estimated Utilization of the Key Species by Vegetative Type and Exposure, 147 100 Step Transects, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summer , 1957. Species Oakbrush Serviceberry Chokecherry Average Southern E!E0sure Aspen Type, % Shrub Type, % 28.3 30.8 30.5 29.9 59.6 57.6 48.0 55.1 Northern Ex~sure. .Shrub Type % * ! 15.5 15.5 15.8 15.6 * Aspen types on general northern exposures were not sampled; observations indicated that they are almost completely unavailable during winter. The average estimated utilization of 55. 1 percent in fue southern-exposed shrub type compares very closely with the 55.2 average of the 47 measured transects. Note, too, the marked and consistent difference between northern and southern exposures and between aspen and shrub types. It should be understood, of course, that northernexposed shrub types pertain to slopes, always with northern exposure. Although these slopes contain essentially the same composition as shrub types on general southern exposures, they are generally too deeply covered by snow to be available in winter and, consequently, are not as heavily utilized, Table 4. The average estimated degree of utilization, by species, also compares closely with the measured utilization for key shrubs, Table 5. The means for this value were computed from transects in southern-exposed shrub types, only, being, therefore, directly comparable to the means for the measured transects. These percentages were derived. from 39 utilization estimates (extensive survey transects) in oakbrush, 41 in serviceberry, and 10 in chokecherry. The average utilization, as measured for each species, was derived from all production-utilization transects in that particular key species. . . " Table 5. --Comparison of Average Estimated and Measured Utilization tor Key Browse species, South Fork Winter Elk Range, Summers, 1956 and 1957. Species Oakbrush Serviceberry Chokecherry Average Average Utilization, Measured, % 54.6 60.4 47.2 55.2 Average Utilization Ocular Estimate, % 59.6 57.6 48.0 55. 1 �-62- Average estimated utilization, in all cases, was accurate to within five percentage points of the average measured utilization. The current forage removal on key areas, when correlated with browse condition and trend, is the basis for determining proper use in terms of quantity. Most of the western State Game Departments are using 40 to 60 percent as proper utilization of key browse species. Until long-rtme studies are completed, -SO percent of the current annual growth probably should be considered reasonably safe for conservative browsing of palatable species, if the range is in good condition (Hill, 1956). Hunter (1945)stated that 50 percent utilization was considered about proper in Colorado. Utilization (55.2%) of the current annual growth of key browse species on the South Fork in 1956-57 is judged to be slightly more than moderate. Since the present condition of this range was rated as only fa,ir to good, present use should probably be decreased in order to maintain the upward trend in vegetative condition. The extemely heavy utilization measured on some sites (86.4 percent) can be misleading since it is related to forage production and snow conditions. Thus, a site which produced less would show more utilization than a heavily - producing site if the same quantity of browse were consumed. Julander (1937)explained that it is necessary to correlate growing conditions with utilization in determining the proper stocking of a range. If the population is based on the average year, the range will be understocked when growing conditions are above normal and over-utilized during poor years. In addition, the feeding habits of elk are such as to cause differential utilization on different areas. Because of their habit of feeding in bunches (Gaffney, 1941), and because of the tendency to concentrate in areas of the least snow, it is common to find local areas overgrazed on any part of the range. Management Application .Thts investigation has shown the value of key areas on big-game ranges. It points out the need of evaluating winter ranges and beginning the collection of factual records on key-range lands. In keeping with the multiple-use concept; many of these critical areas should be designatedfor big-game use alone. Factual data are needed to show which areas justify the highest priority e : The most practical, effective, and progressive type of big-game management is effected on a herd unit basis, where possible. The present study, as pcevlously mentioned, constituted only a segment of the winter range of the White River elk herd. Under practical management applications, all winter-rainge units for this herd should be evaluated in regard to key areas and key species. Accumulative records of forage production, utilization, and game days-of-use/acre would provide better and more useable information for game-management programs. The key species production-utilization analysis technique, employed in this field investigation, offers a means of determining proper use as i~ relates to plant vigor. From the management aspect, this would be a needed refinement. An~al condition is considered an ineffective measure of range condition because the fortner is necessarily subsequent to the latter. Likewise, range composttton or denaity trends are poor �-63- measures upon which to base carrying capacity, because the vigor of key forage plants has been lowered by the time such changes become clearly apparent. Since this situation often requires many years for recovery, a finer measure is needed. Costello (1954) states that we will not be ready for intensive management until we can define this narrow band of proper use on all types of big-game ranges. The use of annual twig measurements and other indices of vigor, correlated with current intensity of use, makes it possible for the game manager to detect changes in vigor which precede changes in composition and density, especially wbere heavy use rather than natural succession is causing the decline in vigor. In such determinations, provided animal numbers can be adjusted accordingly, the range condition can be more effectively maintained or improved in quality. Recommendations for Further Study This study, although limited in time and sco:pe, has revealed the need of maintaining .and improving the present condition of winter ranges if harvestable numbers of biggame animals are to be sustained. Furthermore, it has emphasized the value of key areas and key species in the analysis and management of such ranges. In view of these needs, further studies are recommended as follows: 1. Winter-range -studies similar to this investigation should be undertaken on a herd- unit basis aSfa means of defining the needs and shortcomings of all important winter ranges in Colorado. 2. Develop standards or criteria for evaluating big-game ranges, particularly key areas on big-game ranges. Such criteria should be developed for local application where necessary. 3. Develop criteria for evaluating site factors in relation to browse production and proper use. Such information would be of considerable value in selecting key sites, and in evaluating range conditions and trends. LITERATURE CITED Costello, David F. 1954. The need for research on ranges used by big game. West. Assoc. state G. & F. Comm. Proc. 34: 177-181. Gaffney, William S. 1941. The effects of winter elk browsing, south fork of the Fla1head River, Montana. Jour. Wldf. Mgt. 5(4): 427-453. Hill, Ralph R. in Taylor, W. P. 1956. The deer of North America. Stackpole Co. , Penn., and Wldf. Mgt. Inst. Wash. D. C. 668 pp. (3~3-414). Hunter, Gilbert N. 1945. Methods of determining trends in big game numbers and range conditions. Trans. N. Amer. Wldf.>Oonf', 10: 234-241. Julander, Odel. 1957. Utilization of browse by Wilcllife Trans. N. Amer, Wldf. Conf. 2: 276-287. Submitted by:_ _;:..J_;;;;ohn=..;;H;;;;_a;;;;;r;;_;r;;_;i;;_;;s;.._. Approved by: Date: ..;;;A.:.Ip;.;:r~il:.t.,....:1::.:;9..;:;.5.;;.8__,..---- Laurence E. Riordan. ' Federal Aid Coordinator �-69'J0B April, COMPLETION 1958 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS . State of COLORADO ----~------------------------------- Project No. A Study of the Irrtr oduc ti.on.. Release W-73-R-5 Survival 'Of Exotic Game Birds Job No . 1 .11 Title of Job: Study of the Adaptability of Spanish Partridges and to New Habitat Period'. Covered: October 1, 1956 to April 30, 1958. Objectives: To.Lea rn the reaction of the birds to their new environment. To chart their distribution, survival, s ea s ona.l breeding reactions, nesting attempts, clutch sizes, egg fertility and the success attendant upon the rearing of the resulting young. Procedure: It was intended to carry out sufficient field work in. the Masonville and Little Thompson areas to determine the number of resident birds present at the end of each quarter, and to list the numbers by species, and. age' (where possible). Also to maintain a cover type map on which the distribution of all birds contacted would be indicated according. to species, and age (where possible). Abstract: Three separate areas were stocked with Spanish red-legged partridges from 1952 to 1957•.. A total of 226 were released ..in Carrizo Canyon in far southeastern Colorado, 95 in 1952; 118 in 1954 and 13 in 1956., The s e cond.a r-ea was Irrfhe foothills near Masonville southwest of Fort GGllins where 131 birds were released, 82 in 1955 and 149 in 1956. The third area received only one transplant of 80 birds in 1957. This site was in Little Thompson Canyon northwest of Longmont. The success of the Carrizo Canyon transplant cannot be determined . satisfactorily as there have been no sight records since Nove-mber, 1956. One,brood 'of eight was reported in 1953' and one brood- of-nine young was reported in 1955. . ' . At Ma.sonvi.l.le , .the survival has seemed to be the most encouraging of the .three areas as a minimum of 32 young were counted in 1956 .. ' Again in .1957, eighteen young partridges were seen in one group. The transplant at Little reproductive success. Thompson Canyon is still too recent to indicate �-70- Findins-s: follow-up Unfortunately, survey during a part-time 1957. student could not be obtained for a The only.information available was supplied by Mr. Gurney Crawford, local Wildlife Conservation Officer. A reported observation was made by Mr. Milner who lives at the Olin ranch that on or about July 15, 1957 he saw two old birds with 18 young red-leg partridges that could ..£ly. This may possibly have been two broods. on April 17, 1958, Mr. Crawford contacted the Milners again, and they informed him that they knew. of at least six pairs on.their ranch near Masonville. Another observation was made by Messrs .. Crawford and Sig. Palm on February 6, 1958 when they flushed about 12 birds at about 10 P. M. while working on deer control. The birds were roosting rather high on the rocks in an open place on the Don Chance Ranch two miles south of Masonville. At the Little Thompson area, 1957 at the release enclosure No new reports of observations ..Carrizo Canyon area. Mr. Crawford saw 12 birds on November 17, where one pair of red-legs was still penned. during 1957 have been received from the In order to make this report as complete as possible, it is felt that a compilation of .the pertinent parts of previous reports should be incorporated here for general information. The compilation was done originally fo r a short paper presented at the Western Association of Game and .. Fish Commissioners in 1957. The Spanish red-legged partridge (Alectoris rufa hispanica) was first introduced into Colorado in 1952. This first shipment was arranged almost entirely by Mr. George Cranmer of Denver whose experiences in . Spain led him to believe that this partridge might be well adapted to sorrie parts of eastern Colorado. In the following years all arrangements for trapping wild birds, local feeding and. care, veterinarian fees, export. permit, air transportation and quarantine were handled by Dr. Gardiner . Bump. Liberation methods varied somewhat in the early releases and it is believed that some of these details should be of interest to show the evolution of the releasing system used in the last two years. The first shipment of Spani sh red-legged partridges was sent by air express from Madrid, Spain to New York, and after quarantine, by air -expr e s.s to Denver. One hundred nineteen live partridges were received in Denver on December 12, 1952, of which 95 were trucked to Carrizo �-71- Canyon in .the far southeastern of the Oklahoma boundary. section of the State just a few miles north Because of drouth conditions and the apparent scarcity of feed, it was decided to release the birds in three groups to increase the chances of some of them finding fair food conditions. These three sites were not far apart and airline dimensions roughly resembled a large triangle with the sides approximately three, four and five miles. Three old vacant buildings were remodeled and used for liberating pens. Sacks were tacked on the windows on the inside and one inch mesh wire on the outside. The shipping boxes were taken inside the buildings and the birds were removed one at a time, banded and turned loose in the holding: room. They were fed and watered until it was apparent that they were in good condition. Then: the doors of the building were opened and the birds allowed to go out at their leisure. The 40 partridges at Cottonwood Canyon (No.1) and 27 at Skull Canyon (No.2) stayed in the vicinity and regularly used some weatherproof feed stations until the first part of March, 1953. The Number 3 plant of 28 birds iii Whitby Canyon apparently did not stay in the vicinity as they started down the canyon in a group from the release building and were still going west when last seen. The only record the first year but a very worthwhile one was an' observation of one brood of eight young in May, 1953 by Mr. Richard Kerr, a local ranch hand. Another shipment of 150 partridges was received on April 14, 1954 and 118 birds were released the ne xt day on the Mizer pr ope r tyIn . Cottonwood Canyon in the same location where 40 birds were released in December, 1952. Some birds have survived in this general locality as indicated by the following observations. Mrs. Miles Mizer reported 'seeing five or six partridges in the small canyon east of her home several times in August. 1954. Dick Kerr reported to Donald Hoffman that he saw a group of seven birds in Cottonwood Creek in late September, 1954. In the next year seven .mature birds were observed several times near Cottonwood Ranch during the summer and two old birds with 9 young were Seen during early July of 1955 by Mr. R. G. Dodge. On November 1, 1955, 12 birds were observed in Black Canyon west of �-72- Cottonwood and on January 15, 1956, 13 birds were observed in a field about one mile north of Cottonwood Canyon by Mr. Dodge. The most recent record is of 8 birds seen by Dick Kerr in Cottonwood-Carrizo ".Creek -on November 4, 1956 and 2 birds seen by Bob Dodge on Novernbe r 6, on a rrte s a north of Cottonwood Creek. An additional release of 13 partridges was made on-Walter Dunlap's property in Ca-rrizo Canyon on April 30, 1956. These birds were the remainder of the ones held at the Colorado Springs Bird Farm from the 1952 and 1954 shipments. On March 9, 1955, 82 birds were received by air shipment at Denver and -were taken immediately to a foothills ranch near Masonville southwest of Fort Collins. The birds were freed inside of a 10 by 10 chicken wire cage. All birds were in good condition and many started to dust and feed at once •. Fifty birds were then released at the door of the cage and most of them flew about fifty to one hundred yards. _ About twenty of the birds were seen within two hundred yards of the pen when the release crew left the area, There was water within a few yards of the pen and mixed grain was scattered heavily around the outside of the pen. The remaining birds were left in the cage with food and water as a poss.ible rrrea.ns of preventing excessive dispersal of those already released through hearing the call notes of the penned birds. The penned birds were released by Mr. Gurney Crawford a few at a time at intervals of two or three days until the last ones were released about ten days after the original release. A student field worker- was hired part-time to trace the possible movements and survival during the subsequent spring and summer. This student, Willia~n Cl~fton,. observed. nine birds all .in the same valley -where released, one on. April 22, 1955, a,pair each day on April 29 a-nd -May 5, three birds on May 14, and a single on May 20. _Another observer - reported seeing one bird in Buckhorn Creek in June about five miles from . the release point. On February 17, 1956, 167 Spanish partridges were received in Denver and taken to a iho Lddrig pen located at Mr. Gurney Crawford's house in -Fort Collins. It was thought wise to hold them until much of the danger of deep spring snows might be past, but to release them early enough to a Ilow adequate time for nesting. While in the holding pens, the birds had acc e s s to water , cracked corn, milo, barley, weed seeds, mash, alfalfa, oyster shell and grit. During the holding period, 18 of the �.-73- partridges died. Two of these were te s ted at the Veterinary School of: Medicine. The tests showed there was no serious disease present and it was believed that the majority of deaths were the result of the overall peor cendition in' which s ome of them arrived. All of the partridges were transferred to the r-eIea s e pen~ on the Olin ranch near Masonville en March 18th .. Sixty-one partridges Were put in a srrral.I pen and 88 in a larger pen. Food, water and protection were afforded these birds before and after release. The first, release ..was made .on March 23rd by opening a small hole about 7 inches in diameter in the corner of the small pen .. Feed was placed in a position to help bring attention to the route of freedom. Most of the birds were out within one hour. In the next five days there were quite a few of the releasedpartridges in the vicinity of the pens, 15 being the highest actual count at any one time. The birds were released from the large pen on March 28th and many birds were still within 100 yards of the release point at the end of March indicating that the holding period and quiet release was pr obab ly very beneficial in preventing excessive dispersal. It is also believed that the helding period is very beneficial in rebuilding vitality as all birds were noted to have gained considerable weight at the time of release. Gurney Crawferd reported seeing one pair with nine yeung, orie pair with five young and one pair with two young during the summer of 1956 en and a r ound the Olin ranch. He also reperted seeing three birds tog ethe r on several oc ca.si.ons during the mating season and several pairs were ob served without young. - As of Octobe r 3, 1956, C'rawfo r d reported a total of 58 birds on and around the Olin ranch, four adults near the release pens, 31 near a barley field (9 adults, 22 young), 15 in an apple orchard (5 adults, 10 young) and eight in ariofhe r barley field, all within an area of approximately one mile by one and one-half miles. Other reports received by Mr. Crawford indicate that. two birds were obs e r-ved five miles west of Masonville n~ar Buckhorn Creek and anothe r obs e r-vati.on was of three adults about, 2 1/2 miles southeast of Masonville. On July 6, 1956, Rona Id Cluff of Fort Collins saw three adults near lower'Little South Poudre River appr-oxirrrate ly 30 miles fr-om place of release. Some of the birds remained during the fell ewing winter within close preximity of the release point as Crawford saw 26 in a covey onJanuary 5, 1957. This wa s verified on February 16·whEmappr oxfma.te ly 25 birds were seen on the hillside abeve the release pen by the writer in c ornparry with Cz-awfor'd, �-74- The most recent shipment of 116 live birds was received on January 24, 1957 during a period of below zero weather. Three birds were dead on arrival and several others were quite droopy-looking .. During the' next three days, 31 of the birds died apparently from exposure combined with undernourishment brought on by the rigors of the trip. Seven birds were examined at the Schoof of Veterinary Medicine and all cultures were negative for disease-producing organisms. The remaining 80 birds were held for a time at Crawford's house until they regained weight and vitality and the release was made similar to that of the previous year on March 20 and March 26 at the Eckhardt ranch .in Little Thompson Canyon northwest of Longmont. Crawford saw 25 to 30 birds. armmd the release pens oil April 4, 9, 13, and 14, 1957. Prepared Date: by: Ferd.. C. Kleinschnitz April, 1958 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid-Coordinator ----------~----~---------------------- �-75- April, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Project No. COLORADO W-90-R-3; Work Plan No. Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Improvement on Wildlife. I Job No. ------------~----------~--~~~----~----------------~ Title of Job: Period Covered: 1 Review of Literature July 1, 1957to June 30, 1958. Objectives: To familiarize project personnel with the recent literature pertaining to habitat evaluation and census methods. Procedure: A fairly comprehensive review of literature was completed during the first year of the evaluation project. The objectives of the work during the third segment was to examine recent literature, abstract all newly reported work and bring the original review up to date. All of the library work was done by Robert D. Wood, the student assistant who worked on the project during the summer of 1957. Although less than two weeks were available for this work because of field work requirements it is felt that the subject material was covered to the limit of the available library facilities. Mro Wood used Wildlife Review as a starting point and examined all promising reference material available in the Colorado State University and J. Dean Memorial libraries. Abstract: In a continuing attempt to keep project personnel abreast of current developments in evaluation and census methods, the project student assistant, Robert D. Wood, .reviewed and abstracted all available reports published since the original review of literature in 19550The facts that only twenty articles were reviewed, that more than a third were found in populat magazines and that only one was based on an attempt to evaluate planting influence is ample evidence that pioneer work in this field is needed. Abstracts of marking methods, analysis methods and pheasant movement will be incorporated in the final project report. �-76- General: The book, Pheasantsjn_ North America, edited by Durward L. Allen, was published in 1956. It presents in one volume the best of the present day thinking concerning pheasant management, census techniques and life history. In general, the chapters which touch on habitat improvement report the work already done but present no evaluation of the effect on pheasant populations. Many of the chapters were written several years before publication and do not present some of the known data for the areas described. Habitat Evaluation: Only five new references reporting evaluation of habitat plantings were found. Two of these (Dambach, 1951and Shaffer, H}-53) were papers presented at local wildlife conferences, and in both cases the conclusion was made that comprehensive evaluation must be made before habitat improvement can be justified. Allen (1953)suggested the same thing in Field and Stream magazine. The remaining articles {McDowelland Higby, 1954 and McKenzie, 1957)were presented in state conservation magazines and were both inconclusive in reporting actual value of plantings. Habitat Improvement: Four references were abstracted in this category. Three (Boldt, 1956a and 1956band Moos, 1955)were conservation department magazine articles praising the habitat improvement method but presenting no specific data. Miller, Ball and Knott (1948)reported the value of woody plantings in furnishing food for pheasants. Census Methods: Two references (Hartley, Homeyer and Kozicky, 1955 and Klonglan and Kozicky, 1952)reported methods of evaluating data by statistical methods and a third (Kozicky, Hartley and Hendrickson, 1954)suggested testing correlation between roadside counts and flushing counts made with dogs. Marking Methods: Five articles reporting methods of marking game birds for future identification were reviewed. Four of these {Aldrich and Steenis, 1955; Blank and Ash, .1956; C'raighead and Stockstad, '1956; and Helm, 1955)presented various neckband and tag arrangements and the fifth {Winston, 1955)reported successful marking of ducks with red aniline dye. Movement: Weston (1954)reported Iowa pheasants moved an average of 1. 4 miles from winter concentration areas. MacMullen (1945)reported no distances but suggested that a pheasant may" ... live out its life without leaving a 100 acre farm. Jl Conclusions: Apparently, the need for qualitative evaluation of habitat improvement is being recognized by more and more professional wildlife managers. At the present time however, little work of this nature has been reported and "use studies" are still being conducted and reported in the hope that such short-term work will provide justification for present habitat improvement practices. �-77- Literature Cited Allen, Durward L. 1956. Pheasants in North America. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Penns. 490 pp. ---- 1953. Does habitat improvement work? Field and Stream Magazine 58(5):5051, 95-98. Blank, T. H., and J. S. Ash. 1956. Marker for game birds. Jour. of Wildl. Mgmt. 20(3):328-330. Boldt,' Wilbur. 1956a. The pheasants best friend. North Dakota Outdoors 19(3): 14-15. ---- 1956b. Better cover equals better hunting. North Dakota Outdoors 19(4) :18-19. Aldrich, John W., and John H. Steenis. 1955. Neck-banding and other color marking of waterfowl; its merit and shortcomings. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt. 19~2):317-318. Craighead, John J., and Dwight S. Stockstad. 1956. A colored neckband for marking birds. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt. 20{3): 331-332. Dambach, Charles A. 1951. Habitat improvement should be evaluated. 13th Midwest Wildl. Conf.: Minneapolis, Minn. 5 pp. Hartley, H. 0., P. G. Homeyer and E. L. Kozicky. 1955. The use of log transformations in analyzing fall roadside pheasant counts. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt. 19{4): 495-496. Helm, Lewis G. 1955. Plastic collars for marking geese. Jour. Wild. Mgmt. 19(2):316-317. Klonglan, Eugene D. and E. L. K6zicky. 1952. Variations in two spring indicie s of male pheasant populations, Story County, Iowa. 14th Midwest Wildl. Conf. 4pp. Kozicky, E. L., H. O. Hartley and G. O. Hendrickson. 1954. A proposed comparison of fall roadside pheasant counts and flushing rates. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 61:528-534. MacMullan, R. A. 1954. The life and times of Michigan pheasants. Mich. Dept. Cons. Publ. McDowell, Kenneth and Warren Higby. 1954. Reviewing 'Wyoming's 1953pheasant habitat maintenance program. Wyo. Wildl. 18 (3) : 22-25. McKenzie, James V. 1957. Lots of "cove r". North Dakota Outdoors 19(9)~10-11. Miller, Harold W., C. C. Ball and N. P. Knott. 1948. The comparative value of woody plants as food for upland game birds. Wash. Dept. of Game and S. C. S. Biological Bull. No.8, 39 pp. Moos, Luis M. 1955. Increasing wildlife food and cover. Wyoming Wildl. 19(3): 34: 35. Shaffer, C. H. 1953. A method of evaluating farm game plantings. Seventh Ann. S. E. Assn. of Game and Fish Comm's. 7 pp. Weston, Henry G., Jr. 1954. The winter-spring movements of the ring-necked pheasant in northern Iowa. Iowa St. Ooll. Jour. of Sci. 29(1) :39-60. Winston, Frank A. 1955. Color marking of waterfowl. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt. 19:319. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Date : A .••.•••. p..;..rI;..,·l~, ,.;;;1..;..95;..,8;;.__ _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��COLO DIV WILDLIFE RESEARCH CTR LIB 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022262 -79- April, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~---------------------- ProjectNo. __~VV~-~9~0~-~R~-_3~~~E~v~a~1~u~a~t~io~n~0~f~th~e_E~ff~e~c~t~s_o~f_H~a_b~it_a_ _ on VVildlife. VVorkPlan No. I Job No. 3 ------------------~~~----------------------------------- Title of Job: M~a_"p •.• p-i_n.wg_a_n_d--P_l_a_n_im--e_t_e_r_in ..•. g.__o_f_St __u_d""'y_A __re_a_s_. Period Covered: July 1, 1957 to June 30, 1958. _ Objectives: To determine agricultural land-use acreages on all study areas. Statistically significant variations in crop types among study areas may be more important in affecting wildlife populations than habitat improvement plantings. Before plantings can be evaluated the effects of agricultural land-use must be recognized and removed. Procedure: Base maps of all study areas were drafted from aerial photographs in 1955. These maps were copies and used for field survey work. Planimetering of study area maps were completed by Robert D. Wood, a part time student assistant, and the project leader calculated crop acreages. Abstract: Base maps of all 'study areas were copied, crops were recorded in the field and all maps were planimetered by a student assistant. The project leader calculated acreages and completed the analyses. Six land-use types; small grains, fallow, pasture, sorghum, millet and corn were examined for possible significant variation among study areas or groups of areas. For the year 1957, significant variation at the. 10 level was shown for all six land-use types tested. No further analysis was attempted because the variation is only important if it shows correlation with wildlife population estim ates. �-80- Land-use Data: Land use classification on all study areas was divided into the following groups: small grains, fallow, sorghums, millet, pasture, COTn,farmsteads {in many cases including adjacent shelterbelt acreage), waste ( a classification which includes many areas not suitable for wildlife use), road and railroad tread and miscellaneous (including small acreages of sugar beets, alfalfa, some shelterbelt tree plantings and all open water surfaces). Of these types, only the first six were considered to be of sufficient magnitude to have an appreciable effect on wildlife populations. The remaining four groups either have no wildlife cover or represent a combination of types for which no analysis is possible. In the interest of brevity, the base data showing total acreages of each land-use type of Sections on all study areas will not be presented in this report. A three year summary of acreages of the six major crop types is presented in Table 1. Table 1--Total acreages, Year 1955 1956 1957 Sm.grain 4653.6 50286.4 52527.3 six major land-use types, 27 study areas Fallow Pasture 50187.9 28346.5 51501.4 26537.4 53453.1 27357.8 Sorghum 14807.4 11096.2 6742.2 Millet 6607.9 8369.3 8023.2 .!/ , 1955-1957. . Corn 2932.8 2416. 1 1939.2 Total 149836.1 150206.8 150042.8 The major changes in total acreage shown by Table 1 are the continuing increase in small grains and fallow and the 50 percent decrease in sorghum acreage for 1957. Analysis: In analyzing land-use data for the study areas of Project W-90-R, the primary objective was to determine fuose types which were not randomly distributed among all study areas. No analysis beyond that necessary to determine statistical significance among the artificial analysis groups has been attempted. The eventual analysis procedure involves examination of wildltfe population estimates adjusted for the multiple curvilinear regression of population counts on all factor's which appear· to be affecting wildlife. Method: Both the 9-planting and 6-planting groups of the basic research design include 9 study areas, but only 8 suitable controls could be located. It is possible to complete the least-squares analysis of land-use data with unequal subclasses, and the method is probably adequate to show significant differences in crop acreages. However, a missing item nullifies the addition theorem for sums of squares (Snedecor, 1956)and the orthogonal properties of the analytic design are upset (Anderson and Bancroft, 1952). Since the final analysis will require estimation of values for the missing control area this procedure has been followed in these analyses. The missing control area is tentatively being estimated by: �-81- Ox = 3(E2';' B2) .;. 3(06';' 07) - Sc 4 where E2 and B2 are study areas with the same location and 06 and 07 areas with the same planting density as the missing area. Sc represents the known totals of all areas with the same location. In the analysis, one degree of freedom is sacrificed for Error and the variance for Location is always slightly higher than it should be. The error is usually very small however*, and until the formula for the estimation of the missing class receives final approval no attempt at correction will be attempted. Analysis of Variance: Tables 2 through 7 present the analyses of variance for land-use acreages on the 27 study areas for 1957. *" The significance of the test is accentuated but the correction for this condition is quite trivial for cases in which only a single value is missing." Leonard and Clark, 1939, P. 181. Tables 2-7 --Analyses of variance, land-use acreages, W-90-R-3, 1957. Variate Table 2. --wheat acreages Table 3. --fallow acreages Table 4. --pasture acreages Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error Density Location Type DxL D x.T LxT Error Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error 27 study areas of Project Degrees of Freedom 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 Mean Square f .10 110759.43 692953.51* 1171625.02* 71763.21 125403.28 436653.08 159730. 19 486543.91 1256327.08* 784380.33* 52538:45 142596.68 620270.99* 157994.32 203435.55 2824970.38* 1669365.04* 129976.93 235727.26 891160.76 425320.56 �-82Tables 2-7--Analyses of variance, land-use acreages, W-90-R-3, 1957-Continued. Variate Table 5. --sorghum acreages Table 6. --millet acreages Table 7. -- corn acreages Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error Density Location Type DxL DxT LxT Error 27 study areas of Project Degrees of Freedom 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 Mean Square f .10 102074.44 29964009 359139.86* 57463.92 99470.76 56188.40 63184.04 14105082 295763.46* 18707.15 49100.89 56506.30 40699.17 37963.97 37528.56* 147.16 43885.46* 3011. 67 60605.82* 5266.94 6510.95 Conclusions: No interpretation of the data has been made. The fact that significance is shown for a particular land-use type requires that adjustment of wildlife population counts for tha type be made. Further examination of land-use variability can be made if any actual influence on wildlife is exhibited. In 1957, the most noticeable change in land-use was the inclusion of two new types in the group for which significance is shown. Wheat, fallow, pasture and corn have been significant in each study year. During 1955 and 1956, a larger total acreage of sorghum was recorded than in 1957, but its distribution was random over all study areas. In 1957, despite a tremendous drop in total sorghum acreage, significance was indicated amo~ the groupings for type. Millet acreages, which did not vary significantly in 1955 and 1956, dropped slightly from ,the 1956 Ievel , Significance was shown in 1957however because there was a shift of millet production to the southern part of the study region. Literature Cited Anderson, R. L. and T. A. Bancroft, 19520 Statistical Theory in Research. McGrawHill Book Co. : New York 399 pp. Leonard, W. H. and A. G. Clark 1939. Field Plot Techniques. Burgess Publ. COo: Minneapolis 271 pp. (mi..eo). Snedecor, George W. 1956. Statistical Methods. Iowa State College Press: Ames. 5th ed. 534 pp. Approved by: Laurence E. Riolr'dan Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Federal Aid Coordinator Date: Aprtl, )958 _ �-83- April, 1958 O""""n" \j' [., '. > .J Uf"'U. ,,;;'/i Vv·~~ JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ------~~~~----------------- State of: Colorado ProjectNo,~ VV_-_9_0_-_R_-_3 __~;~E~v~a~lu~a~t~io~n~o~f_t~h~e_E~f~f~e~c~ts~o~f~H~a~b~i~ta~t~hn~~ _ ment on Wildlife. VVorkPlan No. II Job No. 3 ----------------------~------------~------------------ Title of Job : ~P~h~e~a;.;;s~a~n.;...t ..;;;M;;;;.o;;;.;r;;.;t;.;;a;;;;.lI~·t""y...;St;;..;;.;.;u~d~ie~s;;.;_ Period Covered: July 1, 1957 to June 30, 1958. Objectives: To evaluate pheasant mortality due to various factors on areas with and without habitat plantings. The investigation will be primarily concerned with evaluating the protection afforded wildlife by plantings during severe weather conditions. Reports: As of this writing, northeastern the winter of 1957-1958 has been relatively mild in Colorado, and, barring a late spring blizzard, no pheasant mortality will be recorded. Initial work on an investigation of the 1948-1949 blizzard has been started, since this approach will represent but only a compilation of opinion and conjecture from :other sources it is not known whether any really qualitative conclusions can be made. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Date~=- A.p_r_il~,_l_9_5_8 Approved by: Laurence Eo Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ _ ��I~ilmll~' ~I~'~il~irlllli~iil~~~~1 i~illll~11 BDOW022264 April,1958 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT " •...• ri,.'n .- ..• u ,:',; ...•. ,.": ..; .~ \.~ V 0,.1 '<1: v INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of: COLORADO Project No. Work Plan No. W-90-R-3; Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Improvement on Wildlife. Job No. 4 ----~~----------------~~~----------~-----------------Title of Job: Pheasant Winter Cover Preferences --------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---------------IT Period Covered: July 1, 1957to March 31, 1958. Objectives: To determine the preferred winter cover types in the study region and evaluate the relationship of habitat improvement plantings in pheasant preferences. Procedure: During the first winter of the cover preference study, twice monthly examination of 10,000 square foot plots in representative cover types showed that habitat plantings were used more than all other plots and that wheat stubble plots were a very poor second. In the second winter only habitat plantings and wheat stubble plots were examined. The relative size of the stubble plots in comparison with the enormous acreage available to birds made reliable evaluation impossible however. For the winter of 1957-58, stubble plots were enlarged by searching with an automobile at night, and a small number of woody cover plots were searched in the method of previous years. Eight plots, 10,000 square feet in area, were searched on foot twice a month from November 25, 1957to March 27, 1958. All evidence of wildlife use was recorded and roost sites were destroyed to prevent replication counts. In addition, six wheat stubble sample plots were searched the night before or the night after the woody plot search. This investigation involved driving through the field at8-12 m. p. h. and recording aU wildlife flushed. Since most habitat plantings were too dense to allow passage of a vehicle it was impossible to make comparable observations in both wheat stubble and woody cover. �-86- Abstract: In a continuation of a three-winter study of pheasant cover preferences in northeastern CQ1QradQ,eight 10,000 square foot plots in habitat improvement plantings were searched at two,week intervals f rom November 15, 1957through March 30, 1958. In addition, bi-weekly flushing counts were conducted in random wheat stubble fields with a vehicle at night. Weather condrtions during the winter of 1957-58 were so, mild that no,pattern of pheasant roosting use in habitat improvement cover was established and very few roosting sites were recorded. In order to, make a valid compartson of pheasant roosting patterns for the three winters, all evidence of pheasant use of habitat cover' for six of the plots was rated on a point system with major emphasis on rQQsting sites. The analysis of variance proved a significant difference among areas means, year means and among the means of the area x year and year x period interactions. Pheasant use of two,of the study plots was Significantly lower than the use of the remaining four'. In one case, the plot was part of a large timberclaim, and although use of the timberclaim appeared to,be fairly heavy, the part of the use occur ring in the study plot was relatively light. 'In the second case, the planting demonstrated a propenstty for inundation by drifting snow and a resultant loss of cover values. There was some indication that the yearly means of pheasant use varied in .direct cor-relation with the severity of weather conditions during the three winters'. Nineteen fifty-five-fifty-Six was the only winter in which pheasant mortality was recorded, and pheasant use of plantings was significantly higher during that pertod, The weather conditlcns among the three winters were not comparable however' because the var'iation in total snowfall was so,great. Thus, it was not pos sible to, determine the .importance ' of weather factor's Qnpheasant use with the yearly relattonships. The area x year Interaction made possfble an examination of the var-iation in pheasant use on individual areas. In general, the highest use rating on each area occur-red during the first winter of study, but none of the areas showed year to,year changes in direct correlation with the mean changes. ExaminatiQn of individual area variation in relationto the adjacent agricultural cover types and the propensitles for snowdrift accumulation demonstrated that pheasant use of habitat plantings declines when there is no,good access cover and when drifting snow inundates the planting. The year x per iod interaction demonstrated the influence of weather factors for single check per-iods on the var-iation in pheasant use of habitat cover , Four per-iod means were significantly different from the yearly means, but no,relationship was obvious, A more comprehensive analysis, testing the correlation and reg resston of use ratings Qn minimum temperatures, precipitation and wind velocities demonstrated that. most of the variation in pheasant use of plantings is due to weather factors and that correlatton , , �-87- is negative for both high winds and snowfall. Apparently, the woody cover established to protect pheasants from winter storms is avoided by the birds at the time when they most require shelter. Six random wheat stubble plots, searched with a vehicle at night had flushing rates very close to one pheasant per acre throughout the winter. Relationships of stubble flushing rates with weather factors were not as strong as those for habitat planting ratings, but they demonstrated the possibility that wheat stubble is the alternate cover selected by pheasants when storms occur and use of habitat improvement cover declines. Two revisions of the present planting pattern are suggested if any winter cover values are to be provided by habitat improvement plantings. First, some method must be found to guarantee that part of the planting remains snowfree or at least is not completely inundated. Second, a vegetative rather than a woody cover is suggested for attracting pheasants. �-88- Study Areas: Woody cover planting s. Development No. 1 - seven row windbreak planting. Elm, R. olive, hackberry (2), plum, sandcherry (2). Partially cultivated between rows. Development No. 2 - six row windbreak planting. tumbleweed accumulation in understory. Elm (6). Not cultivated. Heavy Development No.3 - seven row windbreak planting. Cottonwood, plum and cottonwood (2), plum, plum and cottonwood, cottonwood (2). Partially cultivated between rows. Development No.4 - three row evergreen planting in roadside park. Juniper, ponderosa pine (2). Trees spaced 15-20 feet apart in rows. Annual weeds in understory . Development No.5 - three row windbreak planting. Elm (3). Cultivated between rows. Tumbleweeds in understory. Development No. 6 - three row windbreak planting. Caragana, elm, R. olive. Partially cultivated between rows. Development No. 7 - part of larger timberclaim. One row plums, small willow clump and scattered boxelders. Perennial grasses. Development No.8 - small cattail area and adjacent willow clump - non-man made. Study Areas: wheat stubble fields. Ten fields were selected for study but only six were surveyed on any single night. The fields sampled were located: Field No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7 No. 8 No. 9 No. 10 W 1/2, SE 1/4, Sec. 12, T. 10 N., R. 44 W. N 1/2, NE 1/4, Sec. 13, T. 10 N., R. 44 W. N 1/2, SE 1/4, Sec. 13, T. 10 N., R. 44 W. N 1/2, NE 1/4, Sec. 24, T. 10 N. R. 44 W. NE 1/4, SE 1/4, Sec. 24, T. 10 N., R. 44 W. S 1/2, N 1/2, NW 1/4, Sec. 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. N 1/2, Sec. 13, T. 10 N., R. 44 W. W 1/2, SE 1/4, Sec. 24, T. 10 N., R. 44 W. N 1/2, S 1/2, NWI/4, Sec. 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. W 1/2, E 1/2, SW 1/4, Sec. 19, T. 10 N., R. 43 W. Pheasant Use of Plantings: During the first winter of the study, 189 roost sites were recorded in 11 plantings; and in 1956-57, 70 roost sites were counted in 9 plantings. In 1957-58 however, only 11 sites were recorded during the study period. Pheasant populations in the study region have generally shown an increase �0~~ 1-"} ~;. -$ - over; . the three year period and the decrease in roosting use of plantings can be almost entirely attributed to variations in severity of the weather among the three winters. In order to compare total use as well as the sporadic roosting use the field data was rated on the basis of the following point system.. Point total ratings for the areas searched during the winter of 1957-58 are presented in Table 1. Pheasant use indicated by: No pheasant sign recorded Few pheasant tracks Manypheasant tracks One or more birds flushed Pheasant sign other than tracks (scat, dust sites) Up to 5 roost sites Five or more roost sites Points o 1 2 1 1 3 4 Of the 8 areas examined in this study, 6 received virtually the same amount of pheasant use for the winter period. Only areas 4 and 7 were not used to any great extent, and in both cases the reasons for non-use were fairly obvious. Pheasants were probably not attracted to area 4 because the wide spacing of the conifers confined the shelter value of the planting to the values of individual trees. Area 7, as a part of a larger timberclaim, may have received a proportionate share of the total pheasant use within the timberclaim, but because the total shelter area is so large the use of any individual part was relatively light. Table 1. --Point value ratings of pheasant use, 7 habitat improvement planting study areas and cattail-willow area, winter of 1957-1958. Area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (cattail) Total Jan. Feb. Mar. Total 2 1 2 0 2 2 0 2 1 0 0-,2, 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 9 14 3 1 1 2 3 '2 4 1 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 8 12 2 5 1 5 1 1 "2 0 1 5 2 '4 1 0 1 2 11 22 16 16 16 6 15 15 1 13 98 Nov. Dec. 2 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 9 2 2 0 2 1 0 1 10 1 1 In the effort to delimit preferred habitat planting types for pheasants, the 1957-58 data gives little new information because pheasant use was so light and the final ratings were so low. For six of the areas however, it is possible to present point value ratings for the winters of 1955-56 and 1956-57. Table 2 presents this data. The analysis of these ratings for the three year period is presented in Table 3. _') , �-90.- Table 2. --Point value ratings of pheasant use, 6 study areas plantings, winters of 1955-56 and 1956-57. 1955-56 Area Dec. Mar. Nov. Jan. Feb. 1 1 0 4 5 1 0 1 2 2 7 5 2 5 5 7 3 0 2 3 5 4 1 3 1 0 3 4 3 4 7 5 5 6 4 5 6 5 2 6 7 6 6 7 7 2 6 4 3 4 3 1 1 3 7 4 0 1 1 1 19 15 10 16 Total 30 3434 2220 Area 1 2 3 5 6 7 Total Nov. p 0 0 0 1 0 1 Dec. 3 0 1 1 5 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 12 3 1956-57 Jan. Feb. 1 0 0 4 0 2 5 5 4 6 5 4 3 4 3 5 0 1 2 1 3 0 0 1 1113 15 20 in habitat improvement Total 16 37 25 46 46 15 185 Mar. 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 1 1 0 0 0 8 8 Total 10 16 30 24 6 5 91 Table 3. --Analysis of variance, three-winter summary of point value ratings of pheasant use, 6 study areas in habitat improvement plantings, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. N = 162 Source DF SS2 M2 F F05 Total Areas Years Period Area x years Area x period Year x period Error 161 5 2 8 10 40 16 80 663.07 100.63 124.79 28.68 87.65 45.76 125.43 150. 13 20.13 62.39 3.59 8.77 1.14 7.84 1. 88 10.71**33.19** 1. 91 4.66** 2.33 3.11 2.05 1. 95 4.17** 1. 77 To determine the value of D, the minimum difference between variate the following formula was used: Continued on next page. means for significance, �-91- Dis greater than the square root of : where EEMS is equal to m~ 2EEMS n (1 t m2 for treatment) SS~ Areas: D, . 79 Means, area 1 - 1. 56 area 2 - 2.56 area 3 - 2; 63 area 5 - 3. 15 area 6 - 2.48 area 7 - .78 Pheasant use of area 7 was significantly lower than use of all other plots except area 1, and use of areas 2, 3, 5 and 6 was significantly greater than use of area 1. A probable reason for the low rating in area 7 has already been discussed. In comparing area 1 to the remaining four however, the planting differences which resulted in the variation in pheasant use are less obvious and appear not to be directly due to vegetative composition or arrangement. The primary difference can probably be expressed in the depth and persistence of snowdrifts collected by the plantings. Area 1, throughout all three winters of study, was characterized by a snowdrift much larger than those in other plantings. In 1957-58there was little windblown snow in any plot before March, and pheasant use ratings were not affected. By contrast, a November blizzard in 1956 deposited a snowdrift almost eight feet deep in area 1, and pheasant use was curtailed throughout the winter period. Area 6 also collected a persistent, but smaller, snowdrift in 1956, and use of that plot was also curtailed. Years: D, .62 Means 1955 - 56 - 3.43 1956- 57 - 1. 69 1957 - 58 - 1. 46 The relationship of the yearly means of pheasant use show a general correlation with the relative severity of weather conditions during the three winters. The 1955-56 period was the only winter in which weather mortality among pheasants was recorded, and pheasant use of habitat plantings was significantly greater during this period. Nineteen hundred and fifty six and nineteen hundred and fifty seven was somewhat more severe than 1957 - 58 because winter weather reached blizzard proportions in both November and March. No mortality was recorded in either winter however, and the differences in pheasant use of plantings were not significant. Area x year interaction: D, 1. 32 Means: area 1,55 - 56 - 1. 78 area 3,55-56 -2.78 area 6,:55 -56 ..;;5. 11* 56-57 -3.33* 56 -57 - .67 56 -57 - 1. 11 57-58 -1. 78 57-58 - 1.67 57-58 - 1. 78 area 2, 55-56 -4. 11* area 5,55-56 -5.11* area 7,55-56 - 1. 67* 56-57 -2.67 56-57 - . 56 56-57 -1. 78 57-58 -1. 67 57-58 - .11 57-58 - 1. 78 �-92- This interaction makes possible an examination of the variation in pheasant use on each study area. The test shows that significant year to year variation occurred on all but one area (No.1) and that in every case but one, 1955-56 use was heavier than use in one or both of the other winters. The fact that area 3 received significantly greater use in 1956-57 suggests that the use-relationship may not be entirely dependent on weather severity however. Other factors which might affect pheasant use patterns are adjacent cover quality (juxtaposition), and snowdrifts which collect in the plantings. Table 4 lists, for each study area, the adjacent cover and snowdrift factors which may have influenced pheasant use. Table 4. -- Adjacent cover and snowdrift factors influencing pheasant use ci study areas in 6 habitat improvement plantings, 1955- 56, 1956-57, 1957-58. Area 1955-56 Good weed cover, pasture, fallow small drift 1/ 1956-57 Fair weed cover, stubble, pasture, large drift 1957-58 Good weed cover, fallow, late drift 2 Good weed cover, fallow, F air weed cover stubble, Sorghum stubble, fallow, 3 Fair weed cover, fallow, pasture, Fair weed cover, stubble, pasture, small drift Sorghum stubble, fallow, pasture late drift 5 Stubble, Fallow, small drift Stubble, 6 Stubble, pasture Fallow, pasture deep drift Stubble, pasture, 7 Timberclaim . Timberclaim Timberclaim 1 1/ Drift depths are relative because of varying original deposit and melting rates within each planting. In general, a depth of less than three feet was not recorded while large drifts ranged up to 8 feet in depth. Stubble, unless otherwise noted, is small grain stubble. Cursory examintion of this data suggests that pheasant cover preferences are influenced by a combination of factors including severity of winter weather, persistence of snowdrifts and quality of adjacent agricultural cover. On the one area (No.7) which was protected from drifts and had no change in adjacent cover, pheasant use declined in proportion to weather severity in the three winters. Use of area 5 also followed the �weather severity pattern because adjacent agricultural cover always provided access. Area 3 presents the most important relationship because use of this area in 1956-57 was significantly greater than in 1957-58, and somewhat higher than in 1955-56. On this area, pheasant use in 1956-57 was the reverse of the general pattern because adjacent stubble cover provided access not available in the other two years of study. In contrast to the use of areas 3, 5 and 7, and even though the same general decline because of weather patterns can be seen, on areas 1, 2 and 6, the second year drop was proportionately greater because deep, persistent snowdrifts inundated much of the cover. On area 6, the drop in pheasant use was even greater in 1956-57 because no cover adjacent to the planting gave pheasants easy access. Year x period interaction: D, 1. 61 The final significant comparison in the analysis of variance is that for the year x period interaction .. Significantly high and low ratings among the period means should demonstrate the variation in pheasant use of plantings due to the influence of weather conditions. The variation among years during comparable periods is, of course, meaningless, but four period means were significantly different from the individual year means. Year means: Significant means: 55-56 - 3.43 Dec. 1-5.67 Mar. I-I. 67 56-57 - 1. 69 Feb. 2- 3.33 57-58 - 1. 46 Mar. 2-:-3.33 Comparison of these four means with each other and with the variation in weather conditions for the seven days preceding the field checks (See Table 5) indicates no reason for the variation. Two of the significantly high period means followed precipitation totals of .20 and. 13, but a third high mean was preceded by precipitation of only. 01. The significantly low mean followed a week in which wind velocity daily means totalled 51. 4, but one of the high means followed a week totalling 50.5, Since the data relating to the four significant variates appear to be almost meaningless, a more comprehensive analysis, testing the regression and correlation for all 27 check periods on weather conditions was made. Table 5 lists the rating totals for each field check during the three winters and tabulates the temperature, precipitation and wind velocity data which applies to each total. The temperature and prectpitation data were taken from the records of the weather station at Julesburg. Temperature is expressed as the average minimum for the week preceding the field check and precipitation as the total for the same period. Wind velocity data, since the Julesburg station has no annemometer, were taken from the records of the Agricultural Experiment Station at Akron and are expressed as totals of the mean wind velocities for the 7 days preceding the field ·check. Although the Akron station is nearly 60 miles from the general region of the study areas, compared to about 15 miles for the Julesburg station, there are no major topographic barriers in the intervening region, and it is felt that the Akron wind velocity data provides reliable trends even though the estimates may not be absolutely accurate. �-94- The comparison of pheasant use ratings and weather factors is shown in Table 6 as linear correlation and multiple regression coefficients for individual weather factors and all factors combined during each year of the study. The year to year variation demonstrates an almost unpredictable diversity in the influence of any single weather factor, but the multiple R indicate a strong relationship between the total influence of weather factors and the ultimate amount of pheasant use recorded. The year to year decrease in R corresponds to the degree of weather stress on pheasant populations during the three winters. In 1955-56, the only winter which produced pheasant mortality in the study region, nearly 90 percent (R2 ) of the variability in pheasant use of plantings was caused by weather factors. By contrast, in 1957-58, winter weather was not severe, and only 57 percent of pheasant use variability could be related to weather. Table 5. --Total pheasant use rating of 6 winter cover preference plot s in habitat improvement plantings by bi-weekly periods, daily minimum temperature mean, total precipitation and total of daily wind velocity means for seven days preceding field checks, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. (During periods when actual precipitation was recorded as only a trace, the figure. 01* has been used as a maximum estimate to allow the statistical anallses.} R-ratings T-temperature, p., precipitation, W-wind velocities 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 R T R Dates P W T P R P W W T 16.1 1 30 .07 22.6 Nov. 2 25.7 .33 28.8 9 22.3 .02 38.7 ·Dec. 1 11. 3 12 34 25. 1 .00 33.4 .20 30.8 6 20.4 .00 35.0 16.5 .00 28.7 3 21. 0 .17 34.7 Dec. 2 22 5 19.1 .00 42.1 11 25.6 .00 30.5 19 23.1 11 Jan. 1 .01* 29.5 19.0 .01*36.6 13 15.8 Jan. 2 20 .01* 23.4 8.6 .03 36.4 2 16.3 .21 50.0 15 19 .11 30.3 Feb. 1 2.7 8.9 12.1 .01*32.9 .00 31. 4 7 15 5.9 20 11 Feb. 2 .00 20.3 22.6 .01 35.3 29.4 .00 39.2 Mar. 1 10 24.7 8 18.9 .32 44.7 .02 51. 4 8 13.4 .52 40.9 16 29.3 27.4 . .. 13 50.5 .00 37.2 8 Mar. ·2 25.'Z .66 65.0 20 91 182.1. 1.52 340.2 185 145.4 Total .42 274.2 79 179.4 .90 365.9 Table 6. --Multiple regression and linear correlation for pheasant use. ratings of 6 winter cover plots in habitat improvement plantings and temperature, precipitation and wind velocity. Nov. 15 to March 31, 1955- 56, 1956-57, 1957-58.N-27 Weather Temperature Preclpitatlon Wind velocity Multiple R 1955-56 -.287 .721 -.471 .947 1956-57 -.355 -.566 -.081 .855 1957-58 .628 -.051 .233 .756 Three years -.249 -.250 -.414 .427 �The reasons for the wide diversity in year to year influence of individual weather factors are not at all obvious, but the strength of the multiple regression coefficients demonstrates that the relationships are not random. General examination of the data suggests that the diversity may be due to an interrelationship pattern in which the influence of any single weather factor can be completely negated by another factor particularly during that part of the winter in which weather conditions are not capable of killing pheasants. A second possibility is that pheasant cover preference patterns are not the same from year to year. Any test of the interrelationship thesis must be based on the multiple linear regression of ratings on the three weather factors. Table 6 shows the R for all data to be .427. If the multiple regression formula is solved, Y = 25.654 - .273 wind - 30 103 precipitation - 0120 temperature, and the Y' in Table 7 are estimated by the weather factor data 0 Table 7. --Multiple regression estimates of pheasant use ratings on 6 winter cover plots in habitat improvement plantings from temperature, precipitation , and wind velocity data, Nov. 15 to Mar. 31, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. Regression estimates Date 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1703 Nov. 2 13.7 12.4 Dec. 1 15.3 13.5 13.7 15.8 13.1 Dec. 2 11. 9 Jan. 1 1408 14.3 13.4 17.3 14.6 Jano 2 9.4 1 1607 1600 15.2 Febo 1904 13.3 .Febo 2 11. 4 Mar. 1 8.6 10.2 11. 3 Mar. 2 1200 2.8 8.2 13702 111.5 Totals 106.9 The standard error. of the estimate is 7. 12, and eight variates fall outside the plus or minus 7. 12 which should dascribe 67 percent of the cases for a normal distribution curve. Of the eight variates, only two occurred in the period from the first of January through the middle of March. The average error of the estimate for November and December was 809 and for the last half of March, '70 O. During the "cr-itical perfod" inthe middle of the winter however, the average error of the estimate was 3.4. Thus, if the possibility of a late fall or early spring storm capable of killing pheasants is disregarded, the 15 variates from January 1 through March 15 are probably more representative of the pheasant winter cover relationship than the original 27 variates. The regression analysis with these 15 variates demonstrates a much stronger regression within each year and a better total R than the analysis with all variates. The data in Table 8 demonstrates that wind is probably the most significant factor in determining �-96-" pheasant use of plantings, precipitation has a secondary effect and temperature usually has very little influence. With the exception of the wind velocity influence however, the year to year correlation factors still demonstrate a wide variability. Table 8. --Multiple regression and linear correlation for pheasant use ratings of 6 winter cover plots in habitat improvement plantings and temperature, precipitation and wind velocity, Jan. 1 to Mar. 15, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. N - 15. Weather factor Temperature Precipitation Wind velocity Multiple R 1955-56 -.345 .252 -.735 .993 1956-57 -.025 -.667 -.452 .820 1957-58 .523 -.327 -.69~ .944 Three years -.142 -.462 -.690 .715 The very minor increase in the three year R over the r for wind alone shows the temperature and precipitation are not consistent in their influence and would not be of much value in predicting pheasant winter cover use levels. It cannot be assumed that the year to year variation in the r for temperature and precipitation are meaningless because the yearly use estimates (R) are much stronger than the estimates based on wind alone. The conclusion suggested by these data is that the pheasant woody cover use patterns are based on the experience provided by the first storm in the fall. Thereafter, the pattern may be altered if it proves to be unsuccessful, but the influence of the pattern may be strong throughout the winter period. The test for this thesis is based on the correlation "betweenpheasant use ratings and weather factors during late November and December. The patterns thus established are presented in Table 9. Table 9. --Linear correlation for pheasant use ratings of 6 winter cover plots in habitat improvement planting and 7 day temperature, precipitation and wind velocity records, Nov. 15 to December 31, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. Weather factor Temperature Precipitation Wind velocity N - 3. 1955-56 ~.799 .936 .052 1956-57 .233 -.944 .465 1957-58 .985 .922 -.216 With a sample involving only three pairs of variates, linear correlation above . 9 can occur 10 percent of the time if no correlation exists. Thus. even the largest figures in Table 9 may not be significant. The important point shown by the analysis is that in almost every case, the high correlation coefficients establish the use pattern followed for the remainder of the winter with temperature and precipitation. �9.r;;t:' .~~'.'\ -97- In 1955-56, the November-December storms were characterized by light snow, cold temperatures and light winds. Pheasant use was established on the basis of protection from light snow and cold - both of which were apparently offered by woody cover plantings. Subsequent experience brought out the negative correlation with wind, and reduced the strength of the snow correlation, but the habits induced by the first storms remained influential throughout the winter. In 1956-57, the November-December storms were characterized by extremely heavy snowfall - to the virtual exclusion of the effects of temperature and wind. Pheasant use patterns were based on the fact that plantirgs offered death by burial during storms and little cover thereafter until drifts had melted. Subsequent experience resulted in the negative correlation with wind, and the imprint of the early storms remained strong throughout the winter as a negative correlation with precipitation. In 1957-58, the November-December weather was generally warm, dry and windy. Pheasants had little need for shelter of any kind and the woody cover use pattern appeared to be a continuation of the brood period pattern in which hens with chicks apparently seek woody cover to protect broods from direct sunshine, rain and avian predators. During the winter, the strong negative wind correlation was established and some of the correlation with temperature remained. Correlation between pheasant use ratings and pr'ecipitation did not remain positive, but comparison of the crstical period data with that of 1955-56 gives some indication of a possible reason for the shift. In 1955-56, prectpitation was limited to repeated light snowfall, and the Julesburg station never recorded more than 2 inches of snow on the ground. The precipitation relationship therefore remained roughly equivalent to the November-December pattern. In 1957-58, storms resulted in Julesburg recordings over 2 inches five different times and the inundation of woody plantings by drifting snow apparently resulted in a reversal of pheasant use patterns for the winter. Summarization of the regression and correlation analyses infers the following points: 1. The variation in pheasant use of woody cover plantings is due primarily to the influence of the three weather factors; wind velocity, preclpitation and minimum temperatures. During the three winters of study, 67 to 99 per cent of the observed use variation could be traced directly to weather factor variation, 2. Wind velocity is the most consistent, and probably the most important, factor influencing pheasant use of plantings. During the three winters, an average of 48 percent of the observed pheasant use variation was determined by negative correlation with wind velocity. "-'.--~ �-98- 3. The influences of precipitation and temperature are fairly important in determining pheasant use of plantings in any single year, but the effects are not consistent from year to year. Apparently, the experience of pheasants in the period before January 1 determines the influence of cold and snow for the remainder of the winter. Under deep snowfall conditions in midwinter however, pheasant use correlation with precipitation becomes negative irregardless of the November-December experi:ence. Based on these three points, a general pattern of pheasant use of habitat improvement cover during the winter period can be formulated. The significance of this pattern is best appreciated through examination of the three factors which combine to kill pheasants inthe winter. Wind, snow and cold can occur in seven different primary combinations, but wildlife mortality is normally produced only by those storms incorporating the worst of all three. The only binary combination even suspected of killing pheasants is that of wind and snow. The general pattern shows however that pheasant use declines in proportion to increases in wind velocity or snowfall. Thus, the cover being established primarily to protect pheasants from winter storms is avoided by the birds at the time when they require shelter the most. The only possible conclusion is that woody cover planting s are much less effective as winter cover than wildlife managers have hoped. Since this conclusion is so much at variance with the generally promoted theory concerning windbreak cover plantings, examination of the data for field-method bias seemed necessary. Specifically, it can be suggested that the negative correlation for wind resulted from progressive obliteration of pheasant sign by windblown dust or snow and that negative correlation with heavy snowfall was caused by a similar association. The existence of such a relationship can be considered very remote because it could only occur if pheasants consistently left woody cover shelter before storms had abated. Nevertheless, two tests for the possibility of bias can be made. The first test is based on correlation during the midwinter period between pheasant use ratings and the weather variates for the two days before the field check. If any obliteration relationship is present, the correlation for the two-day relationship should be stronger than the correlation using the weather data for a full week preceding field checks. The data in Table 11 demonstrates however that no such relationship exists. The wind correlation coefficients for the two-day periods are generally weaker than the r for the full week, and the two-day r for precipitation are virtually the inverse of the 7-day relationship. Table 11. --Linear correlation for pheasant use ratings of 6 winter cover plots in habitat improvement plantings and 2-day temperature, precipttation and wind velocity records, Jan. 1 to Mar. 15, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. Weather factor 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 Temperature -.013 .037 .131 Precipitation -.917 . 166 Wind velocity -.471 -.570 -.138 �-99- The final test of bias in the field data is non-methematical and quite obvious. There is little doubt that tracks, roost sites and birds are more easily seen when snow is present. Thus, a good chance existed for a positive correlation bias between pheasant use ratings and snowfall. If any such bias existed however, it was completely denied by the strength of the actual negative correlation. Conclusions: The data evaluating pheasant use of habitat improvement cover during the winter reveals a relationship which is in direct conflict with the theory on which windbreak planting for wildlife shelter is based. Overall pheasant use of such plantings, as evidenced by comparison with other cover types, is quite heavy during the winter period. The plantings are not however attaining the desired effect because pheasant use decreases as the need for shelter from the elements increases and bird use is primarily important when shelter is not needed. Wheat stubble plots: The data obtained in after dark searches of wheat stubble fields is, unfortunately, verY inconclusive. The winter of 1957-58 was so mild that pheasants made no attempt to search out cover capable of offering blizzard protection. Throughout most of the winter, it was possible to search with a vehicle as planned, but the heavy snows of March were so deep that many roads were impassible and fields could not be entered at all. Pheasant use during this period was checked by recording the number of tracks crossed in snowshoe surveys. This data cannot be compared to that taken with a vehicle at night however, and it is of interest only because it demonstrates the amount of traffic across stubble fields ' even when the stubble is barely visible above the snow. No roosting sites were found, and it appeared that the majority of the tracks were made by pheasants randomly searching for grain or crossing to cover not buried by snow. Table 12 presents the compiled data from the field checks made during the whiter of 1957-58. Each sample represents the summation of data from six different wheat stubble fields. Except for the low number of birds flushed on December 27, the usual flushing rate for the winter period was close to one brrdper acre. Table 12. --Miles driven and pheasants flushed, night searches of wheat stubble fields winter of 1957-58.' Miles Pheasants Pheasants Date driven flushed per acre Acres* 15 19.09 .786 Dec. 3 6.3 Dec. 18 16 16.06 .996 5.3 Dec. 27 16. 06 .249 5.3 4 16 .895 Jan. 13 5.9 17.88 Jan: 24 5.7 24 17.27 1. 380 15 16.97 .884 Feb. 10 5.6 1. 000 6.6 20 20.00 Feb. 24 Mar. 11 (walked) 2.1 (tracks) 24 (tracks per mi. ) 11. 4 *Assuming a width of survey strip within the headlight beam of 25 feet. �-100- Since winter weather was so mild, this data provides little opportunity for evaluating wheat stubble as winter cover. In any case, past observations have shown that blizzards will kill pheasants in the wheat stubble, and it seems certain that the cover type could have little value after snow depth has reached a few inches. The weather data relating to pheasant use of wheat stubble cover is shown in Table 13. Flushing rates are more dynamic than roosting site counts and are probably not influenced by temperature and wind factors other than those immediately apparent. For this reason, the temperature data in Table 13 are the minimums eventually reached on the nights of search and the wind veolcity data are the means for 24 hours ending at 8 A. M.on.the morning after the search. Precipitation is expressed as the total for the 7 days preceding the check because snow remains onthe ground and can be expected to influence pheasant use for several days after falling. Table 13. -- Pheasants flushed per acre of wheat stubble in night searches with a vehicle, by biweekly periods, minimum temperature and mean wind velocity for the night of search and precipitation total for seven days preceding the check, 6 random stubble plots, Nov. 15 to Feb. 28 1957-58. Pheasants Date Temperature flushed/ ac re PreCipitation Wind Velocity Nov. 2 .786 22 .03 5.8 Dec. 1 .996 23 .00 8.8 Dec. 2 12 .249 .01* 7.1 Jan. 1 .895 25 .00 5.8 Jan. 2 1. 390 27 .21 9.2 13 Feb. 1 .884 4.6 .01 * Feb. 2 1. 000 37 .00 13.4 The linear correlation coefficients for pheasant flushing rates and weather factors were. 617 for temperature, .615 for precipitation and. 344 for wind. During the critical period (Jan. and Feb., N - 4) the r were. 297 for temperature, . 968 for precipitation and. 374 for wind. None are statistically significant, but the relationships shown by wind and prec ipitation, particularly during the critical period, are important because they are a reverse of the weather r for habitat improvement use ratings. During the critical period the correlation between use ratings of woody cover and flushing rates in stubble is -. 820~ Thus, although statistical significance cannot be shown because of the small sample size, most of the data suggest that wheat stubble is the alternate cover selected by pheasants when storms occur and use of habitat improvement cover declines. Since wheat stubble and windbreaks represent the major part of the cover in the study region, this is not surprising. It also gives further credence to the data showing that habitat improvement cover is not providing the winter cover values desired. �2'0Q ;c· •.- ·,.f., -101- Conclusions: The data evaluating wheat stubble relate only to a very mild winter and offer a very small sample for analysis. For these reasons, they are much less reliable than the data for habitat planting use. Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that wheat stubble has a greater attraction for pheasants during inclement weather than plantings. This is unfortunate because the average height of most wheat stubble is only 14-16 inches, and any storm capable of killing pheasants will inundate such cover. The disastrous result is that pheasants attempt to endure winter blizzards in cover which is not capable of protecting them. Recommendations: The fact that pheasant use of windbreak plantings during the winter is not compatible with wildlife management aims cannot be taken as a blanket indictment of the theory for providing winter shelter. It does suggest however, that present planting patterns must be significantly revised if any winter cover value is to be received for the money spent on tree claims and windbreaks. One very necessary revision can be suggested by anyone who has examined a woody cover planting after a blizzard. It is obvious that cover inundated by snowdrifts has no shelter value, and no wildlife shelter will be offered until trees and shrubs are planting in a pattern which will collect all the snow in the upwind rows and leave downwindcover virtually snowfree. If a planting must be forty rows wide to achieve this result, then that is the width necessary to provide dependable winter cover for pheasants. In those regions where the center rows of very wide plantings tend to die out, the answer might lie in leaving out every fourth row, but whatever the answer, winter cover cannot be successful if it is buried by snow. When a planting offering a snowfree protected area is designed, it still may be necessary to provide a different type of cover to attract pheasants. Based on the relationship of woody cover pheasant use and wind, it seerrrspos sible that the overhead movement of branches has a detrimental influence on pheasant cover preferences. If so, the birds may avoid woody cover even when it is snowfree. The data in this study provides no positive indication of the cover type best suited to pheasant roosting, but some general conclusions can be implied by the wheat stubble study. Undoubtedly, some of the demonstrated pheasant use of wheat stubble was due to a food relationship. Shattered grain is the primary staple of wintering pheasants in the study region, and part of the roosting use of stubble was probably due to the fact that birds had no reason to seek better cover for the night. If the food relationship was entirely responsible for the amount of use recorded however, it seems doubtful that the correlation between. after dark �-102- flushing rates and weather factors or the critical period inverse correlation with woody cover use would have shown the relationships they did. A deep, heavy grass, offering about the same cover characteristics as wheat stubble might provide the desired attraction for pheasants in a permanent planting. A perennial grass would be more desirable than an annual grain because all annuals require maintenance, and past experience has shown that personnel are not usually available to continue regular maintenance over a period of years after the woody cover has been established. Report submitted by:__ L_._J_a_c_k_L .••. y_o_n DATE : _ ..-;.A•••p_r..;;;il-'-,_1~9..;;,5..;;.8 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coor'dlnato r �·/~i -~ ',.',_', April, 1958 -103JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ProjectNo. VV~-~9~0_-R~-~3 __~~E~v~a=1~u=at=i~0=n~0~f~ili~e~E=ff~e~c~ts~o~f~H~a=b~i~t=at~Im~ on Wildlife. VVorkPlan No. ------~--------~~~----------~-------------IT Job No. Title of Job: Hunting Season Survey Period Covered: July 1, 1957 to June 30, 1958. 6 Objectives: To determine the effects of habitat development plantings in aiding, or reducing, the pheasant harvest in northeastern Colorado. One of the major game management problems in this region is the poor hunter-success ratio despite a good pheasant population. Any additional harvest which can be traced to the influence of habitat plantings will be of benefit to the pheasant population, the sportsmen of Colorado and the Game and Fish Department. Procedure: In 1955, the pheasant season in the study region consisted of 20 days in two ten-day periods beginning November 11 and December 10. In 1957 the season was only 9 days long and began November 9. On the opening day of the hunting season each year, all available personnel were assigned study areas. Each man patrolled his 9~section plot and contacted the sportsmen who hunted there to determine total hunter load and pheasant harvest. In addition, each observer maintained records of the type of cover in which each bird was killed. . Each year about half of the areas were surveyed in the same manner on the second day of the season. No survey work was done after the second day because hunting pressure after the opening weekend dropped off so completely that many areas actually received no pressure for the remainder of the season. During the split season of 1955 an attempt was made to survey a few areas on December 10, but only one of the areas selected received any hunting pressure and no birds were killed. �-104- Abstract: On the first-and. second days of the pheasant hunting seasons in 1955 and 1957, representative 9-section study areas were patrolled to determine total hunterload, hunter success and pheasant kill in relation to presence or absence of habitat improvement plantings. Based on the data collected, it required from 1. 7 to 3. 8 times as long to kill a pheasant on control areas as on areas with plantings the first day of the season. On the second day however, hunter success was only slightly better on improved areas. A series of tests to determine the reliability of the base data are presented. Apparently, the hunter-success on improved areas is partially dependent on the increased hunting pressure these areas receive, but even after adjustment, areas with plantings produced consistently better hunting than controls on the first day of the season. Second day correlation between hunter-load and kill-time revealed that plantings lost most of their effect after the first day and that success was primarily dependent on hunting pressure. A total of 12 correlation tests between crop acreages and hunter-success and pheasant kill is presented. In no case is the effect of a single crop significant in improving pheasant hunting. Examination of the percentages of pheasants. killed, by cover type, reveals that wheat stubble, weeds, habitat plantings and corn produced almost 90 percent of the kill. Corn was felt to be less important than this data indicates because so little of it is grown in the major part of the study region. Several possible management recommendations aimed at increasing pheasant harvest in the study region are suggested. If hunters can be persuaded to search wheat stubble fields for pheasants, total kill can probably be increased. Weed areas might be protected through pointing out the economic disadvantages of indiscriminate burning to landowners. The best apparent method to increase hunting success seems to lie in the establishment of permanent woody cover. Before recommending large amounts of such work however, it will be necessary to estimate the cost of the additional pheasants harvested by this method and compare the cost with that of pen-raised and released birds. Acknowledgments: Recognition is due the following men; without whose cooperation this' study could never have been accomplished: Francis Metsger, Richa'rd Pillmore, Har-ry Bobinson, William Rutherford, Richard Takes, Gene Bassett, Bert Baker, John DeGrazio, Bert DeFreese, John Ellis, Paul Gilbert, Jack Grieb, William McKean, Laurence Riordan, Harry Figge, Ferd Kleinschnitz, Dr. Lee Yeager and Wildlife management students MacDonald and Bowes. �-105- Table 1. --Total hunter-load in minutes, number of pheasants killed and average time required to kill a bird on 17 study areas, opening day of the pheasant season, 1955 and 1957. Study Hunter Hunter Pheasants Minutes Pheasants Minutes Area Minutes killed per bird killed Minutes per bird 1955 1955 1957 1955 1957 1957 SD 3255 120.6 8000 75 27 106.7 G 970 11 88.2 Fs 2355 19 123.9 D3 720 6 120.0 1281 7 183.0 D2 1 335 335,0 A2 3040 138.2 2·2 E3 105,0 6405 61 114,2 8220 72 E2 1010 4 2065 227.5 12 172.1 B2 5624 28 200.9 F3 4760 o 2400 12 200.0 F2 870 435.0 2 C3 31 3790 122.3 03 2790 2160 240,0 8 348.7 9 07 985 2 492.5 05 555 590 10 2 277.5 59.0 04 720 260.0 7655 24 319.0 3 06 1530 o Mean Summary Summary Mean Summary Summary Specials 115.4 8000 75 106.7 6580 57 9-plant. 14100 190,5 103 135.6 74 13966 81 6-plant. 12454 153.8 43 Controls 10405 6580 15 242.0 438.7 149.0 Evergreen 150.7 4321 1055 29 7 114,1 142,0 112 Deciduous 15909 7415 65 144.0 6190 43 Mixed 2815.0 5630 2 148.4 146 186..7 44825 302 Year 27260 Study Areas: During 1955, the first year of the study, 14 areas were surveyed on the opening day of the hunting season and 7 were surveyed on the second day. Study areas were selected from the 29 project areas on the basis of planting density and the sample consisted of 3 areas with large central plantings, 6 areas with 9 or more standard plantings and 5 controls, In 1956, one of the heaviest snowfalls in recent years blocked all roads and prevented reliable field work. In 1957, 11 areas were surveyed on the first day of the season and 6 were studied the second day. The 1957 study areas were selected so that the sample would include all project areas in the dense pheasant population region of Sedgwick and Phillips Counties. The sample consisted of one area with a large central planting, 4 areas with 9 or more standard plantings, 3 areas with 6 standard plantings and 3 controls, �-106- Hunting Success: Based onthe statements of sportsmen who pass through Game and Fish Department check stations during the hunting season, the best measure of hunter success is a full bag. Success is measured by the amount of time it takes to kill the three-bird limit. Accordingly, the influence of habitat improvement plantings on hunter-success was measured in terms of the average number of hunter-minutes invested in each cock pheasant killed. Table 1 presents the data from 1955 and 1957 showing the total hunter-load in minutes, the number of pheasants killed and the average time required to kill a bird on the first day of the season. Table 2 presents similar data for the second day of the pheasant season. Data are summarized for each year at the bottoms of the tables. Discussion - opening day: The data in Table 1 show quite conclusively thatmore pheasants are killed and fewer hunter-minutes are invested in each bird on the opening day where habitat plantings are present. In 1955 it required from 2.3 to 3.8 timesas long to kill a pheasant on control areas as it did on areas with plantings. Even in 1957, when the data was influenced by a party with dogs which killed 8 birds on one control area in an average time under an hour, it took 1. 7 to 2.3 times longer to kill a pheasant where plantings were not present. The 1955data suggested a differential harvest according to the species included in habitat plantings, but the 1957data show that this difference was primarily caused by the sampling variation among areas. Variation in hunting success among areas with different planting density in 1957 followed very closely the pattern shown by the comparison between planted and control areas in 1955. The averages indicated that it took 1. 3 times longer to kill a pheasant on 9-planting, 1. 4 times longer on 6-planting and 2. 3 times longer on control areas than on areas with heavily developed central plots. Discussion - second day: The data in Table 2 indicate that improvement in hunting success due to habitat plantings did not prevail on the second day of the season. There is every indication that the decline in success is muchmo're pronounced where plantings - are present ~ either because the pheasants have been killed or, more p-robably, because they seek the protection of stubble fields- which are not searched when the more obvious habitat cover is available 0 As a test of this suspected success inversion, correlation factors for the time required to kill a pheasant in a specific area on the opening and second days were computed. For 1955this factor was. 2147, and for 1957it was - .5278. Unfortunately, in both years the number of variates was too small to indicate significance, but it seems possible that the 1957figure is more indicative of the true situation. In 1955, only one bird was killed on the control area surveyed, and the negative correlation suggested by the data from improved areas was reversed by this area. �-107- Table 2. --Total hunter load in minutes, number of pheasants killed and average time required to kill a bird on 10 study areas, second day of the pheasant season 1955and 1957. Study Pheasants Minutes Hunter Pheasants Minutes Hunter per bird Area Minutes killed per bird Minutes killed 1957 1955 1957 1955 1955 1957 SD 4340 16 12 361. 7 4090 255.6 G 1270 635.0 2 Fs 540 270.0 2 D3 1 925 925.0 A2 . 369.0 1845 5 E3 3600 20 900 450.0 180.0 2 E2 1575 525.0 3 F3 1800 9 200.0 03 630 1 1095 4 273.8 630.0 o 05 90 Mean Mean Summary Summary Summary Summary 16 Specials 6150 16 4090 255.6 384.4 245.5 11 9-plant. 2700 6100 24 254.2 369.0 6-plant. 1845 5 296.3 4 1185 630 1 Controls 630.0 369.0 925 1 1845 5 Evergreen 925.0 450.0 900 2 Deciduous 5175 23 225.0 9 200.0 1800 Mixed 36 272.8 314.1 9820 Year 12880 41 In 1957, the data from one control could not be used because no birds were killed on the second day; but the 4 pheasants killed on the other control, combined with a four-stage gradation in planting density*, constitutes a sample which, though smaller, is considered to be more reliable than the 1955 sample. The important fact brought out by this analysis is that the major value of habitat plantings in increasing pheasant harvest can be expected on the opening day of the season. On the second day, hunting pressure is much more important in determining hunter-success. *Heavy central, 9-planting, 6-planting and control areas were surveyed in 1957 while only heavy central, 9-planting and controls were checked in 1955. �, -108- Tests: There is a good possibility that demonstrated differences in hunter success may not be entirely due to the influence of habitat plantings. Since hunters usually tend to search the best cover during the opening hours of the season, and birds are easier to kill during that period, the relationship of plantings to success may be entirely caused by early hunting on the improved areas, As a partial test of this factor the field notes for each area were divided into three groups according to the order in whichthey were written. The groups roughly represent: the first hunters on the area, or at least the hunters checked first; the midday hunters; and the afternoon hunters. Obviously, since some areas received their whole hunter-load in 111e first three hours of the opening day, the test is not entirely reliable. It is interesting however that the kill during the second period was at least as high as that during the first period and that a drop of less than 15 percent in the third period was recorded for the two year average. Pheasant kill by periods is shown in Table 3. Table 3. --Breakdown of pheasant kill into three periods, based on the order of fieldnote entry, opening day hunting survey, Project W-90-R. (Area E3 deleted in1955 because only summaries were reported). Year Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Summary 1955 23 24 38 85 1957 103 118 81 302 Summary 126 142 119 387 There is also a series of factors related to hunting pressure and land use which may have been responsible for the variations among study areas. With a sample involving around a dozen variates the chances for outside influence are quite large. Accordingly, the following analyses present various tests designed to evaluate or eliminate the factors which might have influenced interpretation. In each case, the test consists of determining the degree of correlation between the two factors being examined. Correlation coefficients for all tests are presented in Tables 4 and 6. With a single sample involving 11-14 variates the correlation coefficient can be as high as . 65 by chance one time out of twenty even if the actual correlation in the universe sampled is below. 30. In a sample of 5-7 variates .r can be as high as .80 by chance. Examination of Tables 4 and 6 shows that few of the values are high enough to be significant unless year to year comparisons are very similar. Table 4. --Correlation coefficients for factors involving hunting pressure and total kill on the study areas surveyed, hunting survey, Project W 90-R,1955 and 1957. Test 1955 1957 No. Factors First - day - second First - day - second Hunter load 1 ,7453 x kill ,9694 .8791 .8437 2 x kill-time -,5352 -.4091 .1528 -,4405 Kill 3 x kill-time -,6924 -,3509 -.5645 -.6446 �-109- Test No. 1 examines the relationship between hunter-load and total kill, and, as might be expected, the correlation is quite strong. Thus, since improved areas generally received the heaviest gun-pressure and produced the most pheasants, it is possible that variations among areas were due primarily to differences in hunting pressure. Test No.2, correlation between hunter-load and kill-time, also suggests that even though success was independert of hunter-load in 1957, it was at least partially determined by load in 1955. Finally, correlation between total birds killed and kill-time is quite consistent in predicting better success {smaller kill-time) where more birds are killed. These data, excluding the 1957half of Test 2, indicate a dependence of hunter-success on hunter-load which could be more important than the direct influences of plantings. Since the simple correlation tests did not describe the actual effects of habitat plantings on pheasant hunting it was necessary to compile all tests and make a multiple linear regression estimate of hunter-success based on hunter-load and number of birds killed. Calculated formulas and estimates are presented in Table 5. Table 5. --Multiple linear regression estimates of hunting-success (minutes per kill) from hunter-load and total kill on 12 study areas in 1955and 11 areas in 1957. (Data from two areas had to be deleted in 1955because no birds were killed. 1955 Y = 232.4954 f . 1153 load - 15.5777 kill Control 6-planting 9-planting Special 03 429.56 D3 222.05 SD 187.20 07 314.91 D2 254.94 G 172.98 05 265.33 E3 20.75 Fs 208.05 04 268.79 E2 286.64 F2 301. 65 319.65 217.21 189.41 Mean 1957 Y~:= 142. 6966 f . 0398 load - 4. 9606 kill Control 6 - planting 9-planting Special 03 184.02 A2 154.56 D3158.96 SD 89.05 05 116.57 B2 227.64 E3 112.69 04 328.31 C3 139.76 E2 165.36 F3 178.69 209.63 173.99 153.93 89.05 Mean Table 5 shows that, even after adjustments for hunter-load and pheasant kill have been made, areas with habitat plantings produce consistently better huntingthan controls. With equal hunting pressure it takes from 1. 2 to 2.4 times longer to kill a pheasant where there are no habitat plantings. �-110- Tests No.4 through 9 in Table 6 evaluate the influence of varying crop acreages on hunter-success. In general, the coefficients shown are not significant and are no more consistent than random numbers would be. The exceptions to this are wheat, which shows a fairly consistent inverse effect on hunter - success on the opening day; and corn, which was seemingly consistent only within each year 0 Table 6. --Correlation coefficients for kill-time and total kill with, land-use factors on the study areas surveyed, hunting survey, - -_, __ ." 1955and 1957. 1955 1957 Test _First - day - second No. Factors First - day - second Kill - time 4 x wheat acres .3073 -.4357 .3860 .2829 -.0791 .0772' 5 x wheat acres -.0678 -.2789 6 .0619 -.1647 -03263 x fallow .1889 .7148 7 x sorghum .0539 -.0415 -.0040 x millet -.2380 .0018 .0632 :-00461_' 8 0-1659 9 -02705 -.4641 .1062 x corn Kill 10 -.0089 -.3501 -.1694 x wheat acres -.4406 11 -.0824 x pasture .0242 .0292 -.0965 ,;,.1)907 03765 12 x fallow -.0755 .0539 -.2674 13 .0271 .0524 .2089 x sorghum -;7029 14 -00472 -.1977 -.3390 x millet -.3632 15 .2446 x corn .6594 .6323 Tests No. 10 through 15 present a further examination of the influence of agricultural land-use on pheasant hunting. As with the correlation tests for success, the coefficients for kill and land-use reveal no important relationships. There is some indication that large acreages of wheat or millet may result in consistently poorer hunting, but the relationship was not statistically significant. In 1955, the fairly high correlation between kill and corn acreage was caused almost entirely by the heavy hunting pressure and consequent large harvest on area E3. The relationship cannot be considered significant on the basis of this data. In summation, the 15 tests!:Jor various correlation coefficients show that, except for light influences of hunting pressure, no other factor affects hunter-success on opening day to the 'extent that habitat plantings do. On the second day however, correlation between hunter-load and success showed that increased kill on developed areas was probably due to heavier hunting pressure rather than to the improvements. �~~q ,<.,. ~~ .' .. . . -111- In a final examination of the effects of habitat improvement and other cover on pheasant hunting, the data in Table 7 tabulates, by percentages, all pheasants killed according to cover type and planting density. This data generally corroborates the tendencies suggested by previous tests. The percentage harvest occurring in habitat plantings declined as the quality and quantity of plantings declined; weeds produced a generally good harvest on all areas; and wheat produced good harvests except on 9-planting areas. On 9-planting areas the best harvest was recorded in cornfields. The actual importance of corn is probably overemphasized for the study region however. Where it occurs, corn is good harvest cover, but on more than half of the study areas for Project W-90-R no corn atall is grown and on all but three areas the corn acreage involves less than 3 percent of the land. On the basis of this and previously presented data it can be assumed that at least 75 percent of the pheasants killed on the first two days of the season are flushed from three cover types. In probable order of total harvest these are: wheat stubble, weeds and habitat improvement plantings. Table 7. -- Summary of pheasant kill percentages, by cover type and planting density, oEening and second da~ of the Eheasant hunting season, 1955 and 1957. Central Cover 9-planting 6-planting Controls Summary 1955 1957 1955 1957 1957 1955 1957 1955 1957 1955 T~I2e Improvement 26.0 28.6 22.0 13.2 18.21/ 14.0 6.3 0.0 24.3 plantings 27.4 1.6 17.3 14.0 20.3 Weeds 19.2 8.8 1800 28.9 31. 3 34.0. 19.6 26.3 37.2 13.4 23.8 37.2 33.3 23.9 Wheat 42.5 50.5 5.0 7.0 56.3 55.; 3 '.23.8 33.7 32.2 stubble 47.0 6. 1 55.6 33.7 29.2 Corn 6.8 0.0 45.0 37.7 0.0 13.9 2.3 4.3 26.5 3.0 41. 1 18.4 2.3 3.2 Sorghum 0.0 0.0 8.0 12.3 0.0 6.2 7.0 2.1 4.2 1.6 0.0 10.3 7.0 5.5 Miscellaneous 5.5 12. 1 2.0 0.9 6.3 3.7 5.6 5.8 4.3 9. 1 1.4 4.8 4.9 5.8 Based on the total of pheasants shot where plantings were present. 1/ Conclusions and Management ImElications: The two most important facts brought out by this study are that habitat improvement plantings increase pheasant hunting success and that most of the birds killed in1he study region are taken from wheat stubble, weeds and habitat plantings. Since the major present objective of pheasant management on the northeastern Colorado high plains is a harvest more nearly compatible with the known potential, these facts have been considered with that objective in mind. Of the three important harvest-cover types, wheat is the most abundant. Almost onethird of the total northeastern Colorado land area is planted to wheat. By comparison, corn involves less than 2 percent and weeds and habitat plantings combined probably involve less than 5 percent of the area. �-112- Wheat, since it is an agricultural residue and is so abundant, does not offer many possibilities for direct manipulation in wildlife management. One possibility for increasing pheasant harvest is suggested however by both the correlation of Test No. 10 and field observations during the season. The data shows that the number of birds killed decreases as wheat acreage increases. The correlation coefficient is not statistically significant, but the consistency of the relationship suggests that pheasants are escaping gun pressure by seeking the shelter of wheat stubble. H hunters could be persuaded to hunt this cover with more regularity than they now exhibit, it seems certain that total harvest would increase. As a test of this theory, the writer suggested to some hunters on area SDon November 10, 1957, that pheasants were hiding in wheat stubble. Of the 16 pheasants harvested that day, 11 were taken from stubble fields in less than two hours by four men. Since these 11 birds represented one-third of the total harvest on surveyed areas that day, the effect was quite noticeable. The correlation between kill-time and wheat acreage, instead of remaining near. 3, as it did in ,1955,dropped to -.4357 and the inverse correlation between kill and wheat acreage dropped to -.0089. The remaining harvest-cover types, weeds and habitat plantings, produced pheasant harvest equal to that from wheat on a land area less than one sixth as great. For this reason alone, these types offer a good opportunity for increasing pheasant harvest through management. Unfortunately, present trends in agriculture are to eliminate weed areas, and it seems highly improbable that game managers will have much success in reversing the trend. In the study region, many fences have laready been removed to allow cultivation of the road rights-of-way, and the remaining fencerows are quite often sprayed or burned to keep weed growth down. The trend can probably be retarded by continued stress of the disadvartages of repeated burning, but wherever wheat is, the main crop weed areas seem destined to become smaller. There is a possibility that an economic evaluation of burning; through comparison of fencepost . replacement and other costs with expected returns, would be desirable for propaganda purposes. �-113Considering the probable future of weedy areas, habitat plantings assume even greater importance as aids to increasing pheasant harvest. Such plantings have easily demonstrated personal values to the landowners and, once established, can usually be considered permanent in their effect on pheasant harvest. Despite the proof that habitat plantings have a demonstrated value in increasing hunter-success and pheasant kill in northeastern Colorado, this fact cannot be taken as a blanket recommendation for random establish ment of such plantings. Before the true value of plantings in increasing harvest can be determined, the kill on areas with plantings must be compared with prehunting season pheasant population levels. When population data have been analyzed and this comparison is made, it will be possible to estimate the additional harvest attributed to plantings. By comparing this figure with establishment costs, a rough estimate of the dollar value of each cock pheasant harvested can be calculated. If this figure is not at least comparable to the known costs of producing and releasing game-farm birds, the establishment of plantings cannot be recommended as an economically feasible enterprise. Actually, since a pen-raised bird may reach an average cost of $15. 00 in the hunters I bag there seems little doubt that habitat work will be justified under many conditions. Submitted by: Date: L. Jack Lyon Approved: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ..;;A ••p;;.;;r;.;;i;;,jl,:...;;;.;19;;..;5;.;;8;.._. _ � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/d53b84a81f52f45742962e4aa537b29b.pdf ed3d7ed65814976c2968c490c8c2e1c8 PDF Text Text July, 1958 -1- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT. State of COLORADO ------~~~~~~--------~----------------------~---------------- Project No. VV~-~3~8~-_R~-_1_1 VVorkPlan: 1 Job No. ----------------------------~~--------------------------------- Title : --=L:.;o;.;;c;..;;a;;.;:t.:.;io:.;n;:,j,~e.:.;x:.;;.te:::;.;n:;;t:;...;;;;a;;:n;;;:d...;o:;.;w.:..;n:;;e:::;.;r:;.;s:;;;;h;;; _ 1 Period Covered: '-=- N_a_m~e_:_D~e_e_r_-_E_1_k_I_n_v_e_s_ti~g~a_t_io_n_s _ May 1, 1957 to March 30, 1958. Objectives: (1) To prepare maps showing approximate boundaries of all major summer ranges for deer and elk, based on average weather conditions over a number of years. (2) To prepare from these maps a series of township plats showing land ownership of the summer ranges in sufficient detail that decisions can be made bythe Department to purchase, lease, or withdraw them from public sale (public domain) as opportunities corne up, and if there is a need for them. (3) . To obtain a rough estimate of acreages of this land when broken. down into the categories: national forest land, public domain land, state land, and private land. (4) To furnish this information to State officials of the Bureau of Land Management, in order that they may have it readily available for study whenever public domain lands that may have wildlife values corne up for sale or disposal. Techniques used: Objective 1. (Above) - Maps. Information on summer range boundaries carne from three sources: 1. Previously existing maps. These were in the files .of the Game Management Division, but had been . drawn up in large part by various big game project. Federal Aid personnel in the late forties and fifties. 2. Members of project VV-38-Rwho were working on other jobs but were well qualified to bring the information up to date. They drew up new maps on county base maps at a scale of 1/2 inch per mile. These men were: Ross L. Campbell, Jesse E. VVilliams, Paul F. Gilbert, Harold R. Shepherd and Bertram D. Baker. 3. The following other Department personnel assisted by consultation: Laurence E. Riordan, Harold M. Swope, Stanley R. Ogilvie, Richard N. Denney, Glenn E. Rogers, Clifford A. Hurd, J. L. VValdron, Marvin W. Smith, Gilbert N. Hunter, Harry J. Figge and Ferd C. Kleinschnitz, Charles H. Vavak, Allison W. Mason, B. L. Denton, Harry N. Terrell, Donald V. Benson, VVilliam G. Schultz, Donald H. Gore, Elvy J. VVagner, Louis D. Vidakovich, Earl F. Cochran, VVilliam I. Roland, Lester E. Evans, Earl R. Downer, Clifford E. Moser, Merle L. Hodges. �-2- Objective 2 (above}--Township Plats. After one year's work on the project it became evident that the limited benefits to be derived from making plats of land status of summer range did not justify the additional hundreds of man hours it would have taken to produce them. Therefore, this phase of Job 1 was never begun. Objective 3 (above) - Area The big game summer range area in Colorad 0 _is so vast; and-so .Indeflnite: and changeable from year to year in most regions, that it was decided to eliminate this objective also in favor of spending more time on winter range maps and plats (see Job 2). A rough approximation of summer range acreages could be obtained from the maps as drawn, but its value would be limited. Objective 4 (above) - Cooperation. Late in 1957 I obtained one copy of each Colorado district of the Bureau of Land Management. On these maps I copied the big game summer range boundary lines as they are shown on the maps produced under objective one. I turned these maps over to Mr. J. Elliott Hall, Lands and Minerals Officer, of the state Supervisor's office, Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado. Mr. Hall agreed to have copies made of these maps and to send the copies to the appropriate range manager in each of the eight districts. A similar set of maps was sent to the nine National Forest supervisors in the state. Abstract: Two atlases have been prepared to show deer and elk summer range distribution respectively. These were drawn by thirty-one Colorado Game and Fish Department fieldmen and administrators. These maps, appropriately identified and dated, embrace forty-two counties for deer and thirty-eight counties for elk. No eastern Colorado counties are included. Two objectives as set forth under job one were not realized, namely; to produce the complete land status of big game summer range and two, 'to tabulate the acreage therefrom. Two complete sets of base maps showing western Colorado deer and elk summer ranges respectively were drawn up and presented to the state office of the Bureau of Land Management, as planned under objective number four. Oomparable maps were also presented to all nine national forest supervisors. \'=7' �-3- Findings: The big game summer ranges are shown on the same sheets as the winter ranges (Job 2). For deer there are all, or parts of forty-two counties involved. For elk there are thirty-eight counties. These do not include any "plains" counties of eastern Colorado. The county base maps are divided into one to four sheets per county making a total of seventy-five sheets for deer summer range and sixty-six sheets for elk summer range. Each of these sheets has been carefully checked to see that summer range boundary lines connect properly with those adjoining on all sides. (There are one or two sheets in which they do not match).· Each has been mounted on chartex dry map mounting cloth. Complete legends on each map pointed out, together withdates when drawn and by whom. The sheets were then punched for binding and bound by means of bolts run through heavy masonite, hinged corners. There is one atlas for deer and one for elk. Sheets are bound alphabetically by county. The map scale is one-half inch per mile. The atlases are on file in the Federal Aid office of the Game and Fish Department. Since winter ranges and summer ranges do overlap considerably, and since all acreages for winter ranges 'have been calculated (see Job 2), it will be possible in many smaller areas to obtain summer range acreages from the winter range tables and maps. This may be of particular value in future studies dealing with hunting pressure by management units. A Colorado big game ".management unit..", as now used, embraces as nearly as possible the summer and winter range of a herd of deer or elk. Elk summer ranges are, of course, almost one hundred percent on national for.e'st lands. And it is evident that a great majority of deer summer ranges are also. A final word of caution seems appropriate, concerning the summer range maps in particular: each boundary line drawn represents, at best, the opinions of but one or two fieldmen. Ten men could well have ten different ideas of how deer or elk distribution should be shown on a map of the same area. The winter ranges, being smaller in size, more accessible and less changeable from year to year, can be somewhat more reliably sketched on maps. It is hoped that Job 2 will bear out this belief. Prepared by: Date : William T. McKean Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ___;A;.;.oplO..r....;;i;.;;.I,~1.;..95.;..8;.,_ _ ��-5- July, 1958 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECT State of COLORADO ----~--~--~--------------------~------------------------------------- ProjectNo. Work Plan No. Title: ~W __ -3~8~-_R_-_I_I _;;;.I ~;__N_a_m __e_:_D __e_e_r-_E_· _lk __hl_v_e~s~t~ig~a~t_i_on_s ;:.....;;J;.;;o;_;;;b_;N;;.;..;;..o;_. ..;;2;;.._ Location, extent and ownership of winter .ranges. Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Objectives: (1) To prepare maps showing approximate boundaries of all major winter ranges for deer and elk, based on average weather conditions. . . (2) From these maps to prepare a series of township plats showing land ownership of the big game winter ranges in sufficient detail that decisions can be made by the Department to purchase, lease, or withdraw them from public sale (public domain) as opportunities corne up to do so.· (3) To obtain a rough estimate of acreages of this land when broken down into the categories: national forest, public domain, state, and private land. (4) To furnish this information to officials of the Bureau of Land Management especially, in order that they may have it readily available for study whenever public domain lands that may have wildlife values corne up for sale or disposal. Techniques Used: Objective 1. {above) - Maps. Information on winter range boundaries carne from three sources: 1. Previously existing maps. These were in the files of the Game Management Diviaion, but had been drawn up in large part by various big game project Federal Aid personnel in the late forties and early fifties. (2) Members of project W-38-R who were working on other jobs but were well qualified to bring the information up to date. They drew up new maps on county base maps at a scale of 1/2 inch per mile. These men were: Ross L. Campbell, Jesse E. Williams, Paul F. Gilbert, Harold R. Shepherd and Bertram D. Baker. 3. The following other Department personnel assisted by consultation: Laurence E. Riordan, Gilbert N. Hunter, Harry J. Figge, Ferd C. Kleinschnitz, Harold M. Swope, stanley R. Ogilvie, Richard N. Denney, Glenn E. Rogers, Clifford A. Hurd, J. L. Waldon, Marvin W. Smith, Charles H. Vavak, Allison W. Mason, B. L. Denton, Harry N. Terrell, Donald V. Benson, William G. Schultz, Donald H. Gore, Elvy J. Wagner, Louis D. Vidakovich, Earl F. Cochran, W~lliam I. Roland, Lester E. Evans, Earl R. Downer, Clifford E. Moser and Merle L. Hodges. _ _ �-6- The task of editing these maps and compiling them into two atlases is described under "Findings" . Objective~. (above) - Township Plats The formidable job of producing a file of land ownership for so large an area (over 15,000,000 acres) was approached with considerable apprehension. There were several false starts made and retreats, before a plan of work was evolved which seemed practical. Obviously this part of the work has taken a major share of the time during the past two years. Actually the map making and land status work were carried on simultaneously. Work on land status was done whereever I had completed maps available. Naturally the many men listed above did not complete the mapping work all at the same time. The major desire under this objective was to develop this file for use in numerous negotations concerning lands between the Federal Aid Division and the Bureau of Land Manageme!lt. It was decided that more nearly current land status would be obtained ( and' faster) from the books in the B. L. M. district offices and National Forest Supervisors' offices than from the General Land office or other sources. Excellent cooperation was received from all Range Managers and Forest Supervisors. The general procedure adopted was as follows: 1. A grazing district and adjoining national forest was selected for work. 2. Blank township plats ( 1 inch per mile scale) were prepared in the Boulder office with legal descriptions and other headings. A serial number was assigned to each plat to facilitate location. These numbers were placed in red color on the appropriate map. The deer or elk winter range boundary lines were drawn in ink through each plat as needed, together with problem areas, county lines, match lines, etc. 3. A trip was made to the district offices involved and the land status was copied upon each plat from that office'S status books. Frequently two trips had to be made because of the size of the areas. 4. Numerous questions developed with each trip - conflicting records between B. L. M. and Forest Service, irregular township's boundaries, etc. These questions were answered in the General Land Office; at least its records were accepted as having priority over the others in such cases. 5. A complete filing system was developed. This will be described in more detail under "Findings". At the end of this report I have attached a typical Township plat. Two complete sets of land status were drawn - one for deer and one for elk, even though the ranges overlap to some extent. �-7- Objective.!h (above) - Acreage. I determined acreages of each land classifc ation by counting squares directly upon each plat. These figures I entered on the bottom right hand corner of each plat and computed a total. Twenty acres was about the smallest sub division counted. In this work Mr. William H. Rutherford, assisted for about two months. A tabular summary will appear further on this report. Objective 4. (above) - Cooperation. Late in 1957 I obtained one copy of each base map of each Colorado district of the Bureau of Land Management. On these maps I copied the big game winter range boundary lines, together with many "problem" areas, as they are shown on the maps produced under objective one. I turned these maps over to Mr. J. Elliott Hall, Lands and Minerals Officer, of the state Supervisor's Office, Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado. Mr. Hall agreed to have copies made of these maps and to send the copies to the appropriate range manager in each of the eight districts. ' A similar set of maps was sent to each of the nine National Forest Supervisors in the State. Abstract. Two atlases have been preparedto show deer and elk winter range distribution respectively. These maps were drawn by thirty-one Colorado Game and Fish Department fieldmen and administrators, Appropriately identified and dated - these maps embrace forty-one counties for deer and thirty-seven counties for elk, No eastern Colorado counties are included. Data on land status for all areas mapped was copied from three sources, namely; 1. District Grazing Offices, 2. Natimal Forest Offices; 3. General Land Office. Either all of, or part of, 1,914 township plats (1,231 for deer and 683 for elk) were drawn to show this information. The plats are on a scale of one inch per mile. A filing system shows these plats arranged alphabetically by county in folders. Within each folder the numbered plats are clipped together in groups corresponding to the number of map sheets into which each county is divided. The land status appears in the following ownership classes: national forest, public domain, state, national park, and private. Individual private owners are not named. Some, but very few, mineral patents are shown. The tabulation of area of deer and elk winter range took two men approximately fortyfive days to complete.' This information is compiled into tables one to ten. The state-wide data appears in tables one and two, together with totals and percentages by game management region, A further breakdown by counties and 'county map sheets . is shown in tables three thru 9. �-8- Of all vacant public lands, within the area mapped, 71. 4 percent is being used by deer and 14.8 percent by elk for winter range. Of all national forest lands within the area mapped 14.9 percent is being used by deer and 22 percent: by elk for winter range. Two complete sets of base maps showing western Colorado deer and elk winter ranges respectively were drawn up and presented to the State office of the Bureau of Land Management, as planned under objective number four. Comparable maps were presented to all nine national forest supervisors. These maps, and the many personal contacts necessary in order to make the plats, appear to be making for a closer liaison between the agencies than formerly existed, in regard to exchange of information on lands available for acquisition and lands needed. ( ~ �-9- Findings: Objective ill (above) - Maps. The big game winter range maps are shown on the same sheets as the summer ranges (Job 1). For deer there are all, or parts of, forty-one counties involved. For elk there are thirty-seven counties. These do not include any counties of eastern Colorado except those in the "foothill" area. . . The county base maps are divided into one to four sheets per county (see attached key to maps and map sheets) making a total of seventy-four sheets for deer winter range and sixty-nine sheets for elk winter range. Each of these sheets has been carefully checked to see that winter range boundary lines connect properly with those adjoining on all sides. There are,a few sheets which could not be matched, for reasons beyond my control. Each sheet has been mounted on Chartex dry mounting cloth. Complete legends on each map were printed together with titles, dates when drawn - and by whom. The sheets were then punched for binding and bound by means of bolts run through masonite hinged covers, There is one atlas for deer and one for elk. Sheets are bound alphabetically by county. These atlases are on file in the Federal Aid office of the Game and Fish Department, Objective {ID_ (above)- Plats. The township.plats were made to show land status of big game winter range lands as outlined on the county maps. They mayor may not, show land ownership outside those boundaries. Very few mineral patents were shown, these being predominantly "agricultural status" and public lands. There was not sufficient time, or justification to indicate individual private owners. The county maps were frequently divided into' several sheets and match lines between the sheets were shown, Accordingly, each township plats was drawn up to conform to the map sheet into which it fell. All township, and fractional townships, falling with a map sheet were clipped together and placed in the appropriate, labeled county folder, All plats were numbered in the upper right hand corner to conform to similar numbers shown in red pencil on each township within each county map sheet, A key to the numbers shows to which county and which map sheet they refer. It should be useful in the event individual sheets become out of order in the filing system and in other ways, .A copy of this key may be found attached to this report, Here it will be seen that all, or parts of, 1,231 townships are included within the deer winter range and 683townships within the elk winter range or a total of 1,914 for both, A much more exact acreage figure will be shown in the next section of this report. �-10- The souree of the information was shown on each plat by abbreviations in the upper right hand corner as follows: B. L. M., F. S., G. L. O. Grazing district numbers were shown by a sub-number, as B. L. M. Data taken from so called "Section 15" land maps were similarly shown. Land status of only a small portion of the Southern Ute Indian Reservation was included on township plats (eliminated from tables) in spite of the fact that much of it is deer winter range. The reason for this action gies back to the objectives of the project, namely; - to map and obtain land status on major areas where acquisition, leasing; or withdrawals could conceivably be tnade. At this time reservation lands do not fall into this category. For the same reason, the following other areas, which contain some big game winter range, were not shown on township plats; - Larimer County sheets 2 and 3, the counties of Boulder, Clear Creek, Gilpin, Jefferson and Douglas. These counties differ from other "east front" counties in having virtually no remaining public domain lands. The information is not current in many cases. This may be pa:.rtiliulary true of state lands, except Game and Fish Department property. There was not time to use county records; nor were the tract books in the General Land Office used, nor State Land Board records. Objective .@)_(above)- Acreages. The information on extent of winter ranges, as developed by this survey, is divided up into ten large tables which follows. These are planned so as to subdivide the data by game management regions, and then within each of those a further division by counties and county map sheets is accomplished. No further break down would seem feasible at this time, but undoubtedly this may be done by regional and local personnel to good advantage . The state wide acpeage figure s appear in tables one and two for deer and elk respectively, together with percentages by land ownership classes and by management regions. Here a good opportunity is given to compare acreages administered by one public land agency to those of another and one game management region to another, in so far as acres used by deer and elk in winter are concerned. The tables following seem to be reasonably self-explanatory. There are, in the portion of Colorado covered by this survey, 7,677,804 acres of vacant public lands. That figure was derived by eliminating all east plains areas _from the publiahed state -wide total. Table one shows that the mapped and platted-deer winter range comprised 5,636,067 acres. Therefore, 73.4% of all the vacant public land in western Colorado is being utilized by deer for winter range. A similar calculation for elk, using table 2, reveals that 14.8% of all the vacant public lands is being utilizeq for winter range. �-11- Table 1. --Total Deer Winter Range Acreage by Ownership Classes and Management Regions.lj Northwest Southwest Northeast ( Private National Forest Public Domain State National .Park ... Total 2,291,940 249,603 2,896,067 254,340 129,000' 5,820,950 (39.37%) (4.29%) (49. nf'lo) 1,995,130 (37~04% 1,092,670 (20.28%) 2,149,290 (39.90%) (4.37%) (2,22%) (100.00%) 103,204 46,580 (1. 92%) (.0.86%) 5,386,824 (100.00%) o 383 , 62s.Y . 59,790 110,600 (48.14%) (15.59%) (28.83%) (7.44%> Q (100.00%) Southwest 1,639,930 (58.68%) 461,700 (16.52%) 480,110 (17. 18%) 213,150 (7. 62%) o o 2,794,890 (100.00%) Total 6, 111,668 1,863, 763 (42.48%) (12.95%) 184,668 5,636,067 28,570 . ·599,264 175,580 14,387,342 (1. 23%) (100.00%) ',=, (39.17%) (4.17%) 1/ Does not include Indian Reservation lands on the counties .of Boulder', Clear Creek, Gilpin, Jefferson, Douglas and part of Larimer, all of which have minor amounts of winter range-mostly private land or national forest. _&/ Includes only Jackson County and parts of nine townshps in Larimer County. �-12- Table 2. -- Total Elk Winter Range Acreage by Ownership Classes and Management Regions .!/ Private .. . . .. National Forest Public Domain State National Park Total Northwest 653,700 (41. 71%) 403,540 (25.75%) 442, 196 (28.22%) 67,700 (4.32%) 0 0 1,567,136 (100.00%) Southwest 858,550 (24.85%) 1,851,676 (53.57%) 661,840 (19. 16%) 83,194 (2.42%) 0 0 3,455,260 (100.00%) , Northeast 48,410 (22.54%) 115,940 (53.99%) 15,880 (7.40%) 34,500 (16.07%) 0 0 214,730~/ (100.00%) Southeast 270,290 (39.14%) 374,830 {54. 28%) 20,890 (3.02%) 24,570 (3.56%) 0 0 690,580 (100.00%) "==" Total 1,830,950 (30.89%) 2,745,986 (46.32%) 1,140,806 (19.25%) 209,964 0 5,927,706 (3.54%) 0 (100.00%) 1/ Does not include Indian Reservation lands or the counties of Boulder, Clear CreekGilpin, Jefferson, and part of Larimer, all of which have minor amounts of winter range, mostly private land or national forest. ~/ Includes only Jackson County and parts of six townships in Larimer County. �-13- Table 3.--Deer Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and County--Northwest Region. Moffat Routt Rio Blanco Grand National Forest 0 0 0 0 0 21,760 26,360 4,080 52,200 0 0 23,400 231400 17,910 6,140 2,800 261850 Public Domain 476,400 229, 180 114,440 127,030 947,050 "3,960 7,600 26,210 372770 373,170 344,290 27,520 7441980 77,780 ·26,440 1,840 .106,060 Sheet 1 2 3 4 T 1 2 3 T 1 2 3 T 1 2 3 T Private 21,520 389,850 35,180 3062420 752,970 39,620 154,860 70 380 264,860 57,750 75,100 .. 1752462 308,312 127,918 37,320 13,240 1782478 1 2 3 4 T 1 2 T 18,500 152,480 109,153 280,133 135,749 282240 163,989 0 96,830 0 80, 360 20,955 55,595 No Sheet on deer ra~e 20,955 232,785 27,280 207,422 36,818 151880 64,098 223,302 1 T 1 T 1 2 3 T 472498 47,198 522490 52,490 91,090 92,420 59,700 243, 210 422820 422820 17,520 17 520 0 1,760 0 1,760 2,291,940 249, 603 National State Park Total 32,160 25,280 555,360 61,280 0 680,310 263, 180 9,840 103,720 0 471z 300 371850 141,130 129,000 1,9701150 1,320 66,660 0 39,480 0 228,300 5,400 0 106,070 .0 46,200 401z030 2,000 0 432,920 23,160 0 442,550 ·0 48 226,430 251208 0 1z10119OO 31,872 0 255,480 71,200 1,300 0 0 0 17,880 331172 0 344,560 Garfield Eagle 0 120 0 0 0 0 115,330 232,960 185,703 120 6,910 1z280 8,190 O· 0 0 0 533,993 377,361 82,218 459,5-79 320 320 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1051598 105,598 90,570 90,570 458,270* 173,820 181,480* 813 570 254,340 l29,00O 5,820,950 ma,Es. Summit Pitkin Mesa .Total 14,960 14,960 20,560 20,560 367,180 79,640 121 780 568,600 2,896,067 . * This does not include acreage in southwest management region. �-14.Table 4.--Elk Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and County. --Northwest Region. Private 12,980 7,160 National Forest 0 6,800 Public Domain 67,870 80 29,520 492660 102,770 122,240 26,120 2512130 2,320 3,530 47 960 532810 49,110 11,080 9,880 70,070 0 6,800 24,980 27,080 17,160 692220 0 0 52,260 52z260 10,400 8,620 5,280 24,300 7,840 75,790 17,462 11,700 17,600 46,762 5,280 15,960 14 280 352520 49,960 7,600 1,280 58,840 1 2 3 4 T Eagle 1 2 T Summit 1 T 1 Pitkin T 1 Mesa 2 3 4 T 5,600 29,140 27,080 25,880 87,700 41,400 9 280 502680 72120 7,120 26 800 26 800 10,040 0 42,870 3,820 56 730 0 0 17,880 35,540 64,920 25,730 30,800 56,530 202200 20 200 62,280 62,280 0 1,360, 45,670 0 47 030 Total 653,700 403,540 Moffat Routt Rio Blanco Grand Sheet 1 2 3 4 T 1 2 3 T 1 2 3 T 1 2 3 T state 23,630 0 National 0 0 2 040 25,670 4,960 16,300 2,980 24 240 -s:::::c::: 2 3,7.20 200 ,Sz920 .;_'~, 590 1,560 0 11,150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39,400 1572920 150,172 177,320 63,860 391,352 11,320 19,690 114,500 145,510 , 119,060 28,860 16,440 1641360 16,040 34,850 17,880 18,260 87,030 59,054 1,720 60,774 6,040 6,040 5,600 5,600 27,280 0 16,080 22,480 65,840 0 0 160 0 160 2,200 40 2,240 320 320 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,640 63,990 74,500 79,680 239,810 128,384 41 840 170,224 33,680 33,680 94,680 94,680 37,320 1,360 104,620 26,300* 169,600 442,196 67,700 0 1,567,136 Total 104,480 14,040 Garfield ____ ' * This does not include acreage in southwest management region. �-15- Table 5.-~Deer Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and County--Southwest Re~ion. Sheet Private 1 1,880 2 21,140 3 T 23z020 1 122,200 T 122,200 Mesa .Delta National Forest 0 Public Domain 1,820 state 0 National Park 0 Total 3,700 41640 4, 640 0 0 2121440 214,260 159,920 159,920 640 640 1,160 1,160 0 0 0 0 238,860 242,560 283,280 283,280 1,480 12,460 59,100 73;040 2,460 164,560 1301640 2971660 0 8,124 51200 .131324 0 0 0 0 13,980 326,704 275,440 616,124 0 100 0 100 10,800 .11240 12,040 0 0 0 13,430 13,430 0 0 0 0 428,720 136,120 183,860 748,700 355,100 41,920 3971020 94,400 0 1,400 880 2,280 0 0 0 0 94,400 172,080 15 680 1872760 0 0 0 22,950 0 22,950 Gunnison 1 2 3 T 10,040 141,560 80,500 2321100 1 2 3 T San 1 M!guel 2 T Ouray 1 77,800 25,900 80,940 1841640 89,520 20,680 1101200 72:,920 4,360 10,060 0 141420 1,640 3,840 51480 1,400 T Dolores 1 2 T San Juan 72 920 111,380 13,680 125,060 1,400 16,720 0 16,720 346,560 100,060 89 490 5361110 253,140 16,~60" 269,300 20,0~O Billy. Creek 20 080 42,580 1,120 431700 7,810 0 7,810 2,980 0 2,980 10,600 0 10,600 1,560 0 1,560 1,995,130 1,092,670 2,149,290 103,204 Montrose ... Hinsdale 1 2 T Total 46,580 5,386,874 �-16- Table 5--Deer Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and County--'SouthwestREgion. Continued. Sheet Min:'" 1 eral T Saguache· 1 2 3 T 1 Rio Grande T Alamosa 1 ···T Mon.t-·1 zuma. 2 3 .··.T 1 2 T Archuleta 1 2 T Conejos 1 2 T Costilla 1 2 ::T La Plata ... Private 11 960 11 960 National Forest 40 080 ··40080 .Public·· Domain 0 O· 0 O. 48,800 68,740 511380 1682920 82,090 165,960 208,060 371600 4112620 101,300 102,220 137,580 231980 263,780 28,640 3,800 15,640 31340 222780 7,820 0 0 4,920 4,920 0 320,780 430,020 1212220 872z020 219,850 822090 101,300 282640 72820 0 2192850 4,240 4,240 89,580 86,640 652980 242z200 30,020 102,100 132,120 262580 26z580 0 49,000 3z200 52,200 4,280 412220 45z500 62620 62620 132,120 13,240 42,430 187z790 3,220 122060 15,280 1z480 ·lz480 2.00 3,720 62560 102480 1;200 5z080 6,280 21000 .2z000 140 0 26z090 26,230 0 0 0 44,040 96,310 140,350 113,070 128,200 241,270 . 1,840 72780 9,620 1,640 22540 ··4,180 0 0 0 160,590 234,830 395,420 11,280 462580 57z860 42,520 122920 55,440 9,320 76,610 85z930 10,840 7,660 18,500 0 0 0 73,960 143,770 217,730 161,740 115,700 277 440 0 0 0 0 0 0 580 0 580 0 0 0 162,320 115,700 278,020 State 0 National Park 0 .. 40,920 402920 ·222,040 152,600 144,260 518 900 ... 2 38,720 160,460 199,180 �-17- Table 6--Elk Mesa T Delta 1 2 T 'Gunn- 1 ison 2 3 4 T Mont- I rose 2 3 T 1 San Mis:!!e12 T OUra~ 1 T Dolores 1 2 T Sari Juan Hins1 dale 2 T and County--Southwest Region. National Public National Private Forest Domain All in Northwest Region ~l in Northwest Region All iE- Northwest RegIon '0 2,120 140 140 0 2 120 4,120 40 0 16,440 101 600 8 720 '16,480 '1011600 12,840 56,470 101,030 11,720 69,140 78,960 28,160 182,180 39,340 248,640 32,780 100,020 63,840 352,360' 3401570 3191350 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 280 7 600 7,600 0 3 280 0 0 0 -'.22,640 600 61980 6,980 22,640 600 10,000 18;200 520 - 181200 101000 520 0 0 0 0 0 0 _5,440 8,164 31400 17,004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 440 440 15,480 11,240 26,720 44,680, 34,800 ' 79,480 720 40 760 0 3,670 0 3 670 0 44,777 0 44,777 0 35,640 0 35:640 858,550 1,851,676 661, 840 Sheet 1 2 3 4 Total Winter- Range Acreage by Land Ownership State Park Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,260 2 260 4,160 126 760 ' 130! 920 169,220 181,700 ' 478,324 200,040 1,029;284 0 0 10 880 10,880 0 30,220 30 220 29,160 292160 2,320 720 3 040 0 0 0 63,200 46,800 • 110,000 0 0 1 360 0 0 0 0 0 85,447 0 85,447 83,194 0 3,455,260 1,360 0 -' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -.0 ' , �-18- Table 6.--Elk Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership--Southwest Region. -Continued. Mineral Sheet 1 T National Forest 68z560 68,560 Public Domain 0 0 State 280 280 National Park 0 0 Total 87,380 87,380 63,220 47,180 0 110z400 28,680 28,680 0 0 359,719 233,440 0 593,159 142z720 142z720 0 126,080 91,050 0 217,130 9,400 9z400 0 0 7,640 9,790 0 17,430 4z740 4,740 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 556,659 381,460 0 938,119 185,540 185,540 0 0 0 12,420 0 12,420 12,320 44z960 57 280 0 94,360 0 94,360 28,640 139z 160 167,800 0 0 0 0 420 7z880 8,300 0 1,220 0 1,220 0 8S0. 880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108,000 0 108,000 41,380 192z880 234,260 13,950 . 16,680 30z630 16,760 8,820 25z580 107,300 59,880 167 180 56,270 49,240 105,510 70,340 13z460 83,800 2,120 0 2,120 1,400 70 1,470 9,000 lIz700 20z700 0 0 0 800 1,080 1,880 :33, 240 1,080 34z320 600 0 600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72,420 67,070 139z490 129,340 35,060 164,400 110,020 59 880 169 900 Private 18,540 18,540 Saguache 1 2 3 T Rio 1 Grande T Alamosa 1 T Montezuma 1 2 3 T LaPlata 1 2 T Archuleta 1 2 T Conejos 1 2 T Costilla 1 2 T ~ .. ~ �-19- Table 7.--Deer Winter Range Acreage by Land Owners and County--Northeast Regional ~ Part}. Public Domain State Sheet Private National Forest National Park 1 72,978 13,250 67,550 15,720 0 169,498 2 61,340 17,600 22,900 6,980 0 108,820 T 134,318 30,850 90,450 22,700 0 278,318 1 50,350 28,940 20,150 5,870 o 105,310 T 50,350 28,940 20,150 5,870 ·0 1P5,310 184,668 59,790 110,600 28,570 Total Jackson Larimer Total o 383,628 �-20- Table 8. --Elk Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and County. --Northeast Region. (In Part). Public Domain .State National" Park Sheet Private National Forest 1 3,490 49,560 1,440 19,790 0 74,280 2 13,440 48,460 3,460 11,470 0 76,830 T 16,930 98,020 4,900 31,260 0 151,110 1 312480 171920 10,980 32240 0 63,620) T 312480 171920 10,980 31240 0 63,6201 48,410 115,940 15,880 34,500 0 214,730 Total Jackson Larimer )* ( Total * Only these townships are included which had some public domain lands as were near to them in this county. See maps. '~. �-21- Table 9. --Deer Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and County=-Southeast Region. 1 T . Private 7,180 7,180 1 116,810 Sheet Lake National Forest 11,920 11,920 Public Domain 4,630 National Park 4 630 o o Total· 25,370 25 370 o 342,010 o 342,010 40,920 332,500· Chaffee 2 T 1 2 3 T Teller 1 149,520 55,060 20,620 No Sheet 2 on deer winter range maps 116,810 . 149,520 55,060 20,620 21,680 16;480 0 2,760 135,620 15,900 33,120 147,860 No Sheet 3 on deer winter range maps'. . 169;540 . 152,100' 15,900' 3~880 48,910 25,930 3,920 2,840 '.25,930 3,920' 2,840 48,910 o o o 373,420 81,600 81,600 o El"Paso .. 167,970 167,970 5,600 5,600 3,560 ·3,560 31,410 31,410 o o 208,54:0 208,540 185,130 161,820 346,950 25,340 3,140 28,480 190,300 137,040 327,340 42,430 31,740 74,170 o 2 T 443~200 333,740 776,940 1 T 133,950 133,950 43,850 43,850 10,480 .10,480 1 41,020 41,020 8,380 8,660 8,380 .....8,660 208,880 66,410 275,290 1 T F'remont 1 o o Custer o . 0 196,430 196,430 3,320 3,320 .0 ·0 61,380 .61,380 34,360 43,260 1,040 2,710 35,400 .. 45,970 14,060 5,900 19,960 o. o· 300,560 76,060 376,620 4,590 4,590 480,110 15,160 15,160 213,150 o o o 352,580 352,580 2,79~,890 Pueblo T Huerfano 1 2 o Las Animas 1 T Total' 332,310 332,310 1,639,930 520 520 .461,700 �-22Table 10.--Elk Winter Range Acreage by Land Ownership and Countyo- -Southeast Region. Lake Sheet 1 T Private 7,320 7,320 National Forest 9,090 9 090 Public Domain 6z160 6 160 State 2,900 2 900 National Park 0 0 Total 25,470 25,470 530 4 080 4,610 0 660 3,420 4,240 2z640 2,640 3,320 640 3z 960 240 580 22860 3z520 1,760 1,760 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76,220 35 480 111,700 55,350 81,220 30z920 167,490 60,580 60,580 0 640 640 0 0 12 980 12,980 Chaffee 1 2 T Park 1 2 3 T Teller 1 T El Paso 1 T Fremont 1 2 T Custer 1 T Pueblo 1 T Huerfano 1 2 T Las Animas 1 T Total 8,080 5 580 13,660 2,850 21,500 3,900 28,250 321640 32,640 64,290 25, 180 89z470 52,260 58,480 20z740 131,480 23,540 23 540 6 000 6,000 6,340 6 340 7,440 0 7,440 27,370 27,370 17,720 0 17,720 41,810 41 810 1,280 0 1 280 780 780 3,440 0 3,440 1,340 1 340 0 0 0 0 0 29,880 0 29,880 71,300 71,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,,500 7 320 29,820 55,120 200 55,320 600 240 840 2,820 740 3,560 0 0 0 81,040 8,500 89 540 117,790 117,790 60 60 340 340 3 450 3,450 0 0 121,640 121,640 1,639,930 461,700 480,110 213,150 0 2,794,890 o_ -- �-23- In regard to national forests, it was computed that there are 12,510,217 acres within the area mapped and platted for deer ~r range. Of this amount, 1,863,763 acres is being used by deer or 14.9%. By comparison elk winter upon 22% of all national forest acreage or 2, 745,986 acres ( table 2). Objective ill (above) - Cooperation. During the past year there has been a marked increase in the number of inquiries received by the Federal Division from the Bureau of Land Management concerning our interest in acquisition, lease, or withdrawal of public lands for benefit of wildlife. This is very desirable, and it may be due in part at least to this project having brought about a closer liaison between the two departments. Both State. B. L. M. officials and district range managers have a better understanding, we believe, of the needs of big game and the areas of conflict between big game and livestock. Copies of the tables in this report will be supplied to all public land agencies' offices which have cooperated on this project. Prepared by: William T. McKean .Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator --------~~~~~------------- Date: JulY1 1958 ��11111Irllll~'lllril'llII~lllllrr~lll~il~lil ~rllillf~11 BDOW022270 , .,' -25- J()B COMpLETION REP.QR1 . I;NVESTIqAl'IONS PROJECTS '.'State of . .'COLORADO -v • ~-~,..;..~;;";;;;,;;,;;,;;;.;;,;;;;",;;,----------~~~~ 1?roj~c·tNo....••. .. . ',,,,.~ ...- ...•••..••••••. -.,~.,,••• ,,..•••• "~. -"'~"''''''''''''':''''''''>-''''''''''''~''-'' -W::.;..••• -.;;.3.;;.8_-R~-.:;.1.:;.1N~a=m;;;.;e;.;.__;D=ee;;;,;r;..-...;E;;;.I;;;;k;...;;;In;;;.v:..;e;.;;s;.;; ~~ ',' ;.WO~k Plan. .:. ,'" • 2 Job No. ~ .- '. . . •••.•••• ~ 6 ----~----;;_--------.;..;.;;..;;;;..,..;;.-..,;.-~-~~---:--.- •.•••••.• ~ ',- •••••• ; ~ •••• '- ••••••. .»~ .....' 'l'itle of Job: Collection of data .on Elk and, Domestic Sheep use of Sub:llpine Range •.. ' . . . '. -;. .... . .' ~". ". .' c.r :;,-~ Peniod-Cover'ed: . June 16, 1957to March ~1, 1958. . " 6bje~tives: ... •. , To g~ther as 'much Information as possible relative to elknumber's, sex-ratios, number ~f.young, :f~edi:tIg'habi~s, seasonal migratipns and movement~ ~~',the sll.:rnm~r~nge as ,~Ilfluep:gedby grazing sheep. Also to gather information on .Iength. of grazing ~eal)PIl' number of-sheep, method of herding, dates of use, plus. any o1herpertinentinformation . en:countered.' . . . .' ." ..' .." .. ' . " '; ..... : .. Techniques Used: Ground r-ecimnaissance. Elk observations were made during the routine range surveys ,~ith no attempt to concentrate time on thi~ phase of the study. $heep obl)el"Yations : were'inade as time permitted. Info.rmation from other sources was ei~cured'py contacting ~eep herds, camp movers, aportsmen, and Forest Ser\Tice persqnnel'~ '. '.' - . . ',_' ',. "',' Abstract: During the summer of 1957, a total of 236 elk were observed. There were 60 cows; 57 calves, 11 yearlings, 21 bulls, plus.87 'cows and yearlings ~hich could not be .. differentiated, This would indicate a sex-ratio 1:7.5, males to females. ,':rh~year before 542 elk were observed and the sex-ratio was 1: 6.1. . .• '.•: . top Because of the late development of vegetation, elk did not move on until the.Iast ~eel{ in July, a month later than usual. The absence of large summer herds yv~~ noticeable and the largest number seen in one group was 61.: ]3u11sr'emained with the small herds. during the summer. Neither elk nor sheep used the fo,rlilgei~:the : timber to the extent that they have in the past, Elk did use the timber once, the sheep~ arrived.. put returned to several parks after they had left, . ", , . . ...... ,.. ; Sheep use of this range' was delayed to permit the vegetation to reach a 'stage.of . development whereby damage to the range would be prevented. The 'only' mi~~.e . observed was onchoiee bedgrounds, Herding practices appear~dt~ q~satisfactory. . ( �-26Findings: A continuation of the past two summers observational elk study was made during the summer of 1957. Less observations were made because of an extremely abnormal year .. and a reduction .infield personnel. During the 1957 range studies, two field men performed the work load that four men covered the previous year. One man concentrated his time on the winter range study, while the other was assigned to the summer range study. I . '. . A belated winter with heavy snowfall attributed deep and prolonged snow conditions on the summer and upper winter range. There was extremely high runoff throughout much of the summer months and snow depths forced the elk to remain on their winter range longer than normal. On June 16, heavy snow fell most of the day at the South Fork Camp Grounds, an elevation of 8,000 feet. During this day a cow elk was observed from camp feeding primarily on browse plants on the west side of the South,Fork nearly one-fourth mile away. 'Feeding on what appeared to be serviceberry (Amelanchier spp. ~ she made no effort to reach high or low but fed at her height and moving occasionally to another bush. Sometimes she would feed on the green vegetation on the ground. .She remained in the area the entire afternoon. Her coat was shaggy and she appeared thin showing signs of a hard winter. Although a mature animal she gave rio indications of young nearby. The following day an inspection was made of the area in which she was last seen. Her tracks headed up the South Fork canyon on the west side of the river. She was seen again four days .later about three miles up the South Fork high on the side of the canyon wall. On June 20, while moving a camp to Park Creek, eight and one fourth miles above the camp ground, two cow elk in relatively good condition crossed the trail 75 yards ahead. They cane from the dense aspen groves next to the river and proceeded up the steep slope toward Bloomfield Bench, a calving ground. No young were observed and neither showed any sign of pregnancy. Upon returning to the camp ground that afternoon, a ride was made over the Bloomfield Bench. No elk were observed and sign was scarce although there were fresh signs on the aspen and oak brush shelves ' immediately below the Bench. As the winter range study progressed up the South Fork canyon, fresh elk sign became more frequent, especially on areas where green annual vegetation was plentiful. From all indications, the elk were remaining as near to the receeding snow as possible particularly on wet and boggy areas which supported rapid growing forbs. These areas were generally small rivulets which the animals used quite extensively as feed and bed grounds, Elk seen at this time were in ..pairs or small groups of three or four. Other animals lagged behind on the lower winter range as three animals were jumped from their beds not over three 'hundred yards from the South Fork road. On June 15, an attempt was made to ride to the summer range via Hill Creek. Deep snow was encountered near the top at about 9, 550 feet. Four cows and a 4-point bull were observed, the cows being one and one-half miles below the snow line and the bull several miles below the cows. No calves were observed, but the reaction of the cows indicated the possibility of some in the area. Fresh elk sign, mostly tracks, were �-27- common but not abundant. This appeared to the rule on much of the upper winter range that was being occupied. No indications of herd concentration were noted. Only on rare occasions, on very steep terrain, was any soil disturbance by elk observed. . . On July 6, another reconnaissance trip was attempted to the summer range, Deep snow encountered at the head-of Park Creek (10,500 feet) prohibited any further riding. This large park was almost entirely covered with snow varying in depth from four inches to twelve inches in the center and two feet to three feet around the edges. No green vegetation was visible in the open channels cut in the snow by the runoff. Three patterns of elk tracks were found. Elk sign was frequently seen along Park Creek at lower elevations (9,000 to 9,900 feet) from the aspen covered slopes to the creek. The only elk observed were two mature bulls, a four and a five point, feeding in the sagebrush meadows along the South Fork not more than 300 yards from camp. Elk were not observed in large calving or migrating herds untilthe middle of July and even then most of the observations were ori.the intermediate range .. A group of 13 was seen on the slope immediately below the Park Creek study area about this time. The snow in the center of this park had melted and vegetation was just beginning to grow. Meadows at the 11,000 foot elevation remained under deep snow. Even by July 19 much of Lost Solar Park was covered by snow and drifts from fourfeet to aix feet were common on southern slopes of the knolls. Elk sign was scarce and there was little vegetation. Both parks were swampy. . A week later Park Creek Park had dried enough to permit a rapid growth of vegetation and several elk were observed using the area. During the last week in July herds of from two to nineteen head were seen here. On August 2, the largest herd observed during the entire summer (61head) was watched as they fed and loitered on the Park Creek area. The following day, 10 elk were seen moving rapidly along the eastern edge of Lost Solar Park. However, it was not until the second week in August that any appreciable elk use became apparent in this park. Vegetative growth was erratic throughout the park. On areas where the snow melted first, the plants were one-half to two-thirds mature and on protected sites only about one-fourth. Snow drifts remained on a few sites most of the summer. On August 12, a helrd of 22 moved into Lost Solar Park as the sheep moved to Park Creek Park, one and one-half miles away. The elk used the park five to siX days, feeding early in the morning from 5:30 A. M. to 8:30 A. M. and again in the evening from 5:30 P. M. until 7:00 P. M. The Doe Creek, Trappers Peak, and Shingle Peak areas were also covered by deep snow until Iate. During a reconnaissance ride of these areas on July 29, snow drifts of two to four feet remained on all south slopes of the knolls with much of the area being swampy. Fresh.elk sign was scarce as only two sets of tracks were seen nearTrappers Peak and several near the Doe Creek area. Vegetation was poor to good �-28- in the Doe Creek and Big Marvine areas, poor near Trappers Peak, and fair near Shingle Peak although the latter was the least developed. By August 20th, vegetation on . the Doe 'Czeek and Marvine areas was in excellent condition, on the Shingle Peak area it was fair to good and continued to grow slowly. The Trappers Peak area showed some growth but was not ready for domestic grazing. Elk sign, vegetative use, and tracks, remained difficult to find in the Doe Creek and Trappers Peak meadows .. Early use by elk was obvious near Shingle Peak but discontinued long before the arrival of sheep. On the Big Mapine· Wildlife Area, elk use was noticeable. A medium size herd of fifteen to twenty head, which may be the residual herd, appeared to be using the meadows immediately north of the peak. Even though the heavy snow cover, high runoff, and cloudy, cool, and rainy summer weather inhibited early growth, sufficient forage was produced to permit normal but delayed grazing on all allotments. This delay in grazing by domestic stock to meet the peak of plant maturity proved satisfactory except for one case. The Trappers Peak's area was definitely in the poorest condition of any at the start of the grazing season. Since the Trappers Peak allotment included a large area, the sheep were widely scattered and never seen bunched while grazing. Therefore, no definite range destruction could be found. The vegetation even looked better when the sheep were removed because of the rapid growth of vegetation on sites where early development was prohibited by the accumulation of snow and water. Judging the range readiness for grazing by the maturity of the vegetation, stage of heading of grasses, and blossoming of forbs, the following dates were found to correspond with the ranges: Park Creek Park and Doe Creek area, elevations ranging from 10,000 feet to 10,800 feet, the second week in August. Lost Solar Park, Trappers Peak, and Big Marvine, 10,800 feet to 11,000 feet, last week in August. Shingle Peak, 11, 000 feet, first week in September. In every elk herd of any size, mature bulls were found which is unusual for early summer .. In the herd of 61, seven large bulls were seen. Upon approach, the herd separated into two smaller herds leaving Park Creek Park in two different directions. One-half mile west, near Horseshoe Lake, the herds were observed uniting again. Before doing so, a large bull repeatedly tried to persuade his smaller group to remain apart. He chased them, cows, calves, and yearlings, around the meadow and threatened to gore several of the mature cows. This emotional behavior is normal during the rutting season when .the bulls are trying to establish a harem .. The above incident took place on August 2. Calves were seldom seen -ijlisyear. No calves were seen with the herd that used Lost Solar Park and was t~~ o{ other groups observed, .,Anunusual situation was noticed in the Trappers p.~~ vicfnity. After' the sheep had started down, the elk were found to be using the area more so -i;han· durmg the entire summer. ThtsIs normally the time that they remain th¢ timber allq are difficult to fin~, . in . " I.. ", I ' • �-29- Bugling was first heard September 3rd indicating the beginning of rut. This may have' been influenced by the early snow that covered the entire summer range. On August 30, all inch of snow fell and heavy frosts and below freezing temperatures became common. Bugling by the bulls was heard most frequently in the upper South Fork Canyon between Trappers Peak and-Shingle Peak. It continued day and night. As the rutting season progressed elk sign became abundant at the head of Lost Solar Creek Canyon especially on the Bear Creek drainage, a tributary of Lost Solar. Even though considerable bugling was heard, observations of the animals were rare. The only park to show signs of slight dessication was Park Creek and this was attributed to maturity and frost and not to lack of moisture. This park is the first in the area to begin development. Camp was broken and packed down on September 17, 1957. i . Individual elk observations are listed in,Table 1. A total of 258 elk were seen but when known duplications are subtracted it comes to 236. Of this number, 60 were cows, 57 were calves, 11 yearlings, 21 bulls, and 87 cows and yearlings which could not be differentiated. These figures would indicate a herd composition of 9 percent bulls, 67 percent cows and yearlings, and 24 percent calves. The sex-ratio would be 1:7.5, males to females (cows and yearlings). The total elk reported by other persons in the area was 108., Observations of the Various. Sheep Herds in the Area: The Robinson herdwhtchfeeds .on the Nichols-Creek Allotment, moved into Park Creek Park on August 9. They spent one afternoon and that night there before moving out to the ridge above the South Fork. On August 24, they returned to this park and moved to Lost Solar Park on August 27. The herding pattern was quite open and satisfactory. In this herd, considerable reliance on the lead sheep to move and keep the others under control was evident. This was observed again later when the herd moved from Park Creek Park to the slopes over'lookingNichol s ,Gr-~~k,."On.September 5th, 220 sheep returned to Park Creek Park spending the night and part of the next day there before the herder could be located. That same day 200 head wandered back to Lost Solar Park where they remained unattended-for two days and nights. The only range abuse or misuse that was evident by this herd was trailing and bedding in Lost Solar Park. Of the two, bedding was the most destructive, often denuding a knoll chosen as a preferfed bedding site. The desires .of the sheep to use these, areas as Such can be attributed ,to s~ltiilg on or near these areas and the fact that the sheep prefer these sites for bed~~; ±~is abuse will probably always exist on any range used by sheep. Bedding ground desfruction was' most noticeable in the Shingle Peak area where the practfce was to bed in the saple ~re8:'. ~er4ing of tfiis herd was toward ~,moderate to close pattern, Occasionally they were f(;)Uh~ grazing'in a scattered form ~JthQugh : thiswas usually prevented ,by the $~al(()P¢Jl'm¢'adows'in which SUG,h a l~rge ht;id had to be manipulated. Also, graaing s~v~r{head o(porses in the vicinity of the sheep camp produced heavy uttlization in spots," The'Shingle pe* herd J~i~ ~a~e Att9tment) moved onto this area and vicinity August :30 and left .'September 10th. .. . . i,' - , . . .' , �-30TABLE 1. Total· Date .June . 15 16 20 . Cows' . : ".;' 5 4 ELK OBSERVATIONS FOR 1957 . Bulls . Yearling Calves Remarks ;:" .. HillO'r. vicinity, feeding Camp Ground South Fork, feeding 1was 3 mi. above camp ground 1 at Lost Solar, 2 at Park Creek 1(4 pt) 1 4 .j 4 July 6 13 23 2.4 29 2 13 2 4 34 August 2 61 2 6 7 2 4 4' 21* 2 7 32* 7 22 Park Cr. and So. Fork, feeding High on Park Creek,· resting Park Creek, Park, feeding Park C reek Park, .feeding Park Creek Park, feeding in A. M. *cows and yearlings, 1 bull lame Park Creek Park, feeding and resting *cows and yearlings 3 10 .4 2 1 3 Lost Solar Park, moving 4 -2 2 Lost Solar Park; moving 12 22 14 2 6 Lost Solar Park, feeding a. m. & p. m. 13 22 14 2.6 Lost Solar Park, feeding a. m. & p. m. 14 1 1(spike) East L. S. Park and below, feeding 15 40 Reported in Oyster Lake area by Forest Service trail crew 19 3 3 Reported near head of Doe Cr. by herder 61 to 75 Reported near Little Marvine Peak by sheep herder 21 28 19* 1 (spike) 8 Moving up and out So. Fork canyon northwest of Shingle Peak 11 5 1 5 Big Marvine Peak, resting northwest September Tr~ers peak, feeding in meadow 5 8 2 Doe Cr. study area southeast, feeding 10 16 1(& pt.) 15* Trappers Peak southeast, feed and 4 15 18 4 IH pt.) water Trappers Pk. south, feeding 1(5 pt.) 3 2 * :: . " .'rOTAL ": ..... 258 7.4 , 23 17 57 Plus 87 cows and yearlings (all. observation) 236 60 21 11 57 Plus 87 cows and yearlings (minus duplications) T.OTAL ':" . '_ �-31- The Trappers Peak and Doe Creek herds were never seen bunched, except when bedded and herding practices appeared to be satisfactory. They moved on their two areas about August 6th and left September 8th and 9th respectively. The assistance of John Harris on elk observations Prepared by: Donald. Smith Thomas Williams .Date:__ ~~_J_u .•• ly""",_19_5~8 was quite helpful. Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��Iij~II~llij' ijl~'llil]lrlllli~~flij~]~1 ijmllliijil BDOW022271 July, 1958 -~~3- JOB COMPLETION REPORT. INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS Project No"__ ..;.__W;.;...-,;;,3,;;,8_-;;,;R;...,-,;;1,;;1 ...l,:..,.- ...;Na;;.;.,;;;.m=..;e;....:_...;D_e~e-r~~~E-l-k-·-ID.-v...;e:...s. ...•.• _ ____, Title of Job: Mesa Verde Clip Plot study Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. ~ '. . Objective: For sound winter game range management it is necessary to krio~ the percentage of annual growth game may be permitted to remove yearly from key browse plants without injl.l~yto the plants. Also, it is important to know the ~ffecfof different' intenstties of use on the amount of forage produced. " . . " TheMesa Verde Clip Plot study is a long-term clipping experiment simulatirlg different .intensities of game use on five key species of browse -plants: big sagebrush,. antelope bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, serviceberry, and oakhrush, The purpose 'of the . study is to attempt to learn how the yearly removal of certain percentages of the annual growth stems and of old stems affects the plants and their forage' productioIl. ", . ',,' Procedure: . - 1. Twenty-four 10-foot square plots have been established for each plant species, and these have been fenced from game. ·2. Plots were randomly selected to receive specific treatments. 3. Three replications are provided for each treatment. 4. Plants .in the three plots of a replication have been subjectedto the following treatments: (a) .Yearly, 20,40,60,80, and 100 percent of the annual growth stems have been removed in random fashion. (b) Three plots for each plant species serve as controls, receiving no treatment. (c) Two years' stem growth was removed from each plant one year; yearly thereafter, all stems falling within a maximum diameter were removed to simulate destructive use. (d) From tagged branches 2 years' stem growth was removed from a pcrtion . of each plant during late summer of 1956. Yearly thereafter, all stems fallfng . within a maximum diameter are to be removed to produce the effect of destructive; use on a portion of a plant. �-34- 5. The following records are collected yearly: (a) Total number of annual stems removed from each plot. (b) The lengths of 100 annual stems removed from each plot, (c) The green and air-dry weight of stems and leaves removed from each plot. (d) The n umber of annual stems produced and the lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. (e) The number of live and dead plants in each plot. (f) Photographs of the plots are taken from established photo hubs. (g) Observations are made on general plant vigor, disease, seed production, etc. Abstract The Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study is an attempt to learn how some browse plants are affected by the yearly removal of certain percentages of their annual stems and older stems. Stems are removed by clipping. Five key species for Colorado being tested are: big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, serviceberry, and oakbrush. The data for 1957, the 9th year of clipping, is presented and discussed. Clipping has had a pronounced effect on the length of annual stems. It has induced the growth of longer stems for all species except mountain mahogany. For all other species, plants receiving 100 percent clips have grown significantly longer stems than unclipped control plants, To a lesser degree, clips lighter than 100 percent induced the growth of longer stems. Generally speaking, the heavier the clip the longer were the stems produced. Based on 1957 data, clipping intensities of 20,40,60, and 80 percent have not significantly affected the weight of forage produced by any of the species studied. Serviceberry and oakbrush plants subjected to "destructive" clips involving removal of two-year's growth in one year produced stems nearly as long as did plants which received 100 percent clips, �ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .The writer is indebted to Jack R. Grieb, Wildlife Statistician, for making statistical tests for significance. INTRODUCTION The study was begun in 1948. Yearly since then a report of the findings has been published in a Quarterly Report of the Federal Aid Division of the Colorado Game and .Fish Department. If the reader is interested in results for prior years he should ·see especially the following: Quarterly Reports for October, 1954; July, 1955; July, 1956. These are partial summarizations of the results of previous years. This report presents only the data and findings for the year 1957. Detailed year .... to-year comparisons and summarizations will be left for a final report on the study upon its completion. Field Schedule and Crew. -- ~ield work in 1957began as usual July 15. Plot fences were repaired, sacks weighed and tagged. Actual clipping on bitterbrush began onthe 18th. Field work was completed for the year with the clipping of mountain mahogany plots, September 9,th. The clipping crew was comprised of Jed e Ellis, Bill Martin, Melvin Evans, and .•Donald Zufelt. FINDINGS Data Collected: -- The air-dry weight of forage produced, average stem length, number of stems clipped or counted, and the total number of stems for each species and plot are shown in tables 1 through 5. Mean stem lengths are shown in table 6. Adjusted mean air-dry weights of stems and leaves combined are shown in .table 7. The 1956-57 precipitation record for Mesa Verde National Park is presented in table 8. Analysis of 1957 Data. -- Stem length and air-dry weight forage production data have been subjected to Analysis of Covariance. Significance is judged at the F. 05 level. Mountain mahogany. --There are Significant differences in mean stem lengths between treatments; control plants and those receiving 100 percent clips produced the longest stems. The mean stem length for the controls is greater than that for any other species. Plants receiving 60 percent clips produced the most air-dry forage. yields are from plants clipped 80, 20, and 40 percent, in that order. are no significant differences between yields. The next highest However, there �-36- SeJr'viceberry.-- There are significant differences in mean stems lengths, with plants' clipped 40,80, and 100 percent having stems significantly longe'r than the controls. Plants clipped 100 percent have the longest stems. Plants receiving the "G" treatment of so-called ndestructive use" (removal of two-years' growth first year, all stems to 4 mm. diameter the second year, and current growth yearly thereafter) have stems significantly longer than the controls and only slightly shorter than those of plants clipped 100 percent. There are no significant differences in forage yields between treatments. Heaviest yields were from plants receiving 60,80, 40, and 20 percent clips respectively. Bitterbrush. -- Stem-length means of plants clipped 80 and 100 percent are significantly greater than for plants which were not clipped, and stems of plants clipped 100 percent are significantly longer than are those from plants clipped 80 percent. There are no significant differences in air-dry weight forage yields between intensities of clip. Sagebrush. Stem-length means for plants clipped 100 and 60 percent are significantly greater than for the control plants which have received no clipping. There are no significant differences in forage yields between intensities of clip. Oakbrush. -- Stem-length means for plants receiving any clip are greater than for control plants which have not been clipped. Plants having the longest stems are those which have received 100 percent clips and those which have received "destructive" clips. Stems on plants clipped 100 percent are more than 4 times longer than stems on unclipped plants. There are no significant differences in forage yields between treatments. However, it appears that at the F . 10 level forage production for plants clipped 80 percent would be significantly less than for plants receiving lighter clips. �-37- Table 1. Mountain Mahogany Plot No. . Clip .Stem Clip Date or (%) Count .Date Production Data 1957. (gr.) (gr.) (gr.) (em. ) No. Stems Clip or Count Air-dr~ Weight· Stems Leaves Total Stem Lgth. Ave. Total No. Stems ~I 1A 2A 3A ~-9 9-6 9-6 20 20 - 20 23.9 25.6 17.0 21. 6 23.0 10.4 45.5 48.6 27.4 12.9 10.9 17.2 61 104 44 305 520 220 1B 2B 3B 9-9 9-6 9-6 40 40 40 41. 6 45.9 146.3 44.9 42.2 120.3 86.5 88.1 2.66.6 11.5 15.2 22.1 184 115 378 460 288 945 1C 2C 3C 9-9 9-9 9-6 60 60 60 130.4 200.2 47.4 126.8 174.2 57.3 257.2 374.4 104.7 13.4 15.5 12.5 439 549 296 732 915 493 1D 2D 3D 9-9 9-6 9-6 80 80 80 154.3 122.7 -27.1 159.4 82.4 28.3 313.7 205.1 55.4 10.8 25.6 10.7 621 263 99 776 329 124 IE 2E 3E 9-9 9-9 9-6 11 11 1/ controls not clipped controls not clipped controls not clipped 19.9 18.1 22.0 426 450 262 426 450 262 IF 2F 3F 9-6 9-6 9-6 100 100 100 252.4 259.3 141.4 490.3 191. 9 80.1 742.7 451. 2 221. 5 18.6 19.6 25.7 676 498 226 676 498 226 1G 2G 3G 9-5 9-5 9-5 100 100 100 147.0 95.4 111.3 174.5 86.5 131. 3 321. 5 181. 9 242.6 15.5 15.5 11.4 619 288 342 619 288 342 11 Eplots are control plots;they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. 21 Computed totalnumber of stems for clip plots and actual number for control plots. �-38= Table 2. Serviceberry Production Data 1957. " Plot' " No. , " Clip 'Stem Clip or Count (%) Date (gr.) Stem Lgth. Ave. (cm. ) ,No. Stems Clip or Count Air':'dr~Weight, Leaves Stems Total (gr.) (gr.) Total' No. St ems c~/ , 1A 2A 3A 8-20 8-14 8-16 20 20 20 17.4 10. 1 31. 4 21. 9 19.0 40.8 39.3 29. 1 72.2 6.1 4.1 5.1 162 106 224 810 530 1120 1B. 2B 3B 8-19 8-14 8-14 40 40 40 41. 7 35.8 59.1 85.8 39.8 93.8 127.5 75.6 152.9 8.0 6.9 8.6 257 217 566 643 543 1415 1C 2C 3C 8-21 8-19 8-16 60 60 60 236.4 53.2 77.4 300.3 66.5 238.6 536.7 119.7 316.0 8.1 6.0 5.0 1436 421 996 2394 702 1660 1D 2D 3D 8-22 8-20 8-15 80 80 80 129.8 133.7 251. 0 168.6 141. 4 286.1 298.3 275.1 537.1 8.0 11. 5 8.5 743 426 1187 929 532 1484 :IE 2E 3E ,8-19 8-13 8-15 .!/ 1/ 1/ controls not clipped controls not clipped controls not clipped 6.6 3.5 5.8 817 784 915 817 784 915 IF 2F 3F 8-13 8-19 8-16 100 100 100 137.8 192.0 782.0 335.1 326.0 527.5 472.9 518.0 1309.5 10.8 9.4 28.7 9.82 1251 1069 982 1251 1069 1G 2G 3G 8,-21 100 8-20 100 8-20 100 578.6 314.4 404.2 617.7 437.4 477.8 1196.3 751. 8 882.0 16.1 15.3 16.7 1457 1276 1216 1457 1276 1216 .!/ E plots are control plots; they are not clipped. Dates 'shown are for dates measured. ~/ Computed totalnumber of stems for clip plots and actual number for control plots. .._ �-39-:- Table 3. Bitterbrush Production Data 1957 Plot· No. '. Cl lp or .Count stem· Clip ··,A-ir-d!1 Weight· .. Leaves· Sterns Total Stem Lgth. Ave, (gr.) (gr.) (cm.) (%) (gr.) . ....... '.' ... Total No. Stems Clip or Count " ';,,' No. Stems 2/ . " 1A 2A 3A 7-29 7-18 7-29 20 20 20 33.4 6.2 20. 1 51. 3 14. 1 35.6 84.7 20.3 55.7 8.9 8.6 8.7 592 252 497 2960 1260 2485 1B 2B 3B 7-24 7-29 7-31 40 40 40 64.4 25.3 44~0 137.5 41. 6 83.9 201. 9 66.9 127.9 10.6 7.2 9.6 1487 ,473 1013 3718 1183 2533 1C 2C 3C 7-24 7-30 7-22 60 60 60 39.1 66.1 39.7 77.1 130.3 79.2 116.2 196.4 118.9 9.8 8.8 10.7 828 1656 892 1380 2760 1487 1D 2D 3D 7-18 7-30 7-25 80 80 80 93.4 147.1 ' 73.3· 184.2 249.9 124.0 277.6 13.5 397.0 9.8 197.3 . 9.8 2117 2355 1195 2646 2943 1494 1E 2E 3E 7-23 7-19 7-24 1/ 1/ 1/ controls not clipped controls.not clipped controls not clipped 9.5 8.1 8.7 3833 2170 727 3833 2170 727 1F 2~ 3F 7-23 7-19 7-22 100 100 100 121. 7 116.6 115.3 12.8 13.1 13.1 2102 2534 2126 2102 2534 2126 1G 2G 3G All plants dead All plants dead All plants dead 209.3 215·.1 224.9 331. 0 331. 7 340.2 .!/ E plots are control plots; they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. y Computed total number of stems for clip plots and actual number for control plots. �-40= Table 4. Oakbrush Production Data 1957. Plot No, Clip or Count Date Stem Clip Air-Drl Weight· sterns Leaves Stem Total Lgth, Ave. (cm. ) (%) (gr.) (gr.) (gr,) No, sterns Clip or Count Total No, Sterns ~/ 1A 2A 3A 8-28 8-29 8-9 20 20 20 54.7 85,5 108.2 288.3 2.92.8 305.9 343.0 378.3 414,1 4.2 5.4 7.5 455 484 523 2275 2420 2615 1B 2B 3B 8-27 8-26 8-28 40 40 40 161. 8 195.7 191. 7 697,4 696.7 908.5 859.2 892.4 1100.2 11.8 14.1 8.2 1186 1114 1591 2965 2785 3978 1C 2C 3C 8-29 8-26 8-23 60 60 60 209,4 196.1 452.4 750.4 760,8 1417.7 959.8 956,9 1870.1 7,9 7.9 11. 0 1174 1077 1939 1956 1795 3232 1D 2D 3D 8-22 8-23 8-22 80 80 80 321. 9 164. 1 284.9 765.8 455.3 217.0 1087,7 619,4 501. 9 12,7 8.7 10.1 1088 520 1004 1360 650 1255 1E 2E 3E 8-29 9-2 9-2 1/ 1/ 1/ controls not clipped controls not clipped controls not clipped 3.9 4.5 3.6 4096 ·2513 3679 4096 2513 3679 1F 2F 3F 9-3 9-4 9-4 100 100 100 992.2 173.5 498.2 1609.8 1350.3 568.2 2602,0 1523.8 1066.4 26.0 14.1 16.5 1195 1221 1040 1195 1221 1040 IG 2G 3G 9-4 9-5 9-4 100 100 100 675.5 869.6 716.9 1268.7 1470.5 1006.7 1944.2 2340.1 1723,6 14.2 13.0 11. 5 1043 1643 1369 1043 1643 1369 1./ E plots are control plots; they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. ~/ Computed totalnumber of sterns for clipplots and actual number for control plots. ,-. -- �-41- T.able 5. Sagebrush Production Data 1957 .. Seed Stalk Lgth. Ave. (cm.) No. stalks Clip or Count 4135 3290 6505 11.4 11.8 15.4 78 101 249 390 505 1245 2520 2.007 1655 6300 5018 4137 12.0 13.6 12.5 317 388 208 792 970 520 4.5 3.8 5.0 1874 2576 1608 3123 42·93 2680 15.9 12.8 16.4 210 153 306 "350 255 510 223. 1 372.8 213.4 3.2 4.4 3.4 2277 2651 2039 2846 3314 2549 13.7 17.2 13.0 199 240 82 249 300 103 II Controls not clipped 4.0 2.7 4.2 4012 4334 5620 4012 4334 5620 100 100 100 646.5 361. 8 362.9 3.6 3.6 6.1 5830 2087 2217 5830 2087 2217 13.8 576 17.9 116 14. 1 292 576 116 292 stem Lgth. Ave. (cm.) No. Stems Clip or Count 70.2 72.2 215.3 3.4 2.7 3.4 827 658 1301 40 40 40 255.5 267.8 190.7 3.3 4.8 3.1 8-9 8-1 7-31 60 60 60 237.8 223. 1 224.7 1D 2D 3D 8-2 8-12 8-7 80 80 80 IE 2E 3E 8-1 8-5 8-7 II IF 2F 3F 8-7 8-8 8-8 1G 2G 3G All plants are dead All plants are dead All plants are dead Clip or Count Date Stem Clip 1A 2A 3A 8-2 8-2 8-12 20 20 20 1B 2B 3B 8-9 8-8 8-5 1C 2C 3C Plot No. (%) Ii Air-Dey Weight stems Leaves (gr.) Total No. Stems ~/ Tot~l No. Stalks ~I 1/ E plots are control plots;they are not clipped. Dates shown are for dates measured. V Computed totalnumber of stems for clip plots and actual number for control plots. �d'' -:' "<~ . ::.) ::.:\;) . Ta-ble 6. Treatment Stem Means Based on JDO Measurements Each Average j Clipping Intensity Percent 20 40 '6D 80 Mountain "Mahogany Servi ceQerry . -"Bitterbrush Cm , Ranl( Rank Cm. Ra,nk Om. F ~oo 1:3.66 16;27 13.78 1.S.72 '21..30 G E 1.00 l.4~1.' Control 20.00 A B C D By "I'r-eat.merrt and Species, 1 1 ·5'.68 7.82 6.64 9.32 1.6~31 -16~\J2 ,.30 1 -1 8.76 3 "3 9.T5 9.77 3 11.0, 2 1."3;01 1. --- 8.75 3 Oakbrush Rank Cm. -,.69 12.J6 8.9S 10.48 '18.8, l2.88 3.99 , 3 4 3 1. 19,7. Sagebrush Rank Om. 3.16 3.71 4.44 3.67 4.43 3 2 1 3.61 2 2 1 2 6 I ~ ~ I Sig. Dif.f between two or more treatments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes I.SD 3.41 1.94 1.14 1.48 ----~42 . F .0S = 2.21 with , and 1782 DE F- 16.,7* 13.09* = F.05 2.09 witn 6 and 2079 DF F = 45.1.5** 8"6.03** �~ Table 7. AdJusted Mean Air-dry Weights of Stems and 'Leavea Combinedby Clipping Intensity and Species (Analysis of Co-variance), 1957. . t. r-----------~----------------~----------------------~----~--------------_r----,_--------------7 Clipping Intensity ..Per-cent Serviceberry grams, Bitterbrush grams Sagebru$h , . grams Oakbrush grams 23"2."29 335.70 -285.8) 348;08 594.89 1957.06 2109.81 48,.87 326.,2 194.t~o 344.01. -'30;:r.9 466~1.4 380.88 349.66 lW96.8, No No No No No 2.877 1.710 Mountain Mahogany grams. 20 40 60 80 Sig. 'Diff. between two or more treatments , 205.19 ~03.lT 584.-n 1133.19 & ~ C.:> I F values f.05 = 4.35 with 3 and 7 DF 2.877 .361 .146 2.3,5 ~~\) x) ~~;.. �~~\J . ~1) ... ......._ ~:.1~ll.:i Ta:ble 8. "Precipitation Mesa "Verde 'National Par-k, 1956-1957. Sept. Oct ~ Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. "May June July Aug. Total .11 .86 .l3 .65 -5~53 l.49 ~.~D J~'66 .3.37 1.l4 4.31 3.53 25.98 .98 1.25 .83 1.59 2.57 1.18 1.10 1.47 1.24 2.34 2.08 17.41 .79 I ~ ~ i Nine-year Averages covering duration of project f �-45- General Observations. --For all 5 species, plants receiving 100 percent clips have grown the longest stems, and they have been significantly longer except for mountain mahogany. This same heavy clip-long stems relationship, to a lesser degree, holds true for plants subjected to clips less than 100 percent. Serviceberry and oakbrush plants receiving "destructive" clips for only a short time have produced stems nearly as long as plants receiving 100 percent clips. The data tables show the number of stems actually clipped and the computed total number for each plot. These data are presented only as a matter of record. Their possible interpretation will be left for another report. LITERA.TURECITED 1. Aldous, Shaler E. 1952. Deer browse clipping study in the Lake states Region, Jour, Wildlife Mngt. 16 (4) ; 401-409. 2. Dietz, Donald R. 1957. Nutritive composition of key species of mule deer browse in Colorado. Colo. Coop. Wildlife Research Unit Quarterly Report, 11 (1) ;10-14, 3. Gar-rison, George A. 1953. Effects of clipping on some range shrubs. Mgnt. 6 (5) : 309 - 317. Jour, Range 4. -Iohnson, H. G. 1945. Clipping studies to determine a utilization standard for the key species (Gowania stansburiana). Unpublished materiaL Book of Grazing facts U, S. Forest Service, Region 4, 1945, pp. 173. 5. Shepherd, Harold R. 1949 - 1958. Quarterly Report, Federal Aid Division, Colo. Game and Fish Department, July numbers through 1956, January, 1958. 6. Young, V. A, and G. F. Payne, 1948. Utilization of key browse species in relation to proper grazing practices in cut-over western white pine lands in northern Idaho, Journal of Forestry, 46 (1) : 35-40. Prepared by: Harold R. Shepherd Date: ..;,J.;.;;u;;;.:ly .•,...;1;.;;;9...;;;5..;,8~---- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��I~~lmlli'ijl~'~il~lml~~~il~~]~1 ij~rllifijll BDOW022272 July, 1958 -47- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS " State of__ \ .....;C:;..O:;oL:;.;;O.;;.;R~A:.;;:D;..;O;_.,;. _ " , Project No. .. , ,- .;.;-W.;.-_3;;.8;;.-....;R;;.;;-~11;;._ _ _:_---:-...l--D~e..;;.e..;.r-E=lk_, _In_v_e_s_t~ig""a .•. t_i_on-.s ••.•• _:_~ ~_:_---,- Detailed study of range forage by use of fenced exclosures. Period covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Abstract. Pellet group counts were accomplished on partially protected (livestock) exclosures for deer and for deer and/or livestock on unprotected adjacent range, plots at several. exclosures. Without giving the specific figures for the stocking rates summer cattle use was found to be heavy or very heavy on ranges where the Antelope Pass, Herriage _Gulch, and Kelly Flats exclosures are located. Summer deer use was negligible to light on' ranges where the Antelope Pass, Basalt, Broken Road, .Dead Badger','. Hernage Gulch, Kelly Flats, Middle Cottonwood Creek, and Thomas Creek exclosurea are found. Summer cow use was found to be negligible to light on ranges upon which are the Broken Road and Dead, Badger exclosures. A combination repeat photo and general observation study cloneat the W()ods Gulch exclosure revealed that browse plants have been growing normally without use on .them by big game animals under the two unprotected treatments. Grass plant de,nsity .was found to be deficient on the unprotected outside range areas due presumably to too much grazing by cattle too soon after the area was reseeded. Pubescent wheatgrass (Agropyron trichophorum) was found here to be more resistant to heavy spring use than is standard crested wheatgrass (AgropYron desertorum), particularly in dry years when plant establishment in a reseeding is more difficult. 1. Antelope Pass Game-Cattle Exclosure, A cattle fecal pile count was done October 14, 1957 on four permanentbelt transects. The indicated rate of use as computed for cattle for the summer season of 19f)7is ,~.4,3_ acres per AUM. This is a slightly higher rate than the 2.08 acres per AUM obtained for the year of May, 1956to May, 1957. B dh rates of use appear to be too high for this reseeded range, and photographic and numerical proof of this should result when the Parker 3-Step transect studies are repeated in J958. �·-48- . 2. Basalt Deer Exclosure. A deer pellet group count was done July 18, 1957on the outside 1/4 acre plot. An indicated rate of use of 12.2 acres per deer-month was obtained for the 2 months summer season. The calculated rate of deer use for the July, 1956- July, 1957 period is . 306 acre per deer--month. Even with the major use coming in the winterspring season, this stocking by deer is too great for proper maintenance of the mountain mahogany in this mountain brush range. 3. Broken Road Deer-Cattle Exclosure. No cattle and horse fecal piles were counted on the outside transects August 29, 1957. These results correspond with those obtained in 1956. Negligible livestock use continues on the adjacent outside range. 4. Cold Springs Mountain Game-Livestock Exclosure. This new 2 1/2 acre big game proof exclosure was constructed in September, 1957.· General view photos were taken of the vegetative cover inside and outside of the exclosure in October, 1957. 5. Dead Badger' Deer-Cattle Exclosure. The cattle use of the outside range plot at this exclosure was negligible in the summer of 1957. It was found, however, that in 1956the season of use was in the fall rather than the summer as it is supposed to be. Another count will be made in the spring of 1958to check into this further. 6. Hernage Gulch Exclosure. The results given below of a pellet group count for deer and cattle show very light use by deer and heavy use by cattle for that season. Rate of use by deer for 3 months summer (1957)season is 50 acres per deer-month. Rate of use by cattle for 3 months summer season (1957)is 3.44 acres per AUM. When use is computed on a basis for the year August, 1956 -- August, 1957, the results are as follows: Rate of use by deer for one year is 1. 11 acres per deer-month. Rate of use by cattle for one year is 2.63 A. per AUM. �-49- 7~ Kelly Flats.Deer-Cattle Exclosure. The indicated rate of use as determined by pellet group counts on the outside treatments, Blocks ,HAil and "C", in the summer of 1957are 100.0 and 8.33 acres per deer=month, respectively. The cattle use on the same plots in the same order are 3.8 acres per AUM, and no use, respectively. The importance of these results are discussed and compared with similar counts for the summer of 1956. 8. Middle Cottonwood Creek Game Exclosure. A pellet group count for deer use was done on the outside 1/4 acre plot on July 19, 1957 and resulted in the figure of 8.33 acres per deer-month use for the 2 month summer season. This is considered to be light use for this range in summer. 9. Thomas Creek Exclosure. ,All (jeer and sheep pellet groups were tallied on the outside 1/4 acre plot on August 8, 1957. The indicated rate of use by deer for the three month summer period was found to be 13.9 acres per deer-month. The rate of use by sheep for the same period was . found to be 21. 9 acres per sheep-month. The influence of these classes of animals .in ..the summer. of 1957could riot be considered to be very important. 10. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. An August, 1957photo study of individuals and groups of plants under the three treatments was done and compared with photographs made at the same positions in 1954. The comparisons showed considerable expansion in volume of all browse species. Grasses under protection, however, were much larger in size and occupied much more sp.ace inside o~.the fences than on the adjacent outside range. Too early and too heavy use after reseeding is thought to have caused the apparent differences of grass densities. �-50- Introduction. Again, as in the 1956-57 studies, range investigations involving exclosures fell into two different phases of effort. Because one phase dealtwith vegetation and the other with how much evident animal use was made upon the vegetation through computed stocking rates, the various exclosures will be treated separately in following paragraphs. Antelope Pass Game-Cattle Exclosure. Pellet Group Count~ Objective: To determine the intensity of use by cattle during the 1957 summer grazing period on the outside plot. Procedures: Techniques involved will not be repeated here since they have been presented before (Baker, 1957). The belt transects were counted for cattle pellet groups on the outside plot October 14, 1957in order to obtain the rate of use by cattle for the summer season of 1957; A few horse pellet groups were counted in with the cattle fecal pile tally. No freshly deposited deer pellet groups were encounte-red on the transects nor elsewhere on the outside plot bearing out previous findings which indicate that deer have not used this range in any appreciable extent between about May 1 to October 15 the past two years. Deer and Cattle pellet group counts made on May 14, 1957were reported on previously (Baker, 1957). Results: Cattle fecal piles counted and removed from the four transects totalled 24.1. Computing the indicated rate of use from this sample results in 251 cattle groups for 1 acre. The 251 groups when converted to days use equals 20.91. The number of animal unit months then equals 20. 91 divided by 30 or . 697. stated conventionally this equals 1. 43 acres per AUM. The period of time for which this indicated rate is applicable is from May 14 to October 14, 1957, or five months. Discussion and Recommendations: The 1. 43 acres per AUM rate of use by cattle on the outside plot in the summer of 1957is slightly greater than that of 2.08 acres per AUMfound for 1956. Both, however, show that this crested wheatgrass reseeding is receiving a too heavy stocking of cattle. Gross comparisons of vegetation inside and outside of the fences tend to show that this rate of stocking is too strong, also. More definite indications of what is happening to the vegetative cover will be forthcoming in 1958when the Parker 3-step transects are to be read again. �-51- Basalt Deer Exclosure Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the intensity of deer use upon the outside open range plot for the summer, 1957, period of use, and also the intensity of use for the year. Procedures: The outside plot was counted for the presence of deer pellet groups by stripping the entire area systematically on July 18, 1957. Deer pellet groups had been counted and cleared from the plot on May 17, 1957. The results of that count have been reported on (Baker, 1957). Results: The results of the count are summarized as follows: Total number of deer pellet groups on 1/4 acre = 8 Number of deer pellet groups on 1 acre = 32 Number of deer-days use per acre = 2~46 Number of deer-months use per acres = . 082 Indicated rate of use for summer season, May 17 - July 18, 1957 (2 months) .,,_ .. 12. 2 acres per deer":' month. . The results of the July 18 count when added to the count made in May give the indicated rate of use on the outside open range plot for the year (1956-57). In summary, the results of those calculations are as follows: Total number of deer pellet groups on 1/4 acre = Number of deer pellet groups on 1 acres = 1276 Number of deer-days use per acre - 98.2 Number of deer-months use per acre = 3. 27 319. Indicated rate of use for the year = .306 acre per deer - month. Discussion and Recommendations: The indicated rate of use obtained for the outside range plot shows that this winter deer area is receiving severe use on the vegetation by anybody's standards for stocking. Continued efforts to reduce the' size of the deer herd occupying this management unit should be the rule. Broken·Road Deer-Cattle Exclosure Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the intensity of use by cattle (and horses) on the adjacent outside open range plot for the summer season d use, and to compare this with figures obtained in 1956 counts. �-52- ,Procedures: Methods employed followed those described in the 1957 report progress (Baker; 1957). All cattle fecal piles were counted and cleared from fhe four transects on August 29, 1957. Results: No cattle fecal piles were seen on the four transects, and afew old piles were observed on the remainder of the outside plot indicating that there is very light use made of this locality by cattle. These observations correspond with the findings of the count made in August of 1956. Cold Spring Mountain - Game Livestock Exclosure. Rallge Vegetation' studie's _' " " ',' ,,' _ _ ", ';. .' .' . . . '. Objectives: .To establish a base record through the use of photographs from which changes of the general appearance of the plant cover can be followed. Procedures: An eight feet high game proof exclosure fence was constructed in September, 1957. It was put astraddle the north boundary fence of Tract 50 on the Brown I s Park Management Area, the work being accomplished by a fence contractor for that development project. The cover type is a uniformly dense stand of big sagebrush. Elk, mule deer, and antelope will have access to the range on both sides of the boundary fence, while for the present, cattle and sheep will make use of the open range north of the fence. Cattle were observed on the outside range in the vicmity of the exclosure Octobe r 2, 1957. Time was not available to establish line - interception transects, but general view photographs were taken of the vegetation inside of the exclosure on both sides of the boundary fence October 2, 1957, These photos will be kept on file and will be used for reference when future appraisals of the vegetation are made. Dead Badger Deer-Cattle Exclosure Pellet Group Count Objectives: range plot. To determine the amount of summer use by cattle on the outside adjacent Procedures: The four belt transects were counted and cleared of cattle fecal piles on 'October 14, 1957. The results of the May 15, 1957 count for deer and cattle use have been reported on previously (Baker, 1957). Also, for further details on techniques and methods of calculating results, see the foregoing reference. Results: Only , 2 of a cattle fecal pile were recorded on the four transects. This figure represents a negligible amount of use on this area by cattle in the summer of 1957. There is a good chance, however, that some use occurred after the date of the count, and this will be checked when a spring count is made on the transects in 1958. The season of use by cattle appears to be in the fall rather than summer as stated by the B. L. M. ( �-53- Hernage Gulch Exclosure Pellet Group COUIlt·. , Objectives: To determine the summer as well as the total year's indicated rates .of use of the outside open range plot by deer and cattle. Procedures: All deer and cattle fecal groups were counted as the outside 1/4 acre plot was stripped systematically. This was done on August 14, 1957. The May 16, 1957 count and results can be found in a previous exclosire job completion report (Baker, 1957~. Results: 'I'he indicated rates of use for deer and cattle covering the summer season of three months in 1957 are summarized as follows: Deer, Cattle Total number of pellet groups for 1/4 acre 2 26 Number of pellet groups for 1 acre 8 104 Number of deer-days use per acre = .62 Number of animal - days use per acre = 8.67 Number of deer-months use per acre = . 02 Number of animal-months use per acre = .29 Indicated rate of use by deer for 3 months summer season = 50 acres per deer-month. Indicated rate of use by cattle for 3 months summer season = 3.44 acres per AlJM. The rate of use by deer is very light for the 1957 summer season. However, the rate of use by cattle for the same period is heavy, especially when the composition and density of the grasses are considered (Baker, 1957). When the results of the May, 1957 count are added to those of the foregoing, indicated rates of use resulted for both classes for the 12 months period of August 21, 1956August 14, 1957. In tabular form these are given below: Total number of pellet groups on 1/4 acre Number of pellet groups on 1 acre Deer Cattle 88 352 34 136 Number of deer-days use per acre = 27. 1 Number of animal - days use per acre = 11. 33 Number of deer-months use per acre = . 90 Number of animal - months use per acre - . 38 lridicated rate of use by deer for year, 1956-57 = L 11 acres perdeer-mollth. Indicated rate of use by cattle for year, 1956-57 = 2. 63 acres per AUM. �-54- Kelly Flats Deer-Cattle Exclosure Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the intensity of use by cattle and deer in the 1957 summer season on the two outside unprotected plots, Procedure: The two outside plots (Blocks "A" and "C" in previous reports) were examined, and deer pellet groups and cattle fecal piles were counted on October 11, 1957. The new technique by which the previously counted groups had been cancelled through use of yellow center-line highway marking paint seemed to have worked effectively. An April, 1957 count which was scheduled and accomplished in the work period of the present report was reported on (Baker, 1957). Results: The results of the pellet group count for deer stocking rates are summarized as fellows: Period of Use: Summer, 1957 ( 5 1/2 Mos. ) . ., Total Number of pellet groupson Plot Number of pellet groups on 1 acre Number of deer-days use per acre Number of deer-months use per acre Indicated rate of use by deer, April 27 October 11, 1957;Number acres/deer month. of Block A Block C 6 4.6 .35 .01 54 41.5 3.2 .12 100.0 8,33 The results of the cattle fecal pile count are given below in summary: .alack A Period of Use: Summer, 1957 ( 5 1/2 Mos.) . .Total number of cattle groups per plot 124 95.4 Number of cattle groups per acre 7.95 Number of animal-days use per acre .27 Number of animal - months use per acre Indica,ted rate of use by cattle, A. / AUM *Negligible use. 3.8 Block C 3* ( '-=- �-55- Discussion: When comparing the results obtained for the deer use inthe summer of 1957with 'those found for the summer of 1956, it is noted that there was a considerable apparent decrease in the rate of which the outside plots were made use of in 1957. A possible explanation for this might be that the deer were not forced to water at the Poudre River nearby since heavier than normal precipitation throughout the summer made for ot her sources of drtrklng water. Thus there would be a tendency for the animals to spread and not concentrate in the vicinity of the river as might have been the case in 1956. The reverse is found true when a comparison of cattle use is made of the two summers on Block A. The stocking rate went "up" from 5 acres per AUMin 1956to 3.8 acres per AUMin 1957. The increase of 1. 2'acres is not large in this case because of better forage production, however both rates (5 and 3.8 A. /AUM) are much too high for the range to support over a period of years. Care must be taken in applying the rates universally because Block A is adjacent to the drift fence and the stocking rate here might not be indicative of wlat it is for this cattle allotment as a whole. Middle CottonwoodCreek Game Exclosure Pellet Group Count _' Objectives: To determine the intensity of deer use for the summer seasonof 1957and the total for the year ending in July, 1957, on the outside plot. Procedures: Methods used were the same as those employed on it and the other 1/4 acre plots 'previously treated (Baker, 1957). The count was made on July 19, 1957. Results: The results of the count made in May, 1957giving the fall-winter-spring 195657 stocking rate have been reported on earlier (Baker, 1957), In summary form, the results of the July, 1957count are as follows: Total number of deer pellet groups on 1/4 acre = 11 Number of deer pellet groups on 1 acre » 44 Number of deer-days use per acre - 3.38 Number of deer-months use per acre = .12, Indicated rate of use by deer for summer, 1957 (5/13-7/19) 8.33 acres per deer-month. The above results, when added to those of the May count give the following computation of the stocking rate for the year: Total number of deer pellet groups on 1/4 acre = 53.3 Number of deer 'pellet groups .on 1 acre = 213.2 Number of deer-days use per acre = 16.4 Number of deer-months use per acre = • 55 Indicated rate of use by deer for year (7/25/56 - 7/19/57) = 1. 82 acres per deer:"'month. �-56- Discussion: General condition of the mountain mahogany in this mountain brush type indicates that it is not receiving detrimental use by deer on the year around basis of 1. 82 acres per deer-month stocking rate. The bulk of the use is coming in the fall-winter-spring season with negligible use during the summer growing period. The key browse species, mountain mahogany, might be able to stand a stocking rate of up to 1 acre per deer-month if average conditions of rainfall prevail and other factors are status quo. Thomas Creek Exclosure Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the stocking rates of the outside plot by deer and sheep for the summer season of use in 1957 as well as the total use made of the plot by deer for the year beginning in August, 1956, and ending August, 1957. Procedures: Techniques used were the same as those described for the Basalt exclosure. The results of the count made in May of 1957 are written up in a previous report (Baker, 1957). Results: The findings of the August count for deer pellet groups applicable to fhe summer season of use in 1957 are as follows: Total number of deer pellet groups for 1/4 acre = Number of deer pellet groups on 1 acre ..= 28 Number of deer-days use per acre = 2. 16 Number of deer-months use per acre = . 072 7 Indicated rate of use by deer for 3 months, 5/17/57 per deer-month. . - 8/8/57, is 13.9 acres The counts in May and August, when added together, give a stocking rate for the 12 months period, August, 1956 - August, 1957, of .42 acre per deer-month. Sheep use was light on the outside plot in the summer of 1957. The summary of the count is as follows: Total number of sheep pellet groups for 1/4 acre Number of sheep pellet groups on 1 acre = 16 Number of sheep-days use per acre = 1. 23 Number of sheep-months use per acre = . 041 = 4 Indicated rate of use by sheep for 3 months, 5/17/57 per sheep-month. - 8/8/57, is 21.9 acres �Figure 1. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. Same general views along southeast boundary fence of the livestock part of the exclosure. Upper photo was taken in August, 1957 and the lower one in August, 1954. �._ Figure 2. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. Same general views of vegetative cover inside of the deer part of the exclosure. Upper one was taken in August, 1957 and the lower one in August, 1954. , �?~1R .. ~"'~._ Figure 3. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. General view along south boundary fence of the deer part of the exclosure. Note/the' differences in density and vigor of the reseeded grass under protection as compared with that which is unprotected from cattle and horses. Photograph was taken in August, 1957. ' �- (, Figure 4. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. General view along southwest boundary fence of the livestock part of the exclosure. Contrasts in grass densities and vigor are apparent here between unprotected and protected areas. The deer part of the exclosure appears in the middle distance in the upper right-hand portion of the photograph. , �Figure 5. Woods Gulch Deer Livestock Exclosure. Little Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) on the left, and Smooth Horsebrush (Tetradymia canescens) on the right in both photographs showing increase in size with three years protection from use by deer and livestock. �'_ Figure 6. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. Big Sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) protected from livestock and under very light deer use for three years. Note the increase in density of lower growing grasses and shrubby plants (principally Little Rabbitbrush). �Figure 7. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. Black Sagebrush (Artemisia nova) in center background, and Big Sagebrush in front under very-light use by deer and livestock for three years. �Figure 8. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure. A young Bitterbrush plant (Pur shia tridentata) showing vigorous growth on the outside range under very light use by deer and livestock for three years. �-57- Discussion and Recommendations: Only the less desirable species of browse such as oakhrush appear to be holding their own. Although recent evidence was negligible on the outside plot, occupation of the range by horses and sheep is materially burdening the plant cover , also. Reductions in numbers of deer and livestock should be the prime goal of our department and the Bureau of Land Management personnel. Woods Gulch Deer-Livestock Exclosure Range Vegetation, study Objective: To demonstrate ecological changes in plant cover graphically through the use of'photographs. Procedures: A photographic study was done in August, 1957, using the grided, 4 x 5 foot, plywood backdrop.' . The camera was relocated over permanent points marked with steel stakes at the same lens-to-ground distance as when the original photos were taken in 1954. Exposure were made at nearly the same time of day as the originals. General views of the vegetative cover were taken again at or over various exclosure fence corner posts. Results and.Discussion: Figures 1 through 8 reproduce, in part, the results of the 1954 and1957 photographic studies. Although photographs by themselves leave much to be desired in telling the entire story, the ones presented are fairly indicative of what is happening (or has happened) on this grass reseeding and range development area near Parlin. The B. L. M. and the Colorado Game and Fish Department cooperated in the initial phases of this Pilot Range Development. First of all, deer have been presented only in very small numbers on this winter range since the area has been managed intensively for livestock beginning in 1952. It is believed that the decline in numbers is due to a general drop in the local population and not to a possible shift out of the area as a consequence of the range development. Key browse species such as big sagebrush and bitterbrush show normal growth in amount under the three treatments (inside both exclosure parts, and on the outside range). Little rabbitbrush, another important deer forage species, seems actually to have been stimulated through the practices involving sagebrush removal and grass reseeding. This is illustrated In Figures 5 and 6. The foregoing results are not meant to encourage a letup in hunting pressure in this particular Game Management Unit since the basic problem for the Gunnison winter range is the lack of a moderately palatable medium height browse species. This browse species would furnish forage for deer and elk in the severe winters when deep and crusted snows cover most browse plants now present. Under the best growing conditions, big sagebrush will average only about 2 to 2 1/2 feet high and usually is much shorter. �-58- This writer believes .that the ability of deer to utilize snow covered browse is generally under-estimated. Deer do paw out the crowns of shrubs, particularly big sagebrush, in order to expose the branches if the snow is not crusted. Unfortunately, crusting or packing of snow through drifting occurs often enough with low average winter temperatures in combtn.ation, to aid in causing periodic above-average winter losses. Even though 1957 was an extremely good growing season for all plants, as is evident in the photographs, there are relatively fewer grass plants in the understory of the outside range as compared with inside of the two exclosure parts protected from livestock use. Going back and checking for possible reasons for the apparent large difference in grass density between the protected and unprotected areas leads this writer to believe that the damaging use occurred in the spring of 1955. Extremely heavy cattle use on grasses had been observed adjacent to the exclosure in June of that year (Baker, 1956). The reseeded stand of grass probably was not fully established due principally to moisture deficiencfes which the area had experienced in the dry years immediately preceding (1952 - 1954). 'I'hus, heavy use on plants not firmly established appears to have effectively reduced the density of the reseeded grasses. An interesting finding was made in August, 1957in connection with the observed decline of grasses OJl the outside range. Standard crested wheatgrass (Agrophyron desertorum) and pubescent wheatgrass (Agropyron trichophorum) evidentally made up the major portion of the seed planted in 1952on the area. The density estimations made in August, 1954 showed that the above species to be present in an approximate ratio of about 3 to 1, in the order given. The ocular estimates made in August, 1957 showed a reverse ratio of about 1 to 3. From this then, it appears .that with marginal moisture conditions pubescent wheatgrass is a more desirable species to reseed. It is more resistant to grazing, and along with that 'charactertsttc, it is also quicker in becoming established than is standard crested wheatgrass. REFERENCES Baker, B. D. 1956. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept., Colo. Game and Fish Dept. ,July, pp.61-62. _~ 1957. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept., Colo. Game and F'Ish- Dept. ,July, pp.91114. Prepared by: Date:_~ B. D. Baker Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Ooordinator ' ~J;.;;;u;:;;.ly""",~19;..;5;..;8:....,., _ ','.:: _ .. �July, 1958 -59- JOB _COMPLETION REPOET INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO ~~--~~~~~~------------~ State of Project No. ..;.W;...-..;:3~8;...-..:;;R;,;;.-..;:1;.;;1;"__~ .l....,.;N:..:.;;a;;;;m;;;;e;.....;:D=ee.;;.r.;;.-..;:E;;;;;;;;lk.;;.,;;;In;;.v;..;e;;.:s;;.;;t~ig:L:a;;,;t;.:;io;;.:n: _ => " ~',: Title of Job: Study of Forage Utilization by Elk and Domestic Sheep on the South : -;~" . : " Fork of the White River. Period Covered: June 16, 1957 to March 31, 19580 Abstract: A. Forage Utilization Studies. 1. Lost Solar Park. --Forage production during 1957 decreased considerably from the previoua'two years of study; An excessive-amount of snow and rain plus an early f'restwere responsfble for a short growing season, Elk utilization over the three- year period averaged less than one percent, Use in 1957 showed no significant-difference 0 Sheep utilization during the three years averaged nearly five percent. :';~ highly significant increase occur red this past year. 7 Elk days of use decreased in 1957 to the lowest .numbar during the -study. Sheep days of use continued to decrease, --.--20 Expanded Study This portion covers the surrounding area. Forage production decreased constderably from 19560 Time did not allow two surveys on all of these parks consequently elk and sheep utilization was combined. Less forage was taken in 195_7but sincethere was less produced utilization actually increased five percent. Elk days of use increased slightly although statistics difference. Sheep days of use increased but Iittle. reveale~ no significant �-60- Combined use on all five multiple use parks during 1957 was 12.4 percent. Elk days of use amounted to 1,047 days compared to 19,900 days of sheep use, Elk use on the wildlife area decreased from 3, 4 percent to 1. 3 percent, 3. Pocket Gopher Study Initiated In 1957, results reveal a considerable amount of old activity (31 to 74%) on the utilization plots, New activity was down ranging from 10 to 17 percent. Line intercepts in Lost Solar Park revealed 22 percent gopher activitiy, 34 percent vegetation, 32 percent litter, and 12 percent bare ground. Objectives: To determine the amount of forage consumed by elk and domestic sheep in the Flat Tops region. Also to collect information of animal use pertinent to the study. Techniques Used: Sample plots and study areas have been established. The volumeweight - estimate method was used to determine forage production and utilization. Forage was lumped into three classes: grasses, forbs and browse. Dates of range development were recorded and actual field surveys begun following a short training session. A metal ring, 9.6 square feet in area, was used this year to facilitate reading the plots. Pellet group counts were made on 1/100 acre plots using the same plot centers as those used.for the range survey. These counts were made both before and after sheep use to determine days of elk use on the areas. The elk utilization survey and the forage production survey were run together immediately preceding the arrival of sheep. Following the removal of sheep, a survey of sheep utilization was made, The collection of sheep data was obtained from the herders, Forest Service personnel, and from direct observations, Elk observations were made during the range surveys with little time being available for reconnaissance. Field data was then analyzed statistically to determine the accuracy of the study and to make valid conclusions possible. The 10 percent accuracy level was used. This was then compared to the findings of the previous two years of study. �-61Findings: Note: Because the author was made Acting Superintendent of the Little Hills Experiment Station, the survey crew was limited to one man, Tom Williams, during 1957. Consequently,..emphasis was placed on the Lost Solar Study and a pocket gopher investigation. Sheep and elk utilization wa s combined on the remaining areas because there was not sufficient time to run elk utilization surveys before the arrival of sheep. A. Forage Utilization Studies. L Lost Solar Park: Three years of data has been collected and analyzed. A paper entitled "Elk- Sheep Competition on Summary Ranges in Colorado" was presented at the eleventh annual meeting of the American Society of Range Management by this writer. Earlier reports are found in the Quarterly Reports of January, 1956and January, 1957~ Due to a belated winter of heavy snowfall and continuing rainfall during the summer the growing season on this summer range was limited to about five or six weeks. This was one of the wettest years on record. Vegetation on top did mature but was unable to attain much height as indicated by the low production. _ L A base camp was located about a mile from Lost Solar Park on August 4, 1957. The initial survey was begun August 11 and the second survey on September 3. The number of plots used during 1955was 162; in 1956, 419 plots were sampled; and last year 123 plots were used. Table 1 summarizes forage production and utilization by classes and by ~otals during the three years. This table includes the mathmatical means or averages, (x), with their confidence intervals (.;. ) computed at the ten percent accuracy level. This means that the true mean will fall between the upper and lower confidence limits for the computed mean, x , with only one chance out of ten of its falling outside these limits. The standard errors of the means (SX) are also given as an indication of the sample variability. Table 2 shows the comparison between means of elk and sheep utilization and forage production by vegetative classes and totals. Also shown are the ratios between elk utilization and sheep utilization by classes of vegetation and totals. Table 3 is a comparison of the animals days of use for each year. Forage Production: Upon examination of Table 1, the resulting averages for the first two years are similar but, except for browse, they decreased in 1957. However, a comparison of means alone may not always lead to valid conclusions due to variability in the samples. Therefore forage production totals were analyzed statistically by means of the "Analysis of Varfance" tests. The results of this test show that there was no significant difference the first two years when the production mean ranged between 1,111.9 and 1, 163.9 �-62- . . TABLE 1 . FORAGE PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION DATA FROM LOST SOLAR PARK, COLORADO FORAGE PRODUCTION Pounds per acre Grass Year 1955 1956 1957 •.. Forbs i 54.7 _. x = 542.0 - Sx= 33.0 Browse i 62.3 x = 558.9 sX= 37.5 Sx SX= 26.4 - = 621. 8 I- 34.1 SX - 20.7 x = 369.0 I- 46.5 x = 499.1 f x = 532.2 43.5 x - I- x = 11.0 45.5 x 4.6 1111. 9 x= i 100. 0 sX = 60.3 '" 2;7 = 9.9 i a, 2 - = 1163.9 i 70.2 x SX = 42. (3 SX = 1.9 - x = 14.5 I- 8.9 x = 882.6 SX = 4.5 Sx = 0.06 i 0.06 sX = 0.04 x- = 8.87 I- 2. 11 = 0.44 I- x SX = 22.9 SX = 23.5 I- Total .;. 77.6 ~. -- 39.2 ELK UTILIZATION Pounds per acre 1955 1956 - x = 4. 88-,L 1. 41 SX = 0.85 x- = 3.70 l- I. 02 x 0.62 sx= 1957 - x = 3.931. 1. 26 SX = 0.76 = 5.73 i 1. 12 x x SX = 0.68 x = 3.70 l- I. 42 SX = 0.72 x I- 1. 90 =SX 5.63 0:-96 x = 0.21 l.,_ SX = 1. 27 - 9.87 I- 1. 78 SX = 0.13 Sx= = 0.51 i 0.42 X :=:9.84i 2.91 SX = 0.21 SX = 1. 08 1. 47 SHEEP UTILIZATION Pounds per acre 1955 x = 19.40 I- 8.48 1956 x= SX 1957 i 2.16 15.38 1. 31 x = 27.781 SX 2.93 5.80 Mean or average. I- Confidence limits . sx standard error x of the mean I- 0.64 = 1. 23 0-:-38 x = 39.38 i. 11. 06 = SX = 6.66 X : 20.76 I- 4.12 SX 2.50 x = 1.18 I- 0.66 SX = 0.40 x = 37.32 x '" 42.53 I- 8.46 x = = = X x =18.75 I- 6.46 sX = 3: 89 SX = 5.11 SX = 4.27 SX = 1. 29 I- 1. 24 SX = -0.62 SX = f 5.73 3.47 x = 71. 61-/- 11. 50 SX = 5.81 �-63- TABLE 2 COMPARISON OF FORAGE PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION MEANS LOST SOLAR PARK Grasses Percentage of Fo rage Production Year Elk Utilization Sheep Utilization 1955 1956 1957 0.90% 0.70% 1. 00% 3.58% 2.89% 7.53% 1:3.98 1:4.16 1:7.53 Production. 3.36% 3.30% 8.52% 1:4.77 1:3.78 1:7.56 BROWSE of Forage Production 11.16% 11. 91% 8.92% 1:20.43 1:2.68 1:2.52 Percent 1955 1956 1957 0.70% 0.87% 1.13% Percent 1955 1956 1957 0.55% 4.44% 3.52% Percent 1955 1956 1957 FORBS of Forage 0.80% 0.85% 1.13% TOTAL of Forage Ratio Production 3.56% 3.21% 8.11% TOTAL ELK AND SHEEP UTILIZATION 1955 Elk and sheep utilization = 1956 Elk and sheep utilization = 4.06% of total forage production. 1957 Elk and sheep utilization = 9.24% of total forage production. 4. 36% of total forage production. 1:4.44 1:3.79 1:7.18 �-64- TABLE 3. ELK AND SHEEP DAYSOF USE ON LOST SOLAR PARK Elk Days of Use Before Sheep Arrival . . 1955 x = 1, 138.j 167. 8 elk days of use 1956 x = 2,247:L 2.56.8 elk days of use 1957 i = 844.j 174.8 elk days of use Elk Days of Use After Sheep Arrival 1955 x = 110.5 :L 40.1 elk days of use 1956 x = 45.6 :L 28.1 elk days of use 1957 x = 89.0 .j 43. 7 elk days of use Sheep Days of Use on the Area ~known) 1955 8,000 sheep days of use not including lambs 1956 6,400 sheep days of use not including lambs 1957 5,600 sheep days of use not including lambs ( ,_ �-65- pounds per acre. However, there was a highly significant difference in 1957 when the production total was 882.6 pounds per acre. This reduction is undoubtedly the result of climatic conditions for the previous two years were considerably drier with longer growing seasons. Amount of Forage Consumed by Elk: The mean elk utilization over the three year period was less than one percent (.91%). Table 1 and 2 reveal a close correlation between all classes of vegetation and totals, with the one exception of browse in 1955. This reluctance to use the browse the first year may be due to our presence in the park early in the season when they normally use the large open parks. The elk did remain at the south end of the park usually near cover. There was also water, abundant food, and an old salting ground there. Statistics revealed no significant difference during the three years of study. This light utilization may be attributed to the distribution of smaller herds, use of abundant feed in the forest, and reluctance to use the heavy producing marshes which would tend to balance the use on lighter producing areas. Amount of Forage Consumed by Sheep: The mean sheep utilization during this same period was 4. 7 percent. Tables 1 and 2 again show a close correlation of sheep utilization during 1955 and 1956. However, in 1957, with the exception of browse, the consumption nearly doubled. As would be expected, statistics revealed no significant difference the first two years but highly significant difference in 1957. It is felt that again weather was the principal factor for this difference. Normally when the sheep arrive on this park the vegetation is beginning to dry out and they feed in 1I1eforest where forage is still green. In 1957, the vegetation was at the peak of production and much more attractive when they arrived. Other factors may be the difference in herding practices or between different investigators . . Comparisons Between Elk and Sheep: Tables 1 and 2 indicate considerable differences between elk and sheep use each year (Notice the Ratio column in Table 2) especially during 1957. The "Analysis of Variance" test proves a highly significant difference in use between the three years, ahighly significant difference between the two classes of animals, and a highly significant difference for the interaction of "class of animal" times "years". In other words, sheep ate more feed in the park than elk each year. By figuring the means mathematically, we find .that sheep ate over five times (5.2) as much as elk over the three year study. However, the total elk-sheep utilization during this time amounted to only 5.6 percent. It remained a little over four percent the first two years but increased to a little over nine percent in 1957. Competition was limited to a few concentration areas such as water holes and salting grounds. It was also noticed on several species of plants such as marsh-marigold, willow, and Carex spp. but was nothing serious. �-66- Elk Days of Use: " . ". . '. Elk days of use were determined from pellet counts made during the elk utilization survey and again after the removal of sheep. The number of groups counted were averaged per acre and projected to give the mean number on the study area. This figure was then divided by 13, the accepted number of groups deposited by one elk in one day, to give the days of use. The results are presented .in.T'able 3. Our primary interest is in the number of elk days before the arrival of livestock because it is during this early period of the season that the range is especially subject to damage by grazing and trampling. Any use after the sheep move down is incidental and has little effect on the range unless it is extremely heavy. Actually elk seldom return to the parks to feed once the sheep are there. Table 3 shows that the number of elk days doubled the second year (from 1,138 to 2,2.47 days) but was down again inJ957 (844 days). Our presence in the park the first year while establishing the study may have had some effect although elk continued to use the south end of the park until the sheep arrived. The second year a herd numbering nearly one hundred used the park early in the season but spent considerable time resting during the warm days. In 1957a herd of 61 was observed in the vicinity but the late growing season restricted their use of the park before the arrival of sheep. This year they returned to the park after the sheep left. The season of use is normally late June through mid-August. Range damage has been light and noticeable only on a few concentration areas. Thisis computed simply by multiplying the number of sheep (ewes) by the number of days on the area. Days of use has continued to decrease each year since the study began (from 10 days in 1955, 8 days in 1956, to 7 days in 1957). However, utilization .re-malned nearly the same the first two years and actually increased the third year. Again it is suspected that weather and its consequent effect upon the vegetation in the park is largely responsilie for this apparent anomaly. Sheep use is during the month of August. In 1955, the weather was warm and the feed in fair condition. In 1956, the weatherwas dry but cool and feed had dried considerably. In 1957, of course, the rainy weather had just broken and the-feed was in excellent condition. Differences in herding methods, each year there has been a different herder, and animal behavior are other factors which may influence utilization. Range damage was light and noticeable only on concentration areas such as bedgrounds, salting stations, and waterholes. 2. Expanded Study. ',' :'. ". This portion of the study was added to the Lost Solar study in 1956to broaden our perspective of conditions existing on the surrounding range. First year data appears in the Quarterly Report for April, 1957. �-67- The term "Multiple-Use Parks" is a reference to a composite of three dual-use parks: Doe Creek, Shingle Peak, and Park Creek. All statistical comparisons made within this segment of the report is .between this unit. The individual parks are presentedin tables 4, 5, and 6, only for comparison between themselves or with the wildlife area. These three parks comprise a total of 165 acres under study and there is a total of 250 plots on them. The wildlife area, Big Marvine, is off-limits to domestic livestock and was chosen to compare an area used primarily by elk with those used for both classes of animals. The Trappers Peak area was surveyed for the first time in 1957 and is not included in the statistical analysis. The first range survey was made between August 19th and August 24th at which time most of the vegetation had reached maturity. Sheep were already on the Doe Creek area, Trappers Peak area, and had been on the Park Creek area. The second, survey (utilization) was begun September 5th and was completed a week later. Since it was necessary to combine utilization figures in 1957, the data for 1956 has been re-analyzed so that statistical comparisons can be made. The "t" test was used to compare total forage production between_years; total utilization between years; and elk days of use between years. The sign (x), refers to the mathematical mean or average number of pounds per acre, elk-days, etc. computed from the sample and is the figure with which we are interested. The sign.L refers to the confidence limits or range, plus or minus, within which the actual or true means will fall nine times out of ten. SX, is merely an indication of the variability of our samples. Forage Production: Table 4 gives the forage production by vegetative classes and totals in pounds per acre for the expanded study. Upon examination of this table we find that production has decreased considerably in all parks in 1957. Production on the Multiple-Use parks amounted to 2,009 pounds per acre in 1956but fell to 860 pounds in 1957. As would be suspected, statistics reveal a highly significant difference does exist between these two years. This production figure is not a total of the three dual-use parks but an average. The principal factor causing this decrease was undoubtedly the weather and its effect on the growing season. Other factors which may have some bearing is the change if investigators and the activity of pocket gophers. Loss of vegetation to this animal has not been included under utilization. Forage production for 1957by volume weight was composed of 45. 1 percent grass and grass-like plants ( an increase from 1956); 54.2 percent forbs ( a decrease); and 0.7 percent browse (identical). �-68- , FORAGE PRODUCTION TABLEt! FROM: EXPANDED STUDY Pounds per acre Year ,Forbs Grass Browse Total x '" 5.9 i 3.7 x = 1902.0 -. ~:. 1956 x - Doe Creek Area 623.7 sx= 1957 ..J 55.3 x = 1212'.4 i.. '68.6 " si '" 34.6 SX = 1. 9 SX = 45. 6 x = 418. 9 i. 28.2 x = l6..J L 4 x = 788.5..J 55. 2 27.9 x = 368.0 ISX= 37.9 90.4 ..J SX = Cr'7 SX =14.2 19. 1 ss = 27.8 :Shingle Peak Area 1956 x = 702.5..J 84.3 x = 14.20.8l99.0 x=19.1..J1,7.1 x = 2142.4..J129.4 = 42.5 SX = 49. 9 SX = SX = 65. 2 SX 1957 x = SX 420. 6 ..J 56. 9 8. 6 x ~ 379.3..J x = 9.0 ..J 7.2 sX = Sx = 3.6 - 32.7 - = 28.7 16.5 x = 808.9..J Sx 66.9 = 33.7 Park Creek Area 1956 1957 x = 523.4 I- 105.6 sx= 52.6 x= x = 363.6..J x sx 1956 - = 388. 2 31. 9 ..J SX = 16.3 1956 x' = 724.0..J SX = 1957 19.4 i. 23. 9 SX = 11. 9 x = 1968. 2 ..J241. 3 = 734.4 ..J 151. 6 x = 8.6 ..J 10.0 x = 1106. 8 i 205. 0 -- 75.5 SX AVERAGE OF MULTIPLE 78.5 x =, 1365. '7 ..J105.5 = 40. 4 x x= SX 43.6 x = 629.2..J SX 1957 = 87.5 1425.4 i. 173.4 SX = 86.4 -- 5.0 = 6. 9 SX x = 466. 2..J 37. 8 X =5.9£3.5 SX = 19.3 41. 4 x = 537.8.1 88.4 SX = 44.0 ,* Restricted to wildlife use only. x = 37.8i. SX '" 57. 6 SX i = 529.2..J SX =33.3 66.9 = 20.0 SX 40.2 x = 32.4 ..J 38. 7 SX = 19.5 141. 8 72.4 x = 860.3..J 54. 5 SX = 1.8 x = 1421.6i115.6 x = 2009.1..J SX = Big Marvine Area * 83.1 = 120.2 SX = 102.1 -USE PARKS x _ 14.2..J 13.5 SX = 53. 8 SX = 27.8 x = 2183.4..J 175.3 SX = 87.3 x = 1099.4..J SX "" 79.2 159.2 �-69- TABLE 5 COMBINED ELK~ SHEEP UTILIZATION ON EXPANDED STUDY Pounds per acre Yea.r 1956 .Forbs Grass x = 72.8 i 12.8 Browse Total x = 2.4 i,1. 7 SX = 0.8 x = 193.9 I- 19.8 x -- 0.31- x x = 126.2 I- 16.8 x = 7.2 I- 5.6 x = 217.7 I- 35. 1 8K" = 8.5 SX = 2.8 SX = 17.7 .Doe Creek Area' x = 118. 7 I- 12.7 Sx = 6.5 1957 1956 x = SX = i 79.0 9. 5 SX 4.8 x = x = 40. 8.i 4.4 sX = 2.2 - 0.2 sx = 0.1 Shingle Pelk Area :: 84.3 I- 24. 1 Sx = 12.1 1957 6.4 x = 102.9 i 18.3 Sx = 9.2 x = 49.1 I- 6. 1 SX = 3.1 X = 2.0 SX = 10.0 - = 120. 1 I- 11. 1 = SX 5.6 1. 6 x = 154.0 I- 21. 1 6.6 x= T/ sx :: 0.8 Sx = 10.6 Park Creek Area 1956 '_ x = 64.8 i, 39.8 x :.; 47.8 I- 22.1 SX = SX = 19\ '8 1957 x = 45.3 I- 12. 2 SX = - x 6.6 SX = 33.6 i 6. 3 SX - x = 5.01- 11.0 x= 3.1 0.21-0.4 x = 75. 8.i SX= 1957 13. 2 x = x = 81. 8 I- 8.6 - x = 20.4 i 7.1 Sf = 3.5 1957 - = 2.9..1 2.1 SX = 1.0 x 10.1 x = 42.7 i, 2. 3 sX:; SX=4.4- 1956 107.5';' sx = 5.1 6.8 - SX 79. 1 i 15. 9 = 7.9 PARKS ABOVE x = 4.8 I- 2.6 SX x:;:: 188.2 I- 20.2 = -1. 5 x = 1. 0 I- 0.6 1.2 117.6iSO.4 SX = 30.1 x = = 0.2 SX AVERAGE OF MULTIPLE-USE 1956 = 3.3 SX., 10.3 x = 125.5..1 10.4 SX= 0.3 SX = 5.3 4.6 I- 5.6 x '" 74.01-17.4 BW Marvine Area ildlife Use Onl;y: x = 49.0 I- 12.3 SX = 6. 1 x = 9.6 I- 2.9 SX -- 1.5 x= SX = 2.8 x = 0.3 i 0.3 SX= 0.1 x Sf = 8.7 -:. 12.7 i 2. 9 Sf = 1.4 �-70- TABLE 6. ELK AND SHEEP DAYS OF USE ON .EXPANDED STUDY AREA YEAR PELLET GROUPS ELK DAYS OF USE 1956 26 X = 125.0 i.. 73.3 3,600 1957 9 x= 43.3 i.. 30.3 1,800 1956 2 x= 139.4 i.. 13.3 4,800 1957 29 X= - 139.4 I- 52.4 8,400 1956 17 x = 104.6 I- 57.4 4,000 1957 10 x= 61. 5 I- 39.4 3,200 SHEEP DAYS OF USE Doe Creek - Shingle Peak Park Creek ( AVERAGE OF MULTIPLE I- 77.0 12,400 x = 243.7 i.. 64.7 13,400 I- 37.5 None - - 139.4 i.. 54.3 None x = 228.5 1956 45 1957 48 1956 16 x = 76.9 1957 29 x 12 x = 83.1 . ;', Big Marvine ·Trappers USE PARKS ABOVE Peak 1957 . - - i.. 50.5 AVERAGE OF ALL FIVE PARKS EXCEPT 1957 102 900 BIG MARVINE x = 1,047.4 i.. 221.6 19,900 =- �-71- There was 844.3 pounds per acre (-I 133.3) of forage produced on the Trappers Peak area which is slightly less than the average. Forage production on all five parks except Big Marvine averaged 864.9 pounds <i 133.5). Elk-Sheep Utilization: Table 5 compares the combined elk-sheep utilization by vegetative class and totals tor each year. In 1957, grasses constituted 65. 2 percent of their: diet ( an increase from 1956); forbs, 34.0 percent; ( a decrease); and browse O. 8percent ( a decrease). By looking at the "average of multiple-use parks" bracket we see a close correlation between grasses in1956 and 1957and also between the browse. However, the sharp decrease in forb utilization is reflected in the totals column. The actual amount of forage eaten in1957 decreased from 188 pounds per acre to 125. Statistics revealed a highly significant difference. Although there was less forage eaten in 1957, the percent of utilization increased from 9.4 to 14.6. This can be explained by the fact that there was considerably less forage produced hence the difference between total production and total utilization was less in 1957than in 1956. Due to the short growing season both elk and sheep use on these large open parks were reduced during 1957. Early elk use was limited to several weeks before the sheep arrrved although they returned once the sheep had left. On areas where elk and sheep utilization was separated (Lost Solar, Big Marvine, and Shingle Peak) elk utilization remained about one or two percent while sheep utilization ranged from five to eighteen percent. When the sheep arrived on top the vegetation was short but mature and very attractive. They spent more time feeding on the large open parks and less time in the timber and smaller parks than usual. Sheep use was especially noticeable on the Shingle Peak and Doe Creek areas. Tot al utilization by elk and sheep on the Trappers Peak area averaged 80.3 pounds per acre( f 13.8) or 9.5 percent. An average of all five parks (excluding Big Marvine) shows a total utilization of 107.4 pounds per acres (t. 7.3) or 12.4 percent. - . Elk Days of Use: Table 6 is a comparison of the number of elk and sheep days of use on the expanded study. An average of the multiple-use areas indicates only a small increase in elk days of use, from 229 to 244, between the years 1956 and 1957. Statistical tests show that this difference is not great enough to prove significant and that the true mean is probably the same. The total number of pellet groups counted in1957 increased from 45 to 48. Elk days of use increased considerably on the Shingle Peak and Big Marvine areas but decreased on the Doe Creek and Park Creek areas. An interesting note on the Big Marvine wildlife area is that while elk utilization dropped from 74 pounds per acre to 13 pounds, elk days of use has nearly doubled. However, we are comparing figures derived from two entirely different sampling methods and a reliable �-72- comparison cannot be made. Sheep days of Use: In 1957, 'the Forest Service delayed sheep graz irg in.this area until 'the vegetation had an opportunity to mature. The sheepmen kept their normal date for shipment, hence the time that sheep spent on their allotments was less than usual. The sheep arrived on top August 6th and were headed down by September 10th. It was not possible to. observe each individual herd at the same time so information on sheep days wa~ obtained from the herders. Table 6 reveals that sheep days on 'the multiple-use areas increased slightly in 1957. However, further' examintion shows that Shingle Peak was the only park to increase and thatit has nearly doubled. Elk days of use on this park also increased and yet total utilization is down. It is felt that this figure may be too high although the ~ingle Peak areadid have the highest percent of utilization (19 percent) of any park in 1957. The herder on 'the Trappers Peak area was never contacted and sheep days on this area is estimated. Signs and observations of the sheep indicated only one day of use. This was about the same as the previous year. An average of all five parks with dual use indicates 1, 047 elk-days of use as compared to a total of 19,900 sheep days. 3. Pocket Gopher. Study. A pocket gopher study was initiated during the summer of 1957in conjunction with the range utilization survey. The principal objectives were (1) to determine relative abundance; (2) the amount of surface area denuded; and (3) the consequent effect on .the range. An extensive survey was made on all areas to show the relative abundance. This was done during the regular range surveys using the same plots. Old pocket gopher activity in each park ranged from 69 to 94 percent on the larger 1/I00acre plots. On the small plots .(9.6 square feet) it rangedfrom 31 to 74 percent. New activity during 1957was found on 40 to 63 p er.cent of the large plots and on 10 to 17 percent of the small ones. The percent of new activity may well have been higher if the survey had been taken later for gophers at this elevation appears to be more active in the fall. Statistical comparison of the area indicated a real difference between meadows. However, it revealed little difference between range conditions. A more intensive study was made on Lost Solar Park using line transects. One method of measuring composition was by "hits" at one foot invervals on the 100 foot tape. Another was by measuring a distance of ten feet within each transect. Both methods indicated gopher activity to be high compared to the amount of vegetation. �-73- The "hit" method revealed 31 percent gopher activity, 34 percent vegetation, 13 percent barren ground, and 22 percent litter. The "measuring" method disclosed 22 percent gopher activity, 34 percent vegetation, 12 percent barren ground, and 32 percent litter. This bears out the assumption of low range condition but the high percent of litter is encouraging in that it is an indication of a healing range. Recommendations: Results of three years of study indicate no important management problems concerning use by elk and sheep at the present time. Both animals use the vegetation in the timber as the parks dry up. The poor condition on some of the range is undoubtedly the result of past abuse and will require many years of favorable growing conditions before it can recuperate. As the reproduction in the forest eliminates the abundant food source now found there the animals will again be forced to rely upon the large parks for forage. Therefore it is recommended that: 1. The present study areas be marked, recorded, and put on a stand-by basis for future surveys. These can be run periodically to check for excessive range use and to determine the trend of range condition. Time intervals between surveys can be decided by responsible personnel from frequent and careful observations. 2. Pocket gophers may be minimizing range recovery. When and if current studies discover practical control measures these may be applied as a mears of hastening recuperation. 3. A search should continue for other areas where competition exists and studies initiated if the conditions warrant. More facts should be obtained on animal behavior and how it affects the range . . REFERENCES: Williams, Thomas R. 1957. The abundance of pocket gopher activity in subalpine meadows of the Flat Tops Wilderness Area, White River National Forest. (unpubl, ) Problems course, Colorado State Univeraity, Nichols, Lyman Jr. 1957. M. S. thesis, unpubl., Colo. State Univ. Prepared by: Donald G. Smith Date: ~J~u~ly~,_l~9~5~8 ~----- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��J• ..1I1illIDj~&~~ll~~ml~I' My, l~~~j_ -75- / ." . J,OBCOMPLETI()N;.:.R:Epq:R~ . " INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No> W-38-R-ll. -_ .3 -----....-~~-~------..:.--.,... Job No. . ',', "~ '_ ",',. . ' . ,~itle, Rodent Effects on Deer Winter Range. .'Period C~vered: May 1, 1957 t~ March 31, 1958.. ' Abstract: .' : .' .- ...: .. .. ~.-' ' .', -. -;.' :~,'~', i. .. 13 -<.,.............. ,...-..~".,....,.~:, ,':. ~ .. ~•. ..;" .••••.. -'..,'""!.•••••... .,...•. . ",' .-.0 .. - .."'.-. 'r '. : - ".:' ~- .•••••. ""••••. :".-'." ... ~ ." ..• ',' ." ,'.',: -, .•••..•••. "..,..., . :' ~ Deer' - tik Irivestigations " . :.Work PI"anN<:;. " v :'. :-: , ' ;)' ..." 1. The Rodent Effects on Deer Winter Range Study is being undertaken to le~rii how" rodents affect the composition, ground cover, and reproduction of vegetation .in a pinon.:"'junipertype deer range, with particular emphasi"s on bro~se plants.'" .... 2: ~n This. ''''progress report" is an account of the second year's work the 'study .. It is~" yet too early' for any data showing results of rodent C;d~tr~{to have' been obtained. .., .. 3, During the summer and fall of 1957the systematic collection of data was begun and rodent control measures started. ~: -, 4~ A 3-acre control area was established adjacent totlie :rocle~rkxci'o~ure con~tfucte'd. the previous year. .. ..... . . .... .' . . . - ;, ',. _- ;:_. 5. Line intercepts were established within the exclosure and the control area, and these were run for the first time. The method of Parker andSavag~ wasused, 'and it is explained in detail. .' .: .' ",..... . .' •• ; :: .- .• < - •..• < . , ~ ~;. - ': Deer pellet-group plots were established in the exclosure 'and 'contr()1:area, and pellet-group data was collected to provide an indication bf"a~ounf~ (kdee~'tise within the two areas. .. ' . :.'.,~'::_':" ,-.:~ . ." .-. 6. ',',' 7. Photographic plots were established within the exclosure 'aJ{dcontrol at~a to provide aphotog raphic record of vegetative changes. ' ,,'.: " '. '.' . , .. ' u.s~ 8." An herbarium was started to provide a reference plant cbl1~6t;id~for iJ1the ready and positive identification of plants measured aiorlg'11ne'inte'rcepts, .... -. ..•. ,', ' .:- ":' .:.-' 9. Rodent trapping was begun within the exclosure tb eifue'f "exterrriinateo~.control the rodents it contained. It was found that most of the rodehts ehteflywhite-footed mice, had escaped from the exclosure during the period between the completion of the , fence and the beginning of trapping. Tests showed that the rodent population outside the exclosure was much larger than it was inside. �-7-6- It is recommended that in future years a yearly census of rodents be made in the vicinity of the study, using the standardized sampling procedure of the North American Census of Small Mammals. 10. The Problem: Deer winter ranges in many areas are becoming depleted. Woody shrubs are dying and are not being replaced by seedlings. Game biologists have become accustomed to arbitrarily saying that overuse by big game is the cause. In Mesa Verde National Park, in southwestern Colorado, dead bitterbrush plants have been found girdled by rodents. Rodent damage to browse plants has also been observed elsewhere, and it is suspected that rodents may be largely responsible for the scarcity of seedlings of bitterbrush and mountain mahogany, in particular. Observed evidence suggests that rodents may be a.very important factor in winter game - range deterioration. In any sound program of game-range management all of the factors contributing to range use and deterioration should be taken into consideration, including the effects of rodents. A study is needed to learn what effect rodents have on deer ranges in southwestern Colorado. Objective: study how rodents affect the composition, ground cover, and reproduction of vegetation in a pinon-juniper type deer range, with particular emphasis on browse plants. Methods: 1. Review pertinent literature. 2. Fence a three-acre portion of pinon-juniper deer range with a rodent-proof fence high enough to exclude rodents, yet permit the entrance of deer. (This phase of the project was accomplished during the fall of 1956). Fence Specific;:ations: 1. Posts -- 5 ft. steel, spaced 10 ft. apart. 2. Fence wire -- galvanized hardware cloth, 1/4 inch mesh, 23 gauge," 48 in ches wide. 3. Construction -- Construct the fence so that the top of the hardware cloth is app roximately 22 inches above the ground. Two inches above that, fasten a single strand of heavy-gauge smooth wire to prevent deer from riding the fence down. At the top edge of the hardware cloth secure a 10 inch band of 29 gauge galvanized sheet iron to prevent rodents from climbing over the fence. Extend the hardware cloth 15 inches below the ground, ending in an outward projection 11 inches wide, to prevent rodents from entering the exclosure by digging under the fence. 4. stake out a three-acre control plot near the rodent exclosure which will be comparable to it with respect to plant composition and exposure. The control plot will receive no treatment. �-77- TABLE 1. --NUMBER OF PELLET GROUPS COUNTED. Rodent Exclosure Plot Pellet Age No. Summer Older Date Plot No. :3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 . 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 3 0 0 6 2 1 0 0 0 4 1 0 ._5 .1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 1 T()tal 39 Ave. 1.11 Date 1957 1957 1 2 Pellet Age Summer Older 17 2 1 26 -31 15 3 3 3 21 17 4 21 5 3 1 7 10 8 1 3 0 12 3 2 8 8 7 16 13 6 10 8 12 1 308 8.80 9-13 9-16 9-13 9-13 9-16 9-13 9-13 9-12 9-12 9-16 9-12 9-13 9-12 9-16 9-13 9-12 9-12 9-13 9-12 9-12 9-16 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-16 9-13 9-13 9-12 9-13 9-12 9-12 9-13 9-16 9.-16 9-12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Total Ave. 1 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 4 0 3 1 4 4 0 0 0 0 1 6 5 5 9 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 57 1.62 4 33 2 6 9 3 1 8 9 1 9 2 13 22 18 6 17 8 4 13 15 6 17 18 17 10 24 6 7 8 5 7 6 6 19 359 10.25 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-16 9-17 9-17 9-17 9-17 9-17 9-18 9-18 9-18 9-18 9-19 9-18 9-20 9-20 9-20 9-20 9-19 9-18 9-18 9-19 9-19 9-20 9-19 9-20 �-78- 5. Establish permanent line intercepts inside each plot to provide a measure of the composition and cover density prior to, during, and following rodent controls. (a). Randomly locate line intercept sample units within the two plots: in length and number sufficient to provide a sample as free of sampling error and bias as practical. (b). Prior to rodent controls and each year thereafter, collect composition and density data from the line intercepts and record the data on appropriate printed forms. Collect line intercept data in July of each year, beginning in 1957. 6. Establish permanent photo stations within each of the two plots from which to obtain a yearly photographic recordof the vegetation. 7. Establish pellet-group plots inside experimental and control plots from which to obtain data on the year to year fluctuations of deer use and, if possible, of rodent use, also. Make these counts on approximately the same date each July or August for the duration of the study. (a). Randomly locate pellet-group plots in a manner to provide a 'sample as free of sampling error and bias as practical. 8. After initial line-intercept measurements have been made, begin exterminating rodents within the rodent exclosure by trapping and other means. (a). Keep records of the kinds and numbers of rodents taken. If necessary continue rodent control measures for the duration of the study. 9. .In areas surrounding the plots dig up dead browse plants to determine what percentage of them were killed from girdling by rodents. Correlate yearly precipitation with data from line intercepts, precipitation records to be obtained from Mesa Verde National Park weather station. 11. Assemble, compile, and statistically analyze data collected. 12. Determine the effect of rodents on game range by: (a). Comparison of line intercept, pellet-group, and photographic data from control and rodent exclosure plots. (b) Correlation of yearly precipitation with line intercept data. (c). Observations on the numbers of browse plants found girdled by rodents. 13. Prepare a report of findings when justified. 10. �-79- RESEARCHPROGRESSANDACCOMPLISHMENT 1957 INTRODUCTION This is the second of a series of reports on a study expected to continue for a period of years before the stated objectives are fully accomplished. Therefore, it is a Job Completion Report only in .that it reports the completion of one year of work toward the final goal set for the study. At the present early stage of the investigation the most a report can accomplish is to indicate the progress made, explain methods used, and record the data collected. No "results of study" will be possible until the data for the summer of 1958have been collected. This, then, might be called a progress report. The first report, which was published in the Quarterly Progress Report of the Federal Aid Division for July, 1957, is an account of the location and construction of the rodent exclosure. PLOT ESTABLISHMENTANDUSE Control Plot A control plot equal in size to the rodent exclosure was established. It is located due north of the rodent exclosure; its south end is the north end of the rodent exclosure, and its west and east sides are continuations of the sides of the exclosure. The corners' of the control plot are marked by five-foot steel posts. The control plot appears to be comparable to the exclosure with respect to vegetative composition, density, slope, and exposure. It has an area of 3 acres. Line Intercepts Thirty-five line intercepts were staked out in both the exclosure and the control plot. Their locations within the plots were determined randomly by the following means: Maps were made of the plots and these were marked off in 10-meter squares. Each square was numbered, and numbered pieces of paper corresponding to the 117 numbered squares for each plot were placed in a box, shuffled, and 35 withdrawn. The numbers of squares withdrawn determined the location of intercepts. The southeast corner of a square was made the point for one end of the intercept it contained. Intercepts were run diagonally across a square, from southeast to northwest corners. (Figures 1-2). Actual location of the intercepts in the plots was accomplished by running grid lines with a surveyor's compass and chaining off the location of 10-meter squares. The diagonal alignment of the intercepts was adhered .to-unlesa such placement would have run the intercept through the trunk of a tree or similar obstruction, in which event the line of intercept was swung 5 degrees southward. Each intercept is 10 meters long and is permanently marked at each end by an orangecolored steel stake to which is attached an embossed aluminum intercept number tag. �-80Intercept data collection. --The intercept method of Parker and Savage as .developed at the Southern Great Plains Field Station, Woodward, Oklahoma has been chosen for use in the study. The sampling unit is a narrow belt transect 10 meters long. For grasses and forbs it is considered 1 centimeter wide, for shrubs 10 centimeters wide. The method consists of measuring in centimeters the peripheral spread of the foliage cover of shrubs and the actual ground cover of all other species of vegetation directly under and parallel with a tightly stretched steel wire cable 3/64 inchin diameter and 10 meters long. Including that part of the cable extending beyond the stakes marking the ends of the intercept, the cable is 10.6 meters long. A harness swivel snap is attached.to each end of the cable. Into these are snapped a 1 1/4 inch diameter ring at one end and a .short, coil spring with attached 1 1/4 inch diameter ring at the other end. An equal distance from each end of the cable are balls of solder which are grooved with a file to indicate the ends of a 10 meter length -- the intercept length. Through the rings are slipped round, solid, steel pins, 1 inch in diameter and 60 inches long, sharpened at one end. They are driven firmly into the ground and the cable stretched tightly between them so as to bring the balls of solder marking the ends of the intercept directly against the north sides of the intercept marker stakes. The cable is then raised to the upper level of the shrubs. As soon as the line transect is established in this manner, with the aid of an assistant to the record the data, the biologist measures along the wire the portion of the foliage cover of all shrubs that lies within 5 centimeters each side of a vertical - plane projection of the wire. Used for this purpose is a push-pull steel rule 2 meters long and graduated in centimeters. When branches of the shrubs are as close as or closer than 10 centimeters apart, they are considered to represent solid foliage cover. Whentheir proximity to each other exceeds 10 centimeters, the various parts are measured independently and the spaces between considered as blanks. All branchlets of anyone shrub measured in this manner are totaled by the biologist and announced as one figure to the recorder. This provides a tabulated record of the foliage density (cover) and the actual number of plants of every shrub occurring on the line within a strip 10 centimeters wide and 10 meters long. After the shrubs are measured, they are pushed aside and the wire is lowered as close to the ground as possible. This is done easily and quickly by the biologist and assistant working together, simultaneously slipping the rings down the pins at opposite ends of the wire. The next step consists of measuring immediately below and along the wire that portion of the actual ground cover of every species of grass, sedge, and forb that lies within 1/2 centimeter each side of a vertical-plane projection of the wire, within a str'Ip 1 centimeter wide and 10 meters long. These measurements are made most accurately by straddling the wire and using flat, mild steel rules 50 centimeters long and 1/8 inch thick. The rules are pushed with ease along the ground through the crowns of dense plants. �"1'0r-j J,_F:"-= : .~. -81- When the ground surface parts of any herbaceous plant situated along and beneath the wire are as close or closer than 1 centimeter apart, they are considered to occupy the soil surface completely, to represent solid vegetation ground cover. One centimeter is arbitrarily allowed as the ground surface measurement for every single-culmed species whose diarrete r is less than 1 centimeter. Since this often gives to such plants an actual space nearly 1/2 centimeter on either side of the culm, a corresponding space 1/2 centimeter long is arbitrarily allowed to each side of the ground surface periphery of plants having several stems or other ground surface portions situated close enough together to constitute solid cover. When the basal portions of anyone plant are farther apart than 1 centimeter, they are measured separately and the space-between is considered a blank. These separate measurements, read to the nearest centimeter, for one plant are totalled by the biologist and recorded as one figure on the transect sheet, which thereby provides a complete record of density and actual number of plants occurring onthe line. The centimeter readings for each species are totalled and a direct reading of its percentage of cover on the 10 meter line is obtained by moving the decimal point one-place to the left in the total for that species. The percentage of total vegetation represented by each species is readily computed from the total of percentages of all species. The number of readings automatically shows the species present on each transect line· and the number of individuals (Table 2). In recording these data the vegetation is grouped into trees, browse, grasses, and forbs. The data for trees is necessarily inaccurate and is not used in determining the percent vegetative cover, but only to indicate the extent to which the site is a pinon-juniper type. Intercepts of tree foliage are obtained by projecting a line from tips of branches to the cable by holding the stiff, extended, tape vertically between the two. It is not anticipated to attempt any correlation between rodent use and tree cover density. The intercepts were run during the period August 19to September 10, excepting aifew that were rechecked to incorporate desirable changes in procedure the latter-part of October. Pellet-group Plots Thirty-five pellet -group plots were established in both the exclosure and the control area. The plots are circular, having a radius of 11 feet 9 inches and an area of 1/100 acre. In each case the center of a plot is the northwest end of a line intercept unless this location interferes with an adjoining plot or the fence of the exclosure; in which event, the opposite end of the line intercept becomes the center of the pellet plot. The steel stake marking the end of the intercept and the center of the pellet plot is tagged with an embossed aluminum tag to indicate the plot number. Pellet-group data collection. -- At the time of data collection the boundary of a plot was described by a line drawn on the ground with a pointed stick fastened at the end of a small cable of proper radius, using the plot-center stake as the pivot around which to describe the circular boundary. The pellet-groups of deer were picked up, counted, and thrown out of the plots. They were identified as from the summer of 1957 or older. These data are shown in .Table L They will provide a means of judging comparative deer use inside the exclosure and the control area, and they will be collected yearly on or about the same date. �LINE INTERCEPT RECORD FORM Colorado Game and Fish Department Table 2. Sheet No. Pr-oject or Study: Rodent effects on pinon-juniper range Date: __ l \. ..;.9..;.~_I_I_-5_7_.,...... __ ..••.• _ 4 Location: Rodent exclosure ---------------------~----------~-------~Slope (direction and per cent) :. ...;.;S;.;,._;;;;E;,;... _5;;"%~ ~~ __ ---iLin€l intercept No. Soil Texture: __ .•.. S.•.. a_;.nd,;;;;,y.:....;;c_;;;I,;;;;,ay"--Examiner: __ H..;.a_r..;.o .•.. ld_,_R..;.._Sh_e_.p ••. h_e_.f .... d . Browse . Spp. s±mbol Ptr 2 39 10 54 .' 42 Cde 5 Atrr 8 5 15 ,. Centimeter readings on a 10-meter line) Grass~s Forbs Kcr 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 Total per cent density (cover) 16.7 ,5 .8 Per cent compoaition 62.4 1. 9 3.0 3.7 No. of Plants 7 1 1 Note: _ 1. 0 9 Cum eSB 1 6 3 2 Plo 3 4 1 1 1 3 2 4 3 3 Uc 3 2.5 .3 .4 1.7 1.4 .3 .3 9.3 1.1 1.5 6.3 5.3 1.1 .a.; 1 3.4100.0 10 1 2 2 3 3 ~ LIe 2 2 Esu 5 12 Pca 6 4 4 Grand Total Psa 1 1 1 \ This is a sample data form to show manner of data recording. comprises 70 such sheets, one for each plot. ,9 26.8 .2 The ortginal data '=' �RODENT EXCLOSURE Fig. 1. Line Intercept, Pellet Plot, and Photographic I . "='" I--~ I5 r- I - ~ ~ _J Not to scale Photographic plot Unmarked IO-meter square Pellet plot and intercept number Intercept Pellet plot center Plot Locations �CONTROL AREA Fig. 2. Line Intercept, Pellet Plot, and Photographic Plot Locations , . 1_t\J ~ I , o g 43~"----------------------~ 3i- ~Photographic 1 I· IL 2 ._ I ...• _I Not to scale plot Unmarked la-tor square Pellet plot and intercept number Intercept Pellet plot center �Figure 3. --Photographic plot, showing use and placement of grid background. �-83- Photographic Plots Two photographic plots were established in the rodent exclosure and 2 in the control area. Their locations are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Their purpose is to attempt to show photographically changes which may occur inthe vegetation due to rodent control. They were not selected at random but sites were selected which seemed to be comparable. Figure 3 is one of these plots, showing the grid background which will be used for all pictures taken of the plots in the future. ' PLANT IDENTIFICATION Reference Plant Collection To provide a means of positively identifying the plants found along line intercepts, a collection of plants was begun. These were collected mainly. from the vicinity of the study. These will be identified, mounted on herbarium cards, and filed systematically. An attempt will be made to collect representatives of each of the plants found within the study areas. RODENT CONTROL Trapping A trapping program to exterminate rodents within the exclosure was begun August 21 and continued .until October 16. During the most of this period, 84 kill traps and 49 live traps were in operation within the 3-acre exclosure. The live traps were baited with pieces of apple and oatmeal. The kill traps were baited with peanut butter and oatmeal. The traps were spaced about 30 feet apart in parallel rows 30 feet apart. Trap rows were marked with string strung back and forth the length of the exclosure, and the individual trap sites were marked with strips of cloth tied to bushes or trees above or near the trap. Traps were visited and rebaited daily for the first 9 days. Then a week elapsed when the traps were sprung. This was followed by 9 days of trapping. Irregular and intermittent trapping was done during the rest of the time until the traps were taken up, October 16. Only 2 general kinds of rodents were caught. These were white-footed mice and chipmunks. The white-footed mice are probably of at least 2 species. Positive identification to species is yet to be obtained. Although the diggings .of pocket gophers occurred within the control area, none were found inside the exclosure. Twenty white-footed mice Peromyscus spp. were trapped from the exclosure and only 3 chipmunks Eutamias spp. Twelve of the mice were caught the first 4 days. The apparent scarcity of mice within the exclosure was surprising. It was surmised that most o~the mice originally within the exclosure had escaped sometime during the period between completion of the fence and the beginning of trapping, December 7, 1956 to August 22, 1957. �C-:~~-:_~~ ~...::: r...•." -84- ' Fence construction was such that mice and other rodents could easily climb up and over the fence from the inside but could not get back in from the outside. A test was conducted to see if the mice population was greater on the outside of the exclosure than within it. Twenty-four live traps were set outside the exclosure just to the south of it. These were spaced and baited in the same manner as were 24 live traps set inside the exclosure, In addition to the 24 live traps, there were also 84 kill traps set inside the exclosure. For 3 days all traps inside and outside the exclosure were kept baited and they were reset and baited daily. During this period the 108 traps within the exclosure caught nothing, but the 24 traps outside the exclosure caught 22 white-footed mice-- 9 the first day, 8 the second, and 5 the third day. Thus it appears that the mice population is much greater outside than inside the exclosure, and this probably results from their having escaped from the exclosure. Further evidence suggesting that the mice population is much greater outside resulted from a few days of trapping in an area about 300 yards away to obtain live rodents for the live rodents for the U. S.· Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Research Laboratory. During a 7 - day period 70 white footed mice were caught with 49 live traps. A crate of 53 mice was air expressed to the Wildlife Research Laboratory in Denver for identification and experimental purposes. These were in exchange for the use of live traps provided by the Laboratory. RECOMMENDATIONS To provide a means of estimating the rodent population outside the exclosure and the :year-to-year fluctuation, permanent trap lines in the general vicinity of the study should be established. Using these, a yearly census should be made following the standardized sampling procedure of the North American Census of Small Mammals. Prepared by: Harold R. Shepherd Date :. ......;J;;.;;u;;;l""'yi-, ..:.19;;.5:;.;8;;.._ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~-_ �-85':" . ! JOB COMPLETION REPORT '.-; ' .. ', : State of .. INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS' . COLORADO Project No. ..,.... ·...:,W.;..-....;3:;,;8;..-.,;;R;.;.-....;1:;,:1;.._·_~ ,_..J...._=De;.;;.;;;;e.;;.r,....;.=E;;;.lk;;;.· ..;;In;;;;'~v.;;.e;;.st;,;;i;g,g=at,;;;;i;.;;o=n;;;.s.;.. .......•.....• _-.-_ .....• ~ . ( . Title; __ . .....• __,....·....;F::;..;:;;a.;;.te;..··..;;o;;;.f..;;K;;;;.e;:;,y~b;.:r;.;:o;.;.w;,.;s:;.;e:;....=s.p.;;.e.;;;.c,;,;ie;;.;s;;.;;...._ ....,...._.,..... -~---~ _ Period Covered: " Abstract' May 1, 1957 to March 31, '., ... :,"; ':', : j:.' . :,' 1958. . .;: ,";' ... ;__ .... _. . '.. ,,. .... .'. ":" ..' . .'. :.' '. . ... . .' :. ". All standing big sagebrush plants were aged by counting annual rtngs on stem and taproot 'sections on two trial fifty by one foot belt transects. Ullsymmetr'ic~l habits Of stem arid root growth plus other factors not accounted for produced inaccuracy in setting ages for 'plaiits.'/Averag~·3.ge atdeathwas determined, butthe results proved unreliable for purposes of-predicting longevity of plants. .... ' "An-age c';:rrip~sitiori of ~rbitrarily arranged age groups 'was compiled from:each·tran~~ct. Results lite Ii~g-a:tivefrom this preliminary investlgatiorr on big sagebrush inasmuch as the 'plailt"does notiend'itself to accurate aging under field condtttons.ypartfcula.rlyIn., the 61de:fciasses. 'Further difficulty arose in attempting to interpret' the meager and" highly v~riable- data: ., . .'. ,., , " .... ,.' . -: , : of Objective: To 'explore the possibility of predicting, the f3:te a 'browse species' subjected .' , to a particular degree of range use by means of the age composition <f the plant· population and other methods. Procedures: Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) was chosen as the key browse species to work with first because it is generally considered .to.be one of the most important plants in the winter diet of the deer over large areas 'Ofthe critical western slope ranges. Alorig with its common occurrence, it tends to have fairly even distribution of the plants' whereit does occur which is a prime requisite for the proper sampling necessary'iIi applying statistical tests. ,- . " c' . "Another' :r~ason' why big' sagebrush was selected for study is ,t4at it' does. not reproduce , vegetatively,' fhu~ the problem of-determining which' stem or. stems ptcktorepresent , iildividUal plants under consideration for aging is by-passed. It was foreseen that most : of theimportaIit brow~e species 'reproduce vegetatively toforrn either a closelybunched Ihulti -~teinmed type of plant form such' as in the case of mountain mahogany' and serviceberry, or a multi-stemmed thicket characteristic of oakbrus'h and snowber-ry. Under' to �-86optimum conditions for growth, serviceberry frequently forms thickets, also. The procedure as set up in the job work plan called for a study area in the Gunnison or' Upper Arkansas River drainage on a unit of depleted range. Since developing the field technique of aging plants by counting annual rings of sections of stems and/ or taproots posed the first problem, it was decided that for the preliminary work, at least, condition of the browse range study area and the big sagebrush plants was not important. Therefore, a uniformly dense stand of sagebrush in good condition south of Poncha Pass on National Forest Land was chosen as the site for preliminary investigations. The exact description of the location was not determined, but the area upon which the transects were placed appeared to fall in the E 1/2 NE 1/4 of Section 20, Township 48 North, Range 8 East, New Mexico Principal Meridian~ This is in northern Saguache County. Originally, a line transect was decided upon for use in sampling the sagebrush plants. This system was discarded in favor of a belt transect because it was thought that a bias might occur with a line favoring the larger plants out of proportion to the numbers that would actually occur in the stand. The size of the belt transect used then was 50 feet in length by 1 foot in width. The two trial transect locations were not selected in a true random manner inasmuch as this preliminary study was decided for use only in developing and refining techniques in aging the plants. It was decided that the direction of the transect would be perpendicular to the slope with the transects to be contained inside of the sagebrush type which had not been disturbed when the upper portions of the area had been reseeded to crested wheatgrass some time in the past by the Forest Service. Also, the transects were placed so that they were on what appeared to be similar densities of sagebrush to see how much variation in numbers of plants might be expected between the transects under these conditions. Equipment used consisted of a hack saw, D-handle shovel, hand lenses, pocket knife, single bit axe, two 5 1/2 foot transect rods, and a 52 foot length cf flexible aircraft cable with 50 feet marked off on it. These latter 3 items were used previously in doing line interception studies (Baker, 1957). In actual operation, a transect rod was driven at the location of the starting point of the transect as selected. The ring on the transect wire was then looped onto the sliding adjustable hook on the rod, and the wire cable was stretched out over the tops of the sagebrush plants. The other transect rod was driven after the end ring of the cable was placed on the hook and moderate tension put on the cable. Any additional slack was removed in the cable by moving the adjustable sliding hook clamps up and down on the rods keeping the wire cable at crown top level. The belt was considered to be on the right side cf the cable going from the zero to the 50 foot end. A distance of 1 foot was marked on the hack saw so that it could be used as an easy reference in checking the width of the belt, A plumb bob was dropped from the 1foot mark on the saw held horizontally against the cable to enable a check on the placement of the sagebrush plants when decisions were necessary regarding placement of plants relative to the transect. " , �-87= .prowns of individual plants were ruled out for use in determining if plants were on the plots for the same reason that a belt transect was favored over the line transect. If any part of the main stem of a plant was inside of the transect boundary it was cons idered to be Insideof the plot. The main stem was considered to be that portion of the plant stem below the first lateral branch. Many sage plant main branches become decumbent with increased age, and occasionally with old plants, the first lateral branches are buried by accumulated litter and soil. When this occurred, all stem branches, alive or dead, were severed with the saw at ground level. And counts were made of the annual rings of each branch sectton. Or~narily, the main stem or main branches were cut off at an angle at ground level with the saw, or knife, if the plants were young and stems small. If a single main stem was involved, the underground portion of the plant was excavated intact immediately. A sharp pocket knife blade was employed to cut the cross section, and the annual rings were tallted on the severed end or section which had been cut at ground level. Hand lenses were used.to aid in .making the count. Another section was made at a point halfway between the cut (ground level) end and the first lateral root. Annual rings were then counted on this section and recorded as being for the taproot. As was stated in the previous paragraph, If more than one main branch was cut at ground level, each of the branches was aged by counting the annual rings on the section at the severed branch base. The numbers of annuaLdngs for each main branch were recorded separately and notations made as to whether the branch was alive or dead. All plants, _alive, partially alive, and totally dead, were aged where possible. Dead . plants detached from their underground parts were not considered part of the stand were not aged. Taproots of standing dead plants usually were rotted out to the extent that they were unusable for aging even though stem sections were sound or fairly so when cut at ground level. The annual rings were counted on the longest radii. This was necessitated by the unsymmetrical habit of growth of the sagebrush stems. Cross sections were made to angle sharply with the stem in order to enlarge the rings and facilitate counting with hand lenses. �-88- Findings: One of the first things that was noted in the field as the annual rings of stem and taproot sections were being counted was the variability in the numbers of rings counted for those two sections on each plant. Actually, the locations of the sections were not very far apart on the stem since the stem section was made at ground level, and the taproot section was made midway between ground level and the first lateral' root. Also, there was no consistency in the manner of which the ring counts differed, some stem sections being older than .the taproot sections, and vice versa. It should be mentioned, however, that many stem and taproot sections had the same number of rings. When differences did occur with the two rfng counts, the higher (or highest, if multiple main stem branches were aged) one was considered to be the age of the plant. The live plants were grouped arbit rarily into eight age classes from seedlings through plants 46 years and older (Table 1). Table 1. -- Summary of Data from 2 Sagebrush Age Composition Transects, August, 1957. Total Number of Plants Number of Dead Plants Percent of Total Plants Aged Average Age of Dead Plants Age at Death of Plants, Extremes in Years Number of Live Plants with one or more Dead Main S~em .Branches Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Seedlings, Age Class I Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Plants 2-5 years, Age Class II Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Plants &- 15 years, Age Class ill Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Plants 16-25 years, Age Class IV Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Plants 26-35 years, Age Class V Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Plants 36-45 years., Age Class VI Percent of Total Live Plants Number of Plants 46 years and over, Age Class VII Percent of Total Live Plants Oldest Plant, Years July- Transect #1 59 3 5.08 20.33 Transect #2 51 8 15.67 25.14 6 and 46 6 and 46 10 17.86 22 37.29 2 3.57 3 6.98 13 30.23 2 4.65 13 23.21 16 37.21 11 19.82 1 1.78 4 7.14 3 5.36 59 7 16.28 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 11.63 66 �-89- The seedlings, as classified, were all believed to have been plants that had sprouted and developed within the current summer season of growth. Conditions were excellent for seedling propagation during the summer. Similar climatic factors had been absent for so many years that the chances for error in aging these plants was believed to have been negligible. The average age at death for plants on the two transects carry little meaning because the spread in years between the individual plants is so great. An analysis of the total population would have to be approached before a valid representative figure could be arrived at. Also, this problem is compounded by the error in aging plants with partially rotten stems and roots . ( • '=" . Discussion and Recommendations: Although the two transects exhibit somewhat s imflar age compositions with several plants in each of the younger age groups, it would be difficult to say what the present trend is on the face of this evidence, Assuming that this sagebrush stand is at or near its maximum density and that competition is the limiting factor in reproduction, the only statement that could be made from the age compositions as derived, would be that the sagebrush stand appears to be in good condition. Certainly the younger plants predominate and will replace older plants as the latter leave the stand. Also, it would be impossible to predict how long the stand would survive if for some reason all hit one of the age groups were removed and there was no further reproduction. Factors of plant disease and climatic change could act to substantially shorten .or lengthen the anticipated maximum life span of the plants with the intensity of browsing remaining the same. Another factor which would seem to limit further use of the methods employed is the great amount of time necessary to age the plants. Two weeks were required to do the two trial transects. If this number of transects had been increased to permit greater accuracy; full time would have to have been allowed for this job which was not possible. This time factor alone could preclude use of the system eventually by range and game managers on routine range evaluation work. It is recommended that the methods used in the preliminary trials of determining age composition be discontinued for sagebrush. If a different approach cannot be found to obtain the answers for sagebrush, another species of browse can be chosen for future investigations. REFERENCES Baker, B.. D. 1957. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept., Colo. Dept. of Game and Fish, July, pp. 95-96. Prepared by: B. D. Baker . Date: J;;,.u;;,;l;oL,y.l., •...;1;.;;9,.;;;5.;;;,8 __---- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July, 1958 -91- JOB COMPLETION REPORT lNVESTIGATIONSPROJ~TS State of._.;...__..;;C;.,;O;;.;L:;,;O:;,;R;;,;;A;:.:,.;;;OO..;:;_------projectNo.~ __~VV~-~3~8-~R~-~1~1------------~~D~e~e~r~-~E~1~k~I~n~v~e~s~ti.g~a~tl~·o~n~s~ __~~~--- Work Plan No. Title: ,:;:3 .z.._...:J::.;0::;::b~N:.;::0~. _ __;:1~6:..._ _.__-_ The Value of .Internode Counts in.Determining Browse Utilization Period Covered: May 1, 1957to March 31, 1958. Objectives: Explore the possibility of determining the percentage utilization of browse annual stem &Towthby a compar iso.n of.the number of internodes left uneaten with a number of typical for the species. Procedure: During the winter and early spring of 1957-58, current-growth stems of oakbrush, serviceberry, and mountain mahogany were collected for laboratory study. These will supplement those collected during the winter of 1956-57. The stems were collected from plants growing in different locations, at various elevations, and from diffe.rent exposures. Ten plants of each species were sampled at each locality, and 10 stems were clipped from different parts of each plant sampled. In addition to the stems, terminal buds were collected after the same fashion as were the stems. Buds were preserved in an FAA killing .... .fixing solution for possible later embedding and sectioning. A bibliography card file was begun, and considerable study was made of proper techniques. Findings: .From lack of time no laboratory work was done on the study. All of the work done on the study to date has been preparatory and exploratory. stem and bud collections made for two years provide a part, perhaps all, of the materials needed for the determinations planned for in the job outline. A beginning has been made, but much more work will have to be done before any results can be stated or any conclusions drawn with respect to the objectives of the study. Recommendations: During the project year 1958-59, node counts should be made on the two-years' collection of stems. It seems likely that these alone will be sufficient to satisfy the objectives of the study without the sectioning of terminal buds. If time permits, additional stems should be collected. Prepared by: Date:__ Harold R. Shepherd __,.__ J~u_l.y"",...;1;.;..9.;.5.;.8_ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan .'Federal Atd Coordinator ��July, 1958 -93- JOB CQMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS Smteof -~C~O~L~O~R~A~D~-~O __ ~~---------- ProjectNo. ~VV~-3~8~-~R~-~11~-----------...-~------~D~e~e~r~-~E~I=k~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t~io~ Work Plan No._"""!""'_~6~"""!""'_--"""!""'-.......,j:....--J~0;;.;.b;...;;.N;..;;0.;.."""!""'-~1----~--..,.,...Title. Methods of Evaluating Deer and Elk Damage to Alfalfa in the Spring. Period Covered: May 1, 1957to March 31, 1958. Objectives: (a) To determine if any actual loss in production of alfalfa occurs from spring grazing by deer or elk, and if a loss occurs, how much. (b) To correlate the actual amount of use by game animals on the test plots, as to numbers of animals and length of time, with changes in production so that estimates of game use may be converted to change in pounds of hay produced. Procedure: Because the dates of the project year were changed in 1957 only one-half of-the study was completed when the 1956 segment ended. Since a complete report could not be written at that time, a report was not submitted until all of the study was completed in-August, 1957. The completion report for segment 10 and 11 of this project is to be found in the Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly Report, October, 1957, p. 95. The 10 foot steel posts around the test plots have been pounded into the field, waiting for growth to start so that the woven wire can be strung upon them. The counting of deer, measuring heights of alfalfa, counting pellet groups, taking weather observations, harvest and weighing of hay will not start until approximately April 1, 1958. Analysis and Recommendations: Now the dates of the project year are settled, April 1 to March 31, the work done under this job can be done completely in one segment of the project. The work done the spring and summer of 1958 will be reported upon in April, 1959. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Date: -:-. ~_ ;;.Ju;;;I;;oL.y..l..' ~1;,;.9.;;.5;;.8 .•.. Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid-Coordinator ��I~~rll'I~'ij'~'llrl~jr'illi~,U~~~1 ~iil'l(ijll July, 1958 BDOW022278 -95- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of._" __;;C.,;;;O;.,;;L:..;O;;,;;R;,;:A:,:;DO;;;,.;;;-------- ProjectNo. VV~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~1~ VVorkPlanNo. Title. __ ~6 ~,_D~e~e~r_-~E~lk~hN~e~s~t~ig~a~t~io~n~s~ _ ~~J~0_b_N~0~. 3 _ --.:"E;:::x.:.lp::.;e;;.::r:..:i;.::m::;e::::;n::;t::.::a:::l_VV~a;.:.te::::;r::...:D:.:e:::..v:..;e;;.::l;.;::o;.t:p.:;:m _ Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958, The Problem: In the pinon-juniper type ranges of southern Colorado there are some areas where better summer-range use by deer might occur if water were more readily available. Objectives: The purpose of the study is to learn if better summer range use Inthe pinon-juniper type ranges of southern Colorado can be obtained for deer by the development of sources of water in dry areas. Procedure: L "Lizard Springin McElmo Canyon near Cortez, Colorado was developed during the summer of 1956, and a line of pellet-group stations was established to measure the effect of the spring development on the deer population, Pellet-group counts were made immediately following development of water. 2. For the next several years, pellet-group counts will be made in May and again in September to obtain data from which the effect of the water development on the summer and winter deer populations in. the vicinity can be judged, 3, The spring development will be repaired and enlarged as may be required to maintain water sufficient for the deer population, Findings: In previous reports on this job the location and development of Lizard Spring was described. Also, a map showing the location of the pellet-group plots was presented, and pellet-group data up to May 1, 1957were shown, There remains for this report only the presentation of pellet-group data collected October 3, 1957 and of general observations, Lizard Spring maintained a flow of water greater during the summer of 1957 than it produced immediately following development; this was due, no doubt, to the unusually wet summer, Following heavy rains, collection gutters were found full of sand that had been washed off the face of the sandstone cliff above them. The sand had to be �-96- cleaned out to enable the gutters to operate properly. The regrowth of lichens over the cliff face above. the gutters is acting to hold the loose sand, preventing it from being washed into them. This should in time lessen the need for cleaning. Table 1 shows the pellet-group data collected October 3, 1957 and that for the two previous counts. No interpretation of the data will be attempted at this early stage of the study. Table 1. --Deer Pellet-group Plot No. Oct. 10, 1956 Counts Vicinity Lizard Spring Development. Pellet-Grou:es May 1, 1957 o old 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Totals October 3; 1957 3 old 7 old 2 old 1 old o old 2 old o old 2 old 5 old 2 7 Mo. 1 Mo. 9 Mo. 1 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. Mo. 2 1 Mo. 2 6 Mo. 0 Mo. 5 Mo. 1 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 0 Mo. 22 16 8 Recommendations: 1. If the winter of 1957-58 damages the collection gutters they should be strengthened with a masonry wall to prevent freezing and thawing from causing leaks and consequent loss .of water. 2. The water development should be filed on to prevent future use by livestock and consequent damage to the spring or hinder the collection of data. Prepared by: .Harold R. She:eherd Date: J_u .ly""',_1;;.,;9_5_B •• Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �July, 1958 -97- JOB COMPLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS --~----~~~~~--------------- State of COLORADO. projectNo. __---.~VV~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~1~-------__~--D-e-e~r~-~E-lk~1n __v_e_st~iQg_at-i-o~n __-------Work Plan No. Title. ---- 6 Job No. 5 --------~--------------~--~~--~----------------------------- .Methodsof Preventing Deer and Elk Grazing on Alfalfa in the Spring. Period Govered: May 1, 1957to March 31, 1958. Objectives: To determine methods of lessening or preventing deer and elk grazing on alfalfa in the spring. Procedure: The project year for this segment was from May 1, 1957through March 30, 1958~·'This period is after the spring damage period ends and before it begins in the area near Montrose, Colorado. Since little or no field work can be done until segment 12 begins, the only accomplishment on this job was some reviews of pertinent literature and correspondence with the Biologist in the Wildlife Research Laboratory in Denver who is working on repellents to be used on big game. Arrangements were made with him to obtain two very promising repellents to be used in conjunction with this study. The fertilizer test will be postponed this year, because a new field will be planted to alfalfa In 1958, and prepared for the fertilizer work. The field work on this job will start almost immediately after this report is due. Prepared by: Raymond Jo Date: Boyd Approved by: ~~Ju~1~y~,~1~9~5~8----------- Laurence E., Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022280 July, 1958 -99JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of COLORADO ProjectNo, ~VV~-~3~8-~R~-~1~1 ------~------~------------------_ VVorkPlanNo, Title, ~~D~e~e~r~-~E~1~k~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t~io~n~s~· ~ ~ ~6 ~ __ ~J~0~b~N~0~. __ ~7 ~ ~ ..:;St;,:.u=d:::.y~o.;..f -=th;;:.e::;...;;;E;:;f;;,;fe;.;c;.:t.:;;.s...;o;.;f...;F;;.;r;;.;u;;;i;.;.t...;T;.:r;.;;e;.;;e;_D=a.;;;m~a ~----__._~ Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Objective: To determine the production and value of the fruit crop produced by trees that are browse d and/or rubbed as compared to trees not so treated. Procedure: .The Game Damage Control Officer of the Department was contacted and arrangements made to accompany him into areas where fruit tree damage was occurring. These trips were made with him, and two other trips were taken by myself, and one day was spent with the Regional Game Manager and personnel of the Fish and VVildlifeService who are experimenting on repellents in the orchard areas. Orchard operators and packing house superintendents were contacted about the damage situation and their ideas were noted as to how a study might be set up to determine the amount of losses in actual fruit produced from trees browsed or rubbed by deer. Findings: It was the general concensus of opinion that most of the damage to the fruit trees is confined to trees .less than eight (8) years old. However, the average tree does not come into full production until it is about thirteen (13) years old. In order to fully determine what damage, if any, occurs to fruit production it would then be necessary to set up a study of browsed, rubbed, and non-damaged trees that would run for at least fifteen (15) years. This seems to be out of the question considering the amount of tree damage occurring in the State. Recommendations: It is recommended, therefore, that this job be dropped, and intensive work be done on methods of preventing damage to fruit trees. This would be a much more logical study and would not take nearly so long a time to work out an acceptable, economical method. In line with this proposal, contact has been made with the Fish and VVildlifeService, Wildlife Research Laboratory in. Denver, for information and assistance on new types of repellents that can be sprayed on trees without damage to the resulting crop of fruit. A cooperative type of experiment has now been set up for the next segment to accomplish these objectives. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Date: J_u •ly'-',_" .• _19....,5_8 Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator" �� https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/329376f424f1032ce77bf4ea1eaf16f4.pdf cc2073851fa54cc3b831f8a79e18c4fd PDF Text Text ��Survival of first stage larvae cultures has been greatly increased by washing larvae on cotton filtex pads and preserving the pure larvae cultures on relatively sterile pads of cotton in sealed jars. All indirect measurements .of lungworm infection must be made on the basis of the larval output in the feces. In the Federal Aid Quarterly for April, 1956 it was stated that fecal analyses, while useful for determining whether a given herd Js infected with lungworm, were of no value for determining the intensity and incidence of infection. The method used was described and the results of analyses made of samples from the Pikes Peak, Arkansas .Canyon, and Buffalo Peaks herds were presented. !twas als.o indicated that through a statistical study of larval output it might be possible, using confined animals to develop a techlllique which could be used to evaluate the intensity of an infection. Certainly s uch a technique would be of value to management because it would allow the year to year t rend of intensity of the infection to be determined, the relative intensities of infection between herds coul d he evaluated, and possibly the most important time or area where transmiss.ion occurs might be indicated through application of information from fecal analyses to the known range and habits of the sheep, Numerical values are better than arbitrary ones, being more accurate and better adopted to statistical treatment. Couey (1950) indicated that values checked favorably for different pellets from the same collection; however, actual counts .of larvae f:rom single pellet s placed in water in a .stende:r dish and allowed to remain overnight reveals the existence of considerable variation {See Table 1). Obviously, the use of this technique, whether or not reliable iresults would be obtained, is too tedious and time consuming. Twelve pellet samples were us.e d for a time; then it beca·.me apparent that these were subject to too much varia.tion also. It was then decided to increase the sample s.ize to twenty, but again there seemed to be some unusual variation which caused us to doubt the reliability of the technique. Smee much of our anticipated work for the next segment requires a reliable technique, con,siderabl e attention has been given the study of this variation. It was obvious that when a lot of material was placed in the Baerman funnel it took longer for the larvae to reach the bottom of the stem, a..ll'ld even after several days a single layer of pellets supported by a screen disc in the bell of the funnel was apparently the more efficient means of recovering larvae. Even the single layer of pellets with tweµty being the standard number varied in their efficiency, with respect to the time required for the larvae to leave the pellet and concentrate in the stem of the funnel (table 2). From these results it wa.s obvious that previous analyses were subject to considerable error when elapsed time in Baerman was 12-24 hours. Cause of delayed migration of larvae appeared to be presence of mucous in fecal pellet. This matter was discussed with Dr. 0 , W. Olsen at Colorado State University, and he suggested the use of a dilute sodium hydroxide solution to thoroughly cominute the fecal material. Mix thoroughly and take an alequot, and wash th:rough a process of adding water and contrifuging. This failed to result in a sufficiently clear s ample for accurately coW1ting .the larvae present; however, by filtermg this alequot on to a wet cotton disc using a porcelain funnel and an evacuated filter flask, the debris and most all of the la:rvae are tirapped on the cotton. (The cotton discs were prepared by cutting 11 Red Cross cotton'\ 15 oz. package - Johnson & Johnson into proper-sized discs and dividing these into halfs or thirds ,of the original thickness) . The prepared discs are placed in warm water s upported by a screen in the Baerman funnel. Ten samples were t r eated in this manner and after about 12 hours an of the larvae were contained in the sample taken from the stem of the funneli and none found a;fte:r the elapse of an additional 24 hours. �-4Table 1. Six .Samples -Collected at Glen Eyrie March 29, 1957 Pellet No. Larvae counts from individual pellets, pellet groups lettered 1 A 2 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total 8 6 24 10 10 8 31 44 14 22 176 - B C 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 6 0 0 0 0 D 2 0 2 0 23 2 7 3 18 0 32 150 3 0 1 0 12 1 1 0 1 23 - - E F 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 - 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 5 1 Five Samples .Collected from Buffalo Peaks Area (all from rams) March 25, 1957 3 140 194 1 3 1 5 71 1 10 5 1 5 6 2 101 2 129 58 191 20 270 54 9·s 3 5 2 3 0 37 . - 2 8 0 4 2 0 21 6 9 65 78 56 46 52 88 128 3 16 85 77 74 102 62 2 35 87 95 72 6 114 30 30 9 665 ~ 701 - Repeats f:rom same groups collected Buffalo Peaks March 25, 1957 59 130 1 130 22 196 22 73 272 124 89 218 1336 6 1 1 0 1 0 6 1 16 4 33 9 9 7 37 1 11 21 17 . 81 2.31 10 4 5 10 64 146 46 104 18 41 48 15 97 54 57 700 -54 - 4 �-5- TABLE 2. fl _Sample No. 1 · .. 202 Ela~sed time in 24 hr. ;eeriods ·2 3 4 No. Larvae No. Larvae No. Larvae · 153 124 2 109 291 7 3 7,930 53 4 5 1 No. Larvae .·: Total No. Lar vae per 5· 20 pellet No. Larvae sam,ele 479 407 10 7, 993 7,260 196 7, 456 7, 960 61 8,021 6 1,900 100 0 2,000 7 1,490 10 0 1,500 8 2,360 10 0 2, 370 9 2, 850 200 2 3,052 10 1, 170 40 0 1, 210 11 1,050 30 0 1, 080 12 2,530 1, 120 3, 650 13 10, 600 3 10, 603 14 202 124 326 15 109 291 400 153 153 17 41 16 17 24 18 7,930 1,9 2.0 53 16 7, 999 7, 260 196 7, 456 7, 960 61 8,021 �-6.Table 3. Comparison of 20 pellet Samples from the Same Pellet Group. Group .No. 1 . - Sample 1 7,999 Larva,! Counts · 8ample 2 7,456 2 1,900 1,490 2 days 3 2,360 2,850 2 .days 4 1,170 1,050 2 days 5 2,530 10,600 2 days 6 4,560 4,263 3 days 7 4,150 3,910 3 days 8 9,450* 11, 710* 9 920 5,470* 3 days 10 540 2, 570* 3 days 11 490 none* 3 days 12 780 4,070* 3 days 13 1,450 21,460* 3 days 14 920 2,900* 3 days 15 1, 150 1, 010* 3 days 16 1,720 190* 3 days 17 160 90* 3 days 18 760 12,030* 3 days _Sample 3 8,021 Time in Baerman 5 days * Sample treated in dilute Na .OH and alequot filtered on cotton pad before placing in Baerman. �-7In table 3 is seen considerable variation within a single pellet group, even when samples conta.in as high as twenty pellets, also variation :resulting between treatments. To account for the vuiation within the pellet group there are two possibilities; one .the lack of random selection of pellets (e. g. larvae may have been concentrated in pe,llets at one end of group) from the group or very high concentrations of larvae may exist in single pellets within the group. lt appears that the technique should utilize as much of a pellet group as is possible to collect. This sample placed in . 3 normal sodium hydroxide solution overnight then the material thoroughly cominuted and mixed before an alequot is taken for filtering on cotton pad, Baermanizing and counting of the larvae concentrated after 12 hours. standardization of the mixing procedures and alequot size is yet to be accomplished. The procedure in counting has been to use a small petri dish with a grid etched on the bottom, a ,Veeder-Root counter, and a stereomicroscope employing a 15 x WF ocular and a 1. 3 objective, then controlling the illumination for best view of larvae to count the larvae present. Results of Experimental Transmission Studies with Lungworm (Protostrongylus) A description of 011closures .for experimental animals is given in the Federal Aid Quarterly, July 1957, p. 191-192. These pens were completed in September of 1956 at the Denver Federal Center under Cooperative Agreement between the Coloirado Game and Fish Dept. and the U. S. Fish and :Wildlife Research Laboratory. The technique used in attempting to infect the experimental animals is essentially ·the same in that suitable snail hosts are infected by exposing to first stage larvae which develop to the infective suge (see previous reports) within the snail foot tissues. Five different methods of administering the larvae to the prospective host have been used. They are: 1. Oral by feeding infected snail, usually with shell removed to permit counting of larvae on or concealed in food. 2. O:ral in water in the back of the mouth cavity by means .o f a pipette the larvae still unsheathed in cuticles and in some cases in the snail tissues. 3. Oral by means of pipette but larvae freed of ensheathing cuticles. 4. Intravenous injection of the unseathed larvae in normal saline. 5 . Intraperitoneal injection of the .exsheathed larvae in normal saline. Determination of whether an infection resulted has been based largely upon routine collecting and Baermanizing fecal samples .to recover the first-stage larvae; however, many of the animals have been slaughtered and examined. Rabb.its are generally slaughtered after the exposure rather than chance the conflicting results that might a r ise were the animal subjected to subsequent exposures. The domestic rabbits used have been New Zealand �-8- Table 4. Results of Attempts to Establish Protostrongylus Infections in Experimetl.tal Hosts Speqies .of . Prctostrongylus Experimental Host No. lnf. Larvae How Admin. stilesi hybrid sheep · ."M" · Many 20-45 20--50 oral I. V. I.V. Date Results 1956 . 6/20/57 6/24/57 neg: ·· neg. neg. ~ilesi hybrid lamb 76 59 100 oral I. Y. I. V. 5/22/57 8/24/57 9/24/57 neg; neg, neg. stiles.i hybrid ewe 70 oral 5/22/57 neg. stilesi goat male-kid 17 125 oral I. V. 6/14/57 50 I. v. neg. 8/21/57 neg. 8/22/57 _2neg. -"' stilesi goat female kid 10 oral 6/14/57 neg . stilesi rabbit d. young 15 oral 7 /23/57 neg. stilesi young 15 oral 7 /23/57 neg. stilesi rabbit adult 100 I.V. 8/3/57 neg. stilesi rabbit young 43 I. P. 9/18/57 neg. stilesi rabbit young 41 I,P. 9/18/57 neg. stilesi rabbit young 35 I.P. 9/20/57 neg. stHesi rabbit 20 I. P. 10/7 /57 · neg. young stiles_i rabbit-young 20 I.P. 10/18/57 pos. stilesi rabbit-young 33 I. P. 10/30/57 pos. stilesi rabbit-,adult 91 I.P. 2/7 /58 neg. �-9- Larvae How Admin. many oral rabbit-adult cottontail adult 34 I. V. 9 oral oral 4/16/57 to 5/29/57 6/25/57 1/30/57 2/28/57 cottontail young many oral oral 5/30/57 6/27 /57 neg. neg. cottont~il young 8 9 oral oral 7 /26/57 7 /26/57 neg. neg. sylvilagi cotton.tail young 20-25 oral 8/19/57 pos. sylvilagi cottontail young 17 oral 9/11/57 neg. sylvilagi cottontail young 35-40 oral 1/30/58 pos. boughto:ni rabbit adult 14 oral 5/9/57 boughtoni rabbit adult 18 I. V. 7 /27 /57 neg. boughtoni rabbit adult 26 I. V. 7 /27/57 neg. mac:rotis mule deer male 18 oral 5/9/57 pos. macrotis mule deer female 30-40 oral 6/6/57 pos. mac:rotis fawn 30=40 oral 7/2/57 neg. Species of Protostron~lus sylvilagi sylvilagi sylvilagi sylvilagi sylvilagi Experimental Host rabb,it adult No. Inf. 6 24 Date Results neg. neg. pos. pos. ' neg . (died 7 /11) mac:rotis fawn 12 oral 7 /2/57 neg. (died 7 /16) �-10- whites .from registered stock belonging _to Mr. Barnes, of Arvada, Colorado~ In this way it was hoped that the results .would be uniform, but this has not been fue case. With the cl>mestic rabbits the ear vein has been used fo:r giving intravenous injections, while the juglar \ein has been used in the larger animals. Intravenous injections have not been used with the cottontails to date. In feeding the larvae one can be reasonably certain•of the numbers .of larvae actually administered, but this has not been the case with injecting them because some larvae invariably adhere to the sides .o f the syringe or may be lost in inserting _the needle. However, some correction is made in that larvae recovered from the water used to flush out the syringe after use can be counted and these subtracted from the original number used. All of the attempts made to infect animals a.rtifically are summarized .in Table 4. For the succe ssful cases, histories follow : . Case 1. Cottontail Rabbit Sylvilaeys auduboni baileyi.. This rabbit livetrapped at the Denver Federal Center, January 30, '1957, was fed 9 larvae of Protostrongylus sylvilagi reared in snails .of the genus Pupilla .which were exposed _in October, 1956. Prior -to this time several s.ets of lungs were examined from road-killed cottontails and numerous fecal pellet'an,alyses were made to establish the absence of lungworm infection in this area; furthermore, no snail hosts have been found in the searches made in and about the pens. All fecal samples collected .from this rabbit were negative between January 30th and - F ebruary 28th. Six (6) more larvae were fed on February 28th. When no larvae were recovered from the feces by Ma:rch 19, 1957, six (6) more larvae were fed. The first appearance of larvae in the feces was noted March 25, 1957, but this was the first sample since the 19th and ·.the sample · included fecal pellets for the whole period. First-stage larvae continued to be shed, ·i n small numbers, in the feces up to April 17, 1957 when this an,imal was slaughtered for post mortem examination. On the day before slaughter a large number of snails containing at least 12 infective larvae were fed to this rabbit. Post mortem examination revealed. that this animal was in excellent condition, the testes were large, no external parasites were noted, and the only pathology observed was confined to the lungs. The lungs exhibited typical lesions .near the posterior tip .of the diaphragmatic lobes which are brown-pigmented consolidated areas; in addition, there were on the costal surface of these lobes several small hemorrhagic !es.ions, also some leucocytic ones. The hemorrhagic lesions in some cases had light-colored, granular centers visible through t he pleura, which on further examination anddissectiori proved to be eggs of the parasite. Dissection of one of the lungs yielded three adult nematodes identified as_f.. sylvilagi. ,T he stomach, intestines, and their contents were carefully examined, and no trace of either the snail shells or infective larvae were found. The only evidence of other par asitism was a few coccidia oocysts. No larvae were found in the lymph nodes (mesenteric) or in 20 cc. of blood which. were also examined. The p:irepatent period .indicated here is 25 or 53 days. Case 2. Cottontail rabbit, Sylvilagus auduboni baileyi was also live-trapped at the Denver ·Federal Center. This rabbit was fed-between 35 and 40 larvae still in tile snail tissues. These larvae from Vallon.l.a ,;p,!!!chella, exposed some time earlier to first- stage larvae of !!-. sylvilagi, were fed on January 30, 195-8. First-stage larvae were _recovered from �the feces March 13, 1958. This .indicates a prepatent period of 42 days. Case 3. Domestic rabbit (Oryctolagus) Male. To this rabbit was administered approximately 34 unsheathed, infective larvae of .f. ·sylvil!!;i, in a saline solution which was injected, intrave~ously, on June 25, 1957. On July 16, 19.5 7' a single larvae was recovered .in the fece'S. Subsequent samples all contained larvae up to July 24th, after which no -larvae were recovered up to July 31st when .this animal was slaughtered for post mortem examination. Small hemorrhagic lesions were scattered .over the lungs, especially the costal or parietal surface of the diaphragmatic lobes and lungworm eggs were visible through the pleura· .i n the center s of some of these. Dissection of most of the lung yielded five adult nematodes identified as E· sylvilagi. The prepatent period here was only 21 days. ) Cases ,4 and .5 . . Domestic rabbits (Oryctolagus). _Two very young still in the nest were injected intra peritoneally with unsheathed infective larvae of_F. stilesi. One October 18, 1957 with 20 larvae and .the other with 33 larvae on October 30, 1957. No first stage la:rvae were recovered from fecal samples up to 60 days after exposure when fecal analyses were discontinued. On January 31, 1958 these animals were slaughtered and a few first-stage larvae were recovered from each of the lungs; however, no lesions were observed or adult worms demons.t rated. In view of the care used with equipment it is inconceivable that contamination of equipment is involved, especially when each of the lungs was handled separately. Cases 5 and 6 . Mule deer (Odocoileus .hemionus hemionus). ;Male and Female. The male was obtained at the Mount Evans Management Area in October, 1956 and was over a year old at the .time. The antlers were deformed as .the result of injury to them while still in ,the velvet attributed to dogs, and it was at this .time that the game department first encountered this deer. This buck was in good condition when obtained in October and maintained condition well through the winter; furthermore it was tame and easily handled. Fecal samples were taken from the rectum or picked up fresh from the ground. Analysis for lungworm larvae made along with samples .from the ~xperimental hybrid sheep over a long period precluded any chance of its being naturally· infected with Iungworm. In March, 1957 a doe was received .from 1he western slope which was very thin with backbone and ribs protruding. Som e fecal samples were taken and checked at the time this deer was r eceived, but because it had not been allowed to or did not roam beyond the farm yard where it was raised there seemed little chance that it could already be infected with Prptostropg:lus. The buck was fed 18 infective larvae of E· macrotis on May 9, 1957. It this .time scouring and slight emaciation was n<ted which was attributed to green grass in the diet. No fecal samples were examined until shortly aft er June 6, 1957 when the doe was given between 30 and 40 infective larvae orally by means of a pipette. The buck became more e mac-iated in June and had a mucopurulent nasal discharge and fecal samples were analyzed .which contained nematode larvae, not Protostrongylus, which were identified as -Dic~ ocaul:!!Ls. viviparous larvae. The doe was also found to be shedding :Dictyocaulus larvae. The first Protost:r-ongylus larva .t o be identified ·were from the buck on July 1, 1957, but it was not until July 8th that the two forms of la:rvae could be readily differentiated and differential colllnts made. No Protostrongylus lalt'vae were found in the samples from the doe before July 16, 1957. �-12- The prepatent periods ind,icated are 41 days for the doe and 53 days for the buck. Undoubtedly this-period .would have been less for the buck had it not been for the complicating ·Di~tyocaulus ,infection. ,In checking ·back it was learned that the doe fed with and among both cattle and hogs on · the ranch wheire .it had been raised near ·Nucla, Colorado. There can be no doubt but what the doe was the sou.r oe of the Dictyocaulus viviparous infection. Furthermore, the moisture conditions throughout the spring and summer undoubtedly favored the survival and transmission of this parasite within the pens. The emaciated conditions of both animals is cilrectly due to the :Diofyocaulus infection. ,I t was decided to continue to check the droppings of both deer to determine the duration of both the Pro,tostrongylus infection for whic.h there is no possibility of reinfection and the Dictyocaulus infection for which exposure to reinfection i s repeated and frequent. The doe has shed no PrQtostrongylus larvae s,ince Decr.embe:r 4, 1957 and the output of Dictyocaulus larvae is consistentlrle_s s than from the buck. Along with this .there has .been an improvement in the condition of the doe, so that the backbone now has the character of an .illverted U instead of an inverted V. _Protostrongylus larvae has continued _to be ·shed by the buck. Our data suggests an inverse relationship exists between the output of the two types .of larvae but this may he due .to sampling and the increased difficulty in detecting _ProtostropgYlus larvae when the output of I)ictyocaulus is great. _In general the results of the attempts to establish infections have been very inconsistent as indicated in table 4. The difficulty in getting an infection established in the Audubon's cottontail would seem to indicate that it is not a normal host for E sylvilagi. .The establishment of an infection by intravenous ,injection cl~arly indicated that no essential development takes place along the natural routes .of infection With the possible exception of the exsheathment of the larvae. In the -literature concerning -lungworms development occurring in the mesenteric lymph nodes is reported, · (On 1he occurrence of larvae in the lymph nodes, see section treating the examination of bighorn lungs from the Pikes Peak herd. ) . Na_tural Infections in Sna,ils at Glen Eyrie Glen Eyr ie is located just north of the Garden of the Gods at the mouth of Queens Canyon · and was the home of General Palmer, founder of Colorado Springs. In the winter of 1914, the ·Colorado §pripgs Gazette reported .that bighorns were driven down and were feecling . about the stables because of snow. According to George Jones, who formerly worked with bighorn sheep in Colorado, there were some bighorns along the Rampart Range and occasionally a few were s,e en by the Caretaker at the Northfield Rese r-voirs prior to the release of 14 bighorns made at Green Mountain Falls in March, 1947; Following this transplant of b,i ghorns .from the Tarryall herd there was an increase in numbers along the Rampart Range . . Ther e .is some evidence that there may be occasional movement across U. S. Highway 24 between the Rampart Range and Pikes Peak, · three sheep were seen 3 miles west of Manit ou on south side of U. S. Highway ~4, · in June, ' 1954. In 1953, Gjlen Eyrie was acquired by the Navigators as their in,t ernational headquarters. 1 �-13- I first visited Glen·Eyrie in Novembe.r, 1953 during the rut and several times was very close to these sheep, much closer then than at any time since. Conservation Officer, F . A. Colley, has mention.ed that prior to 1953, bighorns had visited this area two or three previous years. Therefore, bighorns have continued to use the grounds and especially the lawns-of this estate since about 1950. I collected fecal samples .from the lawns on November 7, 1953 and found lungworm larvae present, and on November 18, 1953, I collected several quarts of fresh droppings and noted, "Density of droppings are such on the grounds that if intermediate hosts are present, area would be ideal site for picking up lungworm. n . subsequently, VaUonia 2ulchella was collected .from these lawns, but the first attempt to infect some of them fa.Hed. ·Larvae were found to penetrate and undergo development in this species the following year. In 1955 large numbers of these snails were infected in the laboratory but none of the snails collected from the lawns were found naturally infected. During 1956, the lawns we:re the greatest source of experimental snails. At first each lot of snails was held for a quarantine period before being examined for natural infection prior to being exposed to laboratory infections, late:r we became somewhat careless and it was not until early in 1957 using snails ,collected in November or December from Glen Eyrie in a laboratory exposure that one of the snails was noted with a single infective larvae of Protostro~ylu~. This was s_o unusual that I considered contamination of the snail containers as being the source of this infection until April 9-10, 1957 when another sna,il was found with a single infective larvae. All of this lot of snails were dead when next examined, otherwise more infection might have been found judging by what was found the following August, when about a 50 percent incidence of infection was found. Maps 1 and 2 and the tables 5 and 7 show the grounds, localities where snails were collected and the incidence of infection found. There has been a defmite reduction of the incidence of infection between August and November collections. The actual incidence of infection among the snails was probably less than the incidence indicated because trees were used to mark the collection sites used. Two reasons exist for this belief, first the tendency for the sheep on the grounds to bed down about the base of a tree, the b lue spruce tree 4#: 2 on the map No. 1 and the ponderosa pine #1 on the same map are two areas frequently used; and the second reason is shade offered by trees or other structures and its effect upon moisture as it controls the survival and activity of both snails and larvae. The reason for the declt"ease in incidence appears to be mortality of snails, which may have resulted from freezing weather when there was not sufficient protective cover of vegetation oir snow on the surface. Certainly, collecting in some of the same areas at a later date there were so many dead snails that they were not sorted and counted when material was scraped up and screened. The effect of cover is .indicated by the collections on February 19, 1955; the deep grass area had .98 living snails to 20 dead ones while this ratio for two other sites, #1 was 3 to 115 and.# 4 was 49 to 144. The vegetative cover functions in preserving a microclimate favorable to snails. Dead shells vary in their appearance from chalk white opaque shells to nearly transpare.nt shells with the natural lustre of living shells. This appears to be the result of two factors, age of snails at time of death and time elapsed since death. Many of the dead snails had the na.tural lustre and many contained the dead, dehydrated an.ail tissues which suggested dessication as .the cause of death, In two of these dead snails infective larvae were noted just in sorting as no speci1al attempt was made to examine dead sna,ils. Matekin et. aL (1954) indicates .that the larval survival within the snail is dependent upon water content in 1he snail tissuest a 21 to 28 percent water loss being lethal �-14~ to larvae and .that such water loss·was fatal to most snail sp·e cies as well. Larvae may survive i~ snails:killed by freezing :so long as .the water loss ·does_not approach the limits •given above. This would expla:in·our recovery of living larvae·from dead snail tissu.Efs. It is not safe to assume, ·therefore, that the observed death of the snails greatly lessened the chance of infection~ Certainly the amount of grazing on these lawns, done by the bighorns would result in -.the ingestion of s.ome snails .even under the least favorable conditions, while the nu:mbers ingested.under the .f avorable conditions of moisture and temperature could be large, even in a short period of time. The number of larvae within a single infected snail would also be of s.ome importance and our data is given in table 8• . )Vb.en the high incidence of infection in snails was noted it was hoped that some of the sheep · might .b e captured and penned where snail hosts were not present and the fecal output of larvae from these sheep compared with samples collected from the sheep that continued to use the ground, but this d,id not happen because of delay in getting started until November then lack of success in capturing any until snares were used in January and February. · However, fecal samples that were collected _indicated a greater output of larvae in January and thereafter then was present in November·and December, but samples were small. No evidence of illness was noted other ·than some coughing. The build up .of the incidence of infection of the lawn is attributed to the more moist seas.on and to the longer period of use by bighorns during the 1956-1957 season. With respect to the season of use by the bighorns at Glen Eyrie, we have the following information by year: 1953-1954 Use began about November 1 and continued into April. 1954-1955 -·W ere here in November and use continued into April. 1955-1956 Were here in November and use continued beyond the middle of April. 1956-1957 Use began about mid-September and continued to last of May. 1957-1958 Use began October 5 but a .few s heep visited the ground one day in August and also for one day in September, and use continued into May, 1958. During _the past season, it appeared that these sheep were using the hogbacks to the :north of ,Glen Eyrie to a greater extent than they had in previous years. From ou:r observations, it is apparent that there was an increase in the numbers of snails present on the lawns at Glen -Eyrie, and ass.ociated with th.is inc:r;ease there was also an increase .in the incidence of infection with lungworm larva.e . It was also apparent that consider~le mortality had .taken place among -the snails prior t o mid-November when further c.o llections were made. Prior to the fall of 1956, no infected snails h ad ever been encountered though many had been collected from t~e grounds at Glen Eyrie. Evidence which offers the possible and probable explanation of the observed conditions exists in the long season o!- use by the b.ighorn sheep for the season of 1956-1957 and the weather records_ for Colorado Springs, Colorado indicated in the climograph (Fig. 1)'. The fall of 1956 was more moist than normal, and .t he spring of 1957 was much wetter than no:rrnal, while· the month of November was much colder than normal. Furthermore; in _the fall of 1957 moist conditions aga,in prevailed, there can be little doubt but what the month of · October was favorable for the transmiss_ion of the infection from the snails t o the bighorns. ·and �COLORADO SPRINGS,COLO. t.· ....... . . .... . . . .. ___ ---, ---- .,,,. . -~-. -~7: - --::-:· -.... ,..... ·;:,..,...,....,,,__ 70 I•••• ..... •• .+· ·;· - - - .,,,,,.. I 60 UJ a:: -- -- ~ :) ·.. t<( a: w a.. -- ,( .. ·• •.. 50 '~ I . . :E -- -- -- UJ t- -- -- \ I I I I \ I \ ~-\ _________________________ ,..I ! • • .!...------ ----• --·>--------------1I r\ • - - I •• ~ • .+ . ' :~ \ •. :· .··.·+ \ I I . .J __ -•:•. I \ 30 I I I t - - - - - __ I t ----.. -----1957 ......... 1955 ·' .\'I.•• ,.'· .. t + I I I I I I 40 -1 I -NORMAL ••• l \ 20·.t----L----'-----'-----'-----1----2 3 PRE CI PITAT 10 N FIG. I 4 5 �-15Table 5. --Collection of Vallonia pulchella from the lawns at Glen Eyrie, El Paso County, Colorado (See Map No. 1) . Collection Date Nci,. Dead Snails :Coll~cted No. Clean No. Infected 1955 no tally 600-700 0 p49 Apr. 1956 Q, Rpt. 1956 no tally several hundreds 1 collections used as source of snails for experimental infections, single inf. snail from Nov. or Dec. collection. (Sheep at Glen Eyrie in Sept. 1956) , 4--/57 no tally approx. 100 1 some of snails- collected by C. S. U. students. 8/7/57 2 48 42 5 5 0 4 79 98 32 53 8/13/57 53 66 9 31 59 29 25 51 8 0 0 47 48 17 41 33 52 3 8/30/57 74 35 32 38 27 9 Remarks 4 19 31 0 # 1 ponderosa I 2 spruce f 3 juniper 14 Mulbery f 5 White fur # 6 along wall # 7 along wall # 8 along wall f#: 9 east of gate house 7 94 131 44 35 43 4 0 along wall (6-8) slope below wall near spruce (2) 474 832 428 Total s for August 1957 63 87 2 15 �-16- Table 5--continued. Collection . ·.,Date 11/14/57 Snails ,Collected *No; dead ·· "No,·· clean 0 a. b. Many 4 6 6 24 0 3 c. d. Many 301 14 e. 13 0 0 1 f. g. h. 14 0 1 Same loc. as 16 Same loc. as .#7 115 Many 3 27 0 0 144 20 49 98 0 0 Same loc. as #1 Same loc. as #1 (one dead snail containing an inf. larva) Same loc. as #4 Deep grass area Many 25 2 Same loc. as f 1 6 62 21 Total s - Nov. 1957 Mar. 1958. 6 2.0 13 11/19/57 12/7-8/57 53 33 1/20/58 2/19/58 3/21/58 .- No; infected Remarks . . Bighorns'-'- few down at'G1E3t1:.Eyrie 1 day·· in Aug. and 1 day in Sept. Generally down after Oct. 5th, 1957. 6 - 0 * Dead snails much more numerous than in August 1957 collections. �+ Ponde.rosiS. pine CJ A White frr· {3Apple A Pou.9las. fir c"' 'nd en '.....-~)t..1 L,ilo.c. • BIW?. spr-u.c.e. Q Cottonwood. II Juniper, sc.opu.lorv-M (') ... White ,ii/sh • J1-tniper 1 monospermtA.m POOi.. • Pinon p'1ne. 0 Oa.k '-, 8 Ml.llbel"r':l ~ A Q c,O aA £19 D II .. liil ti) D ll Cl 11111111 • a IJ ,,.. . ., ll. .~ . -. ,• 1.11,£1,. + b. A Cl A D• ,PA ~ £l 0 g.. ; tPAr:,. A II II h. Iii A " N _( _ _ ' } I ----STABLE~ , ,- l Sna1Ai I Collections (.1- 8 ; a- h) I"= 120' I__ _ __ M~p. No. 1. �~- -17- Table 7. Collection of 25 Living Snails at Each numbered Locality during November 1957. (See Glen. Eyrie Map No. 2) Locality No. No. Snails .Infected 0 14 0 2 0 15 0 3 4 16 0 4 0 17 0 5 0 18 0 6 0 19 0 7 0 20 0 8 0 21 0 9 0 22 0 10 0 23 0 11 0 24 0 Locality No. 1 No . Snails .Infected ~- (one larva from dead snail). 13 26 0 Total number Snails .Examined: 650 Total number Snails Infected 4 Incidence of Infection: . 6 percent 0 �-18Table 8. Distribution of Infective Larvae in Naturally Infected Snails Collected at Glen .Eyde in August 1957. Number·of Larvae ..Per _Snail Number of Snails So Infected 1 95 95 2 77 154 3 28 84 4 10 40 5 5 25 Total Number of Larvae Recovered 6 3 18 7 2 14 8 0 0 9 1 9 10 1 10 11-23 0 0 24 1 24 25 0 - 223 473 .Totals 0 �POOL. ,o. JI. 19 . 12. 15 . L r ~ STABLES I ~ rl.._ -_-_-:- I ,.. ,No• GLE:N t.YRIE Map No. Z. �-19Lungworms in .Game Animals -- Natural Infections ' Rabbits In the Federal Aid Quarterly (Colorado) for July, 1957, I reported that the species of Protostrongylus infecting the ·Iungs of the mule deer, snowshoe hare, and cottontail rabbits, have the s ame life cycle involving the same groups of snails as the intermediate hosts, and requiring essentially the same conQitions for transmiss.ion as found for the lungworm of the bighorn sheep P stiles.i. Specimens previously examined were also reported in _this quarterly, giving some <i. the first information on the incidence and distribution of lungworm infection in Colorado ha:res and rabbits. Olson (1954) reported the occurrence of Protostrongylus boughtoni in the snowshoe hare fr om Colorado, while Honess and Winter (1956) record Protostrongylus sylvilagi in Nuttal's cottontail and the white- tailed jackrabbit from Wyoming. Erickson (1947) indicates .that Sylvilagus has been found infected with !:· boughtoni in eastern United States but that it is not a normal host. I have found f. sylvilagi in one snowshoe hare froilll Teller County, with a heavy infection of this species and no E.·boughtoni present, while all of the other infected with]>. boughtoni and no·_E. sylvilagi. One white-tailed jackrabbit from Park county, was infected withj>. boughtoni. Simultaneous infection of two species of Protostrongylus occur in the bighorn and in the arctic hare of Siberia (Ryzhikov, !:_t . _!-1, 1956). Protostrongylus sylvil<mi Scott, 1943 in similar and certainly related to a Eurasian species, f. pulmonalis (v. Frohlich, 1802) and was placed in synonomy with it by Doughterty and Goble 1946). Honess (Honess and Winter, 1946) has defended the validity of_E. sylvilagi as a species, and it seems convenient to distinguish this species from its Eurasian counterpart. In .the laboratory the following snails have been infected using first stage larvae from the lungs of cottontail rabbits infected with _E. sylvilagi, they are: Pupilla blandi, Vertigo concinnula, Gastrocopta pentodon (not previously reported as a host species of the genus P.rotostroµgylufl), and Vallonia pulchella. Several collections of snails have been made along the Rampart Range Road in El Paso County, and several infected cottonta.i l rabbits have also been taken along this same road. However, infected snails were found at only one of the sites, where two infected rabbits were obtained. This site is the junctfon of the Rampart Range and Mt. Herman roads in a relatively open stand of aspen with a kinnikinick ground cover and just below the r oad a few yards southwest of the junction. Collections were made on July 30, and August 19, 1957, and included 5 Pupilla muscorum one of which was infected (20 .percent), 40 Vallonia cyclophorella of which some containedp:reinfective stages of Protostrongylus larvae but actual incidence not determined, 10 Vertigo concinnula of which .t wo were infected one with several larvae (some preinfective stages) (20 peircent), 3 EtJ,conulus, and 2 .Succinea were not infected. Ryzhikov (1956) for the Eurasian counterpart !!· J?Ulmonalis g,. terminalis syn. used) reports that 30 percent of 80 VaUonia tenuilabris and 36 percent of 18 Pupilla muscorum examined were found infected. These are the na.tural intermediate hosts in the Yakut region and their habitat is osier-bed or other deciduous ,vegetation on the flood- land pastures and openings in the taiga. Rather dense populations may be found, sometimes 5, 000-6, 000 per square meter, but usually the density observed is between 200 and 1,000 per square meter. �-20The illvestigations of Ryzhikov, ~!!,; were undertaken because these lungworms are abundant-and widespread·pathogenic helminths·, assumed toplfW an important role in causing -f luctuations •in the density of rabbits. · Lahermaa, (1951 studied a Iungworm infection .in Finland where in spite of a high incidence of infection, (94 percent) the hare population held up for two years before .there was any sharp reduction in the population. No direct correlation between the disease and the decline was established because it seemed probable that other intervening .factors played a decisive part. He states that the existing .reports on , the destructive effects of lungworm infection are at variance but the mortality due to lungworm in .the domestic rabbit is very great. . With respect to the pathogenicity of.,P sylvilagi in this country Scott (1943) reported cottontails dying in Centennial Valley on Sheep Mountain, Wyoming during September of 1931, and heavy infections with lungworm were found the same year in nearby areas. In the same areas cottontails were scarce the following year and a year later the rabbits were increasing in number but it became increasingly difficult to find any infection. In October and November 1956, cottontails were obs.e rved to be numerous along Phantom Creek a few miles north of Divide, Teller Coun.t y, Colorado. (Twelve were seen along the creek in less than a mile just as it became dark on October 15th). Seven cottontails Sylvilnus nuttalli p:in.etis, were collected and all found to be infected with~. sylvilagi ranging from modera.t e to heavy infections. The following year three trips were made to this area and not a s,i ngle rabbit was seen, even though a search was made after dark using a spotlight. In this same area the use of kinnikinick as food was observed and substantiated by stomach analysis made by A. L. Ward of the Fish and Wildlife Res.e arch Laboratory in Denver. In September, 1956 during the bighorn sheep hunting season a dense population of snowshoe hares was noted in Park County east of Twelvemile Lake, an.don September 6, 1956, two Conservation Officers, C. Roberts and G. Seneff shot snowshoe hares, the lungs of which were examined and moderate to heavy infections noted on£_. boughtoni. The following summer two trips were made into this area and no snowshoe hares were found. No hmgworm infection has been noted in rabbits found east of the mountains, while every cottontail from ponderosa pine-Douglas fir, lodgepole pine, or spruce-fir types collected between the months of September and June has .b een infected. In each case, however, these mountain habitats have included some interspersion or large stands of aspen and some type of stream bottom usually with some willow present. McCrae (1956) examined 75 cottontails probably a.II the Audubon's cottontail from Larimer County and found no trace of infection by Pl"otos trongylus. For the {sl~ea east of U. S. highways 85 and 87 in Colorado, we have examined the lungs .of 1 from Adams County, 1 from Arapahoe County. 6 from El Paso County, and 2 from Bent or otero Counties, and no evidence of lungworm has been found. !n view of this evidence and our experience in trying to artifically establish infections .i n the Audubon's cottontail it is not to be considered a normal host for g_. sy:lvilagi; however, this res,istance may yet be due to environmental rather than genetic factors. Table 9 summarizes by county the examinations .of cottontails and snowshoe hares, w:b.ile table 10 gives the seasonal distribution of the collections. �-21Table, 9. Rabbits Examined Up to May 1, 1958 . County ~~ Cottontail Rabbits No. Pos. Neg. Larimer Boulder Snowshoe Hares No. Pos. 2 2 Neg. 1 1 Gilpin (several fecal samples pos.) Clear Creek 3 Jefferson* 2 Douglas 3 1 Teller 9 9 El Paso 10 5 5? Park 9 7 Chaffee 11 6 3 2 2? 1 1 {E, sylvilagi) 2 4 4 5 2 2 Eagle 1 Custer 2 Saguache 7 Totals from the table above 57 1 32 1 1 7 8 8 25 18 17 1 * Fo:r Jeffers.o n County several additional :rabbits, including the results of examinations of live-trapped animals later sacrificed, have been examined from the grounds of the Denver Federal Center. ,, ? '' Indicates that one case reported as negative had les.ions on lungs suggesting lungworm infection but since no eggs, larvae, or adult worms could be demonstrated, they have been included wah the negatives. �-22- Table 10. Seasonal Distribution of Collections. Number Month Infected Stage of Infection Number Number of Uninfected Snowshoe hares Early Recovery December 3 1 0 8 November 17 2 7 1 October 6 1 2 0 September 1 1 8 4 August 2 1 0 1 July 2 1 0 June 2 1 1 2 May April 2 March 0 1 February 0 0 January 0 3 32 25 ? 2 1 1 2 17 2 �-23Lahermaa, (1951) referring to _E. pulmonalis infection of hares in Finland distinguJshes between. initial and final stages .of the disease and states that the disease lasts for about a year from the last infection and if the animal survived _ recovery is complete, but if infection is continuous then the duration of the ~isease is indefinite. In general this fits the obs.erved conditions encountered in the examination of the lungs .o f the infected cottont~ils. The typical appearance of the lesions of a P. sylvilagi infection is different from that of an infection with E.· boughtoni and the descriptions which follow apply only to ~ - sylvil<$i. .The early or initial stages of the infection are frequently characterized by small hemorrhagic or lymphocytic lesions largely restricted to the costal or parietal surface of the larger, diaphragmatic lobe (venteral lobe) and as noted in the section of this report treating the artificial infection of the Audubon' s cottontail and the domestic rabbit. Under magnification clusters .of eggs may be seen through the pleura in the center of some of the hem:orrhagic !es.ions. The typical lesion usually but not confined to the posterior tip of the same lobe is consolidated and pigmented a dark brown, nearly black. On dissection of the bronchi, adult forms can usually be demonstrated and eggs will usually be more conspicuous than the larvae. The active or chronic stage will have the typical lesions mentioned above but usually the color will be more of a gray-brown oll." greenish-brown and may be more extensive involving all lobes. The border of the lesions is not sharply defined at first and frequently some indications of inflammation involve some of the rest of the lung tissue. The recovery phase is indicated by the greener coloration and the very sharp differentiation between the lesion and the rest of the lung, no eggs are seen through the pleura. Dissection may or may not yield adult worms but masceration and Baermanizing the lung tissue will usually yield some first-stage larvae. Jin two instances we failed to demonstrate any eggs, larvae, or adult worms .in lungs which appeared by gross examination to be infected. These have been included in the tables with the uninfected. The lungs of one cottontail found dead in the woods by Conservation Officer, F. A. Colley showed conspicuous pathology of lungworm infection but there appeared _to be some congestion of the liver and kidneys. There was little evidence of decomposition so this rabbit had not been dead long, yet on dissection the adult worms in the bronchi were practically liquified, but the lungs were not inflamed. This :rabbit was found in April, on the Rampart Range. Another rabbit collected the last of July, also on the Rampart Range contained some first-stage larvae but many of these were dead and no adult worms could be demonstrated. The consolidated .tips of the lungs were a yellowish-brown. A few days later another rabbit in the same area was collected which demonstrated the effect of a continuing infection as the lesions resembled those to the preceding case. A few eggs were visible th.rough the pleura, many first-stage larvae, and four nematodes, one an immature male, were recovered. Another interesting example of recovery was exhibited by one of three cottontails taken on the Mt. Evans Management Area in, September" The lungs of this rabbit had returned to a normal pink color but there were two adhesions to the thoracic wall and on collapse of the lung a transverse line was apparent on the diaphragmatic lobes crossing them in the middle and just including the adhesions and is interpreted as representing a difference in the elasticity between the two halves of the lung lobes marking the border or extent of an earlier infection. A new infection was also present with dark pigmentation at the very tips .of the same lobes previously infected, �-24- Lahermaa, 1951, states .that bacteriologfoal investigations were not carried out, but on the basis .of .bronchial oburation and inflammatory reactions (lymphangitic streak:s) that se-condary bacterial ·infection always complica,tes :b ut belongs in the clinical picture. Culture media was .inoculated from 8 cottonta,il lungs and these were sent to the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Laboratory under the direction of Mr. George Post for culture and jsolocation of bacterial. Mr. Post reports in a letter of March 28, 1958: 1 got one organism from both .the cottontail No. 4 and No. 6. I ran it down but cannot get it to the genus. Young cultures of the organism are moderate-sized, rodshaped bacterium. As the ct\lture gets older, the organism become extremely pliomorph_ic (going to short rods and coccoid forms). It is an interesting organism and more interesting because it came from two rabbits." 11 Nos. 1 - 6 a,.11 came from an area .north of Glentivar, in South Park about 6 to 10 miles along the road to Tarryall and aU of the lungs .of eight cottontails collected- (through the cooperation of Dr. R. Z. Brown of Colorado College) which were examined were infected with _E. sylvilagi. From our obs.ervations on the life cycle of this and the other species of Protostromo::lus it is clear that for the dise.a se cycle to be completed in a year there must be a sequence of events such as follow. 1. Illfected animals must be present and contaminate the area with their feces bearing the first-stage larvae. 2. These feces must be deposited where the intermediate host is present. 3. There must be suitable moisture and temperature conditions for the larvae to leave the feca.l pellets and the same conditions for the activation of the snail hosts . 4. The larvae must penetrate the foot tissues .o f the snail and in this respect the cont~ct-,., from our laboratory observations, is one of chance as the larva do not seem to be attracted to the snail; furthermore, penetration of the snail seems to be in r espons,e to the drying of the substrate .on which .the larvae and snails are present. 5. The larvae must develop'- to the infective stage within the living snail which under . fa.vorable conditions may require as long as 40 to 60 days, the rate of development largely influenced by temperature. ' ) 6. The snail wl:li.ch is usually found in the litter at the base of plants, must be ingested by the rabbit or -in the case of the other species .of Protostrongylus their respective final hosts. · 7. For step six to be completed, the plants which provide the habitat for the snails must provide food for the final host and the temperature and moisture .conditions must .favor the activity of the snails in order for them to be up on .t he parts of the vegetation eaten by the host, 8 . At least two, one male and one female, worm must succeed in overcoming any of the natural defenses .of the host and reach the lungs where they can mature, mate and deposit their eggs. �-25- Obviously the densities of the two hosts affect the chances ,o f th·e cycle being completed, and the climate as .it favors the survival of the larvae, the activity of the snails, ·and its affect upon the density of·or habits ·of the hosts. Matekin, !;t, ~ . (1954) have investigated the biOlogy of Proto_s trongylus larvae in Russia and state that the habitat of all intermediate hosts generally adapted so that contact with the definitive host is most likely. They have measured some of the moisture and temperature requirements which we have not done. We have noted that in some cases living larvae can be recovered from dead snails while in other cases .the larvae are also dead. They found larvae were killed when there was a 21- 48 percent water loss from the tissues, and that in snails killed by freezing the larvae were not killed providing dehydration below the stated limits did not follow. Firststage larvae survived warming to 56 degrees C. and freezing to -32 degrees centigrade but at -20 degrees larvae only survived for 11 days, but under the snow they survived 150 days with the air temperature ranging from 1 to -28 degrees C. Larvae within the fecal pellets can withstand 80-90 percent loss of moisture from the fecal pellet, but to leave it a 90100 percent rela.tive humidity was required. The greatest activity of molluscs was between 5 and 20 degrees centigrade and our observations of snail activity in winter were confirmed. Snails retracted when the relative humidity was less than 60- 70 percent. They reported that the subalpine areas offered the best conditions for transmission. is Probably the greatest numbers of snails are infected when the fecal pellets have accumulated on an area where the snails are present then prolonged moisture conditions favoring transmiss,i on prevail. This would be the case when the fecal pellets are accumulated in the snow then.when the snow melts the larvae would he released and .snails activated. Some of the snails woold probably become infected at this time, others when activated by later periods of mois.ture. The larvae infecting the snails at this ,time would have reached the infective stage by late summer or early fall . Infected snails surviving the following spring or summer and possibly longer would retain the infective larvae and result in cumulative :pools of infected snails and thereby increas.e the hazards .of infection, .Matekin ~ - al. (1954) recommend a three to four year pasture rotation for the control of Protostrongylus infection in domestic sheep. It is readily apparent that infection could be incurred at any time of the year; however, the evidence indicates that an annual cycle exists. This may be due to s,everal factors . There are: annual mortality of infected snails, seasonal resisance on the part of the rabbit to infection, seasonal food habits of the rabbit, seasonal concentration or changes in habitat for reasons other than food, the seasonal distribution of temperature and moisture conditions affecting the transmission of the parasite. Because of approximately a three months spread in the cases definitely classified as early or recovery stages .of the disease, the food and habitat factors, coupled with climate are probably the most important. However, the conditions observed at Glen Eyrie certainly indi::a,te .the mortality of snails is a definite possibility. There is little evidence as to the longevity of the other species of Protostrongylus in the lungs of their respective hosts, but certainly there is a seas,o nal fluctuation in the discharge of larvae in the feces (Couey 1950, and our own observations). �-26Deer •With deer the hea_viest lungworm infectiolls have been seen in fawns ,of their first year th.oug!l,-.the number of samples .is very small. Lungs were obtained from a highwaykilled fawn near St~te Bridge, Eagle County, Colorado, March, 1957 which had an advanced case of pneunionia at the time and was severely infected with lungworm. 1n this .cas_e the pneumonia was directly due to the· lungworm infection becaus.e nearly all of the lung was loaded with eggs and larvae of this parasite. On dissection, over fifty adult worms were recovered and certainly many more were present. Larvae and eggs .could be demonstrated in tissue slices from all lobes ~d surfaces of this lung. Bighorn Sheep Through the cooperation of the hunters and Conser;vation Officer, F. A. Colley, three sets of lungs were obtained from the Pikes Peak area during the 1957 hunting seas.on. All three exhibited hea,vy lungworm. infections, the lesions of which were well defined and concentrated near the tip of the diaphragmatic lobes but extending along the dorsal margin into the apical lobes. The bronchi and some of the le$ions from each lung were dissected and only P. stiles_i was encountered. There have been two reports .of dead or s,ick sheep from Pikes Peak but it has not been possible to confirm them because of time elapsed between the time they were supposedly observed and the time they were reported to us. During the hunting seas.o n the best count of the population was made since the mortality occurred in 1952-1953 and reported .to me by Mr. Colley as follows: West end of Strickler Tunnel Head of Bison Creek .Windy Point Bison Creek Head of Cabin Creek 42 head of ewes and lambs 9 head of ewes and lambs 20 rams (two of which were killed) 1 ram killed ___l2ld ram reported 73 head of bighorns. The times when the dead sheep were reportedly seen was prior to the hunting season and .no such Joss .of sheep or evidence of such loss was .encountered <luring the hunting season. It is significant that even though four years have elapsed since the heavy morta,lity occurred ~at heavy lungworm infections persist. All three of the rams killed were old animals (10 to 12 years) and survivors of the 1952-1953 epizootic. After the hunting season it was learned through flnother. employee of the Department, John Stevenson, that a salt station has been maintained along the Cog Railroad near Windy Point as an attraction to the sheep that they might be seen more often by the passengers on the trains. In view of the incidence of infection among snails which was associated with anothe:r salt station (F. A. Quart, Jan. 1955), it is believed _that there might be a similar connection, which would explain the observed infections. On the large mediastinal lymph nodes s.ituated between. the diaphragmatic lobes of the left and right lungs of one of the rams. several small lesions were found ab out the size of a small pin-head. From these lesions two types .of larvae were recovered by dissection; �JOO 50 0 l ' ' MICRONS FIG . 2 I �-27one the small first-stage larvae of Protostrooolus arid a larger larvae similar to the infective larvae recovered from the snails but larger having granulation present within the g.ut and conspicuous .cephalic papillae. (Fig. 2}. (Table 11 gives the measurements). From the Buffalo Peaks herd, 21 sets .of lungs were recovered during the hunting season, also 8 complete intestinal tracts. These lungs were obta,ined in the field as soon as possible after the sheep had been killed and placed in clean plastic bags in which they were transported to camp or stored in snowbanks for later transp.ortation. In camp, a small fiber tag bearing a number was a,ffixed to the lung, at the same time a gross examination was made for evidence of lung infection. In the field, insulated box containing dry ice was used .to store these specimens until they could be transported to the hatchery at Chalk Cliffs where they were frozen hard and later transported to the Denver •Fish Hatchery for further storage. There the material was stored in a cold room mistaken for one which would keep the samples frozen. The consequences were unfortunate in that all of the intestinal tracts were lost to spoilage and deterioration of the lung samples .g reatly reduced their value for study. On the basis of the field examination it appeared that all lungs were infected, with some type of le~ion being pres_e nt especially near the posterior tip of the diaphragmatic lobes. Most of these lesions were small and well defined in definite nodules; however, the lungs of some, apparently all yearlings, were found to be more generally consolidated near the tips of these lobes, to have nodular areas not so sharpl,y, defined and to exhibit a bluish color evident in the involved area while the rest of the lung was of normal color and texture. Two of the sets of lungs were obtained the last day of the seas,on and were not frozen but examined in deta,il in the laboratory. One set was from a yearling and a heavy somewhat diffuse infection of the posterior tip of the diaphragmatic lobe was noted \Wich would support the g-eneral field observation involving the lungs of other yearlings. The other set of lungs was from a ewe, reportedly "dry", the only lesions of which were small, yellowish ones .only one to three millimeters in diameter. By dissection it was possible to demonstrate within several of these nodular lesions, the sclerotized spicular portions .of male E_. stilesi; furthermore, the encapsulated calcified centers of these had a worm-like structure. All such lesions were encapsulated by tough connective tissue. First-stage larvae were recovered when a small quantity of macerated lung tissue was Baermanized indicating that there was probably some current infection present. Culture media was inoculated from the lungs of two of the ewes and sent to the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory for culture and subculture by Mr. George Post, director of the laboratory. In spite of the fact that these lungs had undergone deterioration and disc.o loration, he was able to is,olate and identify a Pasteurella organism from one of them. Table 11. Measurements of Three Larvae from Mediastinal Lymph of Bighorn Ram in Microns. 1 2 3 Anteri6r end _to excretory pore 97 105 100 Length .of esophagus 202 217 200 Maximum width 40 40 40 From anus to tip of tail 39 40 46 Total length 770 777 826 �-28- Recommendations: 1. Approxim~tely thirty ·bighorn sheep should be trapped and removed from Glen Eyrie during .the fall of 1958. 2 . The experimental pens should be modified to eliminate conditions ...: responsible for the build up of paras.i tic infection in the penned animals which is not a part _of the experiments planned. Literature Cited Colorado •Fed. Aid Quarterlies for January 1955 and July, 1957. Couey, Faye M. 1950. Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep of .Montana. Montana Game and Fish Commission. Bul. No. 2, pp . 1-90. Lahermaa, G. 1951. Investigations .o n the lungworm disease of the hare. Papers ,o n Game Research 6:47-56. Erickson, A. B. 194 7. Helminth paras,ites of rabbits .of the genus .Sylvilagus. Jour. Wld. Mgmt. 11(3):255-263. lioness, R. and.:W inter K. 1956. Diseases of Wildlife in Wyoming. Bul. 9, Wyo. Game and Fish Comm. Matekin, P . V., Turlygina, E . S., and .Shalaeva N. M. 1954. !n regard to the biology of larva of Protostrongylus in sheep and goats in connection with.the epizotiology of protostrongylosis · in Middle Asia. (In Russian) Zhur. 33:373-394. ,• ,. . Mccrae, R. 1956. Helminth parasites of cottontail rabbits from a .dry foothills habitat in northern .Coloradoo M. S. Thesis Colo. State Univers,ity. Olson, 0. W. 1954. Occurrences of the lungworm Protostrongylus boughtoni Goble and Daugherty, 1943 in snowshoe hare (Lepus a.mericahus· bairdii) in Colorado. Proc. Helm. Soc. Wash. 21 (1) : 52. ··· Ryzhikov, K . M. Gubanov, N. W. and Fedorov. K. P . 1956. An interpretation of the biological cycle of Protostrongylus in hares. (In Russian) Akad. Na.uk SSSR Dok. 108:166-168 . Scott, J . . w. 1943. A new lungworm from the Leporidae, Protos.tr?p.g;vlus ~lvilagU (n. sp. ) Univ. of Wyii> . Pub. 10 (6) : 57-71. Prepared by: R. E . Pillmore Date: October , 1958 · ,Approved by: Laurence E . Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator . �October, 1958 -29- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS --------------- State of COLORADO Project No. W"."95-R-2 Investigations of disease and paras,ites affecting game animals. Job No. _____2______________St_u_d..,Y.__o_f_c.y_s__ti_·c_e_r_c_o_s_is..._o_f_m_ul __e_d_e_e__r_._ _ __ Period covered: March 1, 1957 through February 28, 1958. Abstract: Cysticerci were found in 25 of the 212 carcasses of deer examined during the 1957 deer hun.t ing season in Colorado. A search was made for the tapeworm, Taenia krabbei in 14 carnivores, bobcats, and gray foxes but none were found. Methods: _For determining the incidence of infection, the carcasses .o f mule deer in processing or locker plants were ins!pected for the cysticerci. Only those cysts visible from the surface could be detected. The following information was recorded: Name of hunter, resident or non-resident, license number, date of kill, general condition of the animal , age class, and the number and location of the cysticerci detected. No attempt wa.s made to contact the hunters to determine the location where killed. In examining the predators for tapeworms, the intestinal tracts were stripped and washed to recover the contents, which were further washed by sedimentation and decantation with water. All parasites were recovered from the sediment both tapeworms and round worms and the numbers reco:rded. Some of the tapeworms were strained .and mounted for microscopic examination and identification. Results : The cysticerci were found in all parts of the musculature of the body, including neck, shoulder, foreshank, rib-cage, loin, flank and rump. Two separate surveys were conducted, the first during October from 21st to the 27th when 151 carcasses were examined at locker plants located in Salida, Saguache, Gunnis,on, and Montrose, Colorado; and, the second during December from the 9th to the 11th when 61 carcasses were examined at locker plants located in Montrose, Durango, and Corte:z, Colorado. In the October survey 9 or 5. 8 percent of the 151 were found infected, but examination was hindered by the fact that the majority of the animals examined were fat and in excellent condition which obscured much of the muscle surfaces which was true also of blood-shot, or wound hemorrhage.; areas on the carcasses; furthermore, this wa.s the first experienoo in making the inspections by Mr. John DeGrazio, to whom the work was assigned. Undoubtedly, some cases of infection were missed because of the above factors, as a result the figures represent a minimum incidence. In no case was infection found in fawns examined. �-30.I n the ·December survey 16 of the 61 carcasses or 26. 2 percent were found infected. Mr. Jesse Williams, who initiated work on cysticercosis was most helpful in giving us benefit of his experience and time on this second .s urvey. The carcasses of the animals inspedred on this survey were not so fat and examination was more complete, resulting in one fawn being found .intected. Sarcosporidia c.ould be demonstrated _in most of the carcasses .examined_where it was looked for, and a .few cases of leg worm, Wehr dikmansia, were encounted .in this .December survey. Taenia .k rabbei is the adult tapeworm responsible fo:r the larval form Cysticercus tarandi in the musculature of deer and on the basis of the work by Williams (1956) may also infect domestic sheep. Determining which carnivores are host to !.· krabbei and .the incidence of the infection in each is the first step in the control of the paras,ite. No ·!.· kr abbei have been found in the 14 carnivores examined. These ·were: 3 Coyotes Park Co. , Colo. , Tarryall area Jeffers.on Co., Colo., Golden Gate Can. 1 Coyote 2 .Gray Foxes .Fremont Co., Colo. Currant Creek 2 Bobcats 5 Bobcats Fremont Co. , Colo. Currant Creek Garfield and Mesa Cos. Other tapeworms recovered which have been identified are; Taenia pisiformis most abundant, Cysticerci in rabbits .1· hydatigena 'M esocestoides sp. Wewisb to acknowledge the cooperation of the Fish and,Wildlife Service for three of the coyot es, and of Jesse -Williams and Preston steele .o f the Game and Fish Department for their respective contributions of material from Mesa and Galfi eld Counties, and .Fremont County. Liter.a ture Cited: Williams, J . 1956 . ' Colo. F. A. Quart. Jan. 1956 pp. 1-10. Prepared by: John De Grazio R. E .' · Pillinore ______ _____ Date : __.....,..,.....,. J958 Octob~~ Approved by: Laurence E . Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �-31- JOB COMPLETION REPORT ________________ ....,..____ COLORADO INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Investigations of disease and Project No. __w.......,-.9.....5_-.,..R_-_2__________.p.._.a_r_a_s_i_te_s....... af_f_e_ct....i_ngljil..ligil,,,am=e---an..; .•_tm .. . _a_ls_._ _ __ General investigations of Job ,No. ______3_____________-'-__d_i_s .... e .... a-se....s........an ......d...,P.,.a..,r_a_s_i..., te_s_._________________ Period covered: March 1, 1957 through February 28, 1958. No further work was done with respect to leptospirosis, except that some effort has been made to keep up with current literature. No reports have been seen of further cases, except on the area east of the mountains in El Paso County. The presence of tularemia in beaver was reported from North Park but has not been worked oh by personnel on this project. lcon;ferred with Dr. O. -W. Olson, at Colorado State University regarding projects dealing with parasites of game animals which might be undertaken by students in which it was s.t ated that from the standpoint of the GaID.e and Fish Department, the projects which would be most valuable would be those treating the ecological relationships and the importance of particular parasites rather than cataloguing and general surveys of parasites present s,o often undertaken where nothing is ga,ined by the Department unless there is follow up work to dete'rmine what ecological relationships exist and the effect upon the population of game animals affected. Students must frequently work upon non-game animal paras.ites because they. can not get the material and the da.ta needed from game animals. Several leaflets were prepared treating game diseases, warbles and lungworms, for information to Department personnel. Other material is be.ing accumulated for similar distribution by the Information and Education Division of the Game and Fish Department. Prepared by: R. . E . · :Pillmore --------------- ·Date: ,~tober, 1958 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��October,· 1958 -33JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATJONS PROJECTS State of._....... c..,.o....L....O_R.,..A_D_O_ _ _ _ _ _ __ Project No. W-95-R-2 Investigations of disease and paras.ites affecting game animals. Job No. _ _ _ _4_____..,...._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _...i ~Pu __b_l;;.;;i... c_at_i_on .......o...f_f_in_d-i_ngliijl,,s...~ - - - - - - - Period covered: March 1, 1957 through February 28, 1958. A paper was prepared and presented in the technical section at the meeting of the Western Association of State Game and Fish Commissioners which was held in Glenwood Springs, Colorado during June of 1957. The title of this paper was, "Lungworm and Its Relationship to Bighorn Sheep Management 11 • With respect to the co-authorship of a bighorn pamphlet, the increase in information and the difficulties .in writing have prompted the dropping of this plan in favor of sepairate publications. Conr:.iderable information is being accumulated but no manuscript has yet been prepared. Time has not been available for other publications. Prepared by: R. E. Pillmore --------------- Date: Octo1:>er, 1958 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ����-374. In the final regression equation, independent factors represented by r' below . 45 were deleted because the minor improvement in the multiple R was not felt to be commensurate with the sacrifice in degrees of freedom for the final analysis. ·The exceptions to this procedure were found in those cases where only one factor would have remained for the final regression. In this extreme, r' were accepted as low as . 30. ·. · 5. In the final step, the"·\ adjusted-count variates were increased to Ni raw data variates in the.·proportions indicated by the Ni raw data variates. Degrees of freedom for analysis are based on N1 - l - j ' . The apparent duplication of regression analyses in steps 2 and 4 was necessary because some of the factors considered to be statistically independent were not actually independent. Landuse acreages, for instance, we re independent only to the extent that each study area :was · limited in size and an increase in the acreage of one crop necessarily caus.e d a decrease in one or more other crops. Thus, it was poss'ible for linear correlation coefficients (r, step 1) to indicate a relatively strong relationship (i.- . 45) between counts and two different indepentent factors when the actual relationship was confined to only one of the independent factors~ The first multiple curvilinear regression -equation (step 2) ~as used to provide recognition of this possibility; r: (step 3) measured the strength of the correlation with such relationships removed; and the final multiple curvilinear regression equation (step 4) provided the best estimate of adjusted population counts. Although raw counts could have been adjusted on the basis of Ni instead of N.., 29 variates; it was felt that the N = 29 adjustment and subsequent :i:-eapportionment gave a much more accurate measure of actual variance in the final analy13is. When the Ni :regression analysis is used, the i variates com.prising the totaLfor any one study :.a rea a:re equal and variance for the adjusted counts is considerably reduced. Crowing Counts Two permanent listening stations were established on alternate corners or opposite sides_ of the center section of each study area at the maximum distance from farm.buildings or . other sources of possible sound disturbance. Each year, two-minute counts of pheasant c r owing activity were made from these points at least three times during the April 1 to . June 15 period. _ All counts were taken between an hour before and an ho11r after sunrise. Temperature and wind velocity were recorded for each count period, but there were many other factors which had an influence on count levels. Since it was impossible to · recognize and measure all such factor s, it was assumed that any single count probably represented something less .t han the optimum for llie ~tation at which it was taken and that t he lowest of the three replications was the least accurate. Thus, the lowest count for each station was deleted from the analysis and _.the data used consist of two counts per station, four counts per study area, eacp. year. Adjustment of Crowing Counts Using the multiple curvilinear regression adjustment methods previously described, raw data crowing counts were adjusted for a variety of independent factor influences (Table ·1) and adjusted coun.ts (Table 2) were computed. - �<»38- Table 1. --Correlation and regression estimates leading to adjustment of spring crowing .· .·. •COllfits 1.·.29 nine--se~tion study areas in no.rtheaste:rn Colorado; 1956i1957, 1958. Years · Itldepentlerit · 1957 · 1958 1956 Factors ·· ····• 1mear correHi.tion (r) . •·· · . 487 . 496 476 Wheat stubble , 277 • 270 . 686 Fallow -.741 Pasture - , 588 -. 545 -. 032 .107 Sorghums .162 -.230 Millet -.258 -.461 N, , 254 .027 . . 072 Ni •·Corn Ni l ;.., 242 - , 313 .. . 506 -,388 . -.230 sunrise -.193 .. ,307 ... ,051 . .057 .... 170 -,.628 Temperature -.769 · .· , 006 . · , 046 ;..,024 · • -.184 .·· · · · -; 078 Wind velocity . -.008 Multiple curvilinear regression ~rtwith r . 20 · 0 (6) .. , 947 Pasture SUnrise ; 726* .564* Wheat stubble·· --.•193 -.241 Fallow Millet • 574* ,293 •. 301* -,109 . 271 ,272 -,243 -,474* -,542* • 471* . 750* The calculations in Table 1 demonstrate several important relationships which should require further examinationo For the purpos~s qf thi$ r~pprj however, only the gross relationships were examined becau.s e the major purpose of the calculations was adjustment of the :raw data counts for independent factor variations, Of the six lafid...use factors examined each yeari oruy four were demonstrated to have •some t'elatively consistent .effect on ·pheasant populations. The multiple regression analyses sb:ow that pasture a6reages have a stronger influence on pheasant levels .than any othe:t 1md-use factor .. In all three years of study; a minimum of 30 percent of the variation (:r 2) recorded in raw data crowing counts could be correlat~d with variation. in pasture acreages on study areas. The strength: of other land-"use effects is less obvious, but the changes in stli."ength when interrelationships effects are :removed provide some evidence · of the troe ·influence patterns. The r 1 in Table 1 are the linear correlation between· raw data counts •an.d the count est:i:matesJ:rom · m.ultiple regresslon ·curves for the independent ·fa.ctors. In effect, r' is the :best estimate of .the correlation between counts and a single independent factor with >the influences .of all other independent factors adjusted to their means, The r' for pasture, in every year, demonstrated a very minimal influence by interrelationship with other factors. Their' foir wheat onthe other hand, . lost strength every year; demonstrating that the relationships for wheat were at least partially based on correlation w:i.th other landuse factors .rather than .with. pheasant population .· levels. .Millet, .. surprisingly, . was tbe major beneficiary of the multiple regression adjpstments and demonstrat~d .smne increase in . strength ~ach year the study. . Fallow influenc~s .on pheisant populations gel(l,erally decreased in strength whemmultiple regression influences tested, . . . . .· of were �- 39~ The significant conclusion suggested by these regression equations is that pheasant survival, or movement, during the winter period is not based so much on preference for a particular cover type as it is on apparent avoidance of large areas of pasture and millet stubble where no good cover is available. Of the independent factors controlled by variation in field technique, sunrise was the most important in all three years of study. The decrease in the strength of the sunrise r from -. 506 in 1956 to -. 242 _in 1958 was felt to be due primarily to an .increase in the pheasant population over the same period. Mean crowing counts for all points increased from 24, 2 in 1956 to 25. 2 in 1957 to 46. 1 in 1958. Thus, as crowing intensity approached the probable sa.t uration level for the habitat, the regression lines describing the influences of sunrise on crowing intensity tended toward the horizontal. Over the same period, temperature influences increased. The average temperature at the time of count was slightly higher in 1958 than in the other years, but the diffeirence between the 1956 and 1958 means was less than one degree so there is little reason to suspect that the influence of temperature is more important at some population levels than others. It is suspected however, that census of a relatively dense pheasant population may be more sensitive to variations in all independent factors which have a direct physical effect than census of a lower population. The combined influence of several independent factors on pheasant population levels is demonstrated by the multiple curvilinear R in Table l. These data are primarily important because of their strength. In effect, the R for 1956 demonstrates that 83 percent (R2) of the variation in raw data counts can be accounted for by variations in the five factors comprising the multiple regression equation, Two of these factors had so little influence that R' is still capable of accounting for 7 5 percent of the variation with only three independent factors. In 1957, three independent factors accounted for less than 60 percent of the ~tal variation :recorded, but in 1958, five factors were responsible for over 90 percent of the recorded variation. Thus, in the analyses of a4justed pheasant crowing counts, at least 60 percent of the variability due to all factors has been removed through regression and the remaining lesser percentage is the total amount which could accrue to the influences of habitat .improvement plantings. The regression analyses were not carried to the obvious extreme of adjustment for all independent factors for several reasons. First, and most obvious, it was not possible to measure, or even determine, every independent factor which could have an influence on crowing .counts and pheasant population levels. Since the counts cannot be adjusted completely, the final evaluation is based on year to year changes in s ignificance and shifts _in the ranking with.in analysis groupings rather than on direct significance. The increas.e ·in R' after any r' drops below . 45 for an individual independent factor was not usually considered commensurate with the required loss .o f degrees of freedom in the analysis. Analysis of Crowing Counts The analysi s of variance for adjusted crowing counts arranges the study area .data in a 3 x 3 x 3 lattic e for Density (the number of plantings per study area), Location (northeast, central or southwest within the study region) and Type (species composition of plantings on study areas). This general pattern is described graph ically in Table 3 and the analyses �Table 2.--A,djusted spring crowing counts, two replications from each of two .stations per area, 29 nine-section study areas in n.ortheaste:rn Colora.do~ 1956, 1957, 1958~~ Study 1956 ,Area Station 1 Station~ 2 _ ]1)2 D3 D4 E2 E3 E4 21.8 14.7 27.1 26~9 22.7 11.1 F2 23.8 F3 9 •.1 F4 ,A.2 A.3 A4 B2 B3 B4 G2 C3 c4 02 03 04 05 Ox 06 07 08 09 8.1 48.4 26.9 9.9 19.8 9.8 o.o 1,., 24.7 14.8 19.6 30.l 13.4 12.2 iJ.8 .36.3 24.1 4.9 47.3 7.6 21.4 20.5 1$.8 · 16.8 4.$ 6.8 2lo3 35.8 20.0 31.3 11.9 12.8 25.2 30.,3 15.7 20.4 42.1 11.4 7.2 Tota.ls Sl 67 .o 15.9 $2 51.1 33.l SJ 11.7 56.6 34.8 21.5 35.0 10.6 14.2 10.4 . 2J.5 27.6 ..·.· 25.2 J.5 . 8.4 11.9 14.,7 10.4 51.5 12.4 · 10.2 29.6 26.7 43.$ 1,.2 2L4 32~, 42.7 13.5 14.9 71.l 1$2.1 39.1 48.1 98.1 118.1 40.6 17~3 19 .. 1 61.1 112<.l 116.3 72.1 156.1 82~1 44.o 20~2 12.6 55.a 5.3 29.,6 42.8 15. 8 53.1 58.l .69.6 46.,1 ·.·. 184.6 7J.6 124,.6 1,0.6 17.2 39.0 55.-9 6~$ 76.6 75.6 95.1 ·34.9 28.8 o.o 41.5 180.1 87.l 32.6 28o2 2,.1 9.0 Jl.O 13.8 48.4 E 45 •.'l 13~7 21.5 37.5 62.1 14.1 55.3 J6 .4 43.6 21.9 29 . 7 3L9 14.4 47.1 33.l 20.4 43.1 2Iirm.9 Station l 45.2 28.J 31.9 39.1 17.4 44.7 .• StatiOn 2 59.2 40~9 1$.2 38.J 18.$ 42~5 54.8 49.7 1$,.8 18.7 Jt.,5 . 16.8 24.4 3.3 21.2 - 14.5 58.9 22.8 3.3.6 22.5 22.2 25.1 31~5 11 .. 2 -1.2 - 2.0 -1.2 36.4 10.0 18.4 24., . 16. 7 35.0 9.0 ll.8 -1.2 35.6 6.$.0 ,o.4 24.6 · · 24.6 26.7 12.7 -0.3 24.J 22.3 12.-7 7.3 20.s 14.9 18 .. 5 lfr.9 29.8 16.8 34.9 40.9 7.9 56.J 44. 7 o.n 38.J 35 . 8 13.8 59.9 1$.2 26.0 11.4 19.8 59.3 48.4 2.7 16.2 . o.o . o.o 7.5 47.9 27.2 7.9 46o!i 37.,2 20.9 42.4 47 .2 o.o i5 ~5 1,.0 28.4 19.5 12~7 • 0 •.3 18.7 22o,'3 11;2 51.8 37;5 19 .. 8 48.6 30.5 22~9 26.9 23~6 . 2~7 184.1 5.5.1 24.o 46.6 3i.5 34.2 30.2 2-5;.2 61.1 29.0 2L5 22.6 16.9 21.;4 191.6 1958 1957 £ . station 1 1a4.4 · 11.s 79.4 55.4 1,7.4 34.6 228.4 68.6 86 .. 4 68.8 111.4 33.8 ,1.4 47.J -5.6 24.7 157 .4 59.5 61.4 73~4 52.4 49.7 81.4 42.3 95.4 . 72.6 45.,4 29.8 ...o.6 lL.6 78.4 34.2 10lo4 48.9 63.4 >o9 15L4 47.5 141.4 51.2 49-4 34.4 21L4 74.2 138.4 53.5 70.4 J8.l 148~4 64.9 135 -4 49.7 5.4 13.9 2701'i<>l3 85'.9 52.6 64 . 9 23.9 18.1 43.2 65.,3 57.5 39.7 53.,3 27.8 26.,5 48.8 . 59.,9 50.4 48.J 34.6 . . 17 •-' 73.7 84.4 47.8 68.2 24.0 58 .6 79 .. 9 53 .. 6 Jl.6 ·. 34.1 9.9 42.1 51.0 2L4 52 .. 3 56.1 29.5 7lol 63.4 36.3 41.1 · 10. 7 13.9 2. 7 43.1 45.8 8.3 55°) 56.1 35.1 50.2 $1 .. 8 25.9 62.1 47.5 9.2 69.3 50.1 39.7 85.2 39.8 £ 291.6 182.6 1J5.6 276.6 201.6 26.5 56.!5 114.6 216.6 59.6 20,5.6 16.0 92.6 296.6 209.6 79.0 43.9 30.7 ,o.s 28.l 5°4 36.2 49.9 19.0 80., 57.2 19.6 155.6 2S6.6 123.6 29.6 I 1$5.6 .,,.::, 195.6 54.6 235 .6 226.6 70 .1 5t3.9 36.3 i18.6 265.6 227.6 136.6 60.7 228.6 41.6 57.5 4.6 22 5.6 490l.2 167 ~4 79.1 · 67 .2 108~4 75 .2 27.7 82 .. 4 52.6 Station 2 27.3 78.1 73.4 45.8 67,.2 39.3 38.9 291.6 21506 164.6 �-41varianee for the three years are presented in Table 4. 1n order to complete the 27 variate lattice block it was necessary to delete the data for the Jhree ,v ery _heavily improved are_a s {Sl, S2, S3) and estimate a value for the missing va1r'iate Ox by averaging the two control areas with the same Location {03 and OS). Degrees of freedom for analysis are determined by the total number of variates (108) minus one, less the number .of independent factor-s . . in the final regression equation less one for each of the four Ox variates. 1n all three analyses, 'the Fos level of significance was accepted-as indicative of statistically important relationships. Table 3. --Lattice arrangement of study area population count data _for the analysis of . variance, 27 nine-section study areas in no:,;theastern Colorado. 9-planting 6-planting JJ.O planting / areas / areas / controls D2 1)3 D4 (evergreen) A2 A3 A4 (evergree~ 02 03 04 (no plantings) E2 E3 E4 (deciduous) B2 B3 B4 (deciduous) 05 Ox 06 (no plantings) F2 F3 F4 (mixed) C2 C3 C4 (mixed) 07 . 08 09 (no plantings) Location: northeastern, l 2 t 02, 05, 07 cent:ra1);3 /. 03, Ox, 08 . southwestern,.l:4 .t 04, 06 09. Derislty: · 9-planting areas,EDEF 6-planting areas,.t ABC _no planting areas,Z: O -_ TYJJe: . Evergreens, EDA i 02, 03, 04 . · ·.Deciduous, . ;E EB ./ 05, Ox, 06 Mixed,£: EC ./- 07, 08, 09 Discussion Before attempting to evaluate the influence of habitat improvement plantings on pheasant populations through interpretatio~ of the significance shown in the analyses of· variance (Table 4), several important limitations of the data must be recognized. First, and most important, it has already been demonstrated by the regression adjustment patterns that habitat plantings could not possibly be responsible for more than 40 pe:rcent of the variation among study area crowing counts in any single yeair. In 1956 and 1958, the variations in land-use patterns and field tech~ique were r esponsible for so much of the recorded variation that the portion left to all unmeasured influences, including habitat plantings, was only 25 percent in 1956 and less than 10 percent in 1958. Second, the adjusted crowing counts are the best estimate of study area winter carrying capacity after the influences of factors . which cannot be considered perennial have -been removed, but they are not necessarily a -· measure of habitat improvement influence. Although it seems possible that certain types of habitat improvement will increase the carrying capacity of wildlife range, it is also possible, particularly in the case of winter cove:r, that the basic carrying capacity will not be affected by the little improvement work necessary to achieve the desired 11seed stock 11 protection. Instead, the influence of winter cover will be measured only in the .changes �-42- Table 4. --Analyse_s of v~riance, adjusted crowing counts, 29 nine-section study areas, 4 replications, nQrthe~stern5CoJorado 1 1956, 1957, .1958_,-_. . -'1956 . : · - 1957 · . · ! i958 Source of DF . Tota}lJ x2 . DF /l'otall:' x2 -- : - .DF TotalB :x:2 Variation 'I'-otal - Location Density Type Period · DxL DxT DxP LxT Lx P . TxP Dx LxT DxLxP DxTxP Error Error . x2 100 . 19595, 34 . 100 2 '. .•. 2752. 10** 2 2 2 4 4 '4 6 4 6 6 8 12 12 2-9 ·Mean s9,uare··~ 217. 00 701. 84** 330.72* ·:2 1s; 13 94.48 112.93 132. 56 90.34 49. -02 361. 57** 85.33 86 . 85 103. 731 3008.21 29239. 81 98 43445.04 ·4294;'69** 1110. 53** 1230. 25** 42.85 61L 76** 1027. 11** 96.41 661;45** 56,:H 61.18 194.12* 73.95 45.72 81,610 2366,'69 . 2 13073.73** 510. 01* · 1320.15** ... 25. 39 172. 25 Mean sq'a1ire '-· 2 2 3 4 4 6 4 6 6 8 12 12 29 ,. 2 2 3 4 4 6 4 6 6 8 12 . ·12 27 534. 62* 92.14 563. 30** 47. 68 119 . 12 184. 32 65. 79 87. 35 . 13·3 _580 in ranking within various groupings of study areas following mild and severe winter conditions. Thus, although no change in the_basic car.eying capacity oLthe habitat .would be recorded, the ranking of areas which had been improved with effective winter cover would r ise after a severe winter because of the higher survival rates. Table 5 lists the means for each subsample group of variation sources recorded as significant in any year of the study and presents the "d" l./ (difference between means necessary for s ignificance) in ili.ose cases where significance was recorded. l/ d:>t 05 V 2 EEMS .. n- where EE~S (estimated et-ro:r mean square) EEMS = -M2 .error (1 / M2 _treatment) . -E .x2 error and n = -...,N""'_ _ _ _ _ _ __ number of means Location: rhe most important single fact brought out by the analyses of variance is the inordinate strength of the Location factor. The graduation in pheasant populations from northeast to southwest within _the study region. represents .the single greatest variation recorded in this study, and it i.s .obvious that minor variation in location within subsample groupings for. other factors could result in a significant mean .square in the analysis when no real significant difference between pheasant population levels actually exists. · The reasoni;; for the extreme drop in the pheasant population toward the southern part of the s.tudy �-43Table 5. --Means .of subsample groups and differences necessary.for significance analyses of va:riance, .· adjusted·spring crowing counts, 27nine-section study . areas in northeastern Colorado, 1956, 1957, 1958. i · · Scmtc'e of · • SUbsantple group means .·.· n · 1956 d-::>- > 1957 Variation •.·.· •··· Subsample •·. ·• · d> 1958 36i6 • · 61.7 . Location .· Northeast 36 23, 7 .. 50.0 Central Southwest 9;;;.plantlngs · 6.-planting s .· .· 22.9 18.7 41.0 5. 2 47. 4 . 5. 9 . ••·· ..·,~P 12Ianti~s · .. ·•·•· ·· . 29~.2 Type ···. 29.3 . ·51.5 21.2 .· 27,5 45.3 23. ·7 24.6 25.2 45.9 44.0 26.2 39.5 45.6 65.4 Evergreens · Deciduous · Mixed . Sta. Dxt · Sta. 2, 1st count .2nd count .· 9-planting, n()rth . . · . 6;;;.planting; 12 36.2 .: 2.7.J, . no planting, 32;7 .· 9-plantmg, central 2L0 42.6 19.9 49.2 .· 6:-planting, no planting, 9-planting, south . 6.;.plantingv ·. no plantipg, 9 planting, evergr. 19.2 16.6 •· ...44. l ·.i29i1 34;6 14.7 13,3 · 14, 7 . 28~ 7 22.1 56.9 . 28.6 20.0 9~0 ·. 24.7 · 50. 8 .· 49.4 42.9 55.2 18.7 14. 5 decid. mixed ·6--planting, .evergr. decid . .· mixed no planting, < 27.4 19.9 21.4 2s~o 25.0 ··•····.23;4 D :x Lx T 59,1 60. El 12.0 · · 10.5 35.1 35. 7 10.8 24. 3 • 1L7 20.3 28.5 . 35.0 34.2 33.8 48~4 52,5 · 9.6 . 41.3 . 1958 72.9 45.7 33.9 69. 2 50. 4 28, 7 54.2 51. 4 23. 2 . 74.2 52.4 38.9 64.2 30.9 7.4 ·· 38.9 48. 9 13. 7 58.9 56.7 2'9.7 66.4 56. 9 34. 2 · 56. 4 . 57. 2 10. 4 · ----------------------------Areas D 2.:... 3 _4 E2-3-4 F2-3-4 A2-3-4 B2-3-4 C2-3-4 02-3:-4 . 05-x-6 07 ... 8'"'.9 2L8 23. 8 17 .4 18.4 9.8 19.2 18>9 13. 3 14, 5 11. 5 46.2 17.8 38.0 12.0 24. 5 29. 5 10. 2 ... 31.237.7 15~3 28. 8 29; 1 18. 0 $9. 0 2Q;; 5 . 10. 8 46.1 57 .1 15. 4 39.4 23.9 19. 6 37.9 52~ 9 37. l 39.4 28.4 18.4 -1.4 13.1 20.4 11.4 -0.2 25.4 15.9 35.4 . 12.4 34.6 17.6 33~ 9 1. 4 �-44= study region.are not.known but there1$ apparently sorp,e :relationship to the total rainfall recorded in the ·. stuliy region over the past ten years. · Until 1957 ~ all of southeastern Colorado and the 1:najor part of the. so:ifttern Great F>lai:ns wheat heU was characte:dzed by annual failure of crops and yirtu~li,Ycomplete moisture . .The conditions did not extend .into Phillips $(:1dgwick 9ount.ies. ip. the northern part of tlle study region, but and Washington cow:ities in so~tl1.errrpa:rt were qµite d.tyand failures ..... in the area containing the "4'' study areas were not uncommon. Oth,er observers have noted that phe3:~antscannotadjustto lack ofsma.llgrain .agric1.1lt-ure, andJtis not too surprising con.tilluous yea.rs su.b:no:rmafcrops, and. drouth con9itions might. de- .· trimental effect on pheasant population levels. In order to make recognition of the Location factor possible, pa:rticulary as .i t affects the subgrot1ps of .other faptors tested in the .analysis of numerical of Iocatioii established all, areas. . .The Township containing area B4 at the southwestern limit of the study region was given coordinates 1 and 1 .andeach Township or. Ra1t1ge northandeastwasI1.umbeJred consecutivels,higheir . ...The product of th.e two . coordinates for the township .contain.big each..study airea was considered.to be the numerical location code for that area. · Location code numbers are presented in Table 6. a or Ywna lack of severe crop the a of that sevel"al have a. code variance'.a was. for study Table 6. --Location for· . 3Qstudyareas · . Tahle3\ code num~~Es . .... .......... . . · ........ ·. in nol'theastern . ·.· .. · ... · · . Colorado ~see ·. also 9-plantipg areas Dt-99 . n3 ...40 · D4--30 E2-88 E3-90 , E4-28 F3-40 .· F4-12 A2:..110 B2·90 F2-56 C2-64 Special.areas (heavily improved) · no Phmting areas · 02-110 03-49 05 ... 8.8 Ox--49 A3-42 A4-25 B4-1 B3-24 07-81 · C4-9 C3"'."42 s1-121,s2.:.72, sa-21 · < ()8-48 04--20 06-18 . 09-4 Density: A significant variation among the means of the three d~nsity--of.,,;.planting groups was recorded u1two of the three years'. .Jn both 1957 and 1958, ijle spring c;rowing count poptifaifons were.significantly lower on s...pJa.nting than. . on.eitherQontrol or 9...planting areas. The relative rank of any density group in a single year is notparticula:rly significant except that it indicates improvement plantings do not increase the habitat carrying capacity or total pheasant<population, The changes in rank, however,, are veryimpo:rtant because they demonstrate the probable winter cover values of windbreakplantings. The winter of 1955-56 was the most severe of the three recordedduring this study, Pheasant mortality was not excessive, but some birds were killed by storm conditio~s, Jn contrast, the winter of 1957-58 was considered to be one of the mildest ever recorded in northeastern Coforido~··. No were sno~all was fc:Lirly heavy was never accompanied by high Winds eitreme coia: · · The winter of i956+57 ranked about midway between 1955--56 and 1957-58 in sever:ify. >Weather was fairly mild during the December, 1956, through February, 1957, period, but blizzards we:re :recorded during Noveniber and March. No pheasant mortaU.ty was a.t tributed to either the fall or spring blizzards of 1956-,57. m3:jor hiizzards re~orded, aiid althoug~ or 1t·· · Following these three wifiters; the ranking of the Density groups followed a pattern which generally suggests that windbreak plantings increase rather than reduce pheasant mortality. Since !95'7-58 wa.s the niildEi~t vv~teir <>f ~llt:l ~t:u.g;r~ -µi.Ei rank111g fc,r tllEl .~p:tit!g .of 1958 is considerEld to the beist niE,aSg:r"e t)f Jhe ~llh~r~rtt <'ia.t:ryitilg c:a,p~city of the stt1dy areas involved in each Density~~o11p. ~eafrierwas so 11J.il~ th.at pllea.~a.Ilts wer19 nof fo:t"(J~d to s~ek be �-45winter. shelte~, and the spring populations probably demonstrated as little winter movement .or mortality as ever occurs in the study region . . The 9~planting areas ranked first, control areas were second and the mean of the counts on 6"'.'."plan:ting areas was significantly1ow:er. than . either of the othe-r groups. The ratio and ranking of the 1958 crowing count levels were very similar to the ratio and ranking demonstrated by _the location-code numbers for the same study area groups. Thus, it seems probable that disp:roportion,ate subgroup sampling for Location_ was responsible for the variation. The ranking of Density group means following the fairly severe winter of 1956-57 shows that the 9-planting areas dropped into second place and were replaced by controls. The 6-planting ,a rea mean was again in third place by a significant riiargin, and this margin was much greater .than it was after the mild winter of 1957-58. Following the most severe winter of the three, 1955-56, the .9~planting areas ranked lower than all other _ groups, 6-planting areas were second and controls demonstrated the highest mean.crowing count. None of the differences in 1956 were significant. • The relationships demonstrated by the -Density group rankings can be interpreted several ways, but none of the interpretations give credence to the supposition that windbreak plantings provide effective winter shelter for pheasants. From time to time it has been suggested that windbreak plantings, particularly those which are not -at least seven rows and more in width, may represent death traps instead of shelter because pheasants are buried :by drifting snovv. No important pheasant losses due to burial have been reported in Colorado and no mortality of this type was recorded during the three winters of the study reported in this paper. When it is considered however. that significance was shown by only 5. 2 calls variation in 1957 and 5. 9 calls in 1958, and that the greatest difference between Density group means in any year was 10; 5 calls, it can be seen that the death -of a very few pheasants could cause the recorded changes in ranking of the Density group means. In total, the death of only one cock r. pheasant per Section, over the whole winter period, through causes directly .related to windbreak plantings, could have been detected in the ranking. shifts and would have caused th~ . relationships demonstrated by the Density group means. . . Another, but less probable, interpretation of the ranking shifts demonstrated by Density gr oup means is based on the assumption that pheasant movement patterns during the .winter are controlled p11imarily by the quest for food. Beca:use s.o much wheat is grown in the study region there is an abundance of waste grain, and food is not normally a problem. During a seve-re winter, however, it is possible that available food supplies would be exhausted or buried in the areas adjacent to windbreak plantings. Pheasants which might otherwise remain in the gener al area near plantings would then be foirced to search farther afield for waste grain, and the distance traveled in search ofwiri.dswept areas would be in direct proportion to the severity of winter weather and the total need for food . ., Until a more intensive study .of pheasant winter moveIX1ent and mortality patterns •than any now available has been conducted and reported, it will not be possible to determine . the exact reasons for the shifts in mean crowing count levels r eported here. Whatever the ~xplanation, windbreak plantings in.· nol'theagteni Colorado are not -providing effective winter cover because, at best, they do not prevent pheasants from moving to unimproved areas; _.and, _at worst, they appear to be responsible for a small increase in pheasant mortailty in s.eV'ere winters. . . �-46T,Ype: ·· /,,. significant variation among Type mean-s was demonstrated .i n every year of-the study·, but no interpretation of the relationships is·possible because each of the type mean~r represents the combined data from six impro'ved areas and three control plots. The Density x Type intel'action, which separates the improved a.nd control areas offers the best .··· opportunity for evaluation of the influence of species composition of improvement plantings, and discussion of the Type factor is confined to that interaction. Period: A significant difference among the m eans of the four counts taken on each study area was recorded only in 1956. This difference has no meaning relative to the influence of habitat improvement plantings, · -but it does tndicate that 1956 crowing counts were probably initiated too early in the Spring and that some of the counts may have been made too early in the morning; Most •of this type of variation was removed by taking three counts at each station and deleting the lowest count from analysis, but the elimination method was not entirely successful. Density ;( :Loca:tlon. interaction!-_T his interaction tests the possibility that the influences of Density were 'n ot the :same within each of.the three Location groups. In this case, because each Location :represented a vastly different pheasant p·o pulation level, it -als.o tests for the possibility that a small pheasant population is--affected in a different way than a large populatiofi. Significance-was recorded only in 1957. The most important fact demonstrated by the ·D x L variates is that the data from three study areas, even with four-replications per area, are extremely variable. The difference necessary to detect significance in 1957 was ;equal to 25 percent of the highest and 90 percent of the lowest counts recorded. The location-code means for t he D x L interaction show·that dis .. · proportionate sampling for Location in the interaction subsamples varied from the Density pattern..only,in the northern part of the study region where 9;...planting areas were generally situated further south than other areas. When this factor is considered, the general pattern of ranking shifts within each of the three Location groups was similar to that shown by the Density variate means except that the relationship was progressively weaker as the pheasant population became smaller. Since the loss of any percentage <>fa pheasant population is much easier to detect where the population is h1gh, this relationship is not surprising; and it seems doubtful that it actually indicates proportionately smaller losses in the less heavily populated part of the pheasant range. Densit,y-x Tzye interaction: This interaction is, in theory; a test ofthe possibility that the influence of improvement planting species composition varies: according to the ·number of plantings established. Actually, since it was not possible to determine the influence of species composition with the groupfn.gs forthe Type variate, the test is als.o the only measure of the variaJion in influence of improvement plantings caus.ed by differences in the species composition of plantings.- Significant differences among means·were recorded in 1957 and 1958, but in both years the vax-ration was felt to be ·due to dispfroportionate sampling for the Location factor rather than to actual variations in_the pheasant populations. In evefy grouping, mixed planting area.s were located further south than other ·Types, and .correspondingly, the miied planting TYl)e ranked lowetfl; ·w. most obs.ervattcins. Decidupus pl!i.n,ting a-reas were niore · northern in the 9-planting sample and .e vergreen planting areas were more northern in the 6-planting sample. The shifts in ranking from year to year indicate that pheasant mortality �-47is highest for areas with deciduous ,plantings. ~ both the 9-planting and the 6-planting groups, the dec'iduous sub-group tended lower than the subsample disproportionate . sampling for Location and the evergreen and mixed groups tended higher - particularly in the years following severe winters. That this relationship actually indicates population losses are confined to deciduous-planting areas seems doubtful, but it does _suggest that. fewer birds are lost where evergreen plantings are present. The significant differences between c mtrol area groups in 1957 and 1958 show that pheasant winter mortality due to non-windbreak causes was greater in the subsamples f:rom the more northern, and more heavily populated, part of the s,tudy region. ~- Location x Type interaction: The interaction of Location and Type should be a test of the . · possibility flat plantings of a .c ertain species composition are more effective in one Location, in this case a density of pheasant population, than another. Since each variate represents the data from two improved 8.lt'eas and a -controlhowever, there is some doubt that the relationship has any meaning. None of the ranking for the L x T interaction variat~ means disagreed with the general conclusion shown by the Density and D x L variates, but the means are not shown in Table 5 because the interaction cannot be cited as further evidence that pheasant mortality is lower where evergreens are planted or that mortality is generally greater toward the northern part of the study region. Density x Locationx TYJ)e interaction: The final analysis of variance interaction for crowing counts is a direct comparison of individual study area .m eans. Significan~ differences were noted in 1956 and 1957, but there was no detectable difference among pheasant populations on individual areas in 1958. In each of the years when significance was recorded, a general group of study areas toward the southern portion of the study region had significantly smaller mean counts than a similar g r oup in the northern portion <;>f the region, but : only two study area means in 1'956 and three in 1957 were significantly greater .than the . yearly means, and only three were smaller in 1957. The range of areas significantly at variance with the regional means demonstrated no consistent pattern although 9-planting and northern areas were represented slightly more often than areas in other groups. The shifts in :ranking of study areas from year to year were mostly so variable that no pattern was discernable. In general, it appeared that pheasant populations' on 9-planting areas were more variable than populations on 6- planting or control a r eas and that slightly greater variations were cha:racteristic where deciduous plantings were present. The :ranking of impr oved areas within Location groups provides further confirmation for the winter cover relationships already described. In every case, the deciduous-area populations tended to rank lower than the disproportionate sampling for location would have indicated. §pecial Areas: · The evaluation of the three heavily developed areas, Sl, S2 and ~3, _could not be 'included in the regular analysis of variance because not enoug}:l samples were available to complete a Density block comparable to those -f or the standard windbr eak plantings. The crowing counts for these ar.e as wereadjusted with the other 26 areas studied however, and it is possible to make some general comparisons which provide at least a partial evaluation of the areas. �-48- Area Sl was further northeastthan any other study area examined, and .in every year Sl had a higher count than. the mean for the northern group. Area S2 was slightly north of the central group 1ocati0n'"-C6de mean and ariea .83 was north of the southern code mean. On both a:reaS, crowing counts:were higher than the mean for study areas in the same. Locationgtolip, Althou.gh the generally high crowing counts on these-three study areas were felt tbhEfdue to tb.e differericesin sample location, the shifts in :ranking from year to year show that at least part of the count may have been du.e to other.factors. In eveey year, a.reaSl tanked highest, ·S2was ·second and 83 ·was·lowest. Thedifferences between. areas varied from year to year however, and the variations demonstrate that at Ieasttwo . of the special areas had a higher pheasant population following a severe winter than the location' alone might :indicate, It is ~isum1ad that the differences necessary to· ittdicate.significance among the 27 .study areas bi the·. analyses variance were a·. reasonable.·estimate· of the d which could apply to nf the special·areas, both·area·s1 and-a:rea S2 had significantly higher crowing count means . than. th.e average for their location in 1956, Following the milder winters of 1956-57 and . 1957-58; this s.igniffoance was nol :recorded; and further; the genell:'al similarity tolocationcode m.u:rtbers was stronger followittg the mild winter of 1957-58 than in any other year . . Thus, even though the special areas did derive their above average counts from.the fact that they were in a more favorable location than the general sample, there is evidence that the difference was greatest followmg a severe winter and least followiJJg ~ :mHcl.\\Tinter because cover on the special areas was more effective, · Area S3 did •n ot follow the pattern of the other two··special areas, and in.fact demonstr ated spring populations· which were almost equal to the. southern .Location mean .and lower than . thej.r shoul&have been according to the location-code .of. -S3 in both 1956 and 1957. This Js . not surprising however, because area 83, even though heavily developed, had almost no . . large plantings ot•·concent:rations of plantings as did the other two .special -. areas . .In effect, area'. S3 ·wa.s very si:tnilar fo the F areas in·the main analysis except that considerably more than 9 plantings were involved, · The fact that area 83;· which had a.number of veey fine evergreen plantings in the older age class.e s, did not show any significant value as effective winter covet Alsd suggests that the possible value of evergreens shown by.the main analysts was ju.st· a demonstration of fewer. windbreak-caused pheasant winter mortalities . · The development in area S2, by contrast to 83, consisted of a single large timberclaim near an intethiittent c:reekbottom. The width of this claim was equivalent to atleast 25 normally spaced windbreak. rows and the·cover was supplemented by several willow thickets and a deep draw cuthy inteftlnittent spring and sutnmerfloods. On area Sl, a centrally located 160 acre plot was very heavily planted with wildlife improvement windbreaks ranging f:rom three to sev~ltl.tows in width and following the watercourses as well as the straight row pattern typical of the standard windbreak. The incidence of weed patqhes and land ioo to cultivate was also fairly high within the 160 acre plot, and it is probable that these non"."' windbi'eak areas provided winter cover values in addition to any supplied by :the wider parts of the total development pattern.·· It is -possib1e··infact, ·tha.tthe intermittent creekb()ttom areas and atien~nt overhanging grassy banks, willow thickets and weedypatches were more valuable to pheasants on both Sl and S2 than any of the perennial woody improvement cover. :rough . �""'49- Tha;t the cover. on area S2 was more effective than that on area S1 is demonstrated by the relationship following .the severe winter of 1955-56. The mean.crowing .count level on·s2 was higher in 1956 ·than any other area in the same general location and higher thanmost of the area means in the location group farther north. ·There was in fact, a difference of less .than two ·calls between 82 .and Sl means. After the less severe winters of 1956-57 and 1957- 58, area- S2 had a mean crowing count level only slightly above the mean for the central location group and .c orresponding very closely to the location-code comparison for the central group. Roadside Counts During the first year of the study, roadside counts were conducted on all study a:r(las three times dUring .the late-July to early September period. Every road on a study area was included in the survey and all broods sighted .were flushed with a dog to assure complete counts. The automobile was driven at an average speed between 25 and 30 m. p . h., except where it was necessary to backtrack an already surveyed road to reach a new road, and all counts were conducted between 4 :00 A. M. and 7:00 A. M. Beginning in June, 1956, roadside counts were conducted on each study area once a month through May, 1958. Only the roads around the center Section, and in some cases for a half-mile from th~ corners of _the center Section, were.included in the surveys. The maximum distance driven on any study area during a single monthly survey was 5 in.Hes, and in most cases a lesser distance was surveyed. Counts during the winter months were condmted_during midday, but for,the remainder of the year, early _morning counts were the usual procedure. In any one ·month, all counts were made during the same relative period of the day, and, if possible, within a single week. Complete records of the time spent on eacJ;i. study area and the number of miles driven during each survey were maintained except during 1955 when no mileage record was possible because the odometer could not be read accurately enough to estimate the mileage driven in backtracking already surveyed roads. ;Adjustment of Roadside Counts For the 1955 roadside counts, the i, or total number of replications for each study area, was three. In each of the other years, the monthly surveys :resulted in so many zero observations that the counts were combined in bi-monthly totals to reduce some of the -variability. Thus, i for 1956.:.57 and 1957--58 rroadside counts was six instead of 12. The periods fhus delineated were considered to r epresent the following periods of pheasant life history: June-July - hatching and summer brood period. August - September - fall brood period. October-November - hunting season period. December-January - early winter period. February-March - late winter period. April - May - crowing and nesting period. The correlation and regression analyses for multiple curvilinear regr ession adjustment of roadside count data are presented in Table 7. The immediate conclusion which can be reached after examination of these data is that the roadside count method is subject to �-50- a much greater variability than the crowing count method and that the possibility of detecting variations in pheasant populations caused by hahitat i.Inprovement or any other factor is considerably reduced .f rom the level shown by crowing counts. The onlyla:nd use factor .tested which demonstrated any consistent cor.relation with the .numbe:r of pheasants seen was .pasture acreage, andthe .EJingle factor which appeared to have the greatest overall influence oil the number of pheasants seen was the amount of time spent on .individual study areas. In addition; it was possible to recognize severatfactors ·which had an important . influence on roadside counts but for which no unit of measurement could be .established. Among ,the untested independent factors, general road quality was considered to be the most important. Because windbreak plantings are .g enerally associated with other cultural improvements, a higher proportion of roads control areas was unimproved, and the ease with which 11 pheasant could fade into roadside cover was considerably increased. It was als,o feltthatthebetter roa.d .surfaces on somestu<iyare.as mayhaveoffered the supplement~! attractions of gravel and waste gra;in spilled from passing trucks, Finally, there was no way to evaluate the influElnce of variation, in roadside cover quality, •. but there was little doubt.that obs.e rvation conditions along grassy :roadsides were not comparable to conditions adjacent to weedy areas. the on Table 7, --Correlation and regressio:n estimates leading to adjustment of roadside counts of pheasants, 29 nine-section study areas in northeastern Colo:radot 1955, . 1956-57, .• 1957 ... ss . . July - SE:lptember · . June-:May .· .. June-May Period: Independent 1956-57 ... ·. 1957 ... 58 1955 F.a ctors . ....· Linear coz:relation (r) •· ..·.· Wheat stubble . 308 · < • 090 . 226 ..187 . 383 .353 Fallow . Pasture -.427 . -. 241 -. 326 . ·. , 113 Sorghums . •.·. -. 041 -. 129 -.169 · -.176 Millet --.370 Corn . 284 -.098 .160 N1 Ni . 304 . -.368 • 362 SUnrise -.066 -.153 Time (on area) • 208 ,372 .343 , 215 Miles • 307 . Multiple curvilinear regression H3L with. r.> ; 20 (6) ·•· . 703 Correl ation ·with regre$Slon ,estimates · (r'J . .. . ··.277 · · --.289 · , 456 Pasture Time (on area) . 527 .375 • 439 Sunrise . 320 .441 Fallow .420 -,223 Wheat stubble .069 -.201 · -.178 . Miles -.238 Corn .325 . Millet -:: .·.··.-· _::. ... . 361 No ·final multiple curvilinear regression (.-..R111.1,).,..1 c_o_m_·oli,ip_u... te....d... . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ .:· . . -· ··. ,. · . ' .. · ,... . _____ . _: · .:: .. ·. _. _ . �-51-,. In all three years, :the multiple cur:vilinear Rill the preliminary regression adjustment indicated that .less· than 50 percent .of the vattability.irt count l evels could be attributed to were adjustment. and :random ( independent factors that not con1pletely r>. 20} the ri showed thafe:ven this lov.r 1evel could not be .attained.unless-virtually insignificant influences {r'<; 45) were used the final regression Accordingly • .the roadside count ciafa. adjµsted for variation of independent factors. Raw data roadside counts are presented in Table 8, 9 and 10 for 1955; 1956-57 and 1957-58 respectively. in. were nof . Table 8. - Roadside counts, three replications per area, 29 nine-section study areas in northeastern Cololt'adoa late-Julythroµgh early Septe:mbe:r, .1955. ·. · · Replications · · July'."";August Awst . . August-September Study Area Arrangement D2 . D3 D4 E2 iE3 E4 F2 .F:J F4 A2 A3 A4 B2 B3 B4 C2 Cs . C4 8 0 .. - 7 0 2 9 0 3 . 15 1 12 0. 0 25 1 24 5 6 5 29 0 O 7 18 o o o 35 1 12 8 3 2 O 1 . . .. 0 8 10 o 0 8 O 0 0 O O 5 3 O 0 o. 0 0 O 5 02 03 04 O l · () 7 O 0 5 05 ·· Ox 06 O 1 O O 3 O 5· O 07 08 09 · 1 O ... 4 0 0 .,. 10 . 0 Analysis of Roadside Counts The analysis of variance for roadside count data follows the 3 x 3 x 3 lattice described in Table 3 for crowing counts. Degrees of freedom for analysis are based on the total . number of variates (81 in 1955 and 162 thereafter) minuf; one, less one for each of the Ox variates. Analyses alt"e presented :in Table 11. Table 9. --Roadside counts, twelve replications per area, by bimonthly periods, -29 nine"'.' section study areas in northeastern Colorado, June, 1956 through May, 1957. Study Area · ·Bimonthly periods · ·· · · .· · Arran,gement Jne-Jly. _Aug. -Sept~mber, .O ct. -Nov, Dec. -Jan . . Feb. -Mar. Apr. '.""~fay D2 D3 D4 . 8 4 (f 12 20 o 1 2 O . 3 O O o O o 5 i3 1 E2 E3 E4 0 1 4 1 1 3 O O O O O O 10 O O O O1 F2 A2 F3 A3 F4 A4 1 2 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 O O O 6 23 0 8 2 0 57 20 0 O 23 43 O3 B2 B3 B4 0 0 0 10 O 0 1 7 0 0 4.8 4 0 O.. · 23 0 0 0 1 7 OO C2 C3 C4 1 0 O 5 9 0 9 7 O 3 1 1 03 04 0 0 2 () 5 5 1 0 2 O os Ox 2 o 1 ·0 O o· 0 .· .2 4 1o 08 06 09 O o 07 0 0 ' 0 9 1. 0 6· 0 7 O O O 0 0 1 0 0 o () 0 0 7 0 O. O 02 O O 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 o ti Sl .. 82- ·. . ·...s. ?.~· ... • · 1 l ••,~-.1'O . Iii' " .· o o- o 6.0 O O o 0 25 0 . 0 .3 0o 12 · · 2 5 · �-52= Table 10. --Roadside..counts, twelve replications per area, by bimonthly periods, 29 ninesection study areas northeastern C?lomdo, June. 1957 through Mayr 1958. Study Area ..·..· . .· . · · . · . < · Bintonthly pe:riOd . · · .··· .. • .·. · ··· • . ·•·•··•.••·•·/ > in Arrangement .. •·• Jne"-Jly D2 E2 F2 A2 B2 c2 02 05 07 S1 ·] )3 . E3 F3 A3 B3 ·D4 E4 F4 A4 B4 2 9 3 4 1 35 9 0 0 8 2.1 6 30 0 0 C3 C4 . 0 2· 0 03 04 5 0 1 . os . • . · . · • o,c. 2 1 1 08 09 18 2 0 S2 83 14 . 0 31 · · Aug~sept. · ··•·· Oct; ""Nov. Dec; -"Jan. ·.· Feb, .. Mar; · Apt-; -May 0 TO . 12 0 0 0 l 'O O< . 5 4 0 7 •5 2 12 0 10 1 0 1 1 l· 0 2 O 9 5 0 l 33 0 ·· 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 .· 1 1 1 4 0 O 59 4 0 15 O O 10 O O l6 2 l 10 2 4 1 2 0 18 2 0 1 0 0 l O O 12 3 0 . ,3 1 o 25 O O 4 0 O . . O JL O 7 4 o 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 17 1 1 1 0 0 4 o o o o o .. <o ·...o . o. 0 0 o 1 2 1 0 o o n o o o o o 16 0 .o 1a o s. a 1 33 >s ·.· . o · tr o · 6 · · 12 o · o 10 ·1 a Table 11. - Analyses of variance, roadside counts, 29 nine-section areas, 3 replications in 1955, 6 replications in 1956-'57 and 1957-58 , northeastern Colorado: Source of · . 1955 . ,' 1956-57 . ' . . . . · 1957-58 ,•' ... 2 < DF Total Z x2 DF Total,£ x DF TOtal .Zx 2 Variation 77 3816. 00 . 155 8262. 50 155 9195. 61 Total ·· •· · •· Mean sqUare . ...·. • Mean .square ·.-•·· ·2 40.48 • 2 .. • 199 / 94"'"' . 2 470.26** Location 2 244, 40** 2 127.14 Density 2 171. 00** 2 80.04 2 254. 37** 2 1; 6. 05 Type 2 23,37 5 39. 67 5 147.67* Period 4 189. 66** 4 199.35* DxL 4 158. 71 ** 4 115. 51* ', 4 123. 43 DxT 4 97.21* 10 44. 94 10 6L69 DxP LxT · 4 39.41 ' 4 •' 84.40 4 88. 68* LxP TxP DxLxT 8 49,96 DxLxP · DxTxP Error •· Er:ror.E x2 10 10 8 50. 29 16. 21 ,, 33.15 20 20 ,,· ·', 38.78 51. 51 ,· 5'1 ,,,',, • 32.191 1605. 26 • 1738.31 10 58.59 10 32.45 8 32.72 26.65 20 ''' ,',,', 54 24. 76 54.662 2951,73 Discussion Evaluation of the influences of habitat improvement plantings as shown by roadside counts has essentially the same limifations .as evaluation ba,sed on crowing counts. Although no adjustment of roo.dside counts was made, the regression ag.alysesshowed that at least part of the recorded variation was due land'-Use field techni(lue fa¢torsnotrelated to habitat improvement. In addition; it is gene:rS.lly ·recognized that the roadside count method has a high inherent variability due strictly to sampling errror because so little control over chance observation is attained. Table 12 lists the means for each subsample group of variation sources recorded as significant in any year of the study and presents the "d" for those cases where significance was recorded. to and �-53- Location: No significant d_ifference among pheasant populations in the three Lo·c ation groupings within the study-region was -r ecorded ;in 1955 roadside counts. In both 1956-57 and 1957 ~~8 how~yer, _si~ificaJ?:tly g:re?-te,r nutnber_s .of birds were_obs~rv_e d i~ t:llt:l :n(?rthern third of the study .regfori. The_relation:ships were approximately the same as those shown by crowing count estimates-.of:eopulati()n_~evels. . ___ Density: -Significance for the Density classification was recorded in two of the three years of study. For 1955,_ lio\Vever,_the comparison is confined to thefall _br()Od peri()drather than the whole year and the discussion .is accordingly relegated to the D x Period interactfon. A greater number of pheasants-was seen on the 6-planting areas in 1956-57 and the Density groupings for 1957-58 demonstrate a similar relationship although significance was not _re·- .. -·-. .. . - corded, ~ ~- . .,,. . These means demonstrate an unexpected and very important s.o urce of sampling er ror and show why roadside counts cannot be considered a very reliable measure of pheasant population levels for habitat evaluation. Examination of the base data reveals that the number of pheasants seen on area A2 made up almost half of the total obsexvations in the~6-planting class. This area did have a higher pheasant population than most other areas in the 6-planting class, but the difference demonstrated by roadside counts is completely out of proportion to levels suggested by crowing counts, hunting success or any othe:r indicator, and it is obvious that some_factor related to the roadside technique was re.s ponsible fo-:r-the difference. For the purposes of roadside counts, area A2 was vastly different from all other areas in only one respect - instead of a series of disconnected windbreak plantings, -the improvement cover on A2 ,was represented by a single mile-long windbreak parallel to one leg of the roadside survey route. This planting was considered equivalent to s.ix normal win:dbreaks, and it is felt that tl1e infll.1ence ~n ph~asant poplllatiotis wa1:1 n() differ~nt than that- of six .-s mall plots. The influene:e on roadsi~e counts ho:9"_eve~, is_~ply demonstrated by ~e magnitud(? of the c_o unt on ar ea A2. Although the pheasant population was essentially the same as on several other areas, the -available pheasants concentrated in 1he impr ovement planting adjacent to the -road and the number of birds actually observed was proportionately far greater than the actual population. Recognition of this relationship is particularly significant becauseit means that the assumption of random sampling i s invalid fo:r the roadsi de count data. Even if it were possible to determine a mathematical relationship describing the regression of observed pheasants on the amollnt of in1pr<>vemen~ -~~yv,er adjacent to the suryey r oute, the adjus,tmept could not be applied to contr ol :ar;ea data because the pheasant population distribution on controls is probably more homogenous than that where plantings concentrate the birds/ If the data for area A2 are deleted from the 6-planting classes,- the :means for the remaining 55 variates (2. 5 in 1956-57 and 2. 8 in 1957-58) suggest that significance would not n ormally -h ave been recorded for the Density factor. · Type_: Most of the habitat improvement cover available _to pheasants on aJZ'ea A2 was evergreen, and, accordingly, the 'e vergr een 'ciass ranked significantly above all other types in the number of pheasants observed .in 1956-57. The mean for the remaining 55 variates in the evergr een class (2. 7) was not significantly high however. Since one third of the observations for each Type mean were made on unimproved areas, no further examination of the Type r elationship is possible except unde:r the Density x Type x Period interaction. �-54T.able l2. Means of subsample groups and <iifferences necessary for significance, analyses of variance, roadside counts, 27 nine-section study areas •in northeastern Colora:do. :Fall 1955. 1956-57, 1957-58. Source of · ·-subsample Group Means 1957:-58 Variation Subsample 19_5 5 1956-57 4. 6 n:r: · 56 · · 6. 6 n = 27 Locaticm Northeast 6. 8 11: 56 3.6 2.3 1.5 Central ·1.6 d,>-3 ; 0 ._· o. 6d::;,i,2~3 Southwest · 3; 5 n. 56 Density •9 -plantingsSee -Dx P 2. 2 n 56 4.9 . 6,-plantings · · interaction 4.8 0 . 5 d~2. 3 1.5 no plantings ·.· · SeeDxTxP 5.1 n = 56 4. 4 n::: 56 Type Evergreen interaction 1. 2 2.9 Deciduous 1. 3 d72.3 -2.-6 Mixed 5. 9 'n = · 27 •.. Period 1.ln:: 27 June-July ,Augµst-SeptemlYer 3.9 2.9 6.4 •.· .· >October-November · 3. 9 i 1. 6 0; 6 December-Januacy 1. .2 . .. :· .·. ''.,: ·. 3 .• 8 •February-March 2.4 April-May: 2. 8 . 3 . 7 d:>4. 2 . · .'. 2.8 .:0, 7 0.4 . 7; o.. 7.4 3.3 DxP June-July 9-6-0 · 1.6· .. 4 . -6 . 2. 7 1.3 8 . 6 10. 1 0 . 4 Aug . ... sept. 9..:.: 6--0 6. 6 3.6 1.2 10. 1 o. 3 0.4 . Oct. -Nov. 9-6-0 4. 3 0.1 · .D>3, 4 Dec, -Jan, 9--6-0 0, 3 3. 2 · 0. 1 0.6 1. 2 0.-0 :Feb. -Mar. 9-6-0 2.2 9.2 0.0 2.6 2. 7 1. 9 : Apr. - May 9:...6-0 -3. 0 4,. 2 L l > 2, 7 4. 7 3. 7 n: : 27 ' n: -9 n. 9 9-plant, north . . . Dx Lx:P . 5.. 7 ll= 3 15;0 n= 3 .5. 6n=9 ••··· . ( Aug .... Sept. 6-plant, 5. 0 8.2 28.3 0. 0 . only) -no plant, .. 1.1 1. 3 9-plant, cen,tral 2. 6 7.0 3. 2 6-plant, 2.1 3. 0 2.0 no plant, • a.o 2. 3 0. 0 9-plant, south 11. 6 1.0· 7.3 -· 6-plant, o.o 0, 0 0.2 ·-no plant 0 . 6 d,.'3. 4 1. 7 0. 0 A , 9 n: 9 · 12. 0· : n .. ·3· DxTxP 9~plant, .evergr. 7;3 n;.. · 3 12. 2 1.7 (Aug - Sept. decid. 7.3 0.0 only) mixed 2.6 11. 0 -6-plant, evergr; 6.0 0.0. 21. 0 = , " no plant, . ~ida ixe tl 1.0 1.7 · d>6.3 i:} 0. 7 0 ..0 ki , 0 .- 0 1. 3 0.- 0 �-55= Period: Significant variation among the numbers of pheasants seen at different periods of the year is another im.pottant indication of the relative a.ct:mr11cy of the roadside count · technique. In general; the val"iations recorded followed the pattern which could be expected with a .fall hunting season following the population growth during the spring and summer. Actual population variations could not possibly have been as great as the range indicated· by the period means; but the counts do demonstrate .the effect of the hunting season on roadside census during the fall and early winter periods. In 1956, a very heavy snowfall on the opening day .of the pheasant hunting season virtually cancelled· all hunting in the study :region. The immediate result was an increase in the number of pheasants seen du:ring the October-November period - partially because of the snow cover, but aJsobecause birds did not hide at the approach of a vehicle. In contrastf the hunting season period count for 1957 was only one-fourth as la:rge as the count for the fall brood period. Counts during the ea:rly winter (December-January), despite periodic snow cover and other aids to observations .of birds, were lower than at any other period of the year. Following the early winter low--count, observation totals generally increased through the late winter and crowing and nesting (April-May) periods to a high-count during the fall brood period (August-september). First order interactions: ~hree of the first order interactions, Dens.fty x Lo,cation, Density x TyPe and Location x Type, · demonstrated significfa.nt variation. in atleast one of the three study years. In each case however, the significance could be traced to the influences of the high count on area A2 and the real significance of the interaction could not be interpreted because •it was felt· that the· relationships· may have varied throughout the year. Accordingly, the means for the interaction groups were.not presented in Table 12 and discussion is confined to the second orderiilteractions involving a'breakdown for<the Period factor except fo:r L x T. Both the L x T and the L x T x P interactions were deleted from examination because the· individual-variates combined data Jrom. im.p:roved and control areas. Density x Period interaction: No significant difference among means of this first order· interaction was found in 1956-57 and 1957-58, but the interaction variate means offer the best comparisonwith the Density means of 1955 • In 1955, significantly more pheasants were counted on areas with :nine plantings than on controls, and the· 6...planting area m.ean ranked between the two extremes . '!'he Density means for the fall brood periods in 1956 and 1957 likewise demonstrated a higher concentration of pheasants where habitat plantings were present, and, disregarding minor variations, · 'lhe pattern also appeared to be applicable to the hatching and summer b:rood period (June-July). For the remainder of the year, and particularly during the early winter period, mean counts on 9-planting areas were only slightly higher than on controls, blt counts on 6-planting areas were relatively high. Even if the total count from area A2 is not included tn any period, the means for the eight remaining 6-planting areas are no lower than the 9-planting and somewhat higher than controL:m.eans. InteJrpretation of these changes in ranking throughout the year is necessarily limited by the lack of significant variation among D x P means and the fact that the changes were almost certainly due to pheasant movement patterns rather than population variations; . .Under these limitations however, a circumstantial pattexn of pheasant movement which generally fits the observed data can be outlined. �-56- Apparently, pheasant henE:i lUl<;i cllicks seek the. spade offered by windbreak plantings as soon as_summer heat become,_s aJa9tor in their exi stence, Throughout July and August:. as the -ehicks be9onie more mobile and t~e harvest reduce$ the amount of shade: · available in agriculturaLcover,. illcreasilig numbers of birds move toward the plantings to escape the hea·t of -the sun. This mov13ment is generally confined to distances under one mile, but :because most of the windbreak plantil)gs are s_ituated along the perimeters of land units, the number of pheasants _observed Ill roadside counts :rises in proportion to the presence of plantings. Additionally, the obseryation of pb:easan1B on control areas _ is hindered to, some extent by the generally poorer_quality of roads where human habitation and .windbreak plantings are not present and gr ain trucks bave not lost part of their cargo along the roadsides, _Qnthe opening day of the pheasant season, the perimeter concentrations are scatter.e d, but they reform as soon as hunting pressure is removed. Throughout-the remainder of the winter, approximately equal numbers of:pheasants are observed on improved areas, :irregardless ,of planting density, and fewer birds are observed on controls because the birds are more randomly distributed .and are notattractedto roadside areas,.-_ Finally, beginning sometime -in March, _cock pheasants establish crowing-territories and the number of birds s:een on all areas appr oaches equality. Density x _L ocation x Period interaction: . Significance was recorded !n the_px L interaction for 1955 butjn no other year. Jfthe influence oLthe pheasants _observed on area A 2 is discounted, ,the only significant difference was the greater-number ofpheasants recorded on 9:-plan,ting areasinthe southwestern third of the study region. This relationship is generally substantiated.by fall brood period (Aug. ".'"Sept.) data in 1956-57 and ,1957.:.ss. Although the 6-planting areas in 1he -south did n_o t show ,a corresponding increase in pheasant use -of plantings.during .the fall brood period;._- the .number -of.-bill."ds recoirded during .t he -summer brood period (June-July) in both 1956 and 1957 was above control area use (1. 7,- 0. 7 and 2. 0 7 0. 7). ~hus, it can probably be assumed that pheasant use of plantings in the_southern portion of the study region influences a greater proportion of the pheasant population because protection from the sun is not as readily available in the drouth-affected agricultural cover of that section. Density ,x:_ Tzye xl?erie>d interac::tion: Significantly,more pheasants were observed on the 9planting .deciduous areas in 1955 ~'an on most other D x ,T combinations• .T!ie relationship was not confirmed by counts made in either 1956 or 1957 -during _the fall ~;rood period however, andi t s,eems probable that any preference--pheasant$ _h ave for:::one species composition over-anothe-r is too minor to detect with roadside count data; Special Area.a : J.)ata showing the number of plleasants couI1ted on the .three heavily developed s.tudy areas are -very significant because they again demonstrate-.the effects •of improvement plantings on r o:adside count observations. Both areas S1 -and S3 produced counts higher than the mea,n for areas in their general Location, but counts ou area S2 were very low. In 1956-57, only 4 pheasa11ts were counted on S2 during the whole year while 60 were counted on S1. Since crowing counts demonstrate that population di:ff'e-rences of such magnitude do not exist; .the only possible conclusion is that some facet of the roadside count technique is re sponsible Jor the variation •• General r oad quality appeared to he about equal on all three - heavily developed areas, and no major variation in land-use patterns was discern.able along the roadside count ir'Outes; but the juxtaposition of woody cover to the roads was entirely different on area S2 than on the other areas. The timbercla,im. planting was adjacent to the �- 57- :road only on the narrow end, and the willow thicket areas were separated from the lt'oads by grain fields. · In contrast, plantings on both Sl and S3 paralled the roads for a s ignificant distance. Thus, the theory that woody cover plantings concentrate pheasants near the roads so that roadside counts are improved, ·hut populations are not, is given additional confirmation. During the six bimonthly periods, counts Ori the special areas fluctuated in essentially the same manner as those for the basic 27 areas. Fewer birds were observed during the early winter period·and counts improved during the spring and particularly during the brood periods. In summary, a greater number of pheasants were observed in roadside counts on some heavily developed areas, but the increase over lesser improvement patterns was felt to be almost entirely due to the influence of plantings in concentrating birds near the roads. Summary and Conclusions A sntnma.rization of the crowil1g count and roadside count data demonstrating the relation-ships between pheasant populations and habitat improvement windbreaks shows a year around pheasant preference for woody windbreak cover over adjacent agricultural cover. Evaluation of habitat improvement influences cannot be based on pheasant preferences however, be..; cause no wildlif:e 'administering .agency can afford to be satisfied With the fact that improve-ment cover is 11acc-eptable 11 to pheasants. Instead, the ofily legitimate criterion-for evaluation is proof that improvement plantings will assure greater numbers of birds delivered to the · tables of the license buying sportsmen·; . - Under most circumstances therefore, successful habitat improvement must cause an ~ncrease-in the carrying capacity of the pheasant range; either by augmenting production or by 'insulating the pheasant population-from natural decimating factors. Thus, evaluation of northeastern Colorado habitat improvement windbreak plantings is based on-the ability of-the plantings to increase and to sta.blize the pheasant population. Neither crowing counts ·n6r roadside ·c ounts provided a. direct measure of pheasant pro.. duction, but there was little evidence ih available data to indicate a significant increase in nesting succe~s or brood survival on improved areas. No nests were ever found in monthly searches .of representative plantings and even though more pheasants were observed on the improved study areas during the summer and fall brood periods, the relationship between the number of birds counted and the amount of woody cover immediately adjacent to the survey routes was so strong that true population-differences could not be detected. More significant than nesting use, the increased use of plantings by pheasants during the summer months suggests that shelter from the sun may be an important factor for young chicks and juvenile birds. No pheasant mortality due to heat exhaustion has ever been recorded in the study region, but it seems possible that temperatures exceeding 100° on the waterless northeastern Colorado tableland might cause some weaker birds to expire. It is also possible that the overhead cover and generally open areas between windbreak rows make escape from both avian and ground predators easier for juvenile birds. �-58During ,the winter, the only other period when habitat plantings appeared to have an influence on pheasant _p opulations~ concentration_s of birds were observed.in many of the windbreak plant ings i n the study region. Spring c:ro:w,i:ng counts demonstrated that this choice, at best, was an undesir able one because the number of phe.asants surviving on im- _ proved areas was in inverse ratio to the severity of winter weather and the degree of improyement. Following .a mild winter, pheasant populations on all study areas, as indicated by crowing counts, were essentially similar. By contrast, pheasant population.s following a severe winter were lowest where windbreaks were the most common, higher or lightly developed areas and highest on control areas. Thus, ;instead of aiding pheasant winter survival, windbreak plantings caused a _small but detectable increase in mortality~. Because the variance inherent in the roadside.count method did not allow detection of minor variations in pheasant populations, it is almost impossible to assess the total effect of windbreak plantings for the whole year. Based on the differ ences in population levels necessary to produce the recor ded changes in pheasant crowing counts, and the assumptions that spring dispersal was :unimportant and that pheasants died in proportion to known s.e x ratios, the total mortality d~1e to _plantings in the winter of 19l?~:-56 can be roughly _e stimat~d a.t one cock and two hens per plantings . . Such losses win be smaller in less severe winters, but W'int~r cover p;reforence studies suggest that they will not be proportionately greater in more severe winters. Thus, the estimated effect of windbreak plantings over the winter r anges from zero up to.a maximp.m of four or five birds killed ,per planting: .During the summer, small population variations could not be detected. It is suspected however, that woody cover may prot ec! juvenile birds from the ~eat of the sun and that predation losses .are smaller on impro:ve.d areas. Not even a r<>ugh estimate 9an be made .to de.s cI'ibe these nebulous va_lu~s 1 but it can b~ estimated that an aver~e_additional su~vival of less than two juvenile birds per planting would equalize the winter loss. Iu summary_, the total yea~-around effect of windbreak plantings on pheasant populations could not be estimated,, but it seems _probable that minor increases in winter mortality were equalized by positivf? summer values and that the net result was immaterial. In any case., the influences of perennial vvoody cover on pheasant population_s were so minor that a windl:>reak progr am. for wildlife cannot .be justified on this basis alone. Literature Cited Ezekial, Mordeca,i 1956 . . Methods .o f Cor relation Analysis._. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and .Sons;, Inc. 531 pp• . Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Date:.________ o_c__ to....b__e_r. _1__ 9_58___ 1 Approved by: Laurence E. _Riol'dan Feder al. Aid Coordinator ���-61- Species Composition . ' Unde r this classification, three groupings are presented to descril>e . the general growth form of the vegetation in the plantings examined. E .~ .-·evergteen; T ..;; declduous tree; S,; deciduous shrub For windbreak plantings," the number of rows ofEiach .type are designated; and for other types or mixed windbreaks the proportion of each type is represented by numbers whi?h total ten'..· · • - Age -of Plantings The groupings used to classify age cannot be considered equivalent to actual chronological age because such great variation can be caused by differences in the cultural treatment afforded a planting~ In general however~ the classes were defined as follows; Class 1 - very young planting, probably less than two years. Class 2 - plantings which appear p.ermanently rooted but in which no _plant has reached full growth status. Class .3 - plantings which have been established for a number of years and in. which most plants have reached full growth. Class 4 - plantings in which a few plants appear to have passed maturity. Class 5 - plantings in which a majority of plants have passed maturity and in which decadence has become an important factor. Understory The ground cover beneath the plantings examined was rougJlly classified as regularly -cultivated (C), partially or sporadically cultivated (P) and non-cultivated (N). Area Actual measurements of length and width for each planting .are not presented .in Table 1, but in general the plantings were rectangular in shape and the total areas represented could be grouped in six classes: Class A - under 5,000 square feet. Class B - 5, 090 to 22, 500 squar e feet. Class C - 22,500 to 40,000 square feet. Class D - 40, 000 to 90, 000 square feet, Class .E - 90, 000 to 200, 000 squaire feet. Class F - over 200,000 squaire feet. Adjacent Cover. Cover adjacent to the plantings was rated on the basis of its apparent ability to provide cover lanes for access to the planting. Fair to good cover(wheat stubble or heavy weeds) rated G, poor to fair cover (millet, corn, thin weeds) rated. F and poor cover (fallow, roads) rated P. Since this rating did not remain constant from year to year, it was necessary to present a new rating for each year of study. �-62Table 1. Windbreak and habitat improyementplantjµgs ex~ined in monthly searches to determine wildlife use, northeastern Colorado, June through M:ay, 1955-,56, l.956:..'57 1957 ... 5g_ Part·r i General descrtpuons·of $t'udy 21ots •· .· > •.· .·. <Adjacent cover sf;~1es · · ···•···· · Under .. 1955 1956: 1957 : Cultural . 06:thf . •--56 · ·• .. 57 ;..5a ..·•· >features · Area E T S Age Area story TY;pe • p ]) C 1 wlndbreak(2) 2 3 G G X .p windbreak(4) 4 E 2 G X 2 y p windbreak(2) C C 3 2 3 p 10 C woodlot 3 C z 4 .. ·. p 4 3 3 .· 5 Windbreak(7) F G G G X p windbreak(6) 4 ••>2 4 F 6 D G G X p p .... 7 windbreak{3) E G· G 2 1 3 X p p · 3 G· Windbteak(3) .· B -G 8 3 X p p 9 windbreak(2) 2 3 D G G X p 3 ··.·· B 10 .·windbreak(3) G F 3 X p 11 7 3 F windbrea~(7) D F X F .· 10 0 12 woodlot 3 N F X :·... N 13 windbreak(5) C 3 G G 5 X 14 windbreak(3) 4 B G 3 N X p 4 15 windbreak(4) 4 N B X p C 16 park 7 3 3 D z 17 park 6 4 3 N D G X l 9 •5 :.·• B N G 18 · thicket X p y le 3 19 windbl!."eak( 1) C A y p p C windbreak(4) 2 3 C 20 2 p p p 21 windbreak(8) 1 4 3 E 3 X p F F park 3 2 5 3 F 22 X p p . · . 3 23 windbreak(2) D 5 5 X .. p ·. F . 4 · 4 2 ·. 3 • paJt>k C z 2.4 y windbreak(5) C 3 C 25 2 4 F windbreak(2) 1 26 1 C 2 D G X y .·• p p .C 1 1 5 2 27 windbreak(7) E p 1 C windbreak(5) 2 2 2 E G 28 X 1 2 1 windbreak(4) 1 C D 29 G X 30 timberclaim 10 5 N F .. G G G X y F · ·G 31 N 9 1 5 G timberclaim G p 10 32 timberclaim 4 N E G X p 10 33 timbe:rclaim 4 1) > X N p timberclaim 10 4 C 34 N X p E N ·G 35 .· .· natural· area •. 3 G X ·. N 36 natural area 3 F G G F·· 37 weedpatch (non--wobdy cover area) D a· weedpatch(non...woody cover area) F 38 39 wheat stubble (agricultural co-ver) C wheat stubble (agricultural cover) 40 C 41 C wheat stubble (agricultural cover) B 42 wheat stubble (agricultural cover) .,.••· �·Ta"ble 1. --J>lantings examined in mol'l.thly se11:rches, (continued) Part Jr'~ species ~compo·sition. of plantings: i h~ted no:rth..:sduth o:r·east-west: except ' .... , ·. wher.e ma,rked with an asterlsk 1. 2. pine, juniper pine 3. 4. * spruce, pine, juniper juniper 5. elm, olive, hackberry (2), plum, sandcherry .(2) 6. * cottonwood, plum 7. caragana, elm, olive 8. elm 9. hackberry 10. elm 11. elm, h. locust(3), cotton-wood (2), elm 12. elm 13. elm (2), b. locust (3) 14. elm 15. olive (2), elm, h . locust 16. *currant, elm, hackberry 1 7. * elmt currant, willow 18. *maple (1 tree), plum 19... c.urfant h kb .. JRP!iih~. ~unf,r~m, pine (3) squawbush, caragana 22. *plum, . l ilac; elm, junip~r , pine 23. *hackberry, juniper , pine, elm 24. *currant, elm, juniper, pine 25. juniper, pine, elm (3) 26. elm, juniper 27. * sandcherry (2), plum(3), elm, pine 28. honeysuckle, squawbush-chokecherry, hackberry, pine, olive 29. squawbush, elm, pine, juniper 30. *mulberry, ash, boxelder, b . locust 31, * b. locust, ash, boxelder, cottonwood, h. ·locust, mulberry, plum, Amer. elm 32. ash 33. b . locust 34. * ash, boxelder 35. * cottonwood, . willow, elm 36. * cottonwood, willow z-2'. juniper - Jun.iperris scopulorum pine - Pinus ponderosa spruce - Picea pungens ash - Fraxinus pennsylvanica b . locust - Robinia pseudoacacia boxelde:r - Acer negundo caragana - Caragana arborescens chokecherry - Prunus virgin.iana cottonwood - Popu!u.s deltoides currant - Ribes spp. elm,.mm.us pumila . . hackher ry - Celtis ,occidentali s h. locust - Gleditsia triac.antlios maple - Acer saccharinum mulberry - Morus spp. olive - Elaeagnus angustifolia plum - Prunus americana sand~hetry - Prunus.besseyi squawbush - Rhus trilobata willow - Salix spp. Cultural Features Most of the plantings selE;lcted for study were relatively remote from farmhouses and other building.s b ecause it was felt that disturbance caused by landowners could not be completely evaluated without an intimate knowledge of individual farm dogs, cats and landowner work habits~ Thus , the samples testing this factor are very small for plantings which might . have received .d isturbance. The majority of plantings was classed .as remote (X) because th e nearest farmhou se was .a t least one-quarter mile distant. Related ft) plantings were adjacent to a farmyard on one end, .a11d close (Z) plantings averaged 100 ya:rds from the nearest build,ing. �-64- In order to precltlde the possibility ofdfrectbias In the cori:iparisoti: of such observations as .11 10 pheasants flushed'' and :ntwo roosting. sitesn alLrecords.of pheasant use ofplant.,. ings were grouped and rated according to quantity and consistency of use in relation. to the probable most significant function dur:ilig quarterly periods. The quarters and point values assigned were>as follows: Brood shelter period - June, July; AUgUst 4 - juvenile pheasants ·recorded two months out of three · 3. - juvenile pheasants recorded one month 2·;.;,. adulfbirds or Sign recorded two or three times 1 - adult birds or sign: recorded once Hunting season period .:.·september, October, November · · 4 - ten. pheasants flushed in each search or 20 flushed twice • · 3 ... ten pheasants flushed twice or sign recorded all three times 2 - pheasants flushed or sign recorded twice l - pheasants flushed or sign recorded once Winter shelter period - December. January, February 4 - ·roosting sites recorded, ten Pheasants 3 times or 20 flushed twice 3 - tart pheasants flushed twice or sign recorded ali three times 2 - pheasants flushed or sign recorded twice 1 - pheasants flushed or sign recorded once Nesting period - March, April, May 4 - one or more nesalocated 3 - very young birds or eggs (no nest) recorded · 2 - ·pheasants .flhshed or sign recorded all three months · 1 ... pheasants flushed or sign recorded one or two times Records of all mourning doves and nests; cottontails, jackrabbits and tracks~ and small hirds and nests were rnaintainedth:roughout the study. but no special effort was made to s.e arch for such sign if it was not obvious. The data relating to these species could not therefore be rated in the same way the pheasant data were :rated. instead, evidence of use was considered to be either positive or negative for each search and one point was assigned .if use was recorded. Thus, the data in Table 2 list pheasant 11se ratings for each study area by quarterly periods and dove,. rabbit and small bird use on the basis of the number of months such use was recorded each year. Analysis Within each of the plantings searched, a variety of factors combined to establish the ability of theplanting·toattract wildlife. In genera1,· ·no single factor was ·determinative for any one plantiltlg. ·In attempting to delimit these factors therefore, it was necessary to group the data and compare 1.neans. · Thi s method is not entirely satisfactory because the samples for each factor are not random forr all ofue:r ·factors, but it i s possible to make gen:e:rai conclusfons if the possibility ofinterfactor bias is recognized. Table 3 presents the various test groupings, indica.tes the size of the subsamples and lists the mean ratings for pheasant and other wildlife use. �~ ~ I f -65- Table 2. --Ratings of pheasant use by quarterly periods and mourning dove, · rabbit and small bird .u se by yearly p.e r-iods, 42 study areas including 36 woody cover ~lantin~s 1 Q.ortheastel'Il..Colorado, 1~55-56'&'1957-58 . . ' 'Area Plieaifant Use Ratings Othe a+ Wildlife Qse .. 19517-'58 · 1955-56 Year 1956-57 1957-58 1955-56 1956-57 Period B_HW N -B H W ,N B MWN D -R s D R s . D R ~-S --• t>5··· . . 3, 5 · 3 ' 4· · o 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 4 8 6 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 2 2 2 4 3 5 5 4 0 1 3 1 6 5 6 1 8 6 5 1 1 4 3 4 3 4 1 4 3 3 2 3 5 7 1 4 9 1 3 3 1 1 3 10 6 1 3 2 1 6 6 7 4 4 8 4 2 3 3 1 4 6 7 3 3 4 2 2 2 1 2 4 3 4 2 0 3 4 0 3 9 1 1 2 2 1 3 3 1 1 2 3 1 5 7 8 0 3 1 2 2 1 11 ·2 1 8 1 3 3 1 9 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 1 3 3 8 4 4 6 10 4 3 3 1 5 5 8 3 1 7 3 2 2 1 11 1 6 10 3 2 0 1 3 3 3 1 3 8 8 12 0 3 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 5 5 4 2 4 13 3 0 1 1 4 4 4 1 4 7 3 2 2 1 14 1 3 1 1 3 2 5 15 0 2 3 0 5 3 8 0 1 0 0 1 4 7 16 17 3 5 5 3 2 0 0 18 0 3 2 1 0 5 10 1 1 3 1 19 1 2 1 0 1 1 3 1 5 4 9 5 3 7 20 3 2 0 21 3 2 3 1 ,2 2 2 1 2 10 10 2 10 7 1 4 6 3 3 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 5 5 22 2 3 2 2 2 2 6 23 2.4 0 2 3 1 0 4 6 1 3 1 0 25 4 4 4 1 1 1 0 26 2 3 10 1 0 2 3 1 0 3 3 0 2 8 2 1 4 2:7 0 2 3 1 1 7 7 0 7 7 3 2 2 1 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 29 5 7 9 30 4 3 3 1 3 4 3 2 5 4 8 5 3 8 3 4 3 2 31 0 2 2 1 4 7 10 5 9 12 4 212 · 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 4 1 4 3 3 1 4 5 8 5 3 10 32 1 3 3 1 33 3 5 5 1 0 1 0 1 3 2 34 4 5 9 2 3 2 1 0 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 3 7 8 2 110 35 3 3 8 5 7 10 3~ 3 3 3 ·2 3 3 3 1 .. 1 .. •·. ·_ ,r : 37 38 39 40 41 42 1 2 2 1 2 6 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 4 1 0 2 1 3 2 1 0 0 1 9 2 0 4 1 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 2 0 �Table 3. --Means of Wildlife use ra_tings, yari ous co:tnbimtio11s 1 36 woody cover plantings ---- - and 6 herbaceous areas, northea:s~rn Coloradq, ~1955- 56 1 1956-57; '1957- 58. Influence· Factor Year Type Subsample Grqup ·. .:;.1955:..55 (23) (29) (13) 1. 9 1. 6 1. 9 2. 2 · 2. 5 -1956-57 - 1957-58 2. 1 2. 9 2. 0 2. 8 -evergreen ( 6) 0 ~7 -deciduous (29) (15) (10) ( 5) 2. 0 1. 1 2.3 2. 2 0. 5 0. 3 1. 7 2. 3 2. 1 2. 6 2. 0 2. 4 2. 2 2. 6 2. 8 2. 6 1. 5 o. 8 2. 5 2. 0 -mixed -timbercl3:im -natural Age -weeds -wheat ( 2) -young ( 1) ( 6) (41} ( 10} ( 7} -young f -mature -mature.;. -overmature 4. 2 3. 2 6.7 8.4 1. 5 1. 2 o. 9 1. 2 1.4 1.0 0. 5 1. 5 2. 0 1. 6 2. 2 2.3 1.4 o. 9 3. 0 2. 3 1. 9 4. 1 3. 4 1.0 o. 3 · 3;7' . 4.8 6. 8 6. 7 8.4 3. 9 4.5 4.8 4. 6 6. 6 9. 0 5.5 4.5 4. 0 1. 3 o. o o. o o.o 1.0 4. 0 2. 0 2. 4 2.4 2. 4 o. 8 1. 3 2. 0 1.9 2. 2 0. 8 2. 5 3.6 4. 0 3.8 6.3 6.8 6. 7 1. 8 2. 5 2.5 2. 1 2. 5 2.3 o.- 9 3. 0 2. l 2. 1 1. 9 2. 6 2. 8 1. 9 1. 7 2. 0 1. o - to 22, 500 -to 40, 000 -to 90, 000 -to 200, oo,o -over 200, 000 ( 8) (13) 1. 3 1. 0 1. 7 1. 8 2. 6 1.0 2. 5 1. 7 2. 3 2. 3 2. 8 (34) ( 9) (22) 2. 3 2. 0 o. 8 2.4 2. 7 2. 0 (52) {10) 2. 1 •6 2. 4 2. 1 1. 3 { 3~ _ 2, 3 2. 8 1. 9 1. 7 2. 3 2.5 2. 9 ( 1) Feat -remote - related -close 4. '1 · 1. 7 o. o· o. o · -under 5, ooo (16) s 2. o 2. 9 '1. 1. 0 1. 5 0. 0 - non-cult. (10) (17) 7.0 o. 7 o. 6 Adj. cover good - .to fair -to poor Cult. ( 4) (17) (25) (23) Understory - Cult. -sporadic Area ·Pheasant Use · ·.. · · other Wildlife Use Brood Hunt Wint. Nest. Mean Doves .Rabbits Birds 2. 3 2. 0 1. 3 0 .. -9 1. 4 4.2 3.8 5. 3 1. 4 . 2. 3 2. 2 2. 1 2.0 3.5 3.6 1.0 1.1 o. 9 1.1 1. 3 1. 6 1.5 2. 4 2. 2 2. 4 1. 4 1. 0 1. o 1.·w 2. 4 2. 3 2. 0 1. 3 1. 1 .7 2. 0 1. 5 1. 0 1. 5 1.1 4.4 4. 4 9. 9 ·5 , 9 7. 1 7. 7 2. 0 ' l.O 1.8 1. 4 1. 8 2. 0 1.0 2. 5 3. 7 2. 5 1. 6 3.0 3.9 3.8 4.7 7.4 2.1 3. 5 5.2 5.3 6.9 7.2 8. 5 2,1 2.7 2. 6 2. 5 4.1 7.6 4. 2 6. 6 4. 3 6.3 2. 5 4. 2 3. 4 3.9 ~. 3 . 7. 0 7.2 6. 3 . 2. 0 2. 3 �~67Pheasant Use The mean for all ratings of pheasant use was 1. 9. Ratings were lowest for nesting ·u se (mean, ·1. ·2) and higher for winter use· (mean, 2. 4). Iil comparing pheasant use of groups of plantings littl~ :significance can be attached to th·e se differences however because the basts for the ratings was arbitrary and no comparison other than between study areas during the same .period can be considered :valid; Years: . _T he mean rating of pheasant use was highest for plantings searched _in 1957-58 (nfoan~· 2. 3) and lowest for plantings searched in 1956--57 (mean; l. 7). · These differences were probably not significant and s.i nce crowing counts indicated that the pheasant population in the study region generally increased throughout the three year study, the differences among yearly means were felt to be due to sampling rather than population changes. ~ Among the five woody cover types examined; · evergreens .rated lowest (mean, 1. 5) and ·natural areas rated highest (mean, 2. 3),for year around pheasant use. The significance of these relationships 'is probably not as great as the means indicate however because the two lowest rated groups (evergreen and mixed, l.·6) had a disproportionate number of cultivated areas while the two highest rated types (natur-al areas and timberclaims, 2 . 2) · contained no cultivated areas. Both the weed (mean; l. 4) and wheat stubble areas (mean, 0. 9) rated below all the woody cover types in the amount of pheasant use received. Since wheat, at least, could not be searched during parts of both the brooding and nesting periods, befo:re harvest and after spring discing, the low rating is not too surprising. It is interesting however, that almostthetotal strength of the herbaaeous, cover type ratings was concentrated in the winter period and that ratings for this period were at least as high as ratings for the poorer woody cover types. The mo st important' variations from the total mean and the general pattern of year a.round use appear to be the high nesting and low brood :ratings for evergreens and the low nesting rating for mixed plantings. It is felt that the low rating for mixed plantings was probably due to heavier culti'vation in the mixed samples, but the above average rating for evergreens suggest that such plantings may serve some function not served by other types during the breeding period; Since'the rating (mean,· 1. 5) illjdjcate·s something less than use for .actual production, and the value does not extend into the brood period (mean, o. 7), it is possible that evergreens are better adapted to inclusion in crowing territories than other woody cover tYPes. Age: Mean ratings' of pheasant use indicate very little difference ·in the amount of use received by plantings after the first few years. Very young plantings (clae:i 1) received no use, and class 2 plantings rated lower than classes 3 to 5, · but at least part of the weakness in class 2 can be attributed to the disproportionate amount of cultivation in the sample. The influences of cultivation on the ratings for class 2 were strcngest during the brood period (mean, 0. 7) and had the least effect during the winter (mean, 2. 0). The only other important variation from the year around mean appeared to be the r ating of pheasant use for the class 4 plantings during the nesting period (mean, 0. 9) . The sample was slightly biased by the inclusion of four timberclaim samples, but since the t imbercla,im rating for the nesting period was exactly equal to the nesting mean no reason could be found for the fact that class 4 plantings rated lower than class 3 (mean, 1. 3) and class 5 (mean, 1. 4) for nesting period use. �- 68- Unqerstory: The influence of cultivation on ratings of disptroportionately cultivated samples a.lieady examined has left little doubt th.at cultiya~ion is OtlEl of the most important factors influencing pheasant use of woody plantings in northeastern Colorado. It is interesting however to note that regular.·cultivation was th_e only practice ;which had a .detrimental effect on pheasant use. Where plantings: are -c:ul_tivated sporadic.ally, or between only a part of the r ows, pheasant use was about t!'ie same, . or eve~ sUghtly.greater, , than use of uncultivated plantings. Since the natural succession on uncultivated land in the t ., study region .leads to a climax vegeta~ion of sho.rtgrasses it Js not ~l!:t:Prising that periodic disturbance of the succession will enable taller annual weeds to maintain- dc,,minance .and provide a more acceptable wildlife cover. Appa:rently, the effects of cultivation are m~st -iinportant during the b.rood period and least important during the winter period.: Although this relationship is at least partially due to the fact that juvenile btrds prot,a,bly need.II1ore herbaceous ground cover thanadults, a part of the difference can be attributed to the fact-th.a t cultlya,tion normally takes .placi:i'. during.the brood period. -The disturbance, couplf::d with the creation of minimum ground cover for the whos year, is probably enough to drive he11s elsewhE3re until their chicks haye become independent. _The fact~~at cultivation h~sJittle eff~e;t on phe~sant use during the winter may.be important where woody plantings are being established primarily in an a_ttempt to provide winter cover. _ to Area_: Mean r~tings of pheasant use classified a.cqording ;1ot ar~a were quite variable, tirt'Tn general incijcated that the size of plantings was not an important determinant of pheasant use. The best '.c orrelation between pheasant use and planting size.was demonstrated during the brood period and the poorest during the winter. ApparE3ntly, hens with.chicks prefer larger plantings while adult birds in the winter do not differentiate. It is also possible that chicks were more _.apt to le_a ve the small plantii}gs befClre they could be flushed while adult birds in the vvinter always left tracks even if they were,not flushed. Assuming a c erta_in amount of such· field bias there is little :reas,o n to suspe£t .that pheasant use of larger plantings is commensurate with.the additional investment required. _Adjacent cover: Year around pheasant use of plantings §howed a direct correlation w ith cover quality adjacent to plantings, but it was somewhat ~urprising that the relationship was strong only when adjacent cover was of very poor quality. Poor- adjacent coveir appeared to have the most infl~ence on pheasant use during the brood season (mean, ·o. 8) and the least during the winter (mean, 2. 4). During the hunting period, pheasant use of plantings with _fair adjacent cover rated higher than use of planting~ with good adjacent cover, put it seems probable this relationship can b~ . attributed to the birds to sneak . .. . .. . a~ifrty of .. away .undetected rather than to actual preferences. . . . . .. . . , . . :; ... . ~ �-69- C\:/.ltl,lral fe~tures: Although the samples for .evaluating the influence of planting-proximity to farm building•s were too small to be completeiy reliable, the general pattern ·of pheasant \I.Se shows that plantings more remote from such disturbance sources will b~ the most heavily used by pheasants. The effects .of landowner disturbance are apparently strongest during .the brood period and least important during the winter. Discussion: .P heasant use of woody cover in northeastern Colorado was apparently influenced .to some ·extent by all of the factors measured Jn .t his study, and there is little .doubt that various other factors als:o had important effects. Adru,.tionally, it was qu,ite ·obvious that a number of the differences recorded could as well have been due to bias in the field method as .to actual variation in pheasant use. In most of the tests, for instance, the greatest variation was recorded during the brood period and the least during the winter. While it is entirely probable that hens with chicks are more selective in their cover preferences than adult birds it is also possible that poorer ground cover conditions and other limiting factors require that juveniles flee at .the first indication of disburbance instead of simply hiding to escape detection-as adult birds might do. During the winter, such. escapees would be :recorded because of the tracks they made, but in the brood period they could completely escape. Because there were so many unmeasured influences and possible bias sources it is not .· possible to positiyely .delimit a single factor or group ;Of factors which exerts a controlling influence on pheasant cover us.e patterns. If the interaction effects within subsamples are considered however, only three of the factors examined appear to be important. T.wo of these, cultivation and adjacent cover quality, are of particular significance because they suggest that herbaceous cover is a n.e cessary _part of pheasant habitat in the study region. In both ... cases , the removal of herbaceous cover within or near the plantings caused a :reduction in pheasant use. The third factor, proximity to farm buildings, demonstrated that plantings within the influence sphere of human disturbance received lighter than average pheasant use. The other tested relationships which might he significant . indica.ted that evergreens were not quite as attractive as deciduous species and, not too surprisingly, that young plantings do not receive as much pheasant use as older plantings . .· Mourning Dove Use Data tabulating mourning dove presence in plantings is presented in Table 2. Analysis was made by comparing means of various groupings (Table 3) as was done with pheasant use . data. The mean rating for .dove use indicated that doves would be flushed 2. 7 months per year in monthly searches of an ''average" woody cover planting. Since mourning doves are only present in the study region from April through September, the maximum possible rating for any single study area was six. Examination of the data in .T able 3 makes a complete discussion of mourning dove woody cover use patterns almost pointless. Variation within evecy grouping shows a striking correlation with the disproportionate sampling for age, and the grouping for age confirms the very strong preference for large trees in the older age classes. The only deviation from this pattern is the ahove average mean for evergreens (3.) which apparently have an . additional attraction because their branches offer such accessible nesting sites. �-70Rabbit Use ; ~ Ratings·-for rabbit use of plantings (Table .2)are based primarily on the presence of tracks, both cottontail and jackrabbit; during each monthly search, The mean rating -for rabbit use was only 4 . 2 although it was possible for individual plantings to -be rated as high as 12 if evid_ence of rabbit presence was r ecorded du.ring every search. As with the ratings .for dove use, the ·ratings of rabbit use seem to depend primarily on a single factor. The data·in Table 3 demonstrate correlation between rabbit use and area of plantings and the influence of disproportionate sampling for area in all the other gr oupings. There i s some indication that cultivated areas and e.vergreen plots have less attraction for rabbits, but the total effect of these two factors is .v ery minor -c ompared to the influence of area. Since rabbit ratings are based primarily on tracks, -·and fieldwork >after any snowstorm will show a--virtually· complete network of rabbit tracks over every piece of ground in the sfu:dy region, there is some doubt that these data are a _v alid demonstration of the function of woody cover in rabbit habitat. Based on simple procedures of random sampling, there is a greater probability for a wide ranging mobile animal to cross a four acre plot in any cover type than to cross a one acre plot -of the same type. _Thus, there is -every r eason to believe that the correlation for area could be due to field method bias andthat the minor influences ,of evergreens and .c ultivation are the only factors affecting rabbit use of Woody plantings. Small ~Use __, Data rating small bird use of plantings i s-presented in Table 2 and the analysis is based on groupings in Table 3. The average rating (7. 0) demonstra_tes that some species -o f small bird-will he found in an r.1average" woody planting 7 months of the year during monthly searches. No attempt has been made to differentiate in this analysis between those species considered benefuial to agriculture or the aesthetic tastes of mankind and the less valuable species because it was impossible to maintain accurate totals for all species flushed during field searches. Thus, ratings demonstr_a~e_a co,mpe>site pattern for ~11 avian non-game species smaller than a crow and may not be entirely r epresentative Of the preferences of every species recorded ;in the study region, There was s_o me indication, for _instance, that such gtound•nesting species as meadowlarks and horn,ed.larks found much less need for woody cover than the migrating warblers and the various .species which require nesting areas above ground level. No s ingle factor was of major importance in controlling small bird use of-woody plantings, but it appeared that age was the most significant single influence. Based on the rating means in Table 3, small birds preferred class 5 (older) plantings _of the timberclaim and . natural cover types. Of s.econdary importance was the preference for herbaceous cover as demonstrated by the strength of the influences of cultivation and adjacent cover quality. Evergreens rated low because of disproportionate sampling in heavily cultivated evergreen plots; and .t he tests for cultivation·and adjacent cover.both demonstrate heavier small bird use wher e herbaceous cover was undisturbed. If tire prefer,ence for available herbaceous cover is assumed .t o be a food relationship, which seems very probable, it becomes less important because small birds are highly mobile and the availability of food near perching areas is a matter of convenience rather than of necessity. �-71- Summary and Conclusions Analysis of wildlife use of plantings assutnes .the basic premise that plantings under examination are an itnportant part of the wildlife habitat. In ·e ffect, such a study compares segments of a s.ingle habitat type to dete:rniine relative ability to attract wildlife, but since no comparison of population levels is made, it is not possible to estimate the true value of the type in producing, protecting or otherwise actually increasing populations. It may be significant, for instance, that the ratings based on pheasant use do not demonstra.t e particularly heavy or. sustained use of all northeastern Colorado habitat itnproveni\ent during any period of the year~ Individual plantings apparently concentrate pheasants during the fall and winter periods, but the meanL:2_· ratings in all quarterly periods indicate an average pheasant use equivalent to flushing one or two birds or finding a few tracks in slightly over two-thirds of the field checks. This use level is significantly higher than year around use of comparable acreages of most·other .cover:types in the study region and may indicate a real necessity for woody cover in the pheasant habitat, but it is also possible that pheasant use of plantings is based on physical comfort rather than necessity and that removal of all woody cover from the study region would have no tneasurable effect on the total number of pheasants supported by the dcyland agricultural habitat. Thus, based on the patterns of pheasant use demonstrated _in this study, a general description of the optimun planting to attract pheasants can be suggested, but there is no evidence to indicate that such a planting will do more than concentrate the birds produced and sustained by other covell." types. The most important requirements for the optimum planting are that it be fairly remote from farm buildings and have good herbaceous cover either between the woody cover rows or in close juxtaposition. Species composition is apparently unimportant although pure stands of evergreens should probably be avoided, and ~e optimum size for pheasant use is apparently between 20,000 and 25,000 square feet because lall.'ger plantings do not attract birds in proportion to their s,ize. Age is the prilnary limiting factor for mourning dove use, and the optimum planting for doves can only be attained after individual tree species in plantings have reach maturity. Mature evergreens were preferred, but any larger tree will afford nesting and roosting sites for doves. Although rabbits .use pelt"ennial woody cover to some extent, the evidence provided by this study was insufficient to provide a reliable test for preferred types. There was s.o me indication that evergreens and cultivated areas are avoided by rabbits, but the general pattern of rabbit use suggested t~at windbreak plantings actually have very little influence in concentra.t ing rabbit populations. Small birds ,of various species were attracted by almost all plantings examined, but some preference for evergreens in the older age classes and non-cultivated plantings was exhibited. �-72- LiteraturEf Cited Emerson, John L. 1940, . The relation of Nebraska shelter'helt plantings to_tlle state's wildlife. Nebr. · Bird Rev. 8(1)!30. . . .· . . Orendurff, . Carirol.F. 1941• .The first -wildlife .inventory of Nebraska shelterbelts .. Nebr. B_ird .Rev. 9_(1):7-8;. - ·· · Wandell, Willet N. _1918. Agricultural and wildlife values of hah,itat impl'.'ovement plantings on.the Illinois Black Pra.i rie. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf. 13:2.56-:270. Weston,- Henry G. 1950, Winter behavio_r ,and spring dispersal of the ring-necked pheasant · (Phasianus 2,:. !_. Gmelin) in Em~et County, Iowa. M. S. Thesis, abstract. ·Iowa Coop. Wildl. and Fish Res. Units, Quart, Rept. , July~Sept. ; 5-8. ,•·.: ·,: Boldt, WHbur and Geo_rge O. . Hendrickson. _1952. Mourning.dove production in North Dakota shelterbelts, 1950. Jour. Wildl . . Mgmt. 16 (2): 187".'"_191. Submitted by: _L. Jack Lyon Date:_ _ _ _Oc_t_o_b_er_,.....,19_5_8___ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid -C oordinator ���-75- In the f inal year of the study, pheasant use of wheat stubble for roosting was estimated by flushing birds at night with an automobile driven at 8-12 m . p . h . This seemed the only . feasible method of obtaining enough data to overcome the sampling problem presented by almost unlimited wheat stubble acreages. study Areas In the course of this investigation, eleven different windbreak plantings, twenty-four wheat stubble plots, twenty plots in other crop residue types and five miscellaneous natural cover areas were searched for one or more winters. The following listing of the plots examined presents a short description of the cover and in the case of agricultural plots, the variations from the average. Plantings containing sample plots run east and west and species composition is described from north t9 south unless .otherwise indicated. Abbreviated common names of woody plant species are used in the descriptions, but scientific names are listed in the appendix. Planting No.1- Seven row windbreak. Elm, olive, hackberry (2), plum, sandcherry (2,). Cultivated between rows except adjacent to plums. Planting No. 2- Six row windbreak running north and south. All elms . Not cultivated and under story filled with tumbleweeds (Salsola pestifer) . . P lanting No. 3 - Six row windbreak. Cottonwood (2), plum (2), cottonwood (2). Cultivated between rows except adjacent to plums. Planting No. 4 - Three row windbreak. All elms, Cultivation between rows, tumbleweeds between trees. Planting No. 5 - Three row windbreak. Caragana, elm, olive. Occasional cultivation between rows. Planting No. 6 - Old timberclaim. Row of plum, clump of plum and black locust, several boxelder trees. Grassy understory. Planting No. 7. - Three row windbreak running north and south. All elms. Not cultiva,ted. Understory of annual bromegrass and tumbleweeds. Planting No. 8 - Two row windbreak. All hackberry. Cultivated outside rows only; understory filled with tumbleweeds. Planting No. 9 - Two row windbreak running north and _south. Pine and juniper. Cultivated and sprayed with chemical heribicide. Planting No. 10 - Old timberclaim. Snowberry and green ash. Understory weeds, perennial grasses and tumbleweeds. Planting No. 11 - Three row windbreak. Widely spaced Juniper and pine (2). Understory of annual weeds. Natur al Area No. 1 - Waste area overgrown with annual bromegrass ~- tectorum) . Natur al Area No. 2- Intermittent creekbottom. Willow clump, small cattail area, scattered cottonwoods. Na_iural Area No. 3 - Ungrazed grassy area. Mostly Panicum virgatum and Andropogon scoparius. Natural Ar ea No. 4 - Intermittent creekbotton in wheat stubble field. Annual weeds. �-76Natural Area No. 5 - Cattail plot and willow area adjacent to intermittent creekbottom. 1955-56 wheat stubble plots. In general; the cover left after the small grain harvest in · _July and August was .12-15 inches tall and averaged 30 stems per foot in rows about 10 inches apart. Plot 4 was barley stubble and was only 6 inches ,talL 1955-56 fa:llow plots. Fields were fallow during the summer of 1955, planted to winter wheat in the fall, and during the study period were covered with green wheat less than 2 inches talL 1955-56 s,o rghum stubble plots. Plot 1. was mowed and stacked leaving stubble about 4 inches tall. Plot ·2 was '!lllharvested and grain heads were about 2 feet tall. Plot 3 had 4 inch · high stubble ; Plot 4 was unharvested and grain heads were about 1 1/2 feet tall. Plot-5 . was mowed and stacked leaving stubble about 3 inches tall, 1955-56 millet stubble plots. Plot 1 had 6 inch stubble, plot 2 had 4 inch stubble and plot s 3.: and 4 had 2-3 inch stubble. , 1955-56 pasture plots. Sample areas were established in representative -shortgrass pastures. Blue grama and buffalo grass were the original climax species, but overgrazing has allowed three-awn and some weeds .to invade the areas. Plot 2 was especially heavily g razed. 1955-56 corn.plots ... Sample areas were established in harvested cornfields. Stubble height. and the amount of waste grain.available varied according to the harvest method used. Plot 1 was handpicked, the stubble averaged about 3 feet tall and sample areas showed about 25 waste ears per acre. Plots 2 and 3 were machine picked. The stubble averaged 2 feet and there were about 9 . 7 pounds of loose corn per acre in Plot 2. Plot 3 was grazed by cattle, the stubble height was 1 foot and little waste grain could be found. 1956-57 wheat stubble plots. The cover left after the small, grain harvest aver aged only .~~ inches and there were 30 stems per foot in rows 10 inches apart. Plots 1, 2, 4 and 8 were slightly shorter than the .a verage and plots l, 2, 3, 7 and 8 were full of weeds. 1957-58 wheat stubble plots. In order to increase the size of the wheat stubble sample during the third study winter, areas were searched at night with an automobile. Ten fields were selected for study, but only six were surveyed in any single night. Stubble averaged 15 inches and had 30 stems -p er foot in .rows 10 inches .apart. Pheasant Use of Study Plots During the first winter of the study, samples of all major land-use types in the study region were examined. This data (Table 1) showed that habitat plantings were used more than any other cover type and that wheat stubble was the only agricultural residue cover which r eceived any roosting use . In the second winter, study plots were confined to habitat plantings, wheat stubble and a few natural cover areas. The data from 1956-57 (Table 2) showed a concentration of pheasant use in habitat plantings .very similar to that recorded in the first winter, but data from wheat stubble plots was considered inconclusive because use '.o f any s ingle plot was so sporadic. In the final winter of the study (Tables 3 and 4) the wheat stubble sample was enlarged _b y searching at night with an automobile for live birds. Although this method of sampling precludes,direct comparison with the concentrated search of habitat cover, it seemed possible that an infinite number of -10, 000 square foot plots would -h ave had to be examined if sufficient data to evaluate wheat stubble cover was to be accumulated. �-77In evaluating the pheasant sign recorded in this study, the most important measure of · pheasant use wasJeltto be the number of roosting sites recorded . It is obvious however, that the presence of pheasants in a planting, aJarge number of tracks or other signs of pheasant use cannot be completely ignored. 'rhetefope;<phea.santuse.of stllciyplotsv;.as r,ated on a point system which gfves roosting sites more value than other signs of pheasant use but gives all evidence some weight in the analyses. The following .values were assigned: Pheasant Use indicated by: Points A few pheasant tracks Many pheasant tracks One or more pheasants flushed Pheasant sign other than tracks (scat, dusting sites) One to four roosting sites Five to nine roosting _sites Ten or more roosting s.ites 1 2 1 1 3 4 5 Tables 1 through 3 present the use-ratings for the cover types searched in the winters of 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58. and Table 4 lists the pheasant night flushing rates for wheat stubble samples in 1957-58. Analyses .o f Pheasant Use Data The data presented in Tablesl through 3 demonstrate quite conclusively that pheasant use of habitat improvement plantings is much heavier than use of equivalent acreages of any other cover types in the study region. In 1955-56, the only year in which all land-use types were examined, the average use-rating for habitat plantings was 25. 8 compared fo an ·· average of 10. O for two natural cover areas, 2. O for wheat stubble plots and 1. O or less for all other agricultural residue plots, Mean use-rating,; of habitat cover plots dropped to 18. 1 in 1956-57 and to 12. 1 in 1957-58, but average use of the woody cover types remained generally higher than even the best samples of natural cover during all three winters of study. After 1955-56, the primary effort of the study was directed toward determination of the best combination of species and planting patterns to attract pheasants in the winter and toward delimitation of the influence of wheat stubble in the overall winter cover pattern. From the standpoint of expenditure involved, it was quite obvious that the money invested in about half of the plantings examined was •co:mpletelywasted for wildlife because pheasants did not use them any more than they :might have used comparable acreages of wheat stubble. The wheat stubble examination was continued because stubble is the mat widespread cover type ilr'.l. the study region, and it was felt that the small amount of use recorded in sample plots might have been indica.tive of a more important relationship if the total wheat stubble acreage could be evaluated. �-78Table 1. ~-Point vaJue ratings .of pheasant use, 10, 000 square foot plots in 10 habitat improvement plantings, two natµral cover ar~as, five wheat stubble fields and 20 miscell$eous .a gricultural residue areas, . by_biweekly periods, - ,November 15 thrQ:ugh March 30i 1955-1)6. Area Noy. Habitat planting, 1 4 2 5 4 6 3 4 Natural cover area, Wheat stubble, " 5 7 6 7 8 9 4 10 0 1 1 ,0 1 0 3 4 5_ Sorghum, Millet .stubble,. Pasture 0 6 5 4 7 5 7 6 3 1 0 1 2 3 4 2 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·..4: ... · 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 - 0 4 0 - 0 0 l 0 0 0 _o 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 15 6 19 38 8 2 0 0 5 1 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 1 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 o. 0 17 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 4 3 0 Total 1 1 2 3 1 0 2 6 3 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 6 7 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Mar. 0 0 1 1 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 1 0 0 0 o_ 1 0 0 .0 2 4 0 1 2 0 -- 2 3 1 0 0 2 2 0 4 2 0 2 3 0 1 3 6 5 6 4 1 1 1 1 3_1 6 5 1 0 5 7 3 4 4 5 7 2 0 1 0 1 7 1 2 3 1/ field plowed 0 0 .. 2 3 4 Corn stubble, 5 2- 2 3 FaHow field, .. 0 2 Months Feb. Dec . . Jan, 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/ - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �-79Table 2. --Point value ratings of pheasant use, 10,000 square foot plots in 9 habitat improvement plantingsj<3 natural cover areas and 9 wheat stubble fields, by biweekl;E periods, November 15 .thr~µ~h March 31i 1956--57. • · · Month Mar. Total Jan; Feb. Dec, Nov. Area j) l . · 1 10 0 4 l 3 0 1 0 Habitat planting, 16 1 1 5 5 1 1 0 2 0 2 3 4 0 0 5 1 6 0 7 8 1 1 0 9 Natural cover area, 2 3 I 4 Wheat stubble, 8 9 0 3 •• 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 5 6 7 4 3 5 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 4 5 3 4 4 5 0 0 0 3 4 3 1 4 3 1 0 0 3 1 3 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 1 4 5 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 4 5 1 1 1 l 4 1 0 1 3 4 0 1 2 4 4 0 0 1 3 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 30 24 6 5 33 16 23 0 0 14 0 9 0 y 7 4 3 0 3 0 0 1 l 0 l 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 5 1 5 0 13 0 0 1/ flield plowed Table 3. - Point value ratings of pheasant u:se, lO; ooo square foot plots in 7 habitat improvement plantings and one natural cover area, by biweekly periods, November 15 through March 31 1957-58. Month Mar . Area Dec. Jan. Feb. .Total Nov~ ·1 l is · 2 ·5 Habitat planting, · 1 1 l 2 1 2 1 5 2 0 1 2 3 16 2 2 0 2 4 1 1 16 3 2 2 2 2 0 .. . ·• 3 ... 2 2 1 6 0 11 . 0 0 5 : 1 5 Natural coyer area. 0 2 2 0 3 1 0 0 l 0 1 2 0 4 2 1 0 1 .. 1 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 5 2 4 1 0 2 0 1 1 .. 2 0 1.5 15 1 6 . ... 13 �-80- Table 4. -- Miles driven, pheasants flushed and flushing rates for wheat stubble fields searched at night with an automobi~e, by biweekly periods • . November 15 through February 28, 19.57-58. 1/.. -:· ._ .. - Acres Pheasant s Pheasants Miles ·nushed ..per acre . Date driven searched. 2/ 15 19. 1 . 786 Dec. 6. 3 3 16 16.1 . 996 18 5.3 16. 1 4 . 249 27 5.3 16 17.9 . 895 Jan. 13 5.9 17.3 24 1. 390 24 5.7 15 Feb. 10 17.0 . 884 5.6 20. 0 20 1.000 24 f>.6 .!/ March snows were so heavy that many roads were impassible, and wheat stubble fields could not be entered with a vehicle at all. Since the stubble was complete.ly covered with snow it was assumed that no pheasants would have been flushed had a night time search beenpossible. A random snowshoe survey of six fields on March 11, the date. the survey should have been made, averaged 11. 4 pheasant tracks crossed per mile of traverse, but almost without exception, the tracks were close to edges of the fields and to other cover. No scat or other indication of roosting use was recorded. :l,:/ Based on an assumed width of survey strip within the headlight beam of twenty-five feet. Analysis of Pheasant Use of Habitat Plantings During each year of the study, about half of the plantings examined appeared to have much less attraction for pheasants than the overalf use-rating averages would indicate. In 195556, for instance, use-ratings on four of the plantings averaged 42. 0 while the remaining six pl~nUngs averaged only 15. 0. Th.a t. these differences were stati1?tically significant is demonstrated by the analyses of variance for the separate years presented in Table 5. Area significance: With1n each y~ar, the study area use - rating means fell into three general groups as shownJn Table 6. Group.l includes study plots which had use- rating means significantly higher than: study plots in Group 3, and Group 2 includes the.'study · plots which had use-rating m eans significantly different from only a part of the areas in groups 1 .a nd 3 . Surprisingly, the data in Table 6 demonstrate almost no reason for pheasant preference of one planting over another. Areas 4, ,9, 2, 3 and 5 appeared most often in Group 1 and exhibited more attraction for pheasants during the winter periods than any other areas . Species composition in these plantings ranged from all elms (2 and 4) through a mixture of trees and woody shrubs (3 and 5) to all ever greens (9), and the understories,ranged from .an alfnost complete mat of tumbleweeds three feet deep (2) through various degrees of cultivation to complete control of weeds with cultivation and chemical herbicides (9) . Conversely, the areas which appeared most often in Group 3 also represented several combinations of species composition and understory cultivation. �-80•a- Table 6. -Yearling means of pheasant use-ratings and general s:ignificance groupings, eleven study plots in habitat improvement plantings, N9vember 15 tll.rowh March 31 1 1955-56, 1956-57 1 1957-58. Significance Group 1955-56 Area Mean 1956-57 Area Mean 1957-58 Area Mean Group .1 (significiently 4 5.1 7 3. 7 1 1. 8 higher than 5 5. 1 3 3.3 2 1.8 Group 3) 2 4.2 4 2.7 3 1.8 9 .4. 2 9 2.6 4 1. 7 5 1. 7 Group 2 3 2.8 2 1.8 8 2.1 8 1.8 Group 3 (significantly 1 1.9 1 1. 1 11 0.7 lower than 6 1.7 5 0.7 6 0.1 Group 1) 10 0.9 6 0. 6 7 0.7 �-81- Table 5, --Analyses of variance, biweekly pheasant use-ratings of 10,000 square foot study plots in 'habitat improvement plantings; November 15 through March 31, 1955-56 1956..;57 1957-58. zx 2 M2 F 1955-56, 10 plots, N: 90 89 444.40 9 229.29 8 37.40 177. 71 72 25,48 4. 68 2.468 10. 32* 1. 90 "1956-57, 9 plots, N~ 81 80 270.99 8 90.55 46.99 8 64 133. 45 11.32 5. 87 2. 085 5. 43* 2.82* 2.08 2.os - 4.13 3.50 1.115 3.70* 3.14* 2. 30 2. 14, Source DF Total Areas Periods Error Tota). Areas Periods Error F_os '' 2.0t '' 2.07 1957..:sa, 7 plots, ·N ~ 63 Total Areas Periods Error 62 6 8 48 106. 32 24.76 2.8. 03 53. 53 Completing the analyses for each yea.r, the computed difference (d) between area means necessary to indicate significance was L 3 for 1955-56, 1.·1 for 1956-57 and 0. 8 for 1957-58 .!/. No significant difference among period means was noted in 1955 -56, but the d for 1956-57 and 1957-58 resp_e ctively were 1. 1 and 1. 0 . .!/ dis greater than t 05 times the square root of 2 EEMS divided by n where EEMS (estimated error mean square) is equal to: · M2 error (1 /. 2 M treatment) and n is the number of variates in the .E x2 error treatment summation. �-82- The most striking observation about the data in T.a ble 6. is theapparent lack of consistency in the ranking of any ,study area from year to year. Althqugh habitat plalltings apparently have more attraction for pheasants than any other cover type in the study region, the variations suggest that'factors outside of the plantings are ·influential in determining the amo~mt of use received:. For most plantings there was :s.ome minor year to year variation . in understory composition and time of cultivation, but .the differences were.too slight to have any influence on the amount or quality of available cover~ ·. Excluding the possibility of vari"".' ation in the amount of wildlife disturbance by humans a.rid predators, the major year to year variations were found outside the plantings in the adjacent crop types and within plantirigs in the depth of snowdrift accumulation. Table 7 presents the adjacent cover types and gives a brief description of snowdrifts collected by the plantings examined in each winter. Table 7. - Adjacent cover types and snowdrift accumulation descriptions for study plots in eleven habitat improvement windbreak plantings, winters of 1955-56, 1956-57, · 1957-58. · .• . .. 1/ · study Area · .Adjacent cover arid snowcir:i.ft accumulation descriptions 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1 Good weed cover, pasture, fallow meclium drift Fair weed cover, pasture, ·s tubble 2/ very deep drift Good weed cov-er, fallow, small drift in March 2 Good weed cover road, fallow, Fair Weed cover, road, stubble, medium drift Sorghum stubble, road, fallow 3 Fa_ir weed cover, . pasture, road, · fallow, Fair weed cover, pasture, road, stubble, small drift Sorghum stubble, pasture,. road, fallow · ' small dr:i.ft in March. 4 Stubble, road, abandoned farmstead Fallow, road, abandoned farmstead small drift Stubble, road, abandoned farmstead 5 Stubble, pasture, Fallow, pasture, medium drift Stubble, pasture 6 Timberclaim, Stubble, Timberclaim, s.o rghum stubble, Timberclaim, stubble 7 Fallow, shortgrass area with metal grain storage bin stubble, shortgrass area with metal grain storage bin small drift �-83- Table 7. --Acljacent cover tzyes and snowdrift descriptions (continued) study Adjacent cover and· snowdrift acclltfiulatiort ·descriptions ·•· 1/ Area . 1955-56 1956-57, 1957-58 8 Stubble, ungrazed • Fallow, ungrazed pasture, pasture, medium drift 9 Stubble, road Fallow, road medium drift 10 Timb erclaim, stubble 11 Poor we•e d cover, mixed woody plantings, roads !/ Snowdrift depths are rel ative because of varying original deposit and melting rates; The descriptions are intended to convey only the depth which was persistent in the ·:plan.ting for more than a few weeks during the winter. With few exceptions, all plantings collected drifting snow, but drifts under three feet deep were not recorded unless they were very persistent (small drift). Medium drifts averaged about 4 feet deep and the deep drifts ranged to about 8 feet. l/ Stubble, unless otherwise indicated, was wheat stubble. Comparison of table 6 and 7 affords no really spectacular measure of the influence of adjacent cover types and snowdrift depths on pheasant use of habitat plantings, but sever~ plantings exhibited a pattern showing a drop in pheasant use when lack of cover lanes or . immdation of woody cover was recorded. Among the plantings examined, five ·(1, 2, 5, 8, 9) were inundated by snowdrifts which persisted at depths .o f four feet or more at some time during the s.tudy. On three of these areas (1, 2, 5), · the fluctuation in the use- ranking of the plantings was apparently controlled by the drifting snow; Snowdrifts presumably had n6 effect on area 9 because the -e vergreens involved .offered the -same type a:nd quality of cove-r when lower branches were inundated as when no snow was present. Area 8 was the orily deciduous plot on which the use-ranking did not drop when drifting snow filled the planting; but it seemed possible that the use-ratings of area 8 could have been influenced by pheasants wandering in and out of area 9 because area .9 was so close. Cover juxtaposition appeared to be of secondary importance in controlling ·pheasant- use levels, but for several of the plantings .t he correlation between adjacent cover values and use-ranking was almost as strong as the correlation for ·s nowdrift depths. On areas 3, 5 and 7, adjacent cover quality alternated from year to year, and the ran.king of pheasant use alternated in the same way. Thus, it appears that heavy concentration of pheasant use during the winter can only be consider-ed·typical of-plantings in good juxtaposition with othercover types, and even when cover lanes exist, heavy use in mild weather is no guarantee of winter cover quality beca_u se some deciduous plantings have no attraction for pheasants When blizzards deposit snowdrifts over the major part of the cover. �-84Period significance: A~thoug~ the analys~s of vari1:mce demonstrate that pheasant us.e of habitat plantings varied slgniffoaritlY among· cheql(perfods 1n two years -of the study, examination of the individual period means reveals nothing about the influences responsible for the variatlon·s : ·1t can. be asstiined however that period·,varia.t ionmust be due to variation i:n weather conditions because no other influences except the fall hunting season affect the pheasant population over a wide area. Instead of examitting individual variates in relation to the weather conditions which could have affected pheasant use, i_t is possible to compute a comprehensi ve analysis testing correlation _and multiple regression of use-ratings on all variations of temperature, precipitation and wind velocity. Table 8 presents the temperature, precipitation and wind velocity data which apply to the sever.a l combinations study area data analyzed. Temperature and precipitation data were taken from the records of the Julesburg, Colorado, power plant and the Agricultural ~periment station at Akron, Colorado. ·wind velocity data, since the Julesburg station has no anempmeter, were.taken entirely from the records of the Experiment station. Although temperature and precipitation data demonstrate significant _v ariability between the two .stations, there are no major topographic barriers hi the region, and it is felt that the Akron wind velocity data provides reliable trends even though the figures may not be absolutely accurate for study areas ~earer to Julesburg_. StudY:plot~ it1 Sedgwick and Phillips Counties average 15 miles from the Julesburg station and 60 miles from Akron while Logan County plots aver aged 25 miles from the Akron station and 60 miles from Julesburg. Accordingly, for each year of the study, the biweekly rating and weather data are grouped in relation to the distance from the nearest weather station. of . .- In additlon to the analysis complication .introduced by the double grouping of study areas and weather dlil,ta according to locaiion, it was necessary to consider the possibility that individual .study areas wo-qld not exhibit t~e same pattern of .pheasant-use variability as a whole group of plantings . . The gross compariscm of data ~uggest s that evergreen species could have a different winter cover potential than deciduous species, and for this reason the data .for Logan County is presE:nted in two gro-µps repre~enting the si ngle _evergreen planting. and the .deciduous planting-s. The ·evergreen planting .e xamined in Phillips County in 1957-.58 recetved so little. use that analysis was.not possible and it was dropped from the calculations. Because further classification of areas would result _in such small samples that the analyses.would be_questionable, it was notppssible to attempt evaluation of deciduous plantings according to species composition, and it i s doubtful that the Logan -County data can be considered reliable because the ratings on some plots were so low that the analysis is reduced to a virtual test of use- variability on a ~ingle plot. In Table. 8, te~perature is exp~es;ed a~ the mean minimulli; and wind velo_c ity is expressed as the total of da,ily-mean wind velocities, for sev~n days;preceding the field checks. This computation wasfelt to be adequate for these twoJactors, but a similar calculation for precipitation could not be consi dered because the . influence of a heavy s nowfall may continue for a longer period, and it is conc~ivable that the ~tal snowfall in the week before a field _ check could be .recorded as . 00 when tluf ground wa~ actually covered with snow. In order fo inciude this possibility in the calculations; . preclpitation recordings for Table 8 were determined by totalling all precipitation for the twelve days preceding the field checks and subtracting . 02 from any precipitation on the 7th day, . 05 from the 8th day and an additional . 05 from each day preceding. �-85- Table 8. --Pheasant use-ratings for various groups of winter cover plots in habitat improvement plantip.gs by biweekly periods; d~ily minimum temperature means, adjusted total precipitation and total da,ily wind velocity means for seven days preceding field checks; November 15 through March 31, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58 . . {During those periods when actual pr ecipitation was recorded only a trace in the six days ,preceding field checks; the figure . 01 * has been used as a maximum estimate to allow statistical analysis). R .;: ratings, T - temperatures, P - precipitation, W- wind velocities (e - evergreens, d - deciduous, Logan County only) Year and Period J ~ j 1955-56 Nov. 2 Dec. 1 Dec . 2 Jan. 1 Jan. 2 Feb. 1 Feb. 2 Mar . 1 Mar. 2 Total 195ii'-:57 Nov. 2 Dec. 1 Dec. 2 Jan. 1 Jan. 2 Feb. 1 Feb. 2 Mar. 1 Mar. 2 Total 1957-58 . . Nov. 2 Dec. 1 Dec. 2 Jan. 1 Jan. 2 Feb. 1 Feb. 2 Mar. 1 Mar. 2 Total Sedgwick and Philli:es Co. p • w·-·T R areas 1, 2, 4,,, 5, 5, 6 30 16. 1 . 19 22.6 11. 3 34 . 20 30. 8 23 16. 6 . 00 28.719 23.1 . 01* 29.5 20 15. 7 . 07 23. 4 19 . 09 2.0 30: 3 15 5. 9 . 26 20.3 10 24.7 . 02 51. 4 17 37_. 2 29.3 . 04 "187 144.7 . 88 274'. 2 areas 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 1 25.7 L21 28.8 12 25. 1 . 00 33. 4 3 21. 0 . 23 34. 7 11 . 00 25.6 30. 5 13 8.6 . 09 36.4 15 8.9 , 00 31.4 20 22.6 . 00 35.3 18. 9 44. _7 8 . 32 25.7 . 66 ,6s:o 8 91 182. :t. 2.51 34Q, 2 . areas 12 2z 3& 41 5z 6 9 22.3 . 21 38. 7 20. 4 . 00 35,0 6 18. 5 5 . 00 42.1 11 19.0 . 01* 36. 6 16.3 . 21 2 50. 0 7 12. 1 . 01* 32.9 11 29.4 . 22 39.2 13.4 . 81 8 40. 9 27.4 2.0 . 13 50.5 1'(8. 8- i,60 79 365.9 Logan Countl .·...... p eRd T w ai:ea 9 and areas 7, 8, 10 20.7 5 2 . 05 26.1 4 4 10. 9 . 03 29. 1 22.9 '28.3 2 4 . 00 21. 4 2 2 . 00 34.5 1 4 17. 1 . 08 26. 3 6 5 7. 1 . 12 30. 7 5 2 17. 9 . 00 20. 3 6 7 2.0 . 9 45,9 . 06 7 3 29.0 . 07 34. 7 38 33 167. 9 .41 275.9 area 9 and areas 7, 8 0 2 27. 3 1.03 32.l 4 7 24.1 . 01* 36.3 5 9 17. 3 . 22 32. 1 3 5 25.4 . 00 26. 4 9.6 1 _7 . 01* 45.6 4 3 17.3 • 00 31. 4 4 5 22. 0 • 01* 41.5 1 5 25.6 .14 40. 9 66, 4 .. 23. 1 . 19 1 6 23 49 191. 7 352.7 1.61 No habitat improvement plantings in Logan County_ were surveyed in 1957-58 7 �- 86The comparison of pheasant use ratings and weather factors is shown in Table .9 as linear correlation and multiple regresa,ion coefficients for each group of study plots and each weather factor and all factors combined each winter cr. the study. · Table 9 , Multiple regression (R) and linear correlation (r) for pheasant use ratings of habitat improvement plantings·on temperature, precipitation and wind velocity, November 15 through March 31, 1955--56, -1956-57, 1957-58. N ':'. 9. Weather factors Tempebiture .r Precipitation r Wind velocity r Multipl'e R Temperature r Precipitation r Wind velocity r Multiple R r and multiple R · Sedgwick and Phillips Co. ·plots 1955-56 __ 1956-57 1957- 58 .. ~- . 255 . 636 - . 355 ,;; 408 .·, - . 005 - . 745 -.464 - . 081 . 233 • 7·54 . 650 . 508 ·Logan Couiity Plots. 1955-- 56 1956-57 Evergr. Decid~ Evergr. Decid. . 040" - . 269" -.188 -.440 . 409 .482 .815 .· -.541 - . 133 . 724 -;478 . 311 . 481· ,.-, 666 • 212 . 565 .The correlation coefficients· (r) ~in Table -9 demonstrate ·an unexpected overall inconsisten.cy-~ Few are statistically s ignificant, and none show any uniform influence of weather on fluctuation of pheasant use of habitat plantings. The relationship of snowfall to pheasant use seems particularly inconsistent because the primary reason for the original selection of the woody windbreak as habitat improvement cover was the fact that pheasant concefitrations were noted in such plantings when snow covered the ground. Because of the inconsistencies, the relationships were examined for possible sources of bias. _The most obvious possibility was that some of the wettest storms of all three years occurred in November and late March when winter cover was probably not needed. These storms deposited deep snow over most fields and · h eavy drifts in many planthigs, but there was little--record of pheasant mortality. The heaviest snow .of the three ·year study occurred .in Novembel' of 1956; and although main roads were closed up to a week and many backroads were closed for over a month, the storm did not kill any perceptible number of pheasants. Thus, it seems probable that very early or very late storms do · not have the same influence on pheasants cover preferences as storm:s during the middle of the winter. ' The test for this ·possibility is based on the data in Table S, but only the six variates from the second half of December through the first half of March were used. The correlation and regression coefficients for the mid- winter variates are presented in Table 10. Although the correlation coefficients (r) for pheasant use ratings and the three weather fact_o rs were almost as diversified for the December 15 to Ma_rch 15 period as for the November 15 to March 31 period, the .strength -and uniformity of- the multiple regression coefficients (R) leave little doubt that the relationships were not random. In the Sedgwick and Phillips County plots, more than 80 percent (R2) of the variation in pheasant use of plantings was due to �-87Table 10. --Multiple regression (R) and linear correlation (r) for pheasant use ratings of habitat improvement plantings on temperature, precipitation and wind velocity, December 15 through M.a rch 15, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. N=· 6. Weather factors r and multiple R Sedgwick and Phillips Co. plots 1955~56 1956;..57 . 1957-58 .::; 255 -. 185 . 484 ' Temperature r Precipitation r -.249 -.755 . 048 Wind velocity r - . 698 -. 648 -. 254 . 979 ,• . • 933 . 987 Multiple :f1 Logan County Plots 1955-56 1956-57 Evergr. Decid. ·Evergr. Decid. - . 470 . Temperature r - . 162 . 069 - . 386 Precipitation r . 359 . 617 • 191 . 667 Wind velocity r , 317 . 713 - . 579 . 151 Multiple R . 747 . 887 .633 . 807 variation in weather conditions, and even in the small samples for Logan County, over 50 percent of the variability could be attributed to weather fluctuations. Notwithstanding · that the multiple R show pheasant use of habitat plantings almost entirely controlled by fluctuations in weather conditions, ·there is no indicration.that weather relationships are the·· same from year·to yea.r or even consistent over a large region in the same year. This is an important concept, because even though pheasants have· not been attributed possession of memory or an ability to reason , it has been generally assumed that cover-use patterns are essentially constant. · In accepting the basic thesis that the reasons for pheasant use of cover plantings are not constant from year to year, a tentative corollary that pheasant use patterns for any single year must be determined by the earliest storms of the _winter, -i~ established. The test.for this corollary is based on the relationships between pheasant us.e ratings and weather factors for the first three check periods as shown in Table 11. Table 11. --Linear' correlation for pheasant use'""ratings of habitat improvement-plantings · and temperature 1 ·precipitation and wind velocity, November 15 through Dec. 31, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58. N = 3 Weather factor s Temperature r Precipitation r Wind velocitx; r Correlation coefficients .. (r) Sedgwick and Phillips .Co. plots 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 . 232 . 961 - . 828 - . 768 . 970 . 948 .465 - . 216 • 093 1956-.:57 .· .· .. Evergr . Dec id. Temperature r Precipitation r Wind veloc ity r -.355 . 987 -.562 -.343 -.859 -.901 -.780 .967 - . 926 . 327 - . 888 . 240 �-88-.. With a s~mple involvingqnly three pairs ofvariate.s, Hnear correlation above . 9 can occur 10 'percent ofthe time if no correlation exist~. Thus, even the largest figures in Table 11 may not be s.ign.ificant. The important point shown by the analysis is that in every case, the early fall stortns established use -pattern which influenced the pheasant population _for the remainder of the winter period. a Since the evidence indicates such a strong lack of uniformity in pheasant use patterns of habitat cover from year to year, it is necessary to consider the conditions which might cause pheasant mortality and examine the year to year fluctuations in the light of me>rtality factors alone . Wind, snow and cold can occur in seven different primary combinations, but wildlife mortality is norm.ally produced only by those storms_incorporating the worst of all three. The only binary combination even suspectedof killing pheasants is that of wind and snow. Examination of the. Sedgwick and Phillips County multiple regression equations for the midwinter period (Table 12) shows that wind velocity, in every year of the study, had at least three times as much influence on pheasant use patterns as any other weather factor. Temperatures and precipitation had only secondary effects, but it appeared that snowfall should be considered the most important because it had the stronger influence in the two winters (1955-56 and 195657) when overall weather was worst. In the extremely mild winter of 1957-58, temperature had a greater influence than precipitation, . but it was still only _o ne-third as important as wind in deterinining pheasant use.patterns in habitat plantings.: . Table 12. 7 -M:ultiple· lineai regression equations for the regre~sion of pheasant use ratings . ·.. of habitat improvement plantings on temperature, precipitation and wind velocity, 6 plantings in Sedgw:ick and Phillips Counties, 1955-56 1 1956-57 1 1957-58. . ,strength of influence Winter bi times meani P-eriod Multiple regression equations Temp. (T)Prec. ('P) Wind (W) 1955-56 Y: 36.494 - .191T -1.8. 030P -,406W 2. 802 3 , 602 12. 424' 1956-57 Y= -24. 174 --. O27T . -68. _6 85P 1957-58 ..· Y: . 2.0. 266 l, 336T l3. 996P fl. 230W • 475 - . 493W 6,J)87 7. 349 43 . 665 .·839 -- 19. 860 Examined on the basis of variations for a single year and i n the light of mortality factors, the data in Tables 9, 10, 11 and 12 demonstrate patterns of pheasant use for each year, and a generl:11 summarization_of .the relationships during the worst weather cond.itions provides an estim,ate of the winter cover values ,of habi.tat windbreak plantings. In 1955-56, wind was not an influential factor during the early fall .storms (r, . 093) and pheasant cover-use patterns were established on the basis of shelter from snow and accompanying cold temperatures. As the winter progressed however, the pattern was adjusted to the high winds of the midwinter period (r, - - . 648) and the strength of the relationship with snow was altered to a complete reversal (r, . 948 .to - . 249) . . The influence of temperature declined (r, - .828 to-. 255), but the pattern of the early fall storms was not completely ioit~ In 1956-57, the November- December sto!ffis were characterized by extremely heavy snowfall - to 1he virtual exclusion of any other weather factor as a possible determinant of pheasant use patterns. Use of habitat cover was haired on the fact that plantings offered death by burial during storms and-little cover thereafter (r, - . 768). This precipitation pattern was �-8~- so firmly established that it did not alter significantly for the whole winter period. There was a .c hange however, in the wind influence, which again became the most important single factor affecting vaxiation in pheasant use of plantings (r, - . 255) almost six times as important as precipitation). The winter of 1957-58 was the mildest of the study~ and there wa.s some doubt that pheasants had need for protection from weather at any -time during the winter-~. The November..December cover use pattern was based on shelter from slushy, wet snow in November (r, . 970) and . adjustment to cold Winds m December (r, -. 216) .. As the winter progressed, the correl ation for wind influences strengthened (r, -. 698) and that for precipitation dropped (r, . 048). The temperature .influence remained fairly strong (r, -484) during midwinter and was stronger than during any other winter of the study, but it had less than a third as much influence on pheasant use variation as wind. Although it appeared that virtually every storm had a different effect on pheasants, 1he correlation and regression analyses for pheasant use of Sedgwick and Phillips County habitat improvement plantings m relation to weather demonstrated an almost uniform pattern for storm conditions capable of causing wildlife mortality; · Wind was the most important single factor in -determining pheasant use levels .f or habitat cover I and in all three winters the correlation between pheasant use and wind velocity was negative. Precipitation influences were complicated by a double ·standard .u nder which pheasants sought habitat plantings· for · protection from light snows but avoided such cover when snowfall was heayY. The mfluences o(precipitatfon were never more than about one...foutth as great as those of wind. Temperature influences appeared to be the least pred.ictable of the three weather factors examined, but smce temperature had less effect on pheasant use of habitat plantings than any other factor, it seems at least possible th~t the exhibited variation was due ln.ore to temperature correlation, or lack of correlation, with other weather factors than to any direct effect on pheasants. The strongest relationship between temperature and pheasant use of windbreak oover was .e xhibited during the very mild winter of 1957-58 and, in contrast-to the two previous winters, the re=-lationship appeared to be a continuation of the late· swnmer need for shade rather than a desire for shelter from cold temperatures. In summary; • the relationship of pheasant use of the Sedgwick and Phillips County habitat improvement plantings to weather factors leaves·a very ·strong doubt that such cover could have any real value during the winter. Even though pheasant use of Windbreaks is heavier than use of any other cover types m the study region,-·the analyses show ·that pheasants leave the plantings whenever high winds or heavy snows occur. The analyses of pheasant use of plantings in :J..,ogan County cannot be considered very -reliable because the samples were so small that the discovery of a single additional roosting site could have changed the whole ind.icated regression pattern. Nevertheless, the data evaluating the evergreen plot do suggest some interesting possibilities regarding the influence of weather on pheasant use of conifers. 1n both years of study, the influence of snowfall during the midwinter period was very light, and in both years temperature had a greater effect on pheasant use than it had in Sedgwick and Phillips County deciduous plots. The corresponding rare too low to be significant, but they do suggest the possibility that evergreen plantings, in contrast to deciduous types, may be capable of providing protection from cold temperatures and drifting snow. In 1955-56, the only winter in which pheasant mortality was recorded in the study region, the r for all three weather factors indicated �-90- increased pheasant use of the plantblg as weath~r conditions worsened . . This patt~rn did .not hold true in 1956-57, but-;~ven in th:is year, the r , indic3:ted:a. generally more favor~ble relationship ,than was indicated by the Sedgwick:'.".Phillips County datafor decid~ous p_lots. Analyses of data for Logan County deciduous plots expressed a favorable relationship between pheasant use•and weather factors during both win~rs of study, but the data was considered even less reliable than thatJor the_evergreen-planting beca.ttse the rating.totals for all plots combined were Iower than the to1;al for the evergre~n planting alone;ill 1955-56 and because the strengths-of the relationshipsAn.koth years •appearedt,o ,be due to sporadic fluctuation of little used plots rather than to varlation on the more heavily used areas. This in itself is partial evidence that the lightly us.e d deciduous plantings Inay be furnishing effeotive winter . cover; but only the broadest of .c onclusions can be drawn . alyses. '. . . . from .. . the, . Logan .County. an . ' ' ·, . . ' . . . - For the two year period, area 8 received the most consistent pheasant use, but the data are considered questionable because only three roosting sites were reco_rded in both. years and bec;ause area 8 was so close to area .9 that any use it receivec:l.could have.been a random reflection of the overflow from the evergreen phµ1ting . -The 1955-56 daJa"r~present pheasant use. ra_tings for areas 7, 8 and 10, but total pheasant use of_area 7 wa,s confined Jo a few pheasant tracks observed in each field check, and vir1ually the whole rating total for area 10 was_:r_e corded in a single observation. The strengtl). of the 1955-:56 -analy~is -is further confused by .the fact that the c.o rrela.tion between us~ of area 8 alone and tp.e period J<>tals for all three areas is an .. exact zero. Thus, alth.ough area 8 r .e ceived morE:l than twice as much 11s.e as areas 7 and 10 . combined, the fluctuations of the lightly used areas controlled the anlysis. In 1956-57, only areas 7 and 8 are represented in fue J.ipgan Coµnty decidu~u~analysis. Ratings for area 8, representing one-thir!'.Lof :the total pheasant use for. the sample, had a ~orrel~tion of . 938 . with the period totals, c<>ID.pared-to:- ~01 fo;r area. 7;. again demonstrating .c ontrol of th.e _ fluctuations. by the lowest. ranking. area. . . If .all 'these factors are recognized,_it is surprising that thl:! two regression analyses for Logan County deciduous plots ,showany simHarity at all, and it is _certaJnly .doubtful that any conclus_ions suggested will be reliable. Nevertheless; two of-the areas examined may have had some winter values. Area 7 received very light use in 1955-56 and fairly heayy use in 1956-57. Most of this relationships;was undoubtedly due to the fact that good adjacent cover was not present in the first year of the study, _b ut it may ,alsp indicate. a food availability relationship caused by the heavier. s nows of 1956:'.".57 andthe .p resenceof the .grain storage bin close to th.e planting. Area JO received pheasant roosting use only once during. the winter of 1955-56, but may be significant that this use occurred during the two weekpe_riod which had the strongest wind recording. Area 10 was situated in a large timberclaim, and although the total _.a ttraction -of -the. plot was -very_1ow, the area. was protected J~omfue ..wind, .and was not subject t o drifting snow as lnanyofthe other :plot;s were. ' . ' In summary, it seems doubtful that Jhe Logan County deciduous plot da~ represent more than random occur-rence of pheasant use, but there are some indications that .readi . .. .. -. .. . . ·1y available food may .attract pheasants .to plantings during heavy snowfall periods and that .sheltered parts of very Jarge plantings may offer shelter from winter winds . . -· . .. . ' ' · . . •' . ' . . . �-91Analysis .of _Pheasant Use of Wheat Stubble During the first two winters of the study, wheat stubble plots of the same size as those in habitat improvement cover were searched on foot at biweekly intervals. This data, . in Tabl~ 1 and 2, showed that pheasant use of wheat stubble was greater than ~se of any other agricultural cover type and much less than use of comparable acreages .of habitat improvement cover. The use of 10,000 square foot plots was so sporadic however, that no evaluation. of the cover type in relation to weather could be made. ' ' In 1957-58, pheasant use of wheat stubble for roosting' was estimated by flushing birds at night fr_o m stubble fields with a moving car. Table 4 pres,ents the compiled data from the biweekly field checks. Except for the low number of birds flushed on December 27, the flushing rate was fairly constant at about one bird per acre. The data comparing variation in pheasant flushing rates to weather conditions provides little opportunity for evaluating wheat stubble as winter cover beca'Use the winter of 1957-58 wa.s. so mild, but the regression analysis ;does bring out some interesting relationships. The weather data ~elating to pheasant use of wheat stubble is shown in Table 13. Flushing rates were more dynamic than roosting site and tracks counts, and it was felt that they would probably not be affected by temperature and wind factors other than those immediately apparent. For this reason, the temperature data in Table 13 are the minimums eventually reached on the nights of search and the wind velocity data are th~ . means for the 24 hours .ending at 8 a. m . on the morning after the search. ·. Precipitation is .. expressed by the same formula used for computations relating to habitat planting use. The linear correlation coefficients fo~ pheasant flushing rates and weather factors during the midwinter period (December 15 to February 28) were . 6:22 for temperature, . 648 for precipitation and . 542 for wind velocity. The multiple linear R was . 902, indicating, as the R for habitat planting use did, that variations are almost entirely controlled by fluctuation .in weather conditions'. Comparison of the regr~ssion equaticms for flushing rates and .weather factors, Y = 1. 472 .j.., 062 temp . .,'8. 409 ppt. .-. 378 wind,· with the regression equationJor pheasant 'use of habitat plantings in 1957"."58 reveals a .strong similarity. In both cases, wind had two to three times as much influence on pheasant use -v ariations as the second strongest factor, temperature. It also seems illl.Jrortant that while the wind velocity correlation for habitat plantings was negative, the r for stubble was positive. Thus, even though the correlation between flushing rates and pheasant use ratings was only -. 118 for the midwinter period, there was some reason to believe that wheat stubble may be the.alternate cover selected by pheasants when use of habitat cover declines. · ·· Table 13. Pheasants .flushed per acre of wheat stubble in night searches with a vehicle,by biweekly periods, minimum temperature and mean wind velocity for the night of search and adjusted precipitation total for seven days preceding the search, 6 .r.andom si:ubble plots November 15 to .February 28, 1957-58. Pheasants Date flushed /acre Precipitation Wind velocity Temperai:ul:'e .. .·786 Dec. 3 . 03 5. 8 22 Dec. 18 . 996 8. 8 23 . 00 Dec. 27 . 249 12 . 00 4. 6 Jan. 13 . 895 25 5.8 . 01* Jan. 24 1. 390 27 . 21 9.2 Feb. 10 . 884 13 . 01* 4. 6 Feb. 24 1. 000 37 . 27 13 . 4 . . �-92- Conclusions ,T he study reported in this paper was designed to answer basic questions about woody windbreak plantings and their relationship to wildlife. First; .· · does such cover provide effective winter shelter for pheasants; ·and second, if effective cover is provided; is the value received consistent with the-investment of habitat improvement funds required? Pheasant use -of habitat .im_provement plantings was so variable that it is impossible to arrive · at a single unqualified answer to either question,' buf there is little doubt that the plantings · investigated in Colorado were not adequate in either respect when considered as a group. The data eValtiating _pheasant use Of habitat improvement plantings describes a very complex relationship involving variation in pheasant use of cover due to changing weather conditions, the proclivity of indiVidual plantings for collecting snowdrifts and the juxtaposition of . plantings to other cover types. In general, it appea:red that maximum pheasant use· could never be expected in plantings not bordered by stubble fields or weedy areas offering suitable escape cover.· In addition, those plantings which exhihited a tendency to collect deep snowdrifts could only be considered benefieial when snowfall was very light 'or not accompanied by wind. During the midwinter perfod, when blizzard mortality was most likely to occur; the combined influences of wind, snow and temperature were almost totally responsible for the fluctuations in pheasant use recorded for deciduous plantings. - ln any single year; more than 85 percent of tile variation in pheasant use-ratings was~mathematically related to the effects of weather factors; but the individual influences of wind, precipitation and temperature varied from year to year according to patterns established by the type a.nd severity of late ran ·storms an.d modified by the eventual severity of midwinter weather. Of the three weather factors, wind had the strongest arid the -most consistent influence on pheasant use of hab1tat cover. Throughout the study, the relationship ahvay-s showed phea:saht deseftibri of plantings ::is Wind velocity· increased.. Precipitation-had less influence on pheasant cover-use patterns than wind; and the relationship was not the same for light s nowfall as for heavy snows. The correlation showed however, that pheasants deserted woody cover -plantings when storni:s inciuded -heavy snow . . Finally, fl:ie influences oftemperature:were· incidental to those of other-factors, but there did appear to be . a possibility that habitat plantings could protect pheasants .from extreme cold. In summary, the patterns of pheasant use of habitat plantings in Colorado demonstrate desertion of the pla:ntings Whefr high winds or heavy srt6wfall &ccufs ind show various degrees of disuse irregardless of weather conditions if suitable escape cover is not in proper juxtaposition to the woody cover. Thus, the answer to t he basic question concerning the effectiveness of plantings as winter cover is qualified only by the remote possibility that those few birds remaining in ·. plantings during blizzards could conceivably be in a better po,sition to survive than the majority of the population. On the basis · of winter cover values;alone; deciduous woody windbreaks probably have no economic justificationAri wiidlife management. TJ:ie objective -of winter cover is to preserve a seedstock of birds which will replenish the population naturally, and any cover which is avoired by pheasants when blizzard coriditions>occur cannot-be considered .·. effective in fulfilling this objective. �-93Recommendations The fact that pheasant use of the windbreak plantings examined in Colorado during the winter is not compatible with wildlife management aims cannot be taken as a blanket indictment of the theory for providing winter shelter. There is little doubt however, that present planting patterns must be significantly revised if any winter cover values are to be reoeivei:I for the expenditure of habitat improvement funds involved. Recommendations for proposed revisions cover two main .points. First, it is obvious that blizzard shelter is not available where snowdrifts inundate the cover supposed to protect wildlife'. Increasing the width of present plantings may provide a partial solution, but as long as upwind rows are not impenetrable to windblown snow some drifting over the downwind rows will occur. If perennial vegetation of sufficient density cannot be planted in upwind rows it may be necessary to erect snowfence, but the end result must be the creation of a snowfree area in or adjacent to the windbreak. Second, and much more important, some method d attracting rather than repelling pheasants during periods of high wind must be determined because wind is the primary factor controlling pheasant use of cover. Based on the negative correlation between pheasant use of woody cover and wind velocities, it seems probable that 1he species presently being planted either do not provide effective shelter from winds or that the overhead movement of branches is sufficient to drive bi:ttds away. In either case, a lower, denser cover than that provided by woody shrubs is suggested, Pheasant use of wheat stubble showed a direct correlation with wind velocity changes, and it can therefore be assumed that the cover in the snowfree area must be at least as attractive as wheat stubble. Submitted by L. Jack Lyon Date:_ _ ___Oc ___ to_b_e_r.,_1_9_5_8__ Appiroved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Comlinator ���Introduction In an.yl program to prov value jor minimum .in' w~ldlife range at the I am mdebted to the " ·this s~dy possible~ of the ~spotlighting w otherwise have bee:n . ~ µnits !hounted on,. · . .. ' , '•' because the high m > a Unity No. 741, w trave~sed in a g_tid o spotlight were turned" salmon landing nets _ short time in burlap ):::::/.::"" \·\•/·:;,;,, '·•:'i:a:: -"it <~''-'< ·,._c_;:-:-c,::·'.',{< • ~'\\' •• ;\' ye·m\: 30 percenfal ·-::: Bait--grain trapping trappipg effort in 195 phea.s~ts-wa-s -c -apt\m 0n.:~ ing oJjerations. as ~led by an _oy. ~-: :, ' ''::-} �-97In 1957, spotlighting work was initiated in early Sept~ml>er and 120 pheasants were captured. Four of these were considered too young to dye and several of the juvenile birds dyed were expected to moult most of their dyed -feathers _befo~e,attaining full growth, but _it was felt that at least JOO of the captured pheasants would .e:xhi~it some degree .of Rhoda.mine_· _ B extra coloration.throughout the winter period. __()nly . two of the dyed birds were known to have perished as. a result of the 1957 handling operaticms. •- :()ne died a.t the release site of undetermined injuries and one waskilled, presumably wb,ile still wet _and cold from the dye solution, by a feral cat. Dye Persistence. and Effect on Bitds .. I Rhodamine ~ extra and malachite green aniline dyes were foul)d by Wadkins (1948) to _be alllong the most persistent of several dyes tested on pheasants; and no other dyes were used in this study. Both dyes were used in 1956, but no greep. pheasants were ever observed and in 1957 all marked birds were dyed with the red Bhodamme dye. ·· Observations of a few pheasants shot during the hunting season in 1957 showed that the expected moult of dyed feathers from the m_arked .juveniles hadleft only the tips of primary wingfeathers red enough for identific~~ion. . On those birds which had completed the juvenile moult at the time of capture however, dye colors were still strong, particularly under .the wings, as much as nine months after 'h andling. One bird observed in 1957 was .s till a .brilliant redunder thewings _on March 6, _at least four __ . months after his capture. In 1957, birds observed as late as June had a definite reddish cast on the body feathers and brilliant red area under the wings. The best field observations were made when the birds could be flushed, but even stationary birc:lscould be identified jf observed through binoculars'. The sample of dyed pheasants observed was too small to prove or disprove any theory regard_ing the possibilities that dyed birds were particul;:irly, su~ceptible to predation or were not accepted by the unmarked birds. Much of the cover fo the'area surrounding the release site was regularly searched on foot as a part of another E;~dy, ~nd although red feathers "'.ere found wherever a _dyed pheasant was shot during the hunting season, no evidence of loss .to . predators was recorded . .- Jones (1950) found that the real'.}tion of other pheasants to dyed birds was apparently unaffected by the dye colors, and observations made in this study support his conclusion that unmarked birds make no attempt to _avoid the dyed ones. Almost all of the dyed pheasants flushed were found with groups of u:nmarkecfbirds. Recapture and Sight Record Data Re turn~ eftller by sight record or mortality, were very disappointing in 1956. Two dyed birds were shot and one i;;ight record was received during the .first two days of the pheasant hunting season. The average movement for these three pheasants was 1. 3 miles. Throughout the remainder of thewinter and early spring, and despite repeated checks of the release areas and surrOU11iding territories, only one more dyed bird was seen. This pheasant, a .c ock, :was flushed with eight or nine unmarked birds about a half mile west of the release site in March, 1957. No evidence of mortality was found, and since thehird observed in March was quite _ brilliantly marked, it was_felt that the probable reason for the lack of observations could be related to the small number of pheasanis marked. �-98- In the fall of 1957, no record of the proportion of dyed pheasants in the observed population was maintained during field operations, but it was felt to be significant that more than 75' pheasants had b~en dysd before·:the stubble field neare-st the release site became too saturated with "red hirdsn to preclude successful spotlighting. After the middle of October, · fairly regular· roadside and-iield flushing counts were conducted within a.bout t en miles of the release area. -- In addition, observations of dyed-birds were received from Game and Fish Departmentpersonriel working in the area; from interviews with sportsmen during the hunting season, from band returns and from. local landowners. Over 100 -double postcal'ds ·· · were mailed to land owners within 10 miles of the release area, but only two replies were received; and the personal contacts ottheJocal Conservation Officer proved to be a much more reliable source of landowner observation data. In total, 39 observations of dyed pheasants were .r ecorded between October 15, 1957, and June 30; 1958. ·· -Pre-hunting Season Movement, 1957 Including _the five birds;shot on the opening day of the phea.sant season, 13 observations can be used to measure pheasant movement before the hunting season. On November 9, 1957, the dyed pheasants had had a :m.iriinium of five weeks to disperse from the release point. Although the release s ite wa:s vefy close to a heavlly developed habitat improvement area, two of these birds had moved over 5 miles and the average movement for the thirteen birds was slightly · over two miles. •· During the remainder of the nine;:.;day hunting season:, five more dyed pheasants were killed and four additional observations were recorded. Two of these birds had moved 7. 5 miles from the release site and the average dispersal distance was 3. 8 miles for the nine pheasants. ·· Post;.;hunting Seas.o n Movement, · 1957 · · After the close .o f the -1957 pheasant season on November 17t ·seventeen. dyed pheasants were observed. One dyed co-ck had '.m oved 8. 5 miles and several·bir ds had moved over 4 miles, but the average distance of observed movement wa:s 2. 7 miles. · Discussion _One of the basic assumptions made when the outline for the evaluation project was written was that small study areas with no _biiffer zorie .coUld be used because the yearly movement of pheasants is normally less than two miles. Few reports of movement studies .on wild pheasants have been published,:, and the available reports deal with spring dispersal from winter· cover areas rather than movement of young birds from the general area in which they hatched. Nevertheless; the basic assumption of movem:entfor relatively short distances · is born oat by both the literature and the field data from -this -study. Smith (1954) reported a winter banding study in' South Dakota in which pheasants were killed the following fall. Of the banded birds returned. 84 -percent had moved .less than two miles. The average dispersal· distance for all marked pheasants .observed in Colom:do ·was 2. 58 miles, but only 58 percent of the observed birds had moved less than two b:liles. Since the South Dakota and Colorado habitats are probably similar. it can be suspected that young birds will exhibit a greater tendency to migrate, probably because of the d,isturbing influence of the hunting s.e ason, but in either age group, pheasants appear to be relatively sedentary. Grondahl (1953) �-S9found the average distance of spring dispersal from winter cover in Iowa to be . 55 miles and reported a maximum movement of 1. 49 miles, but since Iowa cover is not similar to cover in the Great Plains wheat belt, no reliable comparisons can be made. Conclusions '(he movement recorded for pheasants in northeastern Colorado in 1956-57 and 1957-58 was somewhat greater than the movement reported for other parts of the pheasant range. ·It was felt that this greater movement was primarily due to the facts that the Colorado sample contained a large proportion of juvenile birds and that the marked pheasants received the heavy disturbance of the hunting season du:ring the dispersal period. Since other reported studies were concerned with the relatively unharassed movement of adult pheasants during the spring dispersal from winter cover concentrations, it can probably be assumed that a maximum movement under three miles per year 'is typical of the greater proportion of northeastern Colorado pheasants. The influence of the movement patterns shown by this study on future planning for habitat improvement will depend primarily on determination of habitat deficiencies in the study region. If pheasant can actually be expected to move up to three miles in search of winter cover, a single good winter cover development in each township should provide sufficient protection for the whole pheasant population. Actually, it seems very unlikely that birds would make any attempt to move such a distance in the short time available before a major storm made travel impossible. The value of the one development per township distribution could however be very important in maintaining a breeding population distribution which would assure complete repopulation of the pheasant range in the shortest possible time. In the same way, it seems doubtful that the whole pheasant population could be aided or increased by nesting, food or water developments at approximate intervals of six miles; but if such development can improve the quality of the habitat in small areas the natural movement of birds away from crowded conditions will insure relatively constant population distribution. The influence of pheasant movement patterns on the validity of population data from ninesection study areas without buffer zones is hard to evaluate, but it seems doubtful that such movement could be very important in determining population levels unless develop.e d plots p,rova:ito be enormously attractive to pheasants outside the area boundaries. Thus, the error, if one is present, would be overestimation of the values of habitat improvement on the study areas rather than a failure to recognize values which were actually present. Literature Cited Grondahl, Carroll R. 1953. Winter behavior of the ring-necked pheasant, Phasianus colchicus 1 as related to winter cover in Winnebago County, Iowa. Iowa State Coll. Jour. Sci. 27 (4):447-465. Hart, Chester M. 1954. Methods and equipment used to live trap pheasants. in California by the _spqtlighting system. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game: mimeo 6 pp. 9 photos. · �-100Jones 1 Gardiner F; 1950. Observations of color-dyed pheasants. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt.14 (1): 81---82. Leedy, Daniel L. and Lawrence E. Hicks 1945. The pheasants in Ohio l!l, The Ringnecked Pheasant and Its Managernent in North America. Wash. , D. C. , The American Wildlife Institute p . 57-130. Smith, Eldon H. 1954; Spotlighting for better pheasant management. So. Dak. Cons. Dig. 21 (4):2-4. Wadkins, L. A. 1948. · Dyeing birds for identification. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt. 12(4): 81-82. Wight. Howard -M. 1953. A suggested method of capturing birds.With a narcosisproducing .drug. Missouri Cons. Comm.. : mimeo, 3 pp. Report Submitted: L. Jack Lyon Date:_ _ _ _ _ _Oc_to_b_e_r_,_1_9_5_8_ Approved by: . Laurence -E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ���-103- In 1956, the survey was cancelled because of an early:-season blizzard which completely blocked all roads in the study region for nearly a week. In 1957, the a~tua.l second year of the study, 11 areas were surveyed on opening day of the season and 6 were siµ-veyed on the second day. Weather during the 9.:.:aay was mostly fair; but hunting pressure was too light after the opening weekend to provide reliable information. Legal shooting began at 10:00 AM on Nc,,em.ber 9, and the surveys were__continued until the 5:00 PM_,closing. The opening-day sample consisted of one area with a heavily developed, centrally located habitat improvement, four areas with 9 or more standard windbreak plantings, three areas with 6 standard windbreak plantings (designated Bl, B2, B3) and three control areas. season Huntipg Success Opening Day: The data in Table 1 show conclusively that more pheasants are killed and fewer hu.nter-minutes are invested in each_bird on the opening day of the hunting season where windbreak plantings are present. In 1955; it required only 0. 26 times as long to kill a bird on centrally developend habitat areas, and 0. 43 times as long on areas with 9 plantings, as on control areas. Even in 1957, when the control area data may have been weighted by a single group of hunterswh:>managed to kill eight pheasants in less than an hour, it took only . 0. 64 times as long to kill a.pheasant on 6-planting areas, 0. 56 times as long on 9-planting , areas and 0. 44 times as long on heavily developed areas as on controls. The differences in hunting-success according to species composition of plantings were too slight to be considered important. Second Day: The second-day data for the two hunting seasons (Table 2) indicate that any major influence windbreak plantings have on hunting success is p·r obably confined to the opening day of the season. In both years, success was slightly better on the more heavily developed areas, but in 1957 it required almost 25 percent-longer to kill a cock on the 6-planting areas as on controls. There was no indication that species composition of plantings had any consistent influence on hunting success the second day of the season. An.alysis Although the direct comparison of kill-times offers justification for a tentative conclusion that windbreak plantings are of value in increasing hunting success, further examination of the data is required for two reasons: ., First, it is possible that variations in factors other than the presence of windbreak plantings may have been responsible for the increased hunting success on improved areas.; and, second, the information would be more useful if a figure estimating the number of additional pheasants harvested could be determined. The following tests were designed to evaluate some of the extraneous influences and make such an estimate possible. �-104- Table 1. --Totai hunter-load in minutes; number of pheasants killed and average time requ,ired ·to hatvest a bird on 14 n.ine-section study areas in 1955 and 11 study areas in 1957, -012eni2& dai·of the J2heasant seasonz -northeastern_Colorado. 1955 1955 HunterMinutes Hunter Pheasants Minutes Pheasants per bird--· · -minutes . per bird Study minutes killed killed Area itimei ltime~ _ iloadl iloadl ikill! ikilll· .. 120;6 27 · •- 8000 S1 106,7 75 3255 1215 11 110.5 S2 S3 2355 19 123.9 Ale 720 6 120.0 1281 7 183.0 A2e 1 335.0 335 61 105. 0 8220 A3d 6405 72 114. 2 1010 A4d 4 252.5 2065 12 172.l -2400 A5m -4760 2 2380.0 12 200. 0 A6m 870 2 435.0 Ble 3040 22 138. 2 6020 B2d 28 215. 0 · 31 B3m 3790 122. 3 · 348. 8 Cl 2790 8 2160 9 240. 0 10 C2 555 277.5 590 59. 0 2· C3 985 2 492. 5 C4 720 3 240.0 7655 24 319. 0 , ' -,0 1530 05 6825 57 119: 7 8000 75 106. 7 r}A 14100 76 185.5 13966 103 135.6 12850 81 158. 6 DB EC 6580 15 438.7 10405 43 242. 0 .. l]e 150; 7 1055 7 4321 29 149.0 7415 114. 1 65 16305 112 145.6 Ed Ilm 1407.5 5630 4 43 .. 6190 144. 0 r:s Table 2. S1 S2 S3 Ale A3d A4d A5m Ble Cl C2 ~s EA BB tc iJ e Dd 2'.lm ·-- Second day of the pheasant season on 7 nine-section study areas in 1955 and - 6 studI a}:"eas in 1957.• 4340 12 361. 7 4090 16 255.6 1390 695. 0 2 540 2 270.0 1 925 925.0 3600 20 180. 0 900 · 450. 0 2 1575 3 · 525. 0 1800 9 200.0 1845 369. 0 5 1 630 630. 0 1095 4 273.8 90 0 6270 16 391. 9 4090 16 255.6 6100 24 254. 2 2700 11 245.5 1845 5 369. 0 630 1 630. 0 1185 4 296.3 925 1 1845 925. 0 5 369. 0 5175 23 225. 0 2 450. 0 ~00 1800 9 200. 0 �-105- Test No. 1: Comparison of average hunter-loads on improved and control area groups demonstra.ted that improved areas generally received higher hunting pressure than controls. Thus, it is necessary to deter:n:iine the imltiefioe of hunting pressure on hunting success. The test is based on correlation between htlllting pressure (load, the number of pheasants ha:rvested (kill) and hunting success (time). Correlation coefficients are presented in Table 3. . . Table 3. --Correlation coefficients for factors involving hunting pressure and total harvest of pheasants on 6 to 14 nine-section study areas, 1955 and 1957, northeastern Colorado. 1955 1957 Independent Variables First - Day - Second N: 14 N: 7 First - Day - Second N"' 11 N- 6 Load and Kill Load and .Time Kill and Time . 768 . 353 .876 - . 530 . 169 -.285 -. 696 .· . -.347 . 837 , 969 .:... 510 - . 645 With a single sample involving 11 to 14 variate pairs, r can be as high as 0. 65 by chance one time out of 20 if the actual correlation in universe sampled is below O. 30 (Ezekial, 1956), and r with 5 to 7 variate pairs can be as high as 0. 80 by chance. Statistically, few of the r in Table 3 can be considered significant, but the general similarity between the 1955 and 1957 data suggests that the computed rare good estimates of the true correlation. These data show, not too surprisingly, that correlation between load and kill is strong and direct. On the second day of the season, particularly, an in.crease in hunting pressure caused an increase in total kill. Despite the strong relationship between load and kill however, the low r for the associations of time demonstrate that success is virtually independent of hunting pressure on the opening day. On the second day, this independence is lost and the r for time relationships show a strong dependence 'o n both load arid kill. Another possible source of hunting-pressure b:ias is suggested by field patrol experience which shows that pheasant hunters generally beginhuntingin.the best cover.they can find. As the opening day progresses, hunting pressure graduaJlytapers off for a number of. reas.o ns and hunters extend their search to include the poorer cover areas into .which.birds m ight have escaped. A secondary part of the test of hunting-pressure influences, then, .· is an evaluationof the possibility that hunting success is better where windbreak plantings are present because hunters search such areas during the first hours of the season while the . pheasants are still unwary, The test is based on comparison of hunting success (time) for . small groups of pheasants in the order in which they were _killed. F ield data were broken down on the basis of hunter-load for the first 5 to 10, s.econd 5 to 10; third 5 t o 10, etc. pheasants killed on each study area, and the average time required to kill a bir¢1. in each group was computed. Since field notes were generally taken as "party-hoursr, and total kill for the party, it was not possible to select exactly 5 or 10 bird groups for the calculations, Rougn,ly, this breakdown represents a successive approximation of hunting success as the_ available pheasant population grew smaller andmorewary . . The ·datain .Table 4 are a . compilation of the kill-times for each of the groups on the opening day in both years. �-106- Table 4. Progressive hunting success (hunter- minutes per bird) based on approximate five-bird groµps, 11 nine-section study areas in. 1955 and 10 study areas in · 1957,. opening day of the pheasant seas.on, northeastern C.oltta.do. (Data from 'three ~reaS in '1955; and one areain 1957 could not be grouped). Kill.per Number Areas in ·· Period Average time per 'kill Sum Year B C Avg. S A Sample 1955 3 . 36 4.20 3 . 36 12. 23 1 4 . 67 5.00 215. 9 194.0 107.5 104. 0 1 7.00 17. 23 24. 23 116.5 142. 5 107. 5 104.0 102. 9 102.9 117. 8 80.0 72. 0 11 5 3 7.56 228. 8 190.0 310. 8 440. 0 100.9 124. 7 143. 6 93. 4 . 247.5 .. 240. 4 368.0 238. 3 516. 0 1957 10 9 6 6 2 ·1 1 1 1 1 1· 8. 70 6.11 12. 33 4 . 00 8.00 8. 00 6.00 8. iJO 5. 00 5. 00 2.00 8. 70 14. 81 27.14 31. 14 39; 14 47.14 53 . 14 157.3 1.64. 1 264.4 117.3 76. 3 · 75.6 52.5 52.5 61.14 66.14 185. 0 45: 0 185. 0 71.14 · 216. 0 .. 73.;14 iO; o 109.2 186. 6 99.4 240.0 77. 1 185. 0 45. 0 · 1ss. o 276.-0 10.0 Probably the single most interesting observation brought out by these data is the progressive increase in hunting success in 1955. According to the sample taken, it required progressively less time to harvest a pheasant as the population became smaller. An explanation for this· apparent anomaly lies in the character of northeastern Colorado sportsmen and the disagreeable weather mentioned iu the first part d this report. Hunting pressure was very low in 1955 because· much worse weather than that which occurred had been praii'cted. The hunters who did go out however, found that a lightj steady drizzle had made all vegetation extremely wet. The result was that progressive ·elimination affected the hunter population much more drastically than the pheasant population. Throughout the-day, the less able and less dedicated hunter qJJ.it hunting while those who had come prepared for wet weather continued hunting. Presumably the hunters with fortitude were also 1he better gunners, and as they assumed a greater proportion of the hunter population; hunting success increased. In 1957, success followed a more normal pattern. The average time required to harvest a pheasant increased from 117. 8 minutes for the first eight birds to 264. 4 minutes for the 2.8th through 31st on each study area.·· After an average harvest of 31 birds had been reached, the samples consisted of data from only two areas and could rrot be considered reliable. ConclusiQil:;· The data measuring hunting success require adjustment for variation 1n hunting pressure and total kill if a valid evaluation is to be made. �-107- Test No. 2: Although pheasant populations were considered to be generally homogenous in the study region, the possibility that hunting succe~s was dependent on population levels could not be ignored. Both spring crowing and fall roadside counts w~re taken on alt areas surveyed. These data, listed in Table 5, demonstrate a low, but fairly consistent correlation with hunting success (time, Table 1) on the opening day of the season. Conclusion: The data measuring hunting success require adjustment for variation in the available pheasant population if a valid evalution is to be made. · Table 5. --Crowing counts and roadside counts for 13 nine-section study areas in 1955 and 11 study areas in 1957 . Crowing counts from April - June, roadside counts from Aus::2st - November, northeastern Colorado. Roadside Counts Study Crowin& Counts Area 1957 1955 1957 1955 33 S1 70 125 255 16 S2 95 40 46 S3 Al 106 212 8 0 A2 12 5 25 13 A3 61 225 A4 54 148 13 0 A5 131 17 33 36 A6 27 5 Bl 74 225 B2 105 19 29 B3 83 Cl 70 117 5 1 C2 81 187 0 4 C3 78 8 105 0 C4 43 5 Correlation with -.574 - . 122 - . 334 - . 306 hunting success (time) N: 13 N= 11 Test No. 3: In addition to the differences according to number and composition of habitat improvement plantings, there was considerable variation in the acreages of c:rops among study areas . The tests to determine the influence of these variations are based on correlation between crop acreages and recorded hunting success (time) for each study area. Crop acreages are presented in Table 6 and r are presented in Table 7. Based on the limitations for significance outlined by E:zekial (1956), none of the r in Table 7 a r e significant and it can be assumed that crop-type variations were not a major determinant of hunting success on either the opening or the second day of the pheasant season. An interesting relationship demonstrated by the data in Table 7 however, is the inversion of correlation from the first to the second day for every crop except corn. Apparently, one of the strongest influences on second-day success is the number of pheasants killed on the first day. Wherever hunting success was gocrl on the opening day it proved to be relatively poor on the second. �-108- Table 6. --Crop-use acreages, 13 nine-section study areas in 1955 and 11 areas in 1957, millet and c-orn to the nea:rest acre, other values to the nearest 10 ac:res, northeastern Colorado. Ctop-use Study Pasture . Sorghums Wheat· Corn Area Fallow · Year 1955 69 35 18 S1 203 278 94 792 39 S2 173 158 16 287 190 99 S3 217 40 38 8 206 262 Al 147 · 187 70 66 A2 222 164 95 , 80 142 707 A3 131 218 125 21 536 A4 115 33 179 121 56 55 398 A5 156 40 .· · 101 178 107 229 A6 49 164 Cl 231 25 37 235 37 C2 201 265 37 37 270 C3 196 231 36 68 211 14 73 89 83 C4 215 238 1957 192 321 113 32 S1 25 32 97 147 Al 209 282 294 A3 151 165 86 873 356 169 A4 78 233 1088 334 88 189 90 204 310 57 AS 213 17 89 Bl 243 274 89 38 909 77 215 B2 192 53 203 51 226 215 B3 253 271 87 Cl 218 20 378 62 214 , 68 C2 276 32 373 C4 215 12 109 283 234 156 Table 7 . --Correlation coefficients for kill- time and land-use acreages on nine-section study areas, opening and second day of the pheasant season, 1955 and 1957, northeastern Colorado. 1955 · 1957 Correlation between First-Day - Second k ill-time and First - day - Second N,:;. 13 N= . 7 N:::11 N:::5 Factors : Wheat acreage -.216 . 268 . 299 - . 427 Fallow acreage - . 085 .171 - . 166 - . 326 Pasture acreage . 256 - . 295 · - . 080 . 077 •. 085 Sorghum acreages .014 . 715 - . 006 MUlet acreage • 083 . 041 - . 046 . 235 ,766 . 092 . 147 -. 48 1 Corn acreage �-109- Despite the fact that hunting success is apparently not controlled by variation in land-use from one study area to anofuer, there is every reason to believe that certain types of cover are more valuable for pheasant harvest; either because pheasants concentrate in them or because hunters spend more time searching for birds in them. The data in Table 8 list the percentage of all pheasants kiile'd in each cover type in both years of the study on the opening and the second days ofthe seasons. The sample may not be completely.random Jor the study region because the proportion of improved areas sampled is not lmown to be equivalent to the actual ·pr.oportion in the region, ·but .o n the basis of this data it can be assumed that over 80 percent ofthe pheasants killed on the first.two days of the pheasant season are flushed from four cover types . In probable order of total harvest these were wheat stubble, weeds, habitat improvement plantings and corn. Corn is listed last, although it rated high in data, because the major part of the kill in cornfields was recorded on a few study areas and the actual importance of corn in total harvest for the study region is probably over-emphasized. Both wheat and corn, since they are agricultural residues, do not offer many ·possibilities for direct manipulation in wildlife management. It does· seem possible however, that if more hunters could be persuaded to hunt wheat stubble, the total pheasant harvest could be increased. On November 10, 1957, the writer suggested wheat stubble hunting to most of the hunters- on area S1. Few of them responded, but four that did took 11 pheasants, without the aid of a dog, in less than two hours. The two remaining harvest-cover types, weeds and habitat plantings, produced pheasant harvests equal to those from wheat stubble on a combined land area less than one sixth as great as wheat stubble. For this reason alone, these types offer a good opportunity for increasing pheasant harvest through management. Unfortunately, present trends in agriculture are to eliminate weed areas, and it seems highly imp:-o·bable that game managers will have much success in reversing the trend. Habitat improvement plantings, on the other hand, have easily demonstrated personal values to landowners, and, once established, can be considered relatively permanentin their effect on pheasant harvest. Another possible influence of agricultural land-use on hunting success is suggested by the commonly accepted "edge" influence. In general, an increase in the. .amount of edge, particularly for species with a low cruising radius, results in an increase in total available habitat. The influence of edge on hunting success has not been completely explored, but it seems possible that variations could improve hunting because birds can be flushed at the edge .areas. The test of this relationship is based on correlation between hunting success (time) and the average number of fields per section on each study area. Although the average number of fields per section does not give an absolute estimate of edge mileage, it is obvious that'l:1.n increase in the number of fields causes an increase in available· edge and that the two tr.1.easurements will be very closely correlated over the range involved in this calculation. The average number of fields per section is listed in Table 9 and hunting success was taken from Table 1. Based on the correlation between hunting success and available edge, there is no possibility that edge has an important influence on hunting success in northeastern Colorado. Apparently, if any relationship is to exist, the edge must be ditch or fencer.ow of some prominence instead of the simple unmarked and constantly changing field boundaries characteristic of dryland agriculture on the Great Plains. �-110- Table 8. --Percentage of total pheasant harvest.by cover types, 13 nine-section study areas on the opening day and 7 on the second day, 1955; 11 areas on opening day and . 6 on, the second, 1957; .n ortheastern Colorado. Total _Cove_:r: _T ype Year _kill _l)ay ~isc. Plantings . Wh.. stubb. .. Weeds Corn . Sorghums 4_..2 3._7 1955 22. 2 22. 8 20.7 26.5 189 21.6 22.3 25. 0 4. 7 4.1 148 Opening 22.3 2.4 2. 4 Second . 22, 0 14..6 . 26 •. 8 . 31. 7 41 1957 16.6 22.8 13. 3 .. 6 ..8 8 .. 9 . 338 31. 6 . 14. 2 8.9 Opening 16.2 30.1 24.2 6.3 302 8._3 19.4 44.4 11. 1 5. 6 11.1 36 . Second Table 9. --Average number of fields per Section, 13 nine-section study areas in 1955 and 11 study areas in 1957; data used in determining ".edge effect 11 on the opening day of . the pheasant season, northeastern Colorado. · Average Nuniber of Field per Section study _ Area S1 S2 S3 Al A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 . 1955 1957 14.7 11.0 12.2 12.6 22.2 24.4 33.4 17.0 21. 6 14.8 11. 7 20.2 33.4 15.1 Bl 8. 9 16. 3 10. 6 B2 B3 Cl 10.0 11.6 C2 8.7 8. 1 C3 C4 11.9 Correlation .. 12.9 . N =. 13 r = •. 035 N= 11 10.9 . .t = . 019 Conclusion: None of the factors involving agricultural land-use proved to have a significant effect on hunting success and no adjustment of data for land-use influences is considered necessary for valid evaluation. ·· · · · �-111- Evaluation The adjustment of hunting success for all facets of variation in hunting pressure, total kill and original population can. be accomplished with a ~~ltipl~ linear regression . calculation for Time using the abbreviated Doolittle method as described_by Anderson and :aancroft (1952). This calculation s:inlultaneously adjusts the dependent factor (time) for variations in two or mote independent factors (load, kill andpopulations) and gives: Y = a -I b1 x1 -I b2 x2 -I b 3 b3. Crowing counts were used as the best estimate of population levels because they showed a higher correlation with hunting success than roadside counts. Data for areas AS and CS in 1955 were deleted from the calculations because both samples were felt to demonstrate extreme variation.from the pattern described by the remaining variates. The multiple regression equations and estimated values for adjusted time on the opening day are presented in Table 10. Since the hunting success relationships demonstrated by the available data gave no indication that habitat planting influence extended past the opening day, no attempt was made to adjust the second-day data. Table 10. Multiple.linear regression estimates of the average time required to kill a . pheasant on 12 nine-section study areas in 1955 and 11 study areas in 1957, adjusted for hunter-load, total harvest and pheasant population levels, opening dayc£ the pheasant season, . NE Colorado. Multiple regression equations: 1955 -Y = 317.6836-/ .109 load- 14.560 kill - 1.310 population N = 12 and R = . 773 1957 - Y "' 138. 1934 -/. 040 load - 4. 981 kill /. , 025 population N = 11 and R = . 909 _1955 1,957 Study Area S1 115.6 91. 0 · S2 165. 5 S3 245.3 159.9 Al 169. 9 A2 323. 9 A3 47.8 114.0 A4 298.8 164.7 177. 7 A5 deleted A6 348. 0 155.8 Bl 242. 2 B2 137. 5 B3 413. 6 182. 7 Cl 116.7 242. 9 C2 293. 7 C3 29Q.2 C4 327. 5 Mean S areas (Heavily ·planted) 175. 5 9LO Mean A areas (9 planting) 237.7 154.1 Mean B areas (6-plantings) 178. 5 209.,0 311. 6 Mean C areas (no. plantings) �-112- The adjusted estimates of the time required to kill a pheasant under a var iety of habitatimprovement conditions show that it takes _less time, irregardless of hunting pressure or population levels (within limits) where habitat improvement plantings have been established, thian on comparable unimproved areas. In 1955, it required about haUaslong to kin a bird on heavily developed plots and 0. 76 as long on 9-planting areas; and in 1957, it required only 0. 44 as long to kill a bird near heavily developed a.teas, 0. 74 as long on 9--planting and 0. 85 as long on 6-pla:n.ting areas, as on control areas. The method used in establishing the monetary value of pheasants killed because of habitat improvement plantings is :based on the knowledge that the pheasant population under examination is not .being harvested near the known potential. For -nearly a decade, biologists and conservation officers have reported post-season sex ratiOs averaging about ld' : 2~ on the tableland. Since ratios of 18: si or higher have no apparent effect on the breeding potential, it is obvious that an insufficient kill was attained. Under equal hunting pressure on all land areas however, a greater number of pheasants were killed where plantings were present; and the additional birds represented an increase in the harvest~ strictly !9 !h.,e effects ,2! plantings. The calculations, shown in Table 11, list the estimated num:ber of pheasants which would he harve.s ted from a nine-section study area :under. a specific hunter-load for each classification of improvement plantings, and tabulate the increase in kill over the estimated kill for control areas. In each y~ar, ihe estimate~ were ~alculated only for a .small range of hunter-loads around the actual mean recorded in the field. Table 11. -'-Estimates of probable pheasant harvest on nine-section areas in northeastern Colorado according to the density of habitat improvement plantings and increase in harvest due to the influences of plantings. Based on data collected on the opening days' of the pheasant.; seasons 1955 and 1957. .. . Increase due to Year Hunter-load Estimated Harvest Plantings C s A {Minutes) s A B B 1955 1000 5. 7 4. 2 3.2 2. 5 1.0 2000 8.4 5. 0 2. 0 11.4 6. 4 3000 17. 1 12. 6 9.6 7. 5 3. 0 1957 14.4 18. 6 3000 19.5 16. 8 5. 1 33. 0 2. 2 4000 22 . 4 19. 1 24 . 9 6. 9 44. 0 26 . 0 3.3 5000 54.9 32. 4 23 . 9 31. 0 9. 5 4. 1 28.0 6000 65. 9 38. 9 33 . 6 28.7 37. 2 10.2 4.9 7000 76. 9 43. 4 11. 9 45. 4 39. 2 33. 3 5.7 8000 87 . 9 51. 9 44. 8 38. 3 49 . 6 13. 6 6. 5 The completion of calculations to establish a cash val~e for the additional phea~ants harvested wher e improvement planting have been established is based on the cost of duplicating the plantings tested and an average life expectancy of 25 years for most of the species planted · under .dryland conditions. According to Francis Metsger, leader ofthe habitat development program in Col~rado, ihe cost of establishing 5,000 seedlings on a :160 -acre plot (equivalent to the S areas in the study) is approximately $800. 00. This estimate assumes all work will be done by Game and Fish Department personnel with Department-owned equipment and �-113includes two years nf cultivation around plants to assure survival. For a less concentrated planting program, where seedlings are distributed through Soil Conservation Di stricts, the · estimated cost of establishing nine standard windbreaks on a nine-section area is $213.-00 and six plantings $152; 00, This method assumes planting and cultivation by the .landowner... On the average; it takes .about three years for a .deciduous planting in northeastern Colorado · to become established and reach growth: proportions attractive to pheasants. Thus, for the . remaining 22 years of expectedJife, a pl_anting will produce above .n ormal harvests equivalent to the differences listed in Table 11. The total additional harvest ..and the . average cost per pheasant produced under a variety of mean'"!'hunter-loads is presented in Table -12, Table 12. --Calculated additional harvest due to the effects of improvement plantings over . a 25 year period (22 useful years) and average cost of pheasants thus produced. Based on data collected on the opening days of the pheasant seasons, 1955 and 1957, north- . eastern Colorado... Estimated Cost/Bird Hunter-load Additional Harvest A B s A B s (Minutes) I 1955 $14.55 $9.68 1000 55.0 22.0 7.27 4. 84 2000 110.0 44. 0 165. 0 , , . 4 . 853. 23 3000 66. 0. 1957 48,4 ;L 96 · . 1. 90 3 . 14 409. 2 . .112. 2 3000 1. 46 1. 40 2. 09 4000 151. 8 72. 6 547.8 209. 0 90.2 1. 17 1.02 . 1. 69 5000 682.0 1. 41 . 818.4 . 98 . 95 6000 224.4 107. 8 . 84 . 81 1.21 7000 954.8 261. 8 125.4 . 73 . 71 1.06 8000 1091.2 299. 2 143.0 - - The estimated cost of an individual pheasant brought to the hunters' bag because of habitat improvement plantings ranged from a high of $14. 55 to about$. 71. These data demonstrate that total hunting pressure is the most important determinant of the average cost of birds harvested. When weather conditions or other .factors preclude hunter- loads above about 400 hunter-minutes per Section, as in 1955, the cash value of the pheasants harvested is well above the cost of birds raised on a game .farm and released before the .gun. Willis Mansfield, Superintendent of the Colorado Experimental Bird .Farm, .estimated that cock pheasants could · be mass produced forJess than $2. 00. Therefore, as hunter-loads. approach 400 minutes per Section, costs ofbirds produced by plantings drop progressively below those for game- ·.. farm pheasants. Conclusio11s Before attempting to .apply the cost estimates produced by this study to management, it should be pointed out that a number of liberties have been taken in calculating the estimates. Most of the assumptions made appear to be valid in northeastern Colorado, but their general application to the Great Plains pheasant range is limited. First, and most important, -the conclusions can only apply to perennial windbreak plantings of the type examined. Second, �-114- the data have no application where total harvest appears to approach total potential. Hunting success might possibly ·b e improved and sportsmen .made happier if birds were killed in a shorter average time, but if the potential harvest is already being taken, the . value of windbreak plantings can be measured only in hunter satisfaction. .• · Third, . the · calculations in Table 11 and 12 assume that all land .area.s receive approximately the same hunting pressure and that this pressure will be similar for the life -o f the plantings. There is some justification, based on comparison of the average load-among sampled groups; for assuming an equal hunter--load among areas; but it seems very doubtful that any. series of samples would show the same· hunting pressure from year to year. Fourth, the calculations assume approximately the same pheasant population year after year when such a condition is actually belied by the crowing count data for the two samples. Finally, the values on either end of the scales presented in Table 12 represent a slight extension of the regression lines which, although the multiple Rare quite strong, may not be entirely valid. Having recognized the limitations of the cost estimates presented in Table 12, there seems little doubt that perennial .woody windbreak plantings can be, .8: valuable ~dition to tl:le phea~~nt management procedure inihe dryland farming areas of northeastern Colorado and possibly el~ewherEl/. l'redic_tionsf<:>r the future sygge~t no possibil_ity tgat hunting pressurE!s \Vill be _ lower as time goes on; on the contrary, it seems probable that hunter loads well above those recorded in this -study wlll be commonplace in a few years. • Assuming that hunting pressures will be heavier in the future, the value of plantings for hunting should increase, and even if pheasant populations suffer an occasional decline·, the extra birds harvested because ()f plantings will cost no more than similar birds produced domestically. In addition, wild birds harvested because of habitat improvement work offer several advaitages in public relations not otherwise possible. Aesthetically, there is little doubt that wild birds are more satisfactory to sportsmen; plantings offer one of the few concrete evidences of wildlife fund expenditur e that the public can see; and landowners are usually more cognizant of wildlife management aims if seedlings for windbreak plantings have been furnished by a wildlife agency. Recommendations From the standpoint of the Colorado Game-and -Fish Department, a program of woody perennial windbreak improvements for wildlife should definitely be ·continued in the northeastern part of the state where a sub-potential pheasant harvest is normally recorded. It is recommended however, that improvement'. areas be concentrated in plots where planting sur vival can be guaranteed by the Habitat Project personnel. •This ,recommendation is made because the cost estimates for Soil Conservation District distribution of seedlings assumes better landowner cooperatidn and higher planting survival than is normally attained. In addition, improvement areas planned and maintained by the Game and Fish Department can be .designed so that few of the plantings are within shotgun range of farm buildings. Literature Cited Anderson, R. L .. and T. A. Banproft. 1952 . Statistical Theory in Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Co. 399 p. Ezekial, Mor decai. 1956. Methods of Correlation Analysis~ 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 531 p . Submitted by:_ _ _ L_._J_a_c_k_L_y_o_n_ _ _ __ Da te:_ _ _ _ _ _O_c_t_o_b.,.e... r.., , _1__9_5_8_ _ __ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinato'r ���-117- Table L --Analysis of variance, mourning dove incidence on 27 nine-section study areas with a variety of habitat improvement windbreaks, northeastern Colorado, 13 summer months, 195~ 1 1957, 19580 · N = 351. source· .of y2 F .sex2 Yafiati® Totar·· . 337 1082016 .. ··1L68** Density 66.62 33.31 2 Location 3. 20 1. 12 6.40 2 Type 15.87 2 31. 75 5.56** · 12 · Period 90.97 7.58 2. 66** Dx L 4o27 1. 07 4 DxT 4.46 1. 12 4 Lx T 4 3.19 . 80 2, 72 · 21. 78 DxLx T 8 Error 299 852.72 2.852 nr Discussion Density: the relationship of observed dove populations to the number of habitat improvement windbreaks on study areas leaves little doubt that such plantings have an important influence on dove production. Significantly fewer mourning doves were observed on control areas than on either 9-planting or 6-planting areas; and considerably more were observed on 9'-planting areas even though the increase over 6-planting populations was not significant. Dove use can be considered a relative measure of dove production in plantings because many dove nests were found in the plantings searched on foot. Table 2. Means of groups for which significance was recorded, analysis of variance, mournip.g dove incidence, northeastern Colorado. Source·of SUbsaniple Variation .. Subsample Group :Means Density 9-plantings 1. 32 6-plantings . 99 no plantings . 27 Type Evergreens 1. 21 Deciduous . 89 Mixed A8 DxT 9-planting, evergreens 1. 85 deciduous 1.36 mixed . 74 6-planting, evergreens 1. 28 . deciduous 1. 05 mixed . 64 no planting, . 51 . 26 . 05 Period · Months Apr il 1956 May June July August September October . 96 1.89 1957 . 67 . 59 1.07 . 89 1.59 1. 37 . 85 . . 44 . 11 1958 . 11 . 63 �-118- Tzye: For reasons which are.not at an understood, study areas with evergreen plantings received the most dove use, deciduous areas ranked second and mixed pl~11ting areas received the least use·. The means for the Density x Type interaction (Table 2) ·demonstrate_ that this r elationship was not caused by variation on control areas, and since the Location facto·r was not signficant it cannot be shown·that the difference was due to disproporiionate · sampling for location. More doves were however counted in the northern third of the study region, and at least a part of the significant difference must be attributed to the fact that mixed areas averaged further south and evergreen areas averaged further north. Even after attributing some variation to disproportionate sampling for location however, the variates show a slight dove preference for pure plantings as compared to a mixture and a definite pr eference for evergreen plantings. Period: Not too surprisingly, roadside counts show that a significantly higher number of mourning doves eventually _spend the summer_in the study region than_are observed in the early and l ate months of migration. 'July arid August were the peakm6nths of mourning dove counts. The significant drop for September is indicative of one reason dove hunting may never be popular in northeastern Colorado. By the time the season opens on September 1 most of the birds have migrated. Special A.reasc Counts of II1ourning doves on the three heavily developed study areas were significantly libOve the regional mean., .andin the case of the ,most northern area were s ign~:ficantly above the mean for 9-pl anting areas. . The extremely high _this area coul~ have been due to _the presence ofopen water, but a few other areas also had open water and in no case was the area mean significantly high. count on Rabbits Rabbits, as a class, included both cottontails and jackrabbits, ·but.88 percentof'the animals observed Were jackrabbits and the class is probably more important in the destruction of . crops and,pastureland than it could ever be to sportsmen. · lri.total, data are-available .from 14 months in which at least one rabbit was recorded, and N - 378. The analysis of variance is presented in Table 3 and the means for groups in whichsignificance was recorded are listed in Table 4 . Table 3. --Analysis of variance, jackrabbit and cottontail incidence on 27 nine-section study areas with a variety of habitat improvement windbreaks, northeastern Colorado, 14 months, 1956, 1957, 1958. N: 378. · · Source of Variation M2 DF SSx:2 F Total 363 945. 16 Density 2 26. 94 13. 47 7. 29** Location 2 3.27 1. 64 TYPe 2 9.03 4 . 51 2. 45 Period 13 194. 79 14. 98 8. 10** D x.L 4 20.85 5.21 2. 82* DxT 4 18. 76 4.69 2. 54* LxT 4 24. 96 6.24 3.37* DxLxT 8 47. 49 5. 94 3. 21** Error 324 · 599.07 1. 849 �-119- Table 4. --Means of groups for which significance was recorded, analysis of variance, . . .rabbit incidence • northeastern Colorado. Subsample Source of Group Means Variation . Subsample . 9-plantings . 79 Density • . 6-plantings 1. 17 . no plantings DxL DxT LxT Period Months March April May . 52 9-plantings, north 6-plantings, no plantings 9-plartting, central 6-planting; . . 57 1. 74 l~P1Jltgfl ...south no la · •:.40t~ evergreens deciduous mixed 6-planting, evergreens deciduous mixed no planting, .7 . 93 north, evergreens . deciduous mixed central, evergreens · deciduous mixed south, evergreens deciduous mixed 1956 . 57 .90 . 86 . 55 .33 . 69 1.43 . 31 1. 14 . 71 . 88 . 55 . 15 .81 l.958 .11 . 26 1. 70 1.00 1957 2.04 July August September December 1. 56 1. 52 · .41 . 63 . 37 9-plant. , 6-plant. , no plant. evergr. decid. mixed evergr. decid. mixed .04 North Central South • 86 . 93 . 50 : .43 1. 71 . 07 .43 . 60 1. 00 1.81 DxLxT . 60 . 69 1. 64 . 60 1.29 June ' 11 . 34 . 60 . 64 2. 64 .21 2.36 .79 .64 1. 57 1. 64 . 71 1.21 . 86 29 . 36 . 29 . 57 . 50 . 14 .64 . . 86 . 57 0 1.11 �-120Discussion The data in Table 3 and 4 demonstrate a series of relationships between rabbit populations · and habitat hnprovement plantings that virtually defies ifiterpretation. Throughout'the ; - analysis, significantly high and low count s on five areas (underlined in the D x L x T inter.action, , Table 4) caused rabbit-use patterns which actually described no patj;~rn at all. The only conclusions shown by these data are that J une is• the best month to observe rabbits and that some factor other than habitat improvement has a very strong influence on rabbit populations. No larger than the study areas were, lt is possible that the low counts were caused by hunting, poisoning or local rabbit drives, but no r _e ason could be seen for the high counts and it must be concluded that habitat improvement_influence on rabbits can only be determined by a more intensive study than the one presented here. Haw'ks In the course of field work, twelve species of r aptors were identified and counted. Excluding the sparrbw hawk , all were considered physi cally capable of killing young or adult pheasants if the opportunity was available. It should be pointed out however, fuat total observations of several thousand hawks over a period of three years resulted in only one observation of real or int ended predation on pheasants, and in that case the cock involved had already received crippling injuries from collision with a telephone line. The six species which made up the bulk of the data for roadside count analysis were the Swainscm 's and roughlegged hawks, marsh _and ferruginous hawks, golden eagles and prairie falcons . The analyis of variance, presented in Table 5, is based on observations for 24 consecutive months over a period of two years and N = 648. Comparison of significant _tneans is presented in Table 6. Table 5. --Analysis of variance, hawk incidence pn 27 nine-section study areas with a variety of habitat improvement windbreaks, northeastern Colorado, 24 months, 1956-57 and 1957-5$. N = 648. ,. Source of SSxz·· M2 Variation DF F Total 623 3274. 63 Density 2 54. 86 27. 43 5. 41** Location 2 3.05 1. 53 Type 2.83 . 94 2 Year 1 17. 67 17. 67 3. 48 Period 11 255. 32 23 . 21 4.57** --4 DxL 39. ~3 9.98 DxT 4 24. 15 6. 04 DxP 22 . 125.39 5. 70 . 3. 89 LxT 4 15. 54 LxP 22 99. 09 4.50 TxP 22 60. 76 . 2. 76 DxLxT 8 5L23 6.40 DxTxP 44 114.82 2 . 61 Error 475 2409. 99 5. 074 �-121- Discussion Density: There was no detectable difference between the numbers of hawks seen on improved areas, but significantly higher numbers were recorded on control areas. Thus, the large hawks of northeastern Colorado exhibit a preference for areas in which pheasants are not concentrated by windbreak shelter.• ·If there 'is any predation relationship at all .· involved which seems extremely doubtful, ::woody cover apparently has the ability to offer some protection to ga.me birds. . lt is possible that hawks avoid improved areas not because hunting is so fruitless where woody cover offet-s game 'birds protection, but becau.se crows , roosting in the trees, are so ha.rassing that no hunting is possible. · · · Table 6. --Means of groups for which signtiicance was recorded, analysis of variance, hawk incidence. northeastern Colora.do. subsample Source of Variation Group Means Subsample 9:..plantings 1.06 Density 6.,;plantings • 87 1. 56 . 43. no plantings Period June l. 33 July August September October November December January -February March . April May .98 1. 39 3. 02 . 94 . 78 ·· . 89 1. 22 1. 17 . 94 .. . 98 . 26 . 87 Months: The summary of hawk migration patterns over the northeastern Colorado table .... lands shows a significantly higher count in September when the Swainson' s hawks are . , moving south, a minor peak of roughlegged and ferruginous hawk residence during J anu~ry and Febnrary and a significantly low count in May after these species have moved north. The Swainson's hawk peak in September is particularly interesting to the field observer because literally thousands of birds are involved in a migration which normally lasts less than two weeks. Special Areas: The hawk counts for the three heavily developed areas were somewhat below those for the 9 - planting areas and there was some indication that every increase in planting density resulted in a more strict avoidance of improved areas by hawk populations. �-122Small Birds Counts of smaller birds, because they were made from a moving car, were considered somewhat less accurate than either pheasant or ha:wk cotirits, ' hut more than 100 diffetent avian species were recorded during field work. , About two-thirds of these species were irtchided in the general classification 1tsmall hi:tds';· 'Thioligh sheer numbers, and by vi rtue of year around residence, horned larks and meadowlarks were tepresented inore . often than other species, butthe counts included all blrds s:mallet' than a magpie except ' mourning doves and no single species was considered be so numerous as to dominate the analysi s . In the expectation that some species would receive less value from windbreak planting~ tha:n others, the analysis was computed fo'r'both total species and total birds. In the first analysis, each species was counted only once mFany study ar ea in a .single month. Thus, the observation of a single yellow warbler had the same value as the observation of a flock of 25 to 30 horned larks. In the second analysis, the total number of avian "bodies;' was counted. The only limitation applied to this accounting method was that no single species was counted higher than 20. This limitation was felt to be necessary because accurate counts: on flocks involving over -20 birds could not be made and-because most of the gregarious species were considered to be indigenous to treeless areas. Of the total 648 variates, less than 60 were .a ffected by this limitation. Analyses of variance are presented in Table 7 and means of factors for which significance was recorded are presented in Table 8. to Table 7. --Analyses of variance, small bird species and small bird "bodies 11,. on 27 ninesection study areas with a variety of habitat improvement windbreaks, northeastern Colorado, 24 months 1956-57 and 1957-58. Source of Mean Squares Variance DF Species analysis "Bodies" analysis Total 623 x2 = 1694. 65 x2 =112851. 87 Density 2 28. 85** 513 . 98* Location . 73 2 179.89 Type 2 9.76** 1636.85** 6S: 90** . 11 Month 759. 02** ' 1 16; 3't** Year 105. 12 DxL 4 5~22** 708.23** .,. 2. 82 DxT 4 1109. 65** DxM 22 L20 214. 29 ' 4' LxT 4.18* 144. 09 LxM 22 1. 84 314. 53** TxM 22 1. 66 216. 50 3. 83'* * DxLxT 8 245. 42 . ' 44' . 88" DxTxP 155. 46 475 · 1. 375· Error 140. 395 Discussion For the two year period, an average of 20. 4 birds of 2. 94 species was recorded on each area each month. �-123- Density: In both analyses, windbreak plantings demonstrated an important influence on small b ird populations. No_t only were fewer si;nall-birds observed on control areas, the variety of species was also significantly smaller. Type: Throughout the study, a greater variety ·a nd a greater number of small birds used the evergreen plantings. Mixed plantings also ra:nked higher than deciduous, but the differences were not significant. Examination of the Density x Type variate means shows that this difference was not due to variations among pontrol area populations included in each type sample. Months: The patterns of small bird incidence shown by the means for various months demonstrate part of the migration pattern in the study region. The t6tal numb~r of birds observed varied from a peak in July to a low in late winter and early spring, but the variation from the yearly mean was significant only in July, February and April. In contrast, the number of species recorded was significantly above the yearly mean from April through August and significantly low from November through March. Thus, the total population of small birds remained relatively constant throughout the year, but the composition of the population varied tremendously as an almost continuous migration moved through the study region. ~ A significantly greater variety of small birds was recorded in the first year of the study, but the total number of birds recorded was-.nearly equal in both years. No reason for this relationship can be shown, but it is felt that the major difference between the years was a lighter migration of warblers in 1958. It is also possible that the variety of species recorded in 1957-58 was lower than the variety in -1956-57 because the winter of 1957-58 was so mild some species did not reach the southern limit of their migration range in numbers as great as they had the previous winter. Density x Location interaction: Although significance was not recorded for the. Location . variate, the influence of windbreak plantings on small bird populations was apparently strongest at the two extremes of the study region and particularly in the northeastern third. In the northeast, significantly more species and more birds than the regional means were seen on 9-planting areas while significantly fewer species were seen on the control areas. In the southwest, the control mean for species was significantly low. The exact meaning of these relationships cannot be determined, but it seems possible that they may be due to a migration pattern which does not take birds exactly north and south through the study region. The South Platte River borders the entire study region on the northwest, and the sandhills pasture between the river and the cultivated land is only one-third as wide at Julesburg on the northeast as at Akron. Birds migrating north across the dryland areas may tend to follow river toward the northea·s t before striking out across waterless southern Nebraska. If this is the case, both a greater variety and a greater number of small birds could be seen in the northeast because of the converging flyway and the narrow pastureland buffer. �-124- Table 8. --Means of groups for which significance was recorded, analyses of variance, small bird species and small bird t 1bodiesn, north.eastern Colorado. . Source of ' . . Species Analysis 3.17 3. 13 2. 52 .. 3. 17 2.75 2. 91 d .-;,- . 23 d :>- . 22 Jne. . 4 . 33 1. 81 Jly. .· 4.20. 1.48 Aug. 3.69 1. 72 2. 46 Sept. 2.93 3.46 Oct. 2. 61 Nov. 1.94 4.63 d >.47 3 . 10 2.78 d >: North Central South 2. '/6 3. 29 3.46 3.11 3.24 3.04 2. 43 2.65 2.47 d >.39 North Central South 3. 10 3. 19 3.21 2.60 2.96 2. 68 3.22 2. 86 2.64 d"':7 . 39 North Central South 9- plant. 3.25 3, 33 4 . 13 2. 17 3. 2.5 2.88 3,38 2. 88 3.29 6-plant. 2.71 3.75 3.54 2.96 3. 21 3. 13 3.50 3. 00 2.38 no plant. 2. 46 2. 58 2.75 2. 04 2. G7 2.42 2. 79 2. 71 2. 25 d ~ , 70 .. . .. .. Variation Subsample Density · 9-"plantings 6-plantings · · · no plantings • · "Bodies" Analysis 20. 9 21.6 18.7 .d·>- 2. 2 evergreens deciduous mixed Months Dec. Jne, •. Jan,. Jly . Feb. Aug. Mar. Sept. Apr. Oct. May Nov. 23. 6 18. 6 19.0 d>2. 3 20.4 16.9 15.1. HL7 14. 4 20.6 Dec . Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Central Sou1h 22. 9 17. 5 18.5 d-,.. 4 . 0 LxT DxT 9-plant. 6- plant. 26.4 24.9 . ever~reens 23,'2 deci uous 14. 8 mixed 16. 7 2L.6 dz4. 0 DxLxT LxM North Central . ever. June 21. 0 23. 7 decid. Jly. .21.l 23. 2 21. 1 mix. Aug. 23. 3 ever. Sept. 20.3 20. 1 _decid. Oct. 23. 2 23. 9 mix. Nov. 31.4 24. 6 Dec. 26.. 9 18. 2 Jan. 18.1 16. 3 .Feb. 12.3 15.6 Mar. 19. 1 13. 7 Apr. 13. 7 11. 6 May 19.4 18. 6 d ::> 8.3 22.6 20.0 22. 4 25.6 22.7 23.6 21. 6 24.6 d >4. 6 Year 1956-57 1957-58 DxL 9-planbngs 6- plantings · no plantings North 25.0 19.4 16. 8 20.9 no plant. 19.4 ,, 17. 9 18. 8 South 22.4 32.7 23. 7 30. 4 17. 8 17. 8 16.1 16. 4 17. 6 17. 4 18. 0 24.0 �-125Density x Type interaction: The total number of birds seen on areas improved with evergreen plantings was significantly above the regional mean, and the number seen where 9 - deciduous plantings were present was significantly below the regional mean. This is somewhat surprising because it suggests that small birds actually prefer control areas with no woody cover to areas with deciduous plantings . Examination of the Density x Location x Type interaction, for which no significance was recorded, shows however that an extremely low count was recorded only on the 9-planting deciduous area in the centrally located group. No reason could be found for the low count on this one study area. Location x Type interaction: Each of the variates for this interaction was composed of data from one control and two improved areas, and the differences therefore cannot be interpreted. Examination of the Density x Location x Type interaction means shows that the significant variation within the mixed class for species was probably due to variation in the counts on control areas rather than improved areas. Location x Month interaction: Compari son of the means for this interaction with the means for the Month factor brings out several additional facets of the small bird migration patterns through the northeastern Colorado study region. The peak noted in July was confined to the southern third of the study region while the low counts in late winter did not ffect the southern third. Thus, it seems possible that the main body of at least one small bird group reaches the limit of its migration just north of the 40th parallel. The November high peak recorded for the northern third of the study region may indicate that an important segment of the small bird population follows the South Platte River going southwest before resuming a true south flight . Actual delineation of local migration routes would require a much more comprehensive study than that presented here. Density x Location x Tzye interaction: This interaction compares the numbers of species. seen on individual study areas and shows that three area means varied significantly from the regional mean. The 9-evergreen planting area in the northern third of the region and the corresponding control were respectively above and below the mean in the number of species recorded while the centrally located 9-deciduous planting area was below the mean. No reason could be seen for any of the variations. Special Areas: Counts of small birds on heavily developed areas did not vary significantly from regional means for either total species or total birds recorded. Conclusions In contrast to the very small effect windbreak plantings have on pheasant populations, the measurable effect on other avian wildlife is quite strong. Although mourning doves will nest on the ground, the breeding population in northeastern Colorado demonstrated a very strong preference for areas where windbreak plantings were present and it is suspected that a major part of all doves produced in the study region come from such plantings. Rabbits are apparently not affected by plantings, but hawks avoid improved areas and a greater number as well as a greater variety of small birds can be found on improved areas. In summary, windbreak plantings apparently have a beneficial influence on doves and small birds but no influence on rabbits while most hawks avoid improved areas. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Date:_ _ _ _ _o_c_t_ob_er_,.__1_9_58_ _ __ Approved by: Laurence E . Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1958 -127- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT ---- ...------- State of COLORADO. ...............;;;.;. Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Project No. _ _ w_-_9_0_-_R_-_4_ _ _ _ _ __.......,_Im.....,.p_r_o...,v_em ......e_n_t_o_n_W.;.;.;;;.il.dl=if_e,..._. _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Work Plan No. __________________ ______ ________ m ;;.;.., Job No. 7. _.; ___ ;...;.. -· Title of Job: __E_c_o_n_o_m_i_c...E __v_a1.u_a_t1;,;·o_n_o_f_H;;.;;;;;a;;;.b1;;.;:·t_at,;.;·.:;Im . .p~r.:;.o... ve;:;;m:.:;;;:e;::n~t...c;..::o:;.::v..e ;;; ~ r - - _ ; - - - - - - ) t Period covered: July 1, 1958 to. AugJist 31, 1958. Introduction As originally ·stated in the outline for Work Plan III, the Objective of Job No. 7 was " . . . compile the data . . . and to evaluate . . . on the basis of monetary · and aesthetic return on the habitat investment. 1' Since. the outline was written, considerable time has been spent in attempting to establish standards·on which monetary evaluation · can be based; but, in almost every case, values. were io nebulous and standards so flexible that it was impossible to set up reasonable estimates. On a hot July afternoon, for instance, the sight of a .t ree is worth "a million·dollars 11 to a combine operation in a dusty wheat field; but whether he would actually pay ten. c~nts to help establish another tree is an unanswerable question. In the same way, the landowner. thinks his windbreak is a beautiful thing, but he's not sure he isn't losing money on the acreage it takes out of crop production; and the sportsman, while completely enthused about establishing cover for wildlife, is .the first to sw~ar at branches which deflect his sµotgun pellets and cause hitn to miss a pheasant he might otherwise have killed. Thus, the final evaluatiotl of a wildlife habitat improvement program based on establishment of woody windbreaks can only be outlined, and no attempt was made to place monetary estimates on the total result. The following outline represents a summariz3:tion of the results of all field work for Project W-90-R and the additional opinions of .t he project leader. Outline for Evaluation of a Woody-windbreak Habitat Development Program I. Direct return to the Game and Fish Department. A. In effect on game populations. 1. Pheasants. Analysis of pheasant population data (Work Plan Ill, Job No. 1) showed a very slight increase in winte r mortality caused by windbreak plantings and suggested that positive influences during the summer months may equalize winter losses. Value to Dept, . - none. �-128I. A. 2. Mourning doves. Data collected in monthly searches of plantings and on roadside counts (Work Plan m, Jobs No. 2 and 6) show a very strong influence of older plantings on dove populations and; probably, production. Value to the Department - probably not very great because many of the doves produced in Colorado have migrated before the hunti~g season.opens. 3 '. Rabbits. Data -collected in monthly searches of plantings and on roadside counts (Work Plan III, Jobs 2 6) .give little evidence to show that woody plantings have any influence on_e ithel' cottontail O! jac~rabbit populations. Value_to the Dept. - none. and B. In f;ame management. TI._ie analysis_of hun~ing_~_e ason influences of woody cover (Work Plan Ill, Job No. 5) demonstrates that the additional pheasants harvested on improved areas will, over a 25 year period, justify the cost of the program. Results are only applicable to over-populated, under harvested areas; but on the northeastern Colorado tablelands a "planting-produced" pheasants costs less than a game-farm bird. Value to the Department - returns are greater than the cost of the program. II. Indirect return to the Game and Fish Department (Public relations) . A. The Sportsman's opinion of the Game and Fish Department. . 1. Plantings offer one of the few concrete evidences of wildlife fund expenditure which the public ca.Ii see. The values are' somewhat nebulous; but while planted · fish ma.y never be caught, and planted ·birds may never be l:lhot, a well established planting is a solid sign that the Ga.me· arid' Fish Department is on ·t he job. Value to Department - positive. 2. The increase in'. harvest (see I. ·B. ) caused by plantings will not be noticed by sportsmen,. but it 1nay be returned to the Depar tment in·a reduct ion of the· number of disgruntled hunters who did not kill -as many pheasants as they th.ought they should have. Value to the Department - positive. 3. Cost-estimate comparison shows that pheasants can be supplied to hunters at a lower price through habitat management in ti.o:rtheastern Colorado than through · game-farm releases. The fact that wild pheasants, as compared to ''domestic birds' are being shot may also be important to the sportsman. Value to the Departmentpositive. B. The landowners' opinion of the Game and Fish Department. L Many of the average landowners' contacts with wildlife management prove to be disgreeable .- the hunters who trespass and the publicity which send ~ greater plague of sportsmen into his area each year. By contrasts, contacts with representatives of a habitat project are usually friendly, and a landowner who has received seedlings is pr obably more cognizant of wildlife management aims. Value to the Department positive. �-1292, Field windbreaks offer protection to ~ivestockduring the winter, and most real-estate agents agree that windbreak plantings increase the value of farm properties. In the long run, both of these values should improve landowner opinions of the agency which distributed the seedlings. Value to the Dept, -positive. 3. Small bird populations are definitely aided by woody windbreak plantings (Work Plan III, Jobs No, 2 and 6), and it can be assumed that insectivorous species will be of some value to the landowner in protecting his crops. Value to the Dept. positive. 4. Windbreaks use land, and the area involved is usually greater than that actually planted in trees and shrubs because crop yields are low immediately adjacent to the windbreak. If the landowner does not realize that crop yields beyond the root-growth limit of the planting -a re larger because the planting increases snowdrift- moisture deposit, he may feel that the acreage represents a production loss not commensurate with the windbreak values received. Under these circumstances he might also feel that any real or imaginary loss is the responsibility of the agency which distributed the seedlings. Value to the Department - negative. 5. Woody windbreak plantings tend to concentrate pheasant populations (Work Plan III, Job No. l) " If the crop damages caused hy pheasants are increased adjacent to plantings, the landowner may feel that the damage is the direct responsibility of the agency which distributed the seedlings. Value to the Department - negative. C. The general public's opinicm of the Game and Fish Department. Among the non-sporting public, there is a large group interested in the welfare of migratory small birds and other wildlife forms of no particular interest to sportsmen and the Game and Fish Department. Since woody plantings apparently aid such species, the non-professional birdwatcher is apt to have a higher opinion of a wildlife program which results in increases in habitat for passerine species. Value to the Department - positive. 1. 2. The aesthetic values of windbreak plantings are one of the completely nebulous effects for which no evaluation technique is satisfactory. For some people, the flat, dry prairies are uninhabitable without trees; for others, woody cover is "nice but not necessary 11 ; and a few others feel that trees "ruin the view'1. The favorable opinions probably outnumber the unfavorable however, and the net result is an appreciation for the agency responsible for windbreak establishment, Value to the Department - positive. �-130- Summary and Conclusions In summary, it should be pointed out that some of the values attributed to plantings in this outline border on the ridiculous. From the standpoint .o f a wildlife administering agency particularly, only those values which give a direct, measurable return on the investment of sportsmen's money can be used to justify a habitat development program. Certainly, the public relatioos values cannot be overlooked, . but if no other values are forthcoming, the program cannot be justified for public relations alone. In northeastern Colorado, the influences of windbreak plantings on pheasant populations may have been slightly. negative, and in any case wer.e too minor to be considered important. Wildlife -species which were influenced positively by windbreaks were generally not considered to be important to Colorado sportsmen. The only economically justifiable reason for the establishment of perennial woody cover discovered in this study was the increase in hunter-success and total harvest on the tablelands. In Sedgwick, Phillip·s; .Logan and parts of Yuma and .W ashington Counties, where an already enormous pheasant ·population suffer s from perennial under-harvest, woody cover plantings will put pheasants .in the hunters' .bag at a lower cost .than a game-farm can produce birds for release. Elsewhere, pheasant management problems cannot be even partially solved with woody cover development. ..Recommendations Woody cover. development should be continued. wherever pheasant populations show post-season sex ratios lower than it:·2i . In other areas, the development program should be channeled into ex perimental work to determine reliable methods for increasing pheasant populations and providing effective winter cover. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Date:_____O_c_t_o_b_e_r._,_1..,95_8____ Approved by: Laurenc e E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �October, 1958 -ml JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ---------------- State of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-ll Work Plan No. I . Deer-Elk Investigations ------------------------------Job No. 3 Title of Job . __M_...igiilor...a_t_io_n.....,.B_e_tw_e_e_n_Su.....,m __m_e_r__an--d_W...,...in_t_e_r_R--ang_..e_s_._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Introduction: Since 1948 the State of Colorado has carried out annual deer trapping and tagging operations during the winter months. This report deals with a further analysis of the data collected to date in a gross evaluation of the trapping and tagging program. Objectives: To locate and determine the amount and pattern of migration between summer and winter ranges; and to obtain effects of such factors as huntjng pressure and range conditions. Methods: Field reconnaissance, counts on migration routes, and trapping and tagging on winter ranges. This rep6rt will deal mainly with the trapping phase of the investigations. The principal type of trap used is a portable, box-type, designed for catching deer individually. Various other types of traps have been used experimentally, including group traps. Experimental trapping investigations on both deer and elk are presently being conducted in the Gunnison area. Cattle and button tags with plastic discs have been used for marking the deer. Usually, both ears are fagged, using one type of tag in each ear. Various foods such as alfalfa hay, cottonseed meal , and apples have been used to bait the deer traps, but alfalfa has proven most successful. In several instances, animals were transplanted some distance from the trap sites to alleviate overcrowded conditions on winter ranges , and to minimize repeats. Weights of trapped animals have been recorded since 1953 at some of the trapping stations. Weighing boxes and portable scales were used for this operation. �-132- Results: Since 194 7, 22 trapping stations have .trapped 1, 760 deer. Of this total, 292 (17 percent) were bucks, 766 (43 percent) does, and 702 (40 percent) fawns. Fewer mature bucks were trapped because their antlers prevented .them from entering the t raps. The fawn sex ratio was 364 (52 percent) bucks to 338 (48 percent) does. This total includes some recatches and repeats which, when excluded, leaves a total of 1, 631 tagged animals--some of which were tagged as fawns during the- summer. Table 1 gives the nu:rnlrer of deer trapped by ar ea for each year, and Table 2 shows the sex and . , of trapped deer by year . . Trapping dates indicate that over 79 percent of the deer have .be.e n t.r:apped in December, January, . and February as follows: November - 7; 7 percent, December ..; 23~1 percent; January - 28. 5 percent, February - 27. 8 percent, March - 11. 8 percent and April - 1. 0 percent. One deer was trapped in October. Table 3 shows the number of deer trapped, by month, for each trapping season, again 1947 data not include~. The wide variation in the number of animals caught from year to _year was due -mainly to varying numbers of trapping s tations ea.ch year, and to weather conditions. Generally, more deer are caught during severe winters which tend to concentrate them, and make· natural foods unavailable. As an example, 165 deer were tagged at Little Hills during the severe winter of 1956-57 as compared to 36 in the light winter of 1957-58. Since 1948, approximately 87 animals have been recaught {on different years from the year tagged) . Repeats (individual recaught the same year, usually at the same trap site) were too numerous to mention. One individual repeated 14 times the same year. Since tr apping operations began, _approximately 43 of the tagged animal s have perished by causes other than hunting. Twenty seven of these animals died at or near the trap sites due to winter kill, predation, road kills, and some unknown causes. At least 5 of these deaths could be attributed dir<ectly to the trapping operations. It was necessary for department personnel to kill 12 of the tagged animals to remove them from the e:xperimental pastures at Little Hills and four animals were killed with experimental drugs. SUbtractions · of these known mor talities would result in approximately 1, 588 successfully tagged animals. The first tag returns (4) wer e in 1950; and since the, 139 tags have been returned during hunting season. Of these returns, 73 were does and 65 were bucks. Almost all returns · were hunt ing season kills, but at least two were road kills. These returns amount to 8. 8 percent of the tagged deer. The distance which animals were killed from the point of tagging ranged from the immediate vicinity to 70 miles, with the average being 12. 5 miles. lri general, the ycmng bucks, especially yearlings, traveled the greatest distances. · · �V'" Table 1. -- Number o-f Deer Tra-pped by Years and Areps, Western Colorado, 1947 to 1958. Trappin~ Station Little Hills Cathedral Creek Hot Sulphur (Middle Park) Basalt Crystal River Hermosa Creek Sapinero Doyleville Minnesota Creek Estes Park A,nimas Valley Mesa Verde Turkey Ranch Park Creek Gunnison Brown, s Park Radium Uncompahgre # Glenwood Canyon # Georgetown # Cache LaPoudre # Billl Creek Year Totals u7-1W Winter 46-49 49-.50 so-si .51-52 52-5:'.3 53-54 54-5.5 .5.5-50 .56-57 57-58 Area Total 22 134 43 41 93 57 23 37 12 64 38 78 27 165 29 36 695 14 68 5 12 3 8 6 15 6 Trapped in June. 94 3 8 2 1 lO 1 2 12 10 8 2 36 2 39 SJ 17 61 8 t 26 119 12 6 8 2 2 78 57 106 186 182 68 76 4 6 6 3 7 15 ~2 134 124 247 11 56 13 38 5 29 1 42 42 .58 loJ # Deer trapped and tagged incidental to Bighorn Sheep trapping program. I- 209 219 314 427 5 3 7 37 5 1,760 I 1--' C.:) C.:) I �-134Table 2. --Sex and Age of Trapped Deer, 1948-1957. Winter 1947-48 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 Total Percent Total Trapped 15 22 134 124 251 58 163* 219 214 427 Mature Bucks Mature · Does 1 18 83 57 109 30 59 85 142 7 19 50 3 33 40 51 84 4 37 1,749* 100% 3 48 92 25 17% 30 48 42 42 94 121 181 12 691 40% 21 766 43% 292 13 11 71 Does 1 2 31 18 44 44 162 Fawns Bucks . Total 67 96 5 358 (52% 14 29 52 54 85 7 333 48%) * Includes 8 animals tagged in June . Table 3. --Deer Trapped by Month, 1948-1957 Winter 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 Total Percent October November December January February 7 24 17 14 13 45 9 51 56 25 91 54 5 134 7. 7% 111 13 403 23. 1% 7 2 1 1 49 35 54 12 44 62 87 143 11 497 28. 5% 46 39 77 . 25 27 56 94 110 Match April 13 20 30 2 5 66 7 9 9 28 17 3 9 3 5 484 206 27. 8% 11. 8% 17 LO% �~135Table 4. --Deer-Tl;lg Recoveries for 139 Animals -- Showing .Distance Traveled and . Ti~e ~.erval Between Tagging and Recovery. Year Tag Location No. Does .· · Bucks Distance 1 Miles Timer l{onths _Range Mean Raxw;e 1950 1 tittle Hills 4 0 -15 6; 2 7 -9 8. 0 3 1951 Little Hills 7 2 --70 18.-0 11 -20 20: 7 3 4 1952 Little Hills 9 9 2- 20 7.0 7 -33 24. 3 Minnesota Cr. 4 4 4 -16 8.0 7 -8 7. 5 Estes Park 3 2 1 7 -9 8. 0 4 -18 Cathedral Cr. 2 2 11.0 7.0 Mean 1953 1954 Little Hills Cathedral Cr. Parle Cr. Estes <Park Turkey Reh. Mesa Verde Minnesota Cr. 8 2 1 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 Little Hills 9 3 6 3 1 2 Mesa Verde Rky. Mt. Nat. Pk, 1955 1957 1958 1 1 4 l 1 1 -30 5 -10 7.5 39.0 19- 45 28. 8 11 -20 15. 5 16. 0 7 -8 7. 7 8 · -19 12. 6 4.0 1 1 5 -30 7.0 8 -58 38.3 10'"" 2.0 _13. 7 1 Mid. Gunnis.o n 7 1 6 Little Hills South .Fork Mesa Verde Cathedral Cr. Brown's Park 6 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 Little Hills Cathedral Cr. 5 2 3 10- 65 5 ·1 8 2 5 7 4 1 1-2 Radium Mesa Verde Brown's Park E. Elk Cr. 6 4 3 2 1 3 Little Hill s Radium 9 2 6 Brown's Pk. Middle Pk. Hermosa Sapinero 8.1 1 4 8 9-32 19.9 45.0 3 2 3 3 4 1 3 1 1 1 1 139 73 65 8 -10 4 -9 4 -60 2 -5 8 -20 3 -15 24.2 1. 5 8. 5 16. 0 23.0 28.8 8.0 12.7 10.3 0 -70 12. 5 8. 5 8 -10 8. 6 9 - '54 18. 0 8 - '9 8. 6 22- 34 28. 0 ' 8-20 15. 4 22 · ... 34 28. O 8 2 8 8 -92 -20 -34 -23 36.1 13. 5 16. 4 15. 7 47.0 46.0 1.0 10. 0 Cumulative 31. 0 . 9. 0 9.0 4 6 5 -10 2..:. 92 19. 0 �Table ,.-...Weights of 705:'J.'agged Deer by Sex and Age Class for Each Year and Trapping Locality, Western Colorado, 19.53 to 1958. . Fawns · -Does Bucks .Does Mean . Range Mean . Range Mean · Range Mean Yearlings Trap Winter Stat:i,on Bucks · Number Weighed. R,ange Mean 1952-53 Little Hills 21 1953-54 Little Hills 37 1954-55 Little Rills 62 ----- ----- --- --- Bucks Does Range Range: Mean 52-153 128.8 121.0 --- __ 108-156 136. 7 111-125 115.6 --- --- ..,_. 59.70 65.4 48-72 61.4 54-79 67,4 S.l--80 10.1 54-84 66.o Brown, s Park 61 134-179 132-186 153.5 114-1.53 150.l 125-159 137.8 101-114 110.s 67-92 77.3 134.7 107-146 121.6 97-144 122.0 66-84 68.4 1955-56 .tittle Hills 77 56 14 73 l~l-150 140.5 115-162 1 ·1...;135 12,.7 87-145 121-166 -120-135 125.3 117--172 139~6 110-147 129.6 111-124 120.s 48-101 70.9 .· 55;;.78 63.8 Cf 121.s 101-104 102.5 49-78 63.2 · 48-90 61. 7 --14,.o 119-129 12s.o 95.0 80-96 88.0 · 68-77 12.s 136.7 112-133 125. 7 99-112 104.8 64.,. 94 76.9 40 . . 88 71.6 56-89 70.1 I I-' Brown's Park Hot Sulphur Radium -- --- 1956-57 Little Hills 155 142-169 158.6 122-167 86 124.:..185 i,0.9 119..;161 Radium* Brown 1 s Park 63 --- --- -- -- 1l.r6.6 106-170 140.7 105-157 132,7 40-98 65.7 40-75 58,7 ·136 .7 115-126 122. 5 91-115 99.2 52-83 68.o • so-86 66.J 112;..147 131.6 103-152 · 129.8 -- -- -101-127 11,.8 62-81 70.4 60...eo 66.2 1957-58 Little Hills - 15 -- -- Cumulative Grand Avera-ges 111~186 . · 720 C.¢ -1$4.6 140.:..162 149 .1 120-124 122. O -- 52-179 127.4 * Includes data from Middle Park .&ftf&t.~l;. -- . 91-157 106-170 136.J -- 106.8 -- ....... 64 .o 37-67 56.o .. 37-157 68.9 · 40-90 56.J �Figure 1. Deer were frequently recaught at the same trap site the following winter, or a year later. This doe, 1803, was tagged with 1he round button type tag with a 2" plastic disc in January, 1951 when she was listed as a mature doe. In December, 1955, she was caught, weighed (166#), and retagged with a cow type and a plastic disc. �Figure 2. This group trap is made of 6' x 8' panels wired together. The panels.are constructed of 1 x 4's, It can easily and quickly be taken apart to move to a new area. It works well in a.n area where deer are plentiful and moving through. The left end is the crowding and loading out shoot. �t ., I!& Figure 3. An improved "loading out" shoot is shown above. The drop door on the side allows the animal's head to be extended for tagging. The back half of the top is hinged to the center 2 x 4 brace so that it can be dropped; thus forcing a trapped deer to the tagging door, or into the weight box which is placed end to end with the shoot. �Figure 4 . The weight box is shown in position for crowding a deer into it from the trap. Occasionally a little prodding was necessary to get the deer to go into the darkened box. Two .by two' s make up the handles for the weight box. These slide loosely in<metal hangers. Two men can lift the box easily on.to the platform scales for weighing. �Figure 5. Care had to be taken in weighing deer and weigh box. If the scales were not level or the platform became jammed with snow, an erroneous weight resulted. Snow and dirt collecting on the weight box made it necessary to weigh it after each catch. �Figure 6. The weigh box could and was frequently used as a transportation crate to move pest deer to a new site to prevent them from being recaught too many times, for stocking the experimental pastures; or for other reasons. �Figure 7. A trap set in a draw usedby the deer in going to and from favorite spots was always on good loeatiOn. Later this type trap was set with only one door up and the trip wire moved farther to the rear. This resulted m fewer sprung traps and the deer entered the traps just as readily. �Figure 8. The clover net type trap shown here in set position was light and easily moved from one location to another. It is held in place by guying to two stakes. A string to a rat trap trip drops the net gate on this end. �Figure 9. Deer caught in the clover net traps did not get excited or fight the trap until a human approached. Often a trapped animal would lie down in the trap and await its fate. Some trouble was experienced with jack rabbits chewing the lower portions of the net to get the alfalfa used as bait. �Figure 10. The clover net trap is collapsed on a captured deer, and the animal .is easily tagged. During this process, deer occasionally skinned themselves about the face and ears. No way was devised to weigh deer caught in this type trap, and many weights were .missed. �Figure 11. Frequently when traps became snowed in, it was no longer po_ssible to get to them in a four wheel dr.i ve -vehicle witli scales and weigh box. Deer were then fagged and-released. C>fily one drop door is in use on this trap:-: the other door was nailed down. - �Figure .12. . This .·smaller, . on.e. do~r trap was constructed with a channeriron slide for the door. . Deer Were .tagged VIhen they stru~k their heads thr<>ugh the round opening. This trap was :m.om ~asily moved:, couldbe loaded on .a . pickup by one man. Deer entered it•a.s readily a.s the other type traps. and �Figure 13. Experimental drugging was done on trapped animals. Tagging could be done much easier when the deer was not struggling. �Figure 14. A drugged animal is weighed with less equipment and chance of error. This picture was takeninside the group trap. Slats running vertical decreased the chaaces of a deer catching a foot between the slats and breaking a leg. �-137. •, ' The time lapse between tagging and recovery ranged from two months to seven years and eight months with the average being 19. O months. Table4 shows the distance traveled and time lapse between tagging and recovery of deer by year and station. Tagging -recoveries to date indicate that the cattle tags are lost less than the button tags; however, it is still advisable to put a tag in each ear to increase the probability of returns. Since 1953, a total of 720 deer have been weighed. Table 5, in presenta:tion of these findings, gives the mean weight of deer by sex and age for each· station and each trapping season. Total figures for all stations and years showed the following: . ~ Mature Yearling Fawn Bucks 1 Range 111-186 106-170 37-101 Wei~ht-lbs. Mean 154.6 127.4 68.9 Does 1 Weight-lbs . Range Mean 52-179 136. 3 106• .8 91-157 56, 3 40-90 There was considerable difference in mean weights .of bucks, does, and fawns, however, this could be due, in part, to differences iri age classification by various personnel. . Trapping personnel have found -t~e folding pl~tform scales to have some undesirable characteristics as follows: -1. Bulky, 2. Easy to clog With snow -- impairing proper function, . 3. ·Must be sitting leve1·to function prope·r ly. Recommendations: This evaluation of the ten year trapping and tagging program has brought to light several reco:fu.mendations as fo,ows : -· 1. Standardize age classifications of trapped animals - - suggest fawn, yearling; mature·, and old. Where and when possible, deer should be aged by dentition in an effort to obtain more exacting information on longevity. 2. Forms should be supplied which will standan:iize trapping, tagging, and recovery reports. Special effort should be made to obtain complete and accurate information on all tag recoveries. �-138- 3. Condition of the animals could be generally noted as a reflection of food availability and range cOnditions. 4. Tag recoveries should bepl6tted on a. map with tet:eretice fo the location tagged--if . possible, by the person supervising the trapping ~nd tagging in that area. 5. Iridex cards should he obtained for recording the complete trapping, tagging, repea( . . recatch, and kill information for each individual animal. 6; Sp:drig scales should be tried, and perhaps substituted, for the platforlll scales provided that required accuracy can be obtained.· Trappingrecords show that a fotal of seven elk - 3 hullcalves; 3 cow calves, and one mature female have been tagged incide11tal to the deer trapping operations. Miscellaneous Tagging Some faggirig was done ptior·tol948 •. ··•FotesfSetvfoe employeestaggeff anunknown number of deer in the Basalt area during the winter of 1937, Compiete records of this program are unavaHabl.e. 'Afew de.e r weretaggedby ParkService employees at Estes Park. . Date of tagging is . Uiikn.own . . Some suninier tagging bf'deer fawhs was done in 1947 in the Gunnison area and on the Uncompa.hgre Plateau. Also, one cub bear was tagged at this time. is A complete list of all known tagged animals included in this report. This will make it possible for a field representative to quickly check a:nd tell huntetthe history of any tag he may turn in. a Much assistance was given in this tagging program by members of the National Park Service, u. R Forest Service, !heLittleHills Experiinent Statioustaff, Ted BeUing, D. V. M., and othersfrom Colorado state Uni.vetsity; Marion Ruth, J.a ck Truax, 9€01'ge Crandell, A. M. Greer;, Marion C . Coghill, 38-R project biologists, and at times the local Game and Fish Department Wildlife Conservation Officers and Trappers. Prepared by Paul F. Gilbert and John Harris ------------- Date: October, 1958 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �October, 1958 -139 JOB COMPLETION ~EPORT .. INVESTIGA T.IONS PROJECTS --------------- State of COLORADO Project No. .W'.'"38- R- 11 Deer-Elk Jnve stigations . Work Plan No. Title of Job. .· -------------------------------~I Job No, 5 Experimental Trapping .Techniques for ~er and Elk. 5A Trapping and Tagging Program ,.with Present Methods. Period Covered: Winter of 1957-1958. Abstract:, A total of 39 deer were trapped at the Little Hills Experiment Station and one at the Sapinero Game Managemen,t area. Two elk were also trapped at Sapinero. The winter was open and few deer were seen on the lower winter range, making it difficult to lure deer into the traps. Objective: To stock the experimental pastures at the Little Hills Experiment station for forage and range utilization studies. Techniques Used: Twenty individual wooden box-type traps and 3 wing traps extending from the pasture fence were baited with second cutting alfalfa. The individual traps were scattered throughout the Dry Fork drainage of Piceance Creek and trapped deer were loaded into plywood boxes and hauled .to the pastures by pickup trucks. Drives were made after dark into the wing traps to force deer into the pastures, One clover net trap was used for several weeks, but caught no deer. Findings: The 1957-58 deer trapping operation, at the Little Hills Experiment Station began eax-ly in November, 1957, and was suspended March 20, 1958. A total of 39 deer were trapped; 36 by the wooden type traps, and 3 by thew~, traps. Tags were put on 26 of these deer and 10 others were recatches from previous years. This compares with 149 deer tagged during the severe winter of 1956-1957. The reason for this large difference was an open winter, .and also hunters harvested an estimated 11,359 deer from Game Management Unit 22. The open winter with light snowfall allowed the deer to remain on their intermediate range where they had access to an abundant food supply. They were well scattered and were observed at higher elevations than ever before. �-:!.40- Dur.ing the fall migration, many deer fed on our alfalfa meadows after dark; but few wer e seen around our wing traps. Salt, apples, and alfalfa hay failed to lure them into these ar eas. It was not until late February that they appeared in any noticeable numbers on their lower winter range. Our trapping territory was expanded to ··the Burke ranch on Piceance -Creek and higher up in the gulches of Dry Fork, but most deer paSd little attention to the alfalfa bait in the traps. Although, most of the deer observed appeared healthy, sotne of the fawns .trapped were small and anemic. A total of 11 fawns were trapped and delivered .to Colorado state University at Ft. -Coli.ins. Dr. Robert Davis.,- of the College of Veterinary Medicine, and Dr. Lee Yeager, of the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Re search .Unit, will use them for experimental research. Trapping personnel included A. M. Greer, Pat Burke, Nelson Cain, and George Crandell . . Don Smith and Hal Boeker assisted occasionally. Prepared by: Donald .Smith Approved by: Laurence E . . Riordan .Federal Aid Coordinator Date:_ _ _ _Oc ...._to_._b_er_,____ 19..... . 5...,8..... �October, 1958 -141 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ______~--- state of...___.,;;.......,...,;;,;;;,;;,.;....,. COLORADO Deer-Elk Investigations Project No. W-38-R-11 Work Plan No. 1 _Loc-atic;m and Extent of Seasonal Ranges Job 5 _ . ;· Trapping Tech4_tques for Deer and Elk _ _ Job No. _5 B. .I nvestigations into ~ore Efficient Trapping Techniques. - < - Period covered: May 1, 1957 through .March 31, 1958. Objectives: . To experin1ent wiLn }1.ew ideas in trapping deer for· the purpose -of i.ncreas.ing the efficiency of trapping operatio~s. Procedure: .During the course ofother work .in the Gunnison area, - several conversations Were held with the cusibdian of the Sapinero Game Management Area, -Mr. M:. Coghill, regarding the trapping program thci'Federal Aid -Division carried on for deer and elk.- It developed from these conversations that Mr. Coghiff had seVeral new and radical ideas concerning the use of a group trap for big game animals. ·c. The group trap, as now used in Colorado,. has a trigger mechanism that needs to be pulled or tripped over in order to drop ·t he gate behind the ani:rnals .. .. Because of this only one animal ca:n set the trap off, and the iarge, more exp-ensive trap is wa~ted upon only one animal. Another problem is how .to handle the animal after it is in the trap. - These two problems will have to be solved before an e£fi.cient, practical gro:iip trap is developed. • After talking to the project leader it was decided to move one of the Federal Aid group traps to Gunnison, from the Little Hills Experiment Station, and modify it to the . sfandards set by Mr. CoghilL ·· · ·· · · · ·· · · ·· ·· ·· · · A. Trap Gates - Two gates were developed for the .trap -- one of them to be used prinlarily for deer and the other for elk. . The deer-gate was to takeadvanta:ge of the habit of deer of jumping into a haystack yard or other similar enclosure. __·the niain principle was to have the deer duck under one portion of the gate and jump over the inner part. . (See Figure 1). From the inside of the trap the gate looks solid, thus preventing the deer from jumping back out of the trap. The gate is, therefore, _i:er,manently set and allows the principle of a group trap t o be fufly utilized. - The elk gate takes advantage of the habit of elk of pushing through fences to get to haystacks. The main principle of the gat e was to have the elk push through an easily moved panel to. get to the alfalfa hay used as bait. These panels were so designed so that they closed a.s soon as the animal passed through theni. (See Figure 2). Again, these gates were permanently set, and any number of animals could easily get into ·t he trap,' but none could get out. �-142- The mail portion of the trap is :made of wooden p~nels 4 feet wide and 8 feet high. They are tied together with :fl:9 smooth Wire; - and also tied to steel posts for extra strength. .. The enclosed space is about 30 feet in di;µneter. B. Handling Trapped Animals - Probably the most ingenious portion the whole trap setup is _the new method devised to contain or immobil-ize the animals -that are :to be tagged or otherwise worked on. During tre war when the Army wanted to ship live cattle overseas, it was their practice to drive the animals onto a cargo net lald on the dock and then lift the net with a crane and load the _aninials _into .t he hold of a ship. With their legs _sticking through the net the animals could-not ·s truggle or fight While they were being 1;haded. · After some discussion.it was decided to order a special net made of nylon and use it to immobilize the animals. A net 20 feet by 12 feet, testing 1785 lbs., was ordered and hooked up on the trap . . A special panel was .designed and built with-a door which opened five feet above the ground -- the theory being that the deei- ,_o r elk in the trap would _ immediately jump over the low barrier when it was opened and land in the net, which was suspended at th~ samfheight as the open pbttfon Of the panel. (See Figure 3). Whe.n: tagging and other workwas completed, the net could be released and the animal could run . away as soon as its legs touched . . . the ground. ' . . . Results: A very open winter in -the vicinity of the ·sapiner6-_Game M~nagement Area made trapping very difficult this ,year: An abuiida:nce-of feed on the winter range and a lack of snow covermg _the browse resulted tn ·a situaiion whefe·the animals did notneed'to come to the alfalf8.hay that we used· as bait'for the trap. In a. normal Winter the animals are in need of all the forage they can get, and readily ccime to hay if it is made available to them. In spite of the poor trapping .year, two deer and four elk were caught in the trap. Much was leiirned about the gates andthe netfro:m these ·sbcanimals. Trap Gates: , The two types of e;ate.s were constructed of 1- 1/2 inch black pipe welded t ogether (Figures 1 and 2) . The deer gate was used by itself at first because only deer were a.round the trap itl the evenings. ·:Because·the deer were not forced to use the hay for food, it was decided to let them enter the trap as easily as possible and then trip the gate by hand. A light was set up to niake the ~trap site more visible. Several nights were spent watching the trap and finally a buck deer jumped into the trap and the gate was tripped behind him. He immediately started to fight the trap and tried to jump over the panels or through the gate. By the time we had the net in place the deer had broken one antler off, broke an incisor tooth, and cut.his left shoulder, plus knocking large patches of ha.it off his sides and shoulder. When the gate above -the net was opened he immediately tried to jump out of the trap, but was so tired he could not make it. He laid quietly for a short time and then jumped again; he caught his back legs but fell into the net where he struggled briefly and then just gave up. It was possible to tag him with no struggle and with complete safety to the persons doing the tagging. The net was released and the deer trotted off into the brush. 1 C �FIGURE I - EXPERIMENTAL GATE FOR DEER TO BE U D IN SCALE UP TRAP 1"= 2' T1'+ 4' e' i 3' SIDE VIEW l~~~ FRONT VIEW �Fl RE 2 - EXPERI ENTAL GATE FOR ELK TO BE USED IN OUP TR SCALE k .·. 111 = !1 •·•. 4 • - ~ - - · -~ . w OED .. . ·· ... ·• •· •. 'i .·. r 200! . .· .-· .. ·_- ~ .·· 1 18' 1 " ... .. .. ·.. .. / ..... •· ;.. i .:, .· .. •••• i •·:: .i .. i ·•·· ·.•· > ... ...... > :•.: •:• .··· I i > .. ,. . l• . i ··•·· >< < ... ··••·••: I ·· •• · ....... :.... •:• ·.• .> •. ,. ,.. . ·. .. . · ,, ---. ., , FRONT VIEW '-· SIDE VIEW �3- T CATCHING GA E - U D SCALE FOR BIG P TR I"= 2' GROUP TRAP/ 'l-1/111;/ r------ st--------1 NET 5 1/i 5' SIDE VIEW <% ;;: 1/ 1~ I, I // /I ,, ,,✓ .... ~__,;:,~ ··1:1/. ,/ II ~ I/ I '/ /,, ' ~ / / ;;: 1 %" ,1 f/ .~ I /I { ~I;,' I I f ~ :j I; t (/ / ~ 1/J / ~ I / FRONT VIEW ~ �After this episode, a large tarpaulin was put around the trap to limit the visibility of the animals inside, in the hope that they would not fight the trap so much if they could not see the men working around the t r ap. Another item learned from this first animal was .t he fact that the nylon net stretched mote than we thought it would, so a pipe frame was made for the net so it could be stretched tighter. Since the deer had repeatedly tried.to break out of the trap through .the gate he came in, we decided to wire it shut and use only the elk gate for the rest of the trapping season.,, It was obvious that the spacing of the uprights in the deer gate was too far apart as the buck could get his head and neck all the way through. The tarpaulin was arranged so it covered the deer gate and a section was fixed so it -could be rolled down as soon as the elk gate was tripped. A few days after the deer was tagged and released, the gate was shut behing a calf elk. As s.o on as the gate clanged shut, the calf hit it four times and escaped through it . Subsequent examination of the gate showed that the upper h inge bolt was not completely tight, thus allowing the gate to give a little each time the elk hit it and finally letting _the gate slip by the stop and open enough to let the aili out. The next day a bar was welded across the top of the gate to keep it from opening, even if the hinges did slip. The ga,te was again tripped several days later behind a cow and a calf elk. They hit the gate once and did not try again as the gate did not give. The two elk did not fight the trap at all; in fact, they seemed completely unconcerned. They laid down and paid very little attention to what was going on until we tried to get them to jump into the net. After working about six hours the cow finally jumped into the net. As she went over the barrier in front of the net she hit her front legs and fell head first into the net. As all of her weight was on one of the small sections .of the net, one _o f the knots slipped and cut a strand. This made a hole that stretched large enough to let her slip ,. .o n . . . . , · .. . through and _fall to the ground. She escaped without injury. It was impossible to get the calf to jump out of the trap, so the gate was opened and she was allowed to walk away. Both of the elk were tagged before they got away by the simple method of punching the tag into their ears as ~ey stood hy the sides of the trap. • . In view of this incident, the net was completely untied and rewoven into strands three times as large as .o riginal, and then retied .i nto a net measuring eight feet square. About three weeks later the same calf was caught again. This time an electric shocker was used to see if it would make the animal jump into the net. This had no more effect than l;t,ny of the other methods used. The elk would not even throw her head when the wir e was placed directly on her nose. The gate was finally opened and the calf allowed to walk out unmolested. �-144- An.other deer was caught a short time later, but was only in the trap about ten minutes before the gate above the net was opened'. She jumped on a bale of hay and used .it as a springboard to go over the barrier and land in the net. Both of her front. legs folded under her as she hit the net and she slid completely over the net and off the far end. She was not injured in any way and trotted off without being tagged, The weather began to turn warmer and the animals pulled back from the vicinity of the ranch, so trapping was suspended on March 22nd. Recommendations: . 1. The trap should be set up .again next year .hoping for. a normal· winter which.will make more.animals •available to trap. The height of the panels should be increased to ten feet, or an overhang should be constructed on the present panels. 2. 3. Both types of gates should be set up and evaluated as .to their effectiveness on each species of big game. 4. Development of another type of net catching device for elk should be started. A 11ba.ckstop'' should be set up at the far end of the net to stop animals from sliding over the end if their legs do not go through the net. 5. 6. More panels should be made to increase the size of the enclosure. Table L • Deer and Elk Tagged During the Winter· 1957-58. ·· Sapinero Game Management ·.· Area. . Date. Cattle Tags · N:umbers . · .. Sex Tagged.·. .. Age . . . . w ·• · Yearling · . (Deer) 1457 . 1458 2-:-7 ... 58 Male 1459 · .. A875 (Elk) 2-11-58 .· Female .Mature . A874 A873 . (Elk) 2- 11-58 Calf Female SUmmaq: Two deer andJour elk were caught in the new trap at the Sapinero Game Management A:irea. Poor trapping conditions hampered the operation, but the net catching device seemed to wor k .very well from the limited data secured this .year. The elk do not fight the trap at all, while deer do not stop fighting until they are exhausted. Work will continue on development of the gates and catching .device next year. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd. M. C. Coghill Date:_____ Oc......,.to..;b..,;e;..;r..,,....1.9.;;;.5.;;;.8_ _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �October, 1958 -145- JOB COMPLETION. REPORT lNV~STIGATIQNS PROJECTS '--------------- state of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-ll Deer".'"Elk Investigations Work Plan No. _ _..:2=----------l..---P;..;o..1p...u.;;l.;;.a.;.;ti;.;;.o,.n_Su __r_v_e""'y_s_ ____________~ Job No ......----...::4:......_ _ _ _ _ _ _..__.::;st.;;.;;u;;;:d::.:Y-o;;;.;f;..:.;;;C,.;;;e.;;;n;;;;.su.;;s;;...•T_e;.;;c.;.;h_n_iq;s.;u_e_s________ 4 B - Comparison of Air and Ground Deer Elk Counts Period covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Introduction: ,Although a great deal of work has already been done on this particular study, it remains to be determined whether the ratios between air and ground deer counts will vary from one habitat type to another, and to evolve correction factors for various ground counting conditions "."- mainly snow cover. In addition, to work out·a similar study on elk as has been carried on for deer. Objectives: {l) To determine whether air counts will consistently tally the same percentage of elk as are present on the ground from one time to the nefrt , and from area to area. (2) To determine whether air-to-ground deer ratioswill remain the same .from .one type of terrain to another; and (3) to determine factors which will correct the a.i r counts for different snow cover conditions, and to work out an easily recognized set of standards to permit an accurate selection of the right correction factors by the aerial observer. ·· Procedure: An area in the Sapinero Game Management Area near Gunnison, Colorado was chosen as the first area for an elk air--,ground correlation count . The area is located in parts of Sections 3, 4, 5 , 8, · 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 27 and 28; T. 49 N. ; R 3 W. ; New Mexico Principal Meridan. The exact area counted is between the bottom of East Elk Creek westto the east ritn of Tenderfoot Hil\ overlooking West Dry Gulch, from the Forest Service fence south to U. S. Highway 50. The area was flown three times by Pilot Norman Hughes and Observer Don Benson the first week in March, and the ground count was run on March 8th. Both the pilot and the observer felt that tl:e chosen study area was typical of the whole Gunnison trend area and had good boundaries. �-146Table 1 -- Elk Counts by'fime of Day Flown, Time.Spent and Elk.Counted. Count Number Time Flown 1 A. M. P. M. A. M. 2 3 Time .~ent. 31 min. 35 min. 48min, Elk Counted Bulls 119 13 100 12 125 29 The crew on the ground counted 334 ellcin the same area, Because of the deep snow and very rough terrain-encountered the sfope}ust west of Elk Creek it was felt that the ground countwas not as completely.accurate as it could be. Thirty men were employed in the ground count is walkers, ·with.four ob.s ervers placed in strategic places. on Analysis and Recommendations: It was felt by most of the men on the ground that the elk count was, if anything, conservative. The deep, thick timber the first mile of the walk was not covered as well as it could be'. Therefore, the following recommendations.are.made: . L At least 40 men should be used next year, with the extr a 10 men on the west slope of Elk Creek. 2. Observers should be.placed at ......_ two points .on the.Elk .Creek rim. . . . ' ' 3. A better means of transporting .t he groµnd crew to ·the starting points should be worked, out . 4. A helicopter should also he µsed if it can be obtained. Tllis will give a .comparison of alr count, ground count, and helicopter count. Also the helicopter might he used to transport the men to the starting positions on the Forest Service fence. 5. If at all possible, the count<shouldbe made more than once next year'. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Date:_ _ _ _o_c_t_o_b_e_r,._ , _1_9__ 5_8_ _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid.Coordinator �October, 1958 -147- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS :PROJECTS ---------------- state of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-11 Deer-:Elk Investigations Work Plan No. _ _2_·_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _....__P_o...p_u_l_a_ti_o_n_Su_r_v_e.,.y_s_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Study of Census Techniques, Job No. 4c The Pellet Group Count Tech:nique Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Objective: To field test on an open range the pellet group counting, and check the results against a known deer population. Procedure: A total of eighteen transects, each containing 25 plots, were located at random on Cedar Ridge . These plots were checked in June after the wintering deer herd had left. 1t was felt that additional information could be collected by using the sa.nre plot hub, and counting pellet groups on both a 100 square foot plot and a . 01 acre plot. Personnel: The transects and plots were established last fall with the assistance .of students from Colorado state University under the supervision of Professor Douglas L. Gilbert. Pellet counts were made this spring by John Harris, Don Smith, Harvey Bray, and Paul Gilbert. Findings: Cedar Ridge was intensely sampled for deer mortality in connection with this same project under Work Plan II, Job No. 5. At that time, a total of 366 live deer were counted. This count was made on April 29 after winter loss had occurred. Earlier in the winter {March, 1958} a total count was made using 49 drivers walking side by side in an ·organized line pushing the deer towards stationed lookouts. Deer were counted by the lookouts as they left the area, and by the counters as they broke back through the line. This total count was 396 deer. Table 1 shows a summary of all transects, for both the 100 square foot and the . 01 acre plots. Table . . gives a good comparison analysis of the two different size plots. Then using the information available, a total herd estimate was made as follows : �Table I CEDAR RIDGE PELLET COUNT ANALYSIS FROM 18 TRANSFiCTS, 1./46 PLOTS -- 100 §.QUARE FEET AND 1 01 ACRE I Sm,:;i,ng - 1928 Range within Tot~ PitbJ,et Gro3412s COJ:mt!!d •Pellet groups · Ho1,:iie Transect No. of Date ]2lOt§ Ca1'tle 12er acre J;le!!it No 1 ;El,otl! E~ooiineg. :l,00 2g ;tl 1 01 ~r!! lOO §9 ft 3 01 aore 100 §9 tt 1 0~100 sg tt 1 01 ~ere 100 §9 ft 1 01 acre 100 sg ft 1 01 .aore m l 2 3 .4 5 6 :z 8 9 JO 1:J 12 62 25 6/l.7 s.2 6Q,8 6.0 25 25 6Q.2 6L;i.a 25 62 25 25 22 25 6/l.8 815 10.s 1510 910 16*0 6/l.8 312 6{;f). 2J~8 25 6/.19 J!uO :]6 25 25 25 22 24 l:Z 2~ H 14 J5 18 2~ sl1s 6LJ.2 6/J,9 z,o 6Ll2 J510 6L18 lii:15 6l?.Q :z.2 2,0 gl&Q 6/20 lo.4 gi,,2 2418 ~611 6510 o.;i. 1,2 1,0 l 113 3 :z.1 2 1· ;i,.o ·2 22.0 410 1,0 ,. 2,8 2 321.'Z 310 3 3.0 .1 39,0 20.0 :Z6,3 30.0 33,0 47,0 30,0 laO ;is.o §.o 6Ll§ !hO 3.0 6L1s 6.8 21.2 TOTALS l'.ZJ.10 6]0,9 AVERAGES .9.~5 ;f3o9 :12,8 6 0-3 0-6 0-ll 812 1116 ll,4 20.0 12•.4 21.9 9.6 4 •.4 8ti:18 6 2.2.2 1s4.4 260.0 13018 150.0 156.0 80.0 30512 120.0 4 ~ o-z J 2 l 5.0 2. 0 2 3,0 6.0 0-3 0-3 0-4 0-5 0-2 0-11 0-2 0-5 0::2 lZ,l 132.0 J88,0 0-5 9.9 120~6 310 O+J, J1l 310 2810 0-1 0-J. 0-2 0-6 0-4 59,0 g6 10 3210 it•~ 0-2 o-~ ~ 2 6 12116 :z.o 2 213 1116 0-2 l .u.o 0-315 0-3 0-lt 0-2 0-2., 0-13 0-515 0-J.1 .0-12 3715 3!t 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 0-3.5 0-2 :ho o-:h5 Man hour§ ~.9 J9,2 20.0 :z,o lt1l 21J -~ ~7.6 1Q9,6 16;.7 136.5 5 3 6 6 4 6 6 9 9 8 6 2 3 2 2 .... "'I " I OC> �-149Table 2;. ·· Cedar Ridge Pellet Count Analysis -- 100 ~uare Foot Plots versus . 01 Acre Plots Spring - 1958. Comparis.o n . 01 acre plots Size of plot 11 ft. 9. 3 in. Sampe size /25 plot transect , 25 acre Total size of sample 4. 46 acres Total pellet groups counted 610.9 Average groups/acre 136. 5 Average deer days of use/ acre 8.34 100 sq. ft. plots 5 ft. 7. 7 in. (. 0023 acre) . 0575 acre 1. 03 acres 171. 7 165.0 12.99 Analysis by Transect1 Average no. groups/transect 33.93 Range 8 - 76. 3 Standard deviation 16.4 Standard error of mean 3.8 Coeffic.ient of variation . 48 Confidence intervalt. 05, 17df 33. 93 I 8. 01 Confidence interval t. 10, 17df 33. 93 i_ 6 . 46 Sample s,ize t . 05, 17df,. 05Acc.427 transects . lOAcc. 104 transects . 20Acc. 26 transects 9.50 2-21.8 5. 1 1. 2 . 53 9. 5 I 2. 5 9. 5:l 2.0 514 transects 129 transects 36 transects Analysis by Plot Average no. g,r oups/plot 1.37 Range 0 -13 Standard deviation . 47 standard error of mean . 02 Coefficient of variation . 34 Confidence intervalt . 05, 445df 1. 37 I . 04 t. 10, 445 df 1. 37 I . 03 Sample size t. 05, 445df ,.05Acc. 182 plots . lOAcc. 47 plots . 20 Ace. · 11 plots 0.38 0 -5 . 78 . 04 2. 05 . 38 I . 08 . 38 i_ . 06 7,800 plots 1,671 plots 423 plots �-150- TOTAL HERD :ESTIMATES Size of area censu.sed - 4,544 acres Tota,! interva,l deer on area - 160 days Defication rate - 12. 7 pellet groups/day Average no. of pellet groups/acre for . 01 acre plots .. 136. 5 ' Average no. pellet groups /acre for 100 sq. ft. plots - 165. 7 Formula: No. of deer = (pellet groups /acre) (defication rate) (total acres) (clays on area) • 01 acre plots N• 136. 5 . 4, 544 12. 7 . 160 = 620,256 2032 = 305 Confidence interval t . 05, 17 df = 305 t_ 70 animals 100 sq, ft. plots> N = 165. 7 . 4, 544 = 12. 7 • . 160 753,077 ... 2032 = 371 Confidence interval t ~05, .-1 7 .d f ·= 3-71 t_ 94 animals Summa:r:i: Pellet transects 100 square feet and . 01 acre in size were established and read on a 4. 544 acre tract of deer winter range. A total of 396 deer were known to have wintered on-thfs -area for approximat~ly 160 day~. Using .~ defication rate of 12. i pellet groups per day, the . 01 acre plots gave a population of 305 animals; and the 100 square feet plots gave a total population of 371 animals. Submitted by: Paul Giibert John Harris Date:_ _ _ _Oc ___t_o__ b_er...,......,19_5_8_ __ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coorq¥t~tor �October, 1958 -151 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ----------------- State of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R- ll Work Plan. Deer-Elk Inve stigations ---------------------------------------- Title of Job. II Job No. 4 Study of Census Techniques • .JOB No. _ _ _ _ _... ~_D_ _ _ _ __,_;_P ...o,_p_u_l_a-ti-o.;;;;n_.E__s_t_im=a-te ..s;,..;;;B;,;;a-s...e_d_o;.;;;n.,._A.ig..,e_a_n_d_.Sex=---Ra=tl-'o;.;;..;s. Period covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Objectives: To make a pre-hunting season sex-ratio on the Cedar Ridge deer herd. Procedure: An attempt was made again this year to get the desired informatinn; however, the summer range is so large that it is impossible to get a good sex-ratio sample. No work done. Prepared by: Paul F . Gilbert Date:_ _ __ Oc_ · __ t_o_be _r_.,_1_9__5_8_ _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1958 -153JOB COMPL,ETJ_QN REPORT JNVE.STIGATIONS PROJECTS --------------------------------------------- State of COLORADO Project No. ..W-38-R-ll Work Plan NO". Title of Job: II Deer-Elk lnvestigations Job No. 5 ,Determina.t ion ofWinter Loss Period covered: December 15, 1957 to May 1, 1958. Objectives; .T o improve the techniques for determining deer winter losses. Procedures: _O n April 29, ·1958 at Green Mountain Reservoir seventeen transects eight miles long and one hundred yards apart were walked on foot with the assistance of senior wildlife and forest recreation students from Colorado State University. Each observer tallied the live deer passing back through the line between him and the man on his right. Dead deer observed were listed by sex and age whenever.c possible ..An average sight distance was recorded for each dead animal seen. Number one followed the .high water line on the east side of Green Mountain Reservoir. man Findipg s: _T he first part of the drive. was made in blustery weather, and tt was not until the line got through the "Black .Slides" that' the .s torm.lifted. 'rhisprobably had little · effect on the count, as the deer must move· ahead of the counters due to cliffs at the upper limits ,of the counting .area until they clear the Black Slides. The r esults of the gr ound count is ~ follows:, .Total live deer Qbserved: Total dead deer. observed: Total area: Sample size: Average Sight Distance: 553 35 4,654 acres 3,364 acres . 22. 53 yards The sample size is based on a predetermined sight distance of 26 yards. This figure was determined in an experimental sack count and has been used in all the work done on this job. The average time required to walk one transect was five hours. An additional hour y;as required to get into position. �-154'!'he projection for percentage mortality was made as follows: Total live deer counted T_o tal dead deer counted :Winter population 553 35 588 Therefore 35:: ;3,364 = x : 4, 654 3, 364.x = 162,890 Total.projected loss or x = 48 (48. 42) Therefore .588 divided into _4 8 .,. percentage -winter l9ss .or 8. .16 -% Summary: Year Live Deer Observed 51-52 26!3l/ 714 52-53 53-54 1,094 54-55 -1, 129 55-56 " _·_1, 276 56-57 498 57-58 553 Est. Dead Deer Projected Winter Loss · 612 69.9 . 28 3.8 . 17 1.5 · 3. 5 5. 8 '46 . 8 8.2 41 79 243 48 36.26 ·. Kill From Previous Fall Unit 37 601 260 500 923 28.15 472 26.06 893 369 Av. Sight Distance _In Yards · 22. 53 Copter Check: _On May 9, · a Bell Model 4702 with a 260 HP Lycoming Engine was used experimentally on the same area to try it out on eounting dead deer. Before going into the counting are·a., .- the<oopter and observer spent some trial time W6i'king on .the proper height required to get a desired strip. A piece of masking tape was placed on the bubble directly in front of the observer near the floor as a sight or guide. It was finally decided to try strips .of 330 feet and 200 feet. The average time required to count omst.rp was eight minutes. Four strips eight miles long and 330 feet wide gave a sample size of 1, 280 acres. On this sample seven dead deer were found, therefore: 7 :1, 280 = x: 4, 654 l,280X = 32,578 X= · 25 Total loss for entire area 25 ·i- 588 = 4. 25 percent loss . Eight strips eight miles long and 220 feet wide gave a sample size of 1, 515. 5 acres. On this sample , 5· dead deer were found, therefore: 5:1, 515. 5 = X : 4, 654 1, 515. 5 X ::r 23, 270 X= 15 total loss 15 -, ; 588 = 2. 55 percent loss 1/ Emphasis was not placed on counting live deer in 1952, therefore winter loss is probably high. �-~.55- CEDAR RIDGE DEER MORTALITY DETERMINATION.,.. 1958. Introduction: The area known as Cedar Ridge, southwest of Parshall in Middle Park, Colorado also was intensely sampled for deer mortality on April 29, 1958. Cedar Ridge is a critical segment of the Middle Park mule deer winter range, and is typical of the pinonjuniper and sagebrush range types in this region. This area has been systematically sampled by airplane and.ground drives since 1953 for the purpo,se of evaluating _aerial census techniques. Thus, since a good estimate of the wintering population was available (from the March, 1958 aerial and ground drives), the area offered an excellent opportunity for mortality determinations, as well as ·being a valuable s.upplementary study to the annual Green Mountain deer mortality counts - which involves another portion of the same winter range. Procedure : Deer mortality of Cedar Ridge was determined by an organized line drive similar to that used on the Green Mountain mortality counts. Personnel consisted of two biologists .of the Colorado Game and Fish Department, and eighteen senior game management students from Colorado State University. The drive interval was selected and maintained by guiding on 18 ll"andomly located pellet group transects which tr aversed the area in a north-south direction. These transects varied in distance from approximately 100 to 900 yards apart. The maximum predetermined sighting distance * for similar terrain and .vegetative cover was found to be 150 yards, with an average of 26 yards. Thus, an effort was made to maintain at least 300 yards between observers to avoid duplication. Upon completion of the drive from sou,thto north, each man off-set another interval to his right, or left, depending upon the distance of the man nearest him. Effort was made .to off-set a,t least 300 yards (two maximum sighting distances) from transects previously walked, to avoid possible duplication in counts. Although this was not possible in some instances due to varying distances between observers, it was alw?:ys possible to offset more than twice .. the average sight distance (52 yards) . A second drive was then made from north to sou th -- making a total of 40 sample strips over the area. The distance from sighting point to each carcass was stepped off immediately after discovery. Sex was also noted whenever possible. AH live deer whichpassed to the observers left were recorded on the initial south-north drive. Other animals seen were.also noted. * Determined by experimental s ack counts on the Hot Sulphur area in 1954. �-1~6- Results: The drive was begun .a t 9 :~ Oa . m. ·;and completed a.t l ;30 p._ m., a total of _4 hours, involving 80 man hours. The 20 observers walked a total of 48, 487 yards .each direction, making a total CF 96, 974 yards or 55. 1 miles of sample stli."ip. · Using the predetermined average sight distance of 26 yards, the average width of a strip was 52 yards. Thus, when multiplied by the total length of all ·sample -strips, the ·area ·sampled was·· s,032,492 squareyards, or ·1, 040 acres. The projection for percentage mortality was made asfollows: Total dead deer c.o unted 11 Live deer count (March, 1958) 396 Size of area . 4, 544 acres Size of sample 1, 040 acres (22. 9 percent) Therefore: 11: 1, 040 as x: 4,544 1, 040x • 49, 984 x = 48 Total projected mo:rtalities. ·.• Total estimated wintering population 444 (396 plus 48) · Percentage mortality = 48/444 10. 8 % = A total of 366 live deer were counted on the area at the same time of the mortality count, indicating ·t hat little .t o no migration had taken place since the March census. Of the 11 dead deer found 6 were bucks, 3 does, and 2 undetermined. Eight of the mortalities were found on southern exposures as compared to 3 on 1he northern; exposures . ..· The sight >distances, for this particular •c ount, varied from · 3 to 33 yards,· with the average being -16. 2 yards. Other animals seen during the drive included 1 cottontail, l sp.owshoe hare, 7 jackrabbits, 1 skunk, l coyote, 1 magpie, 2 hawks, 3 blue grouse, 10 sage grouse, and 22 ducks. Conclusions: ,T he winter loss for the Green Mountain deer herd for the winter of 1957-58 was ·c alcula,ted to be·8 . 16 percent. · This figure is based on a winter population of 588, and counted loss of 35 animals which when projected gave a total loss .of 48 deer: * The big problem has always been proper ageing of dead animals. General outer appearance varies a .g reat deal, depending on predator activity, location of carcass as· to slope/ ex-posur e, etc. Usually fly larvae cases being present eliminates a carcass as being current loss. * Winter loss .on Cedar Ridge was figured in a like manner and the percentage mortality was calculated to be 10. 8 percent. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert John Harris Date:_ _ _ _Oc ___to ___ b...,er...,........_19_5_8_ Approved by: Laurence E . Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ., �October, 1958 . JOB COMPLETION REPORT __ __________________ INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ...... State of COLORADO Project No. · .W--38-R~u Work Plan No. Title of Job: _·Deer-Elk Jnvesti~ations --------------------------------Ill Job ·No, 5 Little :Hills Grazing study Period covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Abstract: _The livestock pastures were stocked during the spring and fall seasons and on:e pasture was filled with deer. No utiU:?Cati.on estimates were made on gr~sses and forbs but •· browse measurements were taken before and after grazing. Meter quadrats were charted in the exclosures of pastures 4, 5, and 6 and an analysis of pastfield d.ata was begun. New studies on browse reproduction and soil and site factors were initiated. ~ ___.- . . e . . . . Objectives: To determine degree and selectivity of forage use by deer, sheep, and cattle in enclosures .under various intensities of grazing. Techniques Used: Pasture enclosures were stocked with cattf.~-• · sheep, and deer during ;the regular grazing season. Utilization studies were confined to measurements of tagged browse plants. Meter square quadrats are established and read periodically; The area covered by plants charted is computed by use of a planin;leter and an adding machine. Findings: Stocking .of the enclosures : On May 14, 1957, 38 yearling sheep were placed in experimental pastures 1, 5, and 9~ for the spring grazing season. -· · They were :removed from pasture 1 on July 6; from pasture 5 on. July 7; and from pasture 9 on July 5 except for one which was removed on July· 7. Nine yearling heifers were placed inpastur~s 2, 3; and 8, on ,M ay 24, 1957. Two milk cows · and one calf were added to pasture 8 on July 11 to meet stocking requirements. They were removed from pastures 2 and 3 on July 21, and from pasture 8 on July 24. Fall stocking was begun October 1 when 30 ewes and I ambs were placed in pastures 1, 5, and 9. On November 11, ·these sheep were gathered into one group, a buck added, _and _·. moved to their respective pastures as one unit. They were removed from pasture 1 · · November 20th, from pasture 9 November 29, · and .f rom pasture 5 on December 4 . There were 19 ewes and 11 lambs. The cattle were placed in pastures 2 and 3 on October 2 and in pastur e 8 on October 3rd. The nine long yearlings and one milk cow we:re used. They were removed from pasture 2 . on November 23, and from pasture 8 on November 19. �- ... ~ .· ... · - 158~>, nue"to There is some discrepency in the cattle stocktng·iate. the la.ck of ieed in pasture 2 it was decided to stock it lighter than usual. .On pastures 3 and 8, the yearling heifers were originally considered to be 3/4 of a unit but later it was decided to call them a full unit. Winter stocking of deer was begun as soon as the deer arrived on their winter range but few aliinw.s could be lured into the wing traps. Trapping operations continued to be slow until late winter due_to the abs~nce of deer in this area r esulting from a heayy harvest and a rn.ild winter. 'Efforts were c'oricentrated upon filling pasture· 4, · so deer were . ·trapped individually and carried to this pasture. A deer was· sighted in pasture 3 on November 19 but never located during spring .drives. In pasture 4, a deer remained in the pasture throughout the summer and 35 more were stocked between November 5, 1957, and March 13, 1958. Removal was begun April 15 and concJuded May 15 with a drive _b y 23senior wildlife students from C. _s. U. who did not sight a .live deer. By this time, 5 had been retra,.pped and sent to Ft. Collins, 7 "!iad died, 5 had been,killed; and. 17 driven oµt; .leaving two unacQountedfor. Thes:e. were assumed to have escaped or died by May 1, 1958. • In pasture 5, a dead deer was found September 9, 1957, and a doe was removed August 20th. No deer were stocked _iuthis pasture dur.ing _the 57~58 season. In pasture 6, a doe remained in the pasture all summer and a buck was added November 30, 195_7,. Both were removed April 24, _1958. · ...... .,, . . ,, No deer were placed in pasture 7 during ·th.e 57-58 ,season..· A summary of the 1957--1958 -stocking records is found(~itnble 1. .Utilization Estunates: No -ocular µtilization estimates were taken in the .e xperiment~! pastures .for the fall .of 1956 du~ to the. heari, work l9ad .in the spring of l95,7, f lood.control work and spring farm work on both Dry Fork and Jhe newly acquired !'Square S" property received nearly all of our attention. Spring and fall utilization estimates were also dropped due. to, the lack of trained o:i;.permanen,t persot11?-el assigned to this studyi At the present tune the research -p rogram at the Station is being revised. · · -· · Browse Measurements: Following discussion withthe statistician, it was decided to ~hange species mea.s ul'ed .and to concentrate efforts on.only one species at a _time. _Serviceber:ry, Amelanchier u1:ahensis, . was chosen for fliture measurements. Since the heavy use pastures .l , 2, 4, and 10, are the only ones revealing s,i gnificant differences in utilization; measurements .were limited Measurements .of nbeforet1 . ,.· . -•-, . . to. .. these four. · -· .·. utilization were taken by Lind, Brown, G:i.eer, Madsen, and Smith during August and ~ptember, 1957. Measurements natter'' utilization were taken by McKean, Hazzard and Smith during .Apr.il, .1958. Theffeld d~tl:I. ~ere then sent toJ;he a.t atistician for compila.tio11 and .• analysis. _. ,. ' . . -· · . . ' . . , _. , , •' . • , ., . ., ' ' . . �-159- Chart Quadrats : The 30 meter square quadrats inside one acre exclosures in pastures 4, 5, and 6 were chartered by Carl Lind and George Brown during July and August. During the winter, Lind began an analysis of quadrat data gathered during the past nine years. Most of the charts were planimetered, the area computed, and all were put in order ant filed. It was decided to chart the quadrat at five year interval s instead of every three years because of the small amount of variance shown during the shorter interval. The chart quadrat system was evaluated and a report is filed at the Little Hills .Station. New Studies: Two new studies were initiated in the pastures during tm summer of 1957 by graduate students from the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit at Ft. Collins . One, titled ."Reproduction of Deer Wint er Range Browse Under Varying Kinds and Degrees of Use'' by Eldie Mustard was reported in the Colorado Quarterly Report, AprH, 1958. The other, "Effects of Site Factors on the Growth of Deer Winter Range Browse Under Varying Kinds of Degrees of Usen by Dean .Medin appears in the January, 1958 issue of the same report, Recommendation: All field data should be brought up to date, evaluated, and results reported. At this writing an evaluation of this study is being made and efforts are underway to improve the techniques used to achieve the objectives. Table L Pasture l 2 3 Summar,Y;of 1957 - 1958 Stocki~ Records. Acreage•· No . and Kind Season of Use of Animal 77. 37 15 Sheep Spring 11 Sheep Fall 16 7.25 Spring 3 Cattle 3 Cattle Fall 162.81 Spring 3 Cattle 3 Cattle Fall 4 144. 64 5 86. 42 6 99.93 No deer stocked 36 Deer Winter 8 Sheep 7 Sheep Spring Fall No deer stocked 2 Deer Winter Animal .Months 26.0 24.3 5. 8 5. 1 5.8 5. 2 Acres ,A,nimal Months 1. 53 15.4 14 .8 130.2 1. 1 (or 3, 906 deer -day) 14. 13 14. 73 2 . 99 14. 6 6.9 (or 437 deer-days) No deer stocked Yrlg. cows Spr ing 6 . 97 2 Cows 1 Calf 3 Yrlg . cows Fall 6 . 27 15. 6 1 Cow 9 156. 55 15 Sheep Spr ing 26 . 07 12 Sheep F all 25. 7 3. 01, Not e: All fawns , lambs, and yearling heifers are considered a full unit . The only exception is the calf used in pasture 8 during the spring season. 7 8 90. 67 206. 43 3 Prepared by t,Oon G. Smi th Date:____O_c..,to_b...,e...r"",..,.1_9...5...8_ Appr oved by: Laurence E . Riordan F ederal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1958 -161JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ______ ____________ ..,..... State of COLOR.ADO Project No. W-38-R-11 Work Plan No. _______________ _____________ ____ Title of Job: Dentitio~ and Age.-Weight Correlation V Deer-Elk Investigations ......_ ; Job No. 1 ......, Period covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Field work done between November 21, 1957 and March 29, 1958. Abstract: A total of 15 deer were weighed at the Little Hills Station during the 1957-58 season. Objectives:To determine weight groups by age classes of individual deer herds. Techniques Used: Deer from the trap were placed in plywood weigh boxes and weighed on platform scales. Findings: Since trapping operations during the winter of 1957-58 were confined to the Little Hills area, weights were obtained from the White River herd alone. Only 15 deer were weighed which does not provide enough samples for conclusive average weight figures. Therefore, individual weights are listed under table 1 for each age class. These should be added to previous samples. One buck fawn weighed only 37 pounds, and was extremely small, weak, and anemic looking. Table L Weights by Age Classes of Deer Weighed During 1957-58. Mature Does Yea:t,'l:ing Bucks Doe Fawns 143 pounds 120 pounds 64 pounds 145 pounds 124 pounds 143 pounds 152 pounds 162 pounds 157 pounds 140 pounds 151 pounds Average: 149. l pounds · Buck Fawns 60 pounds 67 pounds 37 pounds 60 pounds Recommendations: The type of scale should be changed from platform to splt'ing. The platform type s;:ale is easy to clog with snow and must be setting level to function properly. The large size platform is more accurate, but is bulky. Efforts should be made for more samples and for more returns if we are to continue this job. Prepared by: Don Smith Approved by: Laurence E . Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date: October, 1958 _______.....______ ��October, 1958 -163- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS --------------- State of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-11 Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. _ _ _6_ _ _ _ _ _ _""'-_D_a_m_ag.......,e_ · _Stu ___d_i_e_s_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Job No. _ _ _ _ _ _7_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ Stu_4x_o_f_M_o_n_e_ta_r..,y_V_a_lu_e_o_f_F_rw._·t_T_re_e_s_ _ __ Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Objectives: To find the total value of fruit trees as to the various species, age classes, and varieties. Procedure: Fruit growers in the orchard areas near Paonia and Cedaredge were interviewed in order to ascertain their costs to raise young fruit trees to full production and as to the expected life of any variety of tree. The actual cost of the young trees before they are put into the ground can be determined by interviewing nursery owners and reading catalogues from nursery businesses. Results: · All of the interviews are not complete at this time because of the furit harvest of peaches, apricots and apples, The fruit growers are much too busy in the late summer and early fall to spend much time talking about their operations. Several interviews are already completed, but it is the feeling of the author that more growers should be contact-ed before a complete report is written up. A special assignment on big game check station will not allow the author time to complete the interviews before the middle of November, so it seems best to make this a negative report until the interviews can be completed. Recommendations: A completed report on this job will be handed in for the next segment to finish up this job. It is not anticipated that more than five (5) days will be needed to complete this job. Prepared by: Ra;x:mond J. Boyd Date:_ _ _ _Oc_,t_o_he_r_..,___ 19_5_8_ __ _ _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Division ��October, 1958 -,165-,- JOB COMPLETION REPORT 1NVES1'IGATION S I>:ROJEC TS --------------- State of COLORADO Project No. W-38-R-11 ; Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. ___7.;____________E_x,..p_e_r_i_m_e_n_t_a_l_B_ig_G_a_m_e_-_R_ang_..._e_R_e__ ve_.g.._a_t_i_on ___ Job No. 3 Experimental Production of Bowse Seedlings Period Covered: May 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958. Objectives: To determine methods of soil preparation and irrigation practices that will produce the maximum amount of browse seedlings in one growing season. These seedlings to be planted on the cotntour furrows as one-year-old seedlings. Procedure: Seeds of skunkbush (Rims trilobata) and Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolia} were stratified in moist peat moss at the Henderson Fish Hatchery near Denver, and planted at Billy Creek when the prescribed period of cold, moist storage was completed. Seeds of sil verberry {Eleagnus comutata) were soaked in water for 12 hours before they were planted at Billy Creek. No special treatment of the seeds was given Sand buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides) or saltbush (Atriplex canescens). These seeds were planted in rows 48 inches apart at the nursery site located at the Billy Creek Game Management area. The;,. nursery site was plowed in the fall of 1956 and harrowed and floated in the spring of 1957 just before planting the browse species, Since it was not possible to obtain an overhead sprinkler system, small ditches were plowed on each side of the rows of seeds to be used for irrigation water. Commereial fertilizer, ammonium nitrate, was applied just before the final floating of the nursery area'. Two hundred pounds of the fertilizer was applied per acre of nursery. The seeds were drilled one inch deep into the s.oil and were spaced, as nearly as the drill could accomplish it, 1/4 inch apart. 'The seeds were irrigated immediately after planting. Periodically throughout the summer the nursery area was irrigated and weeded. Results: For some unknown reason, very slow growth was exhibited by all species. Virtually no germination was observed in sand buckthorn or silverberry. Good germination was obtained in seeds of Russian olive and ksunk:bush. Saltbush exhibited only.fair getm.inatfoll... �-1.E.S'Because of the slow growth of the seedlings, it was decided to cancel the fall digging of the· seedlings and to incorporate the crop of browse plants into job number 2 of this work plan, and-leave them to grow and test useage and palatability by deer. Some incijcations of good germination from seed that was planted directly into the bottom of the contour furrows in the Gunn ison area .m ay completely eliminate .this. browse growing procedure in the future. -·· Prepared by: .~ymond J . 'Boyd Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date:_ ~___o_c_t o_b_e_r_.7_19.,...5_8_ _ _ __ � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/358f764205defd3c01dc39654740e7d9.pdf c38ec0287d20bc760f749692e4092b89 PDF Text Text / _:_ -- -- 3' !":i-r . . . January. 1959 -1- -.---c-,-,----,-,-~--:__-j -. ' ': _ ...~'" r l' ;':. JOB COMPLETION REPOR,!, '""" "!.' ,\': .. i-. <, :, ~.' ;';~'~:" .• -, "'1"..- .•:~:"Stateof ":: .'COLORADO' r:;;., -::, ;. ",'. ~. ,r..: .:. . .•. ' . wil~.~~k~)'; ~~vel~~~~t . Project No.:·,W-:93;':'D:;,:2., . _'}. - ::... Work Plan __ "; .~~~~ /:~ -=.1 ,,",' - "'::~.., ~---:!.J~ob~N;:;;o;.;.·~-..:4~---~---::--~':" . ;-~ ..~~.'< (.,.Period' Covered: . July 1. '1957 to June 30,' 1958~. . ' >:,:.,' .:: <j~;. . .:. . " . .·:.~.·Abstract: Atotal of.200 crops f~om the-early fall perfodfrom the .years 1949 .,' through 1956cwas examined and percent volume and percent frequency of occurrence . -""< calculated, ' A total of 176 different food Items.was found arid ·:identifiedin these , '. 200 crops.. Important: items: of,food in' order ofdecr'easfng importance are grass-hoppers. cultivated oats, acorns: grass leav.~§.I~J)a::rI.~Y:c~ild buckwheat seeds, •. '" dandelton.leaves, dandeliObs'eed heads, bristie'gra-s$.sp~elets, .wtld sunflower -~. , seeds, kinnikinnick fruit, sand dropseed seeds, sleepy grass seeds, clover -----,---~---:-':-:--.-:-~::]eaves;:-timothy spikelets; wild, oats, cotii;Ai1v~t' bl~esten:f~spikelets, snowbenry .,' . .: fruit. cultivated 'wheat, tall dropseed seeds, .false flax seed pods, 'panic grass •. spfkeletszcblueg rasa spikelets, giant. ragweed-seeds.: prickly: lettuce seed heads, harry dropseed seeds,. alfalfa leaves, blue gramia spikeletsj- wild. rose fruit, Rocky Mountain,bee plant seeds; and wild, onion-bulbs •. The'gra,ss family was , .. ,-_ the largest single family represented making up 4:9' p~rcent .of the'.total volume. " Th,irty-four differentspecies '6f grasses' were represented. . I •.. _,- '. • '.' " . ,..... One gizzard and 540 dropping samples 'W81'eexamined from the winter pezlod, .The ten most important items of food found.weregrass leaves," Ponderosa pine .. nuts'; cultivated oats, tnsects;. sand drop seed spikeleta; ~Ol'os'green Ieaves.. .acoms, .'sleepy grass seeds, wildl buckwheat seeds, and staghorn cactus fruit, During the-earlter part of the winter peri6d~·'.it was found that the birds depended upon pine nuts; cultivated oats, insects,' grass seeds.-' acorns,' ,cactus frutt, . . ...and the pe rststent fruits of hawthorne, snowbezry, .and wild lrOses. After the " "g.r;asses and broadtype leaves began greening, up in mtd-February each year the , birds started eating the green leaves and these items became prominent in their diet, ., ) <_;:~. ,-( ._::.;:L';;.':,"-' . One crop .and·6~0 dropping samples from the sprfngpeziod were' .examined •.. .,:,Tile ten most important food items recorded-from the seztes ~f droppings weI"e-, .. ...:;;. g~as~ leaves, forbs g:r:eenleaves, insects, -dandelton flowers, ,staghorn cactus . ,~..:·;:r:r;uit,gi~p.tragweed seeds, cultivatedoats, ~wildros~fruit( Ponderosa pine nuts,': ..' ;".and kin~innickfruit. ' .,.' ' .. .. " " '. · _..... . ",', ..... . ..' v". J, • .. \ A total of 325 dropping samples from the summer period was examined. The ten most important food items found were insects" grass leaves, forbs green leaves, dandelion seed heads, bluegrass Bpikelets~' acorns, wild buckwheat seeds, .dandelion flowers, timothy spikelets, and bristle grass spikelets. ~-:: ': . .' �-2Introduction A knowledge of the food requirements is essential for effective management of any game species. Martin, 1949, stated that food studies reveal the vital dependence of particular kinds of wildlife upon certain plants and animals in theiz environment and provides factual data on the beneficial or obnoxious roles of various species in relation to man and his crops. Once the foods upon which wild animals subsist are known, the environment can be altered more intelli~ntly to control wildiife populations. ReView of Literature Literature concerning the food habits of Merrtara's wild turkey is far from complete. Judd, 1905, was perhaps the first to write about the food habits of the wild turkey. He stated the Biological Survey had examined sixteen stomachs and crops of wild turkeys collected in February, March, July. September, .November, and December. Ofthese sixteen crops, apparently only one was taken within the natural range of.M_ • ..K:.. merriami. This was one taken in the Manzano Mountains of New Mexico in November and contained half a pint of the fruiting panicles of Muhlenbergia sp; , grass blades, seeds of cheat, pinon nuts, and seeds of other pines. .i ,;: .. ,,' ;, !~.'! • .:'; !'t ~J' :':1' ,'; .,': : " Ligon, 1946, reported on the contents of fifteen Mezrtarn!s turkey C:l'OpS, the majority of which were taken in October and November. He stated II the analyses indicate that grasses including both green blades and fruits as well as the dry seeds constitute a major proportion of the food, parttcularly in the fall and e~·1:v winter. The combination of grass products and graLSSQOppersin season may be said to comprise the mCBtdependable diet under all conditions. II Scope'of the:Sfudy '. The present study of the food habits of Merriam's wild turkey in southeastern Colorado through crop and dropping analyses was started during the winter of 1948-49. A total of 201 crops and 1 gizzard collected from successful wild turkey hunters, road kills, and predator kills have been utilized. In . addition, 1545 droppings have been analyzed to determine food preferences during those periods of the year in which czops we:r.enot secured. The laboratory analysis of all samples was done by the author. ,.. ," . : For convenience, this food habits study is divided into the fall, winter, spring, and summer periods. The fall food habits have been the most thoroughly investigated with a total of 200 crops being analyzed, A total of 540 dropping samples and one gtazaxd collected duzing the winter period has been analyzed. A total of 6.80 dr0?pttg samples and cae crop collected durtng tee sprtng pemod was analyzed. A total of 325 dropping samples collected during the summes period was analyzed. !' .. .1.;- �-3Procedures Crop Analyses -- Volumetric Method The series of crops collected during the first wild turkey season in Later crops were air dried and were found to be much easier to work with than those preserved in 1heformalin solution. 1949 were preserved in a formalin solution. The contents of 'the' crops w~re 'emptied into metal pans and tbe different items of food were separated into"separate paper cups by the use of forceps. The different food items were then air dried after wh ich the volume of each food item was measured using four different stzedt'shell" vials. These vials were used in preference to graduated cylinders because the former possess flat bottoms, making direct volume measurements relatively easy. Each of the four vials was of a different size in diameter and each was graduated so that they were interchangeable. Thus, a certain volume of water or other substance would measure the same amount whether placed in the largest or smallest vial. The largest vial was used for acorns and other large food items while the smaller vials . were' used for the small grass seeds and similar items. In all cases, the amount of air space between food particles was estimated and the measurement reading corrected. .' The volumetric reading for each separate food item in each crop was then ·'·c6il'~erted·into-a percentage of'the 'entire volume' of the crop, Volumetric readings for gravel and other non-food items were recorded separate from the food items. The data for the series of crops were then compiled securing a percent volume and a percent frequency of occu.rence for each different food item. Dropping Analyses The individual droppings from each sezies were first sorted and approximately one-half inch of material from each was selected for the anlyses. The small piece of dropping material was crushed and placed under a nine power stereoscopic microscope. A record was made of each food item which could be recognized through the microscope. Unidentified food fragments were separated with forceps, identified by symbol and placed in paper 'cups for later identification. The percent frequency of occurrence was then calculated for each item of f .ood which could be identified . .-; . , ;. '; �-4Identification of Food Items A rather complete food sample collection was maintained during the course of study and used frequently for comparative material to identify the different items of food. This collection consisted of small bottles of identified food items and a pressed plant collection. Plant;and insect specialists were consulted when necessary during the study in order to identifY.unknown items. .. ~.. ~:~ '~:.:~ The Manual.of Plants of Colorado by Dr. H. D~ Harrington was used as the main references for scientifjc names of plants, botanical keys, terms, . . etc . ". The Insect -GUid~:'by'Dr~'Ra.lph B;,-; Swain!was used as the main reference for the identification oi'insects. smentifie.names of Insect families, etc. ~.. Results of Study : ... ~ ~, , .' The most commonly used method of presenting food habits data is by percentage volume. To calculate percentage volume, ,the volume of each food item is recorded for each crop after which the total percentages are divided by the number: of crops examined to give a percentage number. A second c~~o~y used method of pre~enti~~ food habits data is percentage fr.~qUEmcy 'of occurrence. This information is needed to determine distribution, acceptability, and possibly availability of a food item. . ...• i , Bl(ck, 1952, considered percentage volume and percentage frequency of occurrence as of.equal importance and "stated bpt~ factors are necessary to an understanding of a food's importance. . In the analyses of crops, the writer has worked ,. up the food habits data using these two methods -- percentage volume and percentage frequency of occurrence. lJ:l,. the analyses of dropping samples, only percentage frequency of occur.r~nc.ehas been used since measurements of the volume of the remains of food items inthe droppings denotgive a true picture of volumes eaten. Some . items are digested more completely than others and it is almost impossible to measure acc'llrat~ly the volumes. of items. Irom dropping samples. Beck, 1952, suggested specific gravity of the different food items be considered in food habits studies in order to give a more complete picture . .. Mart~J,l, 1949, however. does not mention this method being used by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife' Service. The laboratory analyses of food habits samples by the writer has b-eendone according to procedures recommended by Charles C. Sperry, formerly of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife· Service Food Habits Research Laboratory iIi Denver. ' '!. " . .... .',." .. '. . ',:. . ..;. ~.: . ' . , .:.: ..... .H; " .' !. ~ ;' ~.: . �-5Table 1. Merriam's Period of Year Spring Turkey Food studies Crop Collections --Eastern Type Range Mountain Date 4/24/50 Number of Samples 1 Slope* Total 1 Fall Mountain 9/28/50-10/2/50 9/28/50-10/2/50 9/27/51-10/1/51 10/2/53-10/5/53 10/1/54-10/3/54 10/1/55-10/4/55 21 31 33 29 12 2 Mesa 9/25/52-9/28/52 10/2/53-10/5/53 10/1/54-10/3/54 10/1/55-10/4/55 18 3 40 10 River Canyon 10/1/54-10-3-54 1 128 71 * All Fall crops collected by Departmental field personnel from successful wild turkey hunters during open seasons. Spring crop collected by Bryan Denton from .predato r kill. Fall Period . ~-', "'-, The early fall food habits of the wild turkey in southeastern Colorado has been the most thoroughly explored of the different seasons. A total of 200 crops collected by Departmental field men from successful turkey hunters from 1949 through 1956 has been examined by the writer. Table 3 lists completely all items found in series of 200 crops with percentage volume and percentage frequency of occurrence calculated for each of the different food items and families of food items . . . .. �-6Grasshoppers, comprising 16 percent of the total volume and found in 55 percent of the crops, were the leading item of food during the period. Cultivated oats, compr-ising ,1,6, percent <?~the total volume and found,in:-43percent of the crops, .waa , second, Other major items of food during the early fall period were as follows: acorns, comprising 8 percent of the total volume and found in 26 percent of the crops; green grass leaves and cultivated barley, each comprising 6 percent of the total volume and found in 88 percent and 41 percent of the crops respectively; wild buckwheat-seeds and dandelion leaves, each comprising 4 percent of the total volume and found in 43 percent and 35 percent of the crops respectively; dandelion seed heads, bristle grass spikelets, wild sunflower seeds, and kinnikinnick fruit each comprising 3 percent of the total volume and found in 26 percent, 23 percent, 22 percent and 15 percent of the crops respectively; sand dropseeds seeds, sleepy grass seeds, clover leaves, timothy spikelets, wild oats, corn, andstlver bluestem spikelets each comprising 2 percent of the total volume and found in 48 percent, 32 percent, 31 percent, 23 percent, 15 percent, 5,percent and 3 percent cf the crops respectively; snowberry, fruit, cultivated wheat, tall dropseed seeds, false flax seed pods, panic grass spikelets, bluegrass spikelets, giant ragweed seeds, prickly lettuce seed heads, hairy dropseed seeds, alfalfa leaves, blue grama spikelets, wildrose fruit, Rocky Mountain bee.plant seeds.oandwtld onion bulbs' each comprtsfng' " 1 percent of the total volume and found in 16 percent, 15 percent, ,10 percent, 8 percent, 7 percent, six percent, 6 percent, 6 percent, 6 percent, 5 percent, 4 percent, 4 percent, 3 percent and 3 percent of the crops respectively. Table 4 lists the percentage volume of the different families of food items. The grass family (Gramineae) comprtstng 49 percent, of the total !;" " volume,was by far the largest 'family represented with both the seed heads and leaves .being eaten. Thirty-four differentg rass species are represented. Other families of food items represented with'percentage volumes are grasshoppers (Acrididae) - 16 percent, composite (Compositae) - 12 percent, beech (Fagaceae) - 8 percent, buckwheat (Polygonaceae) - 4 percent, .heath ' (Ericaceae)- 3 percent; pea',Leg'ilminosae) - thr~e percent, capper ',' ..: (Capparidaceae) - 1 percent, honeysuckle (Captifoliaceae) ,~,l percent, mustard (Cruciferae_):- 1 percent, lily (LHiacea_e)- 1 percent, and rose (Rosacea) 1 percent. ~, ' Winter Period One gizzard and 540 dropping samples were analyzed during the study period. Table 5 shows the results of the gizzard contents analysis. This gizzard was from a road kill along South Veta Creek and was almost completely filled with the fruit of wild roses and grit. �~7Table.6 lists completely the important foods found in the series of 540 droppings based upon frequency of occurrence calculations. A total of 36 different food items was tdentifted; The ten most important foods found were grass leaves (66.5%), Ponderosa pine nuts (36.5 percent), cultivated oats (32.2 percent), miscellaneous insects (32•.0 percent) sand dropseed spikelets (16.7 percent), forbs green leafage (13.9 percent), acorns (12.6 percent), sleepy grass seeds (11.1 percent), wild buckwheat seeds (9.8 percent), and staghorn cactus fruit (9.4 percent). Green grass leaves began showing up in large amounts in the dropping samples approximately in mid-February each year. Once the birds started eating the green grass leaves, this formed the main single item of food. During the earlier part of the winter period the birds depended more upon pine nuts, cultivated oats, Insects, grass seeds, acorns, cactus f'ruit, and the persistent fruits of hawthorne, snowberry, and wild rose. Spring Period . , .. ~ One crop and a total of 680 separate droppings were examined during the study period. Table 7 shows the contents of the crop examined. This crop was from a predator kill in the Cucharas River area. Green grass leaves, kinnikinnick fruit, cultivated barley, dandelion seed heads and leaves, wild oats, clover leaves, and insects made up most of the crop contents. Table 8 lists completely the foods found in the series of 680 droppings based upon frequency of occurrence calculations. The ten most important foods found were grass leaves (90.7 percent), forbs green leafage (61. 5 percent), insects (29.7 percent), dandelion flowers (23.4 percent), staghorn cactus fruit (8.7 percentj gtant; ragweed seeds (7.5 percent), c.ultivated oats (7.5 percent), wild rose fruit (7.4 percent), Ponderosa pine nuts (7.4 percent), and kinnikinnick fruit (5.6 percent). A total of 34 different food items was identified. SUmmer Period The summer period is the least crttical of the four seasons of year for the Wildturkey in· southeastern Colorado since foods are generally plentiful. A total of 325 separate droppings from this period was examined. Table 9 lists completely the foods found in the series of 325 droppings based upon frequency of occurrence calculations. A total of 27 different food items was identified.· The ten most important foods found were insects (67. 1 percent) grass leaves (56.3 percent), forbs green leafage (39.7 percent), dandelion seed heads (35.4 percent), bluegrass spikelets (34.•5 percent), acorns (33.2 percent), wild buckwheat seeds (19.7 percent), dandelion flowers (17.8 percent), timothy spike lets (12.9 percent), and bristle grass spikelets (10.2 percent). . �-9.. .: "<i~ .::." -; .._:: ... , Table 2. Merriam's Tn rkey Food Studies Dropping'Collections --E-asternl-Slope*• .", ::. ._ . Number of Period of year Type of Range Date Area Samples Total _-. -'~ Winter Mountain 1/15/57 S. Hardscrabble Cr. 10 . 1/16/57 .Mavricio Canyon 10 1/28/5t7 Mavricio Canyon 10 2/19/57 Mavricio Canyon 20 2/19/57 Santa Clara Cr. 50 2/20/57 Sarcillo Canyon' 10 .. ~....' . - ...• 2/27/57 Sarcillo Canyon 50 -:::. 3/2/57. Sarcillo Canyon 40 . 3/12/57 .Sarcfllo Canyon 10 3/12/57 Mavricio Canyon 20 3/13/57 Santa Clara Cr. 70 Mesa 2/25/57 Sugarite Canyon 20 2/16/57 Frisco Canyon 80 " River Canyon 12/28/55Alahandra Canyon' 10 2/20/57 Pearly Canyon 20 2/25/57 Pearly Canyon 40 "3/7/57 Pearly-Canyon "·,30 Win.57 Pinon Ridge ;.;:4~0 _ . ", . 540 Spring Mountain Spr.51 Saruche Canyon 10 10 5/3/55 Bear Cr. (LaVeta) 10 5/9/55 Bear Cr. (Salida) 5/10/55 Spring Cr. (Howard) 10 . ;_ .•~ : 10 5/16/56 Bear Cr. (Salida) ... 5/16/56 Spring Cr. (Howard) 10 ~ ~~-~. ..-,:. T ',: '. 3/28/57 Del Aqua Canyon. 30. .•... 4/10/57 Sarcillo Canyon 10 4/11/57· N. Trujillo Cr. 40 ~. -. 4/13/57 N. Trujillo Cr. 40 40 5/17/57 Mavricio Canyon 5/27/57 North Fork 100 Mesa 5/13/55 .Mesa deMaya. 10 5/23/57 Frisco Canyon 140 50 Mesa.de Maya . ,6/W/5l River Canyon 040. .4/6/57 .Pear'ly .Canyon . 4/16/57 Alahandra Canyon 120 680 ,-_ Summer Mountain Bear Cr. (TJ;inidad) .)~., 6/26/57. Sarcillo Canyon & .8/27 /57·:N. Trujillo. Cr. ._ 25 .: ~ ...._ 9!22!51'_'Sarcillo Canyon .15 Mesa. _-.. 8/3p/S6 Fri~co Canyon 10. . 6/27/57. 8ugarite C?nyon(Upper)50, 6/27/5,7 8ugarite Canyon(Lower)50 9/3/57.. Frisco Canyon .. 60 '.'. 9/7/57 Mesa Maya 100 .' .. . . . . . 3~ *Field collections made by Donald M. Hoffmanexcept for 10 samples collected in Saruche Canyon (Spring '51) by Chester M. Scott. . . ~.:' ;:) ,,; . . ; I,. -';_ ": 'r " -; ..: ·•.. i . .~ , ~' . . 6i26/5S ",-,' t c- .( de ~~--------------- .' �..•. ~\''Ii', " .. . - ..~:.- -9Table 3. Merriam's Turkey Food Studies--Compiled Data-Basis 200 crops*. All Crops from early Fall Periods - 1949through 1956. Volumetric Analysis by Donald M. Hoffman %Freq. of Food Items of Plant Matter (84%) Occur. %Vol. Family ----Species ',"',' . ; ,', . Amaranthaceae -- Amaranth Family (Trace) Amaranthus sp. trace 5 Redroot pigweed seeds Anacardiaceae--Sumac Family (Trace) Rhus radicans 1 ' trace Poison ivy fruit Rhus trilobata 1 trace Skunkberry fruit 1 trace Skunkberry leaves Boraginaceae -- Borage Family (Trace) Cynoglossum officinalis trace 1 Houndstongue dogbur seeds Lappula sp, trace 2 Sticks.eed seeds .trace 10 Lithospermum sp, Puccoon seeds Onosmodium sp. trace 1 False gromwell seeds Cactaceae--Cactus Family (Trace) Mamillaria vivipara trace 3 Ball cactus seeds Opuntia arborescenali trace 2 Staghorn cactus seeds Opuntia sp. trace 3 Prickly pear cactus seeds and pods Capparidaceae --Capper Family (1%) Cleome serrulata 1 3 Rocky Mountain bee plant seeds Caprifoliaceae --Honeysuckle family (1%) Symphoricarpos sp.l 16 1 Snowberry fruit trace 7 Snowberry leaves, Catyophyllaceae -:...Pin1sFamilYi(Trace) Silene sp, trace 2: Catchfly seed pods Chenopodiaceae -- Goosefoot Family (Trace) , Chenopodium album . Lambsquarters seeds trace 3. *All crops from eastern slope wild turkey ranges - includes 128 crops from mountain type ranges, 71 crops from mesa type ranges, and 1 crop from canyon type ranges. • I, '.',:." ;.,"5 ", .i. ~ .. ' _ z..·~ �.e., ~- . ..,',1. -10- -,% Freq. Table .3 -Continued. %Vol. Compositae -- Composite ;F'~~i'l}r(1i%) ,'!, , •. "." Ambrosia trifida Giant ragweed seeds '.'-, .... Aster sp. Aster leaves Aster seed heads '~ ... ..... Bidens sp. Spanish needle seed heads ...-.:_ Chrysopsis SP4 Golden aster seed heads Carduus sp. Thistle seeds Cirsium sp. . Thistle seeds Erigeron sp. 'r; . Daisy seeds Helianthus sp, . Wild sunflower seeds Lactuca scariola True pric~'y lettuce seed heads Ratibida columnifera Coneflower seeds Rudbeckia sp. , Blackeyed susan seed heads Taraxacum officinale Dandelion leaves Dandelion seed heads '-;"':" Tragopogon sp. Wild salsify seeds Verbesma. encelioides Goldweedseeds Unidentified composite seed heads and flowers' Cruciferae --Mustard Family (1%) Camelina sp. False flax seed pods Capsella bursa - pastoris Shepherd'~ purse seed pods Cyperaceae--Sedge Family (Trace) Eriophorum sp, Cottongrass seeds ,'.".Ericaceae,,:,,:-H~ath Family (3%) -- Arctostaphylos uva-l!!:!L . Kinnikinnick fruit Kinnikinnick leaves .': .He ath leave~., . . Euphorbiaceae--Spurge 'Family (Trace) Euphorbia sp. Spurge seed pods : 'I' " of Occur. : ; I . -, ... 1 6 '.:' trace trace 2 trace" .1· " trace :-';.;::_5 . : trace 1 trace 1 trace. . 1 ".i'_! 3 22 1 6 trace 1 trace 3 4 3 . ':35 26 trace 4 trace trace, 3 1 8. trace 4 trace 1 ,$., . , ,. trace 15 trace 1 trace z 1 3 �~ ... ,~ Al") ~ .. ".;~ ;.~ .) .._ -11- Table 3--Continued . %Vol. %Freq. of Occur. 8 26 trace 3 trace 1 trace 3 trace .5 2 3 2 15 16 43 1 5 trace 1 1 4 trace 1 trace 1 trace 10 trace 1 trace 1 trace 1 trace 4 trace 4 trace 1 trace 1 .: ':., ."1"; ,I " r / Fragaceae--Beech Family (8%) Quercus sp.' , Scrub oak acorns Gerantaceae-c-Ge'ranimum Family (Trace) Geranium sp~ Geranium leaves Gramineae--Grass Family (49%) Agropyron smithii Western wheatgrass seeds Agropyron sp. Wheatgrass spikelets Agrostts sp, Bentgras s spikelets Andropogon saccharoides Silver bluestem seed heads Avena fatua Wild oats Avena sativa Cultivated oats Blepharoneuron tricholepis Hairy dropseed spikelets Bouteloua curtipendula Side-oats gram a seeds Bouteloua gracilis Blue grama spikelets Bromus carinatus Mountain bromegrass seeds Bromus inermis Smooth bromegrass seeds Bromus margmatus Margined bromegrass seeds Bromus tectorum Cheatgrass seeds Calamovilfa sp. Sandreed spikelets Echinochloa sp, Barnyard grass Elymus 'macounit Macoun wildrye seeds Elymus sp. Wfldrye seeds Eragrostis cilianensis Lovegrass spikelets Eragrostis sp. Lovegrass spikelets ., �-1d - ...•.•.~ - '- -12Table 3.--Continued. .v- Festuca elatior Meadowfescue spikelets Festuca sp. Fescue spikelets Hordeum vulgare Barley Muhlenbergia sp, Muhly grass spikelets Panicum sp. Panic grass spike lets Phleum Eratense Timothy spikelets Poa sp, \ Bluegrass spikelets Secale cereale Cultivated rye Setaria sp~ ,., Bristlegrass spikelets Sporobolus asper Tall dropseed seeds Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand dropseed seeds Sporobolus neglectus . Puffsheath dropseed seeds Stipa robusta Sleepy grass seeds Triticum aestivum Wheat Zea~ Corn Grass leaves Unidentified grass spikelets Leguminosae --Pea Family (3%> _- ... , . '; c r.: : ,.-'.:.-, %Vol. %Freq. of Occur. trace 6 trace 1 6 41 . trace 7 1 7 2· 23 1 6 trace 2 3 23 1 .< 10 2 48 trace 1 " .. -" .':..;,.,.-::, . - .- .... " " ., .', ':" ':.. rr ~~, ,,~"'-;:.,'~ .. . ..•.... - ,.' _ .. ,_. - .. 2 32 1 15 2 6 trace 5 88 3 trace 1 1 5 .2 Lupinus sp, Lupine seeds Medlcago sativa Alfalfa leaves Alfalfa seed pods Melilotus sp. Sweet clover leaves Sweet clover seeds ' Pisum sp. Cultivated pea seeds ~~ ... ' trace _w.· trace trace 1 .-. 1 .... trace . 1 ,. �-1 «: '.' .. ::,.~-~ .' -1.3- ,',- Table -J-Continued . .. Psoralea sp. Scurf pea seed pods Robinia neo-mexicana New Mexican locust seeds .:--: ... Thermopsis sp. Golden banner leaves Trifolium sp, Clover leaves Clover seeds Vicia sp. Vetch leaves Legume leaf portions Pea seeds (cultivated variety) Liliaceae- ,--Lily Family (1 percent) Allium sp. Wild onion bulbs Malaceae--Apple Family (Trace) Crataegus sp. Hawthorne fruit and seeds Melanthaceae --Bunchflower Family (Trace) Melanthium virginicum Bunch flower seeds Plantaginaceae-- Plantain Family (Trace) Plantago sp, Plantain leaves Pinaceae--Pine Family (Trace) Abies concolor White fir needle fragments Juniperus scopulorum Rocky Mountain juniper leaves Pinus edulis Nut pine needles Pinus ponderosa Ponderosa pine needles Ponderosa pine nuts . ~Pinus sp. ,., Pine needle fragments Polygonaceae --Buckwheat Family (4%) ' :': Polygonum sp. Bindweed leaves . Wild buckwheat seeds Rumex sp. Dock seeds Ranunculaceae--Buttercup Family (Trace) Clematis sp. Clematis leaves %Vol. %Freq. of Occur. trace 1 trace 8 trace 1 2 trace 31 trace 14 trace 3 1 1 3 3 trace 2 trace 1 trace 1 trace 1 trace 2 trace 1 trace trace 2 trace 4 trace 4 4 43 trace 1 trace 2 ; ," , - ,.' , ' , ~,. 0'" ... , .' ' 2 .. r 1 1 '; �-14Table 3..• --Continued. Thalictrum sp. Meadow rue leaves ROsaceae-Rose Family (1 percent) Fr~aria sp. Wild ~~ strawberry leaves Wild strawberry fruit Prunus virginiana Chokecherry fruit Rosa sp, Rose leaves Rose fruit and seeds Salicaceae--Willow Family (Trace) Salix sp. Willow leaves Saxifragaceae--Saxifrage Family (Trace) Ribes sp , . Wild currant leaves Wild currant fruit Solanaceae--Potato Family (Trace) Physalis sp. Ground cherry fruit Solanum.ap.. Nightshade leaves Sparganiaceae --Burreed Family (Trace) Spargani~; sp. Burreed seeds Violaceae-- Violet Family (Trace) Viola sp. " Violet seed pods Umbelliferae--Parsnip Family (Trace) Angelica sp, Angelica 'Seeds Shim circutaefoIium Water parsnip seeds Plant galls(insect) Unidentified broadleaf fragments Unidentified flowe.r portions Unidentified fruit. \ Unidentified rootlets Unidentified seeds. ': Unidentified woody stem fragments \. %Vol. %Freq. of Occur. trace 1 trace trace 1 trace 2 1, . ...... trace 1 1 4 trace 1 trace trace 1 5 trace 1 -- -'_ , trace -1 trace f: trace 2-' . trace , .•.. 3 trace, 1 trace .. -4-: trace 19 trace 2 trace 2:"·" trace 2 2; ""',,.-.. trace trace 11 r- " ' "/ : ' ..:._ .~.. , .~ .' �1Y;1' i, -15Table 3--continued. %Vol. %Freq. ..of. Occur. 16 55 trace 4 :trace 19 Animal Matter (16 percent) : Ac rIdidae Short-horned grasshoppers Asilidae Robber flies Carabidae Ground beetles Cerambycidae Long-horned beetles Chrysom~l}dae Leaf and flea be etle adults Leaf and flea beetle larvae Cicadellid8.e Leafhoppers Cicindelidae Tige:r beetles Coccinell?j;:!~ Lady beetles Coreidae Box-elder and squash bugs Curculionidae Snout beetles Cydnidae Common negro bug Elatertdae Click beetles . trace .'- '. 2 trace trace 14 1 trace 11 trace. 3 trace 10 trace 13 trace 7 trace - J 'trace 1 trace 15 trace '1 trace 5 ..trace 3 trace trace 11 1 Fo rmicidae Ants Fulgorfdae Planth,oppers Gryllidae Crfckets .. , Hydrophil idae Hydrophilrd beetles Ichneumonidae Ichneumon wasps Ichneumon larvae Lampyridae Common black lampyrid Lycosidae Wolf spiders Lygaetdae Chinch bugs Mantidae , .. trace 1 tzace ..· . 1 trace '2 Mantids trace 3 Membracidae Treehoppers trace 16 '- �A ,;{.>:, -:~.. !.• ~ -16- Table 3'. -":Coritinued. Miridae Miridae Plant bugs Pentatomidae Shield and stink bugs Phalangidae Daddy long legs sp.iders Reduviidae Assasstn bugs,.... Sarco:ehagidae Scarcophagid larva Scarabaeidae Scarab and Nay bettles Scarab' Iarvae-. Silphidae Carrion beetles Staphx:linidae Rove beetles Tabanidae Horsefly larvae Tenebrionidae Darkling beetles Tettigoniidae Mormon crickets %Vol. %Freq. of Occur. trace 3 trace 6 trace 6 trace 1 trace 1 trace trace 8 2 -._:: trace 3 trace 1 trace 1 trace 13 ~ trace 5 trace 1:.. trace trace trace 1 1 Vespidae Hornets Coleoptera (order) Beetle adults Beetle cocoons Bettle larvae Diptera (order) Fly adults: Fly cocoons Fly eggs' '. Fly larvae Hemiptera (order) Bug fragments Hymenoptera (order) Hymenopter wasps Lepidoptera (order) .,Moth adults Moth caterpillars Moth cocoons Moth pupae 1· trace trace trace trace 12 . 1 2 - .' trace :3 trace 4 trace trace ' trace' trace 8 .: .... 3 6 1 1 ;. �-17- % Freq. % Vol. Table 3-continued. of Occur. Arachnida (Class) Spiders Chilopoda (Class) Centipedes Diplopoda (class) .' Millipedes Gastropoda (class) Land and water snails Oligochaeta (class) Earthworms Unidentified insects fragments Unidentified insect larvae Non Food Items Bone: fragments Glass fragments Gravel and fine sand :,: .. trace 11 trace 2 .. trace '8 trace 13 . trace trace trace , 1 4 :.2 . % of Gross Volume trace trace 4 1 1 1 95 76 ". , . -.5 c· v , �>":0···· -18Table 4. Merriam's Turkey Food -Studies. Families of Food Items Representing One or More Percent Volume ,',. in 200 Eastern Slope Crops From Early Fall Period 1949-1956. %Volume 49 Plants Foods (84%) Grass (Gramineae) 12 8 Composite (Composltae) Beech (Fagaceae) Buckwhe-;t·(Polygonaceae) Heath (Ericaceae) Pea '(Legu!Ilinosae) Capper (q_apparidaceae) Honeysuckle (Caprifoliaceae) Mustard (Cruciferae) Lily (LiliGl.ceae) . Rose (Rosaceae) 4 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 -, Animal Foods (16%) Grasshoppers(Acrididae) 16 ': .. Table 5. - - Total 100% Merriam's Tur-key Food Studies. Gizzard Analysis Eastern Slope --South Veta Creek January 5, 1951 (Winter) Food Items Plant Matter (100%) Family --Species % Vol. Rosaceae '::'-Rose Family Rosa sp, Wild rose fruit 100 Unidentified stem fragments trace 100% Non-Food Items Gravel (Grit) (5% of total volume) Total 100 100% �-19Table 6. Merriam.' s Turkey Food Studies . '. Winter Foods in Order of Preference --Basis 540 Droppings*. Food Item Grass green leafage (Gramineae) Ponderosa pine nuts (Pinus ponderosa) Cultivated oats (Avena sativa) Insects Sand dropseed spikelets (Sporobolus cryptandrus) Forbs green leafage --chiefly dandelion and clover Scrub oa.kacorns (Quercus sp.) Sleepy grass seeds (Stipa robusta) Wild buckwheat seeds (Polygonum sp.) Staghorn cactus fruit ( Opuntia arborescens) Hawthorne fruit (Crataegus sp.) Snowberry fruit (Symphoricarpos sp.] Wild rose fruit (Rosa sp.) Wild sunflower seeds (Helianthus sp.) Kinnikinnick fruit (Arctostaphylos ~ - ursi) Panic grass spikelets (Panicum sp.) Skunkberry fruit (Rhus trilobata) Sideoats grama spikelets (Bouteloua curtipendula) Barnyard grass spikelets (Echinochloa sp.) Rocky Mountain juniper fruit (Juniperus scopulorum)' Blue grama spikelets (Bouteloua gracilis) Cultivated wheat (Triticum aestivum) Dandelion seed heads (Taraxacum officinale) Giant ragweed seeds (Ambrosia trifida) Bluestem spikelets (Andropogon sp.) Ponderosa pine needle fragments (Pinus ponderosa) Woody stem fragments Alkali sacaton spikelets (Sporobolus airoides) Amaranth seeds (Amaranthus sp), Chokecherry fruit (Prunus virginiana) Golden aster seed heads (Chrysopsis sp. ) Pinon pine seeds (Pinus edulis) Prickly pear cactus fruit (Opuntia sp. ) Puccoon seeds (Lithospermum sp.) Sweetclovez seeds ( Melilotus sp.) Rootlets % Freq. 'of Occur. 66.5 36.5 32.2 32.7 16.7 13.9 12.6 11.1 9.8 9.4 8.9 8.5 6.9 5.9 5.6 5.4 4.3 4.1 3.7 2.0 1.9 L5 .7 M6 .6 .6 .6 .4 .4 •.4 '.' .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 *All samples from eastern slope wild turkey ranges - includes 300 droppings from .mountain type ranges; 100 from me.sa type ranges; and 140 from river canyon type ranges. Collections and analyses by Donald M. Hoffman. �-- :_.:-P! \') Table 7. Merriam's Turkey Food Studies. ,~rpp Analysis '" ,,' . Eastern Slope -- Cucharas River. April 24, 1950 (Spring) ~.Foot Items .' Plant Matter (99%) Family --Species I •• ,- . t." %Vol. ' Compositae -Composite Family Taraxacum officinale Dandelion le:af fragments Dandelion seed heads Ericaceae -- Heath Family Arctostaphyos uva~ Kinnikinnick fruit Fagaceae - Beech Family" Que-rcuS" sp. Scrub oak acorns Gramineae --Grass Eamily Avena fatua Wild oats Hordeum vulgare Barley Grass leaves Leguminosae --Peal Family Trifolium sp, Clover leaves Pinaceae -- Pine Family Pinus ponderosa Ponderosa pine seeds --- 8 :23 "trace , ." ~" "trace Animal Matter (1%) Family I•. '" Scarabaeidae 1 Scarab beetle Diplopoda (class) 1 Millipede Oligochaeta.(class) "I,Earthworm 1 trace trace Total Non-Food Items Bone fragments (2%of total volume) Gravel (Grit) (6%of total volume) 100% 25 75 Total 100% �-21- Table 8. --Merriam's Turkey Food Studies. Spring Foods in Order of Preference--Basis 680 Droppingsf %Freq. of Food Item Occur, Grass green leafage (Gramineae) -.. Forbs green leafage-chiefly dandelion, clover, and alfalfa Insects Dandelion flowers (Taraxacum officinale) Staghorn cactus fruit (Opuntia arborescens) Giant ragweed seeds (Ambrosia trifida) ... :. '::.' Cultivated oats (Avena sativa) Wild rose fruit (Rosa sp.) Ponderosa pine seeds (Pinus .P2,nderosa) Kinnikinnick fruit (Arctostaphylos ~-ursi) Rocky Mountain juniper fruit (Juniperus scopulorum) Scrub oak acorns (Quercus sp.) Snowberry fruit (Symphoricarpos sp.) Hawthorne fruit (Crataegus sp.) Ponderosa pine needles (Pinus ponderosa) Pasque flower leaves (Pulsatilla sp.) Chokecherry fruit (Prunus virginiana) Sleepy grass seeds (Stipa robusta) Dandelion seed heads (Taraxacum officinale) Sand dropseed spikelets (Sporobolus cryptandrus) . Skunkberry fruit (Rhus trilobata) Tall dropseed spikelets (Sporobolus asper) Crayfish . Horsetail stem fragments (Equisetum sp.) Wheatgrass spikelets (Agropyron sp.) Land snails Bluegrass spikelets (Poa sp.) Panic grass spikelets (Panicum sp.) Wild buckwheat seeds (Polygonum sp.) Wild sunflower seeds (Heliailthus spr ) Pinon pine seeds (Pinus. edulis) . Rocky Mountain juniper leaves (Juniperus scopulorum) Woody stem fragments Nightshade fruit (Solanum sp.) 90.7 61. 5 29.7 23.4 8.7 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.4 5.6 3.4 3.2 2.5 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.0 1.0 .7 .7 •• 6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .4 .3 .3 '. .3 . .1 .1 . .1 .1 .1 *All samples from eastern slope wild turkey ranges - includes 320 droppings from mountain type ranges; 200 from mesa type ranges; and 160 from river canyon ranges. Collections and analyses by Donald M. Hoffman with exception of 10 dropping samples collected by Chester M. Scott. '- �?. AI.F'....... :~\": -22. Table 9. Merriam's Turkey Food Studies. Summer Foods in Order of Preference --Basis 325 Droppings* Food Item Insects Grass green leafage (Gra.mineae) Forbs green leafage --chiefly dandelion and clover Dandelion seed heads (Taraxacum officinal~)" .., ," Bluegrass splkelets (Paa' sp.)'·· ... '" ' Scrub oak acorns (Quercus sp.) Wild buckwheat seeds (Polygonum sp.) Dandelion flowers (Taraxacum,-off-icinale) Timothy spikelets (Phleum pratense) Bristle grass spikelets (Se-taria sp. ) Cultivated oats (Avena sativa) ...... Sand dropseed spikelets (Sporobolus cryptandrus) Sleepy grass seeds (Stipa robusta) '"..... Wild sunflower seeds (Helianthus sp.) Ponderosa pine seeds (Pinus ponderosa)' Wild rose fruit (Rosa sp.) Snowberry fruit (Symphorj_carpossp.) .•.......•..... .. Giaant ragweed seeds (Ambr::>si?: trifida) "':~\:.' ',' Prickly pear cactus fruit (_Qp11'ntiasp.) wua currant fruit @J!2~ sp.) Wild onion bulbs (Allium sp.) Horsetail stem fragments (Equisetum sp.) -Iuniper'fruit (Juniperus sp.) Angelica seeds (Angelica sp.) Hawthorne fruit (Cr~Ja~§.. sp, ) Kinnikinnick fruit (~!ctostaphyl~~~-ursi) Panic grass spikelets (Panicum sp, ) %Freq. of Occur. ·67.1 ··56.3 39.7 35.4 34.,5 .33.2 19.7 17.8 12.9 10.2 10.2 7.4 3.4 ·3.4 2.8 2.2 ---- ~.-- ., 2~2 , : ..~ 1.8 l.~ 1.2 .9 ;'9 ~6 . ". .3 .3 .3 .3 ", *All samples from eastern slope wild tnrkey ranges - includes 270 droppings' from mesa type ranges and 55 from mountain type ranges. Collections and' ' analyses by Donald M. Hoffman. " .. .. . �Table 10. Seasonal Food Preferences. Fall* Grasshoppers Winter** Green leaves Sprin~** Grass leaves ,Summer** Insects C.ultivated oats Ponderosa pine nuts Forbs green leafage - Grass leaves Acorns Cultivated oats Insects -;Forbs green leafage Grass leaves Insects Dandelion flowers Dandelion seed heads Barley Sand dropseed spikelets Staghorn cactus fruit Bluegrass Wild buckwheat" seeds Forbs green leafage Giant ragweed seeds Acorns - spikelets , ~, l\:) Dandelion leaves Acorns Cultivated oats Wild buckwheat seeds Dandelton seed heads Sleepy grass seeds Wild rose fruit Dandelion flowers Bristle grass spikelets Wild buckwheat seeds Ponderosa pine nuts Timothy spikelets Wild sunflower seeds Staghorn cactus fruit Kinnikinnick fruit Bristle grass spikelets *.Based upon 200 crops analyzed by percentage volume and percentage frequency of occurrence methods. **Based upon 540 droppings (winter), 680 droppings (Spring), and 325 droppings (summer) analyzed by - percentage frequency of occurrence method. ~'.• ..::_ . !;l \ .:/} �-24Literature Cited Ligo.n,J. Stokely " ""1946. , History and management of Merriam's wild turkey. " .",New Mexico ~Game and Fish Commission S$ta Fe. 84 pp. - Martin, Alexander C. 1949." Procedure in wildlife food studies. 325. Washington, D~ C. 10 pp. U. S. 1;>.I. Wildlife Leaflet Beck, John R. " 1952. A suggested food rank index. Jour. Wildlife Management. 398-399.: Prepared by: Donald M. Hoffman Date : 16(3): Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator J_an_u-=aryo..lf-l,:._....;;.19_5;..;9 _ �January, 1959 -25JOB COMPLETIONREPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ,State of COLORADO' ----~~~~~----------- Project No. W-96-D-2 ".," -:: Wild Turkey Development ,;: Work Plan No. ":'·2 ' . Job No.' :2 ----~--------~--~~~~~------------------ Title of Job: Establishment of Experimental Winter Food Plots. Period Covered: July 1, 1957to June 30, 1958. Objectives: Establishment of experimental winter food plots, fenced against livestock, to assist wild turkeys through critical winter periods to maintain the highest level of physical vitality both for smr:v:tval and for high spring nesting vigor. It was proposed to build a new food plot at the Charles Nicoli ranch, Mavricio Canyon, Las Animas County, Section 6, Township 31 South, Range 66 West, 6 P. M. This was not accomplished in the fall and could not be done in the spring when Donald Hoffman was concerned with piling eastern slope turkey information before transferring to another project. On the western slope, it was proposed to construct five fenced plots for planting of grain patches. The only plot built was plot No.4 on the Van Pelt ranch.stx miles north of Dolores on Granath Mesa, Montezuma County. Approximately one acre was fenced and turkey "liSel'amounted to a minimum of 37 birds at irregular intervals during the winter. The other proposed plots could not be built because of time given to other field studies and work. As a result, reel-type corn feeders were set up in the proposed plot locations and the feeder in are No~ 5 was fenced. 'Area locations are listed below to show locations of the feeders. Plot No.5-Craig Point, five miles east of Norwood on forest land on the east rim of San Miguel River and the south rim of Clay Creek. Plot No. 6--Cottonwood Creek north of Highway 90 on the old Hill Ranch, Montrose County. Plot No. 7 - North and west of old Ute postoffice on the Brooks Ranch, Montrose County. .. ' �. ; .j. Plot No, 8 - On Sheets Ranch about one mile South of plot 7 and south of Highway-90, .1Yiont:ro$eCounty. . -" -. . .:.:_.~..:.:.~. "'_'. "-. -_ • . .". j :-': Plot No. 9~. On Conifer Hill approximately 3' miles norlhwest of Chromo and 1/2 mile east of Highway 84, -ArchuletaCounty. . "--'_ J:. ..... :..:-:.~:. f~:.' . - •.~ " "*, ,. . '.' -' .;:; .... , ._, ',: ., .!._"_ - '; . ,. ,'.~ ':, 'i .. , . .. ..... '.' ',- . " , ." ',J "._ . ~I • c': : :~. .' Prepared Date : . ; ,'( by: Martin L. Burget J;;.;a;;;;;n;;;.;u...;a;;;.r~y.!., ...;1_9 ...• 5..;,.9 _ Approved by: Laurence E~ Riordan Federal Aid Division �January. 1959 -27.JOB COMPLETIONREPORT " :: : DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ' ;., State ot . \ COLORADO .. Project No. W.•.. 96-D-2 . Work Plan No. __ Wild Turkey Development .=.2 ..!-...:::.J.=.ob=-.::N.:.:o::.:.~ _ _;3;.._ _ Title of Job: study of Food Plot Useage by Wild Turkeys • r: .Period covered: • , :, ~ :. July 1, 1957to June 30, 1958. j ~ •• Objectives: To determine if techniques used in pellet group counts are applicable in showing turkey use on food plots . :.~," ~.. ., ~dure: Established food plots were to be sampled annuallyduring the spring period to secure a trend in use. Linear strip plots were to be tried to sample . 'the areas. During the winter period, population counts were made for use in ': t;. . comparison with the dropping counts. Introduction .. ~ . ; .. '. .;: . , The establishment of small grain plots in favorable wintering areas was started in the spring of 1953 on an experimental basis. The main purpose of these plots is to supplement natural foods and hold the wild turkeys in the respective areas. A total of eight plots ranging in size from one acre to five acres was established during the study period, but present plans are to remove one plot (Plot No.3) due to a poaching situation which has developed since its establishment. Suitable.ar'eas are located within important wintering areas on National Forest or private land, "and an agreement for: use' of the plot, ranging from one to ' five acres in size, is made with the landowner involved. ' .; , The plot is fenced with a four strand barbed wire fence by the Game and Fish Department and small grains are planted. The land preparation and planting is done by the landowners with the Game and Fish Department furnishing the seed. Shrub and tree species have been used in conjunction with several of the plots. A method of measuring the use made of the' established winter food plots by wild turkeys and other game species similiar to deer pellet group counts was started in the spring of 1958 by the writer. Circular 1/100 acre plots located at random within the plots were examined and individual droppings of wild turkeys and pellet groups of deer and rabbits were counted and recorded. Three circular plots were examined per food plot. This type of use check, if done �-.:..t, •• '. -28- annually, will show yearly fluctuations in game use of the plots. Population counts were made in the vicinity of the food plots where possible. : ._j .": . : -, " ;: An 'average 60~t of fencing matertals of $39.27 per ~c~~ f~nced was calc~lated =.the eight food plots in existence on the eastern slbp~.·.A total· of approximately 14. 5 acres is under cultivation, in ~J:.l:~ eight plots. - .. ..:_-. '-Findings: Game use checks made within the four plots showing wild turkey winter ~e showed deer, cottontail r~bbits'~ and jackrabbits also benefitted from the plots. This was the first year that use checks were made, therefore, .. no ..comparative data from past years are available. The two food plots in Sarcillo Canyon, Las Animas Couaty.:;~he food plot on. State-owned land on the Huezfano River, Huerfano County, and the upper food plot in Alhandra Canyon, ,: - "L~~. Animas County showed use by the wild turkeys during-the wtnter, Deer use was ~VideDi}n allplots examined. past : '-r ,i Two plots which did not 'shbw turkey use had excellent crops of oats but there was a plentiful supply of natural foods, and the turkeys 'did not requtre the use of the plots. A third plot did not raise any turkey food and showed no turkey use. Use checks could not be made at one plot because the road was still snowed closed In early April, 1958. .._,:,.' '.; Wintering population surveys were made in the vicinities of the food plots where . '. ·,po'Ssible.,· ,- '."J, .' •.•. .... c. .' ~.' .' ' . .. .. "~, ' !.; ." Of the eight food plots est~blished to date. on the eastern slope, it can be .concluded that three have been suc~~ssful in accomplishing their main objective of tne reasmg wild turkey populations. These plots are the two in Sarcillo Canyon on private land one along the upper Huerfano River on State-owned land. The excellent cooperation received from ranchers, J. Sakariason and MacDonald Brothers and limited predator control are two factors which have aided in the success of the rebuilding of the wild turkey population in Sarcillo Canyon. . . . . . The food plot on. Pass Creek in Huerfano County has aided in holding the wild turkeys in the area, but a poaching situation has. arisen, in the area and present plans are to remove the plot in the near future. This plot .must be regarded as a failure. .' .i .o!'" The two food plots in Alhandra Canyon in Las Animas County have been valuable in the expertmentation of different grains to determine which are best suited tc)thiS"dry area. To dase, oats, millet, and .dry.Iand maize have 'been tried .. '''unsuccessfully. Winter rye appears to hold promise in the and this was used in recent plantings. These food plots have not been in existence long enough to ascertain their true value. area �Table 1. --Game Use of Eastern Slope Food Plots Winter 1957 - 1958. * Plot No. 1 Wild Turkey Droppings, 110 Deer Pellet Groups Cottontail Pellet Groups 45 32 '" I, 62" 22 2 Jack Babbit Pellet Groups s , 12 " 3 2i6 4 .~ ..•.•...•. 12 ", 5 ", , -«, I "'." 0) C\I I - -.._ -. ," 5 6 7 ! :.;" i . "_ 12 TOTALS 360 ,', 8· ..... ,•....•.... 1 """ ,i o 6 56 6 ' 113 Remarks 79 turkeys used plot 3 months. Excellent crop oats and millet. 28 turkeys used plot 2 1/2 months. Excellent crop oats and millet. Use checks could not be made-road still closed by snow early April, '58 98 turkeys used plot 3 months. Excellent crop oats and barley. No turkey use in plot. ......"A few deer pellets seen. , Very poor crop grain. 22 turkeys' used plot ,' .' 2 weeks in fall. No winter use observed. No turkey winter use. Flock of 32 ranged in area in fall period. 12 turkeys used plot during the entire winter period. Plot replanted torye in fall. * The total number of samples found withi~ three 1/100 acre otrcular plots located ~t random within each plot. '. -:-'; ..•....• ~:.',,':, f'~" �~<:",j ~\; . '-'. Table 2. A Comparison of Wild Turkey Wintering Populations by Year s. , !..•.. " '1' I '.l c ' Plot . 'No. Location " 1 ... Sarcillo Canyon Sarcillo Canyon 2 I .' 3 ..Plot ,Estab. 1949.;.'" 19501951 1950 J953(enl. 156) 60 70 ',1955 Wintering Period 1952- 195319511953 1954 1952 1954-',' 1955 19551956 1956- ' 1957 ' 19571958 25 28 28 59 80* 148** '" 79*** 0 4 17 60 40 35 6 ' Pass Creek 40 1954 _ ,9 .... ~ 4 Huerfano River "1955 0 0 0 0 8 31 '41 45 " 5 Alhandra Canyon ., 1956" -- -- -- --. ~ -- -- -~ 40, 20 44 22 --- --- -- --- -- St. Charles River 6 1957 I .- 7 stock Canyon 1957 8 Alhandra Canyon 1957 :. ,.' I 0 .'t - 125 .. 20 ""98 0 , .• -- ,,' .,,": ~ 22 '. -- -- , .. ,!.'1 ; 6 6 25 46 32 -- -- -- -- 12 Where no wintering population counts were made this is 'shown by (--). *Count does not include 11 birds live trapped for transplanting. - " _ .,- . ..•....... I :' ** Count does not include 25 birds live trapped for transplanting. ...•... .z: *** Count does not include 41 birds live trapped for transplanting." _-' ._, ,:" ':i - ~.. .._ ... _.---- r---------------- --- �-31, ;" - Thefoodplofs in Stock Canyon in Las 'Aliimas County and-near St. Charles Creek in.Pueblo County established in the spring of 19~7 have not been in existence long enough to evaluate .their usefulness. .' WESTERN SLOPK Plot No. 1 ~ Lost Canyon Area. This plot showed very little useage either by deer or turkeys dur'ing the winter of 1957 - spring of 1958. Only two bands of turkeys Were Been in the area. One ,of seven ~p.danother' of three (gobblers). Plot No. 2- Lost Canyon Area. . . This plot which lies on the rims above No. 1 also received light useage. ; . . . Not more than fifteen separate tracks were noted in spring checks. A few deer tracks but very light use of the plot. Plot No. 3- Mud Creek - Mancos area. Seventeen turkeys were observed in this plot in February by Mr, Hawkins. Spring 'observation showed this plot had been heavily used and .all of the grain cleaned up by turkeys and deer. Plot No.4 Van Pelt Ranch - Dolores area. Thirty seven turkeys used this feed ground. Although the use was irregular, the author observed seven tracks in the snow during mid winter. The hill below this plot was so open that the birds did not come in regularly. Plot No. 5 Craig Point-Norwood area. This plot is a reel - feeder plot fenced against stock. Two large reels were filled three times during the winter. W.C. O. Mangus counted more than 100 turkeys using ·plot. When visited in late February the area around the fence and inside tlie plot was packed down-wtth turkey sign .. 'About a half ,. dozen ears of corn remained on the ground with but a few kernels of corn on them. The remaining amount of corn was put in and all of it was cleaned up within a week. �. -32- ., ....• : ... j.); ~ ~"'" \. " !.. . ;i" Plo.t No.. 6.Co.tto.nwoo.dCreek-Hill Ranch in Ute area-Mo.ntro.se Co.unty. ;., .'. A reel-feeder was usedin this area and was kept filled until the turkeys began to. disperse or migrate in February. Forty-eight turkeys visited this area regularly last winter. Indtcations were that more birds were using the area but were not in .at the time the checks were made. " Plo.ts 7 and 8 - Near Ute Spring, Mo.ntro.seCo.unty. These two.plots were combined as theywereclose the same birds were using both areas. ....: together and it was found M~re than eighty. turkeys used this plot until. mid-February when they began ..';to. move up withthe spring breakup. Thisj& the.largest number of turkeys to. remain this high through the mid winter •. Birds were in top shape when visited in ~arly February. r :..'.Plo.t ~o.. 9-Confer H;iUArea. ., 'I' , 'r! .: ".',t. tv- ;' I, ~ This is a reel-feeder area. The reels were filled three times during the winter. Observers Ford and Va.vak reported f'rom seven to. twenty eight turkeys using the are~~., . . . ,. '. L 't· . :i,;, '.1'. -. " .... .': ': ·.','1 f! .'1 . ',' ..!.if,. .' . : ~'.: :~:", . : 1: ':r <. " ; ... ,ii. ::! '. :.' . ,,' ',.: : ,,<,' Prepared by: Donald M. Ho.ffman Martin L. Burget Date: Approved by: Laurence E. Rio.rdan Federal Aid Coordinator _..;.J.;;a;;;;;n.;;u.;;;ar;;"Y'-l,~19;;..5;;..9;__ _ �"5 January, IS59 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT -v s :. '. ,'/ . ~.' . . ·..p~oj,ect No._W_-_·9_6;...-...;.D_-...;3;..._.;....__~~"'-\_V...;.i_ld Tu.;....;..r_k_e""'y_D_..;.e_ve_I_0 ..•. p_m_e_n_t_-=~ __ -:~-. """. '. : ',: ._.;# . ~.'" . ·:.:'0W()!k P~an.~~ r.·_·~·_·~r_·_....,......,.._'., ., ":,"".-:-:..;' _~J~ob;;...:N~0;;..;.;.__3;;.._ ~ Title of Job. Location of Transplant ....,.,.::~ Sites . Period Covered: . July 1, 1958 to September 15, 1958. Abstraet ; . Western Slope. : There were two areas recommended last year to receiving strengthening plants that were not filled. These were Transfer Trail in Roubideau Canyon and \_ Sawmfl.l Meaa=Monitor- Mesa in Delta and Mesa Counties. This year two areas have been carefully checked and are recommended for three additional releases . ._.-.--These are. (1)_.The.Big. Salt Wash.area in Garfield County. This leads up to the area immediately west of Douglas Pass. It is similar to the stove Canyr:on area which has shown excellent development during the past two years. Then, (2) Pinon Mesa where birds 'were planted last season. This area is sufficiently .' large to allow a large development of turkeys. It is estimated it will probably '. . parry a P9PulatiQD.ofaro~nd five' hundred birds. It is. . isolated and has ritaiIy of the good f~atUres of the :Uncompahgre Plateau. It is directly north of this area and is separated from: ifby the East Creek 'and West Creek canyon leading from White Water to Gateway. 'I Objectives: ' .. _. fq i~g~t~:·fs~{table siie~for tran~planting wild turkeys. :......... .~ .• ).'.: ':.., '... ~. ." '_ .. '," .:. . .. ~,. , , ••.•••.. , • -. '.:, f I' .. An intensive survey is made by project personnel in areas suggested for release of birds. Suitability is determined 'according to the following factors: 1. Foods; . '. >' 2 •.;Ext~p.t..of proposed area; 3~ Water factors; 4. Predator factors; 5. Land ......... :p~~rship;, 6.~. 'Elevation and of southern slope available;' 7. Roosting . sites; 8~ Nesting cover, 9. Escape cover; 10. Weather and moisture factors. amount .,:._ ' .. Findings: Big Salt Wash. Thts area is located west of Stove Canyon and Douglas pass. It compares favpra.blY.with those areas where turkeys showed good development in the past t\y~ ~ears. . �~p ···}'F f· 1 ' Ecological Analysis 1. Food Factors: :... Pinon-Juniper-Oak type . On north and west slopes it is predominantly covered with oak, serviceberry, mountain-mahogany and snowberry. South and east slopes are covered with pinon pine and juniper. There is some ponderosa pine and spruce in the upper draws. The oaks, roses and thornapple are bearing heavy crops of seeds. Native bluegrass and introduced blue grama and crestedwheatg rass are plentifui. The entire area is interspE;fkd with forbs that are valuable as turkey feed. Under 'average conditions the area will supporta population of l2:roundtwo hundred turkeys. Oak- G"uercus spp. Pinon pine - Pinus edulis Juniper -"Juniperus scopulorum .and utahensrs : Serviceberry": Amalanchier 'spp: '. ~ Rose - Rosa spp. Thornapple - Crataegtis spp. -Chokecherry - Prunus spp. Skunkbusli .: Rhus trilobata Snowberry - Symphoricarpos spp, . Ceanothus - Ceanothus fendle'ri : .: . \ ·2.' Extent of Area: ., This are~ is located wtthin Towpshipa 5 and -6 South, Ranges 102 and 103 West. It is also possiblethat population overflow might expand into the southwest corner of.Rio Blanco County. -, 3. Water Factors:" ' !' This is stock range and there is a constant supply in Salt Creek, There are also numerous springs and at least two irrigation or stock ponds in the area. While this is in a .low moisture section of the state" cor-responding closely to the Stove Canyon habitat, there was a good supply of water even though ,-thiS past season was considered very dry. 4.. Predators: Predators are at. a comparatively low level. -.Known kinds include bobcats, coyotes, foxes, ringtail cats, skunks, bears, owls and accipiter hawks. " . " . """,. �5. Land Ownership: Approximately 50 percent' of this is privately owned. The balance is B. L. M. land. 6. -Elevafton. .Th~. elevation of the area is from 5000 to 7500 feet. More than half of the-area iff south and west facing slopes. 7. Roosting sites: Suitability i..i Roosting sites are mostly in the canyons which afford the turkeys protection. There are not too many roosting sites but there are sufficient to accommodate a good development of turkeys. Available roosts are as follows; cottonwoods in the canyons, spruces on north slopes, pines on the ridges and-south facing slopes. 8. Nesting cover: Nesting cover is no problem. Since the natural preference is on slopes and near water the ground cover is tdeal, There are numerous small parks for strut grounds and springs and nesting cover are nearby. 9. Escape cover. Escape cover is' ideal. The ground cover is plentiful and closely spaced to afford maximum. protection from winged predators. There are many groups of tall oaks, pinon pine and other trees to provide refuge from ground prowlers. .' '.. 10. Weather and Moisture factors. Weather in this area for the most part is mild. The lower area is used for winter stock pasture. There is some tendency to dro-uth as the area lies in the 15 to 20 inch moisture zone. This season has been rather dry. However, food reproduction is at a high level. The summer range receives more moisture and should - under normal conditions be all right. From reports it is noted that pinon nut crops seldom fail in this area. This is not ideal range but since turkeys tn the Stove Canyon'area have shown good progress it is believed it has a potential for success. .' Recommendation: -- It is recommended that this area receive a substantial plant of turkeys this year if possible. ~. ., Pinon Mesa: A more thorough examination of the Pinon Mesa was made this year than last. When the area was checked last year it had rained heavily the night before. This hindered progress into areas beyong Oak Hill. The part of the area that can be stocked with turkeys is smaller than the Uncompahgre Plateau. However, the cover types are highly similar. .' '.. r. • • V t .'~ ; ',. �-36- ~_ ,r' , . , , s This bloc8~otlhange includ.es part ofRa~es 100,. 101, 102 w.est, To~nship 12, 13 and 14. ~nce the area IS large there IS a destre to stock It as rapidly as possible. For this reason it would be, desirable to make two moresubatanttal releases this season if possible." Th~&;hasbeen considered as non-historical range." However, it is reported that a mummified turkey skeleton was found in the arms of an Indian mummy taken from a cave dwelling along the ColoradoUtah border. This mummy is in the utah Historical Museum at Salt Lake City. There are also rep4rts of turkey bones being. taken from cliff dwellings in this area.' 'These reports have!not be~n :V~rifiedto date, but are being checked. ." , '.. ,A'" 1. Food Factors. ' Type Classification _ Pinon _ juniper _ oak. Oak _ Quercus gambelli Pinon-Pinus edulis Juniper _ Juniperus, scopulorum and utahens.is serviceberry'Ainalanchier sp. Mountain Mahogany _ Cercocarpus spp. Roses :- ~ spp, " Thornapple - Crataegus spp. Chokecherry-Prunus spp. '. ....,.,. ~-,,.:~'. :.,:. .~'~L Mani'ariiia - ArctostaphYlo~ pat~~ and ~ ursi (kinnikinnick)-:' .:" Snowberry - Symphoricarpos spp. Ceanothus fendleii In the upper area Ponderosa pine - Pinus ponderosa ,' :, ~'"' ,,' 'Spruce =Ptcea en~ani, and pungeIis'.' ", .Fir' ~ Dougias _ Psudotsuga taxifolia These all provide food and roosts i» ! ~ "~,". ,;, : :,,:':(~, . . .i . 'f: ..... ',; GraSSes and Forbes: Native bluegrass _~spp. , Crested wheatgrass - Agropyron crystatum - Introduced Blue grama - Bouteloua gragilis, * Introduced Arizona .Fescue" - .-..,;, Festuca arizonica ,' '.,,:.,; -..;..;;.;;;,;;..;;;;. ==.;;;.=-~ " At time of examination oak was in heavy mast with acorns covering the ground. Most other shrubs were in heavy fruit or seed. Snowberry had only a light crop while thornapple was bending over with a heavy, load of fruit fully ripe. 2.' Extent or stze of proposed area .. , ' ,,':, , .. ' :' ;.' , The diVidink'lin~betwe~~ this"'~nd the Uncompahgre is the canyon' ,',; formed by East and West Creeks leading from white Water to Gateway. On the north the area is bounded by the Colorado National Monument and Glade Park. The west boundary would be Utah. However, low desert. type, sage-covered flats would prevent the birds moving into Utah. The desert area south of Grand Junction formSa natural eastern boundary to this range. �'-37- -3. Water Factors: t ' Water'is abundant. Numerous side canyons each with a small 'stream 'or numerous springs supply stock water. These would also supply the turkeys. Near the middle of the area are three large. reservoirs supplying the town of Fruita. There are also numbers ,of.stock ponds and irrigation reservoirs in side canyons all of which could be used by the turkeys. Even in dry years water has never been a problem in this area. _4. .. ~. Predator Factors: . This area is stock range a~d a fairly good control program is maintained on most predators by F. & W. L. Trappers. One turkey hen was killed on a nest in this area last sprfng, This predation was observed by the trapper and the coyote was soon caught. Other predators present are bobcats, foxes, skunks, ringtail cats, hawks, owls and eagles. 5. Land Ownership: While a lot of this area is privately owned, there is also a large parcel of this land controlled by the Grand Mesa National Forest. The lower areas are under B. L. M. Last year'.s releases created much interest. Some of the land is posted but is open to legitimate hunting on a controlled basis. It Is certain that the turkeys will be protected -untila hunting season is opened. 6. Elevation of area and south slope. The area ranges from about 5000 to 7500 feet. There is more south and west slope than was thought at first. Between 40 percent and 50 percent faces south or west. 7. Roosting sites: Roosting sites are available throughout most of the range. Large yellow pine seed trees have been preserved in logging operations. Some of the large pinon trees are fifty feet high. 8. Nesting cover: Nesting cover is ideal. Ground cover is heavy with small, scattered parks and water and food near. This makes it possible for the hens to hide their nests yet with an ea.sy way of escape if discovered. ~- :- ..:- ..~.. -: .::..:.~..~~"' 9. Escape cover: _,_ Here again conditions are ideal. Oaks in scattered clumps have grown to a height of 25 feet. Pines, spruce and cottonwood trees are scattered over the _area. In most of this range the ground eover is spaced : -.? to afford maximum protection. �·. •: ;'·~lJ;·~:-.'~~~~';" . ..;. -.3~·T;~ :}~;..:.,':!';.:". '.~ _" ,', .' 10. Weather and Moisture factors: There are heavy rains in summer and some deep snows in winter. These." of course, provide the water supply for the range. Prolonged storm periods seldom cov~r this area. South slopes are common and roads to mo st ~f the area are kept open the year around. . RecommEmdations: -: Because of the size of the area it would be well to add more stock to this area to utilize the available habitat. One more release should be made on Oak Hill (Place of original release - R. 101 W., Township 12 South, Section 18). Another release should be made either in 2"'V Creek or Beezer Creek (Range 103 W., Township 12 South, Section 28 or 32). 'i '; •• .- Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Date: .. ; ""Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator J,;;..an=u.;.;;ary="-" ~,"...;1_9_5_9_" _ �. - - .•... IlllilliRillli1 BDOW022329 January, 1959 -39- JOBCO}~LETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS .r. '-' ::itate qf- '~',' '>"COLORADO ' .:_: .... _.' Project"No~'c· W"':88-R...:.k'-, :~::~. :. '~'.-.~.~~~~ ..:..'~. ~ ;' >._.~ .~._ ,,'\lbr.k: Pliiri 'NO'~_:,"...,.;' .', -c. '1:;..:1::;..' _,'_" ':.< , ;>-,.,i,I."'Title· of"Job: C'" Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations . "-.--_--1.....:J~0:::.!b:::.....:;N:.;:0~.-.L.5 .:__..:;~;.:__-:---:::-_ :,,_,' _'_' .: _~ ••..• _.:,.: <'An! Evaluation of Jv1ethodsfor Improving Goose Nesting Sites on Colorado Breeding Grounds. :"'::":::,,-=, ',-"'~;-=:, .:.....:-=: '==;,-:..:::=-====-..=",,c.=...::==-.!'---:--'--------- , ," .", -';::;:,-=, ":::,,;:=:,:.,"", "; pgr:l04;'~?v~r~d:_':'April 1:;-1958 to July '1, 1958 -":'-: ~... , ' . '.,,~ D~ing the summerof 1958, 25 new nesting structures were built in '." Brown's Park, ,and 10 structures were rebuilt or replaced in the Yampa , : '-''vai;lEiy:- Of the 10 :pla~fofiiis needing reconstruction in the YampaValley, ',five were; d.estroyed::by"-wasliingaway, four had the straw r-emoved by "--~---:--:':.'-"-ca:ttle;--and-one--~c-olTapsed-·in' a sand bank cave-in. Consequent.Ly , rthe analysis of last seasons' use must be based on 35 structures on the eastern slope and 15 structures on the western slope. Geese nast.ed on . ,22 of ..?5 :?i!:-e~ in the Bowles Lake and Bel-Har Estate areas, the fate ,"'-f.: of' five sites'On;'the Johnson Ranch Ln-nor-t.heas t Colorado is unknown, :-~d(:f.'ive' ~ites' built College Lake' were unavailable for nesting due ,-,:t6-::inun~'ati6n.,by:high water'~ Geese' nested on 0 ne of the 15 wes ter'n ;" ·:sl~pE{.sitesl -Vege-t,atiorl'removal was tried on 13 selected islands or '.., which':'geese:nested,,6ri:one:'area. This nesting area improvement is not ",:too practical since growth is rapid, and would probably require treatment about every two ye~s. ':i.,···~··"·~ ~" _ .. ,'.,~". on . c, ',i' Ob';~cti v~:s~-,:~._ determriethe:;effect:: of nesting structures and the clearing , : islands, where{practical~ ~:on the nesting success of the' geese • -;'--',(1)'1'0' -- . ... .. of ':~, .: , " (2) "Todetermine the best type of nesting structure, most desirable "'locati6n;:fQr~::kstructure,.. and the best method for the clearing of the , ",',: isl'and's: of:'brush and willO~l growth• • -. ~.~ .:.: ~.:: , r: .• - .» .,. _••.• :.: ~ -, \·.7 ;'::£.:.'_ :_.: .: ...';' .: :~~~~.i.;..::'.' -. ~.., ':(3) T6: deteriiiirte whether the geese will use 'the nesting structures ",,':'cleared 'a.hia.s"of;the";:islands • .;........ ,_.:-t: '~:"- -: -::::~'.-....:~.:::.-. .:... • ': .. :- -~ -, '. and ;:', .: The original plans in 1957 to construct 25 nesting site platforms were altered ,when,the Watson Land and Cattle Companywithdrew their permission to work on their lands. The holdings have since been divided and one �-40- segment sold to Jack Leonard and Dick Randolph of Steamboat Springs, Colorado. The new owners were contacted and permission was obtained to work on Hog Lake and Spitzie Slough. Further investigation of Land Ownership disclosed 40 acres of public land on State Line Lake, (RIC4WTlON-S12-NEt of swt). Construction of 10 structures on Hog Lake, 8 on Spitzie Slough and 7 on State Line Lake were completed in August'and September of 1958. These, combined with last years' construction of 25 structures on the Yampa River brought the west' slope figures to 50 structures now completed. Combined with the 35 structures on the , eastern slope there 'are now a total of 85 artificial nesting sites in Colorado. The ,construction methods were ,the same this year as described in the' 1957 report. ..,. Straw platforms'were replaced upori 4 structures on the Yampa River that had been destroyed by livestock during the winter. ' Poultry netting was placed under and around the straw to prevent stock from "picking apartll the bales. Wire cross-bracing was replaced on a fe\-],where debris had broken the wire. Data were. collected on the .status of the. structures in connection with field work of other jobs. Residents and users of the areas .\olere con.tacted, for any observations, concerning the use by geese of these' artificial nest sites. Results: The nesting platforms were considered quite successful. in 1958. Broods on 19. of the 20" platforms at Bowles Lake, near Littleton. The remaining one was not useable because the straw platform was removed, probably by vandals •. Nesting geese used 3 of the 5 platforms at Lake Bonfils, Bel-Mar Estate also near Littleton to successfully .produce broods. ' wer-e produced The College Lake structures near Fort Collins were rendered useless because the irrigation company overfilled the lake basin arid inundated the 5 artificial nest sites constructed there. These have been relocated and will be ready for use next spring. The use, if any; ·of the 5 sites on the Johnson Ranch, Sedgwick, is unknown at this time. No field work was carr-Led on in that area this year -. " The wes t.er-n slope structures were observed on eaes, trip down t.he Yampa River in connection with the goose nesting study carried on there. The results of this study reveal that 5 were lost to high water piling debris agains them until they were washed away. Livestock destroyed the straw platform on 4 sites making them unacceptable to the geese. One collapsed on a sloping sand bank. This left 15 useable nest sites of which one was used by a nesting [oose. This nest was 100 per cent successful producing 6 goslings. .._(" . �j~~.:~ _ -41- The ground neste:::-s also had a very successful year as no known nests •. rer-elost. In past years the flood crest, (a major factor) had caught the nesting geese still incubating. In 1958, the high water came just after the peak of hatching had passed. Vegetation renoval to improve nesting areas was tried on 13 selected islands in 1957. One improved site was used for a goose nest. It was 100 per cent successful and produced 5 goslings. This method of site improvement does not appear to be too promising at present because of the replacement by annual growth. At best, from this years indications, the vegetation would have to be cut back about every two years. If the vegetation is killed completely, it is highly probable that the flood waters would destroy the islands and be much more damaging to the resource. Structures built on the eastern slope, and especially those constructed for the semi-wild goose flocks at Bow'Le s Lake and Be.I-Kar-have been extremely successful. It is obvious that in these areas there was a distinct lack of nesting sites available for the geese; hence the reason for their immediate and complete acceptance of the artificial platforms. On the uestern slope, wher-e breeding areas are less restricted and goose density much less it is believed that it Hill take longer for the nesting structures to be accepted. Also much has been learned regarding the type of areas wher-e structures can be most effectively used. Thus, it is probable that in the Yampa River Valley, construction of platforms on islands, particularly those that may be partially inundated by high water will give the best results. It is believed that several more years will be required before the final success of western slope structures can be completely evaluated. Summary: (1) Constr~ction of 25 ne$ting site platforms in BroWn's Park \-las accomplished this year thanks to the new owners of part of the Hatson Land and Cattle Company. (2) Poultry netting Has placed under and around the 4 new straw platforms replacing those destroyed by livestock on the Yampa River. (3) Geese successfully nested on 19 of the 20 structures at Bowles Lake this year. Broods were produced on the 3 platforms used at Lake Bonfils. The fate of 5 nest sites at Johnson Ranch in northeast Colorado is IDurnown. Over-filling the lake basin by the irrigation company inundated 5 structures at C0~lege Lake, and all were rendered useless. (4) Ten wes t slope platforms wer e unavailable to the nesting geese as 5 Here washed away~ 4 had the straw destroyed and one collapsed in a sand bank. (5) One structure of the ••• /,1 �lUi __ ' - -42- remaining 15 on the Yampa River was used. The nest was 100 per cent successful and produced 6 goslings. (6) One goose successfully incubated 5 eggs on an improved area of one of the 13 islands altered in 1957. (7) No known ground nests were lost this year. Flooding a major cause in nest loss in the past, did not occur until after the peak of hatching had passed. (8) Eastern slope structures particularly those in the Denver area were completely successful. It is believed that several more years will be required to completely evaluate structures built on the western slope. Submitted Date: by: Hitchell G. Sheldon January, ~1959 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator __;l_ �,.-.: Janaury, 1959 -4!>- JOB.CQl.iPLETIOl~ REi-ORT .:.: '-, ~, ..:. . hlVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~.. ' Haterfowl Proj ec t No•_ _;W..:..-......;8:;..;:8'--.;:.;R;_-~4'--~ ..•..vlor:,k,Plan' No._',::;1.::.1_" /:': Ti~le ':, ,._ .. : Period ' . . - .Nesting C'overed: ~Abstract: ~ of the Yampa Valley _ and BrownI sPark . ,," , .:, ""_ and Investigations _,;;;.,J..::;,ob=-=N:.;..;o::;...;' .::,..-..-03<----:- -----..,.....;.,_ o.:t:;Job: Irlves-tigations - ~ Surveys Goose·Flock. April 1, 1958 t8' July 1, 1958 '. " ,'," ",,' ":~Bt"711e~kiy courrt s of Canada 'Oeese along the Green and YampaRivers , revealed ·that there has been a steady increase in paired birds from 1956 through 1958, and a decrease in juvenile birds during the same , tim~. Th~.f'ormer vas probably caused by restricted hunting seasons ., ~'along the 'wintering range, and the latter by poor breeding seasons . '.,,---"'-..-- ",--'-duringI9'56--an:d -e'sp'eciallY 1957~' The best hatch of the three-year .'study occurred in 1958 when 121 goslings wer-e produced which is twice as many as the next best year of 1956. The excellent produc,i .' .tiop. of young was due to lack of flooding and predation. No evidence of re:n.esting has' been obser-ved in'·'the three-year period. It is .' " h~lieveq_ t~at juverrfLe geese andjiat.red birds whose nests have been . ':" ,'destroyed m.olt on some of the laJ:'ge lakes in Wyoming since they , di_sappear- 'from th~ study area SOO'ri after mid-May. , '~,:'.:.; '.' Objecti ire :" ' ., . .:".\ (1) To determine the size and annual reproduction BroWn's Park Resident goose nesting flock. -:(2) ±o':d~t~rIilirie factors " ';'of this :flock. '. •.• :~ ',: .. " ', :'(])' .. \" -., ..', .', .. anf'Luencang nesting, success and annual status ... To ~ake r~comfu~rid~tions for '. . ", .' "t6r "·t.hiiLfi()c~. .';:; of the Yampa Valley- ' the improvement of nesting conditions .. .IntI-oduction: z ,•.••.•. The State of Colorado is in danger' of losing the last major wild breeding flock of the Great Basin Canada Goose, located on the Green and Yampa Rivers. For the past several years, field men of the Game and Fish Department have reported that the. goose population was declining. This problem'iscof great concern to the Colorado Game and Fish Department. �-44- tHth these facts in mind, the wat.er-f'cul. investigation program instigated a fact-finding project to determine what could be done to restore the nesting geese to a more stable status. The research of the first year was conducted by Don J. Neff during the summer of 1956. The author conducted the present investigation as well as the field work the summer of 1957. The following specific questions Here being investigated: How many Canada geese are there on the breeding areas of the Yampa and Green Rivers? How many actually nest? How many are successful in hatching? What factors influence the nesting success? What recommendations can be made to improve the status of the geese a.l1dtheir nesting success? .The field investigations consisted of bi-weekly boat trips down the 105 miles of river, searching the 120 islands for nests, and contacting residents of the study area for past history and present observations of the breeding geese. It is hoped the facts gathered will indicate ways to restore t-he goose population to a more desirable status, and methods to improve the nesting success vJithout expensive replanting to restore a vanished \.rildliferesource. Sincere thanks are expressed for the excellent cooperation received from all concerned. Procedure: Bi-weekly counts of the breeding population of Canada geese Here conducted along the Green and Yampa Rivers and the associated lakes and marshes. The geese counted were classified as paired birds (nesting and idle pairs), groups, singles, or juveniles, according to their behavior and frequency of observation on the study areas. Systematic searches of the islands •. rere conducted to locate nests for observation. Follow-up visits ver e made to determine facts about the nests and their fate. . Results: Table 1 compares the 1956, 1957 and 1958 observations compiled from all Green and Yampa River boat trips. These data indicate: (1) a steady increase in the number .of paired birds from 1956 through 1958, probably a reflection of restricted hunting seasons during the past three years; (2) a definite decline of juvenile birds present on the rivers since 1956, wh.i.ch substantiates the results of previous years I work shciri.ng a decline in production from one cause or another; and (3) the Green River supported the largest increase in breeding pairs of any other area of the Colorado breeding range. �-45- Table 1.--Canada Goose Popul2tion, Green and Ymnpa River Study Area, April to June, 1956; April to July, 1957 and April to June, 1958. Location Craig to Juniper Canyon Juniper Canyon to Cross Htn. Lilly Park Brown's Park Total No. in group l.files 1956 1957 1228 Juveniles 1926 1957 1958 Paired birds 1926 1927 1928 49.0 2 16 12 26 26 38 19 11 6 30.2 10.5 12.0 104.7 8 11 27 48 11 6 7 5 14 38 10 6 10 52 12 4 22 64 12 4 22 76 10 7 17 53 0 2 16 29 0 3 12 21 Hiles Total birds 19:26 1927 1928 :1 36 Table 1.--Cont'd. Location Craig to Juniper Canyon Juniper Canyon to Cross l-itn. Lilly Park Brown's Park Total corn d. Nesting pairs 1<;?:26 1957 19:28 49.0 47 53 56 7 9 8 30.2 10.5 12.0 104.7 28 24 54 153 23 23 41 129 19 12 3 2 !r_8 !r_ 1:22 16 2 3 4 16 2 1 11 22 Information contained in Table 2 indicates that the geese could increase their production if the decimating factors can be controlled. Thus, production was increased significantly in 1958 over the previous two years primarily as a result of a higp~y successful nest hatch. This hatch was caused by a combination of factors of which the time of hf.gh-vat.er- crest (after June 10, 1958) occurring after the- peak of nest hatching was probably mainly responsible. This is further pointed out in Table 3 which lists the causes of nest destruction by years. Table 2.--Nesting Success of Canada Geese, Green and Yampa Rivers, 19 6-58. 1958 1956 1957 Number of Goslings Number of Unsuccessful Nests Number of Successful Nests Number of Eggs Lost Average Number/Clutch Average Number/Brood 58 3 13 13 4.9 (1-8) 4.8 (1-8) 29 7 6 40 5.7 (4-7) 4.8 (2-6) 121 0 22 7 5.8 (4-8) 5.5 (3-8) �-46- Table 3.--Cause of Nest Failure of Canada Geese, Green and Yampa Rivers, 1956, 1957 and 1958. 1956 Human disturbance during hard rain squall - 1 Collapse of under-cut barr - - - - - - - -- 1 Cause unknown - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1957 Unknown predator, goose killed on nest 1 Flooding - - - - - - - - - - - 6 ~ No known nest failures Composition of the Canada goose population on the Green and Yrunpa Rivers are compared in Table 4. This table again reveals the increase in paired birds and the decrease in juveniles found on the breeding area this year. Table 4.--Composition of the Canada Goose Population, Green and Ya~pa River Study Area, 1226, 1927 and 1928e Per cent of Total Population 1958 1956 1957 1957 1926 1928 Paired birds Single or groups Juveniles 52 48 53 64 36 29 76 38 21 34.0 31.4 2~.6 100.00 49.5 27.9 22.6 100.00 56.3 28.1 12.6 100.00 iJo evidence of re-nesting was observed in the three years of the study. The goose population on the Green and Yampa study areas in 1957 dropped drastically after the second week of Hay. It is believed those geese which "flooded outll went to the large reservoirs in Hyoming to molt soon after their nests were destroyed. In 1958, the adult population remained stable after the non-nesting geese had left for the molting areas. Contacting the local people living on the study area produced much information about the geese and one additional possible factor contributing to the dO'{llwardtrend. The decrease of small-grains grown in the riverbottom land is believed by many, to have decreased the population, especially in the fall migration period. It is felt by this investigator that this is the period when the large numbers of geese of the past were observed and remembered, and not during the breeding season. 1. The study area comprised of 105 miles of the Green and Yampa Rivers in Eoffat County, Colorado. �-47- 2. Each section of the study area was visited bi-weekly by boat. Counts were made of all geese observed and activity was recorded. Systematic searches of 120 islands were made for nests. Information was recorded on each nest located. J. The observed 1958 adult population totaled 114 birds, of which 76 birds were paired. The remainder were in groups of J to 7 birds. Actual nesting was attempted by 44 geese. At least 121 goslings are known to have been hatched. 4. Twenty-two broods were observed and 14 nests were located during the 1958 study. All wer e on islands, except one on a cliff about 25 feet above the Green River. Visibility is apparently a very important factor in the selection of a nest site. 5. Flooding Has found to be the major factor restricting the breeding success during the 1957 study, but no nest failures Here observed in 1958. 6. No evidence of re-nesting has been found. The geese apparently leave the study area soon after the nest is destroyed. They are believed to go to the same large reservoirs of Wyoming to molt, as do the juveniles. 7. Protection during the balance of the year as v1ell as better protection from nest flooding appears to be in need of further investigation. Submitted by:l·litchellG. Sheldon Date: Januar~, 1959 A- roved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��January, 1959 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111I11111~ BDOW022331 ____ I' /, _ Job Completion Report . ',_. ; Investfgati<>ns:'P~Oj~ cts'F :<-. ", State of C~O_L9R_A_D9~.------,., Project No. W-88-R-4 . <' .:' ;~ ; Cooperative' waterfowl 'o~~tidiDg J' . .~ ", : .. ." ~ ,~;t . '.\, 'Work Plan NO.__;,_.:1;__ ·..;.' _..__ !..(-..;<J::..o:::;:b:::..·...:N~· o:;';>:.~'' ' '~' '"-'' -:--..;._ • ...:;. ;_8.::.·_~_:·~·~: ..·~ _ Title of Job :_---=C:_;o:_;o::...!I>::.;e::;:r:.::a:.:t:::_i v.:_;e::_· .....:W.:...::.at:.:e::;:rf:.::..::o.:.;w.::.I.....:B~a::..!'1:;:.d~l:.:·D::l:g!...·..::.P_;;r:...;:o:.Lje: __ _;,.;_. ~ _ Period Covered: June ~9 to August 2~ ,19~8::/ . :";., . . - . ., . . .," . ~ Objectives: To determine. the distribution of birds from the various porttons of the breeding grounds to the four fly ways. '.~.' O;'.~ •... ;:; (2) To determine vari~t)nns in relative shooting pressure as confp~red to previous years. . . (3) Measurements of annualmortaltty. .._ .. __ ( 1) ~ .. ,. .-.---------Personnei: Charles Hays - Fish -an(rWildlife--Service-~'Coforado";_t~ader~---':"----"----.--, Loren J. Bonde - Fish and Wildlife Service - Minnesota :- Asststant Leadlr .:. Harold Martfn - State Game and,Fi~h:::: Te~;a~~. .-.-.. Richard Appel - State Game and Fish .; Wyoming Carl Berghofer - State Game and Fish - New-,Mexico Preston Steele - State Game and Fish - Colorado -." J' .I'1troduction Crews and equipment assembled in Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada June 23 ~n.d24, 1958. A meetingwas held for the purpose of tnstructtonsand questions. ~-Mr, Fred Glover, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, -was the pdncipai.spe*ei:~ A series of slides were shown to help all personnel to distinguish the different species of ducks and to show the manner of-ageing them. Tec1lrif~[G8 U8?n:: Equipment used consisted of an airboat, net traps, rods 3 to 7 feet long, wiC"'kets:,"'dipnets, 2 and 3 foot rolls of rabbitwfte" 911tboaI"dboat, pliers, spreader sand bands. Waders and tennis shoes were worn, Large ~hallow lakes with lots of vegetation and large concentrr tions ofmoltmg ducks were selected, Traps were set generally on an island or at the end of a narrow neck, where leads made of . wire couldbe used to turn the ducks Intothe trap ••.:- \'~: '.~~. ' . The airboat and otitboard w~r~'-used to drive -, the ducks into the vegetation, where men wearing waders or .tennis shoes would drive them on b:iio the trap. After a catch was made all birds had to be banded as soon as possible due to heat and piling up. The' ducks w~r¢ handed according to spectes, age and s·ex. The crew was unrestricted 'and wo~ked Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba..' '..:;. ;:~-:':' <. '/.:- ':. ::~ ,'.,-;:.- Mode of travel: ..All transpottatloh Vla~:fJhiisli~d%y i{;h and Wildlife Service. . ..: ili~.p.i .~.~~ .. ~~.~.: ._.~;.~>'~j.:.~ ..~'.._..>;'.~~::' '. ~':~~' :'~".,:.- .".' "!"'''''' }:' .• " • .. ':-" ' . .;,;.,,; ..~ .•.. ': . " �t.'/1: i·""\ Summary of Areas Trapped Lake. Stirling Seven Persons 11' 370 399 Cessford Stirling 129 1478 .. 20 63 51 1 15 32 415 205 214 Narrow Lake Hifield Klondike 44 182 196 31~ 3 4.8 76 11 J 5 32 352 384 685 2 1 5 32 1 Beaufield Pelican Lake Coteau Casualties - 15 Species Mallard. Pintails Green-Wing Blue-Wing 6lhovellers Cadwalls Baldpates, Redheads Scaup Coots Ringnecks Black Ducks Merganser T•.•tals 141 48 80 - - - 2 49 4 -2 - - - - 1 - - - 280 827 . 11 - 1768 - - - 54 4 - - 888 381 22 - 14 - 2 2 - 14 - 879 447 28.28 9 121 92 132 415 69 - - 34 25 - 192 - - 1471 4389 1 - 1:3 51 9 1. : . 9 - 50 23 4 10 2: - 72 .115 . 242 23 2 1 620 1122 Retraps - 69 Grand Total of Birds Banded - 11,818 Donated another 1,028 Mallards to Bernie Gallop for his D. U. Study Area I I tJl 0 I �-51- We were about ten days early as large numbers of ducks were still flying, and considerable time was lost due to scouting. back tracking, break downs on air boat and rain in Alberta area. Work was completed about a week early due to the drought in Saskatchewan where about seventy five percent of the pot holes had dried up. Submitted by:Preston C. Steele Wildlife Conservation Officer Date.e : Approved by: J:;;.;a=n:.;;u=a=r:...yW!i,.....;;1~9~5.;:;,.l1 _ Laurence-.k. Rjordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��53 I~illllll~' ijl~'llil~irlilli[illijilliijll~fllll~11 BDOW022332 -53- " ': . . . , , - ... , ,JuB CU1ViPLETIONREPORT . .i.~~'" -:.. ,.;'::. '~'~.: ..~' •. .. :.:.~" ~.i.· INVEST;~~,~~ONS PR~~,~,~T S, state of " .. ~.!~~f":. _;: >.::•... ; •. ,. c:~~\;'~~2 ::::'9,~?_a'52' ."."~". COLQRADO ., 0,':""'" . ,title ·ofJob;..;..·. .. ' . '.,..."~:.~}:.-:,_< .....".' '.r,,'! .'7'-..s:..'•..•. '.,,:,::.:';,'.';, /"'. ~'.',',:,'',:'1"'-: •..•, r,:' " ' _C_h..;..Uk...:.,a_r_·_H_u_n_te_r_:';..;.'6 __ :he_c.:...;·, k _,.;.;.' _•... __ ; ..:..:...;:..'.;_""" __ .,..;....;.....;.;..;"....,. ;---:-__._' __ J,._.;',;_'/..;..:':'..;..._;c.,_;,.,;·;;..;,: :...~~;~<.::').~!;: ...:~:~)-_ , .,~: Period Covered: ~ 4~--__..:...,_';,... ...__ ·_~;;..;.J __ o__ b_..__ N__ o_~. __ ..__ ."__..,.;..-.~.;..;;...~__._~~~~..;..;.;_-'-- .yvork Plan. No. . '.;;..;'.;._:'__,;. .• ..,..' __. __ . ""~.', November 8 through November ·"i~.1958 , . . ;W~;~E3'\;. Gl~mE. Rogers •. OWi~h~,il.;~~~s~~ s~di~~t~~~~{d wiihl~e< ';'; .r : \ Conservation Officers. ';'~_-'~,._.,,;:;;:, . "'~.'..;';.,::,,'" "., "U:. '," '.<;: '<, 7 ~ ", , ~.. p~rsonnel: ... . .'. . _,'._. .. ..•. ,!. _:~':1"";:~"':~;:"'::":!""':::" ...•-,.::.,: •.: :.'>'··.:C: ·:~'~... :~ ... Abstract: A.check station was establfshed to check hunters, birds, and hunting .activtty . , in Escalante Canyon. Delta County, qU:~~illg)b,~: irlit~al chukar h~Ilf iA: q~lorado'. ,A'4di~ ~. : tiona! .•informatio~ Vias gatheredo~hQn.F%;:~~,HViti:.jn.~er ope~.~:~~~:~ -:',:: .v. 'in' -~-"--';--~-"4:t9tal-of'}~2 '~hukars was harve~i~d E~~iii~:';~~'_',C~~~~~ by 1~8',~~i~rs dufing:i~~'_C",..- - ---fir st' two days of the season. MO~~'.Qt the ch1;lkars,~ere taken oi1~t4e',r~ckySi9PeS of " the canyon' with birds generally ascending 'higher 'iIlto)4~hills as th~ season .'P:r.9~, ~:,'" . gressed. Most hunters saw plenty of birds. Reportafndicateddogswere gEhuiraliy"" . )ne~fective in finding and flushi~g;)~:rfl~:~i".:,L;,' ,.... ".:.' .. ,,' ..'. ',~::: •.• '.:_:~" .."·;.~::.·r"r...:.._."' " .'.' ... ._;":' _"; ; ,', ,. _.'...:.' ,'.~.:<:.'.~';.:._. .__ '.'~ .:.~\',~'... ,', Hunting pressure outside of Escal~~~;,C.~~yon.w~s very Ijight. .~Rhunting ac.tjy~.tY..... ~, was' reported in, at least 24 open which cOlltaizi-siieable g'roups' .c;>f chuka:rs:' .#..: .:: .', __ '.• : '. '. -..' . ,";, --' .•..-~ •.. ~ '_;.-:i..; ...•.._~'. ::':: •.. '~_. ~:,,:.'.'~ ::":.:::.. ! ..''W ildlife Conservation Officers checl,{ed'35 btrds .that.hadbeen bagged in 14 areas.,. ' ,... : .. :"" •••. ,. _'. .,.. ..' '.... .•,__•. ; ;.~::'-;;':.-~~~::, .. -.J :-•••.••••. : .:' ',' "'~_;""-:'' '.::" ';, .;_ ._. ".: Reports from sportsmen and landowners indicate at least 83 additional birds were., .~" taken in these 14 areas.· ....:,.,-",".,." a~eii'~: 0" '.~"!. .;,'"J :. • .': • ' •... "., ., ... ,r:j-.J.': ,.:":-' ....•. :~.:. ,~.:.~ :.•.. I The total.kill.of chuka~s Inthe fOl!;~C~~~~.~~e~·a~~~;~obablY did~~t exc~ed:5'':::(O':~~~'" cent the' birds present. It is reri()lnmended 'that'loDg~r' 'seasons 'be permitted durfng . future Seasons, .in areas other than Escalante s . to facil itate a betterharvest ofbtrds; of '.'" : _.". ,:. '.:' .... ,.' ... :..=: , >.,-:', " •. :.~. """ ; . .:..~.. -; \.;::'- '.' '. r.~;." 1-"; ;":' ".. ~':, .';_:~:· __.';;:~:... Y~. 2~;~~~'~ IK" Chukars bagged in Escalante Can~~n variec{in '~~ight'from 13. :to 1 and ~<'::'E 8.83 ozs. with an average weight.cfI lb. and },~._9.~,.ozs.~ .. A near equal number of male and female birds occurred in the bag~with 75:'4%"of the birds being juvenile •. Coloration of primary coverts appeared simtlar .in young' and. adult birds and probably. is, .Qf .0.,0 ,.'.value determining age ofCh\l~~r~'~ ~~~ ,~~a:pe)~ilil ~ppeara~c,~:of spurs .... . . _ ,'\..~ _J.... .........• ~ _ ,: .. <..... . .. as..a cr~~rio.n of sex.in ch~ars.,. ~9:~.:val~p~_ty, of J~i~,xp~thodfo~ se~c~';lgbird~:,..y}7!~:p?L·; .' '.accurately established. Molted j)l,'illlf!.ries. in con~tlnc~i()pwith lel1~~.pf priw-~~, + .; or' i .' feathers. may prove of value in de,terlllining"botb sex-and age of phu~ars 1:0 the'llunter"s .... bag. No parasitism of chukars was noted. > ,. ~n 'Y,~s'ti~:~~; :' .1 ~. '.', •• , , •..••.• ~ •• _ '1 �by visual observation. Objectives: (1) To determine success of hunters during the first chukar hunting season in Colorado. (2) To collect various data on chukars in Colorado, to include: (a) crops for, food habits .analysrs, (b) weights, (c) molting characteristics, (d) sex and ",age ratios, and (e) incidence of parasitism • •; I. Techniques Used: The initial open hunting seasonon chukar partridges in Colorado was held during November 8 through November 11, 19p8 inal] or portions of Garfield, Mesa, Delta, and Montrose counties, in west-central Colorado. Hunting .duriug these four days was in conjunction with' that on pheasants and Gambel ! B quail. The shooting hours were 10:00 A. M. to 5:00 ,P. ,M." and the bag and possession 'limit on chuka:r;swas three birds. i' .:' } Special forms were prepared for use in recording data on chukar weights, sex, and miscelIaneous measurements, and on the success of hunters. 'One road block was established east of the Gunnison River bridge near the confluence of Escalante Creek and the Gunnison River, Delta County, to collect data on chukars and on hunting activity in Escalante Canyon. This check .point was operated from 9:00 A. M. to 5:45 P. M. on November 8 and 9, 1958. All hunters were chec ked as they left the canyon area. Miscellaneous data collected included: (1) weights in grams; later converted to pounds and ounces, (2) the color of primary feather coverts, (3) mformationon molted primaries, ,(4) occurrence and appearance of spurs, (5) sex, as determined by spur characteristics and general appearance of birds, (6) age, as , determined by the depth of the bursa of fabricius, and (7) incidence of parasitism, as determined by visual observations. , . In addition to routine checks at the Escalante check- statim, findings from field contacts by Wildlife Conservation Officers were summarized to obtain an idea of hunting pressure in areas other than Escalante Canyon. Brief checks were made in Escalante during the last two days of the season to determine hunting pressure. Additional reports of chukar hunting were received from a number of sportsmen and landowners and are included in the analysis. , " ',:. " ' ' No planned effort was made to collect crops from chukars for food hahits studies. Several crops, however; from three areas, were obtairi~d and'preserved for future analy'sls~ Findings: Results of this survey fall into several general categories, pertaining to hunter success and miscellaneous data on bagged birds. ' These findings. are given below. , ", ' Hunter Success in Escalante Canyon As anticipated, the Escalante Canyon area, in Delta County, was a popular chukar hunting area. Favorable weather 'conditions and excellent cooperation from the several ranchers in this canyon resulted in considerable hunting activity. Results of the hunter check for the first two days of the season are summarized in Table 1. �., -55- Table L .--CHUKAR PARTRIDGE HUNTERCHECK, ESCALANTECANYON, DELTA CO.UNTY ~ N<?VEMBER8-9, 1958· ' . Date ..Number of Hours .Hunters Hunted 296 Nov. 8 .88 Nov. 9 60 152 . TOTAL 148 448 .Birds Bagg·ed Adult Young Total 77 20 57 45 10 35 30 92 ,122 Number Birds ' Birds/ Birds/ . Crippled Hunter Hour .. 260 17 .88 6 .75 .296 .272 .82 ·23 Additional information obtained on activities of hunters in Escalante Canyon pertains to the locality where birds were shot (in the valley or on hillsides), to the estimated total birds seen by the hunters while hunting, and to the use and value of a dog in ;hunting chukars, Data collected show that only 20 (16.4%) of 122 birds baggedwere shot ·in the valley area and 102 (83.6%) were taken on the rocky slopes of the canyon. 'Twenty-three of the 148 hunters checked stated they saw no birds. Most of ;these individuals stayed in the canyon only a short while, however, then left to go pheasant hunting. ,.Reports by hunters that were able to locate birds indicated large numbers of chukars were .. present; Reports of observations ranged from one to 200 birds, ·with the number of birds seen per individual averaging about 20. Dogs were used by 11 parties, or approximately 16%of the hunters. Although one dog was reported to have worked well in locating and retrieving chukars on the dry, rocky slopes, most hunters stated their dogs did not seem to be able. to smell the birds. No accurate check was made of hunting pressure and success in Escalante Canyon during the last two days of the four-day season. Spot checks and information received from local ranchers and several hunters, however, indicated the hunting pressure was much less than during initial days of the season. Most successful hunters were pursuing birds among rimrocks high above the valley floor during the latter portion of the season. The relatively high crippling loss, 15.9% of birds shot, appeared to result in part from the presenceof many c revices among the rocks which enabled crippled birds to escape the hunters, and from blending of the color of chukats with that of rocks, making them hard to locate once shot. �-56There were 37 general areas open to chukar hunting during the 1~58 season in addition to Escalante Canyon. In the aggregate, these areas contained many more btrd.s than Escalante, .General. information, however; indicates that hunting pressure and ,the bag of chukars outside of Escalante Canyon was very light. Twenty seven hunters were checked in Garfield and Mesa counties by four Wi,ldlife Conservation Officers. These hunters had bagged twenty-one chukar's. In Delta and Montrose counties, seven hunters that had bagged fifteen birds were checked by three Wildlife Conservation Officers. .. .. In addition to these actual bag checks, reports were received of about 90 additional chukars that had been killed in several areas. Data on bag checks and reported kills for specific chukar areas are summarized, in Table 2. No bag. checks or reports' of chukars having been killed were received from 24 areas. Some of these areas, such the Bridgeport and Gateway chukar ranges, contained a considerable number of birds (See Completion Report, Work Plan IV, Job 8, this publication). . . . . ' as T'able 2~ --CHUKAR PARTRIDGE KILL, BAG CHECKSAND REP,ORTS, WEST- . CENTRAL COLORADO, NOVEMBER ,8-11, 1958. Kill County Area Total Bag Checks . Reports Garfield Parachute Creek· Rifle area Sub-total Mesa !' ,. Sub-total Delta. .club-total Montrose. " Kannah Creek (lower) ,Wa.;mmilb Creek(upper) .Stove Canyon' '. Escalante Canyon Little Peach Valley Oak Creek Well's Gulch . west Redlands Mesa Point Creek King Creek Red Rocks Ranch BiouthCanal Sub-total TOTALS - ALL AREAS 1 4 5 1 0 14 15 ,122 ':20 10 30 0 21 l4 35 1 9 9 6 15 20 ·30 9 131 0 5 5 0 2' 0 6 6 8 3 1 .10 0, 3 1 0 5 . ·129 32 . 161 2 6· 5 6 8 157 8 6 6 83 14 240 Miscellaneous Data Se veral types of data on chukar partridges were collected at the Escalante Canyon' check station. These data are summarized under appropriate headings. �C:"';;' c.. Figure 1. -. A rocky retreat for chukar s in Escalante Canyon. Most successful hunters pursued birds among the rim-rocks high above the valley floor. Figure 2. The first hunting season on chukar partridges in Colorado was well received. Hunting pressure, however, was generally light and birds in many areas were unhunted. ~'I �-57"t-..:' .: i:. !ghts~ .:':':":"One hundred and four chukars were weighed at the Escalante check station. Data on these weights are contained .in Table 3. ..', S" ~,,,, Table '3:. --CHUKAR PARTRIDGE WEIGHTS, ESCALANTECHECK STATION_¢: .!.~. Sex NOVEMBER Age, 8-9" 1958 No. of Birds .,. ~.- Minimum _;Weights Ibs. ozs. Maximum Weights .,l;:8ft Ibs. Average Weights lbs, ozs • 1 1 O.~2 0.81 0.25 Female Immature Mature All females . I:: Male Immature Mature All. males ALL nmns 43 10 53 13.29 15.77 13.29 38 -",13 51 104 15.48 0.98 15.48 13.29 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2.76 2.39 2.76 6.29 8.83 8.83 8.83 'I 1 1 1 1 3.42 ..4.89 3.79 1.99 Coloration in primary ;coverts. -- Primary coverts were inspected on all birds brought through the check station to determine if age could be determined by coloration of these coverts. Emphasis was placed on checking to see if the coverts on juvenile birds were mottled, with shades of brown, gray and white, as opposed to a uniform coloration in mature birds. Findings indicate coverts on both adult and juvenile ;birds may be mottled in coloration during early November and birds cannot be aged accurately by checking these feathers. Molted primaries. --Notes were kept on molted primaries to gather information which, ' may become of use in aging chukar partridges during bag checks. The eighth pr'imary was conspicuously short on .nine juvEmilebirds, indicating that molt had progrels~s~d, " through the first eight primaries, with some growth remaining 'on the eighth 'Jrimary. In two adult birds, the lOth, or outer, primary feather was molted, indicating the bird was an adult and molt had progressed through all primaries. Although no technique for aging, and perhaps sexing, technique may be worked out using these characteristics in conjunction with lengths of primary feathers. Occurrence and appearance of spurs. --Sex in chukar partridges at the Escalante check station was determined by the occurrence and appearance of spurs, in conjunction with general appearance of the bird. Since a large percentage. ~I the chtIkl:irs''checked were juveniles, spur development was notalways complete and sexIag by spurs was not too reltable, : Notes 'were kept on the size and conformation ot §l?lltS..:(wneth~rthey were small or large and blunt or pointed), and whether they occurred on one or both legs. Inspections of gonads were not conducted to verify sex and it is impossible at this time to state what size and shape of spurs are typical for young and adult cocks and what the incidence is of spurs in female birds. In general, it appeared a horny, blunt spur was characteristic of the male bird, and that spurs are usually lacking in females. �-58~~ --Although the reliability of using the occurrence and appearance of spurs as an indicator of sex in chukars has not-been accurately determined, this criterion, in'',conjunction with general appearance of the birds, was used to sex all birds checked' a.t the Escalante station. A total of 109 birds was sexed, with 54 birds classified as hens and 53 classified as cocks; a near equal sex ratiO in the bag. Age.--Depth of the bursa was checked in all birds brought through the Escalante station. Findings indicate .75._4%_of the btrds were young and 24.6% were adults. Bursa depths averaged 18.2 mm. in juvenile birds. Tile ~u_:rsawas completely resorbed or did not exceed 9.5 mm. in depth in birds classified as adults. Parasitism. --No parasites were noted on chukars checked from Escalante Canyon during the 1958 hunting season. . Recommendations: Findings from this survey indicate chukar partridge hunting during the 1958 season was well received, but was concentrated in the well-known and easily accessible Escalante Canyon. Light hunting pressure occurred in several other localities, and no reports of hunting were obtained from 24 areas knownto contain considerable numbers of chukar s, It is recommended that consideration be given to establishing an open season on chukars in all major chukar areas, in the future much the same as during the 1958 season, with an extended season in all areas.excluaee of Escalante Canyon. This should permit a suitable harvest of birds in Escalante, followed by distribution of hunting pressure into areas which were little hunted, or' unhunted, durmgthe 1958 season." Comparison of kill figures in Table 2, and popula-. tion estimates inthe Completion Report for Work Plan 4, Job 8, this publication, indicate the total kill during the 1958 season probably did not exceed 5-10% of the totalchukar population in the areas open to hunting. An educational program to better inform sportsmen of hunting areas and methods, in addition to manipulation of hunting pressure by season lengths and closing specific areas. should aid in obtaining a more suitable chukar harvest. Refinement of methods for sexing and aging chukars in the hunter+s bag would be desirable. It is recommendedstudies be undertaken with pen-reared birds to obtain accurate Jnformation (III, molt, res orption rate of the bursa, and the occurrence and appearance of spurs in male and female birds. Prepared by Wayne W. Sandfort Date J~a~n~u~a~ry~·~,~19~5~9~'_ Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �t""i,., G'{o- 'b~i: G~ t-fr~ 'Q' ,,' f.-cA'1 t2.~Ar ' ", v~I' .-t . January, 195~ . ...'.:•.. ::. -59- . ". ;, ~ ': ~.~f. .. .'_; , JOB COMPLETION REPORT n,iVE'STIGATIONSPROJ ECTS ,'- - ','" . '. . ..};.': Sta,te:of;_,_:,_: _,_,,_, _C~O_L_O_R_A_D ..... O",_".;.-' ,...-~~ '. ;" ~.- .';:: /.' " .' '.:' ' P~~j~ctNp.,. ,W-.37,..R-:12' Game Bird Survey '- Vi ork Plan No. 4 ;Job No. 8 ----~~~--------~~~~~--------~----~--------~ Titl~ of Job:__ .-:- .:.;.A:.:;d:::~::.I::~:.::ta=b:::.:i:::.h:.:·t:.LY.!..' __:Su::;: :::.:rv;..::: .;;i.:.;va::.:l:_' .::an=d::::..::P:...:o:;,lp:::.:u:.:l=a~ti:.::o:.:::n:,_C::.· :::h.::.ec:::.:k;,::s::_ '_,. --,. _ ' ~'~.: .~ ",;:P.~l'i~dCovered.. JUll~,,9through December 10, 1958 .' ,"":" -.-'" "_', ._,Abs·tract: Surveys were conducted .Irom June 9 through December 10, 1958 to census , chukar s, ·dete'~mine distiib~tio~ and,tange of these birds, and to: ascertain reasons for ;~lCCE;~S,~r failure. in, deyei~p~ent. A total of 2,673 birds was observed during surveys in 62 ar'eaa-withtn- 12,.cC?~~ties:"The estimated, total pupulation in these areas was 5, 460-,W, 440, considerably higher than previous estimates. Chukar movement from the ,,'point .of.orfgfnat.retease. has resulted in stocking of considerable additional range in ' several areas. ' Failure of chukar populations to develop satisfactorily appears to be related to predation, lack of suitable feed, lack of rough terrain, and to heavy snowfall. Best development has occurred in west-central Colorado where rough, foothills country, mild climate, 'and sufficient food, in:the form of cheatgrass, has created a favorable environment. Objectives: 11) To determine the adaptability and survival of chukars in areas with new or recent releases, and in areas of established populations. (2) To determine dispersal of birds from the point of original introduction. (3) To evaluate the environmental factors in relation to the increase or decrease of this species. ,Techniques Used: Intensive field surveys were car rted out in areas where established chukar populations exist, and in areas where recent chukar releases were made, during the period June 9 through August 21, 1958. Several additional checks were made from August 21 through December 10, 1958. Surveys were generally carried out in early mornings and during evenings along waterways, around fields, and in other localities where a maximum number of birds could be observed. ,Actual observations of chukar s, tracks, droppings, calls, dusting sites, and reports from local residents, sportsmen, and Game and Fish Department personnel all gave clues to the minimum number of birds in each area. General observations of predators and signs of predators, food conditions for chukars, topography, "weather conditions, and human disturbance were made, to determine possible causes for success or' failure in development of chukar populations. Findings:. Findings from this survey are summarized in three general categories, as fotlows: _(1) chukar census and population estimates, (2) dispersal and range of chukars, and (3) factors' responsible for success or failure in chukar development. _' �-60- Census and Population Estimates The maximum number of chukars observed during 1!-)~8, in 65 areas in 12 counties, and the estimated populations as determined from surveys for the period 1956-1958, are summarized in Table 1, As shown in this table, the estimated summer {:opulation of chukars during 1:,.58 was the highest for the three-year period. Concentration of chukars because of the drought during the summer of .l958 resulted in a high count of birds and a high population estimate. Data obtained during this year are undoubtedly more accurate than those gathered during 1957, when above normal precipitation resulted in wide dispersal of birds. '. _' ..... '" .. .'.. ~ ~.' -, '. Dispersal and Range Movement of chukars from the point of original release resulted in stocking of several areas during 1958, which apparently hadpreviously been unoccupied by.these birds. Addttional development of chukarpopulations around the foothills of Grand Mesa, in Mesa and Delta counties, occurred from movement from the Kannah Creek and Well's Gulch areas. Birds were observed during the summer of 19i>8 in King Creek and 'VdndyC1;"eek,which lie between Kannah Creek and 'Nell's Gulch, and along Potnt Creek. which lies several miles to the south and east of Well+s Gulch. • <," • )' ,I I .~ �-61Table 1. --CHUKAR PARTRIDGE OBSERVATIONS AND SUMMER POPULATION ESTIMATESCOUNTIES AND AREAS IN COLORADO, Hf56-1958 Maximum No. of Estimated Number County Area Birds:.bb~er;ed, -..;:o.::..f ...;:C;.::h::.;;u;;.:k~a7r::.s _ Summer, 1958.!/ 1956 1S57~/ 1958 Delta , Angel 's Ranch (Gu~ison River) Black Canyon (portion in Delta Co.) . Broughton's Orchard (Gunnison River) Escalante Canyon Hargrave's Ranch Hot:hkiss Ranch ., Little Dominguez Little Peach Valley North Fork of Gunnison River Oak Creek (west of Eckert) Peeple's Orchar~ (Gunnison River).' Point Creek . Smith Fork (tributary of GUnnison River) Tongue Creek (west of Eckert) Well's Gulch West Redlands Mesa Sub-totals Fremont Red Rock Canyon Twin Mountain Area Sub-totals Garfield Camp Gulch Cottonwood Gulch (east of Grand Valley) East Salt Creek Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon Prince Creek Rifle Creek-Graham Mesa Area Roaring Fork (near Carbondale) Sub-totals Jefferson Guy Gulch (west of Golden) Las Animas Apishipa River Mesa. Big 'Dominguez -" , Bridgeport Coal Gulch .:. 100 . 55 "'~: 0" .".. 100 85 65 15 -700, 300:, 50 15 ..+,.. . __2/ : 7 487 o " ~. -- 64 50 3 100 248 150 25 50. : 10 35 o 100 15 12050 85 o 260 175 110 1,256 1,695 820 o 50 25 23 23 50 25 300- 500 50- 150 5~-:150 7.00,..1200 25- 50 . 25- 50 100:" .250 ·200':" 400 r 40 75 10 17 350- 500 75- 200 50- 100 150- 250 25- 100 350- 500 50- 100 2,500-4,500. 25- 50 50- 150 73 75- 200 5 100- 200 45 25- 50 100- 150 125-, 250 0- 50 100- 225 0- 50 25 o 31 200 101 100 40 60 75 38 243 150 50 600 o o '60 210 10 50 10 100 30 12 102 o 450- 975 75~" 100 150- 200 25- 100 �-62- Table 1. -:-:CHUKAR PARTRII)GE OBSERVATIONSAND SUlv.lMERPOPULATION ESTIMA-::ESCOUNTIES AND AREAS IN COLORADO, 1956-1958 Continued. Maxrmum No. of Eshmated Number Birds Observed,l of Chukar's County Area . Summer, 1958I7 1956··1957· :1958 Mesa (continued) 10 Coon Hollow 10- 15 Cottonwood Canyon (tributary of Dolores R.) 15- 25 75 ·.100- 200 100 DeBeque Canyon 34 40 East Creek (Uniweep Canyon) 321 150 160 500- 700 Gateway Area Gunnison River (between Bridgeport and 100- 500 Whitewater) 75 65 Horsethief Canyon-Ruby Canyon Area 10- 25 Hunter Canyon (Little Salt Wash) 2 19 100 25 50- 100 .Kannah Creek (lower) . 100 Kannah Creek (upper) 115 25 250-.300 100- 150 King Creek 79 40 UiO200 43 100 Plateau Creek 100 90 75- 100 33 Stove Canyon 25- 50 25 Windy Creek (north of Well's Gulch) 510 1, 585-~65 785 875 Sub-totals Moffat _ 18 75 100- 150 85 Brown's Park (Blevin' s Ranch) 50- 100 16 75 50 Brown"s Park (Bull Canyon) ·50 100- 150 63 Brown's Park (Calloway Place) 50-.100 40 Irish Canyon 300- 500 137 160 175. Sub-totals Montezuma 25 McElmo Canyon Montrose 50- 100 Bostwick Park ., 34 50- 100 150 150 Black Canyon (portion in Montrose County) .:";20 0- 50 o Dry Creek . 0 0- .50 25 -0 Duckett+s Draw (West Canal Area):" Olathe Gap· -, . 50- 100 o 150- 3,00 110 100 109 Red Rocks Ranch 25- 150 7 Roc Creek o 250 0- 100 10 South Canal s~ 50 30 30 o South Shinn Park 150 300 325-1,000 Sub~totals 575 Pueblo Beulah-Rye Area 5 25 Turkey Czeek : 25 5 Sub-totals �-63Table l.--CHUKAR PARTRIDGEOBSERVATIONSAND SUMMERPOPULATION ESfIMATESCOUNTIES ANDAREAS IN COLORADO; 19'6f).;.195S: Co~tinued. _ Maxrmum No. of Estrmated Number .'.. Birds. Observe,J of Chukars County --Area· Summer, 19582 ;:~.". 1956 1957 1~b8 Rio Blanco 50- 100 100 30 23 Little Hills Experiment Station:(Th~Cr.) 100- 250 120 35 White River (east of Rangely) 56 . ",:. 150- 350 65 220 79 Sub-totals Saguache 75 Curtis Ranch Area 25- 50 0 25 50 50- 100 150 Saguache Creek Area 0 125 75- 150 0 175 Sub-totals 2,280 5,460-10440 TOTALS-ALL AREAS. 4,425 2,673 1/ Birds counted during a single survey. 2/ Two dashes indicate no count was conducted. 3/ Above normal pr~~ ipitation during 1957 resulted in wide dispersal of chukars and low population estimates. . '. This movement along the base of the Grand Mesa indicates development of a much higher chukar population may be possible, parttcular'ly if additional water developments are placed in dry-canyon or dry-basin a.r~~s. In the Gateway area, chukars currently inhabit range along both sides of the Dolores River over a seven-mile, valley area from Gateway to the Colorado-Utah line. A large portion of this. area apparently was stocked from birds released near Gateway. In addition to the range just mentioned, chukars also have been reported up Sheep Creek, north and west of Gateway, along -Iohn Brown Creek and John Brown Mesa, south and west of Gateway, and in Cottonwood Canyon, about six miles south of the town of GitEM'ClfY Thi~ movement may contribute to further chukar development in the Dolores River (r21r.t8.~e. Recent reports from ranchers indicate birds are showing some development in the Twin Mountain area, north and west of Canon City. Several groups of bizds, have been ~ea and .0.118 .covey of 23-25 chukars was observed by the writer lle_arthe top of South Twin Mountain on December 10. These birds were feeding .on green cheatg rass growing on a steep south-facing slope. Presence of birds in this' area indicates chukars moved at least four miles from the original release site. _ Although many other movements of chukars were noted during the 1958 surveys, those just discussed were some of the most significant. Such movements are believed to be beneficial and should aid in a more uniform and complete stocking of chukar range. A distribution map was compiled by Jim Miller as an aid in establishing the first chukar season in Colorado. This map is presented in Figure 1, with the general range and concentration areas shown for a four-county area. Several additional concentration areasw re noted after this map was compiled. This map, and accompanying key, however. e scrfbe the main chukar areas in west-central Colorado. �-64.' -.'" ~ -~-~- •••• "-"~''''''",'':'' ••_ .•••. , 'if. KEY TO CHUKAE AREAS D"ESIGNATED"~ FIGURE 1:" Area Number -" Mesa County" , ... ' .. NaIn~ -of Area "~~"'-- -. ''', Bridgeport Coal Gulch' DeBeque Canyon Gateway Gunnison River (between Bridgeport-and Whitewate r) Hunter Canyon . Kannah Creek, lower ... . ,.-i Kannah Creek, upper .Plateau Creek Stove Canyon Big Dominguez 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 " 8 " 9 10 12 ", Delta .County Angel's Ranch Black Can.yon (portion in Delta County) Broughton's. Orchard " Escalante Can.yon Hargrave's Ranch Hotchkiss .ctanch . Li~re Dominguez Little Peach Valley Oak Creek (west of Eckert) Peeple's Orchard Smith Fork Tongue Creek -Well' s I~(blch West Redlands Mesa 11 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Montrose County 26 2728 29 30 31" 32 33 34 Garfield 35" 36 37 39 4u 41 " "" - . '. ~ ,. " Black Canyon (portion in Montr-ose County) Bostwick Park " Dry Creek Duckett's Draw Olathe Gap Red Rocks Ranch Roc Creek South Canal South Shinn Park" Camp Gulch "Gi'?~h.im Mesa Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon aifle Creek Roaring Fork (near Carbondale) �GARFI£L ~ G\ D c: .::0 sT-r! .....• '~ I C) V\ :z:::: V., 11 ey C c::: ::rc :s ~ ~ ,." ~ :0 N MESA "'0 :> ""_:0 c.o-! 07::t) /'h'-1 w~ ()') LEG END ~ A pp r-ox in, a+e ~ bounclQry "'"-i rahg e <.n -f COhcenfr4jion a r e a s. ~ ......• CD eo c: 4-i - Inqex humber- to COhcen-trq-tion a reo .; o -< of ----- ---- --- _, MONTROSE '6 �-65Factors Responsible for the Increase or Decrease of Chukars Failure of chukar populations to develop satisfactorily appear to be related to several factors, including predation, lack of suitable feed, insufficient steep slopes and rough terrain in the areas of release, and heavy snowfall during the winter. In Rio Blanco County, poor development of chukars in the Little Hills area apparently has resulted because of heavy winter snows and a heavy predator population, primarily bobcats and redtailed hawks. Where climate is milder, near Rangely, .somewhat better development appears to have occurred •. It is stiJ,l questionablea.however, if sizeable populations of chukars will develop in any area of Rio Blanco County. Poor development of chukars in most areas on the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains seems to have resulted from poor food conditions, lack of rugged terrain, heavy predator populations, and perhaps heavy winter snows. Climate in the Canon City area is milder than in other areas along the eastern foothills, and may account in part for current success in chukar establishment in this area. A predominance of gr'ama grass and relatively severe winters creates unfavorable conditions for establishment of chukars in much of the eastern Colorado area. Good development of chukar populations occurred in west-central Colorado during 1958. This development appeared to result from generally suitable habitat, consisting of rough, foothills country with interspersed canyon areas, mild winters, and generally abundant cheatgrass. Within this habitat, above normal precipitatton and excellent cheatgrass growth during 1957 resulted in the best chukar hatch on record during 1958 (see Job Completion Report, Work Plan 4, Job 2, this publication). The outlook for additional development of chukars in this portion of the state is currently bright. Recommendations: Findings from this study provide a generally good basis for comparison of chukar populations from year to year and indicate if progress is being made in development work. It is recommended these surveys be continued to aid in increasing chukar populations in Colorado. Submitted by: Wayne W. Sandfort Date : ..;;J_;.a;;;;n;.;.;u;.;..a_;.ry"'-fo., _1....9;.,.5;.,.9 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��· "1: January. 1:;;5 .' -67JOB COMPLETION l{EPGRT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS COLORADO State of ----------------------------- Project No._' _\'v_-..;3_7_-_R_l..;;2;..,_,_...:, Work Plan N<.f.4 Chukar Partridge ..;;G_am;..._e_B_i_r_d_SU_r_v_e~y _ '; Job No. 2 Title of Job:._ _.;;;.P..;;:.r..;;:.o.::du.::c.:..t:.::i:.:.on~St;.:;.::ud.::.l;:_;· e;.;;:s;..._ ~ Period Covered: '" .,.- _ June 9 through August 21, 1958 . Abstract: Surveys were conducted in Delta, 'Garfield, Mesa, Moffat, Montrose, and Rio Blanco counties during the period of Jun~ d through August 21 to determine reproductive success by chukar s and factors affecting reproduction. A total of 52 broods was observed which contained 568 young, giving an average brood size of 10.!:1. Counts of young and adult birds were made from July 21 through August 12 to obtain a youngper-adult ratio. Totals of 1, 424,young and 292 adults were obtained, giving a ratio of 488/ .1.00. The ratio was 41::;/100 in areas where birds were released during the spring of ·1~58· and 523/ IuD in localities containing established populations. Reproductne success. during the 1958 season was the highest on record and appeared to be related, at least in part, to climatic conditions and growth of food for chukars, primarily , cheatgrass (Bromus tecto rum). Lush cheatgrass growth occurred. during the summer of 1957 as a result of above normal .precipitation, and abundant green feed was preseIt in chukar ranges during the winter of 1.957-58. Excellent reproduction followed this period, even though the spring and summer of 1.958were abnormally dry. Insects,' primarily grasshoppers, may have played an important part in chukar growth and survi val during this dry period . ....... 'b; ' Obje.ctives: (1.')- To d.ete~!pin.e:-a~ual .productton chli:kars. (2) 'To'd~termine the factors or conditions .responsible for reproductive ~ ~. success. ",.' ",:. \ .; . Techinyues Used: Production by chukars during the summer of 1::158 was determined by gathering two types of data. These consisted of the average number of young per brood and the average number of young per adult. Broods were counted during the period extending from June s through August 21 during routine surveys in areas occupied by chukars. Field notes were kept on the date and locality of observation and on the approximate age (in weeks) of the young. Age classification proved valuable in determining the number of broods ranging within a specific area, and probably eliminated repeat counts of most broods. �-68- The young-per-adult .ratto was determined by making intensive surveys in chukar areas , durtng' the .per-iod July 21 through August 12. Localities along creeks canals, springs, edges of fields, artificial water developments, or other areas of:chukar concentration were traversed by vehicle or on foot to observe and count chukars. Most counts were .made in early mornings or during late afternoons' when birds were concentrated around water or food in valley areas. The young and adults were readily distinguishable during the period of survey, with the aid of binocular-s," and were tallied for each area surveyed. Climlatic data were obtained from the U.. S. We'ather Bureau at \~.alker Field, Grand.Jttn:;tm to determine possible relationships between moisture, temperatures, and reproductive success. Notes were kept on the actual amount and condition of feed in chukar areas. Particular attention was given to the growth of Bromus tectorum, the general time of year it dried up because of drouth conditions or natural maturity, quality of seed produced by this important chukar food, and the amount and types ofiIis~cts apparent within 'chukar range. Notes were also kept on the availability of free water for chukars. Findings: Findings from this survey fall into three general catagories: (1) the average brood size, (2) young-per-adult ratio, and (3) factors responsible for reproductive · success. Data pertaining to these three catagories are presented in the following sectiOns ~. to give an idea of chukar reproduction during 1958, to show variation between the average brood size and the average number of young per adult, and to show posaible effects of various climatic and forage conditions on chukar 1partridge production. , Average Brood Size Data obtained during this study show that 52 broods, counted during the summer of 1958, containead 568 young, averaging 10.9 young per brood. A summary of brood counts for this year is contained in Table 1, with a breakdown showing the average size of broods for three specific months. A slightly lower brood size for the month of June may have ·been obtained because of difficulty in 'observing all the young birds or because of an · inadequate sample. A drop in the average brood size duriDg August was expected as a result of normal loss of some of the young.. '.' ", Table l.--CHVKAR PARTRIDGE BaOOD-COUNT·DATA, WESTERNCOLORADO., SUMIVlER,1958 . ",,,'>: ' Month Number of Broods Observed . Number' of You!l~ Avera~e Brood-Size June July August ALL MONTHS .' 7 31 14 . 52 73 362 . 133 568 10.4 11.7 9.5 10.9 As shown in Table 2, the average brood size for the summer of 1958 was the highest for the three-year period, 195.6-58. �-69- Table 2.--THREE YEAR SUlv1MARYOFCHUKAR BhOOD_COUNT DATA, WESTERN COLORADO. 1956-58 A.verage BroodNumber of Young Number of Broods Observed Year SlZe 8.5 448 1956 53 8.3 116 1957 14 10.9 568 1958 52 y~". :> ~ -,' . ,"f ~ ;} .; _ ~f' • :. ·:..~fl:[~:·..:·:' -. , Although ,the number of young per brood gives a good indication of reproduction. the young-per-adult ratio is believed to give a better conception of the true reproductive success. This ratio is derived by ;considering all birds observed, juveniles and adults; including successful and non-successful breeders. Data summarized in Table 3' show that 1,424 young and 292 adults were observed during the 1958 check. giving a ratio .of 488 young per 100 adults. i' Table 3. --CHUKAR PARTRIDGE PRODUCTIONCOUNTS, ~STERN COLORADO, JULY 21 TO AUGUST 1,2, 1:358 Date of Young/Adult Ratio County Count Young Adults Total Specific Area Areas with New Re'leases during 1958 Gateway July 25 285 36 DeBeque Canyon August 1 15 6 DeBeque Canyon August 5 7 () Mesa Montrose Roc Creek July 25 o Garfield July 21 85 Camp Gulch 7 16 9 ',I', 7 August 12 18 ,,'!; L '22': ' August 12 '100 419 Sub-totals ,, ,Populations Established Prior to 1958 Delta- ,_.:::: ,,::'~alante July 28 299 56 Well',s Gulch July 29 201 34 Dominguez July 30 58 6 Oak Creek August 2 135 17 Smith Fork August 4 63 12 Moffat Mesa • "i' ; , ....... ' . .:-,::,: -c: Bull Canyon Irish Canyon Indian Rock Ranch " July 26 Lower Kannah C'ree'kJuly 30 Brtdgeport. July 30 Upper Kannah 'Creek August 7 18 4 10 15 101 16 40 519 '~Montrose, Red Rocks Ranch , ':Rl0 BlancoIuttle Hills ",HI; /' "~> ':/('If]i" , , 1:19/100 .355 235 64 152 75 79 19 23 ' 97" - 'ALL AREAS .'t: . 61 15 13 82 321 21 13 " 'r j., .,' August 4 64, : 11. ::0'25, 'if;:it.; _ Augustd"+I! ,!Mi;Pc,Q i ,-0 ";i'j1, .?3 ~-""; ','. ;-, :'!}. 'If:,J;,cQAA,' h~2v"l,[19J ..", '., .523/100 .J; !'" -.l~4A,.a'1 ' . 292 ; lq7tfj , 488/100 �.••......._ . -_ ~.'::;- ". -70- ._..':::7- Separate youag-pe r- adult ratios were calculated for area::>where releases otgame.-rarm birds were made duriog the spring of 1958"andfor areas containing chukar populations established prior to this year. As shown In the above table, the young-per-adult ratio .. in areas of new release was 419/100, and 523/100 in areas of established pepulattoas . . :, "the ratio of 488!iOU for all areas, for 1958, is much higher than other ratios recorded during the period l!:155-1958, . as shown in Table 4. . .\. .', Table 4. --FUUR~YEAH SUMMARY·OF YOUNG-PEh-ADPLT RATIOSFOR CHUKAR PARTRIDGES, \\ESTERN COLORADO, 1~55-l958. " " Yiuullg pel. .LOO Adult::; ;un)OOL' or Young NumbtH of AddL:::; . Observed Year Obser.ved 1955 186 102 159 ' . :': ._ '" .. 1956 1957 1958 219 186 i,424 .. 165 100 lJ2 186 488 282 Adaptation tothe environment prtor to the period of mating and nesting appear's to play a part in reproductive success by:chukars ... As shown in, Table 5, the ratio of young in the population has been generally higher in areas where birds are established and accustomed to their environment than in areas where birds are placed .into new habitat shortly before the breeding season. . '''--. Table 5. --COMPARL30N OF YOUNG-PER-ADULTRATIOSIN CHUKARPARTRIDGE POPULATIONS, AREASWITH NEW RELEASES ANDAREAS OF FSI'A BIHiEIl POPULATIONS, 'IN ESTERN COLOftADO.1955-1958 Young per 100 Adults Year Areas with New RElenses Areas of Established Bpttini..s: 1955 ..... lf156 i957 i958 48 160 187 419 222 119 181 52J .. Factors Responsible for Reproductive Success The success of chukar part.rtdge reproduction appears dependent upon several condttfors or factors, including .prec ipitation, temperature and the resulting food conditions for chukar s, and perhaps the abundance of food in the. form of insect life. In general it . appears nesting and hatching success is best when late summer and fall rains cause . , cheatg rass to sprout, :provid.ing green feed for chukars dUring the winter months. ···Sutficieiit·prectpttatton during late winter and early spring, which permits this grass to mature natUrally'·and··produce p-lumpseeds for chukar feed during hot. dry, summer months may also be important in cbilkar survival.. This is probably not as important as green winter feed, however, _a~a greater variety of feed is available during the summer, and diets probably can be changed or modified if a particular food becomes scarce or is lacking. �~jQ. ' ;: ; , -71The relationship between prectpttation, green winter feed, 'and chukar reproduction can be readily seen by inspection of data in Tables 5 and 6. Precipitation during late summer and fall of 1954,and 1957was above normal. Good forage for chukars during the following winter resulted from this moisture and generally high reproduction resulted the following summer. This phenomena was particularly noticeable in 1957:':' 58. Abundant late-summer rainfall caused a: rank, lush growth of green cheatgrass for winter feed, which was followed by the highest reproductive success by chukars on record in Colorado. Although very good chukar partridge reproduction occurred in west-central Colorado' during 1:958, the spring and late summer-months were extremely dry, as shown in Table 6. Cheatgeass did not produce high quality seed, and food for chukar s from this sourc7appeared scarce. During this per~od~:however, the number of grasshoppers ' within chukar range elsewhere, was abnormally high. These insects may have played an important part in chukar survival, particularly in young birds. During the dry summer of 1958, chukars concentrated in,the vicinity of artificial water developments and other sources of water. One incident was noted where the fruit of ' ' cactus was being mgested.. Cactus may have been consumed for food or water, or perhaps both. Although the value of free water for chukars during the reproductive period is not clearly understood at present, general observations indicate these birds prefer to range in areas where water is available. The survival of young birds may be dependent' upon the presence of drinking water. ,' .!: / ... 1'''=:'1" �-72Table 6. --MONTHLY WEATHER RECORDS FOR THE GRANDJUNCTION, COLORADO, AREA. AUGUST 1954 THROUGHAUGUST 1958 Precioitation Temperature Month Year Inches Depart. from normal Mean Ave. Depart. from normal i 'uguSt, '1954 through JUly;~955 August1954 0.59 -0.61 -1.1 74.5 September 67.1 2.51 11.49 -0.2 " October 55.0 0.83 -0.01 10.6 " November 1.69 11.14 42.6 14.0 " December 26.1 0.36 -0.32 -2.4 " 1955 January 0.61 10.01 23.9 -0.1 Los"" 10"42:' '.." . 21.5' -10.5 'r ~ .: . .. '(L 17 " ,.,ii::' 70 '-['~! .. ':.' 38.:) :Jl. r: -2'.7'. March '. -2.9 April 1.13 10 48.;:) 10: 62 '.. 60.9' . -1. 7 May 1.30 ;~()'. 21 69.6 June 0.24 -1. 6 . -0.31 " 79.4 0.'48 July /1.'2 August, 1955 through July. 1956 August 1955 0.85 76.0 70.4 -0.35 ,. September 0.38 69.9 -0.64 12.6 .October 55.9 0.02 -0.82 11.5 November ."0.34 -0.21 35 •.1 -3.5 '. .December 35.8 O. 18 .. . -0. 50 . 17.3 " 1:356 January 1.70 ./0.47 112.3 36.7 '" -r : February 0.7,0. 10. 05 30.9 -1.1 March -fl. 1 42.3 0.07 -0.80 April 0.24 -0.51.' 52.4 10.6 .May . Q26 -0.42 64.5 12.4 75.4 -:: .... ,.',' . Q. 30 -0. 15 June i .: 14.2. ., -OJ :0.53 . -0.26... July. " 77.1.", -1~1.. ,~'-' August, 1956 through July. 1&57 73~:5';"; Augus(:~; 1956' ' .•.2~ 1. 0~i04 -1.16 ';7'O~6,1 : September O~Ol -i.Dt· 13;3 t . 56.3'.' 0.54 ' -o~30": October 11.9 November -0.37 0.18 34.3 -4 • .3 December 0.47 -0.2l 24.9 -3.6 .•. 957 January 2.46 11.86 25.0 11.0 February 0.63 0.00 31.0 11.0 " ,. March.' . 0.73 -0.14 43.2 12.0 April 1. 51 10.76 48.9 -2.9 " May 1. 79 -5.3 11.11 56.8 " ..•. 1. 3 June 0.61 10.16 69.9 ., July 0.57 -2. 1 -0.22 76.1 August, 1957through July. 1958 August 1957 3.48 12.28 72.9 -2.7 ,. September 0.09 -2. i. -0.93 65.2 ': .:..0. 1 October 11.40 ~4.3 2.24 November 1.15 10.60 36.3 -2.3 " 31.5 0.43 December -0.25 13.0 1958 January 29.8 -0.05 0.55 15.8 t ' February 0.70 39.9 10.07 17.9 -1. 0 40.2 -0.03 0.84 March " April 0.06 49.2 -0.69 -2.6 May 65.6 0.34 -0.34 13.5 75.5 I~.3 0.76 June 10.31 J.06 78.0 -0.73 July -0.2 .F'etiruary : :..;o~ I~ , •. f1 I! t- t· ,f/ i It II �-7:jRecommendations: The average brood size and young-per-adult ratio, as determined during production studies, provided the basis for establishing the initial chukarp'2l'ti"1'cge hunt in Colorado during November 8-11, 1958. Studies on reproduction by chukars in established populations and by recently released birds, and on the relationships between precipitation, food conditions and chukar production, provided data that should be of value in future management of ;this species. "J! It is recommended that production studies on chukars be continued as long as the chukar development program is in progress. Emphasis durbg these surveys should include: (1) obtaining an accurate young-per=adrdt ratio, (2) a study of relationships between the amount of free water required by chukar's and the moisture gained from insects and succulents, (3) determination of reproductive success in areas orestablfsfad: populations and in areas of new release, and (4) continuation of studies on the relationship between climate (principally precipitation), food conditions, and chukar : -"'1: . :'n. reproduction. r Pnepazedc by Jim Miller Wayne W. Sandfort Date January, 1959i -------------------~--~~-------------- Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��J anu~ry , 1959 -75JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJE GTS State of COLORADO ----------------------------- P~QjectNo. __~~~·_-~37~-~R~-~12~··_· :.; ~ ~G~a=m~e~B~ir~d~SU=r~v~e~y~ . r. Work Plan No~4Chukar Partridge Job No. " _ :..:: 5 ',' ", , Title of Job: _-=L:..;o;;c::.:a:.:t~ic:::o~n_:o:::::f:..=.:R:;::e::.:le:::.:·a=:· s:::.:e:::....::S:;:.it::e:.::s:;___;__~ ',' ..;_ _ . Period Covered: August 1 through Decembei~"Io~'"1958 .,Abstract: Results of chukar population checks and production studies were analyzed to determine where best chukar development has occurred and to determine the best general localities for additional chukar release. Birds in fourgeneral areas, including the Bookcliffs, Dolores River drainage, Grand Mesa area, and the Canyon City .area have shown favorable development to date and populations should benefit from the release of.additional stock. Nine specific sites, within the. major areas just described, were, selected for the release of approximately 1,425 birds during the spring of 1959. Legal descriptions ofproposed release sites wen:: ascertained and necessary ..agreements and permtsstons for the release of birds were obtained from landowners. Objectives:' (1)'T6'locate suitable areas within the state for the release of wild-ttapped (and game-farm chukars • . : (2) :To obtain necessary agreements or permissions from land-owners (pr'ivate publtc) to,asslire necessary protection Jor birds 'released. . \': or' .•• i',·', TechniQUes Used: Geaer'alar'eas, or porttons of the state where chukar partridges have shown best' dev~lop~~nt, ~e:r.e'd~~;mi~d, from-popuiaticn checks and production .studies during the past severaj yea,r.s.~ .In,gep.eral,' lower. elevations in western Colorado and the eastern foothilfs of the Rooky Mountains near Canon.City, .Fremont County, have shown the best development, .~'as withi~ these areas that searches for additional release sites were conducted. It Chukars are generally placed" ill a specific area for three consecutive years, under the current development program, and -supplemental. releases will be made in several such areas during the spring of 1959. During the selection of new release sites, special attention was given to environmental factors, such as cover, food, water, and terrain, to human disturbance, and to filling gaps in presently occupied range. Landowners were contacted to obtain permission for releases, to gain their support in protection of birds, and to obtain verbal approval for public hunting in the event chukars develop to huntable numbers •. �... ~,.., . . .. . '. , "~; - .. ; -76Findings: Four general areas were selected for the release of approximately 1, 425 chukars during the sprmg of 1959. These areas include: (1) the .Bookoliffs Mountain range along the northern side of the Grand Valley in:Mesa and Garii-eid'-~ounties, (2) the foothills of the Grand Mesa in .Mesa County, ~(3) the Dolores River 'drainage near the· . Colorado-Utah state line in Mesa and Montrose counties, and (4) the Canon City area in Fremont County. tlpecific .re lease areas, with legal descrfptions and the approximate numbe'rofbfrds to be released, are shown hi Table 1. _. ~ i Table i.-':'-LoCA'riON OF CHUKARRELEASE SITES FOR THE SPRING OF 1959 Approx. No Birds to Name of Release Site County Legal Description be. released ". Bookcliffs Dry, Canyon. Sec. :1, TSS, RI04W Garfield 200 ",: Hunter. Mesa' 150 Sec. 5, T9S;' RIOOW 200 W. Fork Lipan Wash Mesa Sec. 27, T8S, RIOIW 550 Sub-total Grand Mesa Area ioo Sec. I, TIOS, R96W Plateau Canyon Mesa 100 .. Sec. 2, TIS, R2E Watson Creek Mesa. 200· Sub-total Dolores River Drainage 100 Roc Cr-eek sec. 4, T48N, RlSW Montrose 200. Sec. 26, T48N, RI9W. Paradox Valley Montrose ... 300 .Sub-total .' Canon City Area Sec. 24, TI7S, R7lW Fremont 100 Wilson Creek 100 Sec. 32, T17S, R70W Fremont 175 Sec. 13, T18S. R7IW West Fork Sand Cr. Fremont 375 Sub-total I 425 . TOTAL-ALL AREAS The Gateway area along the .lower- Dolores River showed excellent chukar development during. 1958 (see Job Completion Reports, .WorkPlan 4, Jobs 2 and 8, this publication), and release of birds in the ROc'Creek and Paradox .Valley areas 'should aid in extending :, chukar populations up the Dolores River. Mtld cltmate and generally ample food for ;; chukai-s in the Dolores River Canyon should aid in development of this species, in spite of disturbance from travel of ore trucks and other mining activity. ,- .. Portions of the Bookcliffs area were open to chukar hunting during November of 1958 and information to date indicates this area will support a much higher ehukar population. ., Releases during 1959 will supplement_current populations in the Hunter Canyon area." : A new release will be made in Lipan Wash and in the vicinity of a water development 'in" Dry Canyon to aid in filling gaps in present chukar range in the Bookcltffs. r Release of birds in Plateau Canyon will supplement the present population of chukars in this area. Placing::..oObirds in Watson Creek Canyon should aid in extending the range of chukars around the base of the Grand .Mesa. �-77Although definite establishment of chukar populations in the Canyon City area cannot be claimed at present, there are indications that a huntable population of chukars may develop. Findings from adaptability, survival, and population checks (see Job Completion Report, Work Plan 4, Job No.8, this publication) indicate birds have moved several miles from the point of original introduction and are adapting themselves to steep mountain sloOes. Releases in 1959 will be made near an area known to be occupied byc:hJtk:ar.s in an attempt to hasten further development of this species in Fremont County. Recommendations: Present plans for chukar development in Colorado call for the release of approximately 1,000 game-farm chukars each spring during the period 1959-1962. Additional releases of wild-trapped birds may be made, depending upon availability of personnel and trapable concentrations of chukars. Location of release sites will be an important part of ;this program. It is recommended that studies be continued on the development of chukar populations and that release sites be carefully selected so that birds will be placed in the most favorabl e localities. Prepared by Da~ Vv ayne W. Sandfort Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~J~a=n~u~ar~y~,_1~-9~5~9~ _ ��78 -79- • .January. I 1959 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJEC TS 11')01"('\/·4 ~ s; I, I)....; i) • COLORADO Beaver Investigations W-83-R-5 Work Plan No.__ --z·~Jo~b~N:..::o~. ~2::.._ ....:5~.....:_ _.;;, _ Title of Job:_--=E::,;x~p:.::::e;;:.r.:.:im::::.::e:.::n:::;ta:::;I:....:;:H:::::a:.:.r.!.v~es:::.t:...:::S.::tu::.::d::i~e.:;:.s ~Period Covered: Calendar year. 1958 Abstract: During 1958, South Cottonwood Creek was dropped and Squaw Creek was added to the list of 7 "pilot streams" to be used as study areas on this job. 2. Beaver habitat appraisal, carrying capacity determinations, census and management recommendations have been completed on all of the pilot streams. This information is presented as Table 2, with management recommendations for individual streams immediately following. Objectives: To determine the optimum number of beavers that can be harvested according to habitat quality in order to maintain beaver colonies in balance with growth of . food plants. Procedure: Techniques developed under Work Plans 5, 6, and 7, for determining carrying capacity, censusing beavers, and determining habitat suitability will be applted to seven experimental streams which have been located. Regional Fur MalUgeLE' .and Wildlife Conservation Officers will be responsible for carrying out the ,actual surveys, with Federal Aid personnel cooperating in all phases. Information will be recorded on forms and maps, and will be available to the Federal Aid Division, Department Regional personnel, and the Forest Service. Control of beaver populations , on these streams; i. e., trapping or restocking, will be based on the recommendations submitted to the Game and Fish Department by project personnel. ' William"H. Rutherford ��'''/Q ;_: -81EXPERIMENTALBEAVER HARVEST William Rutherford Findings: When the completion report for this job under .Segment 4 was subinitted (see Quarterly Report, January, 1958), the streams upon which the work was to be done had been selected, and some preliminary habitat appraisal work had been done. During Segment 5, one change was made in the list of selected streams, Marvin W. Smith, the Wildlife Conservation Officer responsible for ,the work in the Salida area, objected to South Cottonwood Creek as a "pilot stream" on the basis of poor accessibility, high altitude with corresponding late melting of winter snowpack, unstable beaver colonies due to large volume of spring run-off water, and too large an area for adequ-atecontrol, .As an alternative, he suggested SquawCreek as a stream which has none of the aforementioned objections. ' '. '.' Mr .. Smith and the project leader,' .acccmpanted by Regional Fur Manager Bryan Dentcn, made an appraisal of SquawCreek during the summer of 1958~ It was found to be entirely snitable for inclusion as a beaver management pilot area; accordingly, SouthCottonwood Creek was dropped from the list and SquawCreek was added. Table 1, immediately following, shows the pilot streams by region and admtrfstratton: Table 1 -- Pilot Str6!_msfor Experimental Harvest Studies .§!ream Region County WCOin charge Big Willow Creek NE Jackson~ Donald Gore Two-bit Creek SE Lake Albert C. Jordan Squaw C .eek SE Chaffee Marvin W. Smith Cebolla Creek SW Hinsdale James Houston Henderson CReek SW Gunnison Lyman Curtis Oak Creek l\""V' Rio Blanco Rebert Rosette Castle Creek NW Pitkin Robert Terrell Headquarters Walden Buena Vista Salida Lake City Cedaredge Yampa Basalt During the summer of 1958, habitat appraisal and carrying capacity determinations were completed on all of the pilot streams; and in the fall of 1958, be~ver census and management recommendations were made. This information is presented in Table 2. In all cases, the Wildlife Conservation Officers responsible for carrying out the work accompanied project personnel on these trips. All information of an arbitrary nature (i. e., information which must be obtained by resorting to background, knowledge, and experience, rather than by exact measurements) is the composite, of opinions expressed by all persons involved in the work. In many instances, aerial photographs were eextremely helpful in determining the width of valley bottoms and areas of aspen and willow stands. Appreciation is, extended to the U. S. Forest Service, through the ~ervisors of the various Forests on-which the pilot areas are located, for the use of aerial photographs by project personnel. :,,:.::,. ~. . "' •• _»"1/ �-82Table 2 -- Beaver Habitat and Populations on 7 Pilot Streams, Fall, 1958 .!>:: .!>:: (l) . .~ (l) .• (l) (l) I. M .!>:: 0 (l) (l) ::: 0 - ,_.....• Item ... ': ., '. • • .' ••..•• ~....' "\ (l) (l) o ,bD .~~ :, '~' ~ ~ I (l) (J) U M d - 'g. :.0 .';,' E-t to Area of aspen stand Condition 11 A. Ave. , 68A 96 A. Area of willow, stand condition 72 A. 75 A. None Good Poor ,Competition NOD,e, L~ght None , (I)' M C) "0 .. "d ! " .!>:: ttl '(I) ::r: C) 10.4 A. Fair Ave. Ave. (!) (!) (I) '0 ~ .!>:: .!>:: 0 OJ M ~ C) I M C) M .•... .... .0 ~ I ~ M .!>:: 0 21 A. 15A. Ave. Ave. (l) (l) M U (l) .•... rn ~ C) None 92.4~A• . '14 A. Poor Ave. 165 A. 63 A. Poor Ave. Light, Light Light " " -Light " ..... , Gross Carry .tng capacity: colonies 8 beavers 32 ," . -- ~ 0 Net carrying capacity: 1./ colonies 8 beavers 32 •• Census (falli (1958):2/ colonies' .'-- 0,.: . 12 48 26 10%- 0, 10% 13 50 12 48 6 24 6 , , "Deduction for competition .1., 14 56 '0- beavers M •••• " ' '. .- 1 7 3 24 , unk. unk. ',' '" " '10 ,28 4 16 9 3 38 14 10% 10% 10% 4 8 3 14 32 12 4 2 6 2 ! 10 8 " '," : (j. 1/ Based")6n'an arbitrary average of 4 beavers per colony. ,It is now believed that the otfgiD:ai estimate of 6.,,.... beavers per colony 'Is too high. " .... .. ':.;'": . ~/ The number of beavers recorded in census is the number which, in the opinion of the investigators, were actually present, rather than an arbitrary assignment of an average number per colony. ' l'YJ.anagemEmt Recommend2.tions: :.l' L • ~l 'j. 1 j '-. Big Willow;Creek: This stream suffered almost a complete die-off of beavers, attributed to the effects of a tularemia infection. It is racommerded that the stream be left alone through 1959; by the summer of 1960, if the residual population has not increased considerably, restocking of at least 4 mated pairs of beavers is in order. Carrying capacity determinations should be repeated when the populatiC?,nreaches alevel .approaching the present carrying capacity • �-83- Two-bit Creek: This stream has a good beaver population, although well under the carrying capacity. Annual fall census is in order, with cropping in the event the population increases beyond carrying capacity. Re-det ermination of carrying capacity should be done in 1961. Squaw Creek: This stream is unique in being the only stream in the series which had no beaver population present at the beginning of the study. The Wildlife Conservation Officer in charge released beavers throughout the summer and fall, but is is not known how successful these transplants were. Close observations through 1959, with continued releasing of beavers if the need is indicated, is recommended. He-determination of carrying capacity should not have to be done until a good population becomes firmly established. Cebolla Creek: This stream was found to have a beaver population slightly in excess of carrying capacity. The Wildlife Conservation Officer in charge, working with project personnel, determined that a 1958 harvest of 4 beavers was in order. Annual census, with cropping if needed, is recommended. Re-determination of carrying capacity should be done in 1961. Henderson Creek: Lack = of water is ;the major problem on this stream. The indicated carrying capacity of 4-5 colonies of beavers is about maximum from the standpoint of utilization of available water. Close otBervat ions throughout summer and fall, .annual census, and re-determination of carrying capacity in 1961 are recommended. Oak Creek: This is another stream which suffered a heavy die-off of beavers. It is believed, however, that the residual population is large enoigh that transplanting should .not have to be done. Recommendations are to let natural build-up occur, census annually, and re-determfne carrying capacity when a good population becomes established oice more. Castle Creek: The beaver habitat on this stream consists of meadow areas separated by long stretches of non-inhabitable stream. These meadow areas appear to have very little influence upon each other from the standpotnt of changes in beaver population. The Wildlife Conservation Officer in charge, therefore, preferred to use only one of the meadow areas as the pilot area, rather than ustng the entire stream. Recommendations for this area are annual census, cropping of beavers if needed, and re-determination of carrying capacity in 1961. Prepared by:_W;.;...;;;;il;;;.h_·a.;,;;;m;;;...;;H;;.;.;....;;.Ru=th;;;.;e;;.;rf=o.:;.rd;;;;..... Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Date: ..;.J~an_u_a~ry~,__;;;1..;..9.:;.59~______ --~~~~~~~~~~---Federal Aid Coordinator ��January, -85- 1959 /JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJEC'IS , '?,!:oject N.o.__ ' ~w~'-~8::.::3~·~..::R;:.'-,..:5~:,,:,:,'_' --._' _',..-.._' ..;.:.z.,.;',~'-_' _..::B::.:;e;.;:a:.:v:..:e;.;:r_In=.;v:..:e;.;:s;.:t;::zig::L:a;:,;t~i.::.o _ Work Plan No~'----~------------~~~~~----~----~~~------------3 . Job No. 2 "',;' Title of Job:" ."~ .,.J , ~. ~. ~ ... ".. -. . ;.. - -. ", EmbrYo 60UIit~ froin Pregnant Beavers . '... - Period Covered:' Calendar Y~~r 1958 ,', Abstract: .Reproduction data were collected durtng April, May, and June, 1958, from , 45 female heavers, brInging the 'total number in the sample to 502. ,Information, on productivity, ,age classes," and sex ratio is presented in tabular form as Tables 1 ani 2. "",';'2. "Ei3timated agesof beaver~ collected were 'again based on the arbitrary ";; weight classes which havepreviously been established. carcass -- "::"-3'.',-This,Year"s sample, from the San Luis Valley, showed a much higher' rate of population increase than heretofore recorded for similar elevations in other parts of the state. The sample also contained a higher percentage of mature animals, and for the first time, a majority of males, " ;' 4., These sample data, although not adequate in-number for direct comparisons with previous years ~data, indicate a shift in population composition. This .shitt is attributed to ~laremia, flooding out, and general population and habitat disruption over the past 2 years. Objectives: To determine the reproductive rate of beavers in Colorado. , Procedure: Collect reproductive tracts from female beavers taken by state trappers , in as many' areas of the state as possible. Record and compile pregnancy and reproduction data for all samples collected. Prepared by: William a Rutherford �-86EMBRYO COUNTS FROM PREGNANT BEAVERS William Rutherford "' ' '; .. , Findings: Reproduction data were .gathered from 45 female beavers during April, . May, and June, 1958, to bring the total number in the sample to 502. The collections this year were all from the San Luis Valley, at altitudes of 8,500 to 10,000 feet. Table 1 presents' the information gained froJ::Q.JI.~J.:~~~ples examined by project personnel from above 5, 000 feet elevation to date. Not included in the summarization, but-included in 'the:s-ample:total, are 29 female beavers examined by state trappers in the spring of 1957. ~ On these, no data other than number of embryos and number of pregnant animals were recorded; therefore .• J4~.samples are unsuitable for inclusion in productivity calculations. Information on these animals can be found in the Colorado Quarterly Report, January, 1958, :1>;.122~ . Table 2 presents the data on age composition and sex ratio of the 1958 spring catch examined by project personnel. :The 'estimated ages of the beavers shown in Tables 1 and 2, as in previous years, . were again based on arbitrary carcass weight classes of 10-18 pounds for yearlings, 19-29 pounds. for 2-year-olds, and 30 pounds and up for mature animals. , .. ' ,! ; ;., /v. . , I . '~'. �-87- '. Table 1 --Reproduction Data from 359 Female Beavers Taken During Spring Trapping at Altitudes Above 5, 000 Feet. Totals for 1958 1954, 1955, .'Item above 5, 000 above 1956 and . 1957 above: feet 5,000 feet '5,060 feet -;,,' . 314 Total no. of females Estimated ages of females . Mature (carcass wt. 30 lb. or more) : 129 Two-years (carcass wt. 19-29 lb. ) 130 One-year (carcass wt. 1.0-1.3lb.) 55 . No. of definitely pregnant females 79. % of definitely pregnant females ., 25%·' :No. of po.st:=partuLifemales. .. . 19 % of ·aIlfteime!~s-.dMmiteljpregnant or post-partum 31% % of :mature females definitely pregnant or post-partum 76% 15 No. of possibly pregnant females .: % of definitely pregnant, plus post-partum, plus possibly pregnant females. No. of embryos in all definitely pregnant .females -.202 No. of placental sea rs in post-partum: females 52 Average no. of embryos (pregnant and post-partum females) 2.6 No.. of embryos in pregnant females with '. 196 data on corpora lutea . No. of corpora lutea in definitely pregnant females 236 No. of corpora lutea in post-partum females 60 No. of corpora lutea in definitely pregnant, 296 . plus post-partum females Resorption rate (definitely pregnant plus . post-partum females) . Rate of population increase, assuming 40%'.'. 100:100 sex ratio. ... ..... ' 45 359 27 7 11 156 137 66 86 24% 37 7 ., . 16% 18 56% . 34% 93% 1 !.. 58% 39% 22 224 48 100 2.8. .'. 2.6 22 218 30' 266 65 125 95 391 26% 17% 78% 45% Table 2 -- Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch, Spring. 1958 • • Males Females Mature . 2 yrs. old 1 yr .. old Total Mature 2 yrs, old 1 yr{ old' Total --------------------~-------__..------------ 26 .• '. .:' , ·11' '.17" 54, Sex Ratio (No. of males: 100 females) ~ .'. 27 120.0 . 7 '··11 45' �-88- The sample from this spring's beaver catch, .whilesomewhat larger than last year's sample, is stfll small. Samples are gathered. of nrecesslty, from those areas on which Regional Fur Managers believe harvesting Is needed during the particular year involved. 'This year, due to-a-general statewidereduction in beaver populations occasioned by habitat disruption and epizootic tularemia oyer the past 2 years, ..Regtonal Fur. Managers felt that light harvesting; and in some cases no harvest at "all, .was in ' order. 'Accordingly, project personnel were unable to secure a large sample' this' spring. The pregnancy rate, based both on all females in the catch and on mature females only. was considerably higher this year than in past years (Table l)~ A proportion- . ally larger number of mature females were trapped this year, and a proportionally larger number. of them were pregnant. This. of course, -,is a grossly physical explanation of the 'situation. The sample is too, small to, state with any degree of accuracy whether this is the true population status, but it doea.Indicate a departure, in some degree, from the population status of past years. unless it is due entirely to,the chances inherent in trapping. A possible explanation is that :mature animals, and that these mature animals which survived are more vigorous and are better breeders. .""; , : For the first time since this study was initiated. males outnumbered females in the spring catch (Table 2). Again. this may be due to the chances inherent in trapping. or it may be related to the unusual conditions prevtouslynmentloned, A sex ratio of 100:100 will continue to be used as the basis for calculating annual increase. " < The average number of embryos per pregnant or post-partum female in the San Luis Valley sample was 2.8, as compared with an average of 2~3 for similar elevations in the Gunnison River drainage, and an average of 2. 7 for northern Colorado. The rate of resorption of embryos in the San Luis Valley sample was 2,6percent, compared with 24 percent in the Gunnison sample, and 15 percent in the sample from northern Colorado. This high percentage of resorbed embryos is difficult to explain in view o'f the :slightly higher average number of surviving embryos. It means that females in this spring's sample had an unusually high rate of fertilization, which again may be due to being more vigorous breeders.. .Embr-yo resorption, of course, is caused by the female being unable to provide' enough nutrition for a large number of developing embryos, ,. '., , . The higher average number of embryos. and the fact that the sample was composed of a proportionally larger number of pregnant females, is reflected in a constderably higher rate of population' increase; 56 percent,·' as compared with 28 percent for the Gunnison sample for-. the northern Colorado sample,... . .. ~ and 42 percent . .' .- ,., . .. , .. . .. - , _' _, - .. " ., ACKI>:~!ea[ement~: .,Fbi assistance iIl th~~cotlection ~ft]liE!,info~ioatio~:.appreciation Is eRtended-to J. F. And~ew~" Fur:-~an::lger,· .S'!l ~gfon; piiilip' iI.awKer. Wildlife Conservation Officer t saguache";··George Crowley, Water commtsstoner t Saguache; and Hax:ij swiink~ District Ranger; U. S. F~rest service, Saguache. ' Prepared.by; William' H. Rutherford Date:, J~a=n~u~a~ry~,~1=9~5~9~ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ �'86 January, -8~- . JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 195,9 lilfiOOjilliifimir BDOW022336 ~------~~~~~~------ State of COLORADO ProjectNo. ~\V~-~83~-~R5~ Work Plan NO.;.... __ ~3~ ~ .z..· B~e~av~e~r~In~v~e~s~t~ig~a~t~i~on~s_ :;.J!:!:ob~N!!:0:.:..-..;!4_...;,.. ~--- Title of Jab :,__ _.,:::C~o.!!nt:::.:r:.!:o:!:ll:;.:;e:.:::d:...:Stu=!:.gy,z;...::o:!.f..!P,.::r;.!:o~du~c:::.:t::!.iv!.;i~ty, --, Period Covered: Calendar Year 1958 Abstract: In the summer of 1955, 5 mature beavers were ear-tagged and released on Lost Creek, behind a barrier which had been previously constructed. Subsequent obaervattons of this population of beavers indicated that it had diminished by the fall of 1957. 2. In October, 1958, steel trapping was done on Lost Creek to determine - in beaver populatton occurring over this 3-year period • ....... ..--..--,- 3~----TW?'oftlieortgmal ear-tagged animals, yearlings, were trapped. This represented the change a male and a female, plus two male the entire existing population. 4. The only apparent increment to the population over the 3-year period consisted of the two yearlings. 5. The fate of the 3 ear-tagged beavers which were not recovered is not known. There is a possibility that they became victims of a widespread tularemia infection which was present throughout the state during the period covered by .thts study. There is also the possibility that the barrier was not effective, and that the beavers moved away from the area. Objectives: To determine the rate of population build-up from a. known number of· . resident beavers. . Prepared by: ":. '-~. William H. Rutherford ��-91CONTROLLED STUDYOF BEAVER PRODUCTIVITY William Rutherford Findings: During the summer of 1955, the entire beaver population of Lost Creek, a tributary of the Williams Fork River in Grand County, was removed. A barrier against beaver ingress and egress was constructed, and 5 beavers were Itva-t.rapped, ear-tagged, and released above the barrier. This job was reported it.I ;the Colorado, Quarterly Report, October, 1955. Subsequent work has consisted of maintenance on the barrier and an annual census to determine the status of the beaver population within the enclosure. As was reported in the: January, 1957 and January, 1958, Quarterly Reports, the released beavers established themselves in twoseparate and dtsttnct colony sites and maintained this state of occupancy .,thr~ugh the fall of 1956:0'. The population In the fall of 1957 appeared to have been reduced from two colonies to one; at least only one food cache could be found. Although the area was searched periodically, no dead beavers were noted. What had happened to the other beaver colony could not be determined. In the summer of 1958. further maintenance work was done on the barrier, and in early October, a considerable amount of new beaver activity was noted at two different locations, approximately 300 yards apart. Two-lodges were active, although a food cache was under construction 'at only one lodge. ~ The possfbtltty that there were still two beaver colonies present on the stream diminished as it became evident that beavers, although still active at both lodges later 'in the month, were working on only one food cache, Late in October, steel trapping was started. Four beavers were "!trapped in the first 3 days, and after that no further sign of beaver activity was noted and no beavers visited the trap sets. The traps were left set for a week, and were run .every day. It was finally concluded that all beavers had been trapped; accordingly, the traps were then pulled up. The beavers trapped consisted of a' mature male, a mature female, and two yearlings. One of the yearlings was. trapped at the lodge with no food cache: the other three were taken at the other lodge. It ~,eems evident thatthts .population consisted of one definite colony, or family, of beavers, with no others :present. . Following is a tabular comparison of beavers released and beavers trapped: Year Ear tag No•. 3311 3312 1955 3314 3313 '" '3317 sex weight M F 50 M F F Location released 49 58 57 . J! 40 -'" 12' LocatIon trapped] #1 #1 #2 #2 #2 3313 #1 F 49 48 '.. ""'." "#1 3317 M 16 None #1 M 18 None M #1 1/ Locations are listed with reference to the destgnattons given at the time of release, and shown in photographs in the October, 1955, Quarterly Report. 1958 / �:: , : .•. - -92- were Analysts: Table 1 shows that th~'beavers which' ottiginallY released at site No. 1 did not remain,' and that beavers released at' site No. 2 later moved to site No•.. 1 •. It .also shows that a beaver was called . ~. . :. ~ ~. which , ~. . a .female in 1955, based on external palpation, was found to be a male upon dtssectton of the carcass ·in ~058. In 1955, two biologists concurred in the opinion that this 'beaver was a female, which demonstrates the difficulty encountered in accurately determining the sex of live beavers. . . . , .The most significant tnformattou, .however,' is the apparent lack of productivity . in th~ mated parr ~f be~verswhich remained or survived, as the"case may be. At the time of trapping, and durtng' the Intervening tibie since release, no evidence of a lIttter during any spring other than 1957 could be found. The evidence was not absolutely, conclusive, but an examination of the reproductive organs of the mature female indicate? that no young had been produced in 19'58. 'i ...: --;. This study In beaver productivity was intended to supplement Job No. 2 of this . Work Plan, Embryo Counts From Pregnant Beavers,' as an attemptto provide .a more accurate Index of actual yearly population increase, since Job No. 2 does not take'into"accoi!nt post-natal and juvenilemortaUty. Iri view of the peculiar circumstances which attended th'is study," it cannot be: stated whetberthe difference between the number of young beavers at time of btrth and at the time they reach 2 years ofageds as much as indicated, although the opinion of the investigator is that a population under 'normal condtttonswould mot show 'this wide difference. • . : • • . . ~ . j '. • .i . '., ~. : _. . " ~' . .... . It is highly unfortunate that epizootic tularemia was widespread among beaver populations during the time this study was In progress. The value of the study .. 1,slfullified b;Va lack of knowledge of the exact fate of the beavers which were .released. 'fp," 1955 "andwere not recovered in 1958. The tularemia is simply one more uncontrollable Iaetor- which entered into the experiment .: ; ',I ..... -: It can now be stated with cert-ainty what was suspected in the earlier stages of .study; that an experiment of this nature is subject to influence by so many uncontrollable variables that the final results cannot be interpreted. The only way ·in which such an experiment could be controlled would be under ."._. 'coniple"b~'iyartificial~cl>ilditions, ·where all beavers could be' accounted for at any given time. This. is obviously beyond the scope of the present project • ...Approved by: Lau.rence E. 'Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date: ------~~~~~~~----------January, 1959 �9 . January, -93- 1959 COLO DIV WILDLIFE JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH CTR LIB II~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII BDOW022337 INVESTIGATIONSPROJECfS 9200857 State of COLORADO --------------------------.Project No._~W;...-~8;.;;:3;...-.;;;R.;;.-~5;_.... _'l_ Work Plan No. Title of Job: Period Covered: ~6 __.;B=e;;;.av.;..e;..r In;;;.v .•.. e_s;;...;t.;;Jig;;z.;a;;_;t;.;;.io.;;.:n;;;.;s:;._. _ :.;. ;:.;;::J.:::;ob.:::...:N~0;;;.:.:.._. __ __.:.,7 __ ...;..._~ _ Aerial Beaver Colony Counts Calendar Year 1958 '. Abstract: The aerial beaver colony trend counts on routes established In 1955 · were again flown this year to continue the collection of aerial trend data. Information recorded for each route consisted of the number of fresh beaver food C ,caches, plus incidental information on beaver activity. .' 2. Good flying weather was encountered, , .and completed on' schedute; and unlike 1957, all routes were flown' 3~ Data recorded on the trend routes are presented in Table 1, and compared with 1957 data where applicable. On streams which were not flown in 1957, 1ffi6 data are used for comparison. 4. The trend in beaver populations this year is up. The atypical conditions of last year make interpretation difficult, but it is believed that populations in 1957, although down to some extent, were not down to the ; .•.. wel indicated by trend counts, and that populations this year show only a normal build-up. Objectives: To continue the year-to-year aerial beaver colony counts over the .routes previously established, .as a basis for estimating the annual trend in beaver numbers. Procedure; The aerial trend routes which were established in 1955 were flown .this year for the fourth time, to continue the collection of aerial beaver colony · trend count data. The flying this ~ear was done by Department Pilot R. W. Betts · in a Piper. Super Cub plane, with William Rutherford as observer. The plane was flown between 300 and 800 feet above the streams, depending on topogrtphy, at an air speed of about 90 miles per hour. Data were recorded on standardized I forms. Prepared by: .William H. Rutherford ��_,;:1 -95: so .. '". : ~'" AERIAL BEAVER COLONYCOUNTS William H. Rutherford Unlike 19.57, when flights .were terminated by weather conditions before completion, the, weather; this year remained good throughout th~time _of flytng, and ale' routes were flown and completed on schedule. In determining 'percent of increase or decrease of beaver colonies on the trend routes this year, 19'56 data were used for comparison on those streams which were not flown in 1957. These streams are so indicated by footnote in Table 1. . -~ ~ '. .' . ~ .'i i . . • ",". . The most important information recorded for each route was the number of fresh food caches, since these are used as the crttertontor colony centers. Other incidental information. on beaver activi,ty was also recorded. . . '.' Table 1 -- Aerial Beave·i-ColonY Counts 'on S~mple Stream Sections, 1957 and 1958. Route .' Percent ofinc rease .1958' Stream miles 1957 or decrease miles per colonies miles per colonies colony colony Big Grizzly Cr. 0.0* 1. 95 & N. Platte 'Ii. 19 19 Jack Creek &. f18. 2 * 13 . 2.57 '; Illtnots R•. Ii 33 1/2 ·3.05 ,£162.5 21 Laramie River 31 3.87 .1.48 8 0.0 8 4.44 Blue River 4.44. 8 35 1/2 19 Williams Fork R. 7 2.71 3 6.33 -5.1.1 * 1100: 00 1. 67 6 12 Trou.blesome Cr. 3.33 20 . ,£71.4* 14 24 1. 25 Big Muddy Cr. 30 2.14 Rio Grande' R. . .4 9.37 37 1/2 3 133.3 12.50 South Fork of 1.53 . Rio Grande He 121/4 6 2.04 /33.3 8 0.0 San Juan River 5.12 4 5•.12 20,1/2 4 13 ~O Los Pinos River info 4 3.25 .. 0.0 15 15 Bear & Yampa R~ 86 5.73 5.73 26 4 White River· 6.50 -50.0* 2 13.00 2 S. Fork White R. . 15 7.50 4 /100.0* 3.75 Cochetopa Cr. 34 19 1.79 21 1.62 110.5 11 Tomichi Creek 37 1/2 0 info 3.41 ,£166.7 East River 30 3 10.00 3.75' 8 .15 _..... -1.·23 Ta:ylor ftiver' 18 1/2 8 ""2~ 3-1-"" 187.5 ,£500.0' 14 1 6 West Mancos R. 14.00 2.33 10i. 44 1/2' 4 .,fi50.0 11;·12 Dolores River 4.45 S. Fork South ,£.233.3 Platte River 10 3 11.00 33 3.30 7 1.29 9 Michigan Creek 12 0.75 171.4 5 2.00 10 Jefferson Creek 5 2.00 0.0 14 19 1. 36 3 6.33 Arkansas River /366.7 not flown Eagle River 7 0.89 6 1/4 ----** Totals 678 88 4.76 250 2.71 /96.6*** 'J' , . .' . �Qll' f".. • -96- Table 1 --continued * Trend route not flown in 1957. 1956 data are given in first column and compared with 1958 data to determine percent of increase or decrease. ** Eagle River is a new trend route -..: not flown prior to 1958. Beginning point, is top of Tennessee Pass; ending point is Pando. >I>Io+:Overall percent of .increase obtained by discarding 1958 data which have no comparable' 1957 data, when some routes were not flown, Thus'; there is a total of 173 beaver colonies in 1958 on the same routes which had 88 colmies in 1957. ," ::", -',' , ,) : Ffnrlings: ,Total stream miles covered was 678, on which 250 beaver colonies were recorded. The data are summarized by individual streams and compared with 1956 o'r 1957 data, depending on which waathe last p,reviousJligp,t" in Table 1. o : : • • Contra~ted -~ith. 1957, when the tr~nd ~ounts indica~d- th:afbeaver populations ware dowI;l"J},lecO!lntE!thjs year show a rema~kable population, i!!~rea~e. : Last year's downward trend was attributed to the effects, of 'an epizootic Infection of tularemia, and, to the diarupti v:e effects of extremely he,,:vy spring run-off of flood waters. .'~ " ~... In in!~rpre'tiiig_these year-to-year trend counts,' it must.be emph~sized that the results cannot be tndtscrtmtaately applied to anystream in the, state, because it is not ..known whether the trend routes are a truly representative sample. They . were chosen as being. typical of certain geographical areas, and were set upto cover, in varying degree, all of the major drainages of the state. Thus, while certain deductions of an ,interpretive nature can, be made, it cannot be stated with certainty that the statewide beaver population trends will conform exactly to the population trends on the establtshedroutes. It is believed that the true status of the beaver population in the fall of 1957 was' obscured by the atypical biological conditions which exisjeds There is no doubt ' that the population 'Vas down, but it is doubtful as to whether it was down to the extent indicated, particularly since the increase ;this year is greater than would ' normally be expected. The. vast difference in indicated populattonlevels on the trend, routes between the two years is probably due anore to the effects of unsettled 'vs. settled conditions ,than to actual ipopulation differences, Prepared by: William H. Rutherford. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Date:_......__.....;J...,;;a.;;;;n;;,;;u;.;;;a;;;;,r~y.L..,. ..,;1;,;;9...,;;5;.;;9 _ • ,i �January, 1959 --97- JOB COMPLETION REPORT . INVESTIGATIONSPROJECT S ,',_ State of;'___ Project No. . -l£Io.o.l..OuT.-J,O~BioCAIo&D.&lQ~- ••••..••..•••• W-83-R5 . ,,";,1 _ Beaver Investigations '. ork Plan No. . 6 8 --~~-------------------------------~~----~------- 'I'ttle.of Job: . Refinement of Census Techniques Objectives: To determine the number of beavers occupying wirter colentes, ,. Procedure: The previous work oncensus techniques has developedthe need for a broad sample from many ecological types which can be analyzed as a basis for determining the average number of beavers per winter colony over the state. . With this goal in mind, project personnel have collected data from certain beaver colonies over the state, by live- and steel-trapping during the fall after beavers have concantrated in colony centers for the coming winter. To date. the' only sonrcas of such d~ta'hav.e.boonJtappi13g.o,llsr.l3-tions carried out by, or under the control of. project personnel. Any time that reliable data can be secured from state or private trappers, such data will be included; thus far, however, these trappers have not concentrated upon the removal of entire colonies, which is absolutely necessary for reliable data •. It is recognized that a comparatively large sample will be necessary for analysis. The existing sample is inadequate; therefore, the (lata will be presented as such. It is planned that this ;job will be continued over a of several years, with the annual addition of as. many beaver. colonies as possible. ... .. , , ., Findings: Table 1, immediately following, presents the accumulated data, to date, onnumbers of beavers in various colonies. �-98 .•.. ,', _'-.-..- i~ -',:""" . t '•. " : . """ " " r: "I: , . Table 1 -- Nurr.6:d~al Composition of 23 ~eaver Colonies in V~!.ious Habitats. Altitude Major food Y':9~ or'"': T.r ~'pp1.Dg No. of brave rs est, h{stocyfeet, species stream trap'~ . ",:.Willow' . 7 untrapped 9~000 1954 Williams Fork R. 1954 'trapped pre4 Williams Fork R. Willow 8,800 bious year; new colony .Willow Lost Creek 9,000 4 19.54... .untrapped 9,000 , untrapped Willow 1954 7 Lost.Oreek 1954 . 9,000 Lost Creek Willow untrapped 6 Aspen 9,000 1955 untrapped 10 N. Platte River '1955 untrapped Aspen 9,000 7 N. Platte River 1955'" .9,000 . untrapped Aspen 8 N. Platte, River . Aspen 9,OOQ 1955 untrapped 3 N. Platte River 9,OOQ. 1955 Aspen untrapped 11 N. Platte River . N .. Platte ,River 1955 untrapped 7 Water Lily 9,000 10,5()0 Willow 1955' untrapped Nutras ·Creek 3 . Nutras Creek Willow 1955 untrapped 5 1Q,500 untrapped . 9 Willow 10,500 1955 Nutras Creek Willow 8,500 1956 imtrapped Little Muddy Cr. 4 untrapped 9;000 1956 6 E. Troublesome C r, Willow E. Troublesome Cr. Willow 9,000 1956 untrapped 3 . '. trapped clean, 4 .1958 Lost Creek· Willow ,9,000 . ~ mated pair released 1955 Spanish Creek Aspen 8,500 1958 cropped in 4 .... ·t956 _. 1958 _ . cropped in Aspen' ~,6QO 2 ". ,Spanish Creek 1956 Elkhorn Gulch Aspen 9,500 cropped in 1958 4 1956 Los Pinos Creek,., Willow 9,500 1958 cropped in 6 . 1956 Aspen' Los Pinos Creek 9,500 1958 cropped in 5 1956 - ' . .t " ~'. " 'J ,,'. :. I" . Average number of beavers per colony: Prepared Date: by: William ,H. Rutherford Approved by:Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator __;J~a;;;;;n;;;;;u;.;;a:.;;;.r:l..y!.., ...;1;;.;;9~5..;;;9 _ 5.6 �January, lU59 -99JOB COMPLETIONREPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT- 9206858 . State of COLORADO ----------------~---------- Project No•• W-59-D-10 WorkPlan~ ~l Wildlife Habitat Improvement ~~J~o~b~N~o~. ~.~l ~~ Title of Job: Establishment of Food, Nesting and Cover Plots . Period Covered - January 1, 1958 to December 31, 1958 Ahstr.act; Trees and shrubs planted in 1958 included: Ponderosa Pine Pinus ponderosa, Blue Spruce Picea pungens, Rusian Olive Eleagnus angustifolia, Squawbush Rhus trilobeta. Chinese Elm Ulmus pumila, Hackeberry Celtis occidentalis • .-- -------Caragana Caragana- arborescens •. Caragana pygmea. Plum Prunus americana. Rocky Mountain Juniper Juniperus scopulorum. Herbaceous species planted in 1958 included: Milo millet, tall wheatgrass, bluestems, Lincoln brome, Cerecia lespedeza, and yellow blossom sweet clover, and other herbaceous species. Soil Conservation Districts planted 143,686 seedlings. Individual cooperators planted 8, 200 seedlings and project personnel planted 1, 900 seedlings on State-owned properties making a total of 153,786. Potting of 48,500 evergreens consisting of 2-0 stock was accomplished in tar.paper pots at the Fort Collins Nursery. Approximately 25,720 potted evergreens were distributed and planted in 1958. No Rocky Mountain cedar was obtainable for potting for the 1959 season. qbjective~': To plant or supervise the planting, purchase, designing and distribution of approximately 150,000 seedlings on private land, Soil Conservation Districts and state-owned lands. These included 100 cooperators inll Soil Conservation Districts; herbaceous plantings on the Cobb Lake property near Wellington; seven rows of squawbush across the dryland area on the Smith pro. perty at Crook and replanting as needed with stock available on the same property;, To assist W-37-R and W-90-R technicians and/or any other project in an intensive study of nesting, food and voer plantings over a period of years. To pot necessary evergreens for 1959 plantings. To promote wildlife plantings under the "Gil series of the conservation reserve portion of the Soil Bank Program • ...•.Preparedby Francis Metsger and Richard Takes ��, .... ; J : • '"" ESTABLISHMENTOF FOOD, NESTINGAND COVER PLOTS ....... FRANCISMETSGER ANDRICHARDTAKES Results: Approximately 100 plantings were made on land owned by Soil Conservation District cooperators. These plantings were mainly of the farmsteadwindbreak type - five rows, with shrubs on one side and evergreen species on the other. The remainder of the plan ting consisted mainly' of taller species of trees. About ten percent of the plantings were visited and in most cases the plantings complied with project specifications. The plantings were designed so that maximum amount of food and cover could be obtained for wildlife. Plans of all plantings were submitted to project personnel by Soil Conservation technicians. These were inspectedto insure proper design. The project was again short in providing potted evergreen stock. This was due to insufficient .Rocky Mountain " - }uniper stock being produced and a relatively poor survival in potting beds of ponderosa pine .. The size of the stock was felt to be the determining factor in the high loss. The ponderosa pine stock was about three inches too tall for proper potting. S~edling'sthis year were much better and the survival was proportionately higher. Four State properties received development work from this project this year •. The Smith place, near Crook, .Colorado, received seven rows of low shrubs Rhus trilobeta canadensis. These rows were planted in an east-west direction and spaced about thirty rods apart, similar to plantings made in Canada, It was felt that this would offer winter protection for wildlife. Wheat and barley were planted between the rows •. Seedlings replanted also included about 400 larger (12-18") ponderosa pines in areas where survival was poor. These pines were planted bare-rooted and about 75 percent survival was obtained. The Cobb Lake property, near Wellington, was planted to a mixture of grasses and legumes. This planting was done by a broadcast method on top of the snow and results will not be known until the spring of 1959. Sedgwick Bar, near Sedgwick, was summer fallowed. This land seems to be very i11suited 'for food crops, such as milo and corn. Annual weeds were allowed to grow to provide cover between seedlings. Escape routes were disked .. ---" to.providemore perjIneter area. Aid was given in planting the Means Recreational Area near Holyoke. - While this area is being developed by townspeople as a recreational area, it borders on an area of extremely good pheasant hunting, so any thicket development accomplished can be assumed to be of benefit to wildlife. Seedlings were purchased from private nurseries and were received in March. All planting was completed by May 15. This later date, May 1 being normal time to be finished, was brought on by an unusually late spring. �~- ~-:J: :;_""} -102~ On Hand And Total Used By Species Table 1 - Seedlings Purchased, Species Purchased Juniper (Rky Mt) On Hand .., 17,818 P. Pine 4~490 Spruce 3,587 Olive Given To 79-R Planted Su.rElus ... 17,818 4,490 175 3,412 30,000 29,450 550 .. ,. .L., . Squawbush 35,000 35.000 S. Elm :42,000 .41.750 250 11~000 9,866 1,134 .,.10 ,000 10,000 Plum 2.000 2,000 TOTAL 130,000 Hackberry Carazana " . 25,895 175 153,786 1.934' Table 2 -Jndividual .Cooperators Code No. Name l' Pieper 2 Hemmert County. Kit Carson " It " 3 .Woods 4 McClean 5 Forest Service Chaffee 6 Hockstrasser Morgan If 11 " t1 . �.. -103Table 3 -Seedlings Planted By Individual Cooperators Code No. Olive 1 100 Caragana Hackberry Squawbush Elm T9tal 200. 100 400 200 100 400 200 100 400 100 2 100 3· 300 300 3,000 3,200 4 5 200 6 1,650 300 1,000 Totals 1,850 600 1,000 3,900 550 3,SOO 850 8,200 Table 4 -Seedlings Planted On state-Owned Properties Name \;:ounty P. Pine Squawbush Total Smith Place Logan 198 (Bare Root) (ExperimentalNot Included in Total) 1,900 1,900 Herbaceous Plantings - Cobb Lake 10 lbs. Lincoln Brome 30 Lbs. Tall Wheat 20 Lbs. Intermediate Wheat 10 Lbs. Yellow Blossom Sweet Clover 25 Lbs~. Astralagus cicer �-","'i .r~V :.l') Table 5 --Seedlings Planted In Soil Conservation Districts J Hackberry Olive 6aran~a Agate 75 Akron 50 Big Thompson Branson-Trinchera 1,700 Burlington 30 Cherry Creek Colorado Springs , 125,: Cope Dove Creek 1,100,:,: E. Adams E. Routt 1 500, Flagler 600 , Rale 600 Haxtun High Plains Horse Rush & Big Sandy 450' 250 Kiowa 100 Longmont 100 Morgan 100 Northeast Yuma 1,200 Padroni and Peetz Pine River 100 Platte Valley Purgatoire Rock Creek Sanchez 250 Sedgwick 400 South Platte 300 400 100 200 '700 2,400 300 " 1,000 200 100 400 300 1,000 100 200 1,000 500 100 400 1,300 200 900 1.§00 1,400 2,000 250 1,000 1,000 1,000 ' 2,000 1,000 , 900 ":'100 ',~200 1,400 1,100 100 300 500 200 700 400 800 Juniper Spruce 400 700 400 250 200 50 200 . i i : '(.()O,~ ' 25 250 ;:-412 50 1,000 2;'400 100) 1,500 1,700 200 300 '1,200 10,000 1,100 300 1,000 1,500 1,400 1,200 800 ; 900 , 100 ! 300 1,500 2,500 200 ), 000 600 3,000 600 2,000 1,600) 1,200 100 10@ 800 ' 3,200 200 75 50 25' ; 40'0 50 85 350 420 350 200 350 50 50 60 200 400 350 800 100 '50 750 150 200 Plum 1,000 '800 200 600 2,100 200 700 ;2,600 100 500 I 350 " I' 900 1,500 Squawbush Elm 50 200 6,8 1,600 630 ,r;300 . ',2:50 900 " 800 350 1,000 75 90 1,100 2,300 50 400 Pine ! . ;. 100 1,200 1,400 30() 300 600 .500 ,200 1,100 2,200 600 Total 3,400 4,87~ 1,425 3,200 7,300 830 1,653 7,3'75 13,250 9,075 1,100 3,500 6 , 012 i; 8 100 " 6 •100 ~0 ., I 4,250 4,750 ':500 ~850 ir. 5,100 !.. , ,I u.aoo ' " 400 1,100: : i.100 2,050 2,5004 , 150: 8,050' " (continued on next ~'~e) __ ._ _. __ . .. . -------- ' .:. �Table E( continued) Hackberry Southeast Weld Spanish Peaks Upper Arkansas Upper White West Adams West Greeley West Routt Caranga Olive Juniper JOO 700 1,000 600 80 250 50 175 200 200 100 17,818 425 100 300 700 800 400 11 200 400 700 1,600 300 8,866 9,400 27,600 Spruce Pine Squawbush Elm 50 400 1,000 300 300 200 300 400 500 I}200 1,000 100 3,100 300 200 650 ,. 100 450' -. 156 ~. Total - -, , ' .:» 100 Total 2,655 2,150 1,850 :1,225 1,600 5,461 1,450 '. 29,200 40,900 2,000 143,686 3.~412:;4,,490 -. Plum . .. •...I . .- .. 0 ' ' tTl I -, _. - '; ':',_f) OJ �-106bbt much was accomplished insofar as Soil Bank Plantings were concerned. However, close cooperation between Extension Service and Project Personnel was continued in order to obtain well designed plantings. under this program. Approximately 49,000 evergreens mainly ponderosa pines were potted. ; As of December 15, 1958 the survival of potted .stock in the shade house was 92.3 per cent. Seedlings of Rocky Mountain juniper were not found in available quantities for purchase. Prepared :D.ate: by: Francis Metsger J_a_n_ua_r_y_,_1_9_5_9 Approved by:__ L_a_u_r_e_n_c_e_E_·._R_io .•.. r_d_a_n_ _ Federal Aid Coordinator �.Ji.. Ill~IIIIII~'IIIIII'IIJI~j{11111~llflijmlijlllilfll~jijll BDOW022339 -101- January. 1959 JOB COMPLETIONREPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECf State of COLORADO Project No. W-59-D-10 D20685D ; Wildlife Habitat Improvement Work Plan 1 . Job No. 2 ~----------------------~~~~~----------------------- Title of Job: Evaluation of Plantings (Survival) Period. Covered - January 1, 1958 to December 31, 1958 Abstract: A complete summary of plantings from 1949 through 1953 was made. In order to oabtain this data, material from a previous completion report (Colorado Quarterly Report, January. 1956, p.99) was used in addition to field work. .A small sample of the listed cooperators was used. Due to the lack of personnel, itlwas impossible to visit each of the 529 farms planted. It was <l~~~<l~d_ thl:1t_~iJ:l~~ _!hC3 ~l.l!'vivalhad been obt ained, allthat was needed was a sample check to indicate what percentage of loss had occurred from :the original survival data. The survival check in 1955 showed 53,035 living plants in 529 plantings or 17.7 percent survival. The survival check in 1958 of ten percent of the formerly examined plantings indicated only a very slight drop in survival over the three year interval. Objectives: To determine the rate of survival of the different species used in the wildlife plantings for use in future selections • . Prepared by: Francis Metsger JL ��i: B.raluation of Plantings (Survival) Francis Metsger .. lliesults: An attempt to determine the change in survival of seedlings after a £'J.ve-year delay was made. About ten, percent of the plantings examined in 1955 and 1rJritten up for publication ill 1956 Here visited. P'Iant ings revisited wer-e only those whi.ch c ct.ua.Lly had seedlings left.' The object ~':asto get a fjgure for each species to show howmuch loss tre could expect- from one survival count to the next one over an interval of three years. " The sane classification that vie wer-e Lnt.er-estied 1953. used in other' years uas o;T,itted this -year since all in \1fasthe percent increase in loss from collected in Table 1 - SUJ~vivalOf F1antin~s bade In 1<0J,.9 Thr0uph 1953. SEecies Total Pla,nted Alive (1955) ." 9,157 7,033 3,430 3,557 1,357 1,383 1,952 6~251 10,463 1,077 4,.600 154 297 70 697 908 192 274 23 53 0 125 ( 1955) 27.5 19.5 2007 22.3 4.1 14.0 10.8 19.2 26.2 10.4 22•.4 9.3 27.8 • 5•.4 15~9 10.7 3.•3 14.5 .5 8.1 0 22.$ 53,035 17.7 Carai-ana arborescens Sandcherry Ho.ieysuckLe Squawbush P. Pine Crabapple Chokecherry Plum C. 31m Hackberry Olive ~c::oDulorum Buffalo berry Apricot Lulberry Lilac Buckthorn Cottonwood. J. monosEerma HoneylocustJ. virginiana UillmvTotals 33,35P' 36,078 16,610 15,925 33,153 9,B86 17}997 32,556 39,951 10.369 20,546 1,659 1,068 1,303 4,386 8,515 .5,875 1,89 4,839 653 2,483 549 299,642 .:>urviv?-l'f;, Survival % -lH<( 195E!) 25.1 18.7 19.4 22.0 4.0 10•.3 10.1 18.9 .24.4 10.1 20.2 10.8 8.6 13.3 ~<- Based on orily t.hose=pkantdngs which had seedlings left ..~live. -rM< Based on a ten percent check of the plantings exarnined'in 1955. �-llO-·. .. : Table ;2 - ::>urvival By Species In: 1958 Species Caragana. Sandcherry Squawbush Honeysuckle P. Pine Crabapple Chokecherry Plum C. Elm Hackberry Olive .. J. scopulorum Buffalo berry Apricot 1lulberry Lilac Buckthorn Cot-tonwood J. monosperma Honeylocust J. virginiana ~·!illO\« Total ~ HumberPlanted Numberitlive ~·~Survi vaL" 2.937 3.156 2;140 1,201 1~006 1,220 1,503 3,760 737 590 lS.7 4'71 22.0 233 40 126. 152 711 1,.321 81 519 19.4 5,446 802 20571 None in Sample Eone in Sample Hone 'in Sample 576 300 None in Sa:ilple 550 None in Sample None in Sample None in Sarr.ple Hone in Sample 27,168 25.1 4.0 10.3 10.1 18.9 24.4· 10.1 20.2 62 26 10.8 73 13.3 6,276 22.9 Based on ten percent check of the same plantings 8.6 exaIuined in 1955. SW·ji·iliRY:· It is evident that there is a definite leveling out of survival figures after a felrl years. Once the initial loss of seedlings has occurred, it seems that survival figures do not change. Uhat little change there is wou.Idappear to be more from cultivation and rodent damage than from any other causes. 'As the shrub or tree gets bigger; it spreads but so that there is less space for the cooperator to cultivate •. In his attempt to do so J .the cooperator cuts off branches and roots, thus causing some loss. The rGason for a higher over-all survival - 22.9 (1958) as compared 17.7 (1956) - \..rasdue to th~ fact that several of the species wer-e not included in sample. For example, Juniperus s.copu10rurnhad only a 9. 7~ survival in 1956. Approved by:. Laurence -:];.·Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Prepared b;p Francis. Jii:etsger Date; ~J~a~nu~a~~~.~1~9~5~9 _ �January, -111- 1959 JOB CO:tvIPLET ION REPORT DEVELOPMENT .State of'. PROJECT ··....;C:.:::OL=O:::RAD=-O~ _ Prn j ect No o_· _..!W!.:-:..5!.,;29=-D~-=.:1~O:!....· ;;Il--_.....!W~i!:.:dI~'d:.::!:1=i~fe~Ha:t.S!:..!:b;,:i~t2.a Work Plan~ ~1 ~;~J~ob~N~o~.~ Title of J0b: Care of State-Owned Period Cavered - January ~3~ _ Properties 1, 1958 to December 31, 1958 Objectives: T~ impruve habitat on Stat6~owned lands which are too small: to economically warrant a private landowner cooperative agreement. This includes cultivation between seedlings of woody plants on larger properties. Procedures and Results: The Smith place at Cr-ook received three cultivations by project personnel during 1958. These included cultivating between seedlings with an Allis-Chalmers "G" tractor with cultivator atte:chment and hoe.ing , The leasee cultivated between rows. Since more seedlings were planted this year, an additional amount of' time was used in cultivation. ,Some of·the··seedlings·had grown too much for use of the power equipment, so one hand-hoeing was necessary. This insured better use of moisture and less competition from weeds. Total time was approximately 16 days. The Cobb Lake property received about 15 days labor in preparing seed beds for planting of herbaceous species and in cultivating seedlings. A mixture of wheat grass, yellow blossom sweet clover, various legumes were planted . in strips .~n the tillable land. This was done by a broadcast method on top of snow. Results will not be known until the spring of 1959. The yellow blossom sweet clover planted in 1957 furnished good cover until it was stripped by grasshoppers. About five acres of milo-maize were planted in June, 1958, to furnish food for wildlife using area. Poor results were ~btained due to a heavy rain which killed the milo right after germination. The milo was listed-in and the channels thus fcrmed caught the brunt, )f the rain water. The area again provided good duck hunting on the ... three SI!!allponds in the area. The fallowed land also provided better hunting for pheasants, since the other cover made it hard to find birds. Sedgwick , Bar, near Sedgwick, Colorado, was summer fallowed, but nothing was planted due to lack of moisture at the critical planting time. Annual weeds were' allowed to cover the area in late summer to prrvide some tall weed cover for the hunting season., This area has proven to be one of the toughest in getting .fnmd crops and grass esta blished. The pH test proves it, to be very aJ!kaline with a reading of 8.2 a t a depth of 12 inches. Prepared by: F. A. Metsger R. T. Takes.; Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinatcr ��•... -113JOB COMPLETION REPORT ;.INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS , .", 't' ',. ------~------------~~~~~--------~~----------~-- Work Plan No.8· .- -, .~_. ; Job No. , ..... 1 ..' '_ . , , ..... , Chemical Means on Deer am Related Wildlife • . . " ,.;t: .. :'.1,' ; : ~ . Objectives: .:.,;.'::< .c : 1. Determine the direct effects (a few days toa few.weeks) of .2, 4-D . (and other herbicides used) on range vegetation and animal life. _',,-,,: .. .' ! :.; , • ~, 2. .;Determine the after effects, through one calendar year (1959), of 2,4-D (and other herbicides used) on range vegetation and animal life. (Effects' .,after the first year to bs:determined:!n.afollow-upproject,if.such appears , j jll.stifi~d). '. 3. D~te~mine yegetative prodttcti~~, in terms of forage units, bef ore and after spraying; and determine the reactions, changes, and invasion of vegetation after spraying. 4. Determine levels of use by big game, game birds, song birds, rodents, and other wildlife before and after brush eradication. 5. Provide information for use by both state and federal agencies in carrying out progressive land - and wildlife-management programs. Abstract: 1•. The study area is a mixed browse type of about 2, 540 acres located within the Smith Point Allotment, North End district, .Uncompahgre National 'Forest, Colorado, at an elevation of about 8, 000 feet. 2. Twenty-three, -pe rm anent, pellet-group transects consisting of.001 acre,. circular-plots at one .~Jld()l!§l~~f,~~~inil!-~.ryals 'as paced were. used to sample wildlife and cattle use of the study area. The 1, 686 plots were marked in June and July and removed in September to furnish indices of summer wildlife populations. �-1143. The summer deer population estimate was 76 or about one deer per 33 acres. 4. Except for sharptail grouse there was very little summer' wildlife use of the sagebrush type! . ,, 5. The 23 pellet-group transects. were. used ~s census: routes in an attempt to evaluate the distribution. composition, and related abundance of birds within the study area vegetation types •. On the 36 miles of census route, 733 individuals were recorded which included 31 identified species. : .~... . ~ 6. The effects of the aerial application of 2,4-D on sagebrush and assoctated vegetation wfllbe studied on ~ long-srange b::tsis by the U. S. Forest Service spraying four sagebrush units in June. 1959, and leaving four .other units unsprayed as controls, , .' ~ . . .. 7. Vegetation co mposition and density has been sampled on the above eight units with 33 Parker 3-step transects. The oak-sagebrush type was sampled with 12 transects.' .,:; 8. Statistical analysis indicated that an increase in sample size will be necessary in both the sprayed and control sagebrush units as well as within oak-sagebrush type.. An arbitrary totalof 40 transects within each of . the spray and control sagebrush units has. been suggested; -: ..,. :: Prepared by: .Allen E. Anderson . - �10'? . 1.,(_:' -115EFFECTS OF SAGEBRUSHERA.DICATIONBY CHEMICAL .M!:ANSON DEER AND RELATED WILDLIFE ALLEN E. ANDERSO.~ . . . ~. ,..' ~" - Introduction: The study area of about 2,540 acres is located on the Smith Point Allotment, North End district, Uncompahgre National Forest at elevations ranging from about 7,300 to 8,000 feet. I t encompasses all or part of the following sections .of T 15 S, R 100W; 17. 19, 20, 29, 30, 31, and 3.2. The north and west boundaries are bounded by the canyon of Big Dominguez .ereek and on the south and a portion of the east boundary by the allotment fence. The balance of the east boundary is an arbitrary line which partly coincides with the Forest boundary. ... Soils are of sandstbne origin and vary froin deep, heavy Ioams to expremely shallow sandy litho e01 s':-('-Extensive areas of exposed sandstone are found on the east-portion and small rocky outcrops are found on steeper slopes. Accelerated erosion is common on all sites with even a slight gradient. A long, high, ridge dominates the western portion of.the study area. The balance is -relativeJy level but bisected by a few small, shallow occasionally precipitous canyons. P. long, narrow plot extends between Big Dominguez creek canyon and the precipttous slopes of the high ridge. In general, most of the drainages are northeasterly. .,.. Natural, permanent, water does not exist on the study area. There are several well dispersed earthen dam impoundments constructed for livestock use. Permanent water occurs along the north and south periphery of the study area in Big Domingue z creek and two, temporary springs are near the east boundary. The vegetation is a heterogeneous mixture of several woody plant species. TJ1.ree of the most important vegetation types are conifer-sage-oak, sagebrush, and, oaksnowberry in that order. The details of the vegetation types are shown in table 1. Methods: Evaluation of Wildlife Use Deer, rabbit, sharptail grouse and cattle populations were sampled by the installation of 23, permanent, pellet-group transects completely across the study area. Transects one and four were randomly located and thereafter the transects were located at I6-chain paced intervals. All transects were established with a hand compass on a 2850 bearing. This bearing was selected as the one which would place most of the transects in the area of greatest variability;..!.:.!.. at right angles or diagonal to the slope contour, a recommended procedure in sampling' design (Robinette Fergueson and Gashwllar; 1958). Each transect consists of O.001-acre, circular plots, their centers a paced, one and one-half chains apart and marked by a consecutively numbered wooden stake. - Due to the irregular shape of the study area, the number of plots on - ..•. �-116individual transects varied from seven to 127. Numbered steel fence posts were driven at the 0.0 point of 'each tranBect~ , OQestablfshment in ,J1,lneand;;July~','1958; deer, rabbit, grouse and cattle droppings were marked with red paint"applied with a pressure oil can. Summer use of the area by these species was determined by recording and removing unmarked pellet groups 'on the 1, 686 plots during .the first week of September. .. r • i: An index of late summer bird populations (August 29-September 3) was obtained by the writer and·field'asslstatlt,who walked the'23'transects (about 3'6'~miles) and identified and recorded all birds seen with 7 x 50 and 8 X' 60 binoculars. : ~-:; -: .;" ~ .: Pocket gopher'; 'pulations were at first sampled by counting fresh-appearing mounds on-the pellet group plot s •. However, it was later learned from Forest Service personnel engaged in pocket gopher research that this method would not provide a reliable pocket gopher population index. Therefore,' these data are not presented herein. ~.: .' Time did not permit sampling the small rodent populations. this work will be eareted on in 1959•. ~~J • """,; ; '. , It is planned that A daily record was kept of all wildlife and cattle noted on the area from June 12 to September, 17;, 195&., ,;", ' '::;" ,,',~" 'E.valuation:of.V.eg.etation Composition aiKI Density -1· ,,' " Vegetation composition and density were sampled by 100-foot, permanent line transects (Parker, 1954)., tSuch modifications of this method as sttpulatedtn the '.U.-:S. forest, Service. Region Il, 1956, .Range Analysis Handboqkjeere " incorporated in their establishment. Finally, additional modifications of the basic ; technique were-made as fpll~s:" (1) all vegetative strata were recorded;·(2) clusters were randomly located within specific vegetation types, and (3) specially designed tapeholders.were used-to-stretch the steel tape 2/. All hits were made with a plumb bob and, ifnecessary, checked with the sta-;dard 3/4 inch diameter '" loop. Supplementary data on shrub density within the sagebrush type were obtsin- ,'" ed by variable-plot method (Cooper, 1957). Two readings were taken on each transect; one at the 0.0 stake and another at the....99.5 stake • , I , ' .,',' :,',: ... ,l :f .. Eight sag~bfU:~h,.u~it~"to~l~ing about 763 acres were sampled wit}?33 tf.?~,sects ,; in 14 randomly-located clusters. The oak and oak-snowberry types wer~ sampled , with 12 transects in 10 clusters. Each cluster was marked with a numbered steel ' ' fence post located66-100 feet from the 0.0 stake of the first line transect. , . . '. I, ,,' , " ".,' ," \ ,~ ~/ Design courtesy of Mr. George Tdrner ,:1 Forester, Exp, Station~- Fort Collins, Colorado. .' ~ r Rocky Mt, Forest and Range, , r �, ...• :'U7, :r, " , Table 1 --The Study Area Veg!3tation !YEes: Their :£xtent And Important Associates Percent Vegetation TyPe Acres* ...of Total Important Associated Woogy species 'j , Conifer-Sage-Oak 848 33.4 Sagebrush 763 30.0 . ",: Bltterbrush, Mt. mahogany, Serviceberry** Rabbitbrush, Snowberry, Pinyon-oak .•.• r·. '; t , Oak-Snowberry 664 Sagebrush-Chokechezry-Mt; 26.1 . ..•... ; ';" , mahogany ... Oak 155 6.1 snowberry-Sagebrush-Chokeche~r-Y SagebmEih-Oak 91 3.6 sDowberry-Chokecherry Aspen 19 .8 'Snowberry-Oak ":.:. :". . .~ Total 2,540 100.0 * As determined by dotgrtd system !lsing 11': 20,00011 scale aerial photos. ** Ponderosa pine, juniper .' Table 2 -- Sagebrush Units To Be Sprayed And Left Unsprayed In June, 1959 . :,:j',.. " Spray Unit No•. , UnspraIed Acres Unit No. Acres 1 145 2~ 2-Ef, 3 39 4 25 5 52 7 67 6 30 8 ·109 . Totals 266 227 :/ . : :'~J �i /'0: ..• .:.........•.• r -116•.. Random location of the clusters was accomplished by using; (1) the numbered pellet-group transects which crosSed a particular vegetation type snd (2) the numbers ot individual pellet group plots on each of those transects which fell ~ithin a particular vegetation type, Using a table of random numbers the transect"~.n\ifItbe·t',waS::firstdrawn and .then the pellet-group plot number. On arrival at the selected pellet::group plot /s~:thk'ln1tial p~~~;tr~nsect stake was driven atapredetarmined distance ~n4direction from the pellet group stake. Each i transect was run in this predet~rmined dtreetton.. Occastonally, this . .....; ,'.. . . ...~ direction had to be changed to avoid sampling another vegetatu)n "'type-. While , it is realized that somesstattsttctans would not accept this method as truly , random, it is, as non.... subjaettve as time limitations would permit. . .', A preliminary delineation of vegetati~n types resulted in six broad groups. It is expected ;that further refinement 'of these types will be .'necessary. \' Evaluation of Fbrage Production and Use This work was confined to measurement of annual growth onJ~:eY,.1;>rowse species. Measurements, weze made to the nearest one-half inch on one' tagged branch on each of 431 shrubs. By selecttng-the ,sb..r:ubne~,r~§~the stake of every fourth pelletgroup plot on the 23 transects, a total of eight speeies were tagged and measured. Branches were selected subjecttvely depending on,vigor and availability. The age and form «lass (Parker • .2]2.. cit.) of each shrub were recorded. In addition. the - , 'height was measured arid the ~!lenpl~gy.no.ted_Qn. _theindividual shrub. Measurements in June, 1959 will sample the faU"'::winter-sprUiguse of browse .spectes by deer and possibly cattle. This will necessarily be a minimum figure .ainee some growth will have undoubtedly occurred by this date. 1 Academic duties will not permit more desirable earlier spring measurements or a later fall measurement. Plans for Aerial Application of 2, 4-D ". " Arrangements have been made with the Forest Service, wherein their contractor ,.::',will spray: in June, 1959, four randomly-selected sagebrush units leaving four other units Unsprayed. The units which wtllbe.sprayed. total about 266 acres and 'the-control units 227 acres. Thus a total of 493 acres sagebfu~h: will be under study. ' The balance of about 250 acres of sagebrush occurs in small clusters over the study area. 'The eight sagebrush: units under study afe~sbown in Figure 1 and their approximate individual acreages are compiled in Table 2. ' , of Results: Evaluation of Wildlife Use .. ""'-' Deer use during the summer of 1958 was indicated by the 35 pellet-groups removed from the 1,686, .001 acre plots-in September. The deerpopulation estimate was calculated using unweighted data even though the number of plots per transect ..: varied from 7-127 because 10 of the 23 transects did not have ~ny pellet-groups. '. --', -.The~~..c;lJl~~,~ieldan estimate of 76 deer present on the study area or about one deer per 33 acres. ' ._" ... ", . -" .... �-11, 1 J... >!.. ,L_ .: -ll~! .•.... .. . ;..:. The summer distribution of deer, rabbit, grouse, and cattle are shown in Table 3. These data indicate that the conifer-sage-oak and the sagebrush-oak-types received the bulk of the total wildlife use. With the exception of grouse, .the sagebrush type is apparently least important as summer wildlife habitat of any of the major study area types. " .' The distribution of 733 birds recorded within five vegetation types on 36 miles of census route is shown in Table 4. Green-tailed towhees, pinyon jays, mountain bluebirds, and red-shafted flickers were the most abundant of 31 identified species. These data do not, however, reflect the relative abundance of birds within individual vegetation types because the linear distance of the census route through each of the vegetation types has not yet been accurately determined. Yet it is interesting to note that, like other wildlife species, the largest variety and abundarce of birds were recorded within the ponifer-sage-oak and the sagebrush-oak types. Table 3 --The Distribution 0f Pellet Groups On Six Vegetative Types, June 218eEtember 4, 1958 Number and Pellet Grxnn.s bl;:Species Vegetative Types Rabbit Sharptail No. Plots Per Type Deer Cattle 1/ Grouse 2/ Conifer Sage-Oak 663 10 0 62 0 Sage 388 1 1 31 4 Sage Oak 360 13 2 5.6 o· Oak Snowbercy 242 9 1 27 Oak 26 2 0 0 .0 Aspen .7 0 0 0 0 1,686 35 4 176 7 '.' ; 3 ~~.. ." .. Total 1/ Cattle were removed about July 7, but at least 11 head used, the study area the. _.. rest of the summer. ~/ Sharptail grouse were commonly seen and sage grouse were not and it :is therefore assumed that the grouse droppings were sharptatl . •~·I ,,' " . ~ �. -l!2oTable 4 --Bird Distribution Within Five* Study Area Vegetation Types As Indicated '. . By 36 Miles Of Census Route; Augus.t 29-September 3, 1958 Oak Sagebrush Conifer .sagebrush O~~ Sagebrush Oak Sagebrush' Oak Totals' 177 56 ' .. 80 3. Unidentified sparrows .. 38 94 50 ·8 Unidentified birds 3 5 28 20, . 86 46 14 Greentailed towhee 6 80~'~ . Pinyon' jay 22 58 1 66 _. 35 Mountain bluebird. 30 11 15 Red-shafted flicker 6 9 41 .... 38 ,. 31 5. Mountain chickadee 2 36 1 24 11 Grey-headed junco 17 2 9 1 Unidentified bummfngbtrd 5 SteUart-·sjay ." . , 5 1 6 12 .. l()** 10 ~g~r. .~utha~ch , Robtn. 8 B ~ . 8 ~..."..... ~..... Magpie 8 6 2 4 . ~arptail grou~e .. Vesper sparrow 5 3 2 '·5 White-breasted nuthatch 5 ,1' 4 Nighthawk 4 4 Western bluebird . 4 4 Unidentified warblers 3 Brewer's sparrow .. 2 . 1 ::. 3 Sage thrasher 3 Clark's nutcracker 2 .2 2' Winter wren 2 1 1 1 House wren 2 1 1 2 Wood pewee 1 Unidentified juncos 3 2 1 1 Grace's warbler Bush-tit 2 2 .' , 1 1 Poorwill 1 Audubon!s warbler .1 L .,. "_., - ....~. Grasshopper .sparrow l' 1 1 Townsend solitaire 1.< 1 Ruby-crowned kinglet 1 1 Unidentified chickadee 2 1 Red-tail hawk 1 1 Unidentified woodpecker 1 1 Sparrow hawk 1 1 1 Goshawk 1 Unidentified flycatcher 1 733 Totals 3 74 264 55 337 31 No. of Identified Species 7 11 11 23 * No. birds were recorded within the aspen type and it is therefore omitt .d, ** Birds seen in large flocks. !:;". . . ," ," -. . " I'" . ~ i . : . �-121Some observations of general interest on study area wildlife are as follows: although no sage grouse were seen in the study area one was recorded within one-half mile of the south boundary in June. There are at least two grouse booming grounds, believed to be sharptail, on the area. One blue grouse was seen on the study area by Project Leader Paul Gilbert on September 3, 1958. r, Cottontail rabbits were, by far, the most abundant lagomorphs on the study area. Snowshoe rabbits and white-tail jackrabbits appeared to be very scarce. Chipmunks were abundant in all vegetation types except aspen and sagebrush. Evaluation Vegetation Composition and Density j " ! 'j .f Using the Parker 3-step transect data, six categories were used to compare the vegetation on the four sagebrush units to be sprayed and the four units to be left unsprayed. These categories were chosen as the criteria most apt to indicate vegetation changes as a result of 2, 4~:O application. Statistical analysis of these _data by means of the "t"test indicate that in five categories; (1) big sagebrush, (2) perennial grasses and sedges, (3) perennial grasses, excluding junegrass, (4) junegrass and (5) perennial forbs there was no significant difference at the .05 level of probability. The sixth category testeddshrubs and half shrubs), however, showed a significant difference at the. 01 level of probability (Table 5). The most variable category tested was; perennial grasses and sedges, except Junegrass. }rhe least variable were all perennial grasses and sedges and sagebrush in that order, '_ Sample size was cal~uiated for each of the six categories at three levels of probability. These data indicate that to be within-20 percent of the true mean at _ • 05 level of probability a statistically adequate number of transects may not , be practicable. At..t~e. 20 level of probability; however, an adequate number of transects have been installed on the sagebrush units to be sprayed on four categories and on one category of the control. It is probable that by increasing the number of transects to 30 on both the area to be sprayed and Its control, a much lower indicated sample size will result at the chosen .05 level of probability. Parker 3-step transect; data have been statistically analyzed and the .results are summarized in Table 6. A calculation of sample size categories showed that, from 12-133 addittonalfransects would be required to-be within 20 p~rcent of the true mean at the. 05 level of probability. The observation that study area perennial grasses were about equally abundant in the sagebrush and the oak-sagebrush vegetation types were subjected ito an analysis of data from 45 transects by means of the "t" test. A significant difference was found at the • 05 level of probability as shown in Table 7.' ,- .. : �~•. ,:1. :_. .;~;~ . I', J.f>~ Table 5 -- A Comparison Of The Vegetation Composition And Density On The Four Sagebrush Units To Be 3prayed And The Four Sagebrush Units Designated As Controls No. of Additional Transects Category No. of Mean No. Standard Coefficient Calculated Needed to be Within' 20% of Trausects* of Hits Deviaticr.:-.t of "t" the True Mean at Three Levels Vartation. % Value Of Probability , ' , Big sagebrush Artemisia trtdentata Control ~ny • , .05 ,. -" 12 • 10 , 20, . . '-, 21.9 '~O.9 ~ 21 ': .:14,7 ._,9,4 .s .: 67.1,' 45,3 .811 32 0 15 0 9 0 3.78** .. 65. ,. 130:> 44 82 40 , , c~ Shrubs and half-shrubs other than sagebrush Control' Spray " All perenntalg rasses and grasslike plants Control. Spra~ All perennial grasses, and sedges except Junegr~ss, Kooleria cristata Control Spray Junegrass, Koeleria cristata Control Spray Perennial forbs Coutrol Spray * (Parker 3-step) " 4.4' 2,6 12 ~1 3,5 79.6 3.0 118.0 t I-' .. I\) I\) " 12 21 7.8 4,2 54.7' .rr.s 5.5 47.7 1.0 2,3 2,9 233 300 12 21 .91 .406 .096 _. 12 2 o o o 647 ~ ~ 1114 42b 257'. 245 429 44 35 25 1.7 10 1 n 0 0 0 0 - '" 12 21 5.4 5.1 - 3.7 3.7 67.9 71.6 .571 12 21 8.9 8.0 6.4 72 .. 452 4.9 61 19 , , - -:, . ...:-.... ,,' " ',. ..• .~ , '- 24 _, * t. 03'~ 2.042 ** Significant at , 01 lavel· 'of probability ---------------------,' 18 \ -- ~: ~.: ;, 'l.:' I �its -123Table 6 --The Results Of Sampling The Oak-Sage Vegetation With 12 Parker ,"·1'..· • " .• 3-step Transects No. of Additional Coefficient Transect s Needed to of be Within 20% of " ~.. True Mean at . 05 level Mean No. Standard of Hits "De,.ti~ Variation Category' of Probability All perennial grasses and sedges 4.1 6.4 37 6~.4 , . " 2.50 2.7 109.2 133 Gambel+s oak (overstory*) 44.7 33.2 74.4 55 Gambel's oak (understory) 32.7 19.9 60.9 34 Snowber'ry 18.3 4.2 23.1 12 Big sagebrush 8.1 8.2 101.9 113 Sedges , .' ;, * Over 5 ft. in height. " Table 7 -";'A Comparison Of The PereIinial Grasses And Gr~sslike Plants Present In The Sagebrush And The oak-~gkbruf'h Vegntation Types i.',' Vegetation Tvpe Standard Deviation . No. Transects ' ~ ., Mean No. of Hits Sagebrush' 33 10.52 5.29 50.3 Oak-Sagebrush 12 6~42 4.07 63.4 :, '. , .• '. t .05 = 2.014 : Coefficient Calculated "tr• of Vari::ttion! % 2.27 ��-125Table 8 --The Age And Form Class Of 431 TaggedShrubs Measurements Were Taken. On Which Annual Growth Species Yl Number b~ Age and Form Class* M1 M3 Y2 Y3 M2 Big sagebrush 15 14 Sih"er sagebrush 1 Gambel's oak 33 3 7 104 1 1 180 D Total 22 345 , ~ I 15 11 .True Mt. mahogany Bitterbrush 1 Sage 1 Rabbitbrush Aspen 1 * According to (Parker. 1 1954). 3 2 5 66 ,'1-- 6 7 1 2 4 1 3 1 1 2 �.., ~" ..•.;:;; :'\j Table 9 -- A Summary Of Abnual Growth Measurements ! On Eight Browse: .Species:. August, 1958 .. No. .of Additional Branches Needed to be Within 20% . .' Coefficient . of m of Probability Variation, 70 ' t' Mean Growth No. of Per Branch _~. __ Bran_ghe_§__,__ . _ (inches); . ~ecies Big sagebrush ~{tR~:d'51'e~~,an Mean I Standard Deviation' ·345 17.0 20.4 . 66 12.4 : 10.8· 119.6 ! , , Gambel's oak , 86.6 I 0 63 ; I I 7 Mt. mahogany 11.00 Antelope bitterbrush . 33.$ 4 , j I i , : Silver sagebrush 105.3:' H.6 ! 4, I i I 89.3 Sagebrush (Unidentified) j 4'l.0 Aspen 2 9.0 - 14.0 ,: ;~. : '.- ~·I.; t. ;,;.' , I Rabbitbrush Total (Untdentifted) 1 431 ; i ; .' . t.' l: 1651 Twig Length �-127.,:'t'" Recommendations: 1. The number of Parker 3-step transects should be increased on the eight sagebrush 'units to about 40 each, on the spray and the control units. The literature (Kittredge, 1948) and a study of mountain mahogany by Mr. Dean Medin (unpublished) of the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit on the regression of annual growth (expressed in air-dry weight) to crown diameter indicates that crown diameter measurements may, through appropriate formulae, be readily converted to an actual production figure on a pounds per acre basis. This technique should be tested and applied to study area sagebrush forage production. 2. Measurements of annual growth and use should be confined to sagebrush and oak and also snowberry. ." r~f::._':';~_~ . ~ 3. H time permits, bird population, indices should be obtained by some suitable technique on two permanent Ji'b: acre plots selected within one of the sagebrush units to be sprayed and one on the unsprayed. 4. Herbage and browse production as influenced by cattle and deer use following spraying should be evaluated on a long-range basis. This might be accomplished by using exclosures of five acrea each, including one of total exclosure, one of cattle only, .and another forcontrol. ~~.i .' . t " ',' -, . ". !. r. " • ; I ,. ~. �1"; 'Q .•• .:,_ ~ - • '·_.of" -128- Literature • .:. v ' Cited t,'. Cooper, Charles F. 1957. The -varfable-plot method for esttmating shrub density. Jour. Range Mgt., 10(3):111-115. " " .2 l •~- I :. .: Harringt~n,,~. D. 1954. Manual of the plants of Colorado. Deriver, Colorado, 666 p. , I' Sage Books. ' Kittredge, Joseph 1945. Some quantitative relations :cf fol iage in the chapparral. Ecology 26 (1) :70-73. Parker, K. W. 1954. A method for measuring trend in range conditions ~nnationa] forest ranges: with supplemental instructions .for measurements and observation of vigor, composition, USDA, Forest Service, 22 p, with 10 p. supplement, " ','.' arid browse. r. Peterson, R. T., ~~~l. A field guide to western birds. 'Houghton Mifflin" "~'Bbstori. '240 p. ' , " ';:,'" .. -e r . ~.. ,I, .... Robinette, W. Leslie, Ferguson, R. B. and Jay Gashwiler. 1958. Problems involved in the use of deer pellet group counts. Trans. 23d N. A. Wildl. Conf. Prepared by: Allen E. Anderson -:c:.....;..;;~ Date: , Janu3.ry, 1959 _ Approved by:_I:-.?_~l!:~c_~~,:__ ~ior_~:_~ll_ ~\;~"J:8.1 .l~;-::iCoo::·;~.i_;:-ator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/5fb2925aaaabc29b06999a0ce3ac1d4c.pdf 2d7144200b3ca19da29f1cce47fd06b7 PDF Text Text Ill~IIIII~' ijl~'llll~illlll'~1111~ml~1 ~~fllf{~11 BDOW022342 April, 1959 JOB COMPLEI'ION REl?-OR~--:--c-:--c-,---,--_,.....,.---___J INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 92'068G2 State of COLORADO Proj ect No. W_. -....;;3'-'7'--_R_-_1_2_.....; ----~------------------------_ ,....G_am_e_· _B_i_r_d_Sur __ v_e.::.y ~~_:_ Work Plan No. . I Job No. 11 ~----~~--------------~------~------------~------~--------~ Title:, Investigation Period Covered: of possibilities February for pheasant habitat improvement. 1 through March 15, 1959 Abstract: .Ninety-eight landowners, tenants, or land managers were interviewed on 90 farms on randomly selected sections within intensively farmed areas of the South Platte and Arkansas River valleys. The purpose of this survey was primarily to determine possibilities for improving pheasant habitat. The use of 14,629 acres of land was reported, this being comprised of 8,140 acres of irrigated cropland, ,2;729 acres of dry-farmed land,'andJ,760 acres of accompanying pastureland, river bottoms, lakes or reservoirs, . roads, irrigation ditch lands, waste areas, etc. Within the survey area, 785 acres, 5.4 percent of the total area, were reported as waste. Practically all of the waste areas, however, are grazed, rendering them of little value for wildlife. Considerable interest in wildlife was shown by farmers, with 63.5 percent indicating they are-interested in increasing wildlife on their f'arme.. Of- those farmers reporting waste areas, 53.7 percent indicated they would permit areas to be fenced or otherwise protected for wildlife. Three-fourth of the individuals having possibilities for- establishment of wildlife cover stated they would be in aposition to provide supplemental irrigation water to aid in this establishment. The majority of farmers also indicated they would permit protection of wildlife cover from burning. Considerable interest in saving nesting hens in hayfields was shown, and 74.1 percent indicated they would use flushing bars during the first cutting of alfalfa, if· these devices were provided for their use. Although farmers are generally interested in wildlife conservation, circumstances are such they can do little abou~ it. Efforts are directed toward cleaner farming and higher crop production. Rental fees or leasing rates for retiring land for use by wildlife are prohibitive. The Soil Bank program appears to have little application within the area surveyed. No interest in the program was shown by 79.3 percent of the farmers. Data shows, however, that 272 acres (1.9 percent of the total land area) may be available for placement in the Conservation Reserve section of the Soil Bank. Over 50 percerttof the landowners showed interest in incorporation of wildlife practices in the Agricultural Conservation Program, particularly if currently non-cultivated lands becanieeligible for development and annual payments under this program. ", ) In general, prospects for maintenance of pheasant habitat in the South Platte and Arkansas River valleys are not good. Conflicts between,wildlife interests and various federal, state, and county farm programs are numerous, with most, Of these programs involving -measures which destroy wildlife cover. Correction of ,this situation would be.difficult, if not impossible. It would require closer9ssociation and work with individuals and groups directing such programs, and educational- programs directed through media that reached the farmer. Perhaps the only effective means of maintaining habitat would involve legislation, which would recognize wildlife as a farm crop and curtail subsidies for practices which currently destroy wildlife areas. �-2Farmers, in general, appear to prefer to leave pheasant management to professional wildlife people, reserving the right, however, to regulate hunting on their lands. Approximatf ly50 percent of the individuals interviewed stated they would allow hunting by permission -- an additional 34.5 percent reserved hunting for their friends. In answer to specific questions, the majority indicated the pheasant population has decreased, preferred a hunting season not over three days in length, favored a straight season over a split, were against an increase in the bag and possession limit, and were satisfied with the present shooting hours of 10:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Objective: production To determine possibilities on irrigated lands. for habitat improvement and increasing pheasant Techniques Used: Activities for this survey involved preparation of a questionnaire, selection of the study area, briefing of individuals who were to conduct the survey on technical pOints, primarily pertaining to the Soil Bank and the Agricultural Conservation Program, and actual interviews with farmers. Preparation of the Questionnaire: Since the primary purpose of the questionnaire was to determine possibilities for improving pheasant habitat on irrigated land, key questions related to the number and size of waste areas currently available for wildlife, interest in portions of the Soil Bank and ACP programs which would provide additional cover for birds, and willingness to protect areas for wildlife through protection from fire, grazing etc. One question related to prospects for salvaging pheasants from an unfavorable ment through the use of flushing bars. environ- Miscellaneous inquiries, which did not pertain to proVlslon or maintenance of habitat, were included in the questionnaire to obtain ideas and opinions on trends in the pheasant population, areas open to hunting, and preferences in hunting season regulations. A questionnaire, including the above major points, was drafted and forwarded to administrative personnel for comment and suggestions for improvement. Several revisions were made following this review, and the final questionnaire, shown below, was typed and printed. �-3- (To determine possibilities Name for improving pheasant habitat on irrigated lands) Owner or tenant ----------------------------------- Location of farm: County. Number of acres: Total 1959 JUN 1 , Range ~------------ Number of waste areas on farm , Irrigated ---------------------------- , Township ------~-------- , Section -----Dry-farmed _ ------ Estimated acreages (waste areas or marginal crop land): River bottom Ditches, etc. Swales or sloughs Other Odd corners --------------------------------- ------------------------- Are you interested in increasing wildlife (mainly pheasants) on your farm? -------- Would you permit waste areas to be fenced or otherwise protected to increase their value for wildlife? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- __ --------------------------------------------- How much money would you require (payment per year per acre) before you would retire lands for use by wildlife? How many acre~ of land would you have on your farm to be placed in the Soil Bank for use by wildlife'( At approx. $9.00 per acre? (Soil Bank payments) At per acre? (over and above Soil Bank payments)------------------------- ---------- How long would you be willing to place lands in the Soil Bank? 10 years ( ), over 10 years ( ). 5 years ( ), If lands were placed in the Soil Bank, would you be interested in planting trees ( ), shrubs ( ), perennial grasses ( ), legumes ( ) annual food plots ( ----;, developing water or marsh areas for-waIerfowl ( ), constructing a fish pond ( )? Would you be willing to provide occasional irrigation water to aid in establishing shrJlbs or other cover for wildlife? trees, -----------------------------------------Would you be interested in any of these wildlife practices if the practices were entered in the ACP (Agriculture Conservation Program) handbook,along with the Soil Bank? ----Would you permit a fire lane to be placed around wildlife areas established on your farm? Would you otherwise assist in the protection of such areas (by fencing, etc.)? ----------------------------------------------------------------- At present, do you allow pheasant hunting on your land to the General Public? Friends? By permission only? Without permission? ------- ------------ Would you permit hunting on your land if you received payments for placing land in the Soil BaD~ (or ACP)? ------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you be willing to place crop land (perhaps marginal areas) in the Soil Bank, and receive approximately $9.00 per acre in annual payment? ------------------------- �-451 !! ~ §. 1: 1 Q !! !! ! 1~~-- Continued. What additional reimbursement would you need if any before you would allow pheasant hunting on your land? ~------------------------------------------Would you use pheasant flushing bars on your tractor (cottonwood saplings or mechanical devices) during the first cutting of alfalfa, if these were provided and delivered to your farm for your use? -- __ ----~-----------------------------------In your opinion, has the pheasant population increased or decreased in the past several year s ? -------_ In regard to pheasant hunting seasons, would you favor: (1) a season longer than three days , (2) a split season or a straight season , (3) an increase in the bag limit , (4) an increase in the possessiori limi":'"t:::"?-What opening shooting hour would you prefer during the pheasant season? _ Selection of study areas.--This survey was confined to irrigated lands, with interspersed dry-farmed areas, which lie generally in the South Platte Valley between Denver and Fort Collins and Greeley, and in the Arkansas valley in southeastern Colorado. Maintenance of huntable pheasant populations is difficult in these areas, primarily because of intensive land-use. High human populations in proximity to these areas has resul~d in considerable demand for more pheasants. Since some of the most acute pheasant management problems in Colorado prevail in portions of the South Platte and Arkansas valleys, it was believed advisable to conduct a specific investigation to determine possibilities for improving the environment and increasing pheasants in these localities. Within the major study areas, it was decided to interview all landowners and/or tenants on one sectd.on within every third township. Townships within the study area were numbered, and the starting township was selected at random from the first three. Thereafter, every third township was considered in the sample area. One 'section was picked at random within sample townships and included in the specific study area. Sampling- procedures to select. specific study areas were 'carried out separately for the South Platte and Arkansas valley areas.' ' . Interview procedure.--A meeting was held in Fort Collins on February 16, 1958 during which the questionnaire was explained to individuals who were to conduct the survey. Technical points on the Soil Bank and ACP programs were explained by Richard T. Takes, Soil Bank representative for the Colorado Ggme and Fish Department. Following this meeting, individuals were assigned specific sections, and interviews were carried out. Prepared by:__ W_ayn=-_e_W..;.._S.;;.an_, df;.;.,' ....;o_r_t~_"""':""'--:__ �-5Investigation of Possibilities for Pheasant H~bitat Improvement Wayne W. Sandfort Findings: Several shortcomings in the questionnaire were noted during the course of this survey. Explanations are given in the body of the report, however, where data were influenced by phrasing of questions on the questionnaire or by the manner in which questions were asked. Results of this survey are given under appropriate headings below. For purposes of this report, data obtained in the South Platte and Arkansas valleys are combined. General Study Area Twenty~eight sections, within the same number of townships, were selected at random throughout the pheasant range considered, giving a total study area of 17,920 acres. Nineteen of these sections were in the South P.atte drainage and nine in the Arkansas Valley. The use or status of 14,629 acres was reported during this survey, and possibilities for improvement of pheasant habitat within this area were determined. Information on the remaining acreages involved within the 28 study sections was not obtained because of difficulties in contacting some of the land-owners or tenants. Within the area covered, 8,140 acres were reported as irrigated cropland and 2,729 acres as ~-farmed land. Although not classified exactly, the remaining 3,7qO acres included irrigated and dry-land pastures, river bottoms, lakes and reservoirs, roads, irrigation company land, waste areas, etc. A total of 90 farms were involved in the survey and 98 individuals were interviewed. Seventy-two land-owners and 26 tenants or land managers were contacted. Information was received from both the landowner and tenant or tenants on six farms. Waste Ar~as and their Potential for Wildlife Accurate data on wast.e areas were not obtained. This was considered as one of the most Jmportant points of the questionnaire, however, and was included in the survey to find "out just how many areas are presently available for pheasants, or could be developed for this purpose, Failure to obtain highly accurate data resulted primarily from different interpretation of what a waste area consists of. . In spite of failure to obtain precise data in this category, a general idea of the number, types, and acreages of waste areas wi thin the survey area was obtained. Findings indicate a total of 68 areas was presen~; these varying in size from onequarter of an acre to 300 acres. The majority of waste areas ranged in size from one-half acre to three acres. A total of 785 acres or 5.4 percent of the 14,629 acres surveyed was reported as waste. Areas included odd corners, swales and sloughs, seep ditches, creek bottoms, non-irrigated (high) areas, groves of trees, railroad rights-of-way, unfarmed areas along main canals, rocky knolls, and blow-sand areas. Even though the percentage of waste areas appears relatively high for intensively farmed lands, it should be stated and recognized that the large majority of these plots are grazed, thus rendering them of little or no value for pheasants. �-6Interest in Increasing Wildlife Generally high interest in wildlife was shown by farmers. Of 96 individuals reporting, 61 (63.5%) indicated they were interested in increasing wildlife on their farms, and 17 (17.7%) were not interested. The remaining 18 (18.8%) were favorable to some increase in pheasants but did not want them too thick, indicated it would be O.K. to have birds around, or were neutral in their feelings toward wildlife in general. Interest of farmers in wildlife is indicated by response of individuals to several questions. This response is summarized below. Permission to fence or otherwise protect areas to increase their value for wildlife. --Fifty-four farmers in the South Platte .and Arkansas Valley areas reported waste areas on their farms. Of this group, 29 (53.7%) indicated they would permit waste areas to be fenced or otherwise protected to increase their value for wildlife. Nine of these individuals, however, qualified their statements in various ways, including permission to fence if agreeable to the landowner, if labor and materials were furnished by the Game and Fish Department, if the Department did the work, or if annual payments were made to the landowner. Sixteen individuals stated they would not permit fencing of waste areas, six had no comment on the subject, and three indicated their waste areas were already fenced and good for wildlife. Provision of occasional irrigation water to aid in the establishment of wildlife cover.--On twenty farms where individuals indicated there were possibilities for establishment of wildlife cover, 15 (75.0%) farmers stated they would be in a position to provide supplemental water for the establishment of cover. Two men qualified their answers, however, one stating this would be true if water was ample during the season, and the other agreeable to giving water if the Game and Fish Department pumped it from the main canal. Five (25.0%) of the farmers indicating possibilities for establishing cover stated they would not provide occasional irrigation water, two of these indicating the land was sub-irrigated at present and supplemental water would not be needed. Protection of wildlife areas from fire.--Twenty-eight cases occurred where benefit to wildlife cover could occur from protection of this cover from fire. Twenty (71.4%) individuals indicated they would permit fire protection for wildlife cover on their farms. The remaining eight Lndt.cabed permission to protect areas from fire would not be granted. Use of pheasant flushing bars~-Considerable interest was shown in pheasant fluBing bars and the possibilities of saving pheasants during the first cutting of alfalfa. A total of 85 individuals responded to this question. Of this group, 63 (74.1%) indicated they would use flushing bars on their tractors during the first cutting of alfalfa, if these were delivered for their use. Eighteen of these individuals, however, qualified their statements, specifying they would use the devices only if they were effective and practical. Some concern was shown in the probability these apparatuses would cause inconvenience during mowing activities. TWelve individuals stated they were not interested in the use of flushing bars to save pheasants. �-7The Soil Bank in the South Platte and Arkansas River Valleys Since farmers realize income from practically all products produced on their farm, exclusive of wildlife, it has long been recognized that monetary reimbursement for wildlife production may be necessary bef'ore the farmer would consider production of this crop. The conservation reserve section of the Soil Bank contains provisions whereby some reimbursement is now possible. Although it was believed payments would not be substantial enough to interest individuals in the Soil Bank on highly productive agricultural lands, several questions were asked to determine possible interest along this line. Willingness to place land in the Soil Bank.--A total of 92 individuals were contacted relative to placing lands in the Soil Bank. Seventy-three (79.3%) of the farmers stated they were not interested, 11 (12.0%) had no comment on the subject and 8 (8.7%) indicated they were interested in placing certain lands under this program. Plots, varying in size from five to 80 acres, and totalling 272 acres, were listed for Soil Bank considerations. The majority of these plots were in marginal areas and in many cases removed from intensively farmed lands where permanent cover is most needed. Acres of land available for wildlife use,provided monetary reimbursement is received. --General findings indicate 272 acres (as .shown above) may be available for placement in the conservation reserve section of the Soil Bank at an average annual payment of approximately $9.00 per acre. This acreage represents 1.9 percent of the total acreage covered during the survey. In addition to the 272 acres submitted for possible Soil Bank consideration, 1,261 acres (8.7 percent of the survey area) were listed for wildlife use considerations at amounts ranging from $10.00 to $100.00 per acre. Specifically, 640 acres were listed for wildlife use at an annual rental payment of $10.00 per acre, 24 acres at $15.00 per acre, 140 acres at $20.00 per acre, 145 acres at $30.00 per acre, 132 acres at $40.00 per acre, 10 acres at $45.00 per acre, 10 acres at $50.00 per acre, and 160 acres at $100.00 per acre. The general inquiry to determine the amount of money required (payment per year per acre) before lands would be retired for use by wildlife was met in varied manner. Many individuals stated their land was not applicable and they would not consider retiring it for wildlife use at any price. Annual rent~ payments,_suggested by 26 individuals who projected a rough guess, varied from $9.00 to $500:00 per acre per year, with an average of approximately $80.00. Length of time lands to be placed in the Soil Bank.--In several instances where interest was ~ndicated in placing lands in the Soil Bank, an interval of time during which these lands would be retired was also given. Findings show 85 to 115 acres would be available for five-year retirement, 30 acres for five to 10 year retirement, and 70 acres for 10-year retirement. Types of plantings on Soil Bank lands.--The type of cover planting determines the length of time lands must be retired in the Soil Bank to some degree. Limited data show the desired cover types and acreages for several plots where interest was shown in the Soil Banke 30 acres, legumes and grasses; 80 acres, shrubs and perennial grasses; five acres, trees and shrubs, and 4-5 acres, trees and perennial grasses. �-8Interest in Modification of the Agricultural Conservation Program At the request of Richard T. Takes, Soil Bank repre~entative for the Colorado Game and Fish Department, a survey question was included which pertained to determining interest in wildlife conservation practices if these were entered in the ACP handbook. During interviews it was explained that their may be a possibility of receiving payments for non-cultivated areas under the ACP program. This would be provided certain plantings, protection from fire and grazing, or other conservation practices were carried out. Explanation and presentation of this possibility to the farmer may have been somewhat misleading, in that such use of the ACP program may be impossible. Considerable interest, however, was shown by farmers in the possibility of receiving annual payments for presently non-cultivated areas. Of 48 individuals reporting, 26 (54.2%) indicated they would be interested in such a program, which would recognize the wildlife crop as a part of the land produce, and which could result in additional money from areas which presently provide low morietary returns. Miscellaneous Problems and Considerations Improvement of Pheasant Habitat in Several ideas were obtained during farmer interviews which perhaps would aid in a better understanding of pheasant management problems on intensively farmed lands. It appeared quite obvious that general interest in wildlife by farmers was high. At the same time the association of wildlife production and suitable habitat is generally lacking or is disregarded in the minds of the majority of farmers. Pheasant populations that are maintaining themselves in the South Platte and Arkansas Valley areas, result primarily from cover which remains as the result of necessity or chance, not from desire on the part of the farmer. In this connection, the irrigation canal system, with accompanying cover along ditch-banks, increasingly limited roadside cover, and scattered low (wet) or high (dry) spots are largely responsible for cover in the South Platte Valley north of Denver. In the Arkansas valley the above are supplemented by river~bottom cover. The picture would not be so dim except for the fact that Federal, State, and County agencies are exerting efforts through farm programs, some of them monetarily sub ..• sidized, Which further intensify and modernize farming practices. These programs almost invariably result in "furtl:,).er loss of wildlife cover. The above being the case, it appears that educational could best be directed toward other land-use agencies which currently receive the.most attention. efforts to save wildlife cover than toward sportsmen's groups, Educational programs for the farmers may aid in some minor accomplishments in maintenance of wildlife habitat. These programs, however, would perhaps be beneficial only through radio, TV, and newspaper media. A number of farmers were asked if they read the Department conservation magaZine, "Colorado Outdoors." A somewhat standard reply indicated farmers not only do not read this magazine but most have not heard of it. Conservation education for farm groups, therefore, would appear to be impossible through a wildlife conservation publication, and could best be accomplished through farm magazines. In Colorado, reports indicate over 90 percent of the farmers could be reached through publications in "Western Farm Life" and the nColorado Rancher and Farmer. " �-9General Information--Hunting Areas Available, Trends in the Pheasant Population, and Preferences fo"!'Hunting Season Regu'Latd.ons In additien ~ questions whi~h pertained to possibilities for maintaining or improving habitat for farm-game, sev~r£l ~tlestions were placed on the questionnaire to determine the feeling of farmers in regard to hunting, pheasant populations, and the types of bUnting regulations. Lands open to pheasant hunting.--Reports of 87 farmers indicate considerable land is st~ll available for public hunting, even in intensively farmed and relatively heavily populated areas north of Denver and in the Arkansas valley. Forty-four (50.6%) indicated they allowed hunting to all individuals with permission. Twelve (13.8%) prohibited hunting of any kind, 30 (34.5%) stated they reserved hunting for friends, and one (1.1%) indicated anyone could hunt and no'perrnission was needed. Persons who stated they permitted hunting with permission allowed there was much abuse to their wishes, with many hunters entering without their consent. The majority of these individuals appeared resigned to the fact they could not keep hunters off effectively and permitted the unsportsman-like conduct to eXist. Where farmers indicated they would be interested in placing lands in the Soil Bank, it was found that reimbursement in the form of Soil Bank payments would not change their opinions in regard to hunting privileges for sportsmen. Inquiry to determine just what reimbursement would be needed by farmers (who presently do not allow public hunting) before they would permit such activity, indicated most are definitely not interested in additional money. Only two individuals indicated they would favor payment by the hunter for pheasant hunting privileges. One desired $10.00 per day per person and the other $5.00. Reimbursement to the farmer before public hunting would be allowed pertained primarily to higher pheasant populations so that there would be enough birds to hunt. Opinions on pheasant population trends.--Reports by 88 farmers on the status of the pheasant population, indicated there are conflicts in opinions. Fo~-four (50.0%) stated they believed the birds had decreased, 34 (38.6%) indicated pheasants had increased in recent years, and 10 (11.4%) felt there had been little change. Phrasing of the question on pheasant population trends and manner in which this inquiry was made probably influenced the ansWers of individuals interviewed. The majority of farmers obviously detect a substantial reduction of birds now compared to what it "used to be." When it was explained we were interested primarily in ideas on pheasant trends within the last two or three years, many individuals reported some recent recovery had be~n made. Preferences for hunting season regulations.--A summary of data obtained in response to several questions pertaining to hunting season regulations is given below. Eighty-four individuals reported on their preference for length of hunting seasons. Of these, 69 (82.1%) did not prefer a season longer than three days, 7 (8.3%) preferred a season longer than three days, and 8 (9.6%) were neutral in their feeling on the length of pheasant season. Nine farmers, who stated they did not wish a season longer than three days, indicated they would prefer closure of the season. Reports on straight and split seasons by 63 individuals showed a strong preference for a straight season. Forty-three (68.3%) preferred the straight season, 12 (19.0%) a split season, and 8 (12.7%) we.re neutral. �-10- A still stronger feeling was indicated against an Lncr ease in the number of cocks in the daily bag limit. Sixty-nine (88.5%) of 78 individuals reporting, wished no increase. in the bag limit, 4 (5.1%) favored an increase in the daily bag limit, and 5 (6.4%) had no preference. Response to the inquiry on possession limit was similar to that for the bag limit. Many individuals did not understand the difference between a daily bag limit and the possession limit, however, and it is felt a true idea of wishes for a possession limit was not obtained. Once explained, farmers generally agreed permitting possession of cock pheasants from two or more daily bags, would legalize what now commonly occurs. Reports of 82 farmers on their preference for a possession limit showed 53 (64~6%) preferred no increase in this limit, 17 (20.7%) favored an increase, and 12 (14.7%) were neutral. The opening shooting hour preferred by farmers has been discussed many times during establishment of pheasant shooting regulations. Arguments have been given for earlier shooting hours to give the sportsmen a break. Reasons for establishing opening shooting hours later in the day have pertained to giving the pheasant a break, allowing the farmer a chance to get his chores done, and giving sportsmen who have to work until Saturday noon an equal break with individuals who may be able to start hunting earlier. Reports from 92 farmers show the following preferences for pheasant shooting hours. Thirty-seven (40.2%) favored the same shooting hours as have existed for the past two years, 10:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Twenty-three (25.0%) preferred noon to 5:00 shooting hours, 15 (16.3%) were neutral ;~nd five (5.4%) favored shooting hours from sunrise to sunset. The remaining 12 individuals (13.1%) suggested a variety of shooting hours ranging from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. to 10:00 A.M. to sundown. During all inquiries pertaining to hunting regulations, there was general comment by farmers that these should be formulated by the Colorado Game and Fish Commission. Although some individuals felt stronplY about certain regulations, the majority indicated they felt the Department was in the best position to manage the pheasant resource. Recommendations: Findings from this survey show that maintenance or provLsLon of wildlife cover on intensively - farmed lands in Colorado is largely prohibitive from the standpoint of cost., Scattered plots, however, are available for development for wildlife cover; some of these requiring no reimbursement to the landowner and others available for consideration under the Soil Bank or through direct negotiation with the farmer. Data indicate as much as 1.9 percent of the total land area may be available for wildlife habitat developments under the Soil Bank. It is recommended Department personnel methodically canvas critical pheasant areas to determine what possibilities exist for habitat improvement. Since land-use practices are controlled in part by various farm programs, sUbsidies, etc., it is recommended that Department personnel work more closely with the Soil Conservation Service, county agents, and farm organizations, to explain the needs for wildlife and what must be done if pheasant populations are to be maintained. Along this line educational programs must be directed through media that reach the farmer. Few farmers subscribe to wildlife conservation magazines, and preparation of articles for farm magazines or awarding free subscriptions of "Colorado Outdoors" to farmers or farm gro4,psmay aid in explaining wildlife conservation problems to these individualE �-11Perhaps the only effective program in maintaining habitat for pheasants on irrigated lands would involve legislation, whereby wildlife would be recognized more fully as a farm crop. Such legislation would require curtailment of several subsidy payments now available to farmers for draining, clearing, leveling and other practices which destroy wildlife areas, and a transfer of some of these or other payments to farmers for maintaining wild areas. Pending programs, which may be partially effective in providing wildlife cover and increasing pheasant numbers, it is recommended material from this report be used to inform sportsmen of the many problems involved in maintaining pheasant numbers on intensively farmed lands in Colorado. Personnel: Wildlife Conservation Officers Sig Palm, Gurney I. Crawford, Lloyd K. Hazzard, Keith L. Wilson, and Jack Combs and Biologists Richard T. Takes, Donald M. Hoffman, William Rutherford, Glenn E. Rogers, and Wayne W. Sandfort. Prepared by Wayne W Date 0 Sandfort Approved by Apr~l, 1959 ----------~~~~~------------------ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��~ii IIJ'111IU'I;'i~'lj~~iIIlllf~'lfl~~]~1 II~I~'I 133 -13- .'_--c:-~B~D-,-O~W~O_2_2_3.,-4_3~ _ _J April, 1959 JOB COMPLETION REPORT· . INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 92068G3 'State of COLORADO ----------~------------------------- Work Plan No. Title 3 ~ __J_o_b __N_o_._.~~------2-------------------------- M~a~p~p~L~·n~g~o~f __~s~a~g~e~g~r~o~u~s_e __r~a~n~g~e_.~ Period Covered--April ~ ~--------~------~---- I, 1958 to March 31, 1959 Abstract: There are 4,246 square miles of sagebrush range and 651 'square miles of complementary range in the Northwest Region of Colorado. Not all of this area is or could be, inhabited by sage grouse by reason of t~rrain, elevation, size of area, and secondary range types. Other areas not listed could be, or are, sage grouse habitat because of their proximity to, or inclusion of, some sagebrush. Sage grouse areas in Eagle, Garfield, Mesa, Pitkin. and Rio Blanc? counties appear to fall in the light, 1 to 10 grouse to the square mile, classification along with Axial Basin in Moffat county and Twin Mesa, Elkhead, and Slater Creek in Routt county. The --'--re-sTc)'r'Rout'C'an-d-:r5fof'fat counties appears to fall in-flie-fafr~ -IO--to 30 grouse to the square mile, with the exception of Toponas and Twenty-¢.ile in Routt county, and Blue Mountain, Cold Springs Mountain, Great D~ide, and Timberlake areas in Moffat county which appear to have a good, 30 to 50 grouse to the square mile, population. Several areas, where grouse were present ten years ago. now appear void. Grand and Summit counties of the Northwest region, although tion of sagebrush, have not been checked as to distribution listed as to the distribuof grouse. Objectives: (1) To assemble all available information on sage grpuse range and distribution. (2), To complete mapping of sage grouse range. (3) To compile data and prepare disfribution.distribution and density maps of Colorado sage grouse populations. Techniques Used: Interviews were conducted with Department personnel and ranchers on sage grouse observations and numbers. Tracing and planimeteririg of sagebrush range was made from Soil Conservation Service range type maps. ' The sage grouse distribution and density classification was hypothesized for a fall populatiqn from number of birds observed and place of observation on strutting grounds, brood counts, during hunting seasons, ground and aerial big game counts, reports of ranchers and Department personnel, amount of range available, and pure guesstimation. - Prepared J- . -. ,_. '.:~..: by: Glenn E. Rogers ��-1.5- Mapping of Sage Grouse Range Glenn E. Rogers Findings: The distribution of sagebrush and its complementary dry-farmed and irrigated lands was traced from range-type maps of the Soil Conservation Service. These maps were not checked by us for degree of accuracy. The Soil Conservation Service states that they are accurate to twenty acres. In two counties, Eagle and Pitkin, large acreages listed as mixed brush, would have been classified as sagebrush type by the author .. For consistency though, none of the type classes have been changed in this report. Irrigated, river bottoms, and dry-farming lands were included in the report, as areas usable by sage grouse, where these land were surrounded by sage'i>tush. It appears that these lands, particularly when in alfalfa, wheat, or native meadow, are used by sage grouse at least part of the year. Other range types, grass, aspen, mountain brush, or miscellaneous, were not included, although sage grouse may inhabit these types where they are either surrounded by, or adjacent to, sagebrush, or have sagebrush as ~ secondary type. Square miles of sagebrush and complementary ranges by county are shown in Table 1. Also, a map showing this distribution is being prepared for inclusion in the census handbooks. In several counties, with large areas of sagebrush range, conditions of terrain, elevation, and size of sagebrush areas are inimical to a eood sage grouse habitat. Sage grouse appear to like large, continuous areas of sagebrush in flat, or gently rolling terrain, not over 9,000 feet in elevation. Department personnel in the Northwest Region were interviewed as to numbers of sage grouse observed or numbers killed by hunters to obtain a general idea on sage grouse distribution and density. A map showing estimated density of sage grouse is being prepared for the census handbooks. Two counties in the Northwest Region, Grand and Summit, have been checked as to the amount of sagebrush range present, but will not be checked as to distribution of sage grouse until next year. Table 1. SQUARE MILES OF SAGEBRUSH COUNTY Eagle Garfield .. Grand Mesa** Moffat Pitkin Rio Blanco Routt Summit SAGEBRUSH (53.(5Q, 199.08 483.68 199.84 2,292.72 1.52 434.48 452.56 57.36 TOTALS 4,lB4.84 * ** AND COMPLEMENTARY NORTHWEST REGION IRRIGATED RANGE BY COUNTIES & RIVER BOTTOM* 38.96 70.60 43.80 52.28 47.12 DRYLAND FARMING* 20.92 29.52 71. 76 105.32 38.96 29.36 94.52 468.80 174.32 Only that land surrounded by sagebrush. Only that portion of Mesa County in the Northwest FOR THE Region. �-16- In Moffat county four areas, Blue Mountain, Cold Springs Mountain, Great Divide, and Timberlake appear to have enough sage grouse to be listed in the good, 30 to 50 grouse to the square mile classification. Only two other areas, Toponas and Twenty-mile areas of Routt county, appear to have enough grouse to be listed in the good category. The rest of the sage grouse areas north of U. S. Highway 40 in Moffat county and the Sunnyside area of Routt .county, appear to have a fair, 10 to 30 grouse to the square mile, population. The area south of U. S. 40 in Moffat county, the Twin Mesa, Elkhead, and Slater Creek areas of Routt county and all areas in Eagle, Garfield, Mesa, Pitkin, and Rio Blanco counties appear to fall in the light, I to 10 grouse .to the square mile, classification. In several areas that were considered good sage grouse range ten years ago, Josephine Basin, Beaver Creek and Mesa area above Meeker, and the lower White River area near Angorra tn Rio Blanco county, Divide Creek and Carbondale area of Garfield county, and the upper Snake River area of Moffat county, not a single bird was observed during this past y~ar's work. Recommendations: More study is needed on the distribution of sage grouse and the distribution of sagebrush range. A comparison of the two separate distribution maps, along with a field study of terrain and other habitat factors, could give an excellent idea of sage grouse potential and possible sage grouse transplant sites in the Northwest Region. Prepared by: Date: Glenn E. Rogers ~----A.p-r-i-l~,--1~9-5~9 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~ _ �I~~IJIIII~'liliil'1111~illllli[~li~rlll~1 ~11~llIijll BDOW022344 April, -17- .JOB CqMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 1959 920G8G4 -STATE OF COLORADO Project NO. ~W_-~3~7_-~R~-~1~2 --------~~~~~------------------------ Work Plan No. ~ ~3 Period Covered--April ~G~a=m~e~B~i~r~d~S~u~r~v~e~y~s~ ~--~ ~~J~0~b~N~0~.~· ~--~3~-------- 1, 1958 to March ------- 31, 1959. Abstract: A total of 920 cocks and 208 unclassified birds was counted on 54 strutting ground in seven counties of the Northwest Region. There were also 335 cocks and 490 birds counted on eight grounds in two counties of the Southwest Region. In comparison with counts made on the same grounds in 1953 and 1954, the. sage grouse popUlation appears to be steadily decreasing. On this small sample of 18 grounds, there has been seven grounds changes, abandonment or movement, between 1953 and 1958. --Objectives-:----(l)--'I'o+l ocat.e arid map as many sage grouse-strutting-grounds as possible. (2) To select permanent, representative strutting grounds which can be counted annually; these counts to be used in determining changes in the breeding popUlation from year to year. (3)· To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. (4) To instruct other Department personnel in a standardized method for determining trends in the sage grouse breeding popUlation. (5) To eventually turn over sage grouse strutting groutid counts to management. Techniques Used: Department personnel and local ranchers were interviewed as to location of strutting grounds. Roads were cruised from before daylight to about one hour after sunrise in sage grouse range with stops at approximately one-mile intervals to listen for strutting birds. Aerial flights were made over known strutting grounds and sage grouse range to check aerial observations. Maps were made of the strutting grounds from aerial photographs obtained from the Soil Conservation Service and the Commodity Stabilization Service. Written descriptions of the roads us~d and mileage traveled were attached to the maps. Prepared by: G~l_e_n_n E~.~R~o~g~e_r_s~ ~ ��-19Sage Grouse Breeding Season Studies Glenp E. Rogers Findings: A total of 54 strutting grounds was checked in seven counties of the Northwest Region, Table 1. The 12 grounds listed in Table 3 were located in 1953 and 1954, and although some of the other 42 grounds were known to local Conservation Officers, no tabulation of their location or number of birds counted existed. Of the 12 grounds located in 1953-1954, three, Lay Creek, Nichols No.1; and Nichols No.2, were void of birds in 1958. Several areas in the seven counties, with known populations of sage grouse, could not be checked in the past year pue to road conditions or the lack of time. Eagle county in its entirety, Routt county north of Hayden, and about one-half of Moffat county should be checked during one more strutting season for adequate coverage. A Super Cub airplane was used on five flights to try to locate strutting grounds from the air. In flying over known grounds, at an elevation of approximately 200 feet, birds could be easily distinguished and counted. Even with this training and practice no new grounds were located from the airplane. It is believep that the observer attempted to scan too great an area during the flights. ' Two days were spent in the Gunnison area on a count of the strutting grounds set up in 1957, Table 2. Many of the roads in this area. were still impassable and only a few of the grounds could be reached. The Ohio Creek strutting ground, a mile wide and seven miles long, was divided into easily recognized sections so it could be all counted during the optimum time. __ The first strutting activity was observed on the twellh of March. On that date birds were .observed going through the strutting movements, but were not making their customary sounds. Several grounds changed locations three to four times during March and April. These changes may have been caused by the birds dislike for mud and soft snow and a preference for solid footing. ' Maps were prepared from aerial photographs along with a written description of the location of the grounds. Due to a mixup in the ordering of the aerial photographs, not all grounds have been mapped at this time. These ma:ps and descriptions are printed on the reverse side of the strutting ground counting forms. These forms together with a des~ cription of the methods and time of coUnts, will be placed in the sage grouse census handbooks. . Recommendations: Work should be continued by local Conservation Officers and project personnel to locate sage grouse strutting grounds in all areas where sage grouse populations exist. When additional strutting grounds are located, maps and written descriptions should be prepared to allow accurate tabulation of breeding birds and to determine stability of strutting grounds for future reference. From the work done, it appears that the sage grouse population has decreased more than is commonly believed. Also, there is more changing of strutting grounds, complete abandonment of old grounds and establishment of ~ew ones, than has been generally assumed. Only by continued search and the keeping of accurate records will these questions be answered. �::t{.7t8 -20Table 1.--STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1958 Date 4/27 4/11 4/26 4/27 4/28 4/29 5/22 3/12 4/26 4/27 3/12 4/26 4/27 3/12 4/26 4/29 4/30 5/2 5/3 5/3 5/3 4/25 4/27 4/28 4/27 4/28, 4/29 4/14 4/15 4/16 4/17 4/18 4/19 4/24 4/30 4/30 5/1 4/10 4/11 4/19 4/20 4/20 5/22 4/30 4/28 4/29 Sub Totals Name of Ground Moffat CoUnty' , Antelope No. 1 Davidson, Sandfort Rogers Axi.li,~al?iIi, No. 1 Roland Axial Basin No. 1 Roland Axial Basin No. 1 Axial Basin No. 1 Roland Wagner Bear Cr.~Blue Mtn. Rogers Bear Cr.-Blue Mtri. Rogers Big Gulch No. I (Beckett) Roland, Rogers Big ~ulch No. 1 Big Gu.lchNo. 1 Sandfort, Davidson Rogers Big Gulch No , 2 Roland; Rogers Big Gulch No. 2 Big;,Gulch No. 2 Davidson, Sandfort Big:Gulch No.3' Roland, Rogers 'Rogers Big Gulch ,No. 3 Big Hole Gulch' Sandfort Big:HO:leGulch Sandfort, R. White Bor-d Gulch' Sandfort, Rogers Rogers CrossMtn. No. 1 Rogers Cro?sMtn. No. 2 ,Sandfort Dec~ption,Cr. 23 Road Dry Lake No. 1 Roland, Rogers Sheldon Dry';Lake No. 1 Roland Dry:Lake No. 1 Sheldon Dry;taice No. 2 Dry'Lake No. 2 Roland [ Roland Dry Lake No , 2 Fortification No. 1 Davidson Fortification No. 1 Davidson Davidson Fortification No. 1 Davidson Fortification No. 1 Fortification No. 1 Davidson Davidson Fortification"No. 1 Rogers, " Dayidson ,, Fortification No. ,1 Rogers Roland, Great Divide Sandfort, R. Whi~e ' Great Divide Rogers Greasewood No. 1 Rogers High Mesa Betts, Rogers High Mesa Roland HighM~sa Roland High Mesa Wagner Kerron-Blue Mtn. Rogers Kerron-Blue Mtn. Sandfort. Ro White Lester Cox Ranch Sandfort Grassie Res. Grassie Res. Sandfort Counter(s) Grounds 20 Time High Count 6:30 6:44 6:05 5:42 6:45 5:55 4:55 7:35 5:40 6:05 6:55 5:25 5:45 6:50 5:10 5:40 5:30 6:18 6:35 5:10 6:00, 5:50 5:30 4:55 6:15 5:20 6:30 5:15 5:30 5:15 5:15 5:00 5:15 5:04 5:10 5:25 6:25 5:30 5:21 6:35 6:35 5:35 5:30 5:51 6:30 4:55 Highest counts only ** Cocks 4 13 20 19 19 26 *Total Birds 4 2B 20 '5 2 11 19 ,19 28 0 5 12 13 0 0 (5 7 10 ~ ~ 50 50 60 44 4 ~ -, "9 "'"b -:t; """Ii 33 """Ii 34 ~ ~ 19 13 16 23 27 23 19 17 27 28 2b 2b 13 15 13 12 13 14 12 12 13 21 13 14 12 15 22 30 19 17 17 18 14 14 20 "0 l3 21 20 19 12 15 34 (5 27 36 23 34 367 445 34 18 �-21Table l.--STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1958. Date 4/25 4/27 4/29 4/25 4/27 4/29 4/30 4/27 4/28 4/26 5/1 5/1 5/8 5/21 4/27 4/24 4/28 5/2 3/22 4/10 5/8 3/25 4/15 4/15 4/19 5/8 3/26 4/17 3/25 3/25 4/15 4/8 4/21 4/17 4/18 4/19 5/14 4114 4/22 Counter(s) Rogers Davidson Roland Rogers Roland, Davidson Roland Sandfort, R. White Sandfort, Davidson Rogers Sandfort, Dillon Sandfort ,Sandfort Wagner Rogers Rogers Davidson, Rogers, Hughes Sandfort Rogers Sandfort Total Moffat County Roland, Rosette, Rogers Rosette Rosette, Rogers Rosette, Rogers Rosette Rosette Rosette Rosette, Rogers Rosette s. Rogers 'Rosette _ Rosette, Rogers Rosette, Rogers Rosette Rogers Wixson Wixson Wixson Wixson Rogers Name of Ground Moffat County, cont. Nichols No. 1 Nichols No. 1 Nichols No. 1 Nichols N"0' 2 Nichols No. 2 Nichols No. 2 No. 'Fork Big Gulch No. 1 No. Fork Big Gulch No. 2 Roac;l'19 Rou~d Bottom Spring Cr,eekNo. 1 Spr~ng creek No. 2 Stateline-Blue Mtn. Stateline-Blue Mtn. Timberlake,No. 1 (Forshee) Continued Time High Count Cocks *Total Birds 6:15 6:30 5:50 6:19 6:34 6:00 0 0 0 0 5:00 ** TiE 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 6:10 6:32 5:05 5:06 5:39 5:55 4:45 5:50 0 0 24 b 7 15 15 b ""3 12 Upper 18 Road, 7:00 32 Upper Lay creek No. 1 & 2 5:45 ~ Upper Lay Creek No. 2 5:20 4b Grounds Highest Counts 588 33 only Routt County 6:'28 Devi,l'_sGrave (Watson cr.) 14 De-rll'fs'Grave 6:00 .JJ Devil's'Grave 6:00 0 Egerd.a Cr eek 7:07 15 Egeria Creek 6:10 20 Finger Rock Creek 6:55 """3 6:00 26 Finger Rock Creek 12 Five !';ineMesa 5:15 I8' 7:02 S~Y~i.de No. 1 6:10 10 Snnnysf.deNo.1 Toponas No. '1 8:00 3 I'oponas No, 2 7:42 19 Toppnas No. 2, 6:25 l7 Twenty-Mile ' 5:42-6:17 65 Twenty-Mile 91 5:35 Twin,Me13a 5:30 32 Twi:nMesa 30 5:35 Twin Mesa 32 5:45 Twin Mesa 5:38 56 Total Routt County Grounds Rogers Rogers Total Garfield County Garfield County Harvey Gap West Coulter creek 2 Grounds 9 Ii'5 18 b 2'9- IIi Highest Counts 262 only -:3 13 33 '57 >2 686 16 ~ 0 15 20 3' 32 12 23 10 4 27 23 103 141 52 50 52 58 346 5:44 3 3 6:45 Highest Counts only -7 .. 9 10 12 �-22- . Table l.--STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1958. Continued Date 3/28 5/16 4/17 5/7 5/7 Counter{s) Rogers Rogers Rosette Rogers Rogers Graham, Graham, Total Eagle County 4/15 5/11 M~gu~, Rogers Rogers Sandfort, Rogers Rogers Sandfort, Rogers Rogers Sandfort, Rogers Rogers Sandfort, Rogers Rogers * -)Ht- 3 Rio B'Ianco__ Coun,ty SceJ;;lery Glilch Oil Wells, Corral Grounds 2 Mesa County Glade Park No. 1 Glade Park No. 1 Glade Park No. 2 Glade Park No. 2 Glade Park No. 3 Glade Park No. 3 Glade Park No. 4 Glade Park No. 4 Gr-ounds, II Total Mesa County 4/22 .~ Grounds Total Rio Blanco County 4/19 5/4 4/19 5/4 4/19 5/4 4/19 5/4 Name of Ground Eagle CoUnty Bowen Ranch (Wolcott) Bowen R nch Newcomer (Burns Rodeo) Newcomer Red Hill Road Rogers Pitkin County Capitol Creek Time High Count 6:50 6:05 5:40 6:00 5:05 Cocks *Total Birds 16 37 ** 20 20 7 o 0 5 7 7 ,Highest Counts only 32 51 6:30 5:10 1 IT 12 Highest Counts only 12 13 5:30 4:55 5:45 5:05 6:15 5:10 6:50 5:15 3 '2 1 4 2' 1 1 0 0 4 0 6 5 0 9 3 3 Highest Counts only 14 19 5:03 2 2 Total Pitkin County Grounds 1 Highest Counts only 2 2 GRAND TOTAL ALL COUNTIES Grounds 54 Highest Counts 920 only 1,129 Includes hens and unclassified birds as well as cocks. Underlined number is highest count for specific ground .. �1 .,.'to.. Figure l.--Observer checking the Upper Lay Creek strutting ground. Figure 2.--Closer view of the birds and vegetation the Upper Lay Creek strutting ground. on �-23Table 2.--STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE SOUTHWEST REGION, 1958. Gunnison and Saguache Date 4/17 4/17 4/17 4/17 4/17 4/17 4/17 4/18 4/18 4/18 Counter(s~ Benson, Benson, Benson, Benson, Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Williams Williams Sandfort, Evans, Bogart Williams Williams Sandfort, Evans, Bogart Rogers Name of Ground Time Hig:hCount Needle creek 5:15 Doyleville No. 1 (right) 5:36 Doyleville No. 2 (left) 5:40 Doy1eville No. 3 (Harthorn$':56 lola No.1 4:50 lola No. 2 5:35 Ohio Creek 5:10-6:45 Gold Basin 5:00 Lower Antelope No.l,2,3 6:10 Ohio Creek Sec. 1 4:50 Sec. 2 to Sec. 3 *Total Birds Cocks 10 **8 IT IIi 18 E (j IT 18 2b "9 13 i52 3 191 10 97 49 258 lTi4 175 61 380 7 b ill GRAND TarAL SOUTHWEST REGION * ** Highest Counts335 only Includes hens and unclassified birds as well ss cocks. Underlined number is highest count for specific ground. 490 Table 3--COMPARISON OF HIGH COUNTS ON STRUTTING GROUNDS FOR 1953, 1954, and 1958. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Southwest Region Name of Ground 1953 Ohio Creek------------------------------------517 Needle Creek---------------------·------------21 Razor Creek---------------------·----------41 Doy1evi11e------------------------------------26 Woods Gulch-----------------------------------8 Gold Basin------------------------------------4 Totals Southwest Region . 617 1954 301 14 47 13 11 1958 258 8 o 3 295 386 o 26 o �-24Table 3.--COMPARISON OF HIGH COUNTS ON STRUTTING GROUNDS FOR 1953, 1954, and 1958. Continued. Northwest Region . 1953 1. Big Gulch No. 1-------------------------..:---.:..:.·· 28 . 2. Big Gulch No. 2-----------------------------74 3. Big Gulch No. 3-------------------.:.-----------* Name of Ground 4. Lay-------------------------------~---~-----~-- 5. Round Bottom----------------------------------6. Timberlake-----------------------------------7. North Fork Big Gulch No. 1--------.:.-----------8. Great Divide Road----------------------------9. Dry Lake No.1 (Deceptiofi)--------------------10. Dry Lake No. 2 (Freemen)----------------------11. Nichols No.1 (Sunbeam)----------------------12. Nichols No. 2 (Sunbeam)----------------------TOTALS NORTHWEST REGION * These grounds not discovered .Prepared byr __ Date~ * 19 69 32 1 34 26 23 22 31 37 16 25 1958 11 7 50 0 6 15 17 0 19 27 ·0 0 200 335 152 ~45 26 * * * 25 * 1954 until 1954 • ..;;.Gl;;;.e;;.;;nn;;;;.~E.;;.. •...::;R.;.;;o;.s;;g~er~s:;.,_ Approved by: __ La:aur-..:oe ••.• n.:.:;c8liii-oOE •.•• _......RJ,j"i· o"",r...loodlJOla.u.n __ Federal Aid Coordinator ~A~p~r~i~1~j~1~9~5~9 ~------- �II~iIMj~"Mlliiiil~il BDOW022345 April, 1959 -25JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 920G8G5 COLORADO ------~~~~--------------~-- State of Project No. ; W-37-R-12 ,Work Plan Noo__ Title, - ---::3;..._ Game Bird Survey ------·t-..,;;J..,.;;0...;.,b-N;.;.,0,;;.;.;__' ---:-~-..::;5--....~_~~---.;.;;-- Sage' grouse brood surveys Period Covered: April 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959. Abstract: From the second week in July to the middle of August, 2,313 sage grouse, 35 sharptail grouse, and 39 blue grouse were observed on 47 brood count trips in sage grouse areas~ Using the data gathered in the 47 trips, ten permanent sage grouse brood count routes were established in four counties of the Northwest region. Due to an early hatch of sage grouse in 1958, the middle of June would have been more desirable for accurate brood determination in contrast to Ute first of August date established for the late hatch of 1957. ' Objectives: (1) To standardize methods for ascertaining annual sage grouse production. (2) To establish permanent, representative brood count routes in all Colorado sage grouse range. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in a standardized brood count procedure. (4) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. (5) To eventually turn over sage grouse brood survey work to management. Techniques Used: Department personnel and local ranchers were- interviewed to ascertain location of sage grouse. Roads were cruised in these areas in the early morning late in the evening. Records of sage grouse observed, age and number of birds, time of observation, weather conditions, and mileage were kept for each trip. Maps and written descriptions were made for each route, using the above information and Forest Service and Stat'e Highway Department maps for a base. - Prepared by: Glenn E. Rogers ��A-' --'~1 "-27SAGE GROUSE BROOD SURVEYS Glenn E. Rogers Table 1.--SAGE GROUSE COUNTED ON BROOD COUNT AREAS OF THE NORTHWEST REG ION, 1958. Moffat County Date 8/13 8/13 8/1h 7/18 7/18 7/17 7/18 7/17 7/18 7/18 8/11 , \ 7/16 7/16 7/17 7/17 7/16 7/15 7/1h 7/15 7/16 8/15 7/16 7/15 7/16 8/1h 7/15 7/15 7/16 7 16 7/25 8/6 7/25 7 25 Area Counted Time Cold Springs Mountain Beaver creek, Calloway AM PM Beaver Creek AM Cold Springs, Beaver Creek Blue Mountain AM East Blue Mountain west Blue Mountain AM PM Artesia Road, Blue Mtn. West Blue Mountain·· AM South of Maybell cross Mountain AM PM Cedar Sps. Deception Cr. Lay, Axial Basin PM 10 Road PM Northeast of Craig PM Fortification, Longs Gulch Willow Creek PM Greasewood, Snake River AM Greasewood AM 19 & 21 Roads Great Divide and South= AM Great Divide AM Great Divide, Upper Spring Spring Creek PM Midday 7 and 106 Roads PM 6, 7, and III Roads AM Great Divide North and West of Great Divide= Bighole Midday AM Bighole North and West of Craig AM 7, 8, and 17·Roads PM Big Gulch, Timberlake Timberlake PM PM Big Gulch, Fortification Midday 7, 17, and 5 Roads Forshee Road PM otals Moffat County Eagle County North of Eagle AM Castle Mountain Willow Cr., Alkili Cr. PM South of Eagle Cottonwood Pass AM Cottonwood Pass PM Totals Eagle Caun Y Sage Gr011Se Adults Youn'g Unc. Miles Traveled 5 38 23 10 51 25 122 165 326 9.5 26.2 Ih.9 15 h 28 27 12 10 h8 hO 0 8 0 0 3h.2 7.2 20.9 16.8 0 15 2 0 0 0 2 0 23 0 0 0 l1.h 2h.O 23.1 38.1 2 2 6 12 0 0 35.0 20.9 h 10 h 29 0 10 28.7 33.6· 53 21 Ih h 5 13 h3 57 h6 16 20 20 18 62 29 0 0 137 h3.8 3h.0 3h.l 31. 7 55.3 29.2 8 8 19 23 0 1 gh.8 27.2 14 20 9 25 1 4 37 33 31 49 35 4 2 7 0 2 0 8 0 0 20.2 44.0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 25.1 10.7 100.0 50.8 31.2 49.5 54.6 18.9 19.1 .7 ,,_~ .:) �-28Table 1.--SAGE GROUSE COUNTED ON BROOD COUNT AREAS OF THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1958. Contd, Routt County Date 8/5 8/19 8/19 7/23 8/8 8/7 8/7 7/22 7/23 7/24 7/24 Area C01,lIlted North of Hayden Elkhead Slater Park, South Fork Slater, Elkhead Slater, Calif. Park South Hayden Twenty-Mile T'4n Mesa South of Yampa Egeria, Five Pines Egeria, Five Pines, Toponas Five Pines, Su.nnyside Gore Pass W:st of Yampa .•... Watson Creek, Hunt Creek Time Sage Grouse Adults Young. Unc , Miles Traveled PM 6 9 3 1 0 19 3 5 0 0 9 0 35.7 50.1 21.6 14.1 AM PM 10 4 18 1 7 0 19.9 26.8 AM 8 AM 5 30 63 1 8 3 0 0 0 0 19.1 24.0 33.7 9.5 AM 0 0 0 30.0 132 69 16 284.5' 0 2 0 2 510 0 8 0 0 2805 8.6 8.5 PM AM PM PM AM Totals Routt County , 4 .. 6/5 . 8/}7· 8 1<) Mesa County Southwest of Grand Junction Glade Park to Pinion Mesa PM . Pinon Mesa PM Pinon Mesa PM Tntals Mesa County Grand Total Northwest Region 11 0 11 732 1,071 . 1,278.8 �Table 2.--SAGE GROUSE COUNTED ON BROOD COUNT ROUTES IN THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1958. Minu1"ea per Bird Miles Minutes Adults Yo~ Une. Total Big Gulch, Timberlake 3 51.8 221 112 84 142 338 .75- &.52 .61 Blue Mountain 2 24.0 150 30 40 8 78 1.33 3.28 1.92 Cold Springs 3 50.6 380 66 86 613 765 1.30 IS.11 .49 E1khead 2 45.5 189 9 3 9 21 '.33 .46 9.00 Great Divide 2 41. 7 153 24 45 137 206 1.87 4.94 .74 Pinon Mesa 3 45.6 191 2 8 11 21 4.00 .48 9.09 Slater Park 2 60.3 232 10 24 0 34 2.40 .56 6.82 Toponas 3 52.5 193 55 11 0 66 .20 1.06 2.92 Name of Route Young per Adult Birdsper Mile Number of Counts , I'\) Twenty-Mile 1 19.9 101 10 IB 7 35 1.Bo 1. 75 2.B8 Wolcott Divide 1 19.5 144 2 8 0 10 4.00 .51 14.40 Totals 22 411.4 1954 320 327 927 1574 1.02 3.B2 1.24 '-0 I ~,~ ~ '\j' ,F.ti' ~....'j' �1 /,'1:~, ~"t.._ .... ' _.'" -30Findings & Brood counts in the Northwest region were begun the second week in July and continued through the middle of August. The area covered, the number of sage grouse observed, the date, and the miles traveled on 47 trips are shown in Table 10 On seven of these trips no sage grouse were counted. Although not shown, sharptails and blue grouse were observed on six of these seven routes. A total of 2,313 sage grouse, 35 sharptail grouse, and 39 blue grouse were observed in the 1,,278 miles traveled on these trips. The following sentence is extracted from the Federal Aid Quarterly Report for July, 1958, part two, page 125; "Counts should not be started before the last week in July, and more time must be allowed for flushing young birds in these early counts." This year, 1958, young birds hatched from four to six weeks earlier than in 1957, and it was difficult to distinguish young from adult birds in the middle of July. From the experience gained during the above two contrasting years, weather-wise, it is believed that no set date can be established as optimum for counting sage grouse broods. The best times for checking broods, to give us information on age classes, could range from the middle of June to the middle of August depending on'the severity or mildness of the weather prevalent during the spring months. Data collected during the 47 trips were analyzed as to coverage and work load for individual field men, and the ten permanent brood count routes listed in Table 2 were established. These ten routes, each counted three times, shOUld give us a sample of from one to two thousand sage grouse in the four-county area on which success of production each year and variation between years can be judged. Maps, with a written description of the route to be traveled, have been prepared for each brood count route. These maps are printed on the reverse side of the brood count forms, and along with a descriptbn of the methods and time of counts will be placed in the sage grouse census handbooks. Recommendations & No set period can be established as the optimum time for countirtg sage grouse broods from the experience of the past two years. Perhaps peak h~tching dates during 1957 and 1958 were extremes and continued studies during the next few ' years may show'an average period that will be most suitable for counting broods artd determining reproductive success. At present, the number of sage grouse pbserved on roadside brood counts made in the early morning, as compared'with :Late evening, or even, middle of the daY. counts, seems to vary from route to route, depending on the weather, food, free water, or some unknown factor. So far, roadside brood counts have been established on a late everting basis to insure uniformity of counts and for convenience of the local field man, rather than on the ba,sis of superiority of this kind and time of counts. Prepared byg Dateg Glenn Eo Rogers Approved byg April 1959 ----~----~--~~~--------------------- Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �Figure l.--Sage grouse nest located near main Moffat county road. This road is also the center of a spring sheep driveway. Figure 2.--Close-up of above nest. Nesting continued during sheep drives but was abandoned later because of human activity. ��:1f;:1. -33JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS. PROJECTS State of COLORADO ----~~~~-------------------Game Bird Survey Project NO. - W-37-R-12 4 • Job No. 6 ----~----------------------~~~~------~----~------------~ Title: ------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Trapping and transplanting (including release of game-farm birds). Work Plan NO •.. ; Period Covered: February 1, 1959 through March 26, 1959 Abstract: No wild chukars were captured during limited trapping attempts in February', 1959. During March, 1,271 game-farm chukars were re'Leaseddn eight carefully selected areas in attempts to increase the range and numbers of these birds. All chukars but those placed in Paradox valley were leg-banded. Objective: To increase the range and numbers of chukar partridges. ····------:-Techniques--used:-----Trapping and Transplanting Wild Birds Established traps in Escalante Canyon, Delta County were baited with wheat during the fj,rst part of February, 1959. Following concentration of birds, traps were opened and attempts were made to capture wild chukars for transplantation into new areas. Releasing Game-farm Chukars Game-farm chukars were loaded from holding pens at the Little Hills Experiment Station, Rio Blanco County and the Experimental Game Farm at Rocky Ford, and distributed in previously selected areas. Leg bands were placed on all birds which were released - in or near areas which may be open to chukar hunting during the fall of 1959. In aqdition, bands were placed on all birds released in Fremont County in eastern Colorado. Prepared by: Glenn E. Rogers ��-35CHUKAR PARTRIDGE TRAPPING AND TRANSPLANTING Wayne W. Sand! ort Findings: Trapping operations were unsuccessful during the winter of 1959, primarily because of the brief period during which trapping was possible, warm weather and wide dispersal of chukars, and failure to entice birds to feed regularly on the bait. A total of 1,271 game-farm chukars was released during March, 1959 in eight areas. Three-hundred of these were released in the Canon City area, Fremont Courtty, in eastern Colorado and 971 chukars were placed in six areas in western Colorado. Releases of chukars in the Canon City area were designed to further test this area in the eastern foothills of the Rocki.es for chukar adapbatd.on, It is hoped the . relatively mild climate in the Canon City area will aid chukars in establishing a foothold in eastern Colorado. In west-central Colorado 750 chukars were distributed so that they supplemented already huntable populations in the rough, foothills region of lower elevations in Mesa and Garfield counties. The remaining 221 birds were placed in Paradox Valley in an effort to extend chukar populations up the Dolores River from presently . occupied range in the Gateway area. A summary of chukar releases during the spring of 1959 is shown in Table I. Table l.--RELEASES OF CHUKAR PARTRIDGES, GAME-FARM STOCK, ~CH, Name of release site County Bookcliffs Garfield Mesa Mesa Dry Canyon Hunter Canyon W. Fork Lipan Wash .Date of release 3/24/59 3/24/59 3/24/59 Sub-total Grand Mesa Area Mesa Mesa· Plateau Creek Watson Creek 3/24/59 3/24/59 Sub-total Wilson Creek / Priest Cree~ Sub-total .. . "" Number of birds 200 150 20C 550 100 100 200 Dolore s River Drainage 1:/ Montrose 3/26/59 Canon City Area Fremont 3/17/59 Fremont 3/17/59 Paradox Valley 1959. 221 200 100 JOO· TorAL--ALL AREAS 1:1 Previous plans called for release of 100 game-farm chukars in the Roc Creek are~; Dolores River drainage (see completion report for Work Plan IV, Job No.5, W-37-R-12). Since a sufficient number of chukars was not available, release of birds in this area was withheld. ~/ One-hundred chukars were released in the Priest Creek area, Fremont County, instead of in the previously designated sand Creek area. In the final analysis it was felt the Sand Creek release site was too near heavily traveled U. So Highway 50. �-36All groups of chukars released during the spring of 1959 contained an equal number of male and female birds, as determined by occurrence of spurs and general appearance of chukars, with the exception of those placed in Paradox Valley. In this area, 87 cocks and 134 hens constituted the release group. All chukars with the exception of the Paradox release group were leg-banded. Recommendations~ Game~farm chukars were successfully held over winter and released under favorable spring conditions during March, 1959. Findings indicate success in development of huntab~ populations of chukars is geing attained by this procedure. Added expense of maintaining birds through winter appears justified and it is recommended propagation, holding, and release of game-farm chukars be continued until these birds have been placed in all potential habitat. Prepared bys Wayne W. Sandfort Date~ ._._._A~p_r_il~,_1~9~5~9 .. _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �Gc..M~ •....H~h Ar"( (:~~ April, JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 1959 820G867 .State' of " COLORADO --~--~----------------------------- .'Project No. __ W_, -.3;.,.7;.,.-_R_-_1_2 .• Work Plan NO.4· ..••; G_a_m_e_B_i_r_d_Sur_v_e...::y ;.;;;;.;.;._ __ ~ Job No. 7 ------------------------------~------------------~----------~------~--- Title:_· E_xp~e_r_i_m_e_n_t_a_l __H_a_b_i_t_a_t __De_v __el__op~m_e_n_t Period Covered: ~------------------~---- May 14, 1958 through March 11, 1959 Abstract: A minimum of 416 chukars was present in the areas 6f four experimental guzzlers during mid-summer, 1958. Heavy use of three of the four units w~s made after water dried up in other sources and following drying and maturing of plants (primarily cheatgrass) commonly eaten by chukars. One plastic guzzler with a shed-roof type collecting apron was constructed for chukars in the Dry Canyon area of Garfield Guanty at a cost of approximately $329.44. Objective: To determine methods for improving and extending the range of chukar partridges. Techniques Used: Work on this job was divided into two phase$: (1) checks of establisHed guzzlers to determine use by chukars, and (2) construction 6f one california-type gallinaceous gl!zzler. During routine checks of guz.zlers, notes wer-e kept on general .food conditions as well as on the numbers of chukars using experimental water developments. Information on precf.pd t.atd.on was obtained from the U. S. Weather Bureau station at Walker Air Field, Grand Junction. Preliminary to installation of one plastic guzzler, permission was obtained from the District Bureau of Land Management office at Grand Junction, and application for use of public land, for water development ,for.chukar partridges, was submitted to the State Land Manager, Denver, Colorado • .Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandf ort ��-39EXPERIMENTAL HABITAT DEVELOPMENT (CHUKAR) Wayne W. Sandfort Findings: Information on use of guzzlers by chukars and on the installation of one experimental unit is given under separate headings below: Checks of Established Guzzlers Periodic surveys were made in the viCinity of established guzzlers, primarily during the months of May, June, and July. Incidental checks also were made in the Well's Gulch area during November and December, 1958 and on March 11, 1959. Specific information obtained during these studies is given in Table 1. Table l.--GUZZLER CHECKS, WESTERN COLORADO, MAY 14, 1958-MARCH 11, 1959. Date Observation Guzzlers No. ! & 2, we!l's Gulch" ~e!ta county May 14, 1958 June 13, 1958 July 8, 1958 Guzzlers full. No sign of recent chukar use. Five adults and 45 young observed in the vicinity of Guzzler #1. Thirty-two chukars, including 25 young, near Guzzler #2. Some water in Well's Gulch and light use being made of guzzlers. A total of 206 birds observed in vicinity of guzzlers. Heavy use being made of Guzzler #1 and light use of #2. Small amount of water remaining in Well's Gulch. . . Range extremely dry, green feed lacking and chukars feeding primarily on dry cheatg.rass seeds. During an early morning check of both units by two individuals, 260 different chukars watered at the two guzzlers. Additional birds were heard calling. Age classification of chukars observed showed 39 adults, 201 young, and 20 unclassified. Over 80 chukars were observed during a brief cneck in the vicinity of Guzzler #1. No use of guzzlers by chukars. Reports indicate five hunters killed at least seven chukars in the vicinity of Well's Gulch guzzlers during the initial season in Colorado. Many more birds were observed. Eight chukars were observed feeding on green cheatgrass on the slope of a hill approximately one mile north and west of the guzzlers. Guzzlers full and water mostly unfrozen. No sign of recent use by chukars. Range extremely dry' and very little green feed in the area. FoUr chukars observed apprOximately li miles west of the guzzlers. . July 29, 1958 August 6, 1958 November 8, 1958 December 5, 1958 March 11, 1959 �- : 1~f!,: - ,: • <" -40Table l.--GUZZLER CHECKS, WESTERN COLORADO, MAY 14, 1958-MARCH 11, 1959. Date . Observation Guzzler No.3, Prairie Cany~n~'Garfield COUri~y March 31, 1958 May 15, 1958 June 9, 1958 June 26, 1958 July 22, '1958 July 29, 1958 Over one-hundred chukars.estimated to be in the Prairie Canyon area by a Fish and Wildlife Service trapper. Guzzler full. No sign of chUkar use. . No use o,f"g:uzzJ,.er by<;:hukars. Three adult birds ap~ five ybili1gobserveddn the Prairie canYQIL area, " Free water ;inPrairie canyon Creek. .. .' .... '. Some sigh of chukars ~n the vicinity of guzzler. Use of this unit light •. Tnirty-nine birds observed or heard in the Prairie canyon area.' Free water, in addition to the Prairie Canyon Guzzler, is still available in small draw to the west of unit. Guzzler f~l and receiving light use by chukars. One adult and four young observed at the gUzzler.' A total of 96 birds observed in the Prairie canyon area. Light use being made of guzzlers by chukars. Guzzler No.4, March ~O, ),958 April 3, 1958 June 20, 1958 July 9, 1958 July 23, 1958 July 30, 1958 Continued. Camp Gulch, Garfield County Two adult,,¥})ulc~sobserved about 1/3-mile)~e19w guz al.er , Guzzler full. aridunfrozen. Chukars h~ard calling:in two localities ill vi~inity'of guzzler. Accipiter hawk .flushed from freshly killed, adult, male chukarby guzzler. No use of guzzler by chukars. Forty-three birds observed in the Camp Gulch area in the vicinity of the water~ng unit. Moderate use of guzzler by chukars. Sign indicates heavy use ·of the guzzler by chukars. No birds observed. Heavy use of guzzler. Sixty chukars observed in the vicinity of the watering unit. Use of guzzlers by chukars appears to be related pr1ma.rilY to the drying of green feed (mainly cheatgrass) during hot, dry summer months and to the drying-up of free water in sources other than guzzlers. Upon inspection of information in Table 1, it can be seen that use of guzzlers in Well's Gulch was rather abrupt. Birds moved to guzzlers in somewhat spectacular numbers upon the disappearance of free water and drying of natural feed. The sharp contrast in guzzler use during the summer of 1957 (see Federal Aid Quarterly Report, July, 1958, Part Two, pp. 135-138) and the summer of 1958 apparently occurred because of extreme variation in precipitaten. Rainfall during the months of April through September, 1957 totalled 8.05 inches or 77 per cent above normal. During the same period in 1958, 4.10 inches of rain fell; 10 per cent below normal. Rainfall and succulent vegetation resulted in disregard of gUzzlers by chukars during the summer of 1957. These birds appeared dependent upon this source of water under much drier conditions in 1958. . �Figure l.--Dynamite speeds up excavation of hole for 700-gallon, plastic tank during installation of water development for chukar partridges in Dry Canyon, Garfield County. , / Figure 2.--Guzzler tank set and leveled, trough formed for directing rain water into basin, and fencing underway. �Figure 3.--Guzzler covered and collecting ing nearing completion. Figure 4.--water development seven hours. apron and fenc- installed and fenced in �1S;~ ••••• _, •••• ~ •• "l •• -41Guzzler Construction One plastic guzzler with a shed-roof collecting apron was constructed on September 4, 1958 in the Dry-Canyon area, Garfield County. Cost and labor of installing this experimental water develo~ment is itemized in Table 2. Table 2.--COST OF MATERIALS, RENTALS, .ANDLABOR REQUIRED TO INSTALL ONE EXPERIMENTAL WATER DEVELOPMENT FOR CHUKAR PARTRIDGES, 1958. COST MATERIALS Catchment basin Plastic gUzzler Freight charges for guzzler Metal screws (20) Excavation aids Dynamite Dynamite caps Sub-total Shed-roof collecting apron Corrugated roofing (160 sq. ft.) Materials for wood frame 2"x8"xlO' (8 pieces) 2"x4"xlO' (2 pieces) 4"x6"x_5' (8 pieces) Nails (5 Ibs., 30d) Sub-total Sub-total Small apron at mouth of guzzler Pre-mix concrete (2 sacks) I Fencing Split-cedar posts (12) Barbed wire (10 rds.) Woven wire (10 rds, , 321lhog wire) Sub-total RENTALS Miscellaneous tools Sub-total TarAL COSTS LABOR TarAL HOURS LABOR $235.00 26.94 0.30 2.00 0.35 $264.59 19.04 6.80 1.14 8.00 .80 $ 35.78 $ 4.00 $ 4.00 6.60 6.00 9.47 $ 22.07 $ 3~00 3.00 $329.44 Excavating hole for plastic unit, leveling unit in hole, and constructing small collecting apron and shed-roof collecting unit •• Fencing experimental unit •••••••••••• 22 hr s, 6 hrs. 28 �-42Recommendations: Information from checks of guzzlers during 1958 indicates these units are serving a useful purpose in maintaining chukar partridge populations in certain areas of western Colorado. It is recommended that intensive studieEl of units in the Well's Gulch area be conducted to more accurately determine the value of guzzlers in chukar development and to determine optimum spacing of such units. With this in mind, plans have been made for a Graduate Student from Colorado State University, working for the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, to study these developments during the summers of 1959 and 1960. Proposed studies involve construction of additional watering units at designated intervals, trapping and marking birds to study movements, and studying relationships between precipitation, forage conditions, and guzzler use. If findings from this investigation indicate water developments to be desirable in chukar management, surveys to map potential, but waterless, chukar range and to proceed with a more widespre~d development program may be in order. Prepared by:__ Date : W.;.;.. ~ayn~e;_,;,W.;..;.;....;;S;.;an=df=or~t.;__ _ Approved by: A.••• p__ r=il,__ 1_9.59..__ ••.. _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �-43JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATION$ PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------------------~--~~ ,. Project No. W-37-R-12 Game Bird Survey . Work Plan No.6· Job No. 1 --------------------------~------~------~--~------------------ Title of Job: Experimental habitat improvement for scaled quail Period Covered: July 1, 1958 to March 15, 1959. Objectives: To determine the value of water and cover developments in increasing the range and numbers of scaled quail. Procedures: Field inspection of a number of sites was accomplished during the report period to locate suitable areas. Department personnel and others were contacted to assist in the proper selection of areas. Abstract: A number of sites in Baca, Las Animas, Huerfano and Otero Counties were inspected during the report period but no large areas lacking in water could be located to accurately determine the need and use of water development. Cover development appears to hold more promise than water development as the basis for a study. The more important job of developing a census technique held precedence over this job. Prepared by:__ D_o.;..n;.;;,;a;;.;;l.;..d __M..;.. __H..;;.o~ff~m~a;;;;n.;... _ ( �-44EXPERIMENTAL HABITAT IMPROVEMENT FOR SCALED QUAIL Donald M. Hoffman Findings: A number of sites were inspected to locate sites for water or cover development, particularly within Baca, Las Animas, Huerfano and Otero Counties. Large areas several square miles in size are needed to accurately determine the value of water and cover improvements because of the cruising radius of the species which is about three miles, according to Russell (1931) and Figge (1946). In recent years livestock men have developed water for stock use to the extent that large areas lacking in water are difficult to find. The goal of the U. S. Forest Service Land Use Project personnel is to develop water in each section controlled. Experimentation with cover development has greater possibilities since suitable cover is lacking in much of the scaled quail range in southeastern Colorado. The fencing of areas near windmills and stockpits to establish cover for scaled quail and other game birds and the establishment of permanent cover have been used in other States effectively. No work other than the inspection of various areas was accomplished during the report period. This job is of sufficient importance that more time will be utilized in the next segment with the hope that an area can be found to conduct a study from which needed information maybe gained. Summary: The only work accomplished on this job was the inspection of a number of sites all of which proved unfavorable for a study for various reasons. As much time as possible was devoted to the more important job of developing a usable census technique for scaled quail. Literature Cited: Figge, Harry 1946. Scaled quail management in Colorado, Proc. Western Assn. Game and Fish Commissioner, 26: 161 - 167. Russell, ~aul 1931. New Mejdco's scaled quail investigation. American Game Conference, 18: 226 - 229. Prepared by: Date: Donald M. Hoffman Trans .. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator April 1959 --------~~~~~-------------------- �-45April, 1959 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of. COLORADO Project No. W-37-R-12 ----------------~-------------- ,• Game Bird Survey Work Plan No.6· Job No. 2 --------------------------._--~----------~----~-------------- Title of Job:Mapping of scaled quail range Period Covered: Ju~y~, 1958 to March 15, 1959 Objectives: (1) To assemble available information on scaled quail range and distribution. (2) To complete mapping of scaled quail range. (3) To compf.Le data and prepare distribution and density maps of Colorado scaled quail popul.atd.ons , Procedures: Field inspection of scaled quail range in portions of Baca and Las Animas Counties was accomplished during the period. Major vegetative cover types found within scaled quail range Ln the southeast region 'are being drawn on county map sheets, scale 1/2 inch per mile. Field inspection and the use of recent aerial photographs where coverage is available has been used in mapping of the range to date. All observations of scaled quail made during the report period have been recorded on overlays to county map sheets, scale 1/2 inch to the mile, and on special forms with date and time observed, county, specific area, cover types, and numbers of birds observed. Abstract: Of 3903 scaled quail observed from July 1, 1958, to March 15, 1959, most birds (88.52%) were observed within three major vegetative cover types. These were dense cholla cactus and/or yucca grassland, cedar breaks, and sandsage hills. 'Scaled quail 'Were, however, seen in lesser degrees in most all vegetative types in Baca and Las .Animas Counties east of U. S. 85-87. Field mapping of scaled quail ranges is progressing in Baca and Las Animas Counties. Prepared by: Donald M. Hoffman �1_g';( , .... ,'\ -46MAPP!NG OF SCALl!:DQUAJL RANGE Donald M. Hoffman Findings: The scaled quail range within the southeast portion of the state is being mapped on the basis of major vegetative types. Scaled quail populations appear to depend largely upon the existence of suitable cover. Portions of Baca and Las Animas Counties have been cover-mapped to date. Major cover types found to date within occupied scaled quail range include: (1) Dense cholla cactus and/or yUcca-grassland (2) Sandsage hills (3) Cedar breaks (4) Greasewood - Saltbush washes (5) Windbreak plantings (6) Sparse cholla cactus and/or yucca-grassland (7) River bottom type - broadleaf trees and weed undercover (8) Dryland farmland and abandoned fields (9) Irrigated farmland (10) Prairie shortgrass (11) Bluestem and intermediate type grasslands. During the period from July 1, 1958, to March 15, 1959, a total of 3903 scaled quail were observed in the southeast region during random brood counts, field mapping, and trend counts. The following is a breakdown by vegetative cover types of birds observed: Number Percent of Total Observed 'l'n3e Dense cholla cactus and/or yucca-grassland 1562 40.02 % Cedar breaks 1314 33.67 % Sandsage hills 579 14.83 % Dryland farmland 208 5.33 % Greasewood - Saltbush washes 129 3.31 % Sparse cholla cactus and/or yucca grassland 107 2.74 % 4 .10 % 3903 100.00 % Straight shortgrass T01'.ALS ••• 00 o. 0 •• 0 00::; Observations of scaled quail have been made in conjunction with the different jobs within the study. No attempt has been made to sample each major type equally. The percentages roughly indicate that the three main vegetative types in which scaled quail are found in Colorado are (1) dense cholla cactus and/or yucca grasslands, �-..., . "" Figure 1. --Dense cholla cactus-grassland vegetative type affords good scaled quail cover. Higbee study area. Figure 2.--Cedar breaks are utilized by scaled quail along the Purgatoirie River rims. Higbee study area. �1~6 -47(2) cedar breaks, and (3) sandsage hills. Observations of quail made within shelterbelt plantings were listed under the major vegetative type in which the shelterbelt occurred since these plantings were for the most part very limited in size. Many shelterbelt plantings were heavily used by scaled quail particularly during midday during the warmer seasons of the year. Upon completion of the range mapping within each county it is planned to planimeter each type and determine densities of scaled quail populations within each major type. A number of scaled quail coveys have been observed and reported in the mountain regions in the southeast region, particularly in the Spanish Peaks and Greenhorn Range. Isolated coveys ranging at approximately 8000 feet in elevation have been observed during the fall period. These coveys apparently work into the mountain areas from the plains to the east during periods of high popUlations. Prepared by: Donald M. Hoffman Date: Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator April, 1959 ----------~--~~~------------------- ��,.Ln if 111I1111111~'irlIJll"I~li 111~'~llI1ij~]~1~jlrIII(~11 BDOW022348 April, 1959 ..,49-. JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 9206868 state of COLORADO ---------------------------------- Project No. ; W-37-R-12 Work Plan No.~·__·_·6~. Title of Job: Development Period Covered: Game Bird Survey ~ __ J_o_b_._N_o~.~. __ ~~3~ of Scaled.Quail __ ~~~~~~~~~ census techniques July 1, 1958 to March 15, 1959 Abstract: Roadside counts made were too variable along the Higbee-Carey Dam route to provide'needed data. Wintering covey counts of scaled quail made in selected areas appear to have better possibilities for securing population data. A s~ple of sixty broods averaged 9.60 young per brood, and a young to adult ratio of 245 to 100 was calculated during the study. The sample secured was large enough' .to estimate within ten percent of the true mean. ····-Ohjectives:------------··· (1) To determine methods for ascertaining annual changes in scaled quail populations • . (2) To establish permanent zones, areas, or routes for counting scaled quail. _.(3) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information • .Procedures: A preliminary review of literature on quail census methods was made .and methods which offered best possibilities selected. The two quail roadside count routes extending from Carey Dam through the Higbee areas established by Robert J. Tully in 1957-58 were combined into one 21.3 mile route •• A series of five early morning and late evening roadside counts were made following the open season from November 20 to December 3, 1958. Records of temperatures, Wind velocity and directions, cloud cover, and weather were made during the counts for later' analysis. One area in otero County and one in Baca County were selected for wintering covey counts. Cooperating landowners were contacted to help ascertain locations of coveys and field checks were made to locate and c.ount all coveys within the areas. WlfolE§maize~:wa.s utilized in some in§tances to aid in covey counts. Rand~m brood count-s were secured in Baca, Las Animas, Bent, Otero 'and Prowers Counties.' The locations of all scaled quail observed during the period were r~corded on county map sheets. Duplicate counts on the same broods could therefore be. eliminated in the analysis of data, and brood locations w.i.llbe used in the future establishment of trend routes or areas. Donald M. Hoffman '. . ��-51DEVELOPMENT OF SCALED QUAIL CENSUS TECHNIQUES Donald M. Hoffman Findings: Through a preliminary review of available literature, three methods of censusing scaled quail were selected which appeared to offer the best possibilities for securing needed data. These methods were roadside counts, wintering covey counts, and spring call counts. Work on the first two methods was done during the past year while spring call counts in two census areas are proposed during the coming spring. Roadside Counts: Five early morning and five late evening roadside counts were made along the 21.3 mile route from Carey.Dam to Higbee dam. Tables 1 and 2 show the results of these counts. Figure 1 shows covey sizes record~during-these counts. The location of each covey of scaled quail observed along the route was recorded so that individual coveys could be pin pointed and recorded on a map sheet. Through repeat observations each covey's location could be accurately recorded and the total population of scaled quail ranging along the transect during the study period was determined. A minimum population of 592 scaled quail was recorded along the route. In the early morning count between 14.02% and 52.87% of the minimum population were observed and in the late evening count between 9.12% and. 21.11% of the minimum population were counted. The minimum number of samples needed to estimate within 25% of the true mean was too large in either case to be reliable as a census method in itself. The use of the series of five early morning and five late evening roadside counts as a means of counting and locating individual coveys along the route was a distinct aid in arriving at a minimum population estimate and has value from this standpoint. Area census: One census study area in Baca County and one in Otero County were selected for wintering covey censuses. Figures 2 and 3 show the map locations of these areas and coveys recorded. This type of scaled quail census while more time consuming than the roadside count method has yielded accurate data and appears to have possibilities in securing population data. Main drawbacks are (1) the counts must be made after the birds covey in the fall and.before the coveys break up in the spring, and (2) the area must be diligently searched to prevent missing coveys. Local landowners can be of assistance in informing the person making the census where they have seen coveys recently. Within both the areas selected help was received in reporting of coveys counted by the writer. A total of 422 scaled quail were counted in 14 coveys in the Higbee study area comprising approximately 43.5 square miles. Table 3 shows the dates on which the coveys were counted. A total of 291 scaled qua~were counted in 11 coveys in the Carrizo Creek study area comprising approximately 45 square miles in size~ Table ~ shows the dates on which the coveys were counted. The use of small grain as an aid in locating and counting coveys was tested and found to work exceedingly well. �''fi,g.O ~~." -"'.-.J] , -52Table L--SUMMARY OF REPLICATE ROAIiSIDE SCALED QUAIL COUNTS -- 1958 Replicates Date Higbee - Carey Dam Morning Count Date 1 11/20/58 ' 313 11/24/58 108 2 11/25/58 83 11/25/58 121 3 11/26/58 147 11/28/58 115 4 11/29/58 163 12/2/58 54 5 12/ 3/58 172 12/3/58 125 Evening Count Sum of X 878 523 N 5 _5 -x 175.6 104.6 23 8 Min. Number Samples Needed (.25 level) ( Number birds counted along route during period (Table _1_) Percent birds counted Average percent of birds counted (5 counts) 592 592 14.02% - 52.87% 9.12% - 21.11% 29.66% 17.67% �17 1 IS 1 I"~ 1 ,,_,,- 1 1 ,,. I .•• I\. ........__) <, 1 1 ~ ~ /' I .1""1 l 1 16 14 -_.. I '0 ., I~~'~" A'-I ,.. I ~24 .• I Oft I '" o.r.l!O~L)lo,,'II __"... I •• ~~ I~_\ I I 34 I 36 •• II ._~ 34 I. " •• u •• .7 31 as '0 21 I !.. !~I 31 " ," .2 •• '0 .JJ-~QTERO w. ---I COUNTY~_~ \ ..•. -:.-c'f' R:S4W. R.53W. -------T L I(JI·MJ' .tt'"'IGU;tE _j_o " .0 34 y --::':.' 17 11"11 . ,..I·I..jMt" I..~ ~.. u -13 CA?E'Y DAr ro IUG5EE DA}; ;tOADblDE Dfj7l.~:~'JGb'l'UDY PE.:';_:;:()l) 1952. counr ii.CU'l.'b A 'Ii I;D-i s COUNTY --rh' :::1 ~ j= A N M COVEY 81 ZE~j OEC:3 V::':U I .I.#{j s ~::..~ ·:.~:f· ,~;~~,' ",,;,J,. �- ~ ..'--iU•.......... .....--- ------~==.. •• •• •• 31 •• II ~ z ;;,:~ Line :::) o Q II II II II II :I •• n ,. •• Ill! ,. '7 .1 ,_ -- .. ._ , ,--- ,_ - _. __ ._ . _. -_.- ---- - - -- - -- N ILLI LLI 27 •• I I •• •• I ~" _ I ~J .,f'~ ••. ~ 7 === • I n ]1 •• u' q 1- I 34 I •• I I. I 31 '" Wi •• ,.., III I •• , "" -t x IJ.. .I <II r--J? I III , I- Z W " " . :.1=..1" I .. I ... 31 .0 ., It •• •• '0 ' I I .t , OTERO I 10 \. I 21 I I re I 22 .. COUNTY ---~55W'------I-C ·:1~····\f"""·~ .t' J..'J0",1.lL ;2.. • 0 U HIGBEE, N T CEN,;iUci Y JL.::;_EA III'l'H 100'JQ' COF"-"TS OBi.:)E~.vE:J DU_;U?J~} tiT'lJDY PEiUOD ~-~r'" ,, ID �/ (. ) \ ) I ~ ___~_l_'_:j_ 1/ Carrtro I ~ II II 15 II II 17 "" • ~~ ------lr----II "( " ~ ... ~ " 24 / 20 I ··tr·· "" 1\... •• /' •• (I ,7 \r'\ ~o ~ zr: II 1/ '{_!_ Z " 21 I i\ l 21 ~ I... 1\ n 21 \ 27 ) <l: , m ~ <l: 15 T. 34 S. • r , • "i .....J 20 2.4 II U 22 2.S 27 1 I 30 I I I I / I 21 2! Z!5 I' I ... ~.%.~....•... -, , 33 34 3. 4 ->l,~~: ':.II"'~~ 1355 "'00'-__ -=.. UNION ~~gt..;:-.~ ROOW n.·... ••.. ·i:···'· ..·······"· ..~.. 31 3. "' 3 COUNTY O- .•" -, c>''' •• I · -~~'''='..,...'·'~-~.-~--~-R~W COUNTY elM A R RON C 0 UN 1'""00' NEW MEXICO o K L A OBSE;{VED J)U:::U>G H o M f"'~ i'IGU:";,S :.j. Gl"';'.L~.:.!:Z0 C2. Cl:~;;;:)U;:) h'~L!\ I'i I'l'E COVEYS SrUi.)Y l'E:=tICD. ::~ , >.\)' �~ :.-:;-::<.::;:::'':'':~~~-:::;::;:"";1.:'.!:-=;'' .. ::...:.:~:..-"'-"'-~;., :.:·.:,~~.,·:'''::'l·:~!:;:-,:~~_""':'.:";·>"'::·'''~.!:i~>£=':::::;':'': .• '':' ..,....... , ;~'.,.:. . .1.,,', :".;~'~-'l-l.' . .._._._ ... _.- - ... - .:.". ......;..~:~:::.:: . .. _ {Aloi-FAr I f" i, ~ is: Ii I , L I ---- l,u"ciai.AN~O"'*u,,;_ I . --- .h~ ---l - --0;;';::;;;;;; --- --- A[k, "."''''• oR. '~J{p' IIlI IIItllK6rQH ,9",_,0 ~ ..•••....• /' : , I I .,/'OElTA ..-/ i ....·.. IT k ' f"·· ~r ' MONTROSE •.•.•.Z,..,A oKwh h-'(N~(;lId I"" OVI"~ .' ----_-- _. l ""<0,.:11... h '" OVRATO FIGURE 0 @ •• ~ , _ I 'i"p" i i I, "- ~ ...•..•orhW~:1i:' J...._~ • 'I 6uKrl O'AKECITY ~ ,.t~~OL~O~Z:~S~-_~-===::::·~:::::-'-.:..'~ ·-:::::",-,,~-_"",-,,-_./~=.__~. "" • 0 ' _....../ -v-... / I. '- '! 'l • r 'tHI"ANn ~ , "''&'''~NSOA.£E' . .t. /fu~ w,,~·---·_J_cROi'Yi7YC "_/,i-, i ""9-\. \:oURA"Y' II "I \.. I oe,,.., ':>"'~''''''''''. J'I ."'"'rsAt;lIACHE s,o.f/1I6S IOKMIf'dcA ~~ J .V~'VM ( COJ.O,.?liOO '._.- ONTfOSE .-._--. oTtldC',.· 11"0""'0 DELTA co.. '., «. / 6, C.iNERAl . ..,.....-,F· 1\ __ "L -'RFFDr __ olfC'". o Tiinpos o.J.A.4.riJ. "1. Approximete locations of ~"""'r OAco"_;", oSItwrp.lnl, sixty EC81ed q~eil broods SIrFf'!_ ,l.f"O 0f:!r1c_1_ WAU£HIJURG r.·t:';\ O'MIr~H counted during 1958 8eason. o~,·)\) ~f~l:i:JY'It. oT_1 I. I ~--_.I ( I ~"'".,.,_,. - ~Z~U":~:t:' •.:i·~~~~;~;".:~·,;;:<>"'";,·.;::;_ ••. ~~~ •...;i;!wi~I':!~,!·~~r;<".;,~!m;.:.,;..:~,,~?·::~~:'.:;,~·.:::::;::·.~·-· _---_ .... .. .. ~•••~ '" •••~>~? '1~{:":!". �Table 20 -SCALED QUAIL COVEY SIZES --- ItIGBEETO.CAREY DAM ROtJ'l'E Area Higbee Area Ridenour Hdq. Ridenour Windmill J. Autry Hdq. Thompson Hdq. Zimmerman Hdq. F. Griffith Hdq. ~. A. Morrow Hdq. E.Zimmerman Farm Rocking Chair Ranch Patton Windridl1 E. Hall Ranch Rocking Chair Hdq. Hay Feed Area Statue Rocks Carey Dam Windmill (State) West End Dam Liebert· Hdq, West of mailQox Counts Before Season 11/7 Counts During Open Season Nov. 8 - 16 8 9 13 19 Counts Following Open Seaaon November December AM PM AM PM . 20 24 25 25 26 28 29 2 3 3 93 30 20 35 101 101 25 18 40 36 32 25 17 85 40 .18 14 25 2 12 Estimated Population 18 6 40 30 36 45 15 25 25 12 12 10 8 12 20 17 32 36 36 20 6 10- 14 17 78 12 16 16 25 47 11 45 45 0 68 77 35 3 16 10 32 70 20 16 14 24 53 34 20 68 1 35 77 20 20· 9 24 25 35 I \J1, \..oJ I 40 ·20 15 29 15 15 10 11 19 33 14 6 16 TOTAL 1 14 ; 33 14 10 16 592 Total counted in 18 coveys = 592 Total length of route - 21.3 miles Average - 32.88 quail per covey ~, 'J i'~ �~ .,.\'~ ".l>",:' ":(l/l Table 3.--SCALED QUAIL COVEY SIZES --- HIGBEE STUDY AREA Area Counts Be- Counts During Counts Following Open Season November December fore Season Open Season Oct. Nov. Nov. 8 - 16 AM PM AM PM 10 28 . 7 8 9 13 15 19 20 24 25 25 26 28 29 2 3 3 Estimated Popu1ation 18 28 0 20 35 101 25 40 36 32 25 16 17 22 25 Ridenour Pond #1 14 Ridenour Pond #2 17 17 Govt. Springs 20 20 43 4 Lower Vogel Can. 31 30 Ridenour Hdq, Ri~enour Windmill Thompson Hdq, 6 Zimmerman Hdq, 30 F. Griffith Hdq. 12 W. H. Morrow Hdq. 12 Harrington Stonehse. E. Zimmerman Farm Toadstool Area Jack Canyon 28 20 35 93 30 20 35 25 101 14 f>5 40 18 40 10 36 36 8 12 32 20 45 15 6 10 25 25 20 17 16 17 36 14 22 25 TOTAL.••••••••• 422 Total counted in 14 coveys 422 Area Approximately 43.5 sq. mi. Average 9.7 quail/sq. mi. Average 30.14 quail/covey I if �-55Table 4.--SCALED QUAIL COVEY COUNTS --- CARRIZO CREEK STUDY AREA Area Mesa Windmill Mizer Government Pasture Windmill F. Mizer Hdq. Kirkwell & Ormiston F. Mizer East of Dodge's T. Everett Hdq. East of Everett Hdq. R. Dodge Hdq. East Carrizo Cr. 2 mi. S. Everett's North of Everett's 12/8 Date of Count 12/12 12/9 1/8 Estimated Population 39 39 21 26 23 21 26 21 61 25 27 21 61 23 25 27 17 12 32 35 30 18 30 18 TOTAL Total counted in Area approximately Average Average 11 coveys 6.47 quail 26.45 quail ~ 291 291 45 sq. mi. sq. mi. covey Brood Counts Brood counts on scaled quail were started on July 1 and concluded on September 16, 1958. A number of broods observed in early September were very small in size indicating a late hatch in some instances, although most chicks observed through the brood count 'period were of average size. On September 8, 1958, a brood of scaled quail chicks too young to fly was observed,on the north side of Mesa de Maya. On September 12, 1958, and again on September 16, 1958, chicks barely able to fly were seen. Broods Which hatched off very late had generally fewer young per brood than those which were not late. One instance of predation was noted during the brood count period. A male goshawk was observed to be standing near the road ! mile north of the south gate at Carey Dam on September 12, 1958, at 4:30 p.m. Upon investigation, it was seen that it had an almost fully grown scaled quail in its talons as it flew off. A total of fourteen quail (aqults and young) flushed from a cholla cactus clump not over four feet from where the hawk had been eating the scaled quail. �-,";' ... .~ :1:""'1,""1 -~, . -56Table 5 shows broods counted during the 1958 season. A total of 60 separate broods with a total of 576 chicks were counted during the brood count period in Baca, Las Animas, Bent, Otero and Prowers Counties. All broods were recorded on overlays to county map sheets so that repeat counts on broods could be disregarded in the analysis of data. Two different broods were observed on three occassions, each had remained near the original count site. Figure 4 shows the approximate locations of the broods counted. Broods averaged 9.60 young per brood over the season with the smallest brood being 1 and the largest 18 chicks per brood. A young to adult ratio of 595 to 243 or 245 : 100 was calculated disregarding repeat observations. A total of 1320 adults and young were observed during the brood count period from July 1 to September 16, 1958. It was determined that the sample size secured (60) was large enough to estimate within 10% of the true mean based upon the variability of the sample data secured. By comparison, scaled quail broods observed by Harry J. Figge in 1946 averaged 10.7 birds. In 1951 and 1952 a limited number of scaled quail brood sizes were reported by Donald Ho Nolting. In 1951 a total of ~ were observed in conjunction with pheasant brood surveyso In that year three broods in the main Arkansas Valley average 6.3 young per brood and five broods in Baca County averaged 11.2 young per brood. In 1952 seventeen broods averaging 8.8 young per brood were reported by Donald H. Nolting. No attempt was made to secUre brood counts along trend routes during the past brood count period because no information on possible routes was available. In order to accurately compare brood count data from year to year it will be necessary to establish and define brood count routes or areas. The following routes or areas are recommended as possible sites for the establishment of trends. Routes: 1. Las Animas County -- Dale Rose to Tobe via Middle Water. 2. Baca County -- Thirty mile route through sandsage type southeast of Campo. 3. Baca County -- Sandsage route from Bert Tanner Ranch to Pri tchett grade. 4. Bent - Otero Counties -- Higbee to Carey Dam (21.3 mi.). 5. Fremont - Pueblo Counties -- Bessemer Ditch road from Florence to Pueblo. 6. Fremont County -- Chandler to Florence city water works. Areas: 1. otero County -- Government Land Use Lands Census Study area west of Higbee. 2. Baca County -- Carrizo Cr. census study area southwest of Pritchett~ 3. Baca County -- Area south of Cimmaron River in Colorado southeast of Walsh. 4. Huerfano County -- Apishapa Management Area southeast of Walsenburg. 5. Las Animas County -- Seven Lakes Area northeast of Trinidad. Of 1320 Young and adult quail observed during the 1958 brood coUnt period, July 1 to September 16, 1958, the following is a breakdown of percentages by different cover types. �-57Number of 'Quail % of Total Major Cover Type a. Sandsage hills 43.56% 575 b. Dense cholla and/or yucca-grassland 406 30.76% c. Cedar breaks 17.73% 234 d. Cultivated ground 85 6.44% e. Sparse cholla and/or yucca-grassland 1.06% 14 f. Straight short type grassland .30% 4 g. Saltbush - Greasewood washes 2 .15% TOTAL 1320 100.00% �~~. '-1 ('1) Table 5.--1958 BROOD COUNT SEA~ON JULY 1 - SEPTEMBER 16 July Aug. Sept. Breakdown of Clas~es Number of single birds observed Number in pairs (no broods) Total singles and pairs (no broods) 20 46 13 28 18 Below corrected and repeats dis,counted Number adults with broods Number chicks counted Total number adults and chicks 11 87 6 SubTotal 39 92 131 22 112 75 377 108 576 684 Number of Individual Broods (known repeats disregarded) 8 12 40 Average young per brood (known repeats disregarded) 60 9.60 I Number unclassified ( young and adults) (known repeats disregarded) 22 40 443 505 Total birds counted July 1 - September 16 (known repeats disregarded) 1320 Total birds counted July 1 - September 16 (known repeats ~ disregarded) 1392 Young to adult ratio (JUly 1 - Sept. 16) July Aug. Sept. 87 : 77 131 : 67 377 : 99 595 :243 or 245: 100 ~ I �-59Table 6.-- ANALYSIS OF DATA FOUND IN TABLE 5 BROOD SIZES OBSERVED BY WRITER 195~ Number Class 1 1 1 3 4 1 5 11111111 111 111 11111 1111111 1111111111 11111 . 1111 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 i.. 1 III Sum of X ::576' b. N :: 60 c. x mean = 9 •.60 d•.Sum (x - i)2 = 830.40 e. Standard deviation (S) (S) = 3.72 f. Standard error of mean (S -) S x - = .48 x g. Confidence limits (.05 level) 9.60 !.96 h. Minimum number of samples needed .20 level 15 .10 level 60 .05 level 241 Total 1 1 1 8 3 3 5 7 10 5 4 1 3 11 2 1llll 5 1 1 �-60Summaryz Census Techniqu.es. A series of eB.I'lymorning and late evening roadside counts were made in the Carey Dam - Higbee area. While the variability of the data secured during the individual counts was too great to be of much value as a census method, it was found that by accurately recording the location of each covey observed and the number of birds a minimum population of scaled quail could be secured for the period counted. A minimum population of 592 birds was recorded for the 21.3 mile route. The area wintering covey count was tested in two areas and data secured were thought to be reliable for use as a census method. A total of 422 scaled quail were counted on one area in Otero County and 291 were counted on an area in Baca County. A series of call counts are planned through the two areas in which winteting covey counts were made. Brood Counts. Brood counts on scaled quail were conducted from the period of July 1 through September 16, 1958, in Baca, Las Animas, Bent, Otero, and Prowers Counties. A sample of sixty broods ranging from the smallest of one chick with one adult to eighteen chicks with two adults were counted. Broods tallied averaged 9.60 young per brood and a young to adult ratio of 245 to 100 was calculated based upon 838 birds observed at close enough range to determine adults and young. It can be .. concluded that the reproduction success of scaled quail in 1958 was good based upon the sample secured by the writer. ( Statistically, it was determined that sixty samples were needed to estimate within ten percent of the true mean based upon the variability of the sample secured so that the sample secured was sufficient for this degree of accuracy. Literature Cited: Figge, Harry J. 1946. 'Quarterly Progress Report, Project 4-R. Federal Aid Division, Colorado Department of Game and Fish, ~enver. October. Nolting, Donald H. 1951. Quarterly Progress Report, Project 37-R. Federal Aid Division, Colorado Department of Game and Fish, Denver. October. 1952. (QIarterly Progress Report, Project W-37-R-6. Federal Aid Division, Colorado Department of Game and Fish, Denver. ,October. Approved by: Prepared by: __ D_o_n_a..;;..l_d_M_..;;...o _H_o;;_f_f_man..;.;.... _ Date: A..;!;,p..,..I'l-·1 .... 2'--1..;.,9.;;.5.:;..9 _ Laurence E. Riordan -~F~e-;d-e-r-aO;-l-Ai-:-:-· dO:;--:CO;-o-o-r-di'!;"';·~n- �.iifjllifliiu[imii BDOW022349 .-61JOB CO~PLETION-REPORT .. - ....... 9206869 INVESTIGATIONS PROJEcTS State of. .·COLORADO. -------------------------------- ..... Project No ._'_;;.' . W_-_37_-_R_-_1_2 ; Game Bird Survey '.Work Plan'No~ ; Job No.1 .> • 7 ------~------------------- Title of Job: Effects of pesticide application on confined pheasants. Period Covered: ~une 9, 1959 to September 15, 1959 Ab:st~act: Pheasants' were subjected to applications of aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, toxaphene, parathion, and rothane • . Result:3 of the tests;were recorded as of January 1,.,1959. Spray concentrations are appro::idina.t~ as it is impossible to obtain exact concentc-atd.on under field spraying caridi tions. : -"'~'~ .'L .Alctrin (two ounces' per acre): - ~-'-._ ...__ .;-.-;-: .•--.- ..---: .. -~-,_.--.-_:...--...,. .•.,--.--------- .--- . ...:..._-.-_ . no discernible effects. '._'.- .", ' .2. Aldrin (four ounces per acre): two six week-old chicks died, July, 1958. Since one was a.con1:-rolbird, the test was somewhat inconclusive. 3. Di~:J..cfrin (six 0':llcesper acre): 4.• Endriri (6~5ounces 5. per acre): Endrin (l)'ounces per acre): one young-of-the-year bird died, Fall, 1958. one young-of'-fhe-year- died, Fall, 1958. one young-of-the:'year bird died, Fall, 1958. 6.' Parathion (8 ounces per acre): No discernible effects. 7. Rothane (dust, 30 pounds per acre): 8. ,Toxaphene (105 pounds per acre): year birds died, Fall, 1958. one dead chick, August, 1958. Sick chicks, August, 1958; two young-of-the- 9. Toxaphene (three pounds per acre): one young cock died August, 1958, probably ·as a result of.head injuries sustained while trying to escape from test pen. One young..;.of-the-year bird died, Fall, 1958. '.Approximately 3.6 per cent of the 218 sprayed birds died from causes attributed to insecticide poisoning. It may be significant that six birds died in the fall of .1958; therefore, there is possible indication of detrimental after effects • .Objectives: To determine the effects of pesticide application on ring-necked .pheasant populations • .. ;',.' ' �-62Techniffles Used: The study areas were located in the South Platte River valley near J esburg, and the Arkansas River Valley near Las Animas. The insecticides to be used and the location of the crop to be sprayed were obtained from the local spraying operator. Landowners were contacted and permission to conduct the test in selected fields was obtained in each caseo Because of the large-scale grasshopper control program in eastern Colorado, spraying by small operators was somewhat limited. Therefore, in order to obtain desired tests it became necessary for the investigator to spray several sets of birds with a tractor-mounted ground sprayer. Insecticide concentrations were those normally used by custom spraying companies. Prior to field work, eight pens composed of six 8' x 8' x 4' panels of 2" x 2" stock and one-inch chicken wire, were constructed. Three of these pens were placed in each field to be sprayed. An identical pen was used as a control in a nearby unsprayed field of the same crop. Pen spacing varied with the field size, but distance between pens was equal within each test. Thirty-four banded birds of known weight from the Experimental Game Bird Farm at Rocky Ford constituted a complete test. Two pens held nine birds (six chicks, two hens, and one cock), and two pens held eight birds (two hens and six chicks), due to a shortage of roosters. One test, two oz. aldrin, contained less than a full component of chicks as it was feared the young birds would not be able to withstand the inclement weather occurring in the area. However, the chicks remained healthy despite rain and hail. By random selection the control pen and the first test pen assembled in the test were chosen to hold the eight birds. The birds were held in the pens two days following spraying. Each surviving bird was weighed one week and three weeks following the test in an effort to detect slow deterioration or other desorder if present. The weights were compiled and the average percent difference in weight change of birds in each pen in the test and the control were compared. Prepared bye James R. Tigner --------------~---------------- ~,. . �-63- EFFECTS OF PESTICIDE APPLICATION ON CONFINED RiNG-NECKED PHEASANTS Findings: The average percent of weight loss for cont~ol and test birds was compared by use of the t-test for unpaired, unequal samples. The analysis appears in Table 2 and 3 and the discussion ;follows. Table 1 -- Chemicals, Rates of Application, Carrier, Crop and Location Used in Treatments 1958 Approx. Rate Treatper Acre Carrier Crop County ment Chemical 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Aldrin Aldrin 4 ounces diesel fuel water Dieldrin Endrin Endrin Parathion Rothane Toxaphene Toxaphene 6 ounces 6.5 ounces 13 ounces 8 ounces 30 pounds 1.5 pounds 3 pounds water water water water dust water water 2 ounces wheat Sedgwick Natural vegeta- Sedgwick tiQn .maf.ze Bent alfalfa Bent alfalfa Bent seed alfalfa Bent tomatoes Bent alfalfa Bent Bent alfalfa The control chicks in the dieldrin test gained significantly over the test chicks one week follOwing spray application. However, at the end of three weeks the test chicks had made a slightly better gain than the control chicks (Table 2), indicating quick recovery from the spray with little arter-effects. The average per cent weight changes of the other six tests do not closely approach the weight change of the dieldrin-sprayed birds (Table 2). Since the t-test of the dieldrin-sprayed birds was not highly significant, it is probably safe to assume there is no difference in the weight changes of test and control birds in the other six tests. The difference between the means of the control and ,. test birds in the four pound/ acre toxaphene test approaches significance (Table 3). If the sample were larger the standard error would probably be less, and the difference between the means might be significant. One factor which may have an important effect is weather. Under very humid conditions, insecticide residues are longer-lasting. In eastern Colorado where relative humidity is comparatively low, the chemical residue shou.ld dissipate rapidly with less effect on bird life. Indications are that normal field applications of the insecticides tested are not excessively detrimental to pheasants. Recommendations: Since insecticides may be stored in animal tissue, particularly adipose tissue, and since pheasants may receive more than one spray application per year in the wild, it is recommended that confined pheasants be subjec.ted to three successive applications of aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, and toxaphene during the 1959 field season. �~'i.. ..(t) en Table 2 -- Average Differences Percent Pheasant Weight Change, 1958 One Week Aldrin 4 oz. Adults Chicks Dieldrin 6 oz. Adults Chicks Parathion 8 oz. Adults Chicks Rothane 30 Ibs. Adults Chicks Endrin 6.5 oz. Adults Chicks Toxaphene 1.5 lbs. Adults Chicks Toxaphene 4lbs. Adults Chicks Test x .. +.013 +.298 -.052 +.074 -.074 +.084 -.051 +.278 -.072 +.124 -.097 +.074 -.107 +.098 Control x -.022 +.296 -.059 +.141 -.098 +.121 -.083 +.252 -.064 +.116 -.091 +.071 +.118 id .035 .002 .007 .067* .024 .037 .032 .026 .008 .008 .006 .003 -+.066 ** .173 Test x -.011 +.623 -.052 +.557 -.068 +.541- -.055 +.574 -.068 +.460 -.079 +.331 weights Control x -.046 * id .035 +.655 -.118 +.547 -.104 +.548 -.049 +.566 +.486 -.091 +.294 unavailable .032 .066 .010 .036 .007 .006 .008 -.012 *** .056 .026 .012 .037 .002 Three Weeks All figures multiplied by 100 equal percentage. * Greatest difference in average weight change for chicks. Control chicks gained more than test chicks. ~H~ Greatest difference in adult average weight change where control birds made an average weight gain and test birds lost weight. *** Nearest average difference where qontrol adults lost less than test birds. Aldrin 2 oz./acre aridEndrin 13 oz •. per acre weight unavailable for comparison. Full component of birds for aldrin weight not used as explained previously, and field season ended before 13 ounce endrin weights at one and three weeks could be taken. I o-, .r::I �, ',: _" .•.. - ' ~-t-:" • e; .. - ~.. ...... Ie .: Figure 1. .- ••••• , .A-.o.~~.~ ' .........- .'- . _ .....•..~';.~.J ••~- ,- •.••...•.: ~ +. :. " .. _": -+ .'~ ..'K: ".'" .•• It ,,' .:,' ••.•..... ,..•.••- •••••••••••••• ....• ~ .•_ IIIIiII-. ••••••• Netting birds prior to banding. Figure 2. Aluminum leg band being attached on bird used in an aldrin test. . ~-~' �Figure 3. Toe-clipping Figure 4. Weighing banded birds. of chick. �Figure 5. Transferring Figure 6. Placement to crates for trip to Fort Collins. of pheasants in tomato field for rothane test. �Figure 7. Figure 8. Pheasants confined in test pens. Applying dieldrin onto birds in a maize field. �Figure 9. Piper PA-18A dusting with rothane • .,.,------ ..--:-.~------.~-.'.-.'. Figure 10. Douglas B-18 spraying aldrin for grasshopper control near Ovid, Colorado. �-65Table 3 -- Comparisons of Wei ght Change of Treated and Untreated Birds, 1958 n s i of Combined Control Means t X in grams t.o? t-tests Test ,Control Test (1) Dieldrin in chicks one week weights 18 6 128 152 10 .•82 2.21~ 2.07 (2) Toxaphene adults LH, one week weights 7 2 185 362 85.44 2.072 2.36 (3) Endrin adults 6.5 oz., three weeks 8 2 80 60 92.46 .2163 2.31 * Since positive and negative numbers occurred in the data, -100 is assumed to be zero in t-test number one and -300 is assumed to be zero in test number two. All numbers are then positive and in proportion, enabling a t-test to be conducted. Acknowledgements: Supervision of this project during the summer was jointly by the Colorado Game and Fish Department, Laurence E. Riordan, Federal Aid Coordinator and Wayne W. Sandfort, Principal Game Biologist; the Colorado State University, Harold W. Steinhoff, Associate Professor of Forest Recreation and Wildlife Conservation; and the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Lee E. Yeager, Leader. The investigator is grateful for the assistance of Willis Mansfield, Supervisor of the Ex::RerimentalGame Bird Farm at Rocky Ford and Wildlife Conservation Officers, Lloyd Triplet of Julesburg and John Stevenson of La Junta. Others cooperating were C. E. Till, Northeast Regional Coordinator, Hal Swope, Northeast Regipnal Game Manager; Jack Coombs, Wildlife Conservation Officers of Las Animas and Ferd Kleinschni tz, Federal Aid of Denver. Commissioner John McClelland of Rocky Ford gave his support to the project, for which the investigator is grateful. Prepared by: James R. Tigner Date: April, 1959 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��I~~IJIIII~' lil~'llil~illilli[i~ijilll~li~~IIII~11 April, 1959 BDOW022350 i ~? ~~:lol-~'. ; •.,~, JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVEsr IGAT IONS PROJECT S State of COLORADO ------------------------------- Project No. W-37-R-12 Work Plan No.____ Title of Job ~ 7 ; _J G_am_e __B_i~r-d--S-ur--v-ey~----~----------Job No. 2 Effects of pesticide application on insect populations. Period Covered: June 9, 1958 to September 15, 1958. Abstract: Insect populations were sampled in sprayed and unsprayed areas to: "(1) Compare insect populations in sprayed and unsprayed areas. (2) Determine frequency occurrence of insects collected. (3) Compare chemicals in their effect on insect populations. The study areas were located in Sedgwick and Bent.Countieso Objective: To compare insect populations on sprayed and unsprayed areas, by specific crops and. chemicals. Techniques Used: The field and its history of spraying were determined by contact with land owners. After obtaining permission to study the area, the insects were collected by walking diagona~ly across the field sweeping an insect net 100 times. If insects were particularly abundant, only 50 sweeps were made, and numbers in each family of insects was multiplied by two to obtain a direct comparison between samples. Immediately after collection the insects were transferred to a kill-bottle containing potassium cyanide, and upon death were placed in ointment cans labelled as to field, crop, spray treatment, weather, and time of day. The insects are currently being identified to family. Seven samples were destroyed by mold. All samples are now being treated with paradich1orobenzene. Findings: Data not yet analyzed. Recommendations: Techniques should be modified to sample insect populations at a standard time of day and under similar weather conditions. Individual fields should be selected and observed before spraying and at one-week intervals after, until the numbers of insects approximate pre-treatment populations. Prepared by: James R. Tigner Date: April, 1959 Approved by,:.Laurence E..Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��111'' "11111111111 " 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022351 April, 1959 -69JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of ------~~~~--~----------- O""f\ ~"" ..••." ~i~Ub0{1 COLORADO Project No. W-37-R-12 ; G_am_,_e_B_lr_·_d_, _~ v_ey~ _ Job No.3 ----~~----------------"~----~~~~~------------------- Work Plan No.7,· Title of Job Effects of pesticides on pheasant reproductive potential. Period COvered: June 9, i958 to September 15, 1958 Abstract: Pheasants subjected to insecticide spray under Job No. 1 were transported to the State Experimental Game Bird Farm at Rocky Ford, Colorado, where they will be held for productivity tests in 1959. Objectives: (I} To compare egg production by pheasants subjected to various insectic~des witn that of birds which have not been sprayed. (2) To compare fertility and hatchability of eggs produced by sprayed and unsprayed birds. (3) To compare survival of young hatched from eggs produced by sprayed and unsprayed pheasants. (4) To determine which chemicals studied are most influential in effecting the above reproductive processes. Techniques Used: Pheasants sprayed as outlined under Job No.1 were transported to the State Experimental Game Bird Farm. Appropri;ate information on band numbers as related to insecticide treatment was recorded. The birds are being held for productivity tests in the 1959 breeding season. Findings: SUrteys. Data incomplete. Will be finished under Segment 13 of the Game Bird Recommendations: Productivity and fertility of the pheasants held at the Bird Farm should be tested during the 1959 field season. Prepared by: James R. Tigner Date: April, 1959 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��_1~11I11111~'W~~I'I~ll--:-III"~--.,-~~_~!b_'I___J/' II'II'_II"1 April, 1959_L~''''' -71JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT .PROJECT D20G872 state of COLORADO. ----------------------~~----- Project No._.__ ._W_-...;..9_6_-D_-...,;3___________ Wild Turkey Development Job No. 1 ----~------------------- -------------------------------------~ Work Plan No.1.: Title of Job: Period Covered£~: Population Status July 1, 1958 to March 30, 1959 Western Slope There were 1,952 turkeys counted in 58 flocks on the western .slope·in 1958··1959. Flock size for the year averaged 34.65 birds per flock. The smallest flock was at Okanela Lodge with three birds. The largest flock of 87 turkeys was reported by Co Sheets at Ute Spring near old Post office on March 17, 1959. The next l~gest flock of 82 was seen by Clark Ford at the Devil Creek Turkey Ranch on February 24, 1959. ';"" 1. To establish permanent trend areas for turkey population counts. 2. To prepare forms and record books for systematd,e recording of information. 3. To prepare area maps (a!x 11) of each count. area. 4. To instruct Conservation Officer personnel in techniques of population counts. Procedure~ The Wildlife Conservation Officers were asked to record all wintering .flock counts on special notebook forms during the period from November 1 to March I. With increased experience in these methods, each man should be able to provide Wormati.on f'ora trend in population for use by the Game Management Division. It is hoped that each officer can record data on from one to three trend count· areas wi thin each district that has turkeys. ��-s q~ .)l.... .~.,~ -73- POPULATION STATUS Martin L. Burget Findings: In this segment most of the statistical data has been gathered by the Conservation Officers or in company With them in their ~espective districts. Weather and foods are the! two principal factors controlling turkey moyements throughout the turkey range. Weather on the western slope in 1958 and 1959 was conducave to good turkey deveLopment.; It was also favorable for the prcductd cnor good quantities of food. In the spring of 1958 the turkeys followed the snow as it receeded. By the end of March the turkeys were well up above the normal wintering ranges. Under the leaves and needles along the edge of the receeding snow they found an abundance of young succulent plants that are eo necessary in the nesting activities. This early drift toward summering ranges made close checking difficult. During the summer months important food species such as oak, skunkberny, thornapple and roses were in heavy seed. In the early fall the ground was covered with acorns. Because of increased hunting activity the past few years, competition by deer was lighter Ithan usual. Then too, there were fewer wormy acorns than usual. Turkeys show a high preference for natural foods when they are available. The fall VTf3atherwas mild and with ample food available the birds staye(i in the back 'ranges. Hunters reported seeing large flocks nearly everywhere~ Some of these reports were almost fantastic •. One hunter going through the turkey ranch and hunting north on Devil Mountain claimed he counted over 200 turkeys in one day's hunt. Since foods were abupdant in the native ranges the turkeys did not come down to feed stations throughout most of the winter. The weather remained open on the western slope and the birds were difficult to count , Statistical data has been difficult to collect. In some instances track counts have been used. The tracks of a moving flock are followed until they spread out and several cross counts are made. Then the differences are coordinated. This type of caunt has proved more than 75 percent accurate. In recording the data the lower variable has been used. Track counts have been marked with an asterisk (*) in the data. Another means of collecting data,is through the observations of many interested individuals including forest rangers, ranchers, lumbering operators, oil drillers, sportsmen and even tourists. In one case a cook who likes to roam about on his time off, reports regularly on hi~ observations. �-74- Date County 1958 Nov. 15 Archuleta n Nov. 12 n Dec. 7 II Dec. 11 fl Dec. II Feb. 22,1959 n II Feb. 22 Feb. 22 " n Feb. 24 fI Mar. 16 n Mar. 19 Mar. 19 " Location Observed Lee Ranch 64 Little Blanco Macht R But.cher Sp. Martin R. King R. Confer Hill Nine Mile Hill Turkey R. Chris Mtn. Hqtt R. Confer Hill Total b4 Grand total Reported Reported by 77* 47 43 . 39 77 31, 12 82 53* 12T lIT M. Burget L. Adams, C. Vavak Ray Macht C. Vavak Mr. Hagie Ed. King Maintenahce Crew Maintenance Crew C. Ford C. Vavak M. Roberts M. Robertsz C. Vavak 4'84 548 * Track Counts T- Gobblers Jan. 12 La Plata '·1 Jan. 12 fI Jan. 13 tli Jano 19 11 Jan. 19 f·1 Mar. 9 Monger R. Texas Creek Wi ts End Camp Reservoir Cherry Creek Total 27 13 12 29 27 7 11 ·Mar. 17 Montezuma fl Mar 17 II Mar .•17 ff Mar. l7 fl Mar. 17 Mar. 17 " Doyle Milwood Hawkins R. Mesa Verde Park Hay Camp Mesa Gr-anabh Mesa. Total 31 26 18 13 18 11 117 Jan. 13 Montrose fI Mar. 17 Mar. 17 " Mar. 17 " n Mar 17 11 Mar. 17 Clay Creek 2&* Craig Pt. Beaver Canyon Hill Ranch Ute Spring 25 Mesa (Nov. ReEort) 2b Total Grand total 38 16 36 87 59 0 0 Mr. Monger School Driver Mr. Safley Rancher Trucker 23b 2b2 H. Terrell H. Terrell H.•Terrell Jack Wade B. Fischer B. Fischer B. Mangus, M. Burget B. Mangus B. Mangus Rancher C. Sheets Rider �-75- Date) , Mar. 7 Mar. 7 Mar. 7 Mar. 7 Mar. 7 Count;y: Ouray Location Observe1d McClure R. Log Hill Mesa Dallas Creek Harney R. Cow Creek Total' ReEorted Mar. 7 Mar. 18 Mar. 18 Delta 25 Mesa Milk Creek Dry Creek Total 81 12 71 '1641 dan. ~ Mesa Pinon Mesa To al 31 31 D. Jerome Kellog R. Walters R. Rigney R. 19 25 18 B. Jackson B. 'Jackson Loren Kirkham Oil Drill Area Cattle Creek Canyon Cr. Record R. w. Elk Cr. Porter R. Roaring F. Lee Holmes R. Bershenyi R. Crystal Spring Sramex Ranch Stove Canyon Lower Stove C. Douglas Pass Total Grand total 52 12 F. Dunham C. Ford, B. Jackson B. Jackson, M. Burget Mr. Record F. Dunham, M. Bur-get, B. Jackson, F. Dunham B. Jackson B. Jackson J. Bershenyi C. Ford, B. Jackson B. Jackson Do Jerome D. Jerome Do Jerome n n " ft II II ReEorted b;y: Mr~. McClure Mrs. McClure Mrs. Gar shorn C. Gill Tex. Morgan 39' 26 16 12 34 127 L. Burkey,Log Haulers H. Fullenwider H. Fullenwider 1958 Nov. 3 Garfield Nov. 11 " Dec. 3 " 1959 Jan. 5 Jan. 5 Jan. 5 Jan. 6 Jan. 6 Jan. 9 Jan. 12 Jan. 14 Feb. 13 Feb. 19 Dec. 12 Mar. 5 Mar. 5 Mar. '5 fI "n n " "n " " '"n, !I " 11 Feb. 19<, Eagle Feb. 19 " Feb. 19 " !I Feb. 19 Total 1952 Largest flock 87 Average flock 34.65 Smallest flock 3 3* 66 29 32 E. Basalt Ref. Cattle Creek Derby Mesa Red Dirt Cr-eek Total 38 18 7 66 22 16 47 36 45 487 ~19 Bo Terrell B. Terrell Po Bratton Reser 33 19 68 7 127 Prepared by: Martin L. Burget Date: April'~ 19~9 Approved by: Laurence E. 'Riordan" Federal Aid Coordinatqr " ��11111111 11111111111" "1111 ""1111111111111111111111111 BDOW022353 .... _, _-\ ." :198 "" April" 1,959.. -77- ... JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT : stat~ .of ......;.;w...;.·'.;;;L{)_R...;.AD~O_· .••..... __ Proj~ct. No.. ,W-96-D-3 . ~. . ,. Wild Turkey Devel0pPieij.t. ,: , . .Work Plan ~o;'.' '_l .'Ti tl~::'oI,,~cib".=.__ -:-- __ ; _ _...;."J..;"ob...;.. _N_o_.;......;2 : ---:....,_~~:---.~ ._..;.. .=B::,r_::o:.::::o.::d;_C.:.,o.::,.'Un=:.t;:,:s:::....--:__;__; _:__ _ Peri6d Covered:,""July 1, 1958 to September' 15, 1958 ~: Western Slope In western Colorado development a total of 571 poults were z-epcr-teddn 85,' ,', broods •....'.l;'h~smade the average brood size 6.7. Because of open weather in this area'the turkeys nested higher than usual and the first broods were observed later than' :!n,:~9St.years. Very little brood information was secured from Montezuma, MontFbse, Iieita"ahd Ouray counties although the following winter census checks showed that these areas had an excellent increase. This indicated that broods were, plentifUl even though they were not observed or reported. ' .. Objectives! L. To establish permanent, representative brood count areas in all turkey habitat. 2•. To gather information on poult production and survival as an index of . reproductive success. 3. To prepare forms and record books for syste~~ic recording of information by / ~; . . Conservation Officers. 4. To deligate as much brood census wOrk as possiole to Consercvation Officers through the regional game managers , \ Procedures: All of the preliminary work in the procedures outline has been done. Tbis includes selection of census areas; description of time for making counts; description of methods for making counts. Maps of the areas were made'after taking the~men on field trips and descussing the areas with them. In some cases the suggestions of the Conservation Officers' were substituted for an original selection • . ,Since tlie Conservation Officerv s work load is already heavy, only such. areas as 'can be reached most of the year. without much extra travel have been selected. In the present, statistical report, much of the information was supplied by district officers" Excellent cooperation by rangers, ranchers and sportsmen hel~~d to boost the number of broods observed and reported. This asst stence is ·gz.:at-efully acknowledged• .. ' \" : .~ , .. " ��-79BROOD COUNTS Martin L. Burget Findings: The nesting season for 1958 was comparatively dry. This resulted in an excellent hatch. Then, as the season advanced, the hens with poults that were observed showed a high survival and resulted in excellent development for the year. Brood reports began coming in late - around July 8th. Spring came early and as mating activity picked up the turkeys left the wintering ranges as early as the fore-part of March. Most of the turkeys had moved to higher than normal nesting ranges by the latter part of March. There are always a few hens that nest near the wintering ranges. This year, however, seemed to be the exception to the rule. No early broods were observed or reported. It was not until near the middle of July that broods began to show up. When they did show the poults were already fairly large and the average brood per hen was higher than in other seasons. It should be recalled that in the spring of 1957 there was a late wet spring and wet summer. Naturally the brood numbers were down during that period. For some reason, yet unexplained, there has been a sharp drop in flocks in the Montezuma County flocks. This has resulted in lower corresponding checks on broods for the same area. It is planned that this area can be strengthened by the introduction of new breeding stock. Repeated trips into the Uncompahgre area failed to yield brood information. This, of course, did not mean that there were no broods in the area. This was proven by the fact that later population checks showed a sharp up-swing in population trends in that area. This proves there were broods but they were not checked by the usual sources of information. Dates, for the most part in these reports, are the dates of observation. Some are the dates the information was received. Often the dates of those reporting are somewhat uncertain so the date the report was received is set on that report. When an observer does not pick up a date or keep notes, it is difficult to keep exact dates for an observation. During this segment considerable time has been spent in gathering trend information, for books to be placed in the hands of Conservation Officers. This is to enable them to make complete and uniform checks to establish trends for the purpose of management. While these trend areas will not supply as much information as the over-all checks do, they will still give enough information for management purposes. It is true that turkey population centers may shift rather suddenly due to unfavorable conditions. These shifts could be caused by light food reproduction, changes in land use practice, predator factors, etc. The field officer should be aware of these conditions and adjust his checks accordingly. Broods are difficult to observe. Normally, observation is accidental until the young birds can fly freely. This is "When the young birds are from three to four weeks old. During this period the hens keep the poults closely confined. As they grow older and appetites increase they must range more widely in search of food. This accounts for the birds being 1/3, 1/2 or 2/3 grown at the time of observation. �-80- Date Area Archuleta County July, 1958 July 8 Bigbee R. July 8 King Ranch July 21 Lee Ranch July 26 Macht Ranch July 26 Macht Ranch July 26 Macht Ranch July 26 J'Uly31 Aug. 12 Aug. 12 Sept.19 Hott Ranch Chris Mount. stage Barn Bolten & Henderson R. Bally Mtn. Totals La Plata County Monger R. July 31 Aug. 10 Big Bear Cr. Rock Quary Aug. 11 Up Red Creek Aug. 14 Totals Montezuma County . July 8 Mesa Verde Park July 10 Mesa Verde Park Mesa Verde Park July 14 Totals * Different sized poults Mesa County Aug. 11 Pinon Mesa Totals Garfield County July 10 Kellog Rarich Kellog Ranch July 17 July 28 Kellog Ranch Kellog Ranch July 30 H. Williams R. Aug. 12 Stove Canyon Aug. 11 Aug. 12 C - V - Bar R. Raftle R. Aug. 13 Jackson R. Aug. 20 Aug. 26 Bershenyi R. Clay Walk R. Aug. 27 Aug. 28 King Mountain .Aug. 28 Five Springs R • Divide R. S. Sept. 21 E. Elk Cr. Sept. 23 Totals Hens Poults Observed by 13 31 56 12 37 232 Bigbee Ed. King Duke Holcomb Ray Macht Ray Macht Ray Macht * Different sized poults C. Vavak Lee Bartholemew C. Ford C. Ford S. Biers Average for County 7.5 16 91 Mrs. Monger Frank Womer - On Forest Land Tourist Sheep Herder Average for County 5. 7 1 5 1 3 1 8 3 26 21 11 2 2 1 1 2 4 8 2 5 31 9 8 3 9 2 2 Ml:!. 1 5 3 13 Jack Wade & M. Wallace Jack '\-fade & M. Wallace Jack Wade & M. Wallace Average fbr area 4.33 3 3 19 19 Dudley Jerome .' Average for County 6.33 2 10 8 13 B. Jackson B. Jackson B. Jackson B. Jackson Hank Williams D. Jerome F. Dunham C. Raftle B. Jackson J. Bershenyi B. Jackson B. Gallagher M. Bennetti R. Starbuck Mr a, Hawkins Average for County 6.33 1 2 1 5 3 17 37 19 5 3 1 8 o 11 15 7 27 12 16 2 1 4 2 -3 2 11 32 216 Total Birds for area 571 - Total broods 85 - Average broods for area 6.7 ~~ It will be noted that some areas did not yield brood information; however, in the winter census most of these areas showed a higher population. This indicates that-broods were there but not observed. �-81- Ap'ril, 1959 JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT I State of Project Work Plan No. Title COLORADO ------------------------------No. W-96-D-3 ----------------------------- ; 2 ------------------------~ ; of Job Period covered: Wild Turkey DeveLopmen t . Job No.1 Trapping and Transplanting October 1, 1958 to March 15, 1959. Summary: ..~-,...~-. . Two catches of turkeys were made this season, one in Fourmile Creek near Glenwood Springs and one in Sarcillo Canyon near Trinidad. The ten birds from the Glenwoodarea were sent to utah and adjustment was made by charging one month!s salary for two men to the GameManagementDivision. Fifteen birds were caught at Sarcillo Canyon. Six hens were wing banded at the trapsi te and released immediately at the trap. The seven toms and two hens remaining were taken to the GIenwood-Springs'area'aIld distributed in four different areas-among active turkey flooks~ , :Objectives: 1. To restore Merriam's wild turkey to areas within the State found to be suitable habitat. 2. To transplant turkeys to as many suitable locations within the known former range and other unoccupied sites as feasable. ��-8,3TRAPPING AND TRANSPLANTING Martin L. Burget Findings: At the beginning of the perioq, Oct. 1, 1958, the weather was so open that turkey flocks had not worked down anywhere. It was difficult to locate turkey flocks during the season running from October 3 to 6. Fi,ve days were spent prospecting for possible trapping',locations between the turkey season and big game season. The last half of October was spent assisting with check station activities at the ranch and contacting hunters regarding turkey flocks. Hunters reported turkeys nearly everyWhere, indicating a fine development for the year. These birds, however, were too high and too far inland for trapping purposes. During Dece_mber and January, Clark Ford was sent out with feed to strategic areas"near Glenwood Springs and other areas bcith on the eastern and western slope. The trap at the Turkey Ranch was baited regularly. Attempts were made to set up trapping sites on Confer Hill and the King ranch south of Pagosa Springs, also on Snowball Creek. All this was to no avail. The open weather continued. Natural foods were abundant, and the turkeys preference for natural foods kept them in the back country. They would come in for an occasional handout but leave after one or two feeds. The regular feed grounds were set up in the Glenwood Springs area. One in Main Elk Creek, one in Canyon Creek, one in East Elk Creek and one in the Four Mile Creek area. Near Rifle two more baiting attempts were made. These were at the Record ranch on Divide Creek and one north of Rifle on the C-V-Bar ranch on West Rifle Creek. The turkeys were there but could not be concentrated even for tries with the cannon trap. work. A Mr. Jackson at Glenwood Springs was employed part time to facilitate this He was finally able to concentrate around fifty turkeys in the Fourmile area. It was felt the travel from Bayfield to points east of Trinidad was too expensive and too far for practical trapping activity. One trap site was set up in Sarcillo Canyon at the Sakariason ranch. This was under an agreement that if the area was opened to turkey hunting it would not be trapped for planting stock. Mr. Sakariason did the feeding and observed the birds until trapping time. Because of poor trapping conditions we were unable to replace the turkeys taken out. Replacement will be made from the first trapped flock in the fall of 1959. Feed was furnished to other areas on the eastern slope where feed grounds were set up by the Conservation Officers in the districts. These included an area at the head of Frisco Canyon on Fisher Mesa and one on the Billington ranch near Wetmore. The eastern slope weather was as severe as the western slope was mild which made trapping virtually impossible. At the State Turkey Ranch near Pagosa Springs the turkeys movements were erratic. The birds were roosting north of the upper fields, so feed lanes were run fr an this roost area to the trap to induce the turkeys to feed in the trap area. They would come in for two or three feeds then leave for a few days or even a week or two. Logging operations north of the ranch last fall evidently disturbed the turkeys and destroyed or buried a lot of feed. In mid-February the turkeys were baited back to the trap again but within a few days the big toms began their gobbling and breeding display and the hens were lured away. �-84Two catches were made. The first at the Bershenyi ranch on Fourmile Creek south of Glenwood Springs. This consisted -of ten birds, six hens and four gobbler. This catch was made and the expenses paid by the regular Game Management budget. The birds were taken on Feb •.14th ~t 7:10 a.m. The second catch was made at the Sakar'Lason ranch in Sarcillo Canyon. The try had been for a straight breeder catch. The birds were taken at 6:50 a.m. and consisted of fifteen turkeys, seven of which were gobblers. The seven gobblers were wing banded and released as markers., Mating activity was picking up in this area too and it had been feared the try would fail on this account. Statistical Catch No.1 Data: At Bershenyi Ranch near Glenwood Springs Sex Tom Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Wing Band No 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 Hen 390 Birds caught at 7:10 a.m., February 14, 1959, and released at 2:00 p.m. on the west side of Blue Mountain in Utah. Catch No.2 At the Sakariason Wing Band No 391 392 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 Sex Tom Tom \Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Ranch in Sarcillo Canyon on Feb. 19, 1959 Release Site Crystal Spring Crystal Spring Bershenyi Ranch Bershenyi Ranch Elk Creek Elk Creek West Elk Creek Bershenyi Ranch Bershenyi Ranch Age 1- year Mature Mature Mature Mature 1- year 1- year 1- year 1- year ,Nos. 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413 were all hens banded Prepared by: M_ar~t~i~n~L~._B_ur~· ~g~e~t~ Date: A.p~ri~1~,~1~9~59~ Age Juvenile i- year 2- years 1- year 1- year Mature Mature 1- year 1- year 1- year' the following day _ ~ _ Approved by: and released at trap. Laurence E. Riordan -'P.IF-e~de-r-a"lr-"lAi~d:-7lC-o-or-d"'!"~""· n-a"""lt~o-r- �April, 1959 -85JOB CO~PLETION REPORT I INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ----------~~--------------~-- Project No. , W-4l-R-ll o Work Plan No. 1 _; ----------------------~- Title of Job Period covered: Bighorn Sheep Surveys Job No.6 TraPEing of Bighorn She,ep January 1, 1958 to December 31, 2958. Objectives: 1. To determine if portable Clover-type traps can be used successfully to trap bighorn sheep. 2. Experiment with different types of scent to determine if any might be used successfully in attracting sheep in areas where light snowfall precludes the use of alfalfa as bait in luring sheep into traps. 3. To have a trapping technique available, if and when experimental animals might be needed for study purposes. Procedure: A. Trapping in areas of limited snowfall. 1. Skunk essence was used in and around the traps. 2. Three Clover-type traps were used. 3. B. Salt blocks were also used Lq conjunction with experimental scents. Trapping in areas of heavy snowfall. The use of alfalfa bait was proposed to be tried for one more winter to subs'tantd.ate past success in luring sheep into individial traps. Findingsg Georgetown. Information has not been recorded on trapping activities during the early winter of 1957, therefore, it has been included here. Three traps were set up on Douglas Mountain on September 12, 1957. The trap locations were baited with block salt and skunk essence similiar to that used by some trappers for baiting coyote sets. Trapping operations were commenced on November 10, 1957. One ewe lamb was caught in the trap located on top of Douglas Mountain. She was tagged in the left ear with a metal stock-type tag number A-1279o On December 19, 1957 an eight-year-old ram was caught in one of the traps located on the lower slope of Douglas Mountain. This sheep was not tagged because upon approach toward the trap he made one lunge at the netting on the end-gate and broke through. Trapping operations were discontinued on December 30, 1957 because the main concentration of sheep had moved off of Douglas Mountain. �-86Cache La Poudre. One trap was operated on a part-time basis by the Poudre Rearing Unit personnel. No sheep or deer were caught due to the limited amount of snowfall. . Ouray. It was anticipated that trapping operations at Ouray would commence in late January or early February after heavy snowfall had driven the sheep down onto their "Winter range. A suitable trapping site was located north of Ouray and alfalfa bait was put out. During the week of February 17, heavily melting snows and spring-like weather permitted the sheep to move up above their normal wintering area. They never returned to the trapping site so trapping operations were cancelled. In all, the sheep were down for only an eight day period. Although trapping operations on the eastern slope indicated that the use of this type of trap is of limited application in the trapping of bighorn sheep in areas of limited snowfall, it can be sucessfully employed in areas where adequate amounts of snowfall force the sheep to utilize the alfalfa bait. This was borne out at Glenwood Canyon where nine sheep were trapped in eleven days of trapping operations. During this same time a total of fourteen deer catches were made (Coloo Quarterly Report, April, 1956, pp 83-85)0 Prepared by:__ Cl_~_· f_f_o_r_d_A_o_M_o_se_r Date: _ Approved by:_'I'!IL_a""'l'ur_e_n_,c'l"'e-r-E •.• o......,R'I"'i_o_r .... d•..• an __ .'""""I'~_ }l'ederalAid Coordinator April, 1959 ---------~--~~~--------------- �f.i-qril, 1959 JOB GOHPLETIOI-I REPORT INVESTIGATIONS St.a te of Proj eet __;;C;.::o""l:..:o~r...:a:::d::.o:;_, No•__ Hork Plan No. Ti tl e of Job: Period PROJECTS Covered: ..;.W;_"-...:L::;; •• l:;:.;-;..;R~-;...l",l=- ~; ..;l,.__ Bigborn _ Sheen..2.l-lJ'''I[~s Job No. 19'- _ __.I:::m~l2l::.;r~ ..o;:;:.v~em=e:.:no:::t_.;::o.;;f__;;C;.:;' e;;.:_n:;:;,s~u::-.:s::;....:T:;..;e::::.;c::;.;h;:;:n""l;:;;;· 9""'u_e"'-s . _. >_. .__ January ~.>_ 1, 195f5 to December 13, 1958. Objectives! 1. To determine the herd composition of sheep herds at Georgetown and Empire. 2. To obtain maximum herd composition counts in order to determine the rate of productivity, survival of the annual lamb crop and survival of lambs to year-Li ng age class. 30 To statistically determine whether a corrective factor can be applied to counts made by one person in order to determine a representative population picture, Proce@.re: 1. The study area was limited to the Georgetown and Empire sheep areas for better utilization of time and effort. Up to eight days per month were spent on composition counts in both study areas. 2. An ammendmen t to the project was made to include three helicopter fH,ghts in the study area in order to determine if this type of census could be useful in sheep census work. findings: In spite of the relatively great amount of time spent in the two sheep areas during the spring, summer and fall months the sheep counts were so small and erratic it was felt that, after discussion with the State Game Hanager, Gilbert .N. Hunt.er-, no valid determination of the rate of producti vi ty, survival of the annual lamb crop and/or survival of lambs to yearling age class could be made. November and December when the sheep had dropped down to their winter increased considerably, but at no time could as many sheep be counted as .in the two preceeding winters (high count in 1956 was 87 indi viduals).. The highest count made in 1958 was on December 14, when 45 sheep were count ed in both areas. No apparent reason was found for this papulation drop, although seven dead individuals (6 eves , 1 ram) were accounted for. During range the numbers of sheep counted During November and December, 1958, 23 counts ver e made \-Jith an accumulative total of" 5/JJ sheep being counted. An analysis of these data by Jack R. Grieb showed that: a total of 81 counts would be necessary during the two months in order to arrive at an aver-ago "Ii thin 10 percent of the true mean 9'5 t imes out of a hundr ed , Or, by dropping to the 20 percent level 20 counts would be necessary over the two month period to establish an average count which could be compared from one year to the next~ Hovever, when a drop down to the 20 percent level is made it means that no significant difference in mean herd size can be detected unless the difference exceeds 20 percentc Barring a die-off such as occurred during the winter of 1953-1954 at Tarryall and Pike's peak, this would not be applicable to the majority of the small herds vhrch range the higher mountain areas. �The data for December (312 animals counted in an 11 day period) was a 1i tt-Ie better than the November data (236 animals counted in a 12 day period) and a test of these data indicated that for 10 percent accuracy of the true mean 95 times out of a hundred, 60 counts vculd be needed, and for 20 percent 1 15 counts. This is within the realm of possibility, and thus~ with 15 counts in this area in Decemberof each year it would be possible to statistically compare the mean counts and determine if there was a significant difference. ~ill Cen.§,1l£o Aerial census from a helicoptor vas gratifying from the respect that more sheep could be counted from the air than by a gr-ound count, conducted during the same day (December 1, 1958: Air 26~ Ground 19. December 19. 1958~ !d.r 28, Gr~Y.Dd14). But, as with fixed wing aircraft the actual days one is abl.e to operate in the sheep ranges are fe1r! and far between The first flight .••• !,"-,; made on December 1, and it was not until December 8 that the next flight vas pos s ibl.e , and then the helicoptor had to turn back before get.tirg within 15 miles of the study areac 0 Due to unfavorable flyi.ng conditions the third flight was not made until December 19, 1958 '..•. hich would seem to indicate that aerial census, during the t"rinter months at least, is not practical when viewed from the standpoint of time, effort and money involved. Prepared Dat6~ By: Clifford A. Moser ~A~p~r~i=1~.~1~9~5~9 Approved By e _ Laurence;:;;. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111IIIIII -89- , Sta te of froject BDOW022355 April, 1959 ----~----~--------~ JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROjECTS 9206875 C=.;o;;;:,;l::;,;o~r::..;a::;d:=.:o::._ _ No. .Work Plan Noo ~~T_~41~-~R~-~l~l~ :l Title of Job: Period Covered: Management _ .Bighorn Sheep Surveys _ Job No. 11 Studies January 1, 1958 to December 31, 1958 • . ,Abstract: 1., Hunt.Lng seasons have had little or no effect upon the. general behavior general distribution of the bighorn sheep herds. 20 or The hunter success of' the l"'it. Evans, Georgetown,· Empi.re sheep areas for 1953-1958 was 25.2 percent. . 30. _·.__~ .~..of The total number of hunting permits i_2.5_~l.CZ58 W'§'_§__ 1.19Q .e.__ issued throughout the state for the period _ _ ao The total six-year kill was 321 including the ew~ and lamb kill from the either sex seasons making a hunter success ratio of 26097 percent. . b. The six-year kill of rams OI"~y was 265 with the hunter success ratio being 22.26 percent. 40 A much closer evaluation of the status of the various sheep herds is recommended before the issuance of hunting permits. Objectives: 1. To make an ~~alysis of all available kill records of the Mt. Evans, Empire.and Georgetown bighorn sheep herds. . 20 ..To evaluate the effect of the hunting season on sheep .distribution and behavior • . 30 . To complete the plotting of sbeep trend areas. on maps 40 . Submit a final report of bighorn sheep seasons from 1953 to 1958. 0., Procedure: 10 All available kill records from the game department files were evaluated with the resulting information being compiled apd tabulated. 2. Maps were prepared with the aid of aerial photographs to show areas of seasonal use and areas of intensive use along with the established trend areas. These maps, as completed, were turned over to game management personnel. ��-91- HANAGFMFNT STUDIES Clifford Moser Findings: Sheep Trends. All maps showing trend routes, or areas, have been completed and turned over to the Game Management Division. Some sheep areas, particularly on the Western Slope of the Rocky Mountains, were not mapped because the general consensus of opinion between the biologist and district personnel involved was that there was either not enough information available to warrant such a map, or that the sheep numbers were so small and the area so extensive that no suitable trend could be worked out. Hunting Effect. Georgetown, Mt. Evans. Empire. From field observations made before, during and af~er the. hunting seasons little effect could be noticed on either the distribution or general behavior of the bighorn sheep.herds. Both the ram and ewe herds could still be found in the same localities which they favored prior to the hunting seasons. The rams, while exhibiting an increased wariness, would not move out of an area as elk will do, but continued to remain in the same general area. The hunter success for the Mt. Evans, Georgetown and Empire areas dropped. from a 1953-1957 average of 32.5 percent to an 8.3 percent for 1958 with the 1953-1958 a~erage being 25.2 percent. This, along with the drop in the lamb:ewe ratio as indicated in Table 2 would tend to indicate that something has happened to the sheep herds, but the drop in the hunter success can probably be attributed to the change in hunting regulations wherein a·three-quarter-curl ram was legal in 1958, and a one-half-curl ram was legal in the preceeding hunting seasons. Table 1. Georgetown studyarea--permits. .l.2.51 Georgetown GeorgetownMt. Evans Mt. Evans Empire permits kill 10 3 5 Total 15 Hunter success 20.0 kill and hunter success. lli5. l25.6 permits kill permits kill !!!.i!& kill 10 3 10 3 5 0 10 2 10 0 10 k 10 j .2 2 _i2 1 ....£ 1 20 7 20 8 10 2 26 7 24 2 ~ l227 per- 0 3 35.0 40.0 20.0 ~ permits. kill 10 4 26.5 permits kill 8 1 8.3 �-92- Table 2. Georgetown study area -lamb:ewe ratio lambs 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1amb:ewe ratio ~ 18 13 2 19 27 50:100 95:100 48:100 8 2 16 14 18 3 11 4 19 23 42 21 73:100 50:100 84:100 61:100 43:100 7:100 1 Hunting Effect. statewide. The total number of bighorn sheep hunting permits issued in Colorado for the period 195~-1958 was 1190. The kill of rams only was 265 with the hunter success ratio being 22.26 percent. Including Buffalo Peaks which has had three either sex seasons ( 1954, 1957, 1958) the kill was 321 which resulted in a hunter success ratio of 26.97 percent. Table 3. Six-year regional comparison--permits. kill and hunter success. Northeast Southeast Southwest Northwest Region Region Region Region 1lli Permits sold total kill % hunter success 25 8 32.0 95 40 42.1 27 8 29.6 22 2 9.09 35 8 22.8 116 51 43.9* 70 15 21.4 18 5 27~7 35 14 40.0 88 21 23.8. 29 6 20.6 27 4 14.8 23 8 34.7 90 32 19 21.1 3 8.8 30 4 13.3 43 11 25.6 125 45 35.9*{~ 25 3 12.0 25 1 4.0 112 29 2 33 6.6 29.4*** *.:f rams only--19.2· 23 3 10.0 lli4 permits sold total kill % hunter success llli permits sold total kill % hunter success ~ permits sold total kill % hunter success .li51 permits sold tot81 kill % hunter success l22.§ permits sold total kill % hunter success 44 8 18.1 * rams only--25.8 ** rams on1y--16.9 �-93- Table 4. Statewide bighorn sheep kill -- 1923-1958. permits available permits sold 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 169 255 206 188 240 220 169 239 179 177 218 208 TOTAL 1278 1190 lambs ~ ~ 58 58 45 34 39 total kill % hunter 58 79 45 34.3 33.1 * 25.0 19.2 27.5** 22.1*** 18 3 15 12 2 ,lg _g ~# !JJ. 265 45 7 322 success * rams only 24.68 rams only ·17.88 ** *** rams only 15.38 includes four sheep of undetermined sex from Buffalo Peaks as # indicated from the 1957 card return. o Figure 1. Statewide bighorn sheep kill:"-1953-1958. o 34.3 either sex rams only 25.0 22.1 19.2 17.8 / 15{ I I 1953 954 1955 J 1956 1957 1958 �perm:l.ts sold total kill %hunter success rams only Northeast _E§g~on__ 205 57 27.2 Southeast. RegiQf.:..._ Southwe~~t j:~£!on 626 214 37 12.6 209 31. 7~< Northwest ReE;ion 145 19 1.3.1 24.,4 -~.----. 24~4 0 D either sex rams only 13.1 Nortbeast Region Southeast Region Southwest Northwest Iieglon . __ R.egion �-95- Figure 3. Six-year regional comparison--percent hunter success. 29.6 27.7 21.4 20.6 14.8 13.3 12.0 10.0 9.09 ·8.8 .. 6.6 1953 1954 1955 1956 .1957 1958 Southwest Region Northwest Region either sex 42.1 rams only 40.0 3/.•.•7 32.0 25.8 1----. 23.8 25.6 22.8 18.1 16.9 - 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 Northeast Region 1958 1953 J.95~. 1955 1956 1957 Southeast. Regiem ]_958 �-96- Recommendations: With the steady decline in the hunter success ratio it is strongly felt by the writer that a much closer evaluation of the status of the various bighorn sheep herds be made by the district Wildlife Conservation Officers under whose. jurisdiction the responsibility for the issuance of permits lays. It would be much the wiser course to issue perhaps only three or four permits in a given area than to have a total closure of the area by public opposition, or even department personnel. It is also recommended that, in view of the fact that the bighorn sheep project is being discontinued, those persons responsible for game management practices will recognjze the fact that the Georgetown Study Area has a back-log of worthwhile data ~ertaining to census figures and hunting information, probably more than any other area in the state. With this in mind someone, who is qualified and interested, should be designated to continue to gather census figures for at'least five days during the middle of December. Prepared by: Clifford A. Moser Date: ~A~p~r1~·l~!~l~9~5~9 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ �State of JOB COMPLETION REPORT IIIl'VESTIGATIONS PRO.JFCTS COLOR_~no ------~~~~~------- Pro j ec t No. __ ...;\~,J-_::;l.""l __-..:,R.:_-..;l;;l;_ _ Nountain Covered: _ Job No.1 2 Period Bisrhorn Sheep Surveys , Goat Survev January 1, 1958 to December 31, 1953. Obiec:ti vas: L To determine the status of fourteen head of mountain goats released at lVit. Shavano and Cot.tonvood Creek. 2. To asse~ble all available information on goat range and distribution. J. To compile all available data and prepare a distribution and density map of the mountain goat. range. Find.;gurQ: On.ly f'cur sight records of the transplanted mountain goats ver e obtained during the course of this limited study. One of them •eas by game department. personnel, one by a. bighorn sheep hunt.er and two by resort ovner s , . - on Ant.ero " .,.., 1r'. '" -, '", lWO ma1es were observed r'eak (cc ec . _0, 'I. ?_ l,'., 1957 by the owner of the Ra inbov Lodge at Rainbow Lake. rr. 1 '0 ,I.. 7 E.) Five goats were observed at the Clear Creek Ranch (Sec. 20,1. in late December, 1957 by the owner of the Clear Creek Ranch. {"'\ .... me goatt' 1 Vi t'aut (~ was seen on G·rJ.zz_y liO'LL'! c ec , 28 ,j.:;l- ~'l N.,.tt~ Rainbow Lake (Sec. 30, T~ 14 S., R. 791;1.) by Cody Jordan. t:"\ 'T ~ in early 12 S., 6""') 1:!.,'., ,Jul.y, R. 80 V.I.) 'h an d ano cner !>',-L' ~ It vas thought that winter snows voul.d conc errtr-ate t.he goats in the open, wind-s"\,.;,;)pt areas of the Col l egiate Range, but a week (F ebr uar-y 3-7, 1958) spent covering the accessible areas with glasses and spotting scope revealed no animals. From the limited. Dumber of observations available it is f'el.t that it. wcul.d be highly Jmpractical to prepare a map of the Collegiate Range indicating the distr.ibution of goats thereon. It is supposed that the probable range extends Bouth from Clear Creek along the east side of the Collegiate Hange to Jones Peak and :OiL Shavano. Pr epar-ed 'by: Cli.fford At fvloser Approved. by: I.~~urence E ~ Riordan Federal Date·: Aid Coordinator ��April, -99- ,JOB COM~ErION 1959 REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS :',: :;::,'.-, .. ',':~' " '. " ~ ',' :. 9~06e7& .... ;-; "'.::" '_. Deer-elk Title of Job Investigations Co'l.Lectd.on of data. on 'E?lk,ami J.5ve~:t0~k use of. sub-akpdne .-::. ~ •. :;- .. -. ~. .. _' Per-Lod-Dovered a. '~JtiJie~10';.1958 to· January 15,: 1959 ':" - '. .: .. . _.:. .'. J.. : .~:._; < ~. , . '; Objectives:. utilization .,.... ', -: To answer questions study. _ , . _", range. .; ";: -',. arising .:;:- from the recent elk-sheep ". 1. Why is forage. utilization so, light?" What is minimizing range recovery? competition'exists To locate:areas''Where.elk-livestock . - . '. ~:~.'.-, . '_' • - .. _. 'I'echni.ques U:;ed: Ground and aerial surveys, on the White River Plateau using horses; vehicles, and aircraft. Interviews 'With people possessing knowledge of the objectives<, such as Wildlife Conservation' Officers, Fors3t Rangers, sheep-herders,-::-eattlepool-I'ider-s·,,'-.ranchers, and resort owners. Abstrac.t: The competition study was expanded over the entire White River Plateau 9.,u,ring"1958.,':.~: drought occurred' on. the 'Western slope but subsoil moistu+~f:roIll,,-,the'extremely, we.t year:' in 1957, helped make, good forage production.~-:,,~:Pl~t·g~ye:t{)pmEmt:started early and was ''Well advanced on the summerrange by' July 5th. During the calving season (May and June) elk were uidely scattered. over their winter range but by the third week in June they were using their summer range. , From late June until mid-July sizeable herds were using the large parks for feeding, loafing, and playing. As the parks dried out theY'IIloved -Lnto..the timber for food and water. They stayed there for the remainder of the season. -_ '. e~k ". We coun;t:.~,~9f?O by..aerial survey of which 356 'Were classified. The cow to;:,·ci3.rr::J:-~t~~;':w~1=f19(r:61 and the sex ratio' (cow 'to bullY 'Was 100:15. The herds were 'Widely dispersed over their summer range with' the 'largest concentrations occurring in Johnson Park and in the Marvine Peaks area. From our- ground reconnaissance we recorded 415 elk of which 194 were classified. Few calves were observed which lowered the cow to calf ratio to ]00:16.· The sex ratio (cow to bull) was 100:18.' Elk use -w:al3 heaviest in the Johrison Park, Sleepy Cat Peak, and Marvine areas •..;Ear1y trampling -Wasquite noticeable in Johnson Park but the range r ecOv~f'~ rapidly~ .: �··Z}.;~~ -100- Elk'I5ellet group counts on the six study areas ,revealed that the elk days of use was virtually the same as last. year. There were 64 sheep and 500 steers using the Flat Tops Wilderness Area from .' July 1 until October 15, 1958. Most herding practices appeared to be satisfactory although there was some variation. The range near Twin Lakes and Shingle peak were in poor condition.' Most of the sheep had started down after the first week Ln September. Forage utilization is light in the'parks for several reasons. Both elk and sheep/use the late maturing feed found in the surrounding timber. The elk herds are widely dispersed over their summer range. Both elk and sheep avoid the high producing marshes. . The range appears to be recovering slowly from past abuse but it will take considerable time and good management before recuperation can be attained. No serious problem of elk-livestock competition was found to exist on sub-alpine range. Range damage does occur but it is localized and will probably always exist on favored areas. The pocket gopher study was not continued this year but observations indicated that activity had decreased. Mice damage was especially noticeable on the winter range. . Recommendations include discontinuing this study temporarily, close observa"': tions of this range.to assure proper use ( to be done by responsible agencies), and abused range be given every opportunity to recover as. rapidly as possible • Prepared Date: .' by:_-:-D_·.;:;.cm;;:;;....;S_m;.;;;;l.=.·t.;;.:h==-Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator -=A~pr~1.~·l~!~1~9~5~9 _ : ! '') j/ . �ZiP .. •. ,.:-.~} , -101COLLECTION OF DATA ON ELK AND LIVESTOCK USE OF SUBALPINE RANGE Donald G. Smith Findings: The 1958 survey was expanded to cover the entire White River Plateau in an attempt to locate elk-livestock competition. Emphasis was placed on the Flat Tops Wilderness Area because the bulk of the elk herd summers there. " A mild winter allowed many elk to remain high on their winter range and spring investigations found them scattered over this range. The weather was unseasonally dry resulting in early plant development. A base camp vas. established on the South Fork of the White'River -Iune 11,1958. A reconnaissance trip up Park Creek on June 12 revealed that the parks on top were boggy and that snow drifts remained in protected places. No elk sign was seen on top but bed sites and several small groups of mature cows were observed just under the rima "These small groups of, elk tra.veling together are common at this time of the year. They are uaual.Ly wary of Lnta-uders and the cows have their calves well hidden. They make considerable use of the food, water, and cover of'f ered along the streams t.hroughout the aspen groves. No elk sign was noticed on Bloomfield Bench although several deer had moved onto their summer range. On July 1, a trip up Park Creek and down Lost Solar Creek revealed that the parks' were greening up and that elk were using this summer range. We counted 29 elk but found calves. no Harvey Bray, student assistant, rode from Buford to Oyster Lake July 7, without sighting an elk, seeing few tracks, and very little rc:.ngeuse. Herders of Bob Raley's sheep reported three elk on" Hill Creek. At t.hi.s time the sheep were in the parks above Fowler C eek and headed towards Oyster Lake. Vegetation on top was well developed and no competition between elk and sheep was evident. The following day, Bray saw 69 elk in Johnson Park and"heard more in the surrounding timber. Hany of" the animals were lying down while others were feeding, bathing, playing, or fighting flies. This park seems to be a favorite gathering place for elk in this area. The earth was soft and trampling of the, vegetation was qui te not.Lceabl,e, However, damage was not extensive enough to cause compaction or start erosion. Utilization was moder-at.ewith preferred plants being marshmarigold, Calthaleptosepala, sedges, Carex spP., 'ltillows,Salix sPp., tufted hadz-gr-ase, ' Deschampsia caespitosa. and alpine timothy Phleum alpinum. No elk were observed in Lost Solar Park although there were many tracks. Forage utilization was not noticeable. A large bull was seen trotting down Park Creek and 13 elk were seen at the head of Nichols Creek. On JUly 9, ,Bray saw several fresh tracks one mile belOw Bailey Lake which is intermediate or transitional range. During JUly the cows, calves, and yearlings band together in large herds ant spend much time in the open parks. They are usually tame but unpredicta ~le. The mature bUlls are found off by themselves running in small groups of two's, three's, or four's. Flies and other insects are a problem for the elk at this time of the year. �-102- An aerial survey with a Bell helicopter was made July 7, 8, 9, and 10, 1958, to ebtain a cow to calf ratio, to determine elk distribution, and to locate herd concentrations on the entire summer range. Natural boundaries were used to avoid duplication and total flying time was 13 hours and 40 minutes. A breakdown of the number and location of elk is presented in Table 1. The cow to calf ratio was 100:61 and the. sex ratio (cow to bull) was 100:15. We counted a total of 960 elk but could sex and age only 356. This included 202 cows, 124 calves, and 30 bulls. Elk were widely distributed over their summer range and most of the animals seen were on the Wilderness Area. Only 128 :.wereseen between the South Fork of the White River and the Colorado River. No elk were observed on the North Fork of the White River although it was here that a herd numbering between 3 00 and 400 were seen by Forest Service personnel in May, 1956. The largest concentrations were seen in Johnson Park and in the Marvine Peaks area. On July 8, there were 300 elk in Johnson Park but a return flight over this area the following day revealed that many of these animals had moved to Lost Solar Park. We found 100 elk on the southwest side of Little Marvine Peak and 57 near Big Harvine Hountain. Several difficulties were encountered when we attempted to sex and age large herds. In herds of 40 or more it is difficult to age all of the animals when they mill a round or separate into several groups. Spike bulls are difficult to pick out due to their short antler growth at this time of the year. Mature bulls were easy to distinguish from the others. The best time for counting was from 6 a.m. until 10 a.m. because the light was good and most of the animals were in the parks. Afternoon counts were not taken due to the bad light and air conditions which restricted the performance of the small helicopter. A small camp was established near Lost Solar Park on July 14 but reconnaissance ef this area failed to locate any herd concentration. Five elk were seen on Round Mountain. Utilization was light although most plants in the park had reached maturity. Several days later an inspection party consisting of Warren Allred, Federal Aid Supervisor, L. E. Riordan, Paul Gilbert, Harvey Bray, and the writer rode up Park Creek and down Lost Solar Creek without sighting an elk. Range condition was good, utilization was light, and it was agreed that the competition problem in this area was not serious. The following week a trip was taken to Blair Mountain, Crater Lake, and Patterson Creek to determine elk use in that area. There was abundant feed, in the area but no use either by elk or livestock •. Elk sign was old which led us to believe that the area receives only limited use during the ~gration into and from the South Fork Canyon. Several deer were seen in this "Vicinity. �'"");'70 ~'.i:_.~·~_! -103TABLE 1. ELK OBSERVATIONS BY' AERIAL SURVEY July, Number of Elk 1958 Location Observed FLAT TOPS WILDERNESS AREA· (832 85 9 31 of Elk elk) Turrent Peak (South side) Turrent Peak (North side) Shingle Peak Upper South Fork (North side) Upper South Fork (North side Trappers Peak Doe Creek Little Marvine Peak Big Marvine Peak Park Creek Park Lost Solar Park Park east of Oyster Lake Johnson Park Hill Creek Oyster Lake West Marvine Creek 21 31 37 8 100 57 9 38 17 300 26 47 16 buthigher) AREA SOUTH OF THE SOUTH FORK WHITE RIVER AND NCRTH OF THE COLORADORIVER (128 elk) Adams Lake Patterson Creek Buck Creek Lake Creek Upper Stuart Creek Deep Creek 21 31 4 2 65 5 AREA NORTH OF THE NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER AND SOurH OF THE WILLIAMS FORK (0 elk) No e.Ik observed TarAL ELK COUNTED 960 �.•...~ .. ' -104 TABL'E 2. ELK OBSERVATIONSBY GROUNDSURVEY 1 DATE MATURE Cows Bulls YEARLING Female Male 8 -- Calves Total Unideniified Remarks 60 Buford Mtn. Park Cr-, Lost Cr. (Trailcrew) June 10 12 30 1 3 6 4 6 July 1 12 5 12 7 8 8 8 37 1 1 19 1 Ji4 ]5 24 30 Park 29 3 1 II 69 5 3 1 5 1 4 3 1. 8 1 3 1 5 15 and Loat.So.Ler Creek) Hill Cr. (Raley) Johnson Par~ Park Cr. Park Park Cr. Round Mtn. Hound Mtn. Newcastle road Park Cr. Park August 1 2 3 4 81 - Twin Lake s (herd er ) 10 1 5 -20 2 Ji2 3 3 8 5 15 7 6 2 ]2 1 7 1 26 ] 1 9 Big Marvine Papoose Cr. Lost Solar Cr '" Park Cr. Park Sleepy Cat Peak Trappers Peak Hill Cr. September 10 23 25 26 5 12 1 2 4 TOTALS JL09 20 22 5 1 7 22 I 39 9 Jt'W TOTAL ELK COUNTED 194 412 221 Big Mtn. Lost Solar Cr. Doe Cr. The Meadows �2?-2: . -105- Six elk were seen crossing the Newcastle-Buford we returned to Buford. road near Corral Lake as Inspection of the range near Twin Lakes and the head of Doe Creek on July 28 revealed moderate sheep use. :The Twin Lakes area. appeared to be grazed the heaviest and damage was apparent on bedgrounds and where trailing occurred. One band of sheep was several miles south of Twin Lakes and another' near Big Harvine Mountain. The sheepherder reported seeing 81 elk earlier in the season.' On July 30, the large base camp was moved from the South Fork to a park near Lost Solar Park. We counted l~ elk in Park Creek Park .and saw some in Lost Solar but darkness prevented a COunt there. The Forest Service trail crew," Vern CaldwelLand Felix Reynolds, reported seeing about 60 cows and calves along Lost Creek above the North Fork White River. On August 1, a band of sheep were using Park Creek Park but moved to the ridge between Nichols Creek and Park Creek a day and a half later. On August 2, Bray rode through the Big Marvine country but found no competition problem. Vegetation in the large parks was becoming dry and elk were feeding on the late maturing plants Ln the timber and small parks. He saw 20 elk scattered throughout the timber northwest of the Mountain. Camp was moved on August 4th and three large bulls were seen near the head of Lost Solar Creek •. The following day 15 cows and yearlings were seen again in Park Creek Park. .' . Rides into .the Ute 'Creek and Papoose Basin country revealed some elk use but no competition with livestock was evident. A few elk were observed on Papoose Creek. A three day trip into the Sleepy Cat Peak area showed considerable use by both elk and livestock. The herder reported seeing only eight elk but we found more in the dense timber at the head of Milk Creek. One day was spent on range analysis of this area with Bert Roberts, Forest Ranger, and Jac~ Cameron, Jr. Range Manager. Much of this range was classified as being in a high-poor to low-fair condition. T-his apparently has been caused by past abuse but should be closely watched in the future. On August 12, an inspection of the range around Trappers Peak and Little Mar-vi.nePeaks revealed no competition between elk arid sheep. Elk sign vas pr_actically absent arid only one elk was seen near Trappers ~eak. . Sheep observations in this area indicated satisfactory grazing methods were followed. Open herding, where the animals graze over a wide area, was practiced. In the evend.ng , the sheep would concentrate on bedgrounds sometimes chosen by the use of" salt. They began feeding at"daybreak but shaded up in the timer dur-Ing the heat of the. day.'. They began feeding again �in the afternoon. Like the elk, they used the more palatable forage in the timber when given the opportunity. They completely stripped the taller plants like tall chiming bell Mertensia ciliata and geranium Geranium spo. One band of sheep was two miles west of Wall Lake and another was one-half mile east of Little Marvine Peak. A total of 16,450 sheep and 500 steers were using the Flat Tops Wi~derness Area approximately 170 square miles in size. Dates of livestock use on the White River National Forest usually begin July 1 and end October 15. Sheep use the high range for two and one-half months and cattle use the lower range for three months. Bear traps and cyanide guns were used by the sheepmen against predators. A ride through Johnson Park where early elk concentration was the heaviest failed to show any recent elk use. The range appeared to be in good condition although it was beginning to show the effect of the dry summer. By August 26, the elk were using the timber and small parks almost exclusively. Elk sign was very heavy on Hill Creek where plants and trails were receiving considerable use. Nine elk were observed and one bugle was heard. Elk pellet group counts revealed that elk days of use were virtually the same as last year (2.14 as compared to 2.13 days of use per acre in 1957). The Big Marvine study area received most of the use (7.4 days) and the Shingle Peak area received the least (.08'days). other study areas included Park Creek Park (3.8 days), Trappers Peak (2.9 days), Doe Creek (2.3 days), and Lost Solar Park (1.7 days). Sheepherders from Big Hountain east of Flag Creek reported seeing two bunches of elk numbering 8 and 14. They claimed that the deer population was considerably less than a few years ago. A jeep ride into the North Fork country on September 11 and 12 failed to disclose any sign of range damage. We visited Long Park, Lost Park, Ripple Creek, Pagoda Peak, and Sand Peak. Elk sign was old and no elk were observed although we saw a dozen deer. The range was dry and the sheep were movtrig off the National Forest. A sheepman from Meeker, Byron Otteson, reported seeing only a few elk around 'the Chinese Wall. He mentioned that early use was noticeable in Picket Pin Park, the heaa of Snell Creek, and around Pagoda Peak. An inspection of both winter and summer range in the Yampa District on September 16 failed to disclose any competition problem. We went up Moody Creek," Watson Creek, and around Heart Lake but found little elk use. The new ranger, Ray Brown, had spent most of the summer in the field learning the district and was concerned about the lack of elk sign. Vern Baker, pool-rider, reported some elk in the vicinity but no concentrations. Other herders,ranchers and people in the area felt that the elk were scarce. Dick Denney, Regional Game Hanager-, reported several local areas near the head of the East Fork of the Williams Fork were heavily used by elk several years ago. Members of the inspection party were Ray Brown, Leonard Snowden, Asst. Ranger, W. C. 0.: Bob Rosette, and myself. < : �-107The following day, Rosette and I checked winter range on Derby Mesa and Cabin Creek where elk use was noticeable but not detrimental. Damage claims during the winter are common there although the number of elk doing the damage is small. It is thought that there is a herd buildup in the Derby Peaks country. , , ' Ranger Paul Reedy of the Glenwood District felt that he had no cnmpetition' problem and thought that most of the elk in his district were in the Sweetwater Lake-Derby Peaks area. Ranger Bill Pluerde of the Rifle District had no elk competition north of the Colorado River: but knew of several local areas near the head of Middle Elk Creek where elk damage was done.' Time did not allow a visit to these areas. No serious range damage was found in the area north and east of Trappers Lake during an inspection early in October. Areas visited included Picket Pin Creek, :West Lost Lake, Lost Lake Peaks, Skinney Fish Lake, Little Trappers Lake, and across the top to Frazer Lake •. Vegetation was dry and no livestock were seen. The elk were using the timber'as the rutting season was at its peak. . The pocket. gopher study was not continued in 1958 because it was f elt that an intensive study in this area was unnecessary. Observations during the range inspections indicated a decrease in pocket gopher activity since the wet year of 1957. Considerable rodent activity was found on elk winter range where mice had girdled many browse plants and Aspen trees during the winter of 1957-58. Many mice were found dead on the summer range this year. Discussion: Except' for a few local areas, forage utilization remains light in the parks' on the Flat Tops. The primary reason appears to be the additional food source in the timber made possible by the beetle epidemic. Both elk and sheep use this forage during the latter part of the summer when the parks dry up. Another reason why utilization is light is the fact that the elk are widely dispersed over a large summer range. E~.concentrations occur only for a morrth and _. even then ther.e.is.a-.-considetable shift of herds. Most of the sheep herding methods appear. to.be satisfactory as more emphasis is being placed on using.-all-..Qf·-theallotment· in -a.ddition to using the feed in the timber. It appears that the range is recovering as rapidly as possible under the present management plans. It is doubtful that it would improve much faster if all grazing were discontinued. The high altitude, ahort growing season, type and depth of the soil, and fertility all play important roles in its rehabilitation. Non-use is the only answer for recuperation of certain abused areas but often this is difficult or eyen Imposs fbl.e to apply. Vegetation inside a. "total e.xc.Losure'' in Lost Solar Park, built in 1952, shows very little change from the range outside. Utilizat,:j,onin this park is extremely light. A sheep exclosure near Twin Lakes, built in 1948, does show some difference to the outside raBge but it is not pronounced. This �-JJoBarea receives much more sheep use than Lost Solar Park. It is £elt that rodents do playa part in minimizing not considered especially harmful. range recovery but are No serious problem of elk-livestock competition was found to exist on subalpine range at the present time. There are local ar~as where concentrations occur resulting in range damage but these are usually small and will always receive attention. They include sheep bedgrounds, water holes, salt and mineral licks, and shade areas. The general opinion of persons contacted during the summer who possess knowledge of the situation is that there is no competition problem. Actually there appears to be an abundance of elk summer and winter range at this' time.' Recommendations: 1. Abused range should be given every opportunity to recover as rapidly as possible. This may be accomplished by manipulating livestock elk pressure. 2.' Observation of this sub-alpine range should be continued by responsible agenCies to insure proper range management. annually J. If range damage is £ound, steps Should be taken immediately to alleviate the situation. A thorough study of the cause should be made before control measures are applied. 4. This job should be discontinued until the need for it arises. In the £uture it may be desirable to determine the extent of elk use in concentrated areas such as Johnson Park or any other controversial parks. Prepared Date: by:_...:D:;;..,o::::.;n~S;;.:DU::!:·:..t~h~ ~Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ~A~p=r=il~·,~J9~.~5~9~,~: __~----- and �April, 1959 -109- State Project of _---'C::..:o:..=L~O.::..;R:;;.::lIJ);;:..O~------No. _,:.:.W_-.:::,8.:::,8.....;-R:,:_;-4:t._ ; . Haterfowl' Surveys and Investigations toJorkPlan No•. __ Title of Job: --'I;;..·_·--~------ • .. Job No. '4 \~~~a~t~e~r~f~o~w=l~I~.I:i~~~r=a~t=i~o=n~S~t=u:d=i~e:s _ Objectives: .'1'0 det~r;t:Pine the movement;Of. \"aterfowl species into and through various portions of Colorado, during fall migration as an aid to: (1) Gather information f.or· use .Ln determining the best hunting season dates to choose for each area. (2) Gain data.for.use in regulating future kill by species, if this should be necessary. (J) Better interpret the results of waterfowl· kill surveys, and thus the effect of the regulations on the kill for each area~ Nethods: IIigration records, by spec i.es $ wer-e obtained during the aerial waterfowl population counts in the Arkansas RiverValley~ This study \-las run concurrently 1.-1i th the Arkansas Valley 1..Jintering goose flock proj ect. The study area included the follO\"ing lakes and reservoirs: Black, Blue, Cary, Cudahy, Dyes; Henry, Holbrook; John Hartin, Heredith, Rutherford, Timber, Tuo Buttes, Cheraw and Eads groups of lakes •.. The vraterfowl population flights were made at about lO-day intervals between November 5, 1958 and January 8, 1959. Spec Lea.xrer-e observed and recorded for each water area as the duck and ~oo.~~_c~unt~.'w~!e made. Results: Speci~s of ducks present_ on. the Various '·later. ar-eas ..were noted in. an effort to obtain the most accurate migration picture possible of Vlaterfowl movements in southeast Colorado. .' Since this is the second year of recent extensive waterfowl population counts in the ·Arkansas Valley, this report will confine itself to a few brief comments about Figure 1 and the time of movement of vlaterfowl through the study area. FigU.rEl1" is a graph' showing the mi.gr atdon per'Lcd of' each species observed in the. study areabetHeen November 5,'1958 and January 8,1959. The length of the line denotes the period species were observed. The interval between the asterisks shows the heavier migration flights by species. .' �-110- ?ir,urc 1. -- HiR!'&tion Rate of Haterfowl. ~~ Canada Goose Sandhill Cr-ane *--* Coot ~~ Merganser • Bufflehead *--~. • ~r • Teal * -l: * * .' * >:--* · ~~ *' ~i ~~ ~* · Pintail Ballard • • ~~ Redhead Gadwall ~t ~.- Canvasback Baldpate * >; Scaup Colorado. Peale -j( • Goldeneye Shoveller Arkansas Valley, October • • s -t'\ ~~- * • 4 • ,1 2 3 November I '+ 1 2 3 December 4 2 1 January 1rJEEKS Species Observed Heavy Flights ~<,- * 1. Hallards, were present in substantial numbers throughout the entire study, but the heavier flights occurred from the second week of November through the third week of December. The wintering concentrations then remained more or less constant the balance of the study. 2. The pintail population was high through the first half of December then reduced substantially the balance of the Stl~y period. �-111- 3. The southern flights of teal Here apparently over before the initiation of this years' study but some were noted until the ~iddle of November. 4. The gadwal.L migration was under t-laybefore the start of the aerial counts on Nobember 5 but a fev! were observed until the end of November. 5. The flights of baldpate coincided with the gadwall but wer e not noted after the third week of November. 6. Shovellers were observed in considerable numbers as the study was initiated but decreased throughout November. None were noted in December as in the 1957-58 study. 7. Redheads were seen from the first aerial count through the middle of December, with the heavier flights late in November. The canvasback appeared the middle of November with the largest populations noted from the middle of November to the middle of December. Small numbers remained the balance of the study. 8. Scaup arrived with the canvasback but the larger flights lasted a week longer. A few also remained throughout the balance of the counts. 9. American goldeneye was the last migrant to be observed. The first appeared the middle of November and increased in numbers during December. The population then remained stable the rest of the study. 10. The bufflehead were observed in substantial numbers on the first aerial count with a few noted until mid-November. This differs from 1957-58 when these birds wer'e observed only in December. 11. Mergansers were recorded through the entire study with peak numbers from the middle of November to the end of December. In 1957-58 the first flights were observed in December and remained for the balance of the aerial counts. 12. The 1958-59 migration surveys showed the coot migration to be underway by the first count with most of them leaving by mid-November. A few remained until the end of November but not throughout the entire study as in 1957-58. 13. A few sandhill crane wer-e observed until mid-November, but the decreasing numbers indicated these vJere the last of the southward flights. 14. Few Canada geese wer-e observed until the thrid week of November when the large flights started to arrive in the wintering areas. Wintering goose populations of 25,000 to the peak of 44,600 in January were observed throughout the balance of the study period. 15. Food and water conditions were considered to geod throughout the entire area, as they were in the previous year's study. However the winter we at.her- was noticeably more severe this year. Subrnitted by: Date: 7J1. 6: s:;~L-v Sr. Game Biologist April. 1%9 Approved by: Lp.urence K•..·RiordaR· - -oFcd-er al Aid; eo:orcli!JlC3. tOll' ��April, 1959 ~113- STATE OF COLORADO --~--~~~~~----------~.- .Proj ect No. _....;\"'-J--::8~8'--.:..:R:....-:::t:4 _ i:laterfowlSurveys Work Plan No. Title of Job: and Investigations - I;:::._ ;- Job No.2. Trapping and Banding Ducks and Geese Ob.iectives: (1) To trap and band ducks and geese for the purpose of obtaining migration and life history information. (2) To trap the Great Basin· Canada goose as a means of securing brood stock for transplanting in suitable nesting areas throughout the State for the purpose of enlarging the breeding range of this species in Colorado. . Scope: North Park (Jackson County); the Cache la Poudre Valley (Larimer, Weld, and other cOuhties); and Two Buttes Reservoir (Baca County). Personnel: Ken Baer, Roe Heyer, Charles Hayes, and Ray Buller, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Hildlife: Lloyd Hazzard, i·iitchell. G. Sheldon, Robert KitZmiller, and Jack R. Grieb; Colorado Game and Fish Department. Introduction: This report s~~arizes the banding activities of Project i:J-88-R-4for the fiscal year, April 1, 1958 to April 1, 1959.· Since the analysis of band recoveries "fill be done under another job (Plan I, Job 3), little interpretation will be made of these data. The report will be limited to a factual desc~iption of number and location of birds banded, with comments on goos8weight data collected at T-vioButtes Reservoir. Nethods: Banding activities have been roughly divided into two phases -summer banding, and winter banding. Summer banding takes place on the breeding grounds' and emphasizes the banding of young ducks and adults which breed in the vicinity of the banding site. Winter banding is done on the wintering grounds at Two Buttes Reservoir. Three methods were used to trap and band ducks and geese during 1958 and 1959. (1) Drive trapping using the Hawkins drive trap, where the ducks are driven into long wings extending out from the Hawkins trap, and finally into the trap itself; (2) run-do •. m method, where broods are scattered and especially along road-side ditches ",here each brood observed is chased and captured by hand or with a dog; (3J the cannon-net trap, where the birds are baited into 4he area covered by the net. �-114- Results: A total of 752 ducks and 554 geese Here banded during the past fiscal year. No "Hinter duck banding was accomplished this past year. Table 1 lists the number of summer banded ducks, by species and location, while Table 2 lis~s the number of Canada geese banded by location. Table 1. Number of Ducks Banded by Species and Location, 1958 Species Ballard Pintail Gadwall Baldpate Shoveller Green-winged teal Cinnamon or Blue-winged teal Lesser Scaup Redhead Ring-necked Canvasback Ruddy American Coot TOTAL 1959. Total by Species Poudre Other" " (Two Buttes) 70 61 4 69 98 167 4 79 1 21 118 57 12 22 14 19 76 1 23 106 5 210 North Park 135 15 15 75 1 97 2 12 14 538 111 752 4 No summer duck banding in the San Luis Valley was attempted this year due to extreme high water. Table 2. -- Number of Geese Banded by Location in Colorado. Location How Captured Number Banded 1958 - 1959. Remarks Canada Goose Poudre Valley 23 Experimental plant at College Lake, Larimer County, Colo. Two Buttes Reservoir Cannon-net trap 525 Released immediately after banding. Greeley City Park Drive trap 7 Private -- Donation to the Park and were released immediately after bandin • TOTAL 555 �-1l5- The,23 geese banded in the Poudre Valley were Greater Basin goslings· raised from the captive flock at Bonny Dam ,and the result of artificial hatching of wild eggs at the bird farm near Rocky Ford, Colorado. These birds were released to supplement pr'ecedf.n.g plants to investigate the possibility of establishing wild breeding flocks. This is covered in more detail under another job: (Hork Plan 2, Job 2). No Greater Basin Geese were trapped for transplant this year. All geese captured at Two Buttes Reservoir this year wer-e we i.ghed , sexed, aged, and fluroscoped. The purpose of this operation was fourfold: (1) to determine, if possible, the sub-species of white-cheeked geese using this area for vnntering purposes; (2) to investigate weight differences; if any, be tween the birds trapped in any, one year, as compared to past years, and thus determine whether undue harassment during the hunting season had affected the general well-being of the flock;' (}) to determine, if possible, , the age-sex ratio of the wintering flock at Two Buttes Reservoir; (4) to ' determine the incidence of body shot in this flock, (which will be reported under 1rJorkPlan 2, Job 4).' 'The results of this incidental investigation revealed that it is very difficult to tell the differences between the subspecies of white-cheeked geese wintering at Two Buttes Reservoir. It is fairly certain that· three sub-species are present; namely, the Richardson's, Lesser, and Great Basin Canada goose. However, considering weights' and' external characteristics of the birds, while it was possible to determine sub-species of the small birds and the very large'ones, it was impossible to separate the Lesser from the Richardson's whefe they overlap, particularly in weight, and the' same for the Lesser and the Great Basin goose. " Results of the 1959 weighing study are given in Table 3, where it is com':" pared "lith we i.ghf information from 1952, 1953, 1957, and 1958 bandings. Table 3. -- Average We,ights of Geese at T1.VOButtes Reservoir,' During Banding Operations. ' Average "No. Birds Average l.Jeightof Birds that Year Weighed Weight ,Weighed 4. 5 to 7 Pounds 1269 1952 1953 1481 Average we i.ght; 1957 527 521 1958 Aver-age 1.Veight 516 1959 6.28 Ibs. 6.0~ Ibs. 6.171bs. 6.68 Ibs. 5.88 Ibs. 5.78 Ibs. 5·45 Ibs. 6.16 Lbs , , 5.97 ..Ibs. 6;07 Ibs. 5.83 Ibs. 5.79 Ibs. 5.81 Ibs. 5.58 Ibs. Considering the average weights for all birds \'Jeighed,it is evident the 1959 average is slightly below that of the pr ecedangj year-s, This, however , may be, and probably is, due to factors other than hunter harassment affecting the birds' opportunity to feed. The following are some of the possible reasons for this average 10Teightdifferential: �-116- 1. In 1957, 1958, and 1959 the birds were trapped and weighed soon after the hunting season had ended. In 1952 and 1953 there Has a time lapse of two to three months before the last birds were trapped, banded, and weighed. This interval provided the healthy birds with the opportunity to feed at will and put on weight. It also allowed enough time for the wounded-starving geese to pass out of the picture. During these years the geese were baited.as long as forty days before the ihitial catch was made. Thus aver ave weight differences may be due to the time interval between the end of hunting season and weighing time. 2. Weather conditions may be an important factor in average weight differences. It is known that food was scarce in 1956-57 and also concentrated in a few areas. This may be a partial reason for the decline in average weight shown in the 1957 figure. Food, water, and weather conditions were considered very good in southeast Colorado in 1957-58. A plentiful supply of food and water Here also present in 1958-59 but the weather was considerably more severe. There were many more snOH storms that covered the more accessible food supply, for much longer periods than during the preceding "linter. 3. Changes in the sub-species composition of the wintering flock could greatly influence the average we Lght, comparisons. For example, those years when a greater number of big geese were present the average weight should go up, and the converse would be true when there were an influx of the small Richardson's goose. In an attempt to offset the composition changes of the flock the last column shows the average weight of those geese that weighed between 4.5 pounds and 7.0 pounds. Here the same weight trend is shown between years but not as extreme when all data~e considered. While sub-species composition changes may be compensating over a long period, the year-to-year average weights could show noticeable changes. 4. Age and sex ratio changes will affect the average weights between years. It is evident there was a substantial increase in immature birds of the geese we Lghsd in 1958-59 amounting to 24~2:p$r cent over the previous years' figures. Immature females increased 15.3 per cent in 1958-59. Thus, an increase of birds-of-the-year along with an increase in the smaller females may cause considerable change in the average weights between years. 5. A change in numbers of wounded birds in the wintering flock could also change the average weight of the geese yearly. Body condition of the birds ver-e checked, as banded, by the prominence or lack of prominence of the keel. bone in the breast of the bird. A starving-wounded goose was emaciated to the extent that a bird could be picked up by the protruding keel bone. Thus the body condition of the flock may influence the yearly average weights. It is known that the geese handled in the trapping and banding operations in 1958 and 1959 were mostly in fair to good body condition. Considering all of these factors, it-is impossible to determine exactly what caused the average weight differential between 1959 and previous years. It is believed to be a combination of possibly all of these things rather than anyone factor. Submi tted by: 7ll.6. 5.h.,(btt ~. Sr. Game Biologist Date: A~p~r~i~1~,_!1~.~~5~9C=~ . ./ Approved by: ~aureIfC.eE.: Riordan. .. - Fc4ernl A.id ··Coi)I(h~ator - ? . - � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/17e854302d76e69870138d33c615fe11.pdf 1e07a9788a6319773a68e5a4489fc1a3 PDF Text Text Iliiiiiifjlih JVN 2.2 1959. 235 BDOW022357 April, -117- 1959 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ___W~-_"l~D~l~-~R~-~l~ Work Plan No• ; GameRange Investigations 2==-Physical Site ; Job No. 5 Factors Influencing Annual Production Of Jo b r . : Mahogan-y on N1l1 e Deer Winter . Range. ,':' . Objective: To identify and determine the relative factors'of various sites on the annual production (Cercocarpus montanus).· .---- of Mountain effects of the physical of true mountain mahogany L Investigations were conducted at the Little ....··--.c'Stat~ibn76n-tlr€f':~western-'slope-of· the Rocky Mountains, '" sout.hves t ' of Meeker, Colorado. Hills Game Experiment approximately 20 miles 2. Sanrplirig was confined to a one-square mile area (Section 24, T. IS., R~.96 W~, 6th' I'.M.) cons lder ed representative; both vegetatively and geologically, of the surrounding area. '. _.~. . .. J~ Joint observations ~ad~ on 125 sample plots; on mahogany stands and physical site 69 on sandstone and 56 on shale parent factors were soil materials. 4; Sbil and: topographic variables whose relation to mahogany production were tested included: combined thickness. of the A and B soil horizons; clay content of the Ahoriz0I1; surface stoniness; ~spect; slope position; organic matter, phosphate, lime, potash, and pH, all of'the A horizon; infiltration rate; and slope gradient. 5. 0 ".variables A measure of the response was made on O.Ol-acre by the mahogany plants plots by: ' Measuring the crown diameter on the'plot. Rando.miy selectin~ .,weighing (air-dry) of all to the site the mahogany plants one of the plants for clipping of all annual twig growth. Constructing a regression f'rom the clipped .weight of annual growth on crown diameter. plants and using Estimating, by regression, the weight of the annual growth :6f al~ .other mahogany plants '(;>0 the plot, each of which haa a'measurro cro'WDdiameter~ �-118- e. Summing the weiF':htsper plant for the plot and conver t.ing to a pounds per acre figure • .6. Statistical interpretation of the data was made in three parts: a. Computing individual linear regressions of annual growth of mountain mahogany (Y) on each site variable considered individually (X). b. Computing intercorrelations among the variables. c. Solving linear multiple regression equations combining all variables selected for analysis. 7. Plots located on soils derived frow sandstone parent material produced an avel"age of 169.1 pounds per acre. Those located on soils deri ved from shale produced an average of 134.3 pounds per acre. This difference, statistically significant, necessi tated separate handling of the data for each parent mated al . 8. 3i te f'ac t.or-scontributing significantly to the variation in annual growth on sandstone derived sons were: depth of the A plus B horizon; clay content of the A horizon; and surface stoniness (nelSatively). In order of importance the remaining contributing factors were: lime (negatively); phosphate; aspect (negattvely from N.E. to S.W.); and slope gradient (ne6atively). Those factors contributing only very weakly to the variation in annual ;:;rowthwere: slope position; organic matter; infiltration rate; pH; and potash. 9. Site factors contributing significantly on shale derived soils were: depth of the A plus B h~rtzon; and surface stoniness (ne~atively). In order of importance the remainjng contributing factors were: organic matter; aspect (negatively from N.E. to S.W.); lime (negatively); slope position (negatively); an:)clay content of the A horizon. Those factors contrjbuting only very weakly were: phosphate; infiltration rate; pH; slope gradient; and potash. �-119Physical Site Factors Influencing Annual Production of Mountain :'1ahoganyon Hule Deer 'Winter Range Dean E. Medin Introduction: The sustained production of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in Colorado often depends on the adequacy of nutritious forage during critical winter periods. Beca.use of this, persons responsible for the management of the species have turned their attention toward winter range, more particularly, toward the browse plants comprising the food source on winter ranges. The questions are being asked: Which brovs e plants are the most desirable winter foras;e species? l.Jhatis their nutri tive composition? How much use can they vit.hst.ard? What are their site r-equ i rement.s? One of the browse species under scrutiny is true mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus). It is of interest by reason of its wj.dedistribution in the Western United States and its generally accepted desirabi1 ity as a food plant, A study \·18S made during the summer- season of 1958 with the objective of determining the role of physical site factors as they influence the annual production of mountain mahogany. Site factors are commonly groupE>d into two major classifications; living and non-living. The non.,..living factors fall into the broad categories of climate and physiography. This study was concerned with one of these groupings -- the physiographic, which includes those factors relating to soil and topography. Both climatic and biotic factors are of importance to any environmental study relating to plant production, cl unat.e extremely so, but limita.tions of time and resources restricted the present investigation to the physical factors. In a single season st.udy over a limited area, as reported here, macro-climatic influences are assumed constant. Literature Review: Specific Li terature dealing with the ecology of the mountain mahogany browse type is lacking. A considerable amount, hovever , is available concerning related studies and I'undament.al.' plant-soil relationships. Only a few of the more pertinent are citE.G.here , Workers in many fieLds have emphasi zed the need and value of site investigations in range and wildland research programs. Recent among these has been Stone (1957) who points out that the capabilities and potential use of w i LdLand soils are increasingly being est.imat.edindependently of existing vegetation by means of recognizable soil units or combinations of soil-site features. Correlation of these lmits or properties with their capabilities must first be established through observation, experience, or specific studies. Weaver (1924) wrote concerning the technique of using plant production as a mea9ure of environment: "The most fundamental relation in plant ecology is that reciprocal one between the plant and its habitat. Any attempt to determine exactly the causes which are producing modification in the individual, and consequently in vegetation, must include ::a.refulmeasurements of nll the habitat factors." Weaver also recognized the difficulties involved in integrating and interpreting the measured factors. In a four-year study in eastern Oregon and Washington, Garrison (1952) found that biotic and climatic factors can cause wide variations in the annual production of shrubs. Fluctuations in precipitation or damage by rodents and �.' .g¥--.>: 2"~'~ • I ".:._ _J. ' .. -120insects reduced the brovs e- in some years to as little as one-third or one-fifth the production in other year-s •. Schultz, BisHell, and Vlam:i_s(1958) reported on the response of brush plants to fertilizer in California. Four brush species and three soi'_svrer'eused in pot tests. Hestern mouhtain mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides) showed good response to nitrogen applications when grown in a soil derived from sandstones and shales. No response was shown to phosphorus or potassiQ~o Some of the most intensive investigations of the productive capacity of TNild lands are seen in attempts to predict, from basic factors of the environment, the suitability of given sites for growing a timber crop. Although an incrs~sing amount of literature is being contributed, several detailed r-evi.ews are avaf Labl.e , Among the more recent are those of Lemmon (1955) and Doolittle (1957) •. A cla~sic in the field is the work of Goile (1948). JVlanyof these workers have found that good site quality is directly related to factors providing optimum amounts of available moisture during the growin~ season 0 Investigations were conducted at the Little Hills Game Exper-iment, Station on the western slope of the Rocky fiIountains,approximately 20 miles southwest, of J1eeker, Colorado. The area comprises an essential part of the winter range of the large, migratory White River deer herdo Livestock graze the range during the spring and fall periods, the spring season occupying the months of April and May and the fall season the months of October and Novembero Heither livestock nor deer Here present during the study period wn.i.ch began in June and ended in September. The regi,on consists of semi-desert lands broken by low, rough hills and numerous small drainages. The larger portion of the area is plateau-like Hith a gentle northerly inclinationo Elevations of the study area vary frem 6,500 to 7,100 feet. Rocks of the Green River formation are the youngest exposed except in one area ·,K,erethey are overlaid by 400 f eet .of sandy beds that are equivalent to the 'basal beds of the Bridger formation'; The Green River formation originated from lacustrine sedimentation during the middle Eocene and consist of irregularly bedded sandstones and shales (Appendax A) Exposure of the formation includes an area about 95 miles long from north to south and about 48 miles wide (Bradley, 1931)0 Soils are young and broadly classified as lithosols and shallow soils (UoS.D.A. Yearbook of Agriculture, 1938) •. Parent soil materials or underlying bedrock are exposed in many p'Lac es, In some areas, such as valley bottoms and 101. swales between ridges, soils are better developed and profile differentiation is evident 0 0 Climate is characterized by somewhat, dry i.Llters and 1-letterspring and fall periods. Cli;'naticdata .-rereobtained at the Heeker weather station, the nearest stat:.ionat v,hich long-time weather records are available 0' Average annual rainfall computed over a 50-year period was 15086 incheso Only �-121- February has less than 1.00 inch (0.95), while April averages 1057 inches and Auv,ust 1.75 inches. Precipitation often falls in showers with extensive and flash-like runoff. About 55 percent of the yearly precipitation occurs from April 1 to October 1. Temperatures as low as -430F. and as high as 103°F. have been recorded. The a.verage annual temperature for a 36-year period was 42.8°F. Growing seasons average 97 days. Pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) and Utah juniper (Juniperus utahensis) are the climax plants in the region. These species form part of the extensive pinyon-juniper zone, the lowes.t subdivision of coniferous vegetation in the Rocky Nountains. In the aggregate, this zone covers approximately 76 million acres in the United States and extends, in various forms, from Mexico to Canada. Because of the low stature of the trees, commonly between 10 and 30 feet tall, it is frequently referred to as ,-1oodland(Daubenmire; 1943) .• In Colorado, the type covers about one-fifth of the western half of the state (Hull and Doran, 1950). The stands vary from open to dense and are modified by site conditions which allow local intrusions of big sage (Artemisia tridentata), true mountain maho~any, snowberry (Symphoricarpos tetonensis), bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), Gambel oak (Quercus gambelli), several species or rabbitbruSilTChrysothamnus spp.), and other shrubby communities. North facing slopes are often dominated by the moUntain brush type, while small swales with deeper soils and more favorable moisture conditions support dense stands of sagebrush and rabbitbrush. Grasses and perennial weeds form fairly dense understories on these more favorable sites (Riordan, 1956). Hot, dry, south-facing slopes contrast sharply with the north slopes and support sparse stands with more arid types of vegetation appearing. ~1ethods: Investigational Design Sampling was confined to a one-square mile area (Section 24, T18, R961.oI, of the 6th P.M.) considered representative, both vegetatively and geologically, of the surrounding area. All mountain mahogany communities on the section larger than O.OS-acre were mapped and classified according to the following site categories: (1) excellent, (2) good, (3) fair, . (4) poor, and (5) very poor. Site classification was carried out in the field as mapping progressed and was based on such observable plant responses as density, size, height, and general vigor of the mahogany plants. Following this, an estimate of the grossly visible site factors such as aspect, soil depth, parent soil material, slope position, and slope gradient was made for each mapped mahogany community. Only estimates were required during this phase of the study since the early site classifications were a mechanism to facilitate sampling across the full range of the variables being investigated. As the study progressed, frequent observations were made on the distributions of the data being collected following which efforts were directed at sampling "blank spaces" not previously sampled. �2/~·()· -122- After completion of mapping and site classification by communities, a randomly located O.Ol-acre circular plot was selected in each sampled community by making an enlarged sketch of the community and using a dot-grid system and a table of random numbers. This comprised the samplinr, unit and was the point at which the physical site and vegetative response were analyzed. Collection of Physical Site Factor ~nformation Field examination of the soil on each plot was by pit and in .accordance -with standard Soil Conservation SGrvicesoil-survey methods (Soil Survey Staff, 1951). The total depth of the soil solum (A and B horizons) was measured as well as the depth in inches to the bottom of each recognizable horizon. Parent soil material was'identified in each case. Within each soil horizon, structure, consistence, color, root distribution, permeability, and relative percentage of stoniness were examinedo Additional information, such as the percentage of soil surface occupied by boulders and rocks, mottling, depth to ground water, associated vegetation, rodent disturbance, presence of salt or alkali, and other pertinent information was recorded. Devi.at.Lon from standard methods was made in the case of surface stonin~ss. As used here the term includes all rocks and stones larger than three inches. in diameter plus any exposed bedrock that might have existed on the plot. A water infiltration rate determination after the method of Evanko (1950) was made on each plot prior to digging the soil pita This' method involves the use of a tin-can infiltrometer into which a measured amount of '1ater is poured and the time required for the water to enter the soil recorded. After several preliminary field trials, a two-pound coffee can with both ends removed was found most satisfactory. The following topographic features were also determined on each plot: aspect in degrees azimuth, slope gradient in percent, slope position as the percent of the distance from the bottom of the slope, land form, drainage, and elevation. A 500-gram bulk soil sample was taken from the A and B horizons of the soil profile on each plot for Labor-at.oryanalysis In the case of undifferentiated soils, a s~nple was.taken from the uppermost layer of the parent material. Standard analyses of pH, total soluble salts, phosphate, potash, lime, and organic matter were made by personnel of the Soils Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado (Appendix B)o Textures were determined by the writer using hydrometer methods (Bouyoucos, 1956)0 0 Collection of VegetativecInformation .once the physical factors of the site had been determined, it remained to find some measure of response to these factors by the mountain mahogany plants. After considering several possibilities, the weight of annual growth per unit of land area was chosen as the most reliable relative. index of the reaction of the plants to a particular site •. �-123- After cessation of annual growth, one of the mahogany plants on each O.Ol-acre plot was selected randomly for clipping and weighing (air-dry) of all annual th~g growth. Als~the crown diameter of all the mahogany plants on the plot was measured. The clipped plants formed a sample of all the mahogany plants occurring in the plots. A regression of dry weight on crown diameter was then constructed for all clipped plants (Fig. 1). Annual production was then estimated by regression for each mahogany plant within a plot since each had a measured cro~~ diameter. These figures, summed for the plot and converted to pounds per acre, represented an index of the response of the mountain mahogany to the site in question. The regression of annual growth on crown diameter, shown in Figure 1 as a log plot, was parabolic in form and showed a fairly high degree of statistical significance (correlation index of 0.84). The equation of the curve, fitted by the method of least squares, was l?g Y • 1024926 + 1.65607 log X where Y is an estimate of the air-dry weight of annual growth in grams for a mahogany plant having a crown diameter of X feet. The Y-intercept is also in logarithmic units. By measuring the crown diameter and substituting the logarithm of its value for log X in the equation, the air-dry weight of annual twig growth may be computed. The technique of using a crown diameter measurement to predict the more difficult measure of annual twig gr-owth was suggested from the work of Kittredge (1945) who fou::lda sinuiar relationship for Ceanothu8 crassifolius and Arctostaphylos glandulosc:.., 'two chaparral shrub species in California. Results: Soils Soils of the area are young and lithosolic. This is a group of miscellaneous intrazonal and azonal soils varying greatly in character and degree of soil development, nature and depth of soil and soil material, and in such external factors as stoniness, relief, and drainage. Generally, the soils of the study area reflect the influence of the local factor of relief and are shallow, rocky, and vuthout distinct B horizonse On more favorable sites profiles are better developed and reflect the influence of the active factors of soil formation -- climate a.nd vegetation. Development has taken place from the irregularly bedded sandstones and shales of the Green River formation •. The thickness of surface horizons varies considerably from site to site. The A horizon is usually less than three inches deep on poorer sites, but may be up to 10 inches or more on very good sites. A few highly eroded sites lack surface horizons entirely. Coarse textures are characteristic of soils developed from sandstones and sandy shales. All surface soils in the study area are loams, varying from sandy loams to silty clay loarns. The soils developed from shale have higher silt and clay percentages than those developed from sandstone. The mean clay content for shale surface soils is 19.0 percent, while sandstone derived surface soils average 16.3 percent clay. �-124- 1000 800 f-- 600 f-500 f-400 l- I I I j_ I I I I 1J I I I I I I IL I I I I log y= 1.24926+1.65607 log X Correlation Index: .64 Standard Error of Estimate= 36.72 gr. I•...•_j_ 300 .•. I- V t! Ie. 200 •~ ~~ ~ ci 100 -.. (.!) I 80 t-= 60 - Jl"!! 50 0: Q 40 z 30 >- Q ~,,.., • •• 3 4 ~ ~. • - I_- ,_- 20 I !! II • 0 0: A. ~ r _. 4: :::> 10 4: 8 z z • ~ O :::> .,. 1.-. •• ,.•..-, _[~t.~ t- Q r. ~. I~ ...ts~ •• ~- • •• I)':. ~ v ~J ~ • I •• I V· 6 5 V 4 J L 3 V It 2 I I 'I J .I .2 .3 .4.5.6.7.6.91 CROWN Figo 1. 01AMETER - 2 5 676910 FT. Relation between air-dry annual production and crown diameter of Cercocarpus montanus. �Zr',,) .' -125- A weak granular to crumb structure is common to the A horizons throughout the area. On the few plots having a B horizon, a weak subangular blocky structure is evident. The pH values seem to be representative of most uncultivated soils in the region, varying from nearly neutral to a pH of 8.4.. Soluble salts are consistently low and do not present a problem as far as plant growth is concerned. Organic matter content is somewhat higher than one would expect for semi-desert conditions, averaging about 3.9 percent for sandstones and 4.5 percent for shales. Only the rather shallow A horizons, however, are included in these percentages. The lime percentage is, on the average, unusually high, running from one percent to over 40 percent. Phosphate levels are varied, running from a very low to an average amount. Potash is consistently low. Site Factors Considered Individually A difference in production was found on the two parent soil materials sampled during the study. The 69 sandstone sites that were sampled had an average annual production of 169.1 pounds per acre. Shale sites, with a sample size of 56, produced an average of 1.34.3 pounds per acre. This difference, significant at the 0.05 level, necessitated separate handling of the data for each parent material. Statistical interpretation was accomplished in three parts. First, individual linear regressions were computed for each site variable against annual production. Secondly, intercorrelations among the variables were computed. Thirdly, linear multiple regression analyses were used combining all the variables. The following independent variables were involved: - depth of the A plus B horizon in inches. clay content, A horizon, in percent. s surface stoniness (stones three inches or more in diameter plus exposed bedrock) in percent. - aspect, as the sine of the angle from southeast plus one •• 3 X6 X7 Xs X9 XIO Xu Xl2 • slope position, as the distance from the bottom of the slope ih percent. • organic matter, A horizon, in percent. • phosphate (P205)' A horizon, in p.p.m. • lime (CaCO), A horizon, in percent. • infiltration rate in inches per hour. • reaction, A horizon, as pH. • slope gradient in percent. - potash (KLO), A horizon, in p.p.m. ::"".".., .... "" �-126- The dependent variable "lOY"is the annual twig growth of mountain mahogany in pounds per acre. Fach dependent observation was divided by 10 for ease of calculation. Individual regression analyses, including the interactions amen g tLa independent variables, are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. As might be expected from an environmental analysis, many of the variables are interacting. Only those reaching a 0.05 level of significance are shown. The primary purpose of calculating the individual regressions and Lnt.er actd.one in a study of this sort is the interpretive aid they can offer. For instance, it doesn't seem reasonable, in looking at phosphate alone, that it would show a negative correlation with annua.L production. Observing the interactions, it can be seen that phosphate is correlated with soil depth, which indi vidually at least, is 8. key variable influencing production in a positive direction. Phosphate in the A horizon decreases with increasing soil depth, thus, explaining why phosphate considered alone shows q negative relationship. The extreme values listed in Tables 1 and 2 indicate the ranges of the independent variables included in the analysis. It is in itself remarkable that such ranges exist on the small area sampled -- one-square mile. Of greater sa.grrif'Lcance , perhaps J is that wide ranges wi thin a variable provide a better basis for regression analysis. Interpretive information is also available from the mean values of the variables. In explaining the difference in production between sandstone and shale parent material one might look at the difference in soil depth. Sandstones, having a greater soil depth, should produce better. Looking more closely, however, one might notice that the shale sites sampled had a higher average slope position and a greater distribution of plots toward the southwest aspect, both detrimental to increased productiono Do sandstone sites truly produce more mahogany than shale sites? Or is the difference explainable in terms of the sampling distribution'of plots? Probably the only conclusion that can be reached here is that under the conditions of the sample taken there was a significant difference in production on the two parent materials at the level of confidence chosen (95%). It is entirely possible, of course, that the same relation might not be f'ound l-Ji th another sample or another section (see Appendix A for the distribution of parent materials on the study area). Site Factors Consigered Collectively To assess the relative importance of the site factors as they influence annual growth, multiple regression analyses were used. Indi~dual analyses, important as background material, do not ad.equately serve because of the large number of interactions existingo Hultiple regression techniques have the advantage of isolating the effects of anyone variable while holding the others con.stant. The linear model used here is one of fixed X (Snedecor, 1956). �Table 1.--Sm1HARY OF RECrRESSION ANALYSES, ANI'nJAL P~ODUCTIOH OF EOill'ITAIN l:A..iOGANY (y) ON SITE IliIlIVIDUltLLY (X), SANDSTONE PARK'JT r1.ATERIAL. N •• 69. Independent Factor XlI depth A + B horizon (inches) X2' clay content, A horizon (%) Xj, surfact stoniness C%) X4' aspect (sine of angle from S.E. + 1) X5' slope position (%) X6, organic matter, A horizon (%) X7, phosphate, A horizon (p.p.m.) X8, lL~e, A horizon (%) X9, infiltration rate (in./hr.) K10' reaction, A nor-Lzon (pH) Xll, slope gradient (%) X12, potash, A.horizon (p.p.m.) -:H" Factor Hean Factor Extremes 3.69 16.30 11.74 0.0-16.5 3.6-37.6 0-60 0.8314 47.60 J.9l 12.84 14.53 19.30 7.99 32046 55.60 0.0IJ06-1.9998 4-100 1.1-709 4.0-3400 0.8-38.1 500-48.0 7.1-8.4 5-73 35-95 FACTORS ::;O,I)SIDERill Coefficient of Correlation Significant Independent Factor :nteractions 0.75JIHl0.578** -0 .498-:H~ X2' X3, X4' X5' X6, X7 Xv X3, X4, X6 Xl, X2, X4, X6, Xl0, Xli o 5°7>'" -00339"H~ 0.397,,* -0.313-;"<';1-0.037 Xl, X2, X3' X6, Xl0 Xl Xl, X2, X3J X4, X10 Xl X10 -0.247* -0.234 -O~145 00022 X3, X4' X6' 'X8 X3 ••• • '- I<'"i\" I f-' N --J I Significant at theO.Ol level. * Significant at the 0.05 levelo 4\) '.~" ::'1, ;",., �·i~ , :~; y~ Table 2o--SUl1HARY OF REGRESSION ANALYSES, ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF MOUNTAIN :tvrAHOGANY(y) ON SITKFACTORS INDIVIDUALLY (X), SHALE PARENT HATERIAL. N • 56. Independent Factor Factor Mean Factor Extremes Coefficient of Correlation CONSIDERED Significant Indepedent Factor Interactions Xl, depth A + B horizon (inches) X2, clay content, A horizon (%) X3' surface stoniness (%> X4' aspect (sine of angle from S.E. + 1) X5, slope position C%) X6' organic matter, A horizon (%) 3.02 19.00 10.73 0.0-17.0 5.2-34.8 0-55 0.709*';0.089 -O.452?t-)} X3, X4, X5, X6, X7 X7, X8, XIO, Xll Xl, X4, X6, X8, X9, XIO,Xll 1.2014 61.23 4.53 0.00244-1.9998 10-100 106-10.4 -0.435-r'n~ -0.122 0.346 X7' phosphate, A horizon (pp~) XS, lime, A horizon (%) X9, infiltration rate (ino/hr.) X10, reaction, A horizon (pH) XII' slope gradient C%) X12, potash, A horizon (p.p.mo) 16023 22.95 20.84 8.01 28.30 59026 3.°-3600 100-42.6 7.0-60.0 7.5-3.3 3-59 40-130 -0.129 -0.160 -0.228 -O.392~~k 0.039 -0.125 Xv X3 Xl Xl' X3' X10 Xl' X2, KIO X2, X3' XlO X3 X2, X3, X6, X7' Xs X2' X3 f'& Significant at the 0 01 levelo 0 I I-' I\) 00 I �-129- y •• b o • e Where the bls are parameters to be estima,ted and the e are independent 2 normally distributed random variables with mean zero and common vat-Lance r. Procedures used in solving the equation were after Quenouille (1952). In this method the relative importance or contribution of a particular independent variable is evaluated by the amount of total sum squares of Y accounted for by that variable at each step in the solution. Two solutions of the regression equa.tion, using different paths of entry, vlere ma.de including all twelve of the independent variables selected for study. In both solutions the following; var-i.ab Les wer e found to be only weakly contributing to the total variation in growth on sandstone derived soils: X5 - slope position; X6 --organic matter; X9 - inf:i:ltration rate; XIO - pH; and X12 - potash. Tbost contributing only hfeakly on shale derived soils were: X7 - phosphate; X9 - infiltrabon rate; XIO - pH; Xll infiltration rate; and X.12 - potash. The remaining variables, those showing some degree of importance, wer-e selected for further ana Lysf.s , Results are presented in Table 3. The seven variables shown are those having the ·greatest influence among the twelve original variables selected for ana.lysis. An indication of the relative importance or ranking 0:1' eHch variable can be seen in the column headed "sum of squares accounted .Dor by each factoro" Each number in the column is the portion of the total sum of squares of Y accounted for by a.particular variable after the effects of the previous variables have been discounted. An over-all test of the significance of the t.woseven-variable regression equations is shown in Tables 4 and 5. Both regressions are highly significant. Discussion: The significant fa.ctors influencing the annual growth of mountain mahogany are indicated in the analysis shown in Table 3. Soil depth and surface stoniness are significant in both parent ma+.er-i.a.Ls , while the clay content of the A horizon is significant in sandstoneo The relative lack of importance of clay in shale can be explained from the nature of the parent material. Shale is composed of compacted beds of mud or clay, the finest products of rock decay. Soils formed from such a material would be higher in clay and silt sized particles than soils developed from sandstone. As a result, the clay content of the shale derived soils of the area appears high enough to prevent it from being an importa.nt limiting factor. Soil depth and the percent of clay present profoID1dly affect the amount of moisture available to plants during the growi.ng season, The greater the depth of soil, and th·e finer the soil texture, at least in the yOU1'1gsoils investif,ated, the greater the vrater-holding capacity. Since soil moisture is the most critical element for plant growth in most areas in the l'lest,it is not surprising that those factors influencing �-130- Table 3..--Rl::LATIVE CO'.J':.'RIBUTIUN OF SEVE!') SITE FACTOES TO VAiUATIOtllS IN A2JNUAL , PRUDUCTION OF HOUllTA:~H i'1AHOGANYAS E:3TIHATED BY LIl~EAR MULTIPL1 REGRESSION MALYSliJ. P~rtial Regression Coefficients Standard Errors Inde_EendentFactor Sandstone .ParentNaterial. N '"69. ,Xl" depth A + B horizon bl 1.2)7)6 sbl .286)1 X2 '"clay content ~ A horizon b2 .h5658 sb2 •. 13b,:n X) ""surface stoniness b) -.07608 sb3 .,03822 Xs •.•liT1le~ A horizon b8 -.06527 sb8 .07055 X7 '"phosphat e, A h or-Lz cn b7 .122h3 sb7 012561 Xh ••aspect bL. -.088h2 sth 1.2126 XU ••slope gradient bU -.07492 sbU .. 04241 Total sum of squares accounted for by regression Total s wn of squares of Y • • • • • • • • • • • Constant - 7.64 Shale Parent ~1aterial. N,. 56. Xl a depth A + B horizon X3 - surface stoniness X6 = organic matter, A horizon Xh ••aspect X8 ••lime~ A horizon Xs • slope position -)..'-;"!- - 8062 bl b2 b6 bh bS 1.4263h -.070h7 .,3h31h -006322 -.03014 bS R Significant at the 0.01 level .. * Significant at the O.OS levelo 2266. 7~H< 62S .. 9~H~ 117 .. 9* SO,,8 40.,8 21.2 3132.6 4931,,0 R '" .. SO sb1 sb3 sb6 sb4 sb8 023182 ,,02795 .29S91 .98839 .06S72 -.01183 sbS ,,01977 X 2= clay cuntent, A horizon b2 .06191 sb2 010689 Total sum of squares accounted for by regression Total sum of squares of Y • • • • • • • • • • • Constant Sum of Squares Accounted for by Each Factor ·.77 95)oS~H~ 99 0-* 18 •• 3 lSoS 13.3 0 8 .•5 3.6 1111.7 189601 �-131- Table 4.--flJJALYSISOF VARIAlIJ'CE FOR REGRESSION. SANDSTONE PARENT MATE..::tIAL. Degrees of Freedom Sum of Squares Total 68 4931.0 Regression 6 313206 Deviations 62 1798.4 Source of Variation F • 522.1/29.0 - 18.0 Table 5.--ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR REGRESSION. Degrees of Freedom Source of Variation Mean Square P ~ 0 01 0 SHALE PARENT MATERIAL Sum of Squares 0 Mean Square Total 55 189601 Regression 6 111107 18503 Deviations 49 784.4 1600 F :II 185.)/16.0 - 11.6 �nt:;:c~-. .<:' "~:., -132- soil moisture should rank highest on a relative scale. Figures 2, 3, and the relationships betoreen the two variables, soil depth and clay content of the A horizon, and the annual production of mountain mahoeany. 4 show graphically Aspect and slope position, seemingly important from an individual standpoint, dropped out of the picture ~men combined analyses techniques were used. The influence of these two topographic factors is confounded with and reflected in the more direct factors of the soil. It must be remembered, also, that even such soil properties as depth and texture are of a secondary nature and have little or no direct effects of their own. These factors are related to plant response through association with the primary factors of water, oxygen, and nutrients (Black, 1957). The strong negative influence of surface stoniness is probably. a function of the reduced space available for eatablishment and growth. It is a characteristic of mountain mahogany that it can become established and produce, to a certain degree, in extreme situations of stoninesso In no case, however, was it found that good stands were associa.ted with excessive stoniness. The poorest producing sites encountered during the stud.y were those having exceptional amounts of rocks and stones covering the soil surface. Although little studied, it is possible that moisture relationships may be involved here also. The pavement-like arrangement of the surface stones, caused by erosion processes, contributes to a rapid water runoff during the sudden rain showers characteristic of the area. None of the soil nutrients investigated contribut.ed significantly to annual productiono Lime, phosphate, and organic matter show a certain degree of importance, potash practically none. Generally, the nutrient content of the soil in the area studied appears sufficient for the requirements of mountain mahogany. Lime, although high, does not appear to be in excessa �2?::-'1··· . • \:::l', -133- 2 '0.... ...• .••• / ..• . I I en m 300 1/ I _J / I w .••• , ........;-9 / <, I .•.•. I ~ I I 7/ 0: ~25 0: w Q. Z o .-200 u :::> o o 0: Q. gl5 z z <{ 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 DEPTH A+ B HORIZON - INCHES . Fig. 2. . Relation between weight of a~ual production and depth of the A + B horizon, sandstone parent material. Plotted points are the weighted averages for two-inch depth intervals. "."., .• �-134- 400 350 uj m300 / ...J /0 I / I / / w / a:: / (.) <[ / / a::250 / w Q. :z 0 tU ::> 200 0 0 a:: Q.. ...J <[ ::> :z 150 :z <[ u, 0 t- J: (!) w 100 /'9 ~ 50 O~ __~ ~ __-L__~~ o 4 2 6 DEPTH Fig. 3. 8 __~ 10 ~ __~ ~ __~ __~ 12 16 A + B HORIZON - 14 18 20 INCHES Relation between weight of annual production and depth of the A + B horizon, shale parent material. Plotted points are the weighted averages for two-inch depth intervals. �-135- 400 2 o 350 I" , I , I I I u) I ~30 , , , , I , I I l1J 0: I I U \ ct \ 0:250 l1J ,9-., , Q. z· ,,, ,, I o t- g200 o o , o 7 I " I I 0: _. Q. « ~ 150 z « u, o t- ~ 100 l1J 3= 50 CLAY • A HORIZON - 0/0 Fig. U.--Relation between weight of annual production and percent clay in the A horizon, sandstone parent material. Plotted points are the weighted averages for four-percent clay intervals. �. .2'-1 . , -~)L:l. -136APPENDIX A TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY OF SECTION 24, TIS, R96W SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN RIO LEGEND 0 SANDSTONE ~ SHALE E5]. ALLUVIUM ® ------ SAMPLE N f PLOT UNIMPROVED BLANCO COUNTY, COLORADO 15f SCALE: 6"= I MILE DIRT ROAD STREAM INTERMITTENT -vv DAM STEAM CONTOUR INTERVAL: 100' �~.p.pE=#Ih)( B COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation Service) GROWER Dean Medin Little Hills Experiment Station ADDRESS Meeker, Colorado - Lab. 9 589 9 590 9 591 9 592 9 593 9 594 9 595 9 596 9 597 598 9 599 9 600 9 601 - , (HILL BILL) COUNTY AGENT ltlilliamS ~ Ball ANALYST Mel Roebecker --.-~- Field or Grower's No. Plot 1 Al 2 A1 3 Al 4 A1 5 A1 6 A1 7 Al 8 A1 8 B2 9 A1 10 Al 11 Al 12 A1 Location Rio Blanco Depth 0- 1/, 0- 1 0- 5 0- 1 0- 3 0- 4 1/2 0- 4 1,2 0- 6 6-10 1/2 0•.•3 1,2 ,0-21/2 0- 2 0- 1 1,2 pH l:S pH Paste % % % Organic Matter Lime (1) Soluble Salts (2) 8.2 804 8.1 8.2 800 800 81 8.1 8.:? 8.0 702 8.0 8.2 .02 .02 '.02 .07 .05 .05 .08 .10 .08 .02 .05 .07 .02 5.4 1.4 3.0 3.1 6.9 5.5 4.5 500 2.3 10.4 5.0 2.3 1.8 0 6.2 16.2 ! 4.9 '39.2 6.4 5.8 17.2 , 16.6 23.4 27.0 1.3 3.3 29.0 Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P2OS) (K~O) (3) () 52 40 ~6 36 18 25 9 13 6 57 25 28 13 162 110 100 135 100 100 110 110 100 122 110 100 100 Soil Texture Sandy 10 Sandy 10, Sandy 10, Silty c1 loam Loam Loam Silt loa Loam Loam I I-' W Silt loa Sandy 10 am Sandy 10 m Silt loa t - (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is aCid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.S is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20S) - An analysis of 2S or below is very deficient, 26 to SO deficient, and above SO may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops cri tically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - ISO-160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between irisufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, P20S and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammordum ni trate or 122 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. «t"~ ',.It , ;jT �N ion APYE¥~~ B :\:fJ COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation Service) (~fILLBILL) GROWER Dean Medin Little Hills Kxperiment Station Meeker, Colorado ADDRESS ---- Lab. COUNTY AGENT ~iilliamS. Ball ANALYST Mel Roebeckvr ------------ Field or Grower's No. Location Depth pH l:S (1) pH Paste % Soluble Salts (2 ) % % Organic Matter Lime Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Potassium Phosphate (P2OS) (~O) (3) () Soil Texture Plot 8,,2 Silt loa 2.8 Rio Blanco 0- 3 29.1 14 .07 9602 13 A1 95 100 Sandy 10 am .02 2.0 0-11 14 Cl 8.3 13 9603 3.7 110 Loam 002 22.4 30 9604 15 A1 0- 4 709 3.4 110 Loam .02 18.9 16 A1 8.1 5.2 38 01 1/~ 9605 110 Loam .02 17 A1 8.1 3.0 9606 0- 1 1/~ 17.4 32 Silty cl y loam 6.2 190 18 A1 8.1 23.8 0- 2 .09 30 9607 8,,0 110 Silt loa .08 19 Al 4.8 1107 9608 0- 2 1/~ 57 ,,08 17,,9 28 122 Loam 20 Al 8.1 5.8 0- 4 1/, 9609 .08 8 110 Loam 21 Al 6.9 7.8 4.6 9610 0- 4 I f-' ,,08 Loarn 10.1 8.1 9611 21 A3 3.7 4- 16 ~/2 v.> 00 0.8 Loam 22 A1 7.1 .05 6~9 9612 0- 4 1/ I 2~ 14 110 Loam .07 7.6 23 A1 7.7 13~3 9613 0- 4 11l ,,02 1).1. 110 Loam 8.1 4.0 23.4 24 A1 9614 0- 3 .10 Sandy Ie m 500 7.1 73 260 0- 1 7.8 25 A1 9615 (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.S is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20S) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to SO deficient, and above SO may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - 150-160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. I i~~ -------- -- --- ----- ------ ------- Recommendations for the use of con~ercial fertilizers are given in points of N, P20S and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammor.iumnitrate or 122 Ibs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 Ibs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. �~PP~~~/K8 COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation Service) (\lILL BILL) GROWER Dean Medin Little Hills Experiment Station ADDRESS Meeker, Colorado Lab. Field or Grower's No. Location Depth COUNTY .AGENT Hilljam So RaJJ ANALYST pH 1:5 (1). pH Paste % % % Soluble Salts' (2) Organic Matter Lime Mel Roebecker Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P205) (aO) () (3) Soil Texture Plot Loam .02 2~8 1.2 Rio Blanco 0- 2 1/ 25 26 Al 7.2 ,95 9616 Loam 1.4 ~05 3.2 36 95 27 A1 9617 0- 4 7.3 Loam 110 '002 20.5 23 28 Al 5.1 9618 7.9 0- 3 20 Loam 11.6 8.1 0- 2 1/; .05 95 29 Al 3.7 9619 Loam .02 8.0 9.0 4.0 13 9620 30 Al 0- 2 95 Loam 2502 02 801 .05 401 30 95 9621 31 Al Loam 8.0 40 3.8 . 1303 •05 0- 1 95 9622 32 Al 80 Loam 0•.• 3 1/; 8.0 .05 25 304 403 9623 33 A1 110 Sandy loam .02 8~2 2.9 8.5 30 0- 2 9624 34 Al 21 Loam 8.1 .07 6.3 02 1/; 401 95 9625 35 Al 18.6 16 Loam 8.1 ~07 0- 2 1/ 3.7 95 9626 36 Al 20 Sandy loam .02 203 06 3.8 95 7~9 9627 37 Cl 18.0 Loam .02 40 8.2 205 01 95 38 Al 9628 12.0 16 110 Loam .02 5.1 05 1/; 39 Al 709 9629 (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.5 is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P205) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - 150-160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Reconunendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, P205 and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammonium nitrate or 122 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. I I-' VJ -.0 I ~2 .~~ ,.• ,j �N Jl B APPGIV.PI){ COOPERATIVE (Extension GROWER ADDRESS Dean Medin Little Hills Experiment Meeker, Colorado Service, SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation en Service) (~ITLL BILL) COUNTY AGENT .\v.illiamS. Ball Station ANALYST Nel Roebecker ---- Lab. Field or Grower's No. Location Depth pH l:S (1) 9630 9631 9632. 9633 9634 9635 9636 9637 9638 9639 9640 9641 9642 9643 Plot 40 Al 41 Al 42 Al 43 1\1 44 Al 45 C1 46 Al 47 Al 4S Al 49 Al 50 Al 51 Cl 52 Al 53 Al Rio Blancc 0- 3 1/ 0- 4 0- 3 1/ 0- 2 II' 0- 1 1/ 0- l.1/ 0- 4 0- 2 0- 2 0- 1 0- 2 1/ 0- 4 1/ 0- 5 l/D 0- 2 8.1 8.2 8.1 8.1 8.2 . 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.0 7.5 pH Paste % Soluble Salts % Organic Matter % Lime (3) (2 ) .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 002 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P20S) . (aO) 4.7 2.4 4.5 3.G 4.3 1.1 3.6 h.4 309 3.3 3.4 2.0 7.1 5.6 27.1 28.3 24.4 21.2 35.2 22.0 25.2 27.6 41.8 24.9 31.4 27.0 2·g.8 1.5 16 14 23 .'38 20 16 25 30 34 20 6 18 16 34 . Soil Texture ( ) 95 95 95 95 122 110 122 135 150 122 135 110 122 190 Loam Loam Loam Silt loam Silt loam Sandy loa m Loam Loam Silt loam Silt loam Loam Loam Silt Lear Loam (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.S is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20S) - An analysis of 2S or below is very deficient, 26 to SO deficient, and above SO may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - lSO-160 lba. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, PZOS and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 3.00 pounds of ammord.um nitrate or 122 Ibs. of anhydrous ammonia, or SOO lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. , I-' p... o I �~P~;#~/K B COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State U~iversity (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation Service) (WILL BILL) GROWER Dean Hedin Little Hills Experiment Station ADDRESS Meeker, Colorado COUNTY AGENT HilHam ANALYST S. Ball He1 Roebecker ~- Field or Grower's No. Lab. Location Depth pH l:S (1) Plot ~54 C 55 A1 56 A1 57 Al 58 Al 59 A1 60 A1 61 A.l 62 A1 63 Al 9644 9645 9646 9647 9648 9649 9650 9651 9652 9653 9654 9655 9656 9657 ---------- 64 Al 64 B2 65 A1 65 B1 - - ---- -- pH Paste % % % Soluble Salts (2) Organic Matter Lime Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P2OS) (~O) (3) ( ) 14 30 47 28 30 21 21 110 122 150 122 110 Soil Texture H.~oBlanco 0-13 0- 4 0- 1 1/ 0- 3 1/ 9- 1 1/ 0- 1 0- 4 1/ 0- 1 0- 1 1/ 0- 5 0- 4 1/ .u 1/2- 9 0- 7 1/ 7 1/2-17 8.3 8.0 7.9 7.9 8.2 8.2 7.8 8.2 8.2 8.1 7.7 7.9 7.2 7.3 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .05 007 .08 .05 007 . 2.4 42.6 5.0 703 31.8 5.7 18.1 7.5 2.9 33.3 2.9 36.8 13.2 5.4 2.5 . 11.2 21.4 2.3 18.2 3.3 2.9 5.9 7.9 3.9 3.2 1.5 0.6 1.S SO 38 14 21 11 23 13 no Silty c1 - loam Loam Loam Silt loa Loam Silt loa Loam Loam Sandy 10 am I f-I Loam 110 122 135 110 Loam 135 110 Loam Loam 95 Loam 95 pH value over 8.5 is t:; I (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P205) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequat? phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium _.150-160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, PZOS and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammordum nitrate or 122 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia, or SOO lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. ~\) .n ~1J �~~PGNP/X N ,J';! B '.,,;> COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation GROWER ADDRESS Lab. Dean Medin Little Hills Exper~ent Meeker, Colorado Field or Grower's No. Plot 9666 9667 9668 65 B2 65 '83 66 Al 67 Al 68 Al 69 Al 70 Al 71 Al 72 Al 73 Al 74 ],1 9669 75 Al 9670 9671 76 AI. 9658 9659 9660 9661 9662 9663 9664 9665 I Location Depth pH 1:5 I Paste pH I Soiuble " (1) I I William S. Ball ANALYST rIel Roebecker % Organic Matter % Lime 1.3 5.2 7.3 9.2 3.8 (2 ) Rio Blanco 17-34 34-56 0- 5 0- 3 0- 3 0-10 1/ 0- 5 0- 4 1/ 0- 1 1/ 0- 1 1/ 7.7 8.2 8.0 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9 .07 .07 .05 LO 0.6 002 8••0 .3 1 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .05 3.2 2.5 5.1 603 5.5 h.3 5.1 h.4 5.1 2.9 7,1 0 8.C 0- 6 1/~ 8.1 7.8 0- 6 1/ 0- 2 1/ 7.4 7.8 0- 4 1/ 002 .02 .05 5.8 \\'ITLLBILL) COUNTY AGENT Station Salts 77 Al Service) ..., c:' (./ ~07 0.8 935 6.8 2.8 2.4 08 D6.6 0 Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P2Os) (~O) () (3) n 11 45 68 20 20 23 26 h2 36 16 lL. 28 21 95 9.5 no 110 no 110 110 110 110 110 no 9.5' 95 135 I Soil Texture Silt loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam ,_.I Loam ~ N Clay Loam I Clay loarr.. Loam. Loam (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.5 is usually detrimental to plant growth. . (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20s) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium ~lsO~160 lba represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. t Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, PZ05 and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammor.ium nitrate or 122 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. �,41Jf7~/l/O/X 0 COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation Service) GROWER Dean Medin Little Hills Experiment Station ADDRESS Meeker, Colorado (',fILL BILL) COUNTY AGENT Hi.•.. l .•.. 1.•• ia"",mu..' -1b",-' ..._._.JB....,a"..l._l.....__ _ ANALYST Hel Roebecker ---------------- Lab. Field or Grower's No. Location Depth pH 1:5 (1) 9672 9673 9674 9675 9676 9677 9678 9679 9680 9681 9682 9683 9684 Plot 77 A3 78 Al 79 Al BO A1 Bl A1 82 A1 83 A1 84 A1 B5 A1 86 A1 87 A1 88 A1 89 A1 pH Paste % %_ % Soluble Salts (2) Organic Matter Lime Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P2OS) (K~O) ( ) (3) Soil Texture Rio Blanco 4 1/2-11 0- 2 0- 2 1/2 0- 4 1/2 0- 1 1/2 0- 2 1/2 0- 7 0- 4 0- 3 1/2 0- 2 1/2 O. 1 1/2 0..2 0-10 B.l 8.3 801 704 B.l 801 801 8.1 802 7.8 8.0 70S B.2 .07 02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .05 .02 .02 .05 .02 .02 0 .05 3.6 IS07 2.2 14~2 28.7 3.3 1.8 3.7 1.6 1304 3.2 33.0 4.9 , 13.5 19.8 7.9 1807 3.1 10.5 4.7 2.6 3.6 1.0 4.9 15.0 3.4 9 25 23 32 38 21 16 28 34 38 57 SO 11 110 95 162 70 95 110 110 175 95 95 BO 122 95 Clay loam Loam Clay loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam I I-' +"\.>J I -- (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is aCid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.5 is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20S) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - l50~160 lba. represents usually what is consid~red the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, PZOS and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammor.Lum nitrate or 122 Lbs , of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. (\) ')' ',.ii', ' �A~~RP~/~-g ~~ Jr";} COOPERATIVE (Extension GROWER ADDRESS Lab. 9685 9686, 9687 9688 9689 9690 9691 9692 9693 9694 9695 9696 9697 9698 SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation :>;__") Dean Hedin Little Hills Experiment Station Meeker, Colorado Field or Grower's No. Plot 89 B2 90 Al 91 Al 92 Al 93 Al 94 Al 95 Al 96 Al 97 Al 98 Al 9~ Al 100 Al 101 C1 102 Al Location Rl0 Depth .ljlancc 10-15 l/p 0- 2 0- 3 liP 0- 2 0- 1 liP 0- 1 1/2 0- 1 0- 2 0- 3 1/2 0- 2 0- 1 1/2 0- 5 0- j 1/Q 0- 2 1/2 pH 1:5 pH Paste % % Soluble· Organic Matter Salts (1) . (2 ) 8.3 8.2 7.6 8.1 8.1 8.0 8.2 7.7 709 7.8 8.2 7.8 8.2 802 .05 .02 .02 .05 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 002 .02 .02 .05 2.0 3.4 8.3 4.0 2.3 4.7 2.8 6.5 4.2 6.5 2.9 5.6 1.8 3.3 ..• ': '-" Service) (~{[LLBILL) COUNTY AGENT Hilliam S. Ball ANALYST Mel Roebecker % Lime 21.3 34.8 2.7 32.7 8.6 13.1 7.4 22.8 28.3 3007 35.3 5.8 6.7 30.2 Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Potassium Phosphate (P205) (~o) (3) () 11 45 40 25 55 42 47 57 26 38 26 9 34 21 95 95 204 135 110 110 95 175 110 122 122 95 95 110 Soil Texture Loam Silt loam Loam Silt loam Loam Loam Sandy loam Loam Loam Silty clay loam Silt loarr I Loam I-' Loam Clay Loan (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is aCid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.5 is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any trop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20S) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - 150-160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, P20S and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N cou Id be applied by using 300 pounds of ammordum nitrate or 122 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. /- t �111';' e=AI.o I x .B COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation Service) GROWER ADDRESS Lab. Dean Medin Little Hills Experiment Station Neeker, Colorado Field or Grower's No. Location Depth (\>JILL 31LL) COUNTY AGENT William S. Ball ANALYST pH 1:5 (1) pH Paste % % % Soluble Salts (2) Organic Matter Lime Nel Roebecker Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Potassium Phosphate (P2OS) (~O) () (3) Soil Texture Rio Blanco Plot Loam 110 26.2 26 .02 8.1 3.3 0- 2 1/2 103 Al 9699 Sandy 10 If. 20 2.0 4.2 95 .02 8.1 0- 1 104 Al 9700 Loam 150 30 .02 4.2 31.~.2 8.1 105 Al 0- 3 9701 122 Loam 4.5' 39.8 .02 8.1 0- 2 30 106 Al 9702 110 Loam 21 .02 3204 3.4 8.3 0- 2 1/2 107 Al 9703 9.-' ) Loam 6.4 30 4.2 8.0 .07 108 Al 0- 7 1/2 9704 110 Loam 13.1 36 8.0 .07 4.7 109 Al 0- 5 9705 Clay loa 1003 14 8.0 .07 95 3.7 0-10 1/2 110 Al 9706· 80 01ay loa 18 0 2 8 8.2 .07 1.5 10 1/2-28 110 B2 9707 I Loam 18 23.8 8.0 95 .05 3.7 I-' 111 Al 0- 7 1/2 9708 ~ Silt loa .02 95 5.5 25.9 45 7.9 \.J1 112 Al 0- 3 9709 80 Sandy 10 3J,1 I 11.2 .02 38 8.2 303 0- 5 113C 9710 Sandy 10 m 6.2 28 .02 1.9 8.1 95 0-7 114 01 9711 Loam 20.0 28 162 4.0 .07 7.9 0- 4 115 Al 9712 (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soi1--be10w 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.5 is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in.c1ay soils. (3) Phosphate (P20S) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate. phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium --.150~160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. ._- - --- Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, P20S and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 lbs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammohium nitrate or 122 1bs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. iI\J. '<,;.\ rlJ ~~. �N ,A-1'.J7l:lIIu/X :J>y.o~ B ;.~~.!ill' COOPERATIVE SOILS LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Colorado State University (Extension Service, Experiment Station, and Soil Conservation servtce) (WILL BILL) GROWER Dean Medin Little Hills Experiment Station ADDRESS Meeker, Colorado Lab. Field or Grower's No. Location COUNTY AGENT ltIi 1 J j am S. Ral] ANALYST pH 1:5 Depth (1) 9713 9714 9715 9716 9717 9718 9719 9720 9721 9722 9723 Plot 116 Al 117 Al 118 Al 119 Al 120 Al 121 Al 121 B2 122 Al 123 A1 124 Al 125 Al pH Paste % % % Soluble Salts (2) Organic Matter Lime .02 .02 007 .02 002 .10 .05 .07 .02 .02 .02 6.5 3.7 5.0 3.4 4.,2 3.2 2.1 3.9 4.7 3.7 3.4 3209 27.2 4.8 39.1 38.1 20.2 23.4 18.8 28.8 28.4 28.0 Mel Roebecker Lbs./A 6 in. Lbs./A 6 in. Phosphate Potassium (P205) .(~O) (3) () Soil Texture Rio Blancc 7.8 0- 5 0- 3 I/t2 8.1 0- 3 1/~ 708 0- 3 lit:> 708 . 0- 4 lit:> 709 0- 8 709 8.1 8- 17 0- 6 l/~ 7.9 8.0 0- 1 0:"2 l/~ 8.0 0- 2 l/~ 8.0 , _ _--------.. - -- ------------ 40 28 45 28 26 21 9 38 62 34 38 - - ----- 135 190 95 95 162 95 95 95 95 95 95 -- - - Silt loam Loam Silt loam Silty clay loam Loam Loam Clay loam Clay loam Loam I I-' Sandy loam Sandy loam ~ ------- (1) pH - Indicates acid or alkaline reaction in soil--below 7 is acid, above 7 alkaline. pH value over 8.5 is usually detrimental to plant growth. (2) Soluble Salt Percentage - 0.20 or over will adversely affect plant growth. This effect will be more damaging at a given salt percentage for salt-sensitive crops and in sandy soils for all crops, and less damaging to salt-tolerant crops and for any crop in clay soils. (3) Phosphate. (P20S) - An analysis of 25 or below is very deficient, 26 to 50 deficient, and above 50 may be adequate for moderate yields of most crops. Phosphate fertilizer will often be recommended when the phosphate level is over 50, particularly where large amounts of nitrogen are being used for high yields and for crops critically needing adequate phosphate fertilizer. (4) Potassium - 150-160 lbs. represents usually what is considered the dividing line between insufficient and sufficient potash for good production. Recommendations for the use of commercial fertilizers are given in points of N, .P205 and K20 per acre, not in pounds of the fertilizer carrier. For example, 100 Ibs. of N could be applied by using 300 pounds of ammor~ium nitrate or 122 lbs. of anhydrous ammonia, or 500 lbs. of ammonium sulfate or appropriate amounts of other carriers including mixed fertilizers. �-147- Literature Cited Black, C. A. 1957. Soil-plant relationships. Sons, Inc. 332 pp. New York: John Wiley and Bouyoucos, G. J. 1936. Directions for making mechanical analyses of soils by the hydrometer method. Soil Science 42:225-229. Bradley, W. H. 1931. Origin and microfossils of the oil shale of the Green River formation. U. S. G. S. Prof. Paper 168. 58 ppo Coile, T. S. 1948. Relation of soil characteristics to site index'of loblolly and shortleaf pines in the LOwer Piedmont Region of North Carolina. Duke Univo School Foro Bull. 13. Daubenmire, R. F. 1943. Vegetational Bot. Rev. 9:326-393. zonation in the Rocky Mountains. Doolittle, 1>1.T. 1957. Site index of scarlet and black oak in relation to southern Appalachian soil and topography. Forest Science 3:114-124. Evanko, A. B •. 1950. A tin can infiltrometer with improvised baffle. Northern Rocky Mto For. and Range Exp. Sta. Research Note No. 760 3 pp. Garrison, G. A~ 1952. Fluctuations in production of some important eastern Oregon and Washington shrubs. Jouro Range Mgto 6:117*121. Hull, A. C. and C. H. Doran. 1950. Preliminary guide to reseeding pinion-juniper lands of western Colorado. Rocky Mt. Foro and Range Expo StaG Station Paper Noo 4. 16 ppo Kittredge, Joseph. 1945. Some quantitative relations of foliage in the chaparral. Ecology 26:70-730 Lemmon, P. E. 1955. Factors affecting productivity of some lands in the 1r.!ilIamette Basin of Oregon for Dou,glas-fir timber. Jour. Forestry 53:323-3300 Quenoui11e, M. H. 1952. Associated measurements. London: Butterworth. Riordan, L. E. 19560 Selectivity and utilization of three key species of range forage by cattle, sheep, and deer in western Colorado. M. S. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Schultz, A. M~H. H. Biswell, and J. Vlamis. 19580 Responses of brush seedlings to fertilizers. Calif. Fish and Game 44:335-3480 242 pp. 196 pp. �-148- Soil Survey Staff. 1951. Soil Survey l1anual. U', So Dept. Agr. Handbook 18. 503 pp. Stone, E. L. 19570 The contribution of ecology to wildland soil management 0 Ecology, 38:57-59. Snedecor, G. H 1956. Statistical Methods. Press, Ames, Iowa. 534 pp. 0 The Lowa State College U. S. D. A. Yearbook of Agriculture. 1938. Soils and meno Do C.: Gov. Printing Office. 1232 pp. Washington Weaver, J. E. 1924. Plant production as a measure of environmento Ecology 12:205-237. Prepared by: Dean E. Medin Date: ~A~p~r~il~!~1~9~5~9~ Approved by: _ Jour. Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �CcJ9r~~<" ~'~~" . . '" "'. I April, 1959 COLORADO DIVISIONtOP:Yili:.DLl~E·; RESEARCH CENT~RUBRf\RY P.O. BOX 2287 _. -: FORT COLLI NS, CO80522,' > ",~ :PROJECTS Project No. W.~.tOI-R~l Game Range Investigations Work Plan No._'~ __~ ~ ; ~J~ob~1~~0~.~4~ ~~~~~~ Titl e of Job :_ __;E;::.;f::.;f~e::::.;c::.;t::.:s::..' ...::o:.::f~S..:::u~b.:::al::::.p~l.=.:· n~e:::-..:T:..:i:::.:m::.:b::.::e::.:.r--=.C..:::u:..:::t:..:::t.=in::;g~o::.,:n~W;. Period Covered': June, 1958 to Sept ember , 1958. Objectives: L' To.determine·the effects of various timber-cutting patterns and ages of cuttings on mule deer, snowshoe hares, and dusky grouse use of the areas as compar-ed with uncut controls. '. . 2. To determine to what extent cutting patterns and ages of cuttings affect the composition and deri~ityofvegetation as compared with uncut controls. 3. To determine how cutting patterns and ages cuttings a.ffect production of forage for mule deer as compared with uncut controls. ' of .,'_, Abstract: ~_,.'" __ .. .....:.,__·__ '. .' .__ .__ ....:. __ ._.M. " '._ ..__,.'. ,.__. . . ..:__.. .: . This investigation was conducted from June to Septembe~, 1957' and 1958, on the Fraser Experimental Forest near Fraser, Colorado. The main objective was to determine, what effects clear";'cutting timber in varioUs sizes, shapes, and patterns of units had on \lildlife use and forage production in lodgepole pine and spruce-f'Lr forest. ' ' . ~. . '. The pell~t~count meth6d 'Was used' to determine mule deer use of the cut-over areas and to uncut controls. Seventy-two transects, each consisting of ten 0.01acre circular plots at half-chain intervals, were located \I,ithin the cut and uncut control. areas. Droppings' of snowshoe hares with deer pellet groups. and dusky grouse were tallied simultaneously Parker's (1954) line":point method was used to determine the composition and density of vegetation •. One-hundred twenty line transects, one-chain long, were established within the cut and uncut, control areas. . , ".. . - : A wei~ht-estimate method \las used to determine forage production. was done above'the composition-density transects after the vegetation its annual gro1,J"th. Sampling had attained Results of the present investigation shov that, in general, timber cutting does not benefit \lildlife under the specific set of conditions encountered. It must be remembered, - when interpreting these results, that they are from a limited geographical area and,represent only a tva-year period of study. What happens in the future an.-don ot.her 'areas, , remains' to be determined. ��-151- Effects of Subalpine Timber Cutting on Wildlife in Colorado Kenneth Porter The Rocky Mountain Forest anrlRange Experiment Station of the U. S. Forest Service is investigating harvest methods for lodgepole pine and Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir on the Fraser Experimental Forest2/ near Fraser, Colorado. Here, timber stands are being experimentally clear-cut in various sizes, shapes, and patterns of units. The objectives of these studies are to determine how the various cutting treatments affect forest regeneration, windfall, and water yield. A timber-cutting policy based on the results of this research may be adopted to govern timber sales on the large areas of subalpine timber on National Forest lands. Tbese experimental areas, with nearby uncut and older clear-cut areas, provide a rare opportunity for studying the effects of timber cutting'on wildlife. Information provided by this investigation may be of value for multiple-use planning. It is imperative that wildlife be included in such planning if forested lands are to yield maximum benefits. Description of the Study Area The Forest is located approximately 65 miles west and north of Denver, Colorado, in Grand County (Figure 1). It extends through parts of Townships 1, 2, and 3 South; Range 76 and 77 West; Sixth Principal Meridian. The Forest covers 23,000 acres. The Forest and surrounding areas are in rugged mountainous country with elevations ranging from 9,000 to nearly 13,000 feet (Figure 1). Evidence of glaciation is common along the valley floors, on adjacent slopes, and above timber line where cirques are found at the bases of high mountain peaks. Soils from schist and gneiss parent materials are, in general, acidic and moderately productive (Figure 2). They vary in depth, depending on steepness of slope, cover, and other factors. Water moves through them rapidly; therefore, little erosion occurs (U. S. Forest Service, 1952). . The climate is cool in sum~er and cold in winter, with an average annual temperature of about 350 F. January and July are usually the coldest and warmest months, respectively, with mean temperatures of 15 and 550 F. II Hereafter called the Forest. �-152- The average grmling season is 75 days, the frost-free period extending mi d-ilune to mid-September. Annual precipitation has varied from 15 to 30 inches; however, the average is about 24 inches, two-thirds of which occurs as snow (U. S. Forest Service, 1952). f rom Native vegetatio~/ is typical of the Continental Divide zone of the southern Rocky Hount.a.ins , }'rimary tree species are lodgepole pine, Mpelmann spruce, and subalpine fir (Figure 3). Virgin stands are commonly 200 to 400 years old. Aspen occurs in scattered patches on areas opened by fire or lop:ging. Thinleaf alder is found along streams in moist places (U. S. Forest Service, 1952). Shrubby understory vegetation commonly consists of bearberry, blueberry, boxleaf, common juniper (which often grows in dense mats), rose, russet uuffaloberry, twinflower, and willow. Some of the more prevalent forbs are arnica, bluebells, f'Lr-etreed , golden banner, pyrola, and. strawberry. Broolccress, globeflower, and wh.i.t e marsh-marigold are common along streams at higher elevations. Alpine areas consist of rock fields intermixed with meadows containing grasses, sedges , d•.• arf willo"l'fs, and many showy forbso 2/ Important game species found on the Forest include mule deer- , snowshoe hares, dusky grouse, and occasionally elk. The area is used by deer only in the summer because of deep snow in winter. A checklist of vertebrate fauna observed on the Forest is found in Appendix B. The forest was logged commercially to a limited extent just after the turn of the century. Only experimental cutting is being carried on at the present time. TvlO fires have been recorded on the area. One occurred on the upper one-third of the Foo I Creek drainage and adjacent timberline areas in the 1890's and the other occurred between the Forest headquarters and the town of Fraser about 1915. An aLl.o'tmerrt 0: 55 head of cattle graze the more accessible areas of the Forest from July 1 through September 30. Sheep graze occasionally on the alpine area. There was no livestock grazing on any of the study plots. Methods and Materials Techniques employed to measure 1rildl;ifeuse, composition and density of vegetation, and forage production are at.andar'd in the fields of range and wildlife management , The application of these methods was modified where necessary to meet the specific needs of this investigation. Quanti tative data wer e collected on the three important game species en the Forest: mule deer, snowshoe hares, and dusky grouseo The following factors were investigated from June to September, 1957 and 1958: 17 Scientific names of plants are found in Appendix A. ~/ Scientific names of fauna are found in Appendix B. �-153- 1. Five oates of cuttings: 1940, 1944, 1946-50, 1950, and 1954-56. 2. Six sizes of cutting area: strips of one-, two-, three-, and six-chains .rl.dth;five-acre square blocks; and rectangular blocks larger than five acres. 3. T\-lO a.spects: northeast and nor-thwes t., 4. T\"O forest types: lodgepole pine and Engelmann spruce~ subalpine fir. Determination of Wildlife use Hule deer.--The pellet-count method was used to determine mule deer use of the cut-over areas of different patterns, ages, and the uncut control areas. Bennett, et a1. (1940) were among the first to describe this method. It has been modified and refined by others until now the basic procedltre is a standard tool for studying deer populationso Seventy-two transects, each consisting of ten O.Ol-acre. circular plots at half-chain intervals, were located with the aid of a staff compass and a two-chain tape luthin the cut and uncut control areas as indicated in Table 1. The ends of each transect were marked with two-foot, orange-tipped, wooden stakes. Transect number, date, and worker's name were inscribed on the stake at the starting point. Information recorded ~or each transect on the pellet-count field form (Appendix C) included: forest type and cutting area, date, transect bearing, general location, and miscellaneous remarkso Transects were located near the center of the treated areas so that pellet counts wou'Ld not be influenced by roads and other cuttings. Half of the O.OI-acre plots were located on the cut area and half on the uncut in order to obtain a measure of the effect on deer use .of the complete cutting pattern. Uncut control areas were selected nearby for resemblance in all factors except cutting treatment. Transects .Tere located on these areas . at a minimum of 100 yards from roads and cuttings, so that pellet counts vrou l.dnot reflect these influences. The uncut control for the 1954-56 cutting area was the East Saint Louis Creek drainage, an adjacent watershed to the west. The O.Ol-acre plots wer'e defined by using a 11. 77-foot wire as a radius around a central point. Pellet groups were counted by walking around the plot, observing a two-foot strip each time, until the center was reached. Groups were recorded on the field form for this purpose. Plot centers were marked with a small orange-tipped stake. At the time of the first count in 1957, orange implement paint was sprayed on each pellet group with a squirttype oil cano In 1958, only unpainted pellet groups were countedD �-154- Snowshoe hares and dusky grouse.--Drop?ings of snowshoe hares and dusky grouse ,.• ere tallied simul taneouslv 1.vi th deer pellet groups. These droppings ~re characteristically found scattered rather than in groups. Forihis reason, the number of plots containing droppings were tallied rather than the number of groups on the plot. The expression of use was percentage of plots containing droppings. Other.--Records of use of the study areas by all species of wildlife wereJmade by observation. Details of each observation were recorded and filed systematically. Determination of composition and density of vegetation The composition and density of vegetation on the cutting areas and uncut controls were determined as a basis for comparison l..-ith the results of future studies, and as a first step in evaluating forage production. Parker's (1954) line-point method was used in making these determinationso One hundr-ed-ctwerrty line transects, one-chain long, were established ,.• ithin the cut and control areas in August, after pellet counting was completed (Table 2). They, too, were marked with wooden stakes. Lnf'ormatdon concerning the transects, and composition-density data were recorded on the forage inventory field form (Appendix D). A 0.75-inch diameter loop, attached to a 15-inch lrire handle, was lowered to the ground surface on the right side of the tape beside each link mark. A record was made of whatever was encountered ldthin the area of the ring and classified as to vegetation, bare ground, rock, or litter. Grasses, grass-like plants, and forbs ,.• ere recorded when the loop encountered the plant with its leaves visualized at an angle 300 from'the vertical. Shrubs and trees were tallied wnen the loop fell within the live crown. Only vegetation which was alive and available to deer,was recordedo All other IIhitsl!were recorded as litter, rock, or bare ground. Plant species present in amounts so small that by chance they did not fall in any transect point were assumed to make up less than one percent of the density and were not recordedo The or~g~n of each transect was randomly determined by pacing a predetermined, randomly chosen, number of paces onto the area. The direction of each transect was also selected randomlyo If the direction chosen placed any portion of the transect outside the area to be sampled, another compass bearing was selectedo Nearby uncut areas wer-e selected for cont ro.l.s , Uncut three- and six-chain strips were chosen to compare with 1954-56 cutting strips. It was assumed that the lfider uncut strips would not be affected by light and other influences due to cutting and would therefore simulate larger uncut areas. �-155- Determination of Forage Production Pechanec and Pickford (1937) described a method for determining forage production and utilization based o~ the estimation of the weight of vegetation enclosed in plots •. The principle of estimating forage production by weight was used in this investigation. Species sampled were arnica, flueberry, boxleaf, common. juniper, and rose. These species were judeed to be the most important fot deer on the study area due to their abundance and availabilityo Sampling of forage production was begun in early September in 1957 after the vegetation had attained its full growtho Because of an early season in 1958, sampling was begun in late Augusto Before sampling was begun in both 1957 and 1958, estimation of forage weight was practiced by estimating, clipping, and weighing on scales calibrated to O.Ol-gram. This practice was continued until the ability was developed to estimate forage weight to within 10 percent of its actual ~·leight. Peri!!ldicchecks were made throughout the sampling period to verify the accuracy of the estimateso Four equally-spaced points were located along the transects, including one at the beginning and one at the end , The plant of each species in question nearest to each point was selected for sampling. The weight of annual growth uas estimated to.the nearest O.Ol-gram for one species at a time on a fully-covered one~sixteenth square-foot ploto An estimate was made for a species only if it occurred on the transecto The data were recorded on the forage inventory field form. The weight of the four, one-sixteenth square-foot samp1es was added together for each species on the transecto This sum was multiplied by the density percentage figure obtained for the transect, the result being grams of annual growth per one-fourth square-foot. The last step was to convert grams per one-fourth square-foot to pounds per acre, the final expression of forage production being pounds of annual growth per acre, green weight. Results Data collected over the two-year period of stuqy have been analyzed and are presented in this section. Standard statistical methods were used where app'l.LcabLe , Results of the analyses will be discussed in the followingo Effects of Cutting Practices ~ Hildlife Use It is almost axiomatic that environmental conditions created by forest cuttings are beneficial to ruldlifeo Various authors, including Gray and Hermel (1939), Titus (1945), Herbert (1946), Wakeman and Tubbs (1948), and Gill (1957), have discussed timber cutting as a game management �-15&- tool. All concluded that cutting is beneficial to game from the standpoint of increased food and interspersion of food and cover. l-Jhatwildlife workers call "edge effectll is also concluded to be beneficial. Leopold (1933) rated the amount and type of edge as one df the great determining factors in game abundance. It should be noted that all the investigations referred, to were made either in the Lake States or the East. Caution should be used in applying results of studies from one region of the country to other regions where conditions of climate, soil, topography, vegetation, wildlife, and other ecological factors may be entirely differento Hosley (1937) pointed out this principle and added, no • in details at least, every area is a case in itself. Local study is as necessary with wildlife as it has proven to be in forestry." 0 Results of the present investigation show that, in general, timber cutting does not benefit wildlife under the specific set of conditions encountered. It must be remembered when interpreting these results, that they are from a limited geographical area, represent only a two-year period of study, and deal with cut areas in only the very first years after cuttingo ~1at happens in the future and on other areas, remains to be determinedo Mule deero--Ana1ysis of variance was used to test pellet-count data This technique sorts out the variability associated with each factor and furnishes a basis for judging the effect of each factor on deer use. Four analyses were made of data from the following cutting and uncut control areas: 0 1. 1954-56 cutting and uncut control areas for both lodgepole pine and spruce-fir. 2. 1954-56 lodgepole pine six-chain strips, 1940 lodgepole pine five-acre blocks, and uncut control areas. 3. 1954-56 spruce-fir one-chain strips, 1944 spruce-fir one-chain strips, and uncut control areas. 40 1940, 1946-50, 1950, and 1954-56 cuttings, and uncut control areas, all in the lodgepole type. Pellet-count data are presented in tables with confidence limits (mean + one standard error). Statistically significant differences are. shown graphically Significance is indicated where the lines do not overlapo 0 Pellet-count data from the 1954-56 cutting and uncut control were the first analyzed (Table 3). Sampling was stratified to include four cutting-strip vridths, one-, two-, three-, and six-chains; two aspects, northeast and northwest; and tl"iOforest types, lodgepole pine and sprucefiro �-157- Results of this analysis indicated a highly significant difference 1957 and 1958. !,'ihen the data were plotted (mean + two standard errors), it was found that the differences were not associated with the strip widths, but instead were between the cut strips and. uncut control area. The uncut stand received the most use (Figure 4)0 (001 level) in deer use among the various strip widths for both It should be noted here that the 1957 and 1958 data are not directly comparable. The 1957 count represents several years' accumulation of pellets, while the 1958 count is only for one year's accumulationo The second analysis compared data from the 1954-56 lodgepole pine six-chain strips, 1940 lodGepole pine five-acre blocks, and uncut controls (Table 4). Sampling included two comparable cutting area sizes, six-chain strips and five-acre blocks; two aspects, northeast and northwest; one forest type, lodgepole pine; two dates of cuttings, 1954-56 and 1940; and uncut control areaso No significant differences were indicated in the 1957 data. Analysis of the 1958 data, however, revealed a highly significant difference between the cut and uncut control areas. The uncut stand received the most use (Figure 5). The third analysis cdmpared data from the 1954-56 spruce-fir onechain strips, 1944 spruce-fir one-cha in strips, and uncut control areas (Table 5) Sampling was confined to cutting, and to strip width, one chain; one aspect, northeast; one forest type, spruce-fir; two dates of cuttings, 1954-56 and 1944; and uncut control areas. No significant difference was indicated by the 1957 or 1958 data in the use of these two dates of cuttings and uncut control areaso 0 T1rlO additional dates of cuttings, 1946-50 and 1950, were sampled in 1958 to obtain a better picture of the effect of age of cutting on deer us a , A simple analysis of variance was performed on data obtained from four dates of cuttings, 1940, 1946-50, 1950, and 1954-56; and uncut control areas (Table 6). Six-chain strips were used t.orepresent the 1954-56 cutting since cutrt ings for the other dates were all comparatively large in size. All other factors wer e disrega.rded because none :were found to be significant in til e preceding analysis. Resul ts of this analysis showed a highly significant difference in the use of the various dates of cuttings. The uncut stand and 1940 cutting were highly significantly higher in deer use than the 1954-56 cuttd.ng (Figure 6). Tl-roof the four analyses of 1957 data shoved that deer used uncut stands more than cut ar eas , Three of the four analyses made of 195.3 data �-158- shoHed the same results. The other analyses revealed no significant differences. From this evidence, it is evident that, regardless of age or size 0: area, timber cutting did not result in an increase in deer use of the areas studied. In most cases, there was a decrease. Again, it must be emphasized that obaer-vatd oris were made during the first years follovrin~ cutting activities. One explanation of this finding may be the dense slash accumulation on the cuttL~g areas, which no doubt discourages deer movemento Slash covera~e wa s estimated in 1958 on the pellet-count plots, and .•vas found to vary from an avera.ge of 10 percent on the 1940 cutting to 85 percent on the 1954-56 cutting. Depth of slash ranv,edfrom zero to three feet. The fact that cutting did not effect a "r-eLease''of deer browse' is a p1a.usible reason for deer not using the are3.Smore. In general, the same shade-tolerant understory vegetation found before cutting is also found after cutting. Its growth apparently was not· stimulated, at least during the first two or three years, by conditions cr eat.edby the opening of the forest canopy, a finding contra.ry to that of workers in other sections of the country. No significant differences wer e found in the use of the four strip widths on the 1954-56 cutting. It is quite possible that the areas cut in various st.rd.p-wi.dth patterns are too small to show such differences It is more reasonable to believe that a series of larger areas, each cut in a different width, would be more likely to reveal differences in us e. 0 Snowshoe hares and dusky grouse.--The procedure of counting snowshoe hare and dusky grouse droppings as either present or absent on the plots adapts the data for chi-square analyses. Three analyses were made 01: data from the following cuttings and uncut control areas: 1. 1954-56 cutting and uncut control areas for both lodgepole pine and spruce-fir. 20 1954-56 lodgepole pine six-chain strips, 1940 lodgepole pine fi ve-acr-e blocks, and uncut control areas. 30 1954-56 spruce-fir one-chain strips, 1944 spruce-fir one-chain strips, and uncut control areas. Stratification of sampling was the same as discussed for the first three analyses. Data are presented with confidence limits (mean + one standard error)o Statistically'significant differenCes are indicated-where they occur. Specific differences between any two combination of means were determined by inspection of the datao Snowshoe hare and dusky grouse droppings were enumerated only in 1957 due to the difficulty involved in marking or obliterating them so a count could be made the following season , �-159- Analysis of data from the 1954-56 cutting and uncut control is shown in Table 7. A highly significant difference was found for both hare and grouse use. U3e Has ereater in spruce-fir than in lodgepole pine. The second analysis compared data from the 1954-56 lodgepole pine six-chain strips, 1940 lodgepole pine five-acre blocks, and uncut control areas (Table 8). The analysis revealed a highly significant difference in hare use of areas including the two dates of cuttings and uncut control areaso The 1940 cutting was found to be used more by hares than the 1954-56 cutting or the uncut control area. The third analysis compared data from the 1954-56 spruce-fir one-chain strips, 1944 spruce-fir one-chain strips, and uncut control areas (Table 9). A highly significant difference in use by hares and a significant difference in use by grouse was found. The uncut stands were used more than either of the cut stands. Analysis of data collected from the 1954-56 cutting and uncut control area showed a highly significant difference in the use of the two forest types by hares, with spruce-fir used more than lodgepole pineo This result may be explained by the greater protective cover provided by the growth form of these trees. Although there is more available food for snow.shoe hares in the spruce-fir type, it is doubtful whether food would be limiting in the lodgepole. . No significant difference was found in the use of the various strip widths or uncut control area. Perhaps slash on the cut areas provides cover equal to that in the uncut stand , Denser cover may account for the greater use received by the 1940 lodgepole five-acre blocks than the 1954-56 six-chain strips or uncut control areas. A thick stand of three- to six-foot high lodgepole reproduction is present on parts of the 1940 cuttingo This should furnish excellent cover for a ground dwelling animal the size ofa sriowshoe hareo Uncut control areas were preferred to 1954-56 spruce-fir one-chain strips and 1944 spruce-fir one-chain strips Again, denser cover in the uncut spruce fir stands may account for this tendency. Snowshoe hares are considered animals of the dense forest and are seldom found in open areas (Cook and Robeson, 1945)0 0 There is not enough evidence here to conclude whe ther or not timber cutting benefits snowshoe hares. It appears that perhaps cutting in the lodgepole type may be beneficial after reproduction has had sufficient time to become established. Analysis of data from the 1954-56 cutting and uncut control area revealed a highly significant difference in the use of the two types by grouse. Spruce-fir was used more than lodgepole pineo This is not difficult to understand when the habits of this bird are considered. It is generally �, -lW- agreed that blue grouse!! prefer to Hinter along the high timbered ridges of the upper spruce-fir zone (Saunders, 1914; Hunro, 1919; Beer, 1943; Marshall, 1946; and Wing, 1947). The growth form of spruce and fir provides the dense roosting cover pref'erred by blue grouse. Fir is especially attractive. In addition to cover, fir provides an abrmdance of easily obtainable needles which have been found to be a primary winter food of this grouse. Beer (1943) discovered that fir (Abies) provided 60 percent of the yearlong diet of the blue grouse in western Washington. The birds began to eat needles in September, and by October were feeding on them alIDost exclusively. This was continued until April when they changed to other plant foodso No significant difference in use was found among the various strip widths and uncut control area. Apparently the alternate uncut strips in the cutting pattern provide enough cover for the birds. No significant differences were found in the analysis of grouse data from the 1954-56 lodgepole six-chain strips, 1940 lodgepole fiveacre blocks, and uncut control areas. The n~gligible amount of grouse use of this forest type probably e~~lains this resulto Analysis of grouse data from the 1954-56 spruce-fir ohe-chain strips, 1944 spruce-fir one-chain strips, and uncut control areas showed a significant difference in grouse use. The uncut control area was used more than either of the cut areas. Possibly, the one-chain uncut strips in the cutting pattern are not wide enough to provide the cover desired by this grouse. It appears from the data that timber cutting did not benefit grouse in this area. Composition and density of vegetation Composition and density of vegetation wer-e determined as a first step in computing forage production and to provide calibration data with which future studies may be' compared. Although these data were not analyzed statistically, sev:eral general remarks can be made concerning them (Table 10). The 1940 cutting is notably rich in the variety of vegetation present. One explanation may be relatively old age, as compared with other cuttings studied. Perhaps enough time has elapsed to allow a variety of species to become established. Another reason may be that ground cover. vegetation in the dryer lodgepole type suffers less from competition with blueberry, which often grows in dense mats in the moister spruce-fir type. The comparatively large size of these cutting areas woul.d allow more light to fallon them, Which no doubt is beneficial to a number of plant species. 17 The dusky grouse is a regional race, or subspecies of the blue grouseo . �-161- The 1941 cutting which occupies the wettest site studied, also had the smallest variety of vegetation. Blueberry grew very densely there, and it probably crowded out the other species. The 1946-50 and 1950 cuttings in the lodgepole pine type are notably deficient in variety of vegetation present, and might be explained by the relative youth of these cuttings. Perhaps, given more time, they too will exhibit .the same variety present on the 1940 cuttinge The 1954-56 six-chain strips also exhibit a l~ge number of species. This carinot be explained by the age of the cutting because it is relatively young. Perhaps the large cutting area size may have created favorable conditions for a number of species. There can be little doubt. that other vard.ab.Le s not studied account for much of the variations discussed in the preceding paragraphse For example, it is well known that soils differ greatly on relatively small geographical areas in the mountains. Information on soil depth, fertility, moisture relationships, and.texture may be significant in explaining differences in vegetation found on the various study areas. Effects of Cutting Practices on Forage ProduCtion Three analysis of variance tests were made of both blueberry and arnica forage production. Samplin.g stratification was the same as discussed for the first three.analyses. Forage producti6h d~ta are presented with confidence limits (mean + one standard error) in appropriate tables. Statistically si,gnificant -differences are indicated in the tables and illustrated· graphically in figures where they occur. Data on forage production of boxleaf, common juniper, and rose wer!? found to be too variable to yield significant differences by statistical analysis, a circumstance readily accounted for by the low density of these species (Table 10). Forage production data from the 1954-56 cutting and uncut control area were analyzed first (RabIe 11)0 A highly significant difference was found for blueberry in 1957 and 1958 between the two types. The sprucefir type produced the most forage. A highly significant difference was found in the production of arnica on the two forest types and on the various widths of strip in 1957 and 1958 (Table 11). The lodgepole pine type and six-chain strips produced the most arnica (Figure 7). . The second analysis compared forage production from the 1954-56 spruce-fir one-chain strips, 1944 spruce-fir one-chain strips, and uncut �-162- control areas (Table 12). No significant difference was found in blueberry forage produced on these tv.JOares of cuttings and uncut control areas in 1957 or 1958. Production of arnica was highly 19hh cutting than on the 195h-56 cutting 1957 and 1953 (Table 12)e . significantly greater on the or uncut control area in both The third analysis compared forage production on the 195h-56 lodgepole pine six-chain strips, 19hO lodgepole pine five-acre blocks, and uncut control areas ('1';I.1:>1e 13). No signif,icant difference was found in bLueberry forage production on these two dates of cuttings and uncut control areas in 1957 or 19580 Arnica forage production was highly significantly ~reater on the 195h-56 cutting than on ~he 19hO cutting or uncut control in 1957 and 1958 (Table 13, Figure 8). Analysis of blueberrJ forage-production data from the 1954-56 cutting and the uncut control area' revealed a highly significantly greater amount of forar;e produced in the spruce-fir type than in the lodgepole typeo Perhaps the best explanation is the greater amount of soil moisture in the spruce-fir type. Blueherry appear-s to respond to this condition as evi.oenced by its greater density and more luxuriant grmlth 0 No significant differences were discovered in the production of blueberry among the various strip vlidths and uncut control area., .At first glance, the cut areas appear relatively barren of vegetative ground cover. Closer inspection, however, reveals much more vef;etation than is seen from a distance. From these data, it appears that comparatively r-ecent clearcutting does not result in an increase or decr-ease in blueberry forage productiono Analysis of arnica f'or-age production from the 195h...;56 cutting and uncut corrcroL area indicated highly significantly more forage produced in the lodgepole type. It appears that arnica occurs more often on the drier lodgepole sites. Also, there is less competition here because of the less dense vef,etative ground covero Production of arnica was also found to be highly.significantly greater on the six-chain strips. It appears that arnica responds to light and therefore gr-owsbetter in the more open areas provided by the six-chain strips. Ana.Iysi.s of blueberry forage pz-oduct.Lon.data from the 1954-56 spmice-f.i.r one-chain strips, 194h spruce-fir, one-chain strips, and uncut control areas revealed no significant difference in forage producedo In this case, it c.::n be seen that the older cutting did not produce any more fora~e than the comparatively new cutting and the uncut control area. This is further evidence that timber cutting does not stimulate blueberry forage production on the areas investigated. �-163- Arnica forage production was found to be highly significantly t;reater on the 1944 cutting than on the 1954-56 cutting or the uncut control from the information at hand arf''l.s.The only explanation that can be r:.:iven is that arnica had more time to become established on the older cutting. Ana Iys i s of blueberry forage-production data from the 1954-56 lodgepole six-chain strips, 1940 lod;:epole five-acre blocks, and 'uncut control areas showed no significant difference in forage producedo Again, this evidence supports the hypothesis that timber cutting does not create conditions which stimulate b Iueber.ry fOl~age production in this area. j.rnica forage production l"as highly significantly greater on the 195u'_56six-chain strips than on the 19uO five-acre blocks or uncut control areas. In this case, the a~"e of the cutting was not to the benef'Lt of arrri.ca as it was in the preceding compa.ri.son , It appears that loJilile time works to the advant.a.;eof arnica in the spruce-fir type, such is not the case in the lodgepole type. This may not be a valid observation, however, for less time has 'elapsed in the 194U cutting than in the 19uO ~utting. Perhaps, in four more years, the 19hu cut.t.i.ng \vill produce less arnica than a newly cut area. 1I:lso, the strip "I,idthis less in the 1944 cutting than in the 19uO cutting, which may Hell influence the results obtained in the two comparisonso r Observa~~~ of Wildlife on the Study Areas Ivildlife were observed and recorded, but no specific pattern of visits to the study areas was followed. Time limitations prevented an adequate observational study of all areas, a::1dthe observations made were too fe1" to provi.de a quantitative basis for comparison. Therefore, observational data vrill not be presented in this thesis, for they add no valid evidence concerning differences in the use of the various areas by wildlife~ Recomnendations for Further Study This investigation represents cine attempt at determining the effects of timber cutting on wildlife in one situation. It has in essence laid the ground work for future studies. A great deal more quantitative information is required before definite cause-and-effect relationships can be established concerning the effects of timber cuttiNg on wildlife in this section of the country. Recommendations for further study include the following: 1. Repeat this study every five to ten years so that changes may be determined over a long period of timeo It is well known that successional changes often take many years. �-164- 2. S:1J!lple a greater number and variety of sizes of cutting areas under di:Fferent conditionso Hore evidence is needed before any generalizations can be made concerning the effects of timber cutting on wildlife in this regiono It may be possible in the future to have areas cut to order for wildlife investigationse If so, a series of SOO-acre areas, managed in alternate cut and uncut strips of various widths, should provide a better basis for studies to determine an optimum cutting-strip width for wildlife. 3. Study the soils on the study areas in future investigations. Information on soil depth, fertility, moisture relationships, and texture may be very valuable in helping to explain differences found in composition and density of vegetation and in forage nroduc tdon , h. Initiate food habits studies for deer, hares, and grouse on the study areas. If the summer diets of each of these species were known, they would provide good criteria for evaluating the suitability of various cutting treatments for Hildlife. �Table l.--NUl'::::lER OF PELLLT-COUlIJ"T THAl:ISECTS ESTABLJS!-!ED Lod.geuole Pine N. v, Aspect N. E. Aspect 1940 Cuttin~ Five-acre blocks Uncut cor.trol 4 4 2 2 -- -- 194h Cutti~ strips Unr:ut control i'l. FPJI.S;__;,_qE.X:FERIV!.ENTAL FCi'l.E.'::iT J S)r~ce-fir Type E. Aspect i'f. 'ri, Acl)ect Totals ---- -- -- 4 -- 2 2 8 -- -- 2 2 1946-50 Cutting 3,500-acre block Uncut control --- 4 4 --- -- 4 4 1950 Cutting 268-acre block Uncut control 2 2 2 2 -- -- 4 4 1954-56 Cutting One-chain strips Two-chaan strips Three-chain strips Six-chain strips Uncut control Totals 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 14 10 One-scha.Ln 2 2 2 2 2 -- -- -- -- I t-' 0' \J, I Q U " '.J " 8 8 72 ~i ;;""1 ~."V :Yj. ?,<>" 1\1< �?\J ';J) ':;.1:' Table 20 --NUHBER OF FOP..AGE-I~rvT;NTORY TRANSECTS ESTABLISHED J No », As oec t 1940 Cutting Five-acre blocks Uncut control 6 6 3 19L.4 Cuttin~ One-chain strip Uncut control -- 19116-50 Cutting 3,500-acre block Uncut control -- --- N. E. Asoect 3 --- --- -- '} ..J -- -- 3 4 -- 4 FO::tEST. Sl)ruce-fir T:.'1)e N. ':.T. Aspect Lodgepole Type N. E. Aspect ~RA.S!::R Ef:::P~'U:'!:ZNTAL -- Totals 12 6 "1 -" -- 3 -- 4 -- Lt I ~~ 0' 1950 Cutting 268-acre block Uncut control 1954-56 Cuttin~ One-chain strip THo-chain strips Three-chain strips Six-chain strips Uncut control Totals 0' I -- 4 -- 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 L. 4 29 L. 4 4 -- -- Lt L. 11 26 -- -- 4 4 4 4 4 4 16 16 4 20 120 16 16 16 �-167- Table 3.--PELLET GROUPS P},-::R ACRE, 195h-56 CUTTING. Pellet Groups/Acre (Mean ~ One Standard Error) t-lidths One-chain strips Two-chain strips Three-chain strips Six-chain strips Uncut control area F 1958 48.S0 + 11020 28.80 :;:11020 41.30 :;:11.20 36.30 "+ 11020 106030 ! 11.20 13080 + 4.10 17050 :;:4.10 10.00 :;:4.10 8.80 "+ 4.10 85000 :;:4.10 7.72-::--lf - FoOl 1957 '" 616. 22*,'!- 4.43 4.43 N.Eo No v, 51.00 + 7.10 53050 ! 7.10 2500U + 2.70 29.00! 2070 F - 0 .. 06 1016 F .05 - 4035 4.35 Types Lodgepole pine Spruce-fir 55000 + 7.10 49.50 £ 7010 24000 + 2.70 30.00 £ 2.70 F •• 00)0 2061 4.35 4.35 Aspect �0'Q~ i~:·.·"'''···(' -168- Table 4.--COMPARISON OF PELLET GROUPS PER ACRE, LODGEPOLE PINE. Pellet Groups/Acre .(Mean + One Standard Error) 1957 1958 Date of Cutting 1954-56 Six-chain strips Uncut control area 37050 + 30.00 90.00 +" 3.00 7.50 + 9.. 90 77.50:!: 9.90 136.30 + 21.00 152.50 :!: 30,.00 26.30 + 7.. 00 0 67.5 :!: 9.90 1940 Five-acre blocks Uncut control area F • F (Table value) Aspects N.E. N .W. F ,. F .05 = • 3035 11.16*,~ 3.74 (.05) 6.51 (.01) .120.00 + 19 e 00 101.00 +" 19.00 37 00 + 6 •. 30 45 .. 00 :!: 6.. 30 0 0.44 0.83 4.60 4.60 ( �-169- Table 5.--COMPARISON OF PELLET GROUPS PER ACRE, SPRUCE-FIR. Pellet Groups/Acre (Nean.: One Standard Error) 1957 1958 �-170( Table 6.--COHPARISON OF PEI.J..ET GROUPS PER ACRE, 19UO, 19u6-.50, 1950, AND 19.54-.56CUTTINGS, LODGEPOLE PINE. Pellet GroupsJAcre (Nean ~ One Standard Error) 1958 1957 Date of Cutting 1940 Five-acre blocks Uncut control area 1946-50 3,500-acre block Uncut control area 70.00 + 23020 12.5.00 ~ 23.20 1950 ~8-acre block Uncut control area 77 •.50 + 23020 120 00 23.20 1954-.56 Six-chain strips Uncut control area F 136.)0 + 16.40 lu6.70:; 19.00 '" F .01 •• 0 36030 + 16040 106.30 :£ 16,40 ! �-171- Table 7 .--PERCEf~TAGE OF PLOTS CONTAINING SNOIJJSHOEHARE AND IUSKY GROUSE DROPPINGS, 195u-56 CUTTING. Widths One-chain strips Two-chain strips Three-chain strips Six-chain strips Un rut control areas Pooled chi-square a Snowshoe Hares Dusky Grouse 12.50 (80).Y 5 00 17050 11~25 12050 S075 17050 18075 10.00 11025 (80) (80) (80) (80) 0 (80) (80) (80) )SO) (SO) U 02 o 050 020 NoEo N .\v. 6075 (400) 702 5 (J_~OO) 5075 (uOO) 5025 (400) Pooled chi-square - 0010 0.12 .SO .SO Lodgepole pine Spruce-fir u050 (400) 9050 (400) 3.25 (uoo) 7.75 (400) Pooled chi-square - 7.68-l.'-:l- 7 o 78*")} P - .01 001 p - Aspects p • ~ 1/ Numbers in parentheses the percentages. indicate the number of plots used in calculating �-172- Table 8.--PERCENTAGE OF PLOTS CONTAINING SNOWSHOE HARE AND DUSKY GROUSE DROPPINGS, LODGEPOL.l!: PINE. Snowshoe Hares Dusky Grouse 1/ 2.50 (40)7.50 0000 (10) 2 .. 50 (40) 42050 (80) 7050 (40) 0.00 (80) 0.00 (80) 40.0l~!* 3.21 .001 050 Date of Cuttin~ 1954-56 Six-chain strips U Uncut control area 191.t.0 Five-acre blocks Uncut control area Pooled chi-square •• •• P Aspects N.E. N.W. Pooled chi-square -- P • 1/ Numbers in parentheses the percentages. 13000 (100) 27.00 (100) 0.00 (100) 1.00 (100) 3.10 0 .• 51 .10 .50 indicate the number of plots used in calculating �-173- Table 9.--PERCENTAGE OF PLOTS CONTAINING SNmVSHOE HARE AND DUSKY GROUSE DROppnV}S, SPRUCE-FIR .. Snowshoe Hares Dusky Grouse Date of Cutting 1954-56 One-chain strips Uncut control area 5..00 (20).Y 15.00 (20) 0.00 (20) 0 .. 00 (20) 1944 --oDe-chain strips Uncut control area 5000 (20) 50.00 (20) 10.00 (20) 30 .. 00 (20) Pooled chi-square • 17 .98-~....,~ 9033* .001 005 p - 1/ Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of plots used in calculating the percentages. �4\j \'l:) ',.~,;~ -174- Table 10.~PERCENTAGE I~ .., Is If '1 " e+ .." ~ 1940 ~uttlnil Five~or9 blo~k8 anol!t oontrol are •. 1945-..50Cuttin~ 3,500- acre b1·,ok 4 UniJ Jt 0 antral 4 79.50 45.50 4' 4 82.75 38.75 16 16 16 64 65.0a 67.94 65.50 57 •. 38 64.1a 16 30.50 1~a4-5d Cuttinp' One-ec h•. in strips Two-ch9.1n strips Th!"ee-chain strips Six-uh ain strips 1Iean Uncut oontrol area IS "'" en e+- '1 ~ 0" I[ ~., ...e ~'" •... pi 0 <:> 0 •... g. ! co •• .,<:> <:> .,~ tIl '1 0 0 g" 1 •.. Ii '••g." co '1 ". ~ ". 0 lJJ I~ ~ 'it •... i E'•...... •.... •... lJJ ro .,"" co e+- i ::r II> ---- ------- ---- ---- --- -- ------ -- --- --------- --- 0.33 ------ ----- ---- 0.:51 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.25 0.13 0.06 -- - 0.56 0.13 0.03 - >< •... s •... ..•" li> tIl •... "" 0" '" "1 ~ tIl •• ~ '1 0" .,••., ~ .," t"' M ."'"••0 •.... " ...• "0 •.. " .,.,"" 4.00 1.00 0.17 ·co I" •.... ." ~ ". ., 'd .,•.., en Ii ~..." 0 Po .. •... II " <M 3 "" "1 c o '" '< --- --- 0.75 tIl 0 " ~ a". •... •• g. co II --- •• '-'" •.. •.. :tJ 0 co 0" II '1 >< •... g. !:.. " 23.00 15.33 1950 ~uttinlii 268-o.o!"eblock unc'lt ·,ontr,l ",rea .. P .. If fl' Ii 3 3 area g <:> '1 co •... •.. 1944 Cuttinlii 1 0 I!. 53.25 78.17 Unout ~~trol area ... e- ~ 12 6 One-oa&.in strips """ " S II en " g. GROUND COVER AS RELATED TO SIZE AND DATE OF CUTTING AREA. -- -- ---- - --0.08 0.25 0.16 -- -- -- --- - ----- ----- 0.33 4.00 -- ---- ---- --- 2.50 -- --- ---- --- ----- --- - ----- ---- 1.75 0.19 0.06 0.02 -- 0.50 0.06 0.13 1.42 0.33 0.25 0.05 0.31 0.25 0.19 0.44 0.30 ----- -- ----- 0.06 0.02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 4.50 2.26 1.00 0.50 1.75 0.63 1.38 5.81 2.39 0.69 0.92 0.25 21.67 2.00 -- ~-- -- -- -- --- -- --- -- 3.00 ------------ --- --- --- 0.06 0.02 -- - 1.58 2.75 0.67 1.33 1.67 --- ---- ----- - 0;75 2.00 1.75 -- -- -- 0.76 15.25 16.67 .73.33 80.67 11.75 38.50 12.75 36.50 O.OS -- -- 0.58 0.17 -- -- -- 4.67- -8,33 -- 5.33 1.25 1.00 4.75 1.00 0.76 0.25 0.75 0.75 4.00 0.25 4.75 0.75 1.00 3.44 1.38 4.50 1.53 0.19 1.38 0.31 1.56 3.64 0.38 0.22 1.19 1.H 8.83 0.06 2.62 ---- 6.25 2.7li 5.2:> 3.76 0.31 0.06 0.44 0.32 0.28 ---- ---- ------ 0.63 0.25 0.22 0.19 0.13 0.08 27.44 27.94 27.50 0.31 29.06 27.:J9 0.08 0.31 0.:31 1.00 0.13 63.:J4 ------ 5.25 ,:I~ �Table 11.--Ii'OEAGEPRODUCTION IN POU.N'j).S OF ANNUAL GROi,JTHPER ACRE 1954-56 CUTTING. (HEAi\j + ONE ST.4.dDhRD Arnica Blueberry 19~8 19~7 Widths One-chain strips Two-chain strips Three-chain strips Six-chain strips Uncut control area F •• F (Table value) • Aspects N.E. ~\r.~-l. F • Fo05 • ~~ Lodgepole Pine Spruca-f'Lr F • FoOl • 1,740.13 + 111 (64)1/ 1,592.24 + 115 (64) 1,814.08 :; 111 (64) 1,713.24:; 115 (64) 1,838020 :; 111 (60) 1,695.96:; 115 (60) 2,046048 :; 111 (64) 1,888.03:; 115 (64) 1,911.07 ~ III (64) 1,854.41 ~ 115 (64) 1.09 2.52 (.05) 1,889.95 + 1,849061 ~ 70 (40) 70 (36) 0.16 4000 72)006 + 3,015.46 ~ 531.48{Hl7008 1.11 2.52 (~05) 1,787.19 + 73 (40) 1,710.36 :! 73 (36) 651.11 + 2,546.44 ~ 455. 75.,Pk 7.08 1957 1958 96.99 + 48 (32) 40033 :;48 (20) 81.63 :; 45 (28) 398.54 :; 48 (44) . 21.13 ~ 48 (2h) 83.55 + h4 (32) 36.49 :; 44 (20) 73.95 :; 4h (25) 368.77 :; 4h (44) 18.25 ~ 44 (24) 10.51~H~ 3.65 (.01) 10.77-'/.'"* 3.65 (.01) 133049 + 31 (76) 122.92 :; 31 (72) 122.92 + 27 (76) 109.48 ~ 27 (72) - 0.06 4.00 0.25 4000 70 (36) 70 (40) ERiI.OR),GR€EN ~1J'EFrHT, - 73 (36) 73 (40) I f-' ....J 0.11 4 00 V'1 I 0 208039 + 31 (92) 48002 ~ 31 (52) 189019 + 27 (92) 43 022 :! 27 (52) l4 •• 20.,Hl7 •• 08 13 o93.y<"l~ 7 .• 08 17 Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of forage production estimates madeo &\) , ». u\j " �4\:d ,"~'f) ~~.:). Table 12.--FORAGE PRODUCTION IN POUNDS OF ANNUAL GRmITH PER ACRE (I'TEAN + ONl,t; STAiWARD SPRUCE-FIR. - Blueberry 19:sr----~--------r958 EIL~OR), 1957- GREE.N vlEIGHT, Arnica __ m____ 1958 Date of Cutting ~4~6 One-chain strips Uncut control area 0.00 12.48 + 10 (4) 2,655.34 + 157 (16)~ 2,941.52 ! 157 (16) 2,369.16 + 134 (16) 2,891058 ! 134 (16) 2,495.92 + 180 (.12) 2,459043 ~ 180 (12) 2,436.)8 + 155 (12) 103.72 ! 10 (12) 0.00 2,368.20 ~ 155 (12) 0.00 12.4R + 10 (4) 1944 One-chain strips Uncut control area 99.8R ! 10 (12) 0.00 I f-' F • F (Table value)'· 1078 3071 (.05) 3038 21.25-lH~ 19.75M- 3.71 (.05) 6.55 (.01) 6.55 (.01) Y Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of forage production estimates made. .._J r �Table 13.--FORAGE PRODUCTION IN POUNDS OF AN\TUAL GR01.ITHPER ACRE (NEAN .:.ONE STANDARD IillROR),GREEN jjEIGHT,. LODGEPOLE PINE . Blueberry Arnica 19~8 19~7 Date of Cutting ~4~6 Six-chain strips Uncut control area 76.5.39 + 119 (32)Y 68.5.68 + 11.5!(32) 770.19 :; 119 (32) 7.50.99:; 11.5:(32) - 1940 Five-acre blocks Uncut control area F F (Table value) Aspects N.E. No~v. III - .506.10 + 97 (44) 290.02 ~ 138 (24) i 503.22 + 94 (44) 273.70 ! 133 (24) 19~7 1958 669.36 ~ 100 (24) 20.17 !100 (12) 620.38 + 110 (24) 20.17 ! 110 (12) 58 •..58! 82 (36) 0,,00 55.70 .:. 90 (36) 0.00 1050 0.79 15.62*11- 10.91** 3034 (00.5) 3034 (.05) .5.45 (.01) .5.45 (.01) 190.1.5 + 69 (36) 17.5.74 ~ 69 (36) 178 .• 62 + 76 (36) 161.3.4 ! 76 (36) 571040 + 610.78.:. 82 (68) 82 (64) .543.5.5+ 80 (68) .583.89 ! 80 (64) .F 0.12 0013 0.02 0.03 F .0.5 4.20 4020 4020 4.20 I f-' ...J "f !/ Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of forage production estimates made. (x:J ";{) i'~ �-178- FRASER EXPERIMENTAL FOREST LOCATION -COLORADO MAP 105"55' LOCATION MAP SYMBOLS o 1\' St. Louis Pk MILES Contour Interval - FRASER EL.12,230 1000 ft. EXPERIMENTAL 105°55' FOREST BOUNDARY 2-26-54 --ROAD TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION A RUNOFF RECORDER III WIND TOWER ~ STORAGE GAGE ----ST. LOUIS CREEK DRAINAGE BASIN ------EXPERIMENTAL WATERSHEDS CS-SLC-BI Figure 1 �-179- FRASER EXPERIMENTAL FOREST GEOLOGY AND - COLORADO SOILS o MI LES SOIL ------ST, FRASER EXPERIMENTAL FOREST BOUNDARY LOUIS CREEK DRAINAGE BASIN ORIGIN ~ SCHIST AND GNEISS-ALPINE ~ SCHIST AND GNEISS-FORESTED ~ GLACIAL TILL(LATERAL MORAINE) ~ ALLUVIUM AND GLACIAL OUTWASH kx:';,,::::j QUARTZITE _.. TERMINAL MORAINE Figure 2 CS-SLC- 83 �-180- FRASER EXPERIMENTAL N A TI V EVE FOREST - COLORADO GE TAT ION oN SYMBOLS ~ LODGEPOLE PINE D ALPINE ! 0 ~ ENGLEMANN SPRUCE MILES Figure 3 2- 26-54 CS-SLC- 82 �-181- 6 chains 3 chains 2 chains .1 .1 chain Uncut control 6 chains 3 chains 2 chains 1 chain Uncut control o 10 20 30 40 5'0 70 90 Pellet Groups Per Acre 100 110 120 130 Figure 4.--Number of pellet groups per acre (mean ~ 2 standard errors), strip widths and uncut control area, 195'4-5'6cutting. �rt. ,~;['h. .. i~:.~~f'--:1· ;",' -182- I 1940 5-acre blocks 1954-56 6-chain strips I Uncut controls o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Pellet Groups Per Acre Figure 5.--N1.lI!lbel' of pellet groups per acre (meani, 2 standard errors), lodgepole pine, 1958. . 100 �~ I I I Uncut controls 1954-56 1950 ~ , 00 \.U 1946-50 I, I I 1940 30 40 50 70 Pellet 80 90 100 Groups Pe~ Acre Figure 6 .--Number of pellet groups per acre and 1954-56 cuttings, lodgepole pine. (mean 110 120 130 r. 2 standard errors), 140 150 160 170 1940, 1946-50, 1950, ~? {:.~ ~ �-184- 6 chains 3 chains 2 chains 1 chain Uncut control .~I~--~+-----~I 6 chains 3 chains 2 chains 1 chain Uncut control o 100 200 300 400 500 Pounds Per Acre Figure ?. --Arnica forage production in pounds of annual growth per acre (mean i 2 standard errors), ~reen weight, strip widths and uncut control area. 19~4-~bcuttin~. �I I I 1940 5-acre blocks ~ o....• I I I 1954-56 6-chain strips I I I Uncut controls I I-' 00. I I Vl I I 1940 5-acre blocks ~ I 0"- M I I 1954-56 6-chain strips I I I Uncut controls o 100 200 400 300 Pounds Per A.cre 500 600 700 800 Figure 8. --i'..rnica fora~e production in pounds of annual frowth per acre (mean r. 2 standard errors), ~reen weight, lodr,epole pine. ~ ;~j ;i"V �-186- LI'l'1RA.TURECITED American Ornithologists' Union. 1957. Checklist of North American birds. Ed. 5._ Baltimore: Lord Ba Ltdmor e Press, Inc. 691 pp , Beckman, William Co 1952. Guide to the fishes of Colorado. and Fish Dept. Pub. 110 pp. 1943. Food habits of the blue grouse. 7:32-44. Beer, James. Colo. Game J. Wildl. Ngmto, Bennett, L. J., P. F. English and R. HcCain. 1940 A study of deer populations by use of pellet-group counts. ,J. Wildl. Mgmt. 0 4:398-403. Burt, W. H. and R. P. Grossenheider. 1952. A field guide to the mammals. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. 200 pp, Cook, D. B. and S. B. Robeson. Ecol., 26:406-410 1945. Varying hare and forest succession. 0 Gill, John. 1957. Effects of pulpwood cutting practices on deer. Soc. Amer. For. Syracuse, N. Y. Froc. Gray, D. V. and L. C. Hermel. 1939. A study of game cover and openings in the Buck Creek plantations, Huron National Forest, Michigan. 'I'r-ans , N. Amer. ioliliilo Conf ,, 4:554-559. Harrington, H. D. 1954. Hanual of the plants of Colorado. Sage Books. 666 pp. Herbert, Paul A. 1946. vJilcJlife and forests. Hosley, N. W. 1937. management. Denver: Hisc. Cons. Bul., 11:14-17• Some interrelations of wildlife management 'J. For., 35:674-6780 Leopold, Aldo. 1933. Game management. Sons. 481 pp. New York: and forest Charles Scribner's Marshall, William H. 1946. Cover preferences, seasonal movements, and food habits -of P~chardson's grouse and ruffed grouse in southern Idaho. Wilson Bul., 58:42-52. Miller, G. S. Jr. and R. Kellogg. 19550 List of North American recent mammals 0 Hasho, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Bul. 205. 954 pp. Hunro, J. A. 19190 Notes on some birds of the Okanogon Valley, Br-i.td.sh Columbia. Auk, 36:65-67. �-187- LITfillATURECITED--Continued Parker, Kenneth IV. 1954. A method for measuring trend in range condition on national forest ranges with supplemental instructions for measurement and observation of vigor composition and browse. U. S. D. A., Forest Service. 26 pp. with 10-page supplement. (mimeo) • Pechanec, J. F and G. D. Pickford. 1937. A l.•eight estimate method for determination of pasture production. J. Amer. Soc. Agron., 29:894-904. 0 Preston, Richard J. 1948. North American trees. Iowa State College Press. 371 pp. Ames, Iowa: Rodeck, Hugo G. 1943. Gp.ide to the amphibia of Colorado.. Univ. Colo. }1useum Leaflet No.2. 8 pp , Saunders, Aretas A. 1914. The birds of Teton and northern Lewis and Clark Counties, Montana. Coridor, 16:130. Titus, Harold. 1945. TimDer and game -- twin crops. Wildl. Conf., 10:146-163. Trans. N. Amer. U. S. D. A. 1958. Range pLant.s of Arizona and New Mexico. Names, symbols, notations. Fort Collins, Colo .•: U. S. Forest Service, Rocky Hountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 86 pp , . U. S. Forest Service. 1952. The Fraser Experimental Forest -- its works and aims. Fort Collins, Colo.: Rocky Hountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Sta. Paper 8. 27 pp. \i >lakeman,H. and F. F. Tubbs. 1948. Timber cutting as a tool in game management. 1'lich.Cons., 17:3, 10-11, 13. Wing, Leonard. 1947. Seasonal movements of the blue grouse. N. Amer. Wild1. Gonf., 12:504-509. Prepared by:__~K~en~n~et~h~P~o~r~t~e~r~_ Date: -=A~p~r~~·1~,~1~9~5~9 _ Approved by: Trans. Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��"-:l 3 5 ~", ,,' c; " .: COLORADO iJlV; WILDLIfE, . " Reseqf9P ~F!1t~rLibrarY ," 317 ,W, Prospect , ft. Cqlllr,s: .G()" 80526 ,,' ..:.... " , ',: .. .. ; -189';' April, 1959 '-', JOB' Co!.fi'LETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS .,State of __ .;::;C....;;;o..:l....;;;o.:.r..::;;a_d;..:;o _ °._ __;.;"I'_-=l~O=l~-.:..:R~-=l~--z._' ..::G:..::;a;.::m::.;;e~R::.;;a;;,::;n:l.g,L;e;......:I::.;,n:;..:v:...;;e;..:s; .•a;;.;t:;..:1::..;0_n:=.:s::;.._ __ Pro je c,t N " ...... , , ' Work Plan No. I Job No.2 -----=~----~~~~~~~~----------~--------- Tl tl e of Job: ----,' :.:A.....;D=-e.:::;.t~a::.;i~l:::..:e~d=--=S:::..t~u=.;:d:=.<y(,.__::o;..:f;..._:,R.:.::La=n= Fenced Exclosures. , ABSTRACT .,.::! Indicated ~ates of stocking were determ1.ned .- ,counting in'total protected (livestock) . or by sampling .' exclosure group of plots, on partially parte deer and for deer range ar~as. In for . and/or livestock on unprotected general, the of the been by pellet ~ .•..- . either results adjacent counts indicated that there heavy or very heavy summer. ti~e by cattle r-anges where the Antelope Pass and Sagti,~che are Summer use located~ to.1ight on ranges 1-10derate fall use range the Dead Badger at by. cattle at the by cattle by cattle Broken in 1958 was, apparent "Park Catt.le Exclosure. Deer stocking rates was found to be ,negligible Road and Dead Badger for and,moderate on the were moderate 1n 1958 Park 'Exc1osures in 1957 was noted Exclosure, range to high had open summer use near for the Exclosures. the the Saguache winter �-190of 1957-58 on the ranges at the Antelope Pass, Broken Road, and Irish Canyon Exc1osures. Rates were neg1igible- to light f:>rthe ranges at the Dead Badger and Horn Gulch Exclosures for the same winter season of 1957-58. Plant inventories were determined by the line interception study method for the Calloway Deer-Livestock, Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock, Saguache Park, and Saguache Park Cattle Exclosures. Age and form class composition information' was collected and presented for the principle browse species at the Calloway and Irish Canyon Exclosures. A repeat photo study and general visual examination which was done at the Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclo_sure revealed that there have been too many deer on this winter range from 1954 through 1958 for the maintenance of optimum forage production. \ _ �-191A DETAILED STUDY OF RA:\jGE FORAGE BY USE OF FENCED EXCLOSURES by Bert Balcer IlrTRODUCTION Past exper-Lance has ahown that the best appr-oa ch to the r-eoor-t tng of results of field studies on exolosures treat eaoh exclosure separately. The use of a variety methods does, in itself, neoessitate The term variety however, available in a young field of investi- gation have more or less, determined paragraphs the methods to be employed of the phases of investigation. to follow, studies oonduoted will be reported on by exclosure vegetation in study techniques, time for studies, and the need for testing new procedures and the continuity and range stocking ANTELOPE PASS of this mode of handling. could imply a weakneas objeotives, i,s to Thus, in in'the 1958 work year under the inventory of (pellet group count) phases. GAT''E-CATTLE EXCLOSURE Pellet Groun Count Objectives: To determine the intensity the fall-winter-spring of use by deer for season of 1957-58 and by cattle for the 1958 summer season on the study areas accessible to each class of animal. Procedures: All deer pellet groups were counted and cleared from the four permanently marked belt transects outside open range and inside livestock on the exclosure part study �-192areas on r.'iay 7, 1958. Then, on Septe:nbe!" 25, 1958, the procedure 1-TaSrepeated cattle fecal piles o~ the outside belt transects obtain the stocki~g ,,'lith in order to rate for this class of animal for the summer, 1958, season of use. Previous experience was repeated with this count as no deer pellet groups were encountered the transects to indicate that In this vicinity on there was little or no use by deer in the summer season. Results: The. I·lay,1958, deer pellet group cotuit resulted in an indicated deer-month rate of stocking by deer of 1.92 acres per on the study area inside of the livestock of the exclosure and 1.10 acres per deer-month open range study area. part on the outside The period of use for.whlch these rates apply was the fall-1;tinter-spring season of 1957-58. One cat.t.Le fecal pile was found on the outside wi th this 1·1aycount. transects wer-e It might have been missed when the counted on October 14, 1957, or there might have been some trespass fall and spring An indicated transects livestock on the area between the counts. stocking rate of 2.38 acres per Am~ was found for cattle on the outside open range area by the September., 1958 count. This rate applied season of 1958. No livestock for the five months were observed summer on the area in late September. Discussion and Recommendations: on this reseeded range appears, The stocking rate for cattle at the present time, to �-193- continue to be too great for opti'1!umrange p'l.azrt ance. Standard crested wheatgrass mainten- has proven itself to be resistant to excessive use with average moisture conditions so ner'hana the main question which ,'1111 be answered eventually, is how much and for how long this range will stand the present heavy rates of use by livestock it reverts to the original sagebrush here, before type. From the results presented for the winter 1958 deer stocking rates on the t"lO treatments at this exclosure, that the area on the outside ranDe appeared it was noted to have received more use by deer than thp.t inside of the livestqck fence. This is the reverse of "that had happened fall-winter-spr1ng occupied proof in the seasons of 1955-56 and 1956-57 when deer the area enct.osed by the livestock they did the outside. The differences fence more than ~_nall cases has not been great and probably would not be significant level of confidence were the data subjected analyses. Mention Biologist Paul Gilbert a decrease in the use of crested whea t.gr-aaa at a high to statistical is made here of the fact, however , because (viva voce) has noted elsewhere by deer the older the stand became. reseeded The supposition nearby range has been made that, where the rank old gr-owt-h is allowed to remain through nonuse by livestock, appear-s the. new gr-owt.h that each year in the spring is not readily available is less attractive to the animals. Particular attention be paid this anparent tendency as this study continues. and will �-194- The 1958 eeaaon was the third year-in counts were done o[~ the Antelope wh f eh pellet group Pass study area. It is p Larined that these counts will be continued t'V10 for at least more years in order to obta.in stocking rates over a span that will cover such varia.bles as weather effect on vegetation, and deer population It is hoped that more vallO. conclusions of this approach and its changes or shifts. will be the result in future evaluations. BAR D DEER-CATTLE EXCLOSURE Introduction The Bar D Deer-Cattle constructed Exclosure is one of three which were on the state owned or allotted Squa.re S r-anges wi thin the wor-k per iod. completed in ?'!ovemberto enclose adjoining 2i acre livestock the public domai~ The fencing was . 2i acre game and portions. The general location is on what 1s known as Bar D 101esa,'{bichlies be twee n Ryans Gulch and Yello ... , Creek on the Piceance vegetation is d0:I:11nntedby big sagebrush The site is considered winter Creek dr-a Lnage e (Artemisia to be on an intermediate The tridentata) • part of the deer ranGe. Range vesetationinventories of the three treatments were not done be caus e of the Ls t.eness of the season when construction bad been 2.ccomDlished. were initiated, hovrever-, Cattle a.nd deer stocking rate studies and are taken up in follovTing paragraphs. �=?"'~~ ~-'" :;"'-':--;. -195- Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the indicated intensity ca t t Le arid deer on the outside unyrotected fall-I'linter-spring 1958-59 of use by range plot for the season, e.swell as the use by deer of the area inside of the livestock part of the exclosure for the same season. On October 6, 1958, Procedures: wer-e the corners of one acre plots surveyed and staked on t~e two ar-eas enclosed by fence and on the area outside, adj acent to and immediately of the livestock nart. Plot subunit corners were staked. at this same time for use later when range vegetation will be done. northeast studies In order to cancel them out, all cattle fecal piles on the outside one acre plot were marked by spraying v[1 th yellow paint. Deer pellets were not marked on the two plots to receive deer use because the pellets appeared weathered severely and wer-e scattered gr-oup lng , Thus, it vra a believed misageing wou Ld occur on the post-u.se count. to have from their characteristic that little error t hr-ough The plot size of one acre that was chosen for use will now be cons ldered. This explanation \,,,111 serve and be applicable, also, for the other nev"ly constructed acre) two-part or 2i acre one-part 5 acre· (2i acre by 2! exclosures to be considered in this report. The principal reasons for the one acr e plot size are concerned directly vlith the size of the exclosure regarding the performance parts and convenience of pellet group counts. It has been �-196- found through experience that the 2~ acre fenced study areas, in singles or combinations, economics have been about the largest that Hill 0.110'\11. Cost of deer and/or elk proof fencing has been, of course, the main factor high tota.l construction cost. contributing THo arid one-half to the acres in a square block has dimensions of 330 feet on a side. "lhich is approximately feet square, permits a fit within 209 the fenced squares '\IIi th a L'l.owance for perimeter These buffer zones tend to neutralize the fences U90D the vegetation One acre, buffer zones. po ss Lb'l.e i.nfluences of· from a.ccumulations of drifting snow and fence-ridi!l5 by game. NO\I, in consideratj.o'l of the fe.ctor of convenience acre plot in relation to pellet group counting, of the one the one acre area is not too large upon vlhich to make tota.1 counts. At the same time, results obtained are i;.nmedla.telyon a per acre basis. ca.LcuLe.tLone \v1ll reduce the inform- Subsequent ation to stockins rates exprese.ed in standard terms of acres per animal unit month or acres :per deer, elk, or sheep month. Resul ts : The af'or-emerrt f.oned procedures stocking rate determination conducted at this exc10sure. be available following ini tla.ted the animal phase of stUdies which are to be Partial first year results will the spring count of 19590 �-197- BROKE'['J ROAD DEER-CATTIJ: EXCLOSUEE Pellet Grouu Count Cbjectives: To determine the intensity of use by deer. on the outside study area and inside of the livestock part of the exc Lo aur-e for the fa11-\'rinter-sprlng season of 1957-58. Also, to determine on the outside Procedures: study area. I-iethodsemployed at this exc'loaur-e are the same as those outlined counts-at cattle use for the summer 1958 season previously the Antelope in this report for pellet group Pass Exclosure •. The dates of the counts were May 7, 1958 (to obtain a winter deer stocking rate) and September 25, ).958 (to obtain a summer cattle stocking rate). Resu1 ts: The indicated r-ate of stocking by d~er on the outside study area \-TaSfound to be 2.1 acres per deer-month for the fa11-\'1inter-spring season of 1957-58. For the same period the fIgure of 1.43 acres per deer-month was determined on the st.udy area inside of the livestock part •. N'o cattle fecal piles wer-e found on a check of the belt transects .outside on September 25, 1958, and very few were seen of the tra.nsects on adjacent Discussion and Recommendations: is being established the partially open range ar eaa , A possible significant trend when the use by deer 1s compared between protected (livestock) and unprotected plots. The outside unprotected plot appears to be receiving lighter use than does the area inside of the livestock part for each �~1J "'-, ".:,-. ......•• :,.~ -198- year that observations have been made up-to-date. An attempt will be made to determine the reason or reasons for this at the end of the fifth year. Here, as is the case at the Antelope Pass and Dead Bad3er Exclosures, plans are such that pellet group counting will extend continuously over a five year period. Very light use of this range by cattle is indicated from all of the fall counts made so far. CALLO'rTAYDEER-LriTESTOCK EXCLOSURE Introduction The Ca110\iay Deer-Livestock spring of 1958. recently Exclosure It is one of three which were established on or near what, is mown Range, a Federal Aid Development exclosure's was conat ruct.ed in the as the Browns Park Deer-Elk and Operations location by approximate . . . Project. legal description .' is the , SltTi, Section 1, and the WiT';-, Section i2 t Township Range 103 itTest, Sixth Principal The 10 North, }.!eridian,1-IoffatCounty, Colorado. The exclosure dimensions is 2i acre$ jn size, is square in shape, has of 330 feet on a side, and is of eight foot high, woven and barb wire, deer-proof construction. take advantage of deer and livestock of the separation In order to of the range, the exclosure was placed astraddle use the drift fence which bounds the lower Calloway tract on the south �-199- side. Thus, the exclosure projec~s out in triangular form from either side of the drift fence line, north into range used by deer, and south into range used by all classes of animals (deer, sheep, and some few cattle and horses) • Even though the exclosure has onl y one part, the name ""hich was given to it folloi'/Sthe rules that wer-e established previously (Baker, 1955). This is because, except for deer, the area north of the drift fence is protected gr-az Ing and is, in actuality, The exci9sure against a live,stock type of an exclosure. is on the northern margin of Browns Park~which is covered here by a mixed desert shrub type of vegetation. Slopes are gentle at the,exclosure to rise abruptly vegetative site, but the land begins vri thin a short distance 'type becomes pinon-juniper north. , Then the on the'rough, terrain along the foo,t of Cold Springs rocky l\iountain., ,Pellet Group Count Objectives: To determine the indicated intensity winter-spring use by deer on the one acre study area north of the drift fence and outside of the exclosure, the indicated intensity of fall-winter-spring and sheep combined and cattle and horses, of fall- and also, use by deer if present, on the one acre study area south of the drift fe'nce and outside the exclosure. Procedures: On June 27, 1958, all cattle and horse fecal of �-200- piles the outside one acre study ~lot south of the drift O~ f'ence wer-e mar-ked Ilith ye lLov pa.irrt, \'lascovered systematically by u5i~13 chalk lines as guide Ii ne s in stri !'9ing the area. out and eliminated This one acre area The fecal piles wer-e cancelled from possible inclusion in follow-u,:? counts, as hels been stated, through the use of paint sprayed from a pressure arid a large capac Lt y oil squirt gun. C8.n Deer and sheep Tlellet grou:~s wer-e not mar-ked on the outside plot south of the drift fence because the season of us~ will coincid.e for these clnsses of a.nimals and because errors in age ing the pellet sroups- of these a.nfrna'l s 1,"Ti11 'be slight due to the apparently severe wea ther-Lng summer follovling depoei tion. marked 011 "'hich occurs in the Deer pellet groups were not the one acre study area north of the drift fence for the sa:ue reason. It 'vrillbe necessary to use, exclusive of oattle and horses, the total pellet groups counted on the outside area south -. -,' ".' of the drift fence as combined total deer and sheep stocking rate beoause of the difficulty pellets fro~ these animals. in distinguishing It will be pOSSible, however~ to obtain some idea of the proportionate by subtraoting between share of sheep uS'e from the tot9.1 the determined rate of use for deer found for the outside plot north of the drift fence. The two outside plots are near enough to each other and with similar vegetative composition to enable the making of the aS3u::nptionstated in the preceding sentenoe. �-201- Results: Counts of pellet groups will be made in Mayor June of 1959 on the tvlO outside one acre treatments and will be reported upon in the next segment. Ran~e Vegetation Objectives: To determine Study (1) the density and composition by plant species and general classes of vegetation three one. acre study areas ,.and (2) com?osition by the most abundant on the the age...;formclass browse plant species for these same areas. -.. Procedures: The method of sampling range vegetation line interception method, as has been described (1950), was followed generally in establishing by the by Canfield base tables and lists of plant species by density and composition for each of the three one acre areas that are to be kept under observation at this exclosure. clarifications immediate So:ne minor modifications have been made in the method to better fit the· demands of wor-k time limitations of the method °to a predominantly A refinement and and the application shrub type of vegetationo in the line interception :procedure was used on this study and on the Irish Canyon Exclosure study to b~ reported on° in later paragra:;>hs (Baker~ 1956) The refinement clarified the technique continue to be employed when the line interception of measuring br-owse 0 plants and will method used. The three one acre study treatment corners were staked is �Q;"~ Q ~,J~(. ..'--.,.J. -202- in the manner followins the reasoning presented previously in the paragrauhs for Procedures under the heading Pellet GrOUD Count for the Bar D Deer-Cattle Exclosure. recommended exclosure study procedures by Canfield Using (1950) as guides, the r-ect.angular- one acre plot d:tmensions were set u:p to be 200 by 218 feet. Further subdivision of the one acre into 50 foot ;{ide strips organized the area into four e queL sized blocks which wer-e then divided in half to produce eight blocks eaual in size. Tr.• en using 6 inches as the spacing unit for the 50 foot trahsects, the locations of two t.r-anae ct.e for each of the eight blocks were selected f'r-ona table of random numbers. The south or southwest corner of each bloc}: was used as the starting point for Lo ca t Lng the transects. The total number of 16 transects per acre plot col~clded closely with the maximum number which could be read with the time available and still obtain a fairly acceptable degree of accuracy. Age-form class data by browse species were collected as the 50 foot transects were read. little rabbitbrush, All browse plants, except were assigned an age-form designation wi thin a foot "Tide belt. The belt was located on the right- hand side of the transect wire proceeding the 50 foot end. frqm the zero to If, at its point of emergence from the gr ound, 8.:1ypart of a br-owse plant stem was inside of the bel t the plant wa s cla.ssified and included on the work sheet. The Seedling age class wa.s set as any browse plant up to two inches in height. Seedlings were not classified �-203- as to form arid ..• -lerelumped and placed arbi trarilJ Class 1. in Form The age and form cLas sLf Lca'td.cn otherl'l1sefollowed that described by Dasmann (1951). Follol-rine;Grieb (1958), the density statistical analyses of confidence data wer-e subjected to to the extent that means, with limits at the .05 level, and standard deviations were computed for each species plus the broad classes of browse (overstory), grasses, "leeds, and the latter tl-l0combined, understory. Tests were also applied deternine the approximate that cho aen, and consequently, W§l_S have been feasible of increas1ng Results accuracy to the data in order to of the size of sample whether or not 1t would to incree.se the sample size, for the purpose· the degree of precision. a.nd Discussion: survey are summarized The'results exclusive of the range vegetation in Tables 1 through. 5. the plant species encountered transects as Table 6 lists on as v1ell as noted off of the of those receiving specific mention in Table 1. Because of the great variability distribution in the browse species and density, variable when comparisons conclusions were reached bet",een the three treatme::ltswere made in this base year information. For example, when a "t" test was performed on the data for total browse in the case of inside the deer exclosure part plot versus outside plot I (deer use only), no statement relative to the difference could be made at the e05 level on the basis of the sample size �Table 'f\',~ ::'!;:) . .•.-*JJ..~"""""'::J."'I.""'~ ..•....,,_,•. .:lPECI.t!.i:l OR CLASS Spiny Hopsage (Grayia spinosa) .&.~ •••• ~"'oL' ._,....,.~ ~:) 11 Th.i!.AT1'iliNT Inside Big Sagebrush (Artemisia trident.) Outside I II Greasewood (8arcobatus vermic.) • 1 f/.~~ ~.&~ ••. ' ..... 6 ...• ......,j,_, ...• )V 1"\ ~.,; ••..• z. I..... r) '7 ZZ .I,Zv ...•1. C'Q 8. Shadscale (Atriplex confert.) Little Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus sp.) I Sagebrush (A. spinescens) ;0 o ~ I BRmvs;E (OVERSTORY) Totals 100.00 100.00 GRASSES 1.9lt GRASSES AND \'lEEDS Out_sid~_I_~_9_.31 .58_ E=. _.26. .lta 1.16 100.00 100.00 100.00 (UHDERSTORY)Totals 11 For browse , this is based upon the total crown intercept by treatmen.t of a species divided by the total browse crown intercept for each treatment. Grasses and grass-like plants and weeds are grouped for computing composition because of similarity in growth form and method of measuring. 21 Plot is outside of the exclosure fence north of the drift fence and receives deer use only. 3/ Plot is outside and receives deer, sheep, and light cattle and horse use south of the drift fence. ~/ One plant of squirreltail (Sitanion hystrix). 2/ Includes 1.61 feet intercept of needle and thread (stiP comata); .16 foot of squirreltail; .20 foot of Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides); and.2 foot of sand drop seed (Sporobolus cryptandrus). 21 Includes .17 foot intercept of needle and thread and .10 foot of squirreltail. 5 �Table 2. --Calloway Deer-Livestock by Treatment. Sixteen FORH CLASS 1 (Subtotals) 2 (Subtotals) 3 (Sub.totals) AGE CLASS (Totals) Exclosure 50 by 1 foot - Summary of Age-Form Class Composition Belt Transects per Treatment. June, Inside Deer Part AGE CLASS No. of Plants % of Tot. Seedling 1/ 0 0.0 You.ng 4 _l6 . 3 Ha.ture 1 9.1 _ Decadent 0 0.0 Young 1 9.1 ha. ture 3 2'7. 3 Decadent 2 18.2 Young 0 0.0 Hature ' 0 0.0 DecaC!.§3_nt 0 _._9._Q__ Seedling 0 0.0 Young 5_ 45.4 Matw:e 4 ..3.6.4 Decadent 2 18.2 11 _ 100•..9 Dead 2( -1 ~-- TREATl'ilENT Outside I No. of Plants % of Tot. 0 2 : 1 . 2~.=0 0.0 25.0 _ .s. 1 0 4 0 Q!'_9 __ - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2_i.0 25.0 0.0 100.0 II % of Tot. 3 0.0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outside No. of Plants 5'0 • 0 0 of Shadscale 1958·. :: z .1 15.0 30 • 0 :: 1 : .i'!..o.. 2~O 3 fr.o 2 10.0 O~Q _ 5...!..9 __ _ _ 0.,:::;0=== 15~O 4-5 .~O _ 1.2.&__ 0 1 0 - 3 ._ 2. 5':: 3 20 0 - :;;_f~~o_ lliQ_ __ 100.0 -_- _ I N o V"\ 1/ 2/ All seed LLngs wer e placed in Form Class Totally dead'and intact (stem and root 1. parts I not separated). {~~ ',:\j ,.;:i; �(~~ '.:j /\, Table 3.--Calloway Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Sllillillary of Age-Form Class Composition of Big Sagebrush by Tre&tment. Sixteen 50 by 1 foot Belt Tran3ects per Treatment. June, 1958. TRE1-i.Ti·£i\i'l' Inside Deer Part Outside I Outside II No. of Plants iv of Tot. Ho. of Plants i& of Tot. No. of Plants ;~of Tot. FORJ:il CLAS3 AGE CLASS ---~---~Se-edling 1/ 1 Young (Subtotals) Hature Decadent Young 2 Ivlature (Subtotals) Decadent Young 3 Mature (Subtotals) Deg_adent Seedling AGE CLASS Young (Totals) iYIature : Decadent ___ :Dead 2% = 1/ 1. _.2..2 2l. 2 32.2 10 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 _l 1 _L.l 4 0 __ 1 0.0 0 ,-'l.l lIt. 3. 32 4 ~_ 1 l_ _ 28.6 7.2 32'..7 ::L_ ==:. 3i::t 3 2:h!L flL__ 100!..0 3----- .8.11seedlings wer-e placed in Form Class 1. 1~ ~1 .8 0.0 ~_ 5_ 4.1 3.2 _ 38 _ 16 0.0 11!..L_ 16":0-- 6 6.0 0 0 4 0.0 0.0 It.Q 5 - __ .5cs::0 _ 0 32 _lQ.~ ...3Q_ Z.O 0.0 32.0 _.3.9.0 23 _ ~7 16 16,,-,0 __ , 13 __ 19-.6 10 _..l_1±4_ 39 ..3.2._ Iv._<L._ ___It._&__ 35.0 _lOO.O 1<2.0 100._Q.._ 1+5: __ 42 _ ~Q. _ 22 gl Totally dead and intact (stem and root parts not separated). ....l~.6 ~ I ro S?I �Table ~.--Calloway Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Swrunaryof Age-Form Class Composition of Greasewood by Treatment. Sixteen 50 by 1 foot Belt Transects per Treatment. June, 1958. TREl:~THBHT FORH CLA;:)S AG}!; CLASS Seedling i/ 1 Young (Subtotals) Mature Decadent YOVng 2 Mature 19J1btotals) Decadent Young 3 Mature Subtotals) Decadent Seedling AGE CLASS Young (Totals) Mature Decadent Dead 21 Inside Deer Part Outside I Outside II No. of Plants ;{, of Tot. No. of Plants 16 of Tot. No , of Plants I~ of Tot. 1 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 22.0 0 0 1 0.0 1+.2 2 8.3 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 i4 6 _ 0 .0 0 0 - 1+.2 58.3 l~ 4.2 62.2 33.3 0 21+ 0.0 100.0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0.0 0.0 Z 63.6 0 0.0 0 3 27.3 O.~) 0 0.0 1 ~ 0 0 0 1 10 0 11 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 0.0 100.0 I r0 o -.J I II All seedlings were placed in Form Class 1. g; Totally dead and intact (stem and root parts not separated). (~d "\J ":~' �~,:> '.'>J i-'~~~~ Table 5.--cal1oway Deer-LivestoclcExclosure - Summary of Age-Form Class Composition of Spiny . hopsage by Treatment. Sixteen 50 by 1 foot Belt Tr~nsects per Treatment. June, 1958. TREA.THEN'"T Inside Deer Part Outside I Outsice II FORi'! CLA.SS AGE C!JA3S 1 No. of Plants % of Tot. No. of Plants % of Tot. No. of Plants ~~of Tot. Young 1 2.1 1 3.a .9 1 Mature 1 2.1 1 3. 4 6.~ Subtotals) Decadent 1 2.1 0 0.0 2 3. 0.0 0 0.0 2 4 • 16 2~ Subtotals 20.0 18 _ 31.0 0.0 0 0.0 3 20.0 12.1 LSjJ._Q_tot~ls ) 10.0 7 12.1 Young 3 6.2 1 It ----- - 6.~ ~ature 25 20 6 .7 27 46: Decadent 20 1.7 9 30.0' ~_2_ 46.5 100.0 30 100.O~ _______i_EJ- 100.0 Dead 2T~~--- - ~-- ----, 1 1 Z2.1 I l:3-~~n " I 1'0 1/ Y No seedlings were found on the transects. Totally dead and intact (at.emand root parts not separated). Table 6.--List of Plants Found on the Calloway Deer-Livestock Exclosure One Acre Study Plots Not Receiving Specific Mention in Tables 1 - 5. 1. 2. 3. Spiny Horsebrush - Tetradymla spino5~ Scarlet Globemallow - Sphaeralcea coccinea Oheatig rass Brome - Bromus tectorum o CD I �-209- taken. This was true total 'deeds were tested. b=ush , greasewood, these other total gr-s.s se s data and the site the species the .001 differences at and at the other The a rm here, with as great spiny hopaa ge and On the same two treatments, significant the a.Lao when da.ta for hand, new exclosures, a ho~ogeneity to begin ,\,Ti th and to better for re-evaluations. voce) if of course, if statistical conSideration was mainly to have, be able are' available the differences to in future Jack Grieb even though differences tests cover exist (viva in the which ,,'1111 take and detect much change, hO\-T any, has occurred. Originally, to detect the goal waa to have a sample size changes of 5 per cent Sample size requirement br'owse from inside accuracy desired been required tests at run on the was found, to detect also, that to detect a 20% change. accuracy appears to be approximately carried outo of accuracy. data i'or total and 1twas exclosure the As many 8.S 51 wou'Ldhave required and similar enough would have been needed to obtain in the beg innf.ng , It great 95% level exc'Losur-e part, to have been able the 95% level. the wer-e of the deer found tha.t 92 transects this was to select any wer-e detected, ' Advice from Statist:1.cia'n LndLcat.ea that, beginning, into change's, showed of the vegetative everjrthing reasons class from level. The purpose, assign were tested and the as was possible. equal when big sage- a. 107&' change at 13 transects This latter the level investigations degree \"Tere of at which vlil1 have to be �-210- DEAD BADGER DEER-CATTLE EX CLOSURE Pellet Groun ~ount Ob.lectives: To determine (Il the indicated stocking rates by deer on the outside and insic1.elivestoclc exclosure. part study areas for the fall-"dnter-spril1.g season of 1957-58, and {2} the i"(ldicatedrate of stocking by cattle on the outside area for the fall season of 1957. Procedures: The permanently read on Hay 8, 1958. counted and r-emoved located belt transects were Deer and cattle pellet groups were from the four transects on the outside area under observatio:::1. Deer pellet groups were counted and removed livestoc~ from the study area. transects inside of the :part of the exclosure. The outside study area transects fecal groups on September vrer-e checked for cattle 25, 1958, and less than 2 were found Lnd i ca t Lng that there was some possible light use in the summer of 1958. The figure for the September count "Till be added to the 1959 spring count rather than make a separate computation because the observation is not significant by itself and the bulk of the use in the past has been in the fall. Results: The indicated outside unprotected rate of stocking by deer on the study area for the fall-"Tinter-spring season of 1957-58 was found to be 8.33 acr-es per deer-month. On the study area inside of the livestock part of the exclosure, �-211- the indica.ted month for by deer> vas 4.35 acres st.ockang rate the stockinS for 1957, season was determined fal1~ rate per a nf maL unit month. some few cattle wer-e summer of 1958. the pattern feca.l evidenced piles by cattle Discussion indicated Hcwever-, since previously, area in has not been the observations, the in September, 1958, 'l:lill be .,.,hich wer-e counted found by the cattle fevl count to be done in the and Recom:nende.tio~1S: From the results that deer hiGhest years of pellet of the hand, over the three \'lith the stocking numbers of deer vlinteri:a.g location of this in this of the exclosure. is is concern limits ordinarily the About perhaps exclosure of the Middle Park the bulk of the the time when the aru ma'ls are on the move, up or down elevation. The relatively mild "linter receives On the cause connected Because wer-e were the vicinity. ral::.5e under averc,ge condi tiol1s, use "'hi ch the area that group counting. finding on what aonear-e to be the upper "linter rat.es the r_<:: ..teEl_w~r.e not hi€9?-enough to only significance deer this a.rea to be 5.43 acres to have been. on the obt.a rned it was noted is outside of 1959. spring the on the As has beeo mentioned by previous added to the total other deer- sa~e season. The indicated the per of 1957-58 could have a.Ll.owed period of ra::1ge occupation spring season thus at a ccount.Lng in ccmpar-Lao n '\.'11 th the rates the deer a longer any tLi1e within the fall-"llnter- for the sreater s t ock f.ng ra.tes f'ound for the periods winter in �--212- in previous years. The stocking rate by cattle on the outside open range does not seem eicessive considering that the season of use is in the late fall. If the stocking r-at.e s for 1956 and 1957 vlere applied to spring and/or spring-sunnner periods of use, I would say that the rates would be too great for proper range maintenance. HORN GULCH DE~R EX8LOSU?E Pellet Group Count Objective: To determine the indicated rate of stocking by deer on the one-quarter acre outside study area for the fall-winter-spring Procedures: season of 1957-58. .The lack of anow cover perinitted a count of pellet grou;_Jsto be done April 24, 1958. acre plots Here staked outg sldesJ one each Two one-eighth on the east and west outside and adjacent to the one-quarter acre exclosure. The plots wer-e stripped systemat1cally, wer-e counted exclusive of gr-oups and all pellet groups appear-a ng to be a year old or older. Resul ts: The indicated rate of s t.ock i ng by deer was found to be 4 acres per deer-month for the fall-\vinter-spring season of 1957-58e �-213- Discussion and Recom~endations: The rate of stocking deter- mined for the 1957-58 ,",r:1_·"ter aeo.son 1s not h:1.Shin spite of the fa.ct thD.t this writer believes highest it to have been the since the ar-ea has been under personal Sagebrush obaer-vatd on , plants were in a. good state. of and bitterbrush heal th and shoved vigorous current annual growth 0 Sltimmlng use that was noted on the current gro"7th corresponded the results of the stocking .;..~ 'I I: ., II!' TT ~=l,r/flr IRI3H 1'." r2,te determination ,,,1 th procedures ~ ",u' ': 'I" /I 'l'lfl":t!t if iffJ-ihfr:' tN/I? 11'ir lfti"ifir'lr CArrYON DE:SR-Lr.TESTOCK EXCLOStrR~ Introduction The two and one-half acre deer-proof part of the Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock Exclosure was constructed Fish Department in I:rovember,1957 ~ The cxclosure on public domain and, through by the Game a.nd an agreement was placed with the Bureau of Land ~,;ianagement ~ was to have had an ad jo Lnf.ng 2~· acre sheep-proof part built on at that ti~e by a local permittee of the Bureau. available The Game and Fish Department for this additional constructions had made materials however 9 because of mfsunder-at.and fngs the wor-k was not accomplished De cember- until of 1958. The exclosure is located on the plain at the edge of Br-owns Park about one mile southwest of the southern Irish Oanyon 1n northwestern Harrat Count Yo a sandy allU"l.rial wash whlch has hig sagebrush entrance to The site is as the most �-214- abundant plant species. Deer have used the area consistently for a winter-spring season place of concentration. Shee~ are permitted ra!J.S8in the w i rrt er- and spring. Cattle are permitted on the area 1':]' the fall and spring. has been de t.r-Lment.aL on this Use by all animals apparently to the p Larrt cover. It is hoped that through this study an answer can be found to the question of "That effect the deer have in the present poor range condition. Pellet ~roun Cou~t ObJectives: To determine the combined r-at.e of st.ock Ing by deer and sheep on a one acre unprotected Irish Ca.nyon Exclosure plot outside of the for the fall-winter-spring season of 1957 -58. Procedures: On April 17, 1958, the corners of the proposed 2k acre sheep-proof exclosure addition to the existing acre deer exclosure ~ere surveyed a~d staked. 2i Following that, a one acr-e square plot was surveyed and staked wi thin the propo$eAboundarien day a systematic of the livestock addition~ The next count of deer, sheep, and ca.ttle fecal groups was made on the one acre plot .• on the count an atte8pt was made to distinguish bet\'Teenand keep separate tallies of the winter deposited deer and sheep pellet groups. However , because of the uncertainties identification» the numbers of pellet groups were combined for the presentation of the results. in Signs, such as the La ck �-215-, of woo l collected on the shrubby p'l-arrt s and the thEm numerous fresh deer t.r-a cks 0::1 the' ar-ea, te~ded to indicate, that probably deer had outnumbered sheep in the use of the plot. The cattle stocking rate determined questionable due to the fact that a starting point had not been established date. fro~ the count was by marking out all groups at aome previous Conslderable error was pos sfb'le in the ta.lly through the misa.geing of the fecal piles. The information was obtained and is pr-e sent.ed ,herein with the condition might be erroneous. In order to ~orrect possible - -- errors dUe to misageing :that it future -_ .. ,_ of the cattle fecal groU'ps~ all groups on the outside one acre plot wer-e marked ,y-1thyellow paint. This procedure the range vegetation Results: "Tas' done on June 13 t 1958 s following survey. The combined deer and sheep stocking rate on the outside plot was found to be .93 acre per deer and sheep month for the fall-winter-spring The indicated season of 1957-58. stocking rate by cattle on the outside plot was found to be 15.6 acres per animal unit monthQ mentioned, As has been this fig;ure is subject to question and is presented here only for the punpoae of showing that recent use waa made 'of the area. by cattle. Discussion and Recommendations: It is apparent first year stocking rate determination from this that the combined use �-216- of the area by sheep and deer was in the catsgor-y of severe. The count in the spring of 1959 will result in a better appraisal of the deer at.o ckdng rate through separation of the animals by the livestock exclosure fence. The low density of the perennial grasses in the p'l.arrt composition (Table 7) suggests that this range is very poor for cattle. The great abundance of cheatgrass will increase the sraz in_s capacity for the sea.son of spring use. In spite of this, cheatgrass, an annual, is not considered as being part of the pla~t cover. This practice has been followed generally by most range and plant ecologists who employ intensive types of study methods. Range Vegetation Survey Objectives: To deter~jne (1) the density and composition by plant s:pecles and ge!:era1 classes of vegetation on the three one acre study areas, and (2) the age-form class composition of big sagebrush for these same areas. Procedures: Techniques employed in making this base year inventory of the plant cover at the Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock Exclosure were the same as those that have been presented previously in this report for the study done at the Calloway Deer-Livestock Exclosure. acre plots representing Rectangular, 200 by 218 foot~ one three different treatments were surveyed and staked within the established deer-proof exc10sure part, within the then proposed boundaries of the livestock �-217- part (subseque:1tly built unprotected on), and on the outside ra~ge. The one acre "91otS·,.•ere subdivided for .t.he Calloway Exclosure transect adjacent locations study, in the manner described and 16 li!1e interception for each plot "rere selected ble of r-andom numbers.. The field from a ta- work was accomplished June 10 - 13, 1958. Results line interception ..'.. clearly three and Discussion: The summaryof the results transect in Table 7 shows inventory .r-a-ige of the .tbat ...'91g . ~~g€)1JrusIl. domtna t es th~ vec~~.!o(3::tion on all of the one acr-e -plots. entered Other browse spe cLes which into the composition were little rabbitbrush, spiny hopaage , fourwins sal tbu.sh, and gr._easewood. These latter species were of minor importance. TvlO epecdes of pere::::mial grasses 8rass density. A perennial made up the entire They were squirreltail.and bluegrass (Af.,ro-oyronsmithi1) (Poa sp.) and western wheatgrass however, occurrence was so rare that . (Sphaeralcea needle and thread. were noted as being present encountered on the 48 transects. perennial neither Scarlet on the p'Loba , species was globemallow coccioeum) was also noted as being present very minor amounts on the plots and insufficient in; in quantity to be measured on the transects. It can be noted, the total e.Lao, on Table 7, how low in density understory species. Perennial grasses were and weeda �t~<} Table 7. --Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect Summary of Ground occupation and Perc errt age Composition, by Species and/or Major Plant Class. Heasurements to Hundredths of Feet. June, 1958. ;:;~ i'~1 l'ERCENTAGE COl-fPOSITION11 Inside Inside Deer Livestock Outside SPECIES .. OR CLASS TREATMENT Big Sagebrush Ins. Deer (Artemisia Ins. Live. tridentata) Outside Little Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus sp ,) Spiny Hopsage (Grayia spinosa) Fourwing Saltbush (Atriplex canescens) Greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus) 0.00 1.20 -- 0.00 ~ !-I 0) I BROVJSE (OVERSTORY) Totals Ueedle and Thread (Stipa comata) 100.00 ~_ L_~_.j_' J.7/ •..••• f f ~}.)c.. 100.00 ,J..~. Ins. Deer . 1.16 .~~:t .o~ .16 .14 32.95 b.l.'ilf4 Ins. Live. ..1.19 .07 ~ .04 .08j .15 6Outsid..L_ 1.20 .075 :I: .(j~0 .132 ~ .... ·.15 33.90 Sq:uirreltail Ins. Deer 1.41 .088 ~ .0 3 .12 .18 40.06 (Sitanion hystrix) Ins. Live. .75 .ort7 ± .027 .05.3 .09 ~8.66 Outside .77 .olt8:t: .•O~2· .061 21:7rJ .10 Ins. Deer 2.57·· .•16 ± .11 .21 .32 Ins • Live. 1.-9Lt - - - -.12 ~ --.-00·--:-11--·-. ---:2It GRASSES 1:97-·-:-12-±-~08 ~_l2 Subtotals Outside (Prickly Pear Ins. Deer .95 .059 .075 .138 .12 26.99 1;lEEDSOpuntia spp.) Ins. Live. 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 Subtotals _9ut:kicle 0L .098 ±_.151 .,285 • .19 :: 44.3;:Inside Deer 3.52 .22~· .l~ .24 .44 GRASSES AND WEEDS Ins. Live. 1.2lt .i2 ±.O .11 .24 100.00 100.00 100.00 {1JND.Elt.$'IPRY)Totals Outside 3.5lt .22:b .li .294 .4lt _.1/._ for browse, this is based upon the total crown intercept by treatment of a species divided by the total browse crown intercept for each treatment. Grasses and grass~like plants and weeds are grouped for computing composition because of similarity in growth form and method of measuring. * .~ �~2l9- with the latter composed entirely of prickly pear cacti (Opuntia spp.) occupied less than one-half of one percent of the ground area sampled. Sample size determinations on the big sa.gebrush data indicated that density changes of slightly greater than 20% at the .• 05, level could be detected using the 16 transects per plot inside or the livestock ,and deer parts of the exclos:ure. The dat~ were a bit,less precise fot- the outs1.d~ . . -. plot and indicated that density changes of considerably greater than 20 percent were ,ali th~t could be detected. vlhen the to~al br-ovse inter,cept data' we,re sub,jected to sample size tests, it was fou,nd that on two treatments the mmorspecies tended to dec:J;'ease the var.1ab111ty :Q~haps by filling some of the, S'Pace not occupied by the sagebrl1sJ:'l. ThusI' si.%teen tra'!lsectswer-e found to be sufficient to detect 20% changes of the total br-owse on the two treatments inside of the fences. Variability of the sagebrush was compensated only, slightly on the outside plot, and sixteen transects there still were considerably less than what wou l.dhave been required to detect a 20% change. The total browse crown intercept data from the three treatments were tested by the "titformula. Significant difference was found (.05) in the cases of inside deer part versus inside livestock part and inside deer part versus outsideG ·1'10 statement could be made from the test (.05) of total browse �•.. 220- intercept data from inside the livestock part versus the outside. Big sagebrush wa s found to be significantly greater (.05) on the plot inside of the deer part of the e~closure than on the outside plot. No statement (.05) could be made for this spacie~ from tests on d~ta between the two inside exclosure parts and from i 1side the livestock part versus 0 the outside. The results of the lit" tests are. not of great importance at this time, however, mentioned in the discussion for reasons a.lready presented for the Calloway Exclosure. The summary of aEe-form cla.ss composition on the three t.r-ea t nent s is presented of big sagebrush 1.n Table, 8. It ",as noted from this summary that the percentages of the various ase and form classes ",ere fairly comparable throughout. An exception to t.hat conformity was the outs ide plot I S propor- tionately fevler seedlings and more decadent plants than on the other two treatments. Also, there wer-e considerably fewer plants on the outside transects. That fact, coupled with a greater number of dead plants and a lighter density (Table 7), tended to indicate that the sagebrush was in poorer condition on the outside area as compared with the t".lOfenced areas. The cause of the relatively poorer condition and lower density of sagebrush on the outside treatment in this beginning vias probably related to site and location factors.. The year �Table 8.--Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Summary of Age-Form Class Composition of Big Sagebrush by Treatment. Sixteen 50 by 1 foot Belt Transects per Treatment. June, 1958. TREATi·iENT Inside Deer Part Inside Livestock Part Outside FORl-! CLAS'::) AGE CLASS I,To. of Plants % of Tot. No. of Plants fa of Tot. No. of Plants ~b of Total Seedling 11 365 67~7 408 66.0 181 60.9 1 Young _ 3D ID.O 109 17.7 41 13.8 (Subtotals) Mature 16 3.0 1 .2 0 0.0 Decadent 13 2.4 0 0.0 1 _J Young 7 Id_ 7 1.1 8 2.2 2 Mature 15 2.8 12 2.4 6 2.0 _l:~_1.!.PtotaW_Pecadent 31 5.8 31 .5.3 24 8.1 Young 0 Q.O 2 .3 4 1.4 3 Mature 1 .1 11 1.8 6 2.0 (~.iO_talV D_~~<ient __ 3_ ~__ .l2 ....-2.2 26 8.8 Seedling 365 62.7 408 66.0 181 bCl.9· AGE CLliSS Young 93 12.3 118 19.1 53 17.9 (Totals) NaturL_ 52 2:.9 27 1+.1+ 12 If.o ____ -=--:--~D.;:..;eq_adent1+9 9.1 62 1'M __21_ 17.2 :eotal§.. Z.l2._ e e 10.0.Q ~18 100.0 292 100.0 Dead 2(,. 39 55 _ _ --=6..... 5 ----_ I N N I-' I 1/ All seedlings were arbitrarily placed in Form Class 1 because their general form indicated 2/ little past use on them. Also, many seedlings were newly established, perhaps within the year prior to this examination. Those plants approaching the 2 inch height separating the S.eedlingand Young Classes undoubtedly wer-e greater than a year old. Totally dead and intact (stem and root parts not separated). (.J t. I_.>J ,'.1 t\1 ,~d.· <f" �-222- outside there plot on a sheep w mt er- feed bordered "TaS much evidence broken dOT/Tn the brush that vehicles ground, as well and as sheep had mechanically. SAGUACh""E PARK EXCLOSURE Introduction The Sa.suache Park Exclosure in a cooperative of 1956 of the Game and Fish W8.,S effort Department constructed in the between the sout.nwes t Region and the the Rio Grande ~Jational the Department to the Forest Service, the necessary labor the The eight of just foot slishtly Forest. to build than Saguache District of were supplied by Haterials ~nd the latter provided fence an area fence. hie.h deer acd elk proof less summer one acre. enclosed The exclosure is located about one mile sout.hwes t of vhaf is known as the Salt House and is on the crest v/est out of the first north- south draw west of the a s~all the of the rise Salt House at the amount of an aspen grove. rectangular fence projects edge of and enclosing From the southwesterly edge of the aspen into the grassland type. By rough a?proximation, 12, Tovmship 44 North, l4eridian, Saguache the exclosure Range 2 East, County. The lack and good mays prevented doing a better prior of this to the preparation is probably in Section New ].~exico Principal of land report. survey corners job of legal locating �-223- Even though the exclosure had been in place for two years, it was felt that changes in the plant cover had not occurred in a quantity (if at all) sufficient value of the investigation. to detract from the There is the possib1lity, also, that the results might further enhance m'7d correlate with the information obtained by the study on the new 2 acre let-down el.k exclosure in th1s vicinity in the Park. The area is used by cattle from about July 1 to October 1 and by elk and a few deer in the fall, winter, and spring. Use by t.he sa.me spec1es 1s rare or non-existent probably to the close proximity in the summer due of the spot to human activity. Pellet Group Count Ob.ject1ves: To determine the indicated rate of stocking cattle on a ~ acre plot outside summer- of the exclosure by for the see.son of 1958. Procedures: One-half acre plots wer-e surveyed and staked inside of the exclosure fence and outside nearby ",est of the fence on June .$, 1958. The following day all cattle fecal piles on the outside 9lot were marked with yello'\t; paint "TaS done to avoid possible errors due to misageing. 0 The folloH-up count was done in the fallon Results: A totai of 46.5 cattle fecal groups were tallied on the outside plot with the October This October 13. count. Expanded o~ a per acre basis and then converted to months use, the number of groups equalled the 'stocking rate of 3.9 acres per AU}!. The r-at.e .••• ra s applicable for the three mo nt.us summer season �-224- of 1958. Discussion and Recommendations: The indicated cattle stocking rate of 3.9 acres per AmI was some .•.. rhat heavier than the Forest Service estimated rate of 10 acres per AUH which the Saguache Park a.llotment is supposed. to be receiving. the exclosure is !lot far from a water develonment~ coupled ",ith the affinity near fences, and this, cattle have for riding and collecting could possibly explain the apparent heavy use on the outside area. No particular recommendations until more infor~i1ation is available know'l.edge However, ties in \"lithchanGes, can be made regardi'l.ghow this if any, that occur in the vesetation. Range Vegetation Ob,lectives: To determine Survey the density and composition plant species and general classes of vegetation inside protected and outside unprotected by on the one-half acre plots. Procedures: The methods used in accomplishing the inventory of plants on the two plots at the Saguache Park Exc10sure generally the same as has been described the Calloway Exclosure". in this report for The only variation number of line interception transects ,Tere was in the that were established and read. The rectangular one-~~lf acre plot dimensions were setup to �. _.'._..' 1,&1 L, -225- be 150 feet by 145 feet. The dimensions allowed.the plots to be subdivided into six equal sized, 50 foot ~Tide subunits. Ple,cer:1e~ts of t~TOtransects were randomly selected for each subunit making a total of 12 transects for each of the two one-half acre study areB.S. , Both the inside and, outside -plots were placed in the Grassland type. . It was necessary.to maneuver the plot " corners 'inside of the exclosure ,iIlorder to avo ~d the,aspens and the problem of .. sampling another type which here was a very minor portion of'the area encl.osed. The field work o.f'reading the transects was done' JUly 10 and, 'II, 1958. Results a.ndDiscussion: ,Grasses and weed's ocq~red in about equal pro:portions in ,the understory 'on the two plots (see Table 9). Slimstem muhly (I.Iuhlenbergiafi11culmls) occupied the most 'ground of the grasses on,both areas with Idaho fescue' (Festuca idahoensis) very near it in density inside. The ap:parently drier outside plot had more fringed sage (Artemisia frigide.). The total density of the understory species on both :plots did .not reach 10 percent wh;1ch reflects the general picture of the grassland ty~e in the Park. Sample size determinations were done on the,'total understory data for each treatment and indicated that changes of from 10 to 20 percent at the .05 level could be detected on the plots with the 12 transect sample number. This was also the case �(·~~:t ,..':~ /\J .. Table 9.--Saguache Park Exc10sure - Line Intercept Transect Summary of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition, by ~pecies and/or Major Plant Class. Measurements to Hundredths of Feet. July, 1958. TOTAL INTEBCEPT 12 - 50' TRANJECTS SPECIES OR CLASS Big Rabbitbrush STD. DEV. COH.[JO.:HTION 11 Outside PERCENTAGE OF GROmm OCCUPIED 100.00 Inside Outside Inside Outside. Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outis Lde Inside Outside Inside 20.96 1.75.:t: .83 . .02 ± 3.60 -30 ± --~--- Junegrass (Koelaria cristata) Parry Oatgrass (Danthonia ~arr~i) Idaho Fescue (Festuca idahoensis) Squirre1tail (Sitanion h~strix) Mat Muhly (M. richardsonis) GRASSES AND GRASSLIKES Subtotals Fringed Sage (Artemisia frigida) Cinquefoil (Potentilla hippiana) Ol.l-tside----:70 Sandwort (Arenaria rendleri) ------ - • c... -, -- .35 .02 .13 ----- •••.• .57 .0I+ ~21 3.4-9 .lrf .c....•.. 35.37 2.02 - - .60 6.08 - - .--., T. (V .27 ."14- ... 2.73 12.22 1.37 l. .17 1.67 .12 1.18 .0.00 --:66 -±- .02 .04- I ro ro .80 o-, I �Table 9.-- Saguache Park Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect Summary (continued). STD. SPECIES OR C1AS~ Pussy toes PERCEN'l'1-!.GE OF tlBRCENT AGE COi{20SITIOi{ 11 - 0.00 sp , ) Beardtongue (Penstemon sp.) Onion (Allium sp.) WEEDS Subtotals WEEDS, GRASSES,& Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside GRASS -LIKES (UNDERSTOH Totals Outside .07 .02 .89 .~7 .02 .01 .03 0.00 .16 .01 .01 .22 0.00 .006 ± .01 .002 ± .07~ ~ .0 .031 ± .02 .002 ± .00 .001 ± .OO~ .008 .00_3_u±__._004--.-_Q_()~8 .01___ 59.25 ~.9~ ~ .6~ 1~01 _ .• - 0.00 .1 0.00 .0 2.22 .0 .",2 .0 0.00 .02 I N .07 0.00 .013::l: .020 .031 .02 ~001 ± .00li·- :Oo-S-----.001 ± .004--~-0-68 0.00 .01~r:f:--=--o3~o61---0.00 •ott .003:t: .-60lf -.008 19.70 1.64 :!;u .44. __ .70 28.lfOlfO2.37 :b .73 1.13 40.13 3.31t-~1f~:13-~·-----6.-68- .... N 0.00 -J I .40 ---0.00------------- .• 02 .02 -- .olf .37 0.00 .01 .07 3.28 __ __ ~9.09 4.7It -------u~1f8.00 100.00 9.88 100.00 !I For browse this is based upon the total crowuintercept by treatment of a species divided by the total browse crown intercept for each treatment. Grasses and grass-like pl.ants and weeds are grouped for computing. composition because of 'similarity in growth form and method of measuring. (~\~ ,/~> i'h) �-228- "'ith grasses t.akeri as a class. standard dev La t.Lo-is AlthouSh tests were not made, found for each set of data by species wou Ld tend to 51ve streng;th to the assumption the.t changes of greater than 20 percent wou l.d have to be present before differences could be detected. The re?eat reading of the line interception be done after five years have elapsed. will be lessened tra.nsects will The time interval if large changes become appa.rent before then. T'\tTenty-year-oldForest Service exclosures located eLsewher e in the Park indicate that important density and composition chanses do not occur over short spans of years. 'I r- ,. " •• '/ "/' 'I" " " "!JJllj'" ;'"-1r":c:'7-r' ir'' ' ;;=/,°11:,,/, '~/:l-l"':;/; :';::r''ITT I" :11., ••. It '.'" "J1.1l' ~~:r'.'~trTt' I J ,II SAGUACHE PARK CATTLE ExdLOSURE Introduction Report of Construction: vlaS constructed The Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure by perso:lnel of the Saguache District of the Rio Grande I:-Ja tional Forest in June, 1958. }1ost of the materials for the fence were supplied by Federal Aid Project VT-IOI-R-I. wer-e Eighty, 6·§- foot treated posts at a cost of $64 •.00 the only ne.... l item.s purchased. Four rolls of barb \"ire, staples, and smooth .br-a ce wire wer-e obtained from a small store of surplus fencing materials. The Forest Serviqe supplied and used their own steel posts on one side and in places wher-e it was e.asier to drive posts than to dig post �-229- holes because General of the rocks. Information: gr-aaaland hillside The exclosure is located on the open just south of the Continental Divide at the north rim of Saguache Park a.bout one mile east of the Salt Rouse. is approximately The elevation The site is fairly tY9ical of the moderately 10,700 feet. dry west-facing sLooe s found t n the Parl;:. Probably not so typical, hOVlever, is'the use that the elk appeared to have been rml;:ingof the area compared with the estimated average for the Park. vary the locations Since elk tend usually wher-e they winter, it was thought to that if elk alone affect the range, results wou Ld show sooner where consistently exclosure heavier use was present. site was selected criterion vias the abundance by the presence _Thu_s, whe:q._ the in late May of 1958, the main of old and recent sign evidenced of pellet groups. Two acres was the size chosen for the exclosure •. The shape is square, and 'the sides measure 295 feet in length. The fence is four strand with wooden stays and is so constructed that the '\-Tire can be dropped or restrung with relatbre The let-do\-lntype of fence construction order to faci·litate separation elk and cattle uae. ease. was used here in of the elk from the combined Elk use alone is obtained by having the fence, up through the summer season when the cattle are on the area and elk are not present and then d~opning it in �-230- October to allo,,{free access for the elk through the fall, w i nt.e r , and early spring periods. Pellet GrouD Count Objectives: To determine the indicated rate of stocking by cattle on the outside one acre plot for the summer grazing season of 1958. Procedures: Following the establishment of the one acre outside plot corners June 6, 1958, all cattle fecal groups on the plot were marked with yellow paint. All unmarked groups wer e then counted October 13 on the outside plot. These groups wer-e aLso marked with yellow paint as they were tallied in order to ,eliminate them from possible census in the future. Results: A total of 35.5 fecal groups were counted on the one acre plot outs ide. per acre, .01 animal months use per acre, and 10 acres per AU",! indicated Discussion This figure equalled ?,.95 days use rate of stocking by cattle. and Reconnendations: The indicated rate of stocking found for the outside plot is, by circumstance, exactly equal to that which the Forest Service has established for the Saguache Park allotment. It is too earlY1 of course, to assign what, if any, significance range influent from this information. the cattle have as a �•.. 231- Range Vegetation Objectives: To determine Survey the dens~ty and composition pla.nt species and general classes of vegetation .inside·protected plot accessible outside unproteoted Procedures: plots.inside plot used by elk and cattle. range study method was the inventory of plants on the one ac~e and'outside plot dimensions on the to elk only and upon the The line interception used to determine of the two acre exolosure. and sampling techniques previously for the Calloway Deer-Livestock Exclosure .• The field work was accomplished July 7-9. 1958. and Discussion: in this report As is shown in Table 10, slimstem muhly predominates 1n the grasses and grass-like in the composition on both plots. .muhly, and squirreltail The are the same as .those· which have been described Results by Junegrass, plant category sedges, mat were the minor components of the same category. Fringed sage was found to be even more abundant more ground than slimstem muhly 6n the plots. the predominant and occupied It was by far weed. Sample size tests which wer-e done on the data from the 16 transects on both treatments For example, showed variable results. on the inside plot it was determ:l.ned that the sixteen transects would detect changes between 005) in the total grass cover. 10 and 20% (at Changes of between 5 and 10% �t:.;.:,; ,\»)l ~:;D Table lO.--Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure - Line Intercept Transect Summary of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition, by Species and/or Hajor ..tJlant Class. HeasureIilents to Hundredths of Feet. July, 1958. SPECIES OR CLASS Slimstem Muhly (M. filicu1mis) Sedges (Carex spp.) Junegrass ,{Koelaria cristata) Nat Nuhly (M. richardsonis) Sq;_uirrel tail '(Sit~ion h~strix) GRASSES AND GRli.8SLIKES Subtotals Cinquefoil (P. pennsylvanica) .Fringed Sage (Arte~sia fr~ida) Loco - 1- TREATHEHT Inside TRANSECTS Iv1EAN .63 .032 ± .036 ± .006 ± DEV. PERCENTAGE OF PERCENTAGE GROUND OCCUPIED Inside COJYiP08IT ION Outside ••••••••••• Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outs~ __ Inside Outside .58 .10 t" " .68 -~-- Inside L;... -- ... '-- - .ort3 :I: .20 .013 ± i.67 .2i ::I: -- • or;: .OZ2 .04 .01 •..•... -' .123 .02 •• .08 --:01- - - -- --~ .01 .08 "V .03 .01 .055 .02 .10 ~10 .1t55 .59 OJ ~. ._,/-v OJ .22 .02 .. .03 .20 .29 2_• •51 WEE;D8 Subtotals WEEDS, GRASSES, & GRASS-LIKES Totals Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside .02 .1 .0 0.00 26•02 It.Z6 ± .68 1.26 99.10 6.19 + .76 1.lt1 .62 .01 . 12.39 I I\) .\_.V -_.- .----.-,-100.00 I\) I �-233- (at .05) could be detected from'16 transects for total grasses data on the outside plot. As a result of lit" tests done on total weed, fringed sage, JunegrasB, aad sedge data from inside ve::,susthe outside, significance at the .001 level was obtained. are not important These differences nov except to show' that in spite of using care in choosing a site vlith a maximum uniformity vegetative of the cover, it was not p~ssib1e by visual appraisa~ obtain plots to st&rt \-lithapproaching equal densities and compositions. This, of course, has been the rule rather the, exception from sLni1ar investigations exc10sures (Calloway, it must be expected assurances resolve than done at the other Irish Canyon, and Saguache in the future. to, Fortunately, Park), and there are that sta.tistical tests can be employed to help the problem that these base year differences seem to present. SINBAD VALLEY DEER-CATTLE EXCLOSURE Range Vegetation Objectives: forage To determine Survey the progress of recovery species under the three different treatments of key of graz- ing at this tv/o-part exclosure. Procedures: This study repeats at the Sinbad Valley Exclosure a photo study which was done in October of 1954 wher-eby a �-234- gridecl backdrop was set up behind br-owse plants (Baker, 1955). Permanent reference points for the camera were marked in 1954 wi~h steel stakes, and reference stakes located the placement of the backdr-oo, The reference points were relocated and the pho t.ogr-aphy"TaS repeated August 25 and 26, 1958. Only one camera reference stake of the. total of 30 had been ]oat whe n the procedure was repeated in 1958, and this was not serious because, through the use of the original photo print, it was possible to determine accurately the original camera position. As the field Hork was accomplished for the photo study, notes were mad e of .e:;eneral observations of plant densities and vigor and the status of soil stability. These notes were supplement- al inforna.tion and helped to form a basis for conclusions which might have seemed obvious by examination and comparison of the photographs but could have been overlooked. Findings: The results of the photo study are reproduced, in part, in Figures 1 through 10. These figures will be referred to in paragraphs to follo"l 8.S e.naLys es are made of the trea tments • "11 thout exception the plants shown on the figures generally represent the species for the treatment. The 3.1 acres part of the exclosure study enclosed by livestock fence appears to have receive.d an a.verage high rate of use by the deer for the four year period. Serviceberry and big sagebrush, two important deer food species, were tri~ed closely with the former species being utilized more intensely �-235- (Figures I and 3). adversely 2). j Oakbrush cUd not appear to be affected in fact, its sro'lilth was probably The grass density stimulated inside of the livestock (Figure part appea.red to have improved slightly, ho\Vever, severe sheet erosion exists o~ the entire sagebrush park. 6, 7, and 8 illustrate Figures of the exclosure that the browse plants outside fences received those inside of the livestock of the exclosure approximately part. \-[hlchparallel equal use to The two gullies outside the tra:tl show no improvement and appear to be cutting deeper. inside of the deer part of the exc losur-e is in The vegetation marked contrast with that outside and inside of the livestock part. The mountain mahogany (Figure 9) and ~agebrush (Figure 10) have much greater volume of growth, are more vigorous, appear- generally hed5Y appear-ance of sagebrush to have recovered , from the former Old dead main and some lateral r-emarn to indicate former destructive blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) slightly completely and stem branches use. The seems to have increased in density and is gradually filling bare ground in spite of some active sheet and rill erosion. Discussion and Recommendations: '\'Jhen the findings are considered from this Sinbad Valley study, the conclusion that must result 1s the.t there are still too many deer wintering in this area. Intensive effort has been applied in manag- ing th1s herd in Colorado "71th the most liberal types of hunting seasons being put into effect. There has been an �-236- extended or post season in this area every year from 1954 t-hr-ough1957. There \'18.S even a tvlO-deer, either-sex, post season in lY56 effective for the month of December. The problem that exists here is one that is common on the we st.er-nColorado winter ranges whereby the size and quality of the unit of winter range is such that only a few animals, at best, could be allowed on without some adverse effect upon plants and soil. from the standpoint species, although sorne me t hod The situation here is not critical of preservation of the better deer browse it is appar-ent, that much would be gained if of manipulating the hunters could be found to reduce this herd to a Lower- level in numbers. Admf, ttedly, this "rill not be s Lrnpl.e to do s Ln ce problems of inaccessibility and interstate undoubtedly Mountains distribution of the deer exist. Many animals use su~ner and fall ranges in the nearby LaSalle in Utah. " '} "_:j_;}" "'~!r,,,,·.,,. "":;" ',' ;rtf ffrr fffff/trffffffrfT;:!/7t~:$:';/ "# ;,'fff II." SUl;fl~Y A. Antelope Pass Game-Cattle Exclosure. 1. Deer pellet groups were counted ~~y 7,1958, permanently on four located belt transects inside of the livestock part of the exclosure and on four on the outside open range area. 2. Cattle fecal groups 'YTerecounted on the outside transects September 25, 1958. �Figure 1. Sinb~d Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Serviceberry (AMelanchier alriifolia) in the center, and big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) on the left in both photographs. Use by deer only has contributed to the stagnation of the development of these plants. �Figure 2. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Oakbrush (Quercus sp.) used by deer only. The plant developed in spite of heavy pressure on the area by deer over the four year period. �Figure 3. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Big Sagebrush used by deer only for four years, showing some improvement in volume. �Figure 4. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Utah juniper (Juniperus utahensis) showing slight recovery and regrowth from fonner severe mghlining. Used only by deer over the four year period. �Figure 5. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) plant that appears to be somewhathedged in form bub has grownvigorously in the interval between photographs. �Figure 6. Sinbad Valley Deer-Catt1e Exclosure. Mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus) on the outside under stocking by cattle and deer. Production of new growth in 1958 appeared to have been less than that in 1954. Utilization in the winters of 1954-58 must have approached 100% because the plant has not changed materially in size. �Figure 7. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Big aagebruah on the outside unprotected range area. This plant has growna little bit taller but otherwise remains tight~ hedged and heavily utilized •. �Figure 8. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Serviceberry plant on outside range showing reaction to grazing conditions similar to what happened to plants illustrated in Figures 6 and 7. �Figure 9. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. Mountain mahoganyplant under total protection for four years. �Figure 10. Sinbad Valley Deer-Cattle Exclosure. sagebrush under total protection for four years. Big �-237- 3. An indic&ted rate of stocking of 1.92 acres per deer- month was found for the area inside of the livestock part for the fall-winter-spring exclosure season of 1957-58. 4. An indicated rate of stocking of 1.10 acres per deermonth was found for the outside open range area for the fallseason of 1957-58. winter-spring 5. The count for cattle fecal groups revealed an indicated stockin5 rate of 2.38 acres per AUM applicable to the summer season of 1958. 6.--·· The--rate- -of stocking- 'by cattle continues to be -hLgh and apparently detrimental this standard 7. to proper range plant maintenance crested wheatgrass The difference on reseeding. between the indicated rates of stocking by deer for the outside and inside of the livestock ex closure part was noted and its Lap'l.f cat.Lona were discussed. 8. Plans call for pellet group counts to be done for two more ye8.rs thus .mak i ng five years of continuous stocking rate data. B. Bar D Deer-Cattle 1. Exclosure. The Bar D Deer-Cattle exclosure Exclosure is a new 5 acre, t\,To-part located on public domain between Ryans Gulch and Yellow Creek. 2. The area is part of the state administered Development and Operations Project, Square S is dominated by big �-238- sagebrush, and is considered to be an intermediate elevation-wise 3. part of the Piceance Creek winter deer range. In October deer and cattle stocking rate determination procedures wer-e initiated with the surveying and staking of corners of one acre plots inside of the cattle part of the exclosure and on the outside ranze and the cancelling of cattle fecal groups on the outside plot by painting them. 4. The reasons and advantages for using one acre as the plot size are discussed with the explanation meant to serve all exclosure studies reported hereln where 2ft acres, or IDulti-plesthereof, is the size of the exclosure under consideration. C. 1. Broken Road Deer-Cattle Exclosure. The May and September pellet group counts in 1958 were accomplished in a manner similar to that described for the Antelope Pass Exclosure. 2. The indicated rates of stocking by deer wer-e fou!ld to be 1.43 acres per deer-month and 2.1 acres per deer-month respectively for the inside livestock part and outside study areas for the fall-v/inter-spring season of 1957-58. 3. No su~~er use by cattle was indicated on the outside area from the September 4. count of the transects. A definite trend is apparently beccmrrig established the use by deer is heavier on the area enclosed by the wher-eby �-239- livestock fence as compared Hith the outside open range study area. D. Calloway Deer-Livestock 1. The Ca.LLoway Exclosure. Deer-Livestocl~ Exclosure is one of three new ones constructed recently on or near the Browns Park Deer-Elk Range, a Federal .Aid Development and Operations Project. 2. The exclosure is one-part in construction and. 2~ acres in size. 3. Located astraddle a drift fence, the exclosure study actually provides three treatments of grazing including total protection, use only by wintering deer, and use by wintering deer and sheep (plus occasional trespass year around by cattle and horses) • 4. The area is at the northern margin of Browns Park in a mixed desert shrub type of vegetation. 5. All cattle and horse fecal groups were marked with paint to cancel them out on the outside one acre plot south of the drift fence in June, 1958. 6. "linter deposited deer and shee-p pellet groups on both outside plots wer-e not marked since wea bher Lng minimized the possibility of misageing on subsequent counts. 7. The base year forage plant inventory was accomplished in June for the three treatments through random sampling �-240- by the line interception method. 8. The procedures thc::,t 'Here used in r-andom sampling of the one acre plots by subunits 1s des9ribed. 9. Techniques are explained that were used in obtaining age-form 10. class data. Density of the tota.l br-owse overs tory expressed as percentage of the ground occupied varied f'rom 18.26 inside to 20.54 and 22.15 on the tHO outside plots. 11. Spiny hopsage, b i g aagebr-usn, arid greasewood wer-e the three main species of' browse ericount er-ed on the three plots vli th shada ca.Le, 11ttle rabbi tbrush, and spiny aagabr-uah occurring 12. in minor amounts. Age-f'orm class composition of'big sagebrush, spiny hopsage, greasewood, and shadscale are summarized by treat- ment and are presented 13. in tables. Perennial grasses wer-e present in negligible amounts, and combined vii th weed a , the total density of the two was f'ound to be less than 2% on each of the treatments. 14. Means and limits of confidence at .05, and standard deviations f'or each species and the broader classes of' overs tory and understory wer-e computed and then listed in a table of' su~~ary. 15. Students "t" tests Vlere run on some of the data, and it was found that in several cases, highly signif'icant �differences existed between plots for species and classes in this base year plant inventory. 16. "Advice was obtained relative to·statistioal and 1t provided in future re-evalua~ions reassurance of the vegetation, that the initial differences procedures can be a'l.Lowed for~ 17. Sample size tests ind:1,:cated that·generally the sample size of 16 transects which uas u~ed for each One acre plot was reliable to the exte:t;lt that changes of 20% could be de- tected at the 95% level of accuracy. 18 •. Testing for sample size also rev~aledthat of additional increase transects ~/hich would have been· required the precision to ,even 10% were excessive amount of time available to establish Dead Badger Deer-Cattle ExclosurE;l. E. 1. the number to of the them. Deer and catt1e pellet group counts. done in :bray and September followed procedures described for the ~telope Pass Exclosure. 2. the indicated :t'ate§ of stocking by deer wer-e found to be 8.33 acres per deer-month respectively and 4.35 acres per deer-month for the outside and inside livestock pa.rt for the fall-winter-spring 3. exclosure season; of 1957-58. Cattle were on the outside plot in the fall of 1957 by an indicated stocking rate of 5.43 acres per Am~., �-242- 4. The deer st o ckfng rates viere the highest of three conc ecut.I »re years of pellet group counting here, however , they have not approached a point on either treatment to cause concern or be of much importance. 5. The mild "Tinter of 1957-58 ws.s probably a contributing factor in the hisher rate of deer use by'allowing for longer access to ranses wh i ch are normally spring and fall transition ranges. 6. Fall stocking of the outside area by cattle was considered to oe only moderate. F. Horn (}ulch Deer, Exclosure. 1. A pellet group count in April of an unp:rotected one-quarter . ," acre area adjacent to the exclosure yielded an'indicated st.o ck Lng rate of 4 acres per deer-month applicable fall-winter-spring 2. to the season of-1957-58. The stocking rate corresponded with the observed current light use apparent on the two key species, big sagebrush and bitterbrush. 3. This range has experienced light use by deer for the past five years, and the, key species show signs of return to norlilalform, especially bitterbrush. G. Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock 1. Exclosure. The Irish Canyon Deer-Livestock new Browns Park exclo sures • Exclosure is one of the �-243- 2. This t1;lO-pal"t, five acre exclosure is near the south entrance to Irish Canyon on public domain in the big sagebrush type. 3. Deer use the area mainly in winter and spring·right along with sheep \-'hichare permitted by the Bureau of Land I·1anagemente . 4. Permitted cattle and a few horses use the area also, the former in spring and fall, and the latter year around. 5. A combined deer and $heep stocking rate determination in late Apr 11-,---1958,by a count of pellet groups on an outs ide one acre plot resulted in tl~e fi6Ure of .93 acres per deer arid .sheep month. 6. The indicated rate of-stocking winter-early by cattle for the fall- spring season of 1957-58 was found ~o be 15.6 acres per AI'..JM. 7. Because the livestock part of the exclosure "Tas not put up until December of 1958, deer stocking rates will not be obtainable for that treatment until the spring of 1959. 8. The first year rates of animal stocking bore out what a cursory examination of· the vegetation showed and that was that too many gr-az Ing animals have been al Lowed to use the area. 9. The base year inventory of the vegetative three treatments cover on the was determined by the line interception �-244study method. 10. Sixteen transects wer-e established and read for each of the three one acre plots representing the different treatments of grazing or protection from grazing. 11. Big sagebrush clearly dominates the vegetation on all of the treatments "'lithminor amounts of little r-abb Lt.br-uah , spiny hopsage, fourwing saltbush, and greasewood being scattered erratically throughout. 12. The overstory (total browse) density was found to be 17 .04%,_ 1~_.9Q%, and __ 11.94%_ respectively for the deer part, livestock part, and outside treatments. 13. The perennial grasses and we ed.s totalled less than one percent density on each of the atudy plots. 14. Sam?le size tests revealed that the level of precision of about 20% at .05 was obtained. 15. Age-form class information tha.t was collected on big sagebrush by treatment indicated that this species was in considerably poorer condition outside than on either of the two protected plots. H. Saguache Park Exclosure. 1. The Saguache Park Exclosure was builtin 1956 by joint effort of the Rio Grande National Forest and the Southwest Region of the Department. �-24~2. The one acre locsted in srassln~d aspen near 3. plot at the north the by game-proof fence edge of and including is some rim of the Park. Elk use the area and spring, enclosed primarily and cattle in the late fall, ",inter, ar-e on the area from about July o.eter!~il1ations were begun in June I to October 1. 4. Cattle by the stocking cance L'Lat.Lon for Gro~9s on the 5. outside COU'1tinSpur-poaes of the one-half acre stocking rate Even t.hougn the rate cattle fecal plot. The f ol Low-up count in October resulted indic2.ted 6. rate of 3.9 acres per of 3.9 a cres in finding an AUM. per AUH ae emed to be somewhat, on. the heavy side, no r-ecommenda'tLons were made. 7. interception transects Twelve line established order and read on the i'!lside to obt.a Ln an inventory per t acre and outside of the plant plot were treatments density in and composition. 8. Grasses and \-leeds occurred on both treatments density of the 9. aver-age dens1ties LOll "'ith total in about equal the outside having the higher understory. for the Park are less than 107£density 10. Slimstem muhly had the highest on both plots. plot proportions or :the understory reflected by the on both plots. density of the grasses �-24611. Idaho fescue in density 12. Has a close on the inside s e cond to slirnste:_; muhLy area. ::<'rlnged sa:.;e waa the most abund.arrt in fact, it \'IE1.S even sl15htly t.han '1ms sliostem '~1Uhly. 13. tests Sample size higher .•.. 18ed on both in dens i ty on the t.hs.t wer-e done 0::1 eone of the indicated thr'.t changes of from 10 to 20 percent detected at 14. Plans the .05 level call for located transects changes become a9parent I. Saguache 1. vii th N equalling a r-epea.t readins at the Park Cattle end of five outside data coul.d be 12. of these permanently ;rears unles~ SJ:::e<'!:t-_ sooner. Exclosure. The Saguache Park C8.ttle ExcLoaur e was a joint Aid Project plots; li'T-lOI-R-l and Rio Grande National District) undertaking i·,i th the supplying most of the materials Game and Fish Federal Forest (Saguache Department and the Forest Service the labor. 2. The site that vtas have had consistently the Park east 3. The elevation 4. In order 2 acre area chosen .••. ras an area that heavy use by elk on the of the Salt of the appear-ed to north rim of House a.bout one mile. site is approxlmately to allow free access by elk enclosed, the livestock fence 10,700 in winter feet. to the was constructed so �-247- t.hat It could be dr-op ied (Drior to 'rli:1ter) and r-es t.r-ung (in June) • 5. Cattle by the fecal s t.c c kLng rate determ:'na.tions L'La t.Lcn courrt cance for Lng EJ'0ups on the outside . 6. .\ ca t t.Le stocl-:Llg rate the su~~er wer-e begun in June purposes one acre outside of all study of 1958 was found line interception cattle a.rea • of 10 acres season the from the per Aill-i for October follow-up count. 7. Sixteen read on each of the two one acre yec·.r inventory 8. Slimstem transects of the pla.nt placed rnuhly dorn.na t ed the plots. resulted in a base grass composition in ni nor impcrtance rnat muhly, and squirrel on both by s'ed,-ges, tail. 9. !i'rin€sed se.ge ,·m.s the number one plant in dena Lt.y on both plots and wa.s.by far weed , 10. 3asple size ahowed highly equalling tests variable that the predom.inant were done on some of the results 16, changes that and cover. t.r-eat nent.s arid '.,.8.3 follo"red June ..~rass, randomly and consequently, could be detected data with varied N between 5 and 20% at .05. J. Sinba.d Va.lley Deer-Cattle 1. A photo study Exclosure. Has done in August, 1958,. wher-eby the ohct,o backdr-op system was' employed in accom;plishing a repeat �-248- of origina.ls that wer-e taken in 1954. 2. Notes vrer-e pr-epar-ed made as the pho t.o gr-aphy 3. of general observations tha.t were pr-cgr-es aed , 'Jonclusions '.Iere . drawn from the. combination of observa- tions and :photo comparisons illustrated by ten figures 4. Serviceberry 0 ald big sagebrush plants appeared to have been trimmed closely outside, and inside of the livestock exclosure part, almost certainly by deer. 5. Oakbrush gr-owt.h was stimulated by what must have been heavy utiliz8tion by deer inside of the livestock part of the exclosure. 6. !-tlountain mahogany and big sagebrush seem to have recovered completely from former effects of heavy use on the area inside of the deer-proof fence. 7. Blue srama seems to have improved its density inside of the deer part although there was still noticeable active sheet and rill erosion present on that treatment. 8. There is little doubt that in this area the deer numbers are too e;reat, and use in "riY!teron the key br-owse species is too heavy. 9. In spite of past sound programs to reduce the herd, evidentally drastically more liberal seasons or other means of increased hunter take vTill have to be effected the area reaches an irrevers ibly critical st.age , before �-249•• P.EFERENCES CITED Baker, B. D. 1955. J,4'ishDept., Fish Dept., pp , 149-154, Figs. 5~B. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept., Colo. Game & July, p. 47, Fig. R. H.· 1950. ception and Range Exp. Sta., Forest Arizona, 28 pp. Processed, Calif. 1951. 3. Sampling Ranges by the Line· Inter- r-1:ethod. Res. Rept. Dasmann, vI. P. Grieb, Colo. Game & July, 1956. Canfield, Rept., Fed. Aid Quart. No.4, Southwestern Forest Service, U.S.D.A., Tuscon, Some Deer Range Survey Methods. Fish and Game, 37(1):43~52. Jack R. 1958. Fish Dept., Wildlife Statistics. Fed. Aid Division, 96 pp. J 11lus. J (lameo). Pr-epar-ed by:_ ....• B::;.· ..:.. •...:D~. ,..::B:::.;;a;,:;k:;.;:;e;,:.r_· _ _.....Approvedby: Date: April, 1959 Colo. Game & L. E. Riordan Fed. Aid Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/612fea02629f9de93adfbcd22f16fa61.pdf beb2e9d20e693a1cee715133c2b97486 PDF Text Text /jrilllujl1Nb July, 19.59" BDOW022360 , '.:-. JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 9206890 State of Colorado --~--~~~~--------------- Project No. W~38-R-12 ; __~D_e~e~r~-_E~lk~~I~n~v~e~s~t~i~ga~t~l~·o~ns~ ~ _ Work Plan No.1; ----~~----------------- Title of Job: Job No• .5 Experimental. Trapping Techniques Period Covered: April 1, 19.58through March 31, 19.59 ,Abstract: TWobuck deer and four elk (three cows and a 5-point bull) trapping se~son. were caught this , ,--" ,--Tne net worked perfectly in all cases, 'and needs only a better release ,to ,be acceptable for managementuse~ , method of ----,,'---- '-, -"'", /~ The bull elk was-killed-- in the trap-when he broke his neck While being roped. Examination showed he would'have had to be destroyed in any case because of gunshot injuries that were infected. One of the cows was marked with colored ribbons in each ear, colored leather collar that, can be seen from the air. and a light Objectives: .: 1. To experiment with new ideas' in trapping for the purpose of increasing the efficiency of trapping operations. 2. To obtain as much information as is possible from a review of literature and correspondence with other GameDepartments on methods used to trap any type of big game animal. ' To see if these other types of traps could be used to trap deer and elk in Colorado. Procedure: -, A trap ~ite was selected t~ee and ~me-half. (3t) miles north of the Sapinero' ~nag~Jnen~,4rea headquarlers. 'l,'lJ,e' trap is located in a grasay park at' the- junction Qt"Corral Gillch and East Elk Creek., _Th~ park is a favorite apof _for ~lk to' visit iit~;the,wini:er because of the abundance of bluegrass (Poa spp.) which they paw for , through the snow. ' '''~The trap is constructed of eight-inch diameter aspen and lodgepole p~n~.poles , ,,-, .; 10 feet long. Sixteen of the posts are 14 feet Long-f;let-four feet deep in the - ':..,____, ,ground.'".The,enclosed space is about feet in diameter. Each of the pos~~ ~h~~_' , ,\/ -~,- , are set an the ground has two clamps lnstalled" one of them a foot above the groum , \\'.,,'__ 'L~~ and one nine feet above the ground. A one-inch diameter wire rope is, s~ru.n~,~~~~~li these clamps on the outside of the trap. The rest of the intlivi~ual posts are W1red to the cable. This makes the walls of the trap somewhatflexible so they will give when an animal hits them. ?o ��-3- EXPERIMENTAL TRAPPING TECHNIQUES Raymond J. Boyd The first animal caught was a 3-point buck deer. As we neared the trap the deer tried to jump out, but as the poles were set tightly together and in a ' vertical' position there was no way the animal could catch a leg and break it. Also,' the lO-foot- height of the wall did not permit the deer to get more than part of his muzzle over the top of the wall. As soon as the special gate above the net was opened the buck jumped the barrier and landed completely in the net. He thrashed around for about 15 seconds and then gave up_ It was then safe to approach him and he was tagged in both ears with no trouble. The net was released and he-. trotted away uninjured. -The total elapsed time he fought the trap when we approached, .plus the length of tiine he'was in the net, did not amount to more than two minutes. He wi's'notskinned up, aridvery important he was not completely exhausted as they sometimes are when they are G aught in a single trap. Trapping continued, but weather conditions were not condusive to good trapping results. The animals would come around the trap, but would not push through. the gates to get the alfalfa. There was an abundarce of natural feed' showf.ng above the snow which kept the game in a well~fed condition, and they were not forced to hunt forage. Since they would not push the gates open, it was decided to wire the gates open for' a couple 0 f nights, then close them for a night', and so'f'orth.- It washoped that the animals might enter the trap to get the hay if there were'no oostacles in their way, and after a couple of nights eating on alfalfa they might push through the gates to get to the baite This operation went on for several days and one morning the trap was checked" with the'idea of closing the gates for that evening's trapping:' When the-'f,rap'was-' approached .it became evident that something was in Side'arid'''close -examination -snowed two (2) cow elk~' Evidently several elk had beend.n' the trap;ljut 'irl'fightin~for"" trYing to get out the gates were hit in such a manner that they closed and shut in the two cows. Since we had not jumped any elk into the net since it was redesigned (Federal Aid Quarterly Report, October, 1958) both of the elk were roped, thrown to the ground, tagged, and aged before the gate above the net was opened. This was done because we did not want to take a chance on losing animals before they were tagged. As soon as.the elk were released they continued to mill around the ,trap, but they did not try to jump over the wall. When the gate was opened, the smaller of the two cows jumped immediately over the barrier and landed with all f our feet through the net and just touching the ground. The gate was closed, keeping the other elk in the trap. The elk in the net did not struggle in the slightest as the greater portion of her weight was supported by the net, and she eould no b get enough purchase to fight. The net was released and she trotted away unharmed. 'The second cow was treated in a like manner with the net working exceptionally well. �-4A 4-point buck deer was caught several days later and when he jumped into the net we discovered that he was already tagged from the 1958 season. He was' Ln'exce LLerrt condition with no skinned areas or injuries caused by fighting the trap, due in all probability to the construction of the trap. This same buck had broken one antler off, several teeth were broken, and his leftslio'iilderWas-completely bare of hair from f ightihg the old style of trap the first time--he-was caught. This again-bears out the fact that vertical sections are far better in a trap for big game. Near the end of February two more elk were trapped, a two-year old cow and a 5-point bull (about 4 years old) • ~ . . SinCe we had not yet put a bull elk into the net -we roped hini so that-we tag him before we" jumped him into -the net. As he was fighting the' rope,lie fell and broke his neck" Subsequent examination showed that-his left- antler-'had been shot off close to the skull below the burr, infection was present and probably extended into the brain cavity. His lower jaw was broken completely- iii"two on the right side, and his left shoulder was infected. Because of this he 'would probably not have lived and should have been destroyed instead of released. cou'ld The cow was jumped into the net where we tagged both ears with cattle tags, and also connected a I-inch wide ribbon one foot long to each ear • ..-These ribbons were a vinyl plastic-coated cotton twill material that was impregnated with "Day-G'Io" fluorescent paint, "Rocket Red". She was also marked with a light colored leather collar, 2! inches wide. It is hoped that these ribbons and collar can be observed'froin the air, and that range riders will report to us if they see such a marked animal. A short time later the weather turned warm and trapping was suspended no animals were coming around the trap. because Table 1 - Deer and Elk Tagged During the Winter 1958-59 Sapinero Game Management Area Date Tagged S;eecies -Sex Age Tag. No. Tag No. 1/18/59 Deer Male 3! yrs. A-447 A-448 Fat 2/4/59 Deer Male 2! yrs. 1458 1457 2/9/59 Elk Female 5! yrs. A-446 A-445 Recatch from 1958 (2/7/58) Excellent condition 2/9/59 Elk Female 7! yrs. A-444 A-443 2/27/59 Elk Female 2! yrs. A-450 A-449 Remarks Extremely large cow; Est. wt. 500 lbs. Ribbons in both ears and a leather collar �Figure 1 - Bar Holding Trap Gates Open and Solenoid Release �Figure 2 - Five-point Bull Elk Looking Out of the Trap Over the Experimental Gate �Figure 3 - Cow Elk Just After Jumping Into the Net Catching Device. Showing Wire "Backstop" to Keep Animals From Jumping Entirel1 Over the Net. ( �Figure 4 - Cow Elk in the Net, Complete~ Immobilized, Ready to be Tagged~ Aged, and Marked. Leather Collar is Visible as a Belt on Man With Back to Camera. �Figure 5 - CowElk in Net Showing Another Way the Animals Can Land in the Net. She is Complete~ Helpless. �-5~ The last month of trapping was so poor, because of weather conditions and animals not hungry enough to push through the gates, that work was started on an electric switch that could close the gates if they were propped open. It was-felt that if the gates-were left open the animals would enter the trap to smell the haYor- other bait, and if some method could be devised to have a switch where they would paw or nose the bait the gates could be closed, by the action of the animals themselves. The gate release that was used was the Solenoid ani clutch from the'starter of a Pontiac which was modified slightly to fit the holder and bar to keep'tlie gates open (see FigUre 1). The switoh was made from two pieces of bronze we'ld-iil1f rod 1!16;'::'inchapart. Whenthe rods were pushed so that they t.ouchedj it- comp1etea' a circuit, the solenoid pin was pulled away from the bar, and the gates swung shut. The' power source used was a regular 6-volt aut.omobf.Leibat.t.erywhich was completely shut- off' the eLect.r-i.cd, ty- when the gates 5'fiut safety device was" put in 50 that the batterY- would not-De run down should the s'I;?itchbe mashed.together if it vas stepped on by an arri.ma.l . H'Juked - to a' s~lftch that arid hit "a toggle. - This 'I'he electric tripping mechanism\i10rkedperfectly, the trap after it was set into operation. but no ani.na.Is entered Recommemdatzions s The net catching device appears to work perfectly in that injurY- to theanimal is lessened and personnel handling the animals are muchsafer. The maimer in which the net is dropped to the ground could oe improved upon, and this phase will be investigated thoroughly the next segment. Different consist of: L 2; 3: 4. types of bait other than alfalfa hay should be tried. They will Molasses "SWeeties" (a prepared stock feed) Apples S~t Marking the animals caught with ribbons and collars should be expanded with the idea of identifying animals from the air and ground. Another permanent group-type trap should' be constructed on Dry- Gulcli"nortli of the Ellgen property at the Sapinero GameManagementArea in order to get better eoverage of the- area as a whole. It is also probable that more deer will be caught in this trap than in the existing one on East Elk Creek. In short, the experimental trapping program has been very successful fr0m the standpoint of eliminating "bugs" in the trap and net, but it should be continued until it can be evaluated in the light of a heavy winter that 1-1111 be condusive to trapping large numbers of game. Prepared by:__ R.;;,laym~o_nd---=-...:..J.;... _B_o~y:.._d Date: ___________ ~4-~~ July 1959 _ _ Approvedbyt Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��G{o.1~fr((J~r't~ JOBCOMPLETION REPORT . INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of. Colorado Project .No, W~38-R-12 WorkPlan No,, 2 0200881 --------------------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: ; Deer-Elk Investigations L__J_o_b_N-o..;,.._4..:..· _B __ .....;.;;~~~--..;;;,_-- Comparison of Air and Ground Deer-Elk Counts May1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 Aostract: ... Aerial and ground counts 0 f deer and elk were made on two areas in' 1959. Aerial crews 'counted 38$' percent of the deer wintering on Cedar Ridge in Miqdle Park;'- and ,L6 percent of the elk on the Saptiner-o GameManagement~re;i west of'-' Giifuiison;-·Colorado.·. An experimental attempt to herd elk from a pre-counted area with a helicopter proved unsuccessful$ Objectives: (1) To determine whether air counts will consistently tall,y the same percentage 0 f elk as are present on the ground from one t jm~ to the ne~, ~d _~~om area to-area. ----_...... .--- ---- (2Y"To-'dete:Mriine whether air:..to-ground deer ratios will remain the same from one type or terrain' to another; and (3) To determine factors which will correct the air counts for- different 'snow--' :-6oiidJ:tioiiS~-a:ridto work out' an easily recogriized set of sfiaridar-dato -'perMit an accurate selection of the right correction factors by the aerial observer. Procedure-i- Select deer and elk areas that are representative' of- aeriarpopiilaiion trem areas upon which deer and elk are counted annuallY.' - Sucli sites iiriist-'possess terrain features-which make"it possible to obtain a potentially- total 'groaner'count or-tbe--deer and-'elk present~-"'The deer-'study-area- 5IlOula'-be-in--a-tjpe-'different from Cedar Ridge in Middle Park where a similar study was completed in 1955. -Air crew~f-§houldcount the area three- times inrrnediately--prior to' each ground ·arfvs·:--lirl'ormatiori·thus received will be analyzed statistically to determine the-" consistency of ratios. Also, data on ground conditions will be·tabulated to determine the effect of various ground conditions on the counts made. Air crews will fly the deer pastures at the Little Hills Experiment Station where a knownnumber of deer are in fenced pastures in a pinon-jumper"type. An air count success ratio will be worked out from the data thus obtained. Counts .will be made morning and evening with no two ,counts being made in succession. . . The helicopter has been used as a suppliment to ground drives on the- Cedar Ridge area where terrain conditions warranted a good ground count. If the . additional use of a helicopter can be secured, then it is recommendedthat it be tested further to improve the accuracy and techniques. Present plans also include intensive use of the helicopter for observing elk • . . :Effort will also be spent in locating suitable areas as regards vegetative type, typical habitat, and potentiality of obtaining actual count. Intensive work will be conducted on such areas. ��-ll~ COMPARISON OFAIR ANDGROUND DEER-ELK COUNTS John T. Harris ,-General use of the airplane for censusing big game in Colorado began about -1945. Since then, different flying techniques have' been developed to fit diffEirerit-·sets----of~-cotJ.ditions--designed to increase accuracy am cut dojm cost" Also; iii 'more' recent years; considera"ble -work has been done to determine the ratios between air and . ground counts, and to evolve correction factors for various counting condftdons, miiinly snoWcover-, It remaiils to be determined whether the ratios- between' air- and ground-counts of deer will 'vary from one habitat type to another; and, in addition to work out a similar study on eIk; 'weatfier and--snoliiconditions' greatlY irifliience--tIie-accuracy 'of -aerIal-counts. In -an- 'effort -to- measiir-s - these- influerices'- and ultimately- to' nerive-·correctIon------ -.,r-actors-Tor-:-thEirii,the -depar-tment.al.pilots arid observers have-begun 'us-ing an-'easily-' recognizable-set-of standards for classification of snow, light, and air conditions. They are listed as follows: SnowCover , Condition I New snow-COVeT. Count at.arbed within two days of --- new snow.- 100%snow cover. Condition II -= 100%snow cover but old snow with tracks too numerous to locate Condition III -- Bare or spotting all animals. snow cover. Poor background~ Light Con~it~on Condition I -- Clear skies .• Condition II -~ Broken overcast 50%of the time. Oondition III -- Solid overcast~ Air Condition Condition I -- Good solid air. Oondition II -- Mild to moderate downdraft and turbulence. Condition III -- Severe turbulence and down drafts; should not be counting except to finish up a trend. Time 2t Whenat all possible, all flights should be made not more than hours after sunrise and should not start more than hours before sunset unless condition I exists in all of the three conditions listed above. 2t �-12Aerial-Ground Counts - Deer ..-.. .The wintering deer population on Cedar Ridge was counted again this year by aerial and ground crews to further test the consistency of aerial counts as they relate to total numbers and to further correct for various counting conditions. The area was flown on February 11 and 218 deer were counted in 39 minutes flying time. The plane used was a Super Cub piloted by Norman Hughes and the counting was done by Observer Dwight Owens. Only one·aerial count was possible this year due to weather conditions. -.... - -Counting-'conditions -were reported as generally good'by the-Observer who---·· classified the variability factors as follows: snow cover - II, light - I, and air - 1. The ground drive was made February 14 in the same manner that it has been-done in previous years (Gilbert and Grieb, 1957)•. A total of 566 deer were counted, Thirty';'ninedrivers and 6 observers were used to ascertain t he number-of deer on the area. .The drive was made from west to east and an approximate 45 yariifTiiterval was maintained by the drivers. Weather condd.tdons. _the day of the drive were-' as-follows:' temperature - 100 below 0 (start) to 200 above (end of drive); clear sky and bright sun (visibility excellent), snow depth varied from 0 on south slopes to 3 feet on north slopes and in drifts • -.. _. .. . The drive lasted 6 hours, beginning at 9:00 AM and ending at 3:00 PM for a total of 282 man hours. a A sno-cat was used to maintain straight line and the proper interval Detween drivers. The drive in general was well organized and executed, and most of"the personnel who participated felt that a very accurate check was obtained of the animals using this area. The ratio of the aerial (218) to ground count (566) was 38.•5%or 1 ~ 2.59. This figure is slightly under the 42 to 43 percent average ratio from past'studies on this' area (Owens and Gilbert, 1958); however, when- the snow conditi6iiS-are' considered (classified as only fair -- south slopes bare) it is consistent with . results of intensive studies made on this area in 1955 (Gilbert and Grieb', 1957): Snow conditions are considered the most important factor influencing the accuracy of aerial counts s Aerial-Ground Counts - Elk Air and ground correlation counts of elk were conducted for the second year on the Sapinero Game Management Area near Gunnison, Colorado; The study area is located in parts of Sections 3, 4~ 5, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16" 17, 20, 22, 27" and 28; T. 49 N., R. 3 W~, New Mexico Principal Meridian. The specific area counted is bounded on the east by the bottom of East Elk Creek, on the north by the Forest Service fenceline, on the west by the bottom of Dry Gulch, and on the south by U ~S. Highway 5'0. It is about 2 miles wide and miles long; approximately 9 square miles or 5,760 acres. Elevation varies from 7,500 to 9,600 feete Exposure is generally southern with a steep east slope and a moderate to steep west slope. 4t �-13- This area is typical of the whole Gunnison elk-trend country consi.sting of high ridges and numerous rocky outcropso Thick stands of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga memziesii), are found in pockets on'nor-thern-exposed slopes. Vegetation on south- ' facing slopes consists mainly of sagebrush (Artemesia tridemtata)and'oak (Quercus gairibelii) e Patches of aspen (Populus tremuloides) and a variety of grasses are scattered throughout. Three aerial counts were made on February 26 by Pilot Dwight Owensas follows: Bud Betts and Ohserver Table"l -- Elk counts by time of day flown, counting time and counting conditions. Counting Condition Classification Number ~or Snow Time Counting Time' Cover Count Counted Light Flown Air 1 287 AM 33 min. II II I 2 309 AM 30 min. II II I 3 311 PM II II II The observer stated that the three flights were made over the area under fair" coUntLng conditions. Snow'a·auditions 'Werenot too bad with, ,the exception of bare-southern exposures. Light conditions were overcast 50 percent of the 'time. The first two- . flights air conditions were good and on the third flig~t there was mild, burbu'Ience, The first missed • count (287) was relatively low because a herd of 28 animals was .Another-source of variability was due to flights' being made"at a- slightlY higher altitude bhan usual to avoid spooking the animals from t he ares , Regular trend flights are made at lower altitudes and large herds are sometimes spooked to make them string-out for a more accurate counte .,.- -, In addition to the counts on ,the 26th,' aerial counts were made on the two days before the drive (February 26 and 27) and on the morning to the 28th,' .' immediately preceeding the drive. These counts were made'by Pilot' NormanHughes and Observer Don Benson using a Super Cub. Results were as follows: Table 2 -- Elk counts (by date, time of day, counting time, and counting conditions Number . Counting Condition Classification of Elk Time Counting Snow Count . Counted Date Flown Time Cover Light Air 6 1 285 2/26 PM 35 min. II II II 2 239 2/27 PM 53 mine III III III l 248 2/28 AM .hl min. III II I on The ground drive was made February 28. It was carried out in the same manner as the Cedar Ridge drive. A total of 465 elk were counted, most of them leaving the area to the west across Dry Gulch. �-J.h- , -Fifty-five drivers and five observers participated in the elk-drive this-year. Drivers were stationed along the Forest Service-fenceline-at-50'yard intervals and the drive was made due south to U.S, Highway 50. It began at 10:45 AM and was completed at 4:15 PM • .The we ather- during the drive was cool and clear with a bright sunshine ,affording excellent visibility. - Snow depth varied from 0 on south slopes to 4 - 5 feet in drifts and timber. Two sno-cats and two sno-kittens were used for placing the drivers and observers, and one of the sno-cats and a Super Cub were used to patrol and aid in maintaining a straight drive line. Generally,- the drive was much better organized than the 1958 drive. Some all'ficult:Y:-wasencountered again this year in maintaining a straight line and- ---proper interval through the heavily timbered Bull Gulch area. Fortunately there were very few elk in this area the day of the drive. -.' -The ratio of aerial to ground counts -using the average (257) of the aerial counts by Hughes and Benson was 55.27 percent or 1 : 1.8. three There were large herds of elk seen on areas irrnnediatezyaajacerit-tc)-thei study area making it possible, and probable, for a considerable- var~a~ion in tne"" riUmber of elk on the area from day to -day., For-this reason, -the last' aerial count, made on the morning of the 28th immediately before the drive, would' probably be a mOre' accurate figure to compare with the results of the ground drive. Thus; 248/465 = 53.35 percent or 1 : 1.87. The ratio of the aerial to ground counts by Observer Owens on the 26th was 64.94 percent or 1 : 1.54. -- . Since these counts were made two days prior to the ground drive, this ratio would be questionable for reasons stated above. - - ---'T.fiey--are~ 'lioweiver-; 'a-go-onindication' of the consistency which can be obtained by an experienced aerial observer counting preSUmably the same population of animals on the same area under approximately the. same conditions • .--.-~~~.--~ .... -- ........• _.. .' . Blacktail Mountain Helicopter Counts - Elk Past experiences of noting the reactions of elk to a helicopter had led departmental aerial observers to believe that it might be possible to herd or" drive elk with a copter. If such were true, it would be possible to drive'the elk from a pre-counted area with the copter in lieu of the more costly and time con- surning ground drives. A total count would be made of the animals as they left the area by observers at strategic locations. The Blacktail Mountain area approximately 7 miles North of Phippsburg, Colorado was selected for this trial. It-is about 3! miles square in size and was selected because it is typical of elk winter ranges in northwestern Colorado; and because it has well defined boundaries. The study area was counted March 3, 4, and 5, the March 3 count being made with a Super Cub and the March 4 and;; counts with a helicopter as follows: �-15- Table 3 -- Elk counts by sex, date, counting time, and counting condition~. Counting Condition Glassif. Counting Snow No.of Elk Sex Count Counted Bulls Cows Date Time Cover Light Air 1* 103 14 89 Mar.) 2# 119 14 105 Mar.4 3# 106 15 91 Mar.5 III II I 30 nrin , I II I 35 min. I II I * AIrplane" "couilts:" . H Helicopter counts. " " .. FolloWing' the copter count on the mornfngof March 5, an unsuccessful" "effort--" was made' to drive the elk from the counted area. 'They WQuld- readlly"'m.ove" aWB.;y: from the copter; however, they would cut back as the copter circled for ailotfier-pass making it impossible" to "herd" them in a given direction. Repeated attempts to drive the". elk were made before the experiment was called off~ .... -, In this' Lnsf.anee the plane count tallied fairly consistent vlith the' copter counts (Table 3) provided the elk herd remained constant from day to day. " " Also, the sex ratio data indicates a remarkable consistency in the--ahility of an experienced observer to sex elk. Little Hills Pasture Counts Deer were not counted in the pastures at the Little Hills Experiment Station. Past experience on this area has shown that the relatively small size of the pasturesand the low density of deer therein would cause higher than normal variability~ .Also, it would be difficult to apply the counting technique used in regular trend counts to so small an area, Conclusions: Repeated observations have shown that the wintering deer population of Cedar Ridge remains relatively stable. Aerial cr-ews should make as many counts as--possible the week preceeding the ground drive; provided the repeated counts do no t" greatlY---disturb the deer population using the area: Special effort should be made to obtain these counts under a variety of conditions. The Sapinero elk counts by Owens (Table 1) tend to bear out for elk what was found to be true of deer on Cedar Ridge (Gilbert and Grieb, 1957); that aerial counts will consistently tally the same percent of animals present on the ground depending upon the conditions when counts were made. The higher variability in the counts by Benson (Table 2) is probably due to the fact that they were made over a three day period under varying weather conditions. Also there is a good possibility that the number of elk on the area changed from day to day. �The situation and the.terrajn of the Sapinero area make it highly probable that elk numbers fluctuate daily. This fact should be considered when correlating the aerial and ground counts. In an effort to maintain a better "control", the study area boundaries should be' closely observed or perhaps checked regularly for sign of elk entering or leaving' after the experimental counts begin. Thus, if these fluctuating numbers can 09 accounted' for, they can be related to the ground count and the aerial' counts' adjusted accordingly. The success' of these determinations would depend somewhat upon snow conditions and weather. " -,-,- Repeated trials indicate that it is not possible to nherd", or dirve-'---elk---from a large pre-counted area with a helicopter. Well organized drives are'still the best means 0 f determining the total number of animals on an area. ''Constant effort should be maintained to increase the efficiency of these drives. Recommendations: 1. Obtain a number of aerial counts on the Cedar Ridge and Sapinero study areas, weather permitting, before the ground drives. 2. Make similar air-ground correlation counts using the helicopter. 3.. Discontinue the Little Hills pasture counts • .. 4. Make similar studies on different cover types. 5. Design aerial counts so as to permit statistical analysis of the data obtained. 6. Use portable radios in key positions to increase the efficiency of ground drives. Literature C'ited: Gilbert, Paul F. and Jack R. Grieb, 1957. Oompard scn of air and ground deer counts in Colorado. Jour. Wildl. Mgt., 21(1): 33-37 Owens, Dwight and Paul Gilbert, 1958. Deer, elk and-whirlybirds.Colo. Outdoors, Colo. Game and Fish Dept., 7(1): 26-28 •. . , Prepared by: Date: John T. Harris --------~-----------------July 1959 Approved, by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ------------~~~~------~-------- �July, 1959 -17- JOB COMPLETION HEPOR!' INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO --~----------------------------- State of" Project No. ~~Phn~. W-38-R-12 2 ---------------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: ; Deer-Elk Investigations ; Job No.4 C The Pellet Group Count Technique May 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 Objectives: Y.- To-"fieldtest-this technique on Cedar Ridge iriMiddle "Park -to aeteriidne its-applioabihty as a "metnod-"ihdetermining trends and/or total populations of deer using winter concentration areas. . - ~ .. . 2. "Depending upon the success and feasibility of this trial, the mechanics of such a method can be set-up for trial in other areas of the State where applicable~ Procedure: Transects containing a pre-determined number of 1/100 acre plots were set-up in 1957 to sample the Cedar Ridge area. Compare the "estimates of deer number-awi.bh an estimated total population of deer using the.area. This total popUlation may- , be determined by a drive over the area in late winter or by repeated aerial"oounts. These data will be statistically analyzed to determine the desirability of this technique. Results: The 1959 pellet group counts on Cedar Ridge are not scheduled to be run until May pending weather conditions and the spring migration of the herd from the area. Therefore, this report will necessarily be delayed until the next segment. Prepared by: John T. Harris Approved by: --------------------------Date: J_u~1~y~,~19~5~9~ _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��-19~.•• -- Illi/ij~lT1ii -.:...:=--_ BDOW022362 __ ~-'-- 3~(.! July, 1959 .,_{) _j JOB COMPLETION REPORI' INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS D20G08Z .-State of COLORADO --~--~~~~----------------- Project No.~ __W_-~3~8~-_R_-_l_2 ; D_e_er_-_E_l~k_' _I_nv __e_s_t_i~ga_t_l_'o_n_s __ ~ Work Plan No. 2 Title of Job: Population Estimates Based on Age and Sex Ratios. Period Covered: May 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 _ -----------------;---J~0~b~N~0~.~4~D~----~~~~----~--- Abstract: --" Pre"'-and post-season sex-ratio counts were made of the White River elk herd. These-data were compared with the 1958 card survey kill figures and projected to indicate a post season population of 3,165 elk in the main White River Herd. Objective: To determine the applicability and accuracy of making population estimates based on age and sex ratios. Procedure: "Sex ratio counts were made before the hunting season in the areas from which deer Mncentrats'into the Cedar Ridge countr-y, All c ount.s'wer-e kept by- serie-s or10'; 25, 50-,or 100 animals so that a comparison could be made of the variation' ' be,tween the sample Units. Counts are made on Cedar Ridge ana associated 'winterlng 'areas after the hunting season, and by use of kill figures, an estimate can thus ,be,ohtai:ned of the-deer population for that general area, " --~-.The-:-helicopterwas employed in making sex-ratio count-s especially of elk. Helicopter was used intensively for analysis of the white River elk herd during , the year- witn--speci~i.l emphasis on obtaining pre- and post-hunting season sex-ratios for a population estimate. In addition, special effort was made to obtain as nearly accurate kill figures for such areas as possible. ,,"." "' ��-21- POPULATION ESTIH ..4.TES BASED ON AGE AND SEX RATIOS John T. Harris A number of formulas have been developed by trildHfe "Torkers in at tempt.tng to estimate animal populations with a known removal or ki1l. Generally: t.he technique involves the correlation of some other knowninformation such as age and/or sex 't'!l'i th the kill f'Lgures, and by use of ratios or proportions J projecting for total population figures. r10st authors ".•ho have had experience vrlt.h this t31"f!8 of "census agree that the reliability of results depend on the accuracy of t.he d""t:::~ obt.at.ned , The sex-and age-ratio technique of censusing big game has received only limited usage in Colorado to date. Riordan (1948) estimated the number of deer iri the-i1i'hite River Herd of western Colorado by the use of sex- and age-ratios and kill" data. ' In 1954, pre- and post-season sex-ratio counts were made of the ~'fhite River elk herd; however, no projection for total herd numbers 'Wasmade. Results: No sex-ratio classifications were made of the Middle Park deer herd- thisyear. Due to the size and type of country involved it is too difficult 1,6 classify enough animals on the summerand fall ranges to give a reliable sex ratio. Similar counts of the White River Herd were made in 1956 and, using checkstation kill data, were projected for total herd numbers. The results showed _. promis-e; however, a full evaluation could not be made at that time. Sex and age determinations lilere made from a helicopter. White River Sex-R.atio Counts - Elk: The 1958-59 pre-season elk sex- and age-ratio counts· were conducted from September 25 through the 29 and post-season counts were madeHareh 15 through 18 by means of helicopter. The pre-season flights were made as-early and late-iri the day as possible -- 6! 00 AHto 7: 30 A.M and 5: 00 PMto 6: 00 PH. The base of operations was Budgets Resort on the South Fork of the White River. The post-season counts were ta.ken throughout the day} weather and air conditions permitting. Since the elk 1••ere concentrated on the winter range; the early and late flights were not necessary to'see a sufficient number of animals. The fHghts for these counts were made from GlenwoodSprings and Meeker. Study Area: The counting was confined to Areas, E and X as found in the 1958 big game maps. This included managementunits 23, 24, 25, 33 and 34 which covered the area contributing to the main White River Elk Herd. Results: The majority of the elk counted during the pre-season census were on the Flat Tops Wilderness Area. Nost elk 'Here found near the headwaters of the Marvine, North, and South F'ork drainages of the 1tlhite River. The largest groups of elk seen outside the Wilderness Area were on the upper reaches of Hitchell and No NameCreeks -north of Glemmod Spr-Lngs, Very fe"Telk were seen in game managementunits 23) 25, and .3), �-22.•.. The post-season counts were made on the corresponding winter ranges adjacent to these areas. The largest numbers of elk were seen in the Sweetwater, South ' Fork Canyon, Miller Creek, Elk Creek and Sleepy Cat areas. Very few elk were seen on the southern portion of the study area. The results of these counts were as follows: Pre-season -Post-season -- 87 bulls; 164 cows, 117 calves; total 368~ 93 bulls, 356 cows, 320 calves; total 769. For comparison, the 1957 pre- and,post-season counts are given as follows: Pre-season -Post-season -- 100 bulls, 226 cows; 123 calves; total 449; 50 bulls, 278 cows, 279 calves; total_697• ,Accoiding to-the 1958 post card kill survey conducted by State"Game-'Manager" N~'-HUriter;-t1ie' following is the eilekill bY' Unit within Areas E and X for the 1958 hunting season. Gilbert 0" - • ~••• '. Unit No. 23 24 25 33 34 Total Bull 229 175 52 124 69 649 Cow 94 91 24 59 49 317 Calf 13 11 Total 336 277 80 188 118 999 4 5 33 The 1957'card survey returns reported a kill of 984 animals 'composed of 584 bulls, 354 cows, and 46 calves. These data were analyzed by means of formula found in Rasmussen and Doman (1943) to determine size of the total population in the study area. The folloWiiig caleuI..;. ations are made to determine the size of the elk population before and after the 1958 hunting season. Bulls Pre..;,season ratio Kill Post-season ratio 53.04 649 26.12 Cows lOO 317 100 Calves 7l.3ti '33 89.88 x = n1lllJber of females in t he fall before hunting season • •5304 x = number of males in the fall before hunting-season. x - 317 = number of females after the hunting season. ' ~5304 x a 649 = number of males after the hunting season • .• 2612 (x - 317) also number of males after the hunting season. I: Thus:.5304 x - 649 .2612 (x - 317) .2612 X - 82.80 .5304 x - .2612 = 649 - 82.80 .2692 X = 566.2000 , X = 1856 females in the fall before the hunting season. ~5304 x 984 males in the fall before the hunting season. and •7134 x a 1324 calves in t he fall before the hunti~ season. Total fall pop. = 4164 animals Total kill = 999 animals I: a I: �-23- Total post-season population = 3,165 animals, composed'of the following numbers 'by sex and age: bulls, 383 (12.1%); cows, 1,465 (46~3%); and calves, 1,317 (41.6%)• The 1957 sex-ratio data for this herd, projected in similar manner', 'showed a post~season population of 2,952 elk composed of 293 bulls, 1,627 cows, and 1,032 calves. Discussion: It is apparent in looking at the foregoing formula that the accuracy of the final-herd estimate is dependent upon the accuracy of the pre- and post-season ratios and the kill estimates. In the case of the kill estimate,s, the sources of error could be due'either to hunters failing to' report the kill, or just as important, a hunter, bias in reporting kill. by sex. Jack Grieb, Statistician, Colorado Game and Fish Department compared'the 1957 card survey data with the check station data to determine if 'there was huIiter-bias-' in reporting kill by sex. The kill sex-ratios by card surVey and' o hecK 'station for the,game. management, ¢ts involved were found to be extremely close With" oIily-a-slight indication that some of the calves may have 'been reported as bulls on the._ card survey. . . 'The 1958 card' survey and check station kill figures"were compared for the White River Units and, -~ they too, showed a very close oorrelation • . -~ _. These comparisons are tabulated as follows: check. station and card survey data for the White -River and Idaho S Check Stations) 1957 and 19,8 Table 19 Card Survey Bulls Cows Calves 584 (59.3%) 354 (36~0%) 46 ( 4.7%) Check Station Card Survey Check Station 319 (57.9%) 202 (36~7%) 30 ( 5.4%) . 649 (64~96%) 317 (31;73%) 33 ( J 31%) 336 (63~38%) 162 (30~57%) 32 ( 6.04%) Thus it appears that about 50 to 60 percent of the elk from the five study units" are checked through the Rifle and Idaho Springs Check Stations annually. Further, we can conclude that the bull-cow-calf kill ratios used in the formula were sufficientlY accurate. �-2hSpecial effort was made this year to obtain the pre- and post-season sex-ratio counts in groups. Table 2 lists these counts as taken by Dwight Owens,Aerial Observer: Table 2 -- Original data, White River Elk Herd, pre-season sex-ratio counts, September 1958. Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 Cows 20 39 5 10 19 35 7 2 8 9 20 14 164 Calves Bulls Spikes IS" 8 7 6 49- 4 76 1 6 5 3 26 2 6 16 26 2 18 6 117 9 3 7 6 46 12 6 3 1 41 Total 14 24 56 70 4 48 27 368 Statistical analysis were applied to these counts to determine variability; best to analyze, how to obtain future samples and size of sample necessary. how Analysis of the pre-season ratios was done by or-gani.zfngLhe group-scounted into groups of approximately-SO "animals, and then 100"animals; . Chf-square--was" " theIi applied to test for a good fit of the sex-ratios. A good fit-was" obtained between the bull and cow ratios (sum chi-square = 5•.213; chi':'sqtiare--;S,--6df :-S~348) by"or-garilzing the' data into' groups of approximately 100 animals and combining the mature bulls and spikes. size. These data were further analyzed to determine-the variation and-sample Generally the analysis indicated that we would be able to detect about a-20 percent change 'in the sex ratio, and that bulls and spikes are much more variable than the cows and calves (Griet>, 1958). . - - ..... . -.. .Results indicated that a post-season count in excess of 500 animals be-obtained, aila--that the data should be gathered' in groups similar to the above counts so as to permit rearrangement if necessary. For analysis purposes, it was found that the data would have to be organized in groups of' at least 100 and that bulls and spikes should be combined to reduce variability •. �-25- The 1959 post-season sex-ratio counts were taken as follows: Table 3 -- Original data, White River Elk Herd, post-season sex-ratio counts, March 1959. Group COW'S Calves 1 31 22 2 22 3 24 25 21 ;18 18 16 4 .5 6 7 8 9; 10 11 12 13 14 '1.5 16 11 30 32 17 Bulls Spikes "_ 2 6 1 23- 6 4 6 22 8 23 18 34 18 19 24 19 18 2 22 27 7 25 22 2u 17 "16 12 356 320 5, ,2 2 3 3 4 6 32 5 h 1 6 16 61 Total 55 46 43 '47 48 17 60 66 4.2 49 49 47 42 57' 51 50 769 These 'data were first analyzed similar to the pre-season data; however; ~a goodness of"fit could no tbe obtained usdng the chf.-square treatment. Thus, there was no justificatio~ for analyzing the variability. Here again, it was the high variability in the occurence of antlered -animals seen in groups with caws and calves which causes difficulty in'this tYPe-of ,-" analysis. Also, it indicates a greater variability in post-season counts even though over two times as many elk were sexed. The total sample data, which was considered the best estimate of the sex ratie available, was subjected to the 95 percent confidence tables for binomial distributions (Snedecor, 1956, p. 4). This table, in effect, places confidence liinits around a binomial population depending upon the binomial distribution-of the total sample which in this case would be the number of bulls observed per 100 cows. However, the extremes (maximum and minimum ratios), at the 95 percent confidence level were too wide to give a usable estimate of the White River Elk Herd when applied to the foregoing formnla~ Since all of the variables cannot be sufficiently analyzed, the post-season projection of 3,165 animals can only be considered as a point estimate. It should be noted, however, that this figure compares closely with the 1958 estimate of 2,952. In addition, the kill figures, validations and type of season (weather, etc.) appear to substantiate these estimates. Had there been a wide discrepancy in any of the above factors, the results of this investigation would have been much more questionable. �-26- This estimate of the White River Herd is probably the best that can,be ... obtained at present. It is based on factual information and does not conflict to any extent with other current information pertaining to this herd. This technique appears to have definite possibilities as a census method for the White River Elk Herd. Emphasis next year'will be placed on sampling technique, classification accuracy, aging of kill, and analysis procedures. Reconnnendations : 1. Discontinue attempts to obtain pre-season sex-ratios of deer in middle Park. 2. Post-season classification counts of elk should be m8de priGr to March 15. 3. Obtain aerial photographs of elk herds to check observer accuracy in classifying ardmaLs , .., 4. Use'tape recorder-for recording the sex classifications as the animals are seen. This will facilitate counting and analysis of the data. 5. Obtain cow-calf ratios in summer months (July) and bull-spike to other in September .• 6. Make age determinations of elk brought through check stations to suppliment the sex-ratio data. Literature Cited: Grieb, Jack R., 1958. Analysis of data and calculation of sample size and confidence limits for the White River Elk pre-hunting season sex ratio, fall·1958. ·Colo. Game and Fish Dept. in-service training school pub. 9pp. mimeD. Snedecor, George W .•, 1956. Statistical Methods. Ames; Iowa, 5th Edi. 534 pp. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: J-u-'ly~,'__1.:...:95:..;;9 _ Iowa State College Press, Approved by: Laurence E~ Riordan' Federal Aid Coordinator �4-n.,~ July, 1959 ~.' -27JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of . COLORADO --------~~~----------------- Project No. W-3B-R-12 ; Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. 2~ ; Job No. 4 E Title of Job: Preliminar;r Investigation of Other Census Methods .• Period Covered: M~ 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 Objective: To run s~ll-scale tests of those census techniques which appear to have the greatest possibilities. Procedure: ......Griiaed by' the comprehensd.ve"reView of"literatur'e, results of current riela--', investigations; and the more immediate demands of the big game management "pr-ogr-am, various types of'census methods were-to be investigated'on a small scale ~o determine their applicability, accuracy and feasibility. '. Preliminar,r investigation of a photo-electronic counting device for big game showed that a device which would produce the desired results could not be purchased and/or assembled within the scope of this job. -,>: ��LU14 ....l;;..... - •• -29PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF OTHER CENSUS METHODS John T" Harris Mammalogists for a number of years have been measuring such factors as movement, distribution, frequency of occurance, etc. of smallrodent populatioris with the use of electronic devices. More recently, self--contained photo-electronic units have been used not only to record the above information but to suppliment it with pictures taken at each occurence or recording. Some of the people concerned with big game research in Colorado became interested in the possibility of assembling such a unit for experimental-use on big -game. They-felt that the data from such a device could yield important i-riforinatiori reh.ti ve to movement ~ migration, numbers, sex, condition, parasitism, mal-formaties, etc, of big game animals. With these things in mind, this job was initiated to investigate the . possibility and feasibility of assembling such a unit and testing it, under field conditions, on big. game~ . Mr .•Oliver P. Pearson of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of Califorma, -Ber-ke Iy 4, California, was contacted for information.. Mr·~ Pearson has assembled and used a photo-electronic gadget for studying small-mammal' popu'Lat.Lons , His gadget consisted essentially of a 16-mm movie camera synchronized to a Braun Hobby- speed f'Lash, Every time an animal passed," it closed- a circuitwhich activated a.solenoid which pulled a metal pin out of some" ap~lro:priatespotiri"the machinery of the camera. so that a. single frame"of filni"was.expo sea: ""'Using Mr_ Pearson's information as a guide, various people'were contacted relative to the assembly of a similar device for use on big game. The Electrical Engineering Department at Colorado State University in Fort Collins agreed to'assemble the electric eye mechanism and synchronize it to the photographic unit. Mr. Howard A. Lowe of the Rocky Mountain Camera Repair, Denver, and Mn George Ward, Technician of Heiland Photographic Products, Denver, were contacted relative to the purchase and assembly of the necessary photographic equipment -,camera, flash, and solenoid. These men, after investigating several sources of information, could not recommend a bill of goods which was commensurate with the budget set aside for the purchase and assembly of this unit. Therefore, no materials were purchased and further investigation with regard to this phase of the-project was discontinued. Mr. Ward, however, informed of a Robot Registration Camera--maiilifaotured" bi Karl Heitz ,Inc ., 480' Lexington, New York City, N. Y., which would appear to be a ready-made unit with many advs.ncements over the design considered for assemblY under this job assignment. It is an electro-automatic registration system built around a motor-driven 35-mm camera that in itself is fully automatic.. The basio lIRobot" camera takes standard 35':'mmfilm, and various sizes of film packs .can be obtained for up to 3,200 pictures. The manufacturer claims that a 'tRobot" accessory is obtainable which will adapt the camera to any photographic assignment in Science and Industry. The cost of this unit with the necessary aocessories was estimated at about $1,100.00 (retail) which would be prohibitive under the present outlook. Prepared by: Date : Approved by: Laurence E •.Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ---=J....:.;u;:::Jly~,~1~9S~9:....' __,... __ John T. Harris ,_ ��.j.n~ July, 1959 ~." -31JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~~------------------ Porject No• ~~P~ 2 ; ~-----~------------------- Title W_-_;:3:;,..8___ R.... -,;;;;1_2 of Job: Period Covered: ; Deer-Elk Investigations Job No.5 Determination of Winter Loss May1, 1958 to March 31, 1959. Objective: To improve the techniques· for determining deer and elk winter losses; to evaluate the causes of such losses, and to make recommendations for better herd management. Procedure: At'the Green Mountain Reservoir, 16 transects, each eight miles long and 100 yards apart, were'walked out by a large group of senior wlldlife"'a:nd'r6rest' recreation'students in April. The dead deer observed by each observer'were-'tallied~ Live deer observed wmch pass through ·the 'line 'of 'obserVers -are talliea--by-each oDS-ariterwlien'they 'pass betweeh hiM and the man on his' right.- Observers'·are s~ationed at the end of the area to tally animals driven out ahead of the ground crew. The survey has been run in the manner just described in previous years. Results will be compared to those of previous years and will be interpreted-for managementin the light of current winter's weather conditions' as compared to' those of the most severe winter revealed in eXisting'weather records, and in the light of what might be considered to be a normal winter. . Field observations were to be made prior to winter setting in and records checked for various locations in tIle state in order to run similar tests, or checks, for different types ofwinter range. ~reliminary work was proposed on setting the South Fork of the White River. up a test area for elk winter loss on Findings: 'The information collected one year ago in late spring was reported in segment 11. Since' no sizeable amount of information was gathered in segment 12, this is in actuality a negative report. The ground counts were made in April and May, 1959, and, therefore, will be reported in' segment 13. Prepared by: Date: Paul F. Gilbert Approved by: --~Jo,;;;;hn~~'H~ar~T1~·~s~~----------J_u_l~y~,_1_9~5~9 ~------- Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ••,C· ��Ilrl11juiiijw~ -33-,--:-. i~- BDOW022363 __ ~----,._J JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS . 9206884 ., State' of" .. - . - -. - ~ . COLORADO ..•.•..----,----------- Proj~ct No•. '. W-38-R-12 -W~~~_P _ ~an No•__ ...:2=-_- __- Title Collection of Job: Period covered: Deer-Elk Investigations --;--J-o;_b;,__N...;.0...;:..-.:..7---_..;;:....;...~..;...;;;:....:.:_~---of Data on the White River Elk Herd May 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 . Aostract: . Utilization studies on the South Fork winter range indicate elk use decreased- in 1958 and deer use increased. Favorable growing seasons arid mila •Winters-have caused increased production on key browse plants and allowed the -wild~ife to remain scattered over their winter range. . The.wounding loss study on the WID te River elk herd indicated loss in 1958 (1 to 2%). -.-_;_ _:..c~._;_" ._" 0 a negligible _ Comparison of the hunter report card system with check station kill figures reveal' that the report card method is- a reliable means of determining Kill-oata":-' . The Wliite-River- elk kill wa.s nearly 1,000 animals "which nemai.ne-about the same as tne-'-past- five -years in r'e Iat.don to hunter success. Tpe trend toward ki.Ll. and hunting pressure is downward. Objective: To gatner as much information as possible on the White River elk herd includ~ng its past history and an investigation of its present status. o . ."'. Procedure: 'It was--proposed that detailed information be gathered- on the' present status oriIldividua1'herds from district field men'ana the' seasonal ranges be drawn on a large -map: -WorK was to- be--ma.irily-con~eritra.ted on tne South Fork of the White River where range problems appear to be most serious • ��-35- COLLECTION OFDATA ONWHITERIVERELKHERD Don G, Smith Woundingloss survey A wounding loss survey was conducted on the White River Plateau during the fall of 1958. Its purpose-was-to determine the actual loss in the field during the general elk hunting season. ----c Wildlife Conservation Officers were' asked to .pay particular attention bo .-rSI)orts orcrippled or abandoned animals. AttEmmts'to confirm these-reports were- . madEi--if :p6ssiole-~:~Uiic-6nfirinedreports-from'highly relia.ble sources were-considered authentio.. Losses were pinpointed on the map to avoid duplication (figure 1). Difficulties encountered in relocating the carcasses included: inaccessibility of the area, thick cover which obscured good vision, insufficient information, lack of time, and false reports. A total of 36 abandoned carcasses and 23 crippled elk were reported. number, 13 abandoned carcasses and , cripples were confirmed. Of this Elk" hunters-were contacted in the field by seven W.C.Os. and the author • .Mditional reports were received from the district forest rangers, and Game and Fish Dept. personne 1. . ., This loss represents a very small percent of the White River herd (one- and; one-half ) a.ndis considered negligible. Fewer reports were l'-eceived this -ya-ai- than in-the past. Records are nowbeing kept by the district' Conser-vat.fon Officers in the northwest region regardin g wounding losses for future reference. Harvest of White River Elk in 1958 Almost 1,000 elk were harvested from the White River Elk herd during the elk- --, hunting season of 19.58. 'There were,649 bulls, 311 cows, and 33 calves-taken: These figures were derived by the State GameManager from-hunter report cards. -"Mr.-Jack Grieb compared these figUres with big game check station records in"'19.57 and found a very close correlation. John Harris compared them again- in 1958 and also "f'ound a'close correlation. Only five big game managementunits are involved: Unit 23, 24, 2.5, 33, and 34. Twelve percent of the licenced hunters in Colorado hunted in-these five units; Nearly 28 percent were successful in killing an elk. There were 600'hunter's choice elk permits (validations) available for these units. Of this number, only 350 antlerless animals were taken. Report cards were received from 40 percent of the White River hunters. The . successful, ones were better at reporting than the unsuccessful ones (57% as compared to 33%). They reported killing 370 bulls, 181 cows and 19 calves. �-36- Table l. Comparison of report cards an~ projected hunting pressure Unit Kill by report cards 23 24 Kill by projection Cards returned (No. of hunters) Number of hunters by projection 336 34 191 160 43 108 68 277 80 ·188 118 453 420 131 296 153 1100 1048, 335 751 390 Total 570 999 1,453 3,624 25 33 Original plans called for a series of big game check stations surrounding the area to determine the actual kill but was deemed unfeasible. It is believed that htlnter report cards and existing check stations will provide the desired information with a sufficient degree of accuracy. , This harvest is nearly identical with 1957 although it is nearly 30 percent less than in 1956 "and·"in -1955: "Hunting "pressure has remained nearly constant except for 1955 when it was somewhat (14%) heavier. . Production and utilization study on winter range An intensive study of elk winter range was conducted by John Harris on the South Fork of the White River during 1956 and 1957. This area is important Tn that it supports a large portion of the wintering elk herd. Therefore, it was decided-to continue this study on a less intensive basis with the hope of benefiting management of this herd. , Fifteen randoinly selected transects were chosen from the"original"fofty-se'Ve-n transects along the twenty mile range~, Production and utilization-data were-gatl;lered in 1957 and 1958 using the 10-point method proposed by the U. S."Forest-SerVice~ Pellet group counts were aiso made during these studies. Productdonjsurveye "were done during the fall of 1957 and 1958 and the utilization surveys were run during the spring of 1958. The results are shown in the following tables and generalizations are-offered: Figure 2 gives the location of these 15'transects in relation to the original ones. �"T LOCATION OF ABANDONED AND CRIPPLED ELK ~~ WHITE RIVER PLATE AU I ft;lM;1 JJ T.4 N: 1958 {''';4 i[J~~T.3N. Jo1ol;!..)'ld I".J---l T.2N. �Figure 2.. T:pnsects selected for annual analysis SOUTH FORK, WHITE RIVER /////////~;~::;;'////////// HI 0 B L AN C 0 CO UN T Y, COLOR ADO / / % ///// ~~ /,z SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ,z//// /////// ,z/ ~ S CAL E: 314" = I MIL E ~. ~ N ~. 'l " /.. /, '/. % ,, TO ,t:'(..4.,. ~ ,, ~ /. /' / NEw CASTLE / ~ ::; "0Il,s. 'i/// //// /// /// 'l// ~ ~. LEGEND ~---RIVER -, CREEK ~LAKE --_ - _-_- -ROAD ~:"-----IMPROVED X BRIDGE ROAD .{:,',::':= PEAK /.",. /,' .;RIDGET 0 P ----00-- COMP., DENS ITY TRANSEC T o UTALIZATION • \'r .••. ~1i t.c.*s ,._.,. .•.l..~~'s. TRANSECT Se.\..~.Ioe.6 ~Y- IO.74~' WHITE a....."''''.••.. l. ~~~l :""'1:, ~:;> �~i ~?"'.:~ INTER RANGE ""US CONCENTRA.TIO~ JIll I?'ji SUMMER RANGE ICALI I~O I ••• WINTER WHITE AND SUMMER RANGE RIVER HERD COLORAL_ ELK 1959 �-37- Table 2. Transect No. Utilization and pellet -Key Percent Species Utilization 42 QUE 36 " 31 2.5 18 12 " If It It 6 If 48 41 30 23 1'5 II AME II. It It 3 II' 22 9 PRU II" Mean group counts by transect - 1957 and 1958 - Total pellet Groups Counted Elk Deer Horse Cattle Numberof Br-anches 1957 1958 1957 1958 1957 1958 1957 1958 1957 19.58 Overused * .19.571958 1 2 23 17 1 2 55:2 45:1 3 1 1 72~1 50~3 23 18 3 16 5 5 12 2 .5 2 2 4 .53;2 58.2 9 1 7 8 5 63~7 66~6 44 24 1 1 1 2 24:7 9;4 5 21 16 6o~8 36;4 4 28 l2 2 2 53.1 4~7 :3 40;2 34~9 - 13 18 1 2 .5 2 11 24 2 1 2 58~3 50~8 II 11 1 2 55S 41~2 5 4 1 6 7 2 6 48~4 66~2 40 1.5 2 1 82:7 69;3 29 7 4 2 6 51 43~0 12:0 3 6 34;.5 14~0 1 1 7 5 2 3 2 29 1 7L1 46~3 6 54.4 Go.4 Totals 302 185 25 49 4 1 9 3 ---- 54 - 27 -- - * Utilized beyond current annual growth QUE- Oakbrush (Quercus gnnbeli) _ ~ - Serviceberr,r (~Jnelanchier utahensis) PRU- Ghokecherr,r (Prunus melanocarpus) . Table 2 shows that there was less utilization on all but three transects resulting in- a difference in the mean of 14 percent. According-to -tne pe11et'-group counts-'elk d-ays-oruse was less in 1958, as was horse and cattle use, Deer use was heavfer , The number of overused branches was also less in 1958. -GenerallY, utilization percentages for the individual transects, indicate that most of the elk wintered between Hill Creek and Buford (the lower half of the winter range) ~- Utilization on :transects at the camp ground and higher in 1958 was comparatively light~ �-38- Table 3. Comparison of the 1956-57 and 1957-58 Pellet group counts Deer 1957 1958 Horse 1957 1958 Comparison Elk 1957 1958 Cattle 1957 1958 Total No. groups counted 302 185 23 49 4 1 9 .3 5 t.p 4h 1-24 1-6 1-16 0-2 0-1 1-5 1-2 Mean per transect ... .. . - .•. _. - 20.1 12.3 1.5 3.3 .27 .07 .6 .2 Mean per plot ...---_. - .2.01 1.23 .15 ~33 .02 .Q97 .06 .02 Mean Days-Use/Acre 15.9 9.5 1.18 2.52 .2 .06 .5 .17 Mean winter days use per acre 13.9 8.5 .15 .82 Mean -spnng- days use per acre 2.0 1.0 1~O3 1.70 Percent winter use 87.4 89.5 12..7 32.6 Percent spring use 12.6 10.5 87.3 Range' of all transects -. -, _ ,- ' "- .. "'- -, 67.4 Elk pellet" gr-oups and the corresponding days of use per acre were dow-38.7 percent--in"1958:--'Deer-pellet group counts were up 113 percent in 1958' althoughthe-relatfvely"sma1T'number- of groups counted and the- infrequency of such groups wou.ld tend to minimize the significance of this change. "The'greatest proportion of elk droppings (90%) were the "winter and late falltype"~-whereas the deer droppings were mostly the sprin g type. The increase in the nUmber of deer droppings found and the greater proportion of winter type deer droppings are possibly the result of the relatively light winter of 1957-58. Most of_. t. bese ,. deer droppings were made by fawns. Table 4. Comparison of the production data 1956-57 Comparis~n 47 transects 15 transects Total no. shoots measured Shoots measured ungrazed Total length previous to summer Use Amount of summer use Total length ungrazed Total len~r~h avad.Lab Le Average length available Growth index * Percent sununer use (est.) 1957-58 -' 1958':'59.. 15 transects 15 transects 4,764 3,297 1;459 1,017 1;494 1,040 1,759 1,274 6,i51 1,812 68 inches 1,644 II 1,644 tI 1;16 " 1~73 tI 3.8% 2,271 ?,956 -349 inches 5,667 II 5,802 " 1.21 " 1~72 " 5.7% * Calculated from the ungrazed shoots, only _ " 38 inches 2,199 2,239 1~70 2;15 1.2% II " n " -:39 inches 2,868 n 2,917 " 1;66 II 2"'!ll. .tLfI.· 1.3% " �-39- In 1958, 265 (17.7% more shoots'were measured than in 1957. Twig measurements showed an increase of 679-inches (29•. 8%) in 1958 over 1957 measurements. Apparently' the 1958 growing season was more favorable to browse production than the 1957 season. Table 5~ Comparison of the utilization data 1956-57 Comparison 47 transects 15 transects Number of shoots remaining 3,250 Tatar length rematntng 2:,795in. 3,046 It Amount of winter use PerCent of winter use 49~5% Total percent utilization * 54.6% Number of branches grazed beyond current annual growth Number of dead or dying branches Numoer of branches dead or dying due to rodent girdling 1957-58 1958-59 15 transects 15 transects 984 819 in. 928 " 49.3% 54.4% 1,254 1,300 in. 866 " 39~1% 40.4% 54 (36%) 17 (11.3%) 27 (18%) 22 (14.7%) 27 (18%) 8 (5.3%) * Includes both winter and summer use The lower percentage utilization in 1958 is somewhat misleading oecanse ofthe 25~6 percent production (more browse) in 1957 than' in 1956'. Actually; -there was only 6.7 percent difference in the amount of'browse consumed (62 inches) but a resultant 14 percent difference in utilization. The amount of overuse decreased- 50 percent in 1958. Of the 22 dead or dying 8 (36:.3%)were dead or dying due to rodent girdling" Girdling of--6tner species, especially aspen, also indicated an extremely high rodent population. br-anches in 1958; The -cumulative utilization figures for the 15 randomly selected transects (1957) compares very favorable (within 0.2%) with the cumulative data for all 47 transects indicating a good representative sample. No information was gathered on the past history of the White River Herd; therefore an attempt will be made to accomplish this under the subsequent segment. Prepared by: Date: Don G. Smith Approved by: July 1959, ------------~--~~---------------- Laurence E. RiordanFederal Aid Coordinator ��_....... !1,A~ ~ July; 1959 ~,-',,- -41JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --~----------------------------- Project No," W_-;;;..38-:-' -_R_-_12_', _---' ~ Deer-Elk'Investigations 4 ; Job No. 4 --------~~-----------------------~--~~-------------------------- Work Plan Title of Job: Period Covered: Expermental SnowMelting of Key Deer Winter Ranges January 1, to March 31, 1959 Abstract: The use of charcoal dust, tried. It was found to be too light 200 fine, in accelerated snow melting was to dispense efficiently from a plane. Whendispensed from a trailer pulled behind a Sno Cat, the results were promsin-g. ' 'r 17 inch crusted snow was melted down opening up bare ground in 'Tdays, leaVing acorrtro.L snow pack of.' 11 inches. Twoof the 7 days no melting occurred because of new snow and overcast skies. Objectives: To determine a, practical method of dispensing carbon black material and its effectiveness in incr(3asing the rate of snow melting. Techidques Used':, The material used in this experiment was hardwood charcoal; 200-' fine-.' 'The plane"used was' a Super-'Cub"fitted- with"a'crop--tyPe- dusting'aevfc'e: ~-'The dispenser used orithe ground'was a metal hopper constructed to hold trie-charcoal' dust:"- AiF'was"f>lown--in-one-side 6rtfiis-'hbpper With a haiid-poliered-Torge--'61ower. The"aust was"dispensed--tl1rough a flexible 3ft tube. This assembly was towed in a trailer behind a Sno Cat. ' Findings: - "Th~ charcoal dust drifted too muchwhen dispensed from the plane, did not settle on the snow in quantities sufficient enough to be detected. and Using the forge blower behind the Sno Cat' appears to have the greatest-poss-' ibility. This aparatus was tried in two separate areas. The Whitely Peak area had a"37-incli snowpack, and the Hot Sulphur area had a 17 'inch snow pack crusted enough to support a man. On the'Whitely Peak area, the application was somewhat irregular and inconsistent -due to a .light wind. Some'spots were only lightly dusted, while others were' '" nearly black. The sections that reoeived a "medium" heavy application melted down as much as 18 inches in 72 hours. On one small section, a completely black application insulated the 'snow and retarded melting. A snow a day later halted the effectiveness of the dust. In the Hot Sulphur study, the dusted area melted noticeably faster. Starting with the 17 inch pack, 11 inches of this was left in the control area when the dusted area showed bare ground. The first two days after dusting were clear with a high temperature of 42 and 49 degrees which appeared ideal. The t~ird day was partially overcast with a high of 49 degrees, and melting continued. An inch of new snow with overcast skies halted the melting here for several days. Table 1 shows a summaryof the week of March 21 to 28 during which the experiment was tried. �-42TABLE1 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17 16.5 16 14 14 14 13 11 17 14 11 8 8 8 7 4-0 High 42 49 49 48 37 41 48 40 Low 2 9 20 22 25 17 13 25 At 9:30 A. M. 16 28 40 39 32 35 30 32 (March) Control Area Depth -61'-' Snow~"Tnches Dusted Area DeEt!I-of ~Ilow, Inches Date Temperatures The area was dusted at 9: 30 A. M.•, .and all '.t.ms ..same time as possible. It was found that by putting future readings were made as near to a burlap apron around the base of the trailer; a much more closing-·the~"stdes·-ana-oack;cc"theIi-blowing the charcoef dusb underneath, even distribution was acauired. Recommendations: Findings from this survey ind.icate that a heavier probablv work better in dusting snow from a plane. material will An aprori around the Sno Cat trailer, made out of canvas or something m(f:l'e closelY woven"than burlap, should be used for a more even distribution of the charcoal dust. The blower device should 'be motor driven, and some method of agitating charcoal dust in the hoppe~ should be devised to prevent it from packing. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date: J_u_ly~,_1~9~5_9 Approved byt _ th:l Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �Figure-T:-_;-Trouble was-first- eXperienced-in Ksepnig-the-charcoal dust from blowing. Figure 2. - The most rapid melting took place on a south slope where an 18" ablation was measured in 72 hours on a 3711 snow pack. �~>18 ~._ •• L •• _ Figure 3 - Charcoal dust blown under the trailer equipped with skirts gave the best distribut1on. �July', 1959 4~,_ liji'illiii~i -43- BDOW022364 ' JOB COMPLETION REPORT ... ~ INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS 9206883 .State of Colorado --~----~~~~--------------- Porject No. 'W-38-R-12 ; Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No.5; Job"No. 1 ------~----------------~ ----~--~~----~~~~~~--~---- ,Title of Job: Period Covered: . Dentition and Age-Weight Correlation October 15, 1958 to April 15, 1958 ' Abstract: ~'A t,otaroI"122' deer were weighed at the Little Hills Experdmential.Station auring··the"Wintkf""ol'1958-59: "Mature"'does 'averaged 145 pounds; mature bucks" a:veragea~11il"pounas;"yearll.i:tg does averaged 117 pounds; yearling bucks averaged 115 pounds; doe"fawns averaged 69 pounds; and buck fawns averaged 76 pounds. 'The condItion" of""tlie'majority, of ,the deer was good and the weights of these deer appear -c-"---to-be-incr.easing. "__" Objectives: 'To determine weight groups by age classes for the p,iceance Creek Area. Techniques used: Trapped deer were placed in a plywood weigh box, aged, and weighed on portable ,platform sca'les, These scales 'were placed at the entrance of th"e experimental pastures'to eliminate unnecessary movement. Deer were then released into the pastures~ ��DENTITION AND AGE-\·JEIGHT CORRELATIOI'J Don G. Smith Hills Trapping operations during the winter of 1958-59 'were confined to the Lit.tle area near Meeker, Colorado. Weights are fromthe White River deer herd. A'totalof 122 deer were weighed and aged. . Results are presented in Table L Only three age groups were used • for the trJhite River deer herd Table 1~ Av~rage weights by~classes Comparison with '6 year Number Age cUITnllativeaverage weight Trapped Average weight Sex Mature Mat.ure bucks does 41 5 140~6 1bs. 145.4 " Yearlirig Yearling bucks does 9 10 115:L. 116.7 FaWn :If'awn··· bucks 26 31 76;2 68.6 does . below (:1.49;5) Ibs , above (141.8) II " " be]ow (127:8) be Low (121.2) " above ( 67~1) above ( 64.0) Jt " II " II . Mature' bucks weighed less than the 6-year cumulative average because of the samll'slze'and young age of the bucks captured this year. Only a. small" sample '~las taken. Mature does 1,rereheavier than normal andwere in good condition. Several weighed betwfH''m170 and 180 pounds. . orne weather- was mild until late in' the winter. Consequently, trapping' waif slOW-the first part of' tlie season but was quite successful later. Twenty wooden box-type traps were used~ A total of 184 deer were trapped. Of this number, 144 were new catches, 24 were recatches, 6 were caught in the wing traps and not tagged, and 10 were sent to Ft. Collins for research studies. The''conditiori 6f most--of the arrimaLe was good' and feed'was--no"proolem,. Many de-er' remained" high on' their Wiriter r-ange this' yeaI',,' One deer was recaught l-lhich had been tagged in Brown's Jark on January 13, 1955. Deer Tag Returns: A total of ten deer tag returns were received in comparison to '2rreceiVea-rn-I957. Most of the returns were fromthe Little Hills area although one carne from Wyoming. The distance from the trapping site to location of kill varied from several miles to fifty miles~ �\ \ ~. '.. :.~. -46- TRAPPING REPORI' LITTLE HILLS EXPERIMENTAL STATION Table 2. Deer tagged during the winter of 1957-58 Date Sex Age doe buck doe doe buck mature fawn fawn fawn yrlg. doe buck doe buck doe doe doe 12/4/57 12/10/57 doe 12/21/57 buck doe 12/22/57 ~ .-- fawn fawn mature mature fawn mature mature mature faWnmature 11/21/57 11/23/57 11/26/57 11/26/57 11/30/57 12/1/57 12/3/57 12/4/57 12/4/57 -12/4/57 -'12/4/57 -,} , Right Left Weight ear ear lbs A 395 2062 A 78 A 79 A 82 A 77 A 80 A 81 1841 A 83 85 87 A A 90 1851 ? A 1863 A 95 A 189 84 86 88 2814 A 91 A 89 198 143 A 94 2080 37 152 97 A 151 162 157 60 140 124 A A A 2/6/58 2/9/58 3/2/58 3/5/58 3/5/58 doe doe doe mature mature mature A 1769 A 1757 83 A 1770 A 1758 3/6/58 3/29/58 doe doe mature mature A A 1759 168 A 1760 A 169 1/13/58 1/18158 1/19/58 1/21/58 1/2-3/58 1/26/58 1/26158 1/29/58 1/31/58 1/31/58 doe doe buck doe" Duck doe doe Ft. Collins 3/14/58 120 mature 1781 mature A 96 faWnA 152 mature A 153 YI'-1.g~-A 155 JIIatUr'eA 158 mature A 98 aoe-- fawn A 1.~9 Duck faWnA 161 doe mature A 163 aoe -mature A 165 doe fawnA 167-' doe mature A 1776 doe faWn'- A 1774 doe mature A 1771 doe mature 1850 12/27/57 12/29/57 12/31/57 1/8/58 143 60 A A 15h A 156 Remarks Recatch from I2/8/5.5~ welgfitI35 Died in Past. 4 on May 15, 1958 64 67 145 A 157 A 99 A 160 A 162 Recatch from 1/12/57 Wght. 60 1bs. 2 points Ft. Collins 3/6/58 Recatch of 11/18/56 Wght. 170 1bs.4pt Sent to Ft. Collins 3/10/58 Recatch-Ki11ed in Past. 4, 4/15/58 Recatch of 3/6/51. Recatch of 2/14/56 Wght. 120 Recatch of 1/13/56'Wght~.140' Died in Past. 4, found-ti/15/58 Recatch of 2/5/57 Wght. 157 Found dead in Past. 4, 4/15/58 Ft. Collins 3/18/58 A 164 A 166 A 1751 A 1715 Found dead in Past. 4, 5/15/58 A 1773 A 1772 2893 Recatch of 1/21/51 Wght. 155 Found dead in Past. 4, 5/15/58 Recatch of 12/22/49 Died in Past. 4, on 4/22/58 151 �-47- Table 3. 1957 Report on Returned Deer Tags Tagging Date Age & sex Rou.nd Cow tag tag 2/21/55 yrlg. buqk 2325 11/25/56 buck fawn 2829 2/6/56 mature buck 2314 1/1/57 'buck fawn 2870 1/26/57 yrlg~ buck 2904 2/9/56 yrlg. buck 2318 1868 1856 Tpapping site Date of Location kill of kill Distance traveled Little Hills Oct.57 Black Sulphur Cr. 30 mi. Little Hills Oct.57 Behind Past. 4 locality Little Hills Oct.57 Black Sulphur Cr. 30 mi. Little Hills Winter Gas wells (Collins) 8 mi. 56-57 Little Hills Oct.57 Gas wells (Collins Gulch) ....... - -. '" 8--iiii • Little Hills Oct.57 Buford, 2 mi. so. 45 mi. 1553 Little Hj_lls Oct.57 Strawberry Cr. 2882 1839 Little Hills Nov.57 Willow Cr. (Piceance) 35 mi. 11/28/55 doe fawn 2054 A 387 Little Hills Oct.57 Piceance Cr. 3/31/50 mature doe 149 2/12/57 mature buck 2930 1/27/56 yrlg. buck A 1121 Radium 2/14/56 buck fawn A 1301 'Radium 3/6/56 mature doe A 1/19/55 yrlg. buck 2633 A 344 Browns Park Oct.57 1/12/57 mature buck 1997 1998 Browns Park Nov.51 51 mi. nw Maybell 10 mi. locality 12/10/54 mature doe 1/10/57 yrlg. buck 1791 Little Hills Oct.57 Unit 22 Nov.57 Blacktail Cr. (head) mi. Little. Hole,.. Daggett Co. Utah A 804 2cd Dry Cr. Oct.51 Unit 63, Gunnison 1/23/54 A 843 Willow Cr. (Gunnison) Nov.57 1/31/57 buck fawn 12/23/56 mature buck locality Nov.57 6 mi. east Kremmling on Blue River drainage. mi. Oct.57 4 mi. south Kremmling mi. 12/12/53 buck fawn doe locality Little Hills Oct.57 Big Cr-Elk River ;1-372A 1373 .Radium. buck fawn 20 mi. 2 mi. no. road near lola locality Nov.57 Hermosa Cr. above elk fence 13.58 2911 1518 Little Hills Sea.57 1933 1934 Browns Park - Oct.57 Cold Sprgs. Mtn. 10 mi. �42·3·· -48TRAPPING REPORT LITTLE HILLS EXPERIMENTAL STATION Table 4. Deer tagged during the winter of 1958-59 Date Sex 11/18/58 buck doe 11/20/58 buck 11/20/58 11/21/58 doe buck 11/23/58 doe 11/24/58 .11/25/58 buck ·11/2.5/58 doe doe 11/26/58 11/2e/58 buck 11/29/58 doe buck 12/2/58 .buck 12/2/58 12/2/58 doe doe 12/3/58 buck 12/6/58 doe 12/4/58 doe 12/5/58 12/6/58 buck 12/6/58 doe doe 12/6/58 buck 12/7/58 doe 12/7/58 12/8/58 doe buck 12/9/58 12/11/58 buck 12/13/58 doe doe 12/14/58 buck 12/14/58 buck 12/16/58 buck 12/16/58 buck 1/1/59 doe 1/2/59 doe 1/2/59 12/28/58 doe doe 12/31/58 doe 12/31/58 12/31/58 doe doe 1/1/59 1/2/59 doe buek 1/3/59 doe 1/4/59 doe 1/4/59 1/22/59 doe doe 1/4/59 buck 1/5/59 doe 1/5/59 Age Cow tag in ear Weight Right Left Ibs! mature 1630 1631 117 mature 1635 ·1634 152 yearling 1637 121 1636 mature 1638 1639 150 fawn 1640 1643 74 mature' 180 1644 1645 fawn 1647 1646 76 mature 1648 .'1649 143 mature 1650 . 1651 175 :1652 . fawn 165-' fawn 1654 1655 54 fawn 1656 1657 79 fawn 1658 1659 75 fawn 1660 1661 76 mature 1662 1663 135 fawn 1664 1665 "_ fawn 1666 1667 65 mature 1668 1669· 140 fawn 1670 1671 fawn 1672 1673 85 fawn 1676 1674 75 fawn 1678 1677 83 fawn 1680 68 '1679 mature ·1681 1682 mature 1683 1684 80 . fawn 1686 1688 mature 126 1691 1690 mature 1692 169.3 134 fawn 1694 1695 85 fawn 1696 1697 69 fawn 1698 1699 90 fawn 80 A 1764 A 1763 fawn A 1766 A 1765 68 fawn A 1768 A 1767 65 mature A 1790 A 1791 mature A 1792 A 1793 135 fawn A 1795 A 1794 72 fawn 62 A. 1796 A 1797 yearling A1798 .A 1799 115 mature 1810 1809 147 fawn 1812 1811 81 fawn 1814 1813 77 fawn 1816 1815 74 fawn 1818 1817 53 yearling 1819 1820 .118 fawn 1821 1822: 78 .f'awn 1823 1824 63 Remarks 2 pt. spike, other antler shot off Sent to Ft. Collins 4 pt. Front teeth worn off· �-49- Table 4 (Continued) Date Sex Age 2/7/59 1/15/59 1/17/59 1/18/59 1/18/59 1/23/59 1/24/59 1/26/59 1/28/59 1/28/59 1/31/59 2/3/59 2/4/59 buck doe buck doe doe buck buck doe buck doe doe doe buck fawn fawn mature yearling mature yearling fawn .. mature fawn yearling fawn mature mature 2/4/59 2/9/59 2/9/59' 2/10/59 2/11/59 2/15/59 2/15/59 2/16/59 2/16/59 2/17/59 2/18/59 2/18/59 1/5/59 1/5/59 1/5/59 1/6/59 1/6/59 1/7/59 1/8/59 1/8/59 1/8/59 1/8/59 1/9/59 1/9/59 1/9/59 1/9/59 1/10/59 1/10/59 1/12/59 1/12/59 1/12/59 1/13/59 1/13/59 1/13/59 1/14/59 1/14/59 1/10/59 doe doe buck doe doe - doe-- .. Duck buck buck buck doe doe-' buck buck buck doe doe doe buck buck doe .buck buck doe doe doe doe buck buck doe buck buck buck doe doe doe buck Cow tag Right Left A 1402 A 1404 A 1406 A 1408 A 1410, A 1412 A 1414 A 1416 A 1418 A 1419 A 1420 A 1421 A 1422 A 1401 A 1403 A 1405 A ]!O7 A 1409 A 1411 A 1413 A 1415 A 1417 A 1423 A 1424 A 1426 Weight .- Sent to Ft. Collins 141 120 16.3 126 103 153 90 115 73 138 3 pt. 63 A 1425 mature A 1427 A 1428 mature A 1430 A 1429 mature A 1431 A 1432 faWn A 1433 A 1434 --ili-ature A 1435 A_1436 mature A 1437 A 1438 fawn A 1439 A 1440 fawn. A 14hI A·1442 . fawn A )!43 A 1444 yearling A 144S A 1446 mature A 1447 A 1448 mature - A 14h9 A 1450 yearling A 1451 A 1452 .fawn A 1453 A 1454 mature A 1455 A 1456 yearling A 1457 A 1458 fawn A 1459 A 1460 fawn A ].461 A 1462 mature A 1464 A 1463 fawn A 1465 A 1466 fawn A 1468 A 1467 fawn A 1470 A 1469 fawn A 1472 A 1471 mature A 1474 A 1473 fawn A 1476 A 1475 fawn A 1478 A 1477 mature A 1480 A 1479 yearling A 1482 A 1481 yearling A 1484 A 1483 fawn A 1486 A 1485 fawn A 1488 A )!87. yearling A 1489 A 1490 yearling A 1491 A 1492 fawn A 1493 A 1494 fawn A 1495 A 1496 fawn A 1497 A 1498 fawn A 1500 A 1499 Remarks 168 .- 2 pt. Antlers shed. Right rear leg shot & useless Reweighed 3/2/59 (158) Antlers shed .•. 119 144 . 138 123 45 145 115 73 68 138 73 73 73 80 153 80 53 138 126 102 50 88 120 III 86 73 69 80 Sent to Ft: Collins Sent to Ft. Collins 2 pt. 3 pt. 2 pt. 2 pt. 2 pt. 2 pt" 2 pt. �-50- Table 4. (Continued) Cow tag Right Left Date Sex Age. 12/17/58 12/17/58 12/17/58 12/18/58 12/18/58 12/19/58 12/21/58 12/22/58 12/28/58 2/20/58 2/22/59 2/23/59 2/23/59 2/24/59 2/25/59 2/25/59 2/26/59 .2/27/59 3/2/59 3/3/59 3/3/59 3/6/59 3/6/59 3/6/59 3/6/59 3/8/59 3/3/59 3/8/50 3/9/59 3/9/59 3/10/59 3/10/59 3/10/59 3/12/59 3/13/59 3/14/59 buck buck doe buck doe buck buck doe doe buck doe doe buck doe doe doe doe doe buck doe buck doe buck buck doe doe buck buck doe doe buck buck doe doe buck buck fawn A 1753 fawn A 1754 mature A 1776 fawn A 1778 fawn A 1781 fawn A 1782 mature A 1784 yearling A 1187 fawn A 1788 fawn A 1901 fawn . A 1904 mature A 1905 fawn A 1901 fawn A 1910 mature A 1911 fawn A 191~ fawn A 1915 yearling A 1918 fawn A 1919 yearling A 1923 yearling ..A 1924 mature A 1926 yearling A 1928 fawn A'1930 mature A 1932 mature A 1934 mature A 1936 fawn A 1938 mature A 1940 mature A 1942 fawn A 1945 mature A 1946 fawn A 1948 mature A 1950 mature A 1952 .. faWn A 1954 matUre A 1956 fawn A 1959 fawn A 1960 fawn A 1963 fawn A 1964 mature A 1966 mature A 1968 fawn A 1970 mature A 1972 mature A 1978 mature A 1919 3/~/59 .dce'· 3/16/59 3/16/59 3/16/59 3/17/59 3/17/59 3/18/59 3/18/59 3/20/59 3/20/59 3/20/59 buck buck buck doe doe doe buck doe buck doe A 1752 A 1755 A 1777 A 1779 A 1780 A 1783 A 1785 A 1186 A 1789 A 1902 A 1903 A 1906 A 1908 A 1909 A 1912 A 1914 A 1916 A 1917 A.1921 A 1922 A 1925 A i927 A 1929 A 1931 A 1933 A 1935 A 1937 A 1939 A·.. 19hl A 1943 A 1944 A 1947 A 1949 A 1951 A 1953 A 1955 A 1957 A 1958 A 1961 A 1962 A 1965 A 1967 A 1969 A 1971 A 1973 A 1971 A 1980 Weight Remarks 46 8e 146 60 69 80 132 108 81 Fair condition 2 pt. Sent to Ft. Collins 65 139 -58 $ent to Ft. Collins 158 61 67 122 Sent to Ft. Collins 128 91 _ .. -. Condition fair, antlers shed Repeat 3/20/59 . Antlers'shed Antlers shed Repeat 3/16/59 Repeat 3/18/59 Antlers shed Antlers shed .- Antlers shed �-51- Table 5. Trapping Records of Recatches Date Sex Age 12/14/58 doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe doe' doe doe doe doe dQe doe mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature mature yearling mature mature mature mature mature mature mature 3/1/59· ·2/21/59 1/4/59 1/1/59 3/15/59 1/4/59 11/19/58 12/9/58 12/10/58 2/24/.58 1/7/59 1/5/59 1/6/59 1/24/59 3/7/59 12/1/58 1/8/59' 1/15/59 3/17/59 1/9/59 1/2/59 2/17/59 1/18/59 Table 6. Right ear Cow tag .1082 1509 1512 1586 1595 1790 1844 1863 1802 1803 1970 A 19 A 24 A 25 A 158 1958-59 Left ear Weight Round tag 159 2902143 2905 133 140 142 A 335 2062 100 143 133 98 198 486 1.38 146 132 131 2944 146 131 169 150 158 135 13'3 143 142 A 166 none. none 12/19153 1.56 1bs. 1/24/t57 148 1/26/57 - 155 11/26/56 132 12/3/56 140 152 2/11/57 1/13/57- 160 120 2/14/56 139, 2/27/57 2/27/57 - 54 11/22/56 160 12/23/56 160 12/31/56 157 12/31/56 155 1/18/58 1/26/58 1/29/58 114 Browns Park 1/13/55 12/8/55 135 68 3/8/55 2/6/58 158 Mature 2/12/50 3/6/51 Mature 1/11/52 A 167 A 395 A 1579 A 1770 Remarks, First trapped 1958 Report on Deer Tag Returns Tagging date Age ~. sex 12/13/55 mature doe 1/12/57 mature doe Round tag Cow tag Trapping Site Date of kill Location of kill Travel Distance A 178 Little Hills Oct.58 Dry Fork locality 2886 .- Little Hills Winter 57-58 Gas wells A 1761 A 1762 Little Hills Oct.58 5 mi. 2/18/57 mature doe 2939 1800 Little Hills Oct.58 13 Mile Cr. (White River) 10 mi., So. Meeker 15 mi. 2/1/56 yr1g. buck 2310 1852 Little Hills Oct.58 Oak Ridge 2/15/56 mature doe A 1305 Radium Nov. 58 Unit 27, near Kremmling 2/27/56 mature doe 2270 1773 Browns Park Oct.58 Middle Mtn.,Wyo.15 mi. 12/11/55 buck fawn 2066 A 399 Little Hills Oct.58 1/13/58 yr1g. buck A 155 Little Hills Oct.58 Fawn Cr. near Sleepy' Cat pk 50 mi., Timber Gulch 15 mi., 1/28/56 buck fawn Browns Park Nov. 24 Green River 2253 35 mi. 10 mi. �-52- Yearling deer weighed less than normal due to the extremely light weight and poor condition exhibited by four animals. These weights ranged from 91 to 108 pounds. The sample size was small. Fawns were heavier than usual possibly reflecting the thinning of the herd and better food conditions. E:xc1uding the deer which were in poor shape, the condition of the herd.in general appears to be improving as weights are increasing. Recommendations: 1. Standa!'dize age'classification into four cate~ories; fawn, yearling, mature, and old. Age by dentition if necessary_ ·2. The use of spring scales instead of platform scales for better accuracy. 3. Special field forms for the trapping crew to insure the recording of all desirable information. 4. Better indoctrination and closer supervision of the trapping crew. Prepared by: Date: Don G. Smith --~~~~--~-------------J_u_l~y~, __19~5~9_·· Approved by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �July _'," " ,_ J ~1959"" -_... .... ,. :._. ... . ..__ .. , . .' ' :'_',.;. ;/::,rj~:;?~t:':):: Alleged damage, in the form of reduced production of hay'~'frO~' spring' grazing " ': """ "',' :'< ~ by-bi€( game''animals is an ever-increasing' problem. This damage is frequeritly over--' , est'iinated by-the' landowner and accurate knowledge of the effect of 'deer andte Lk :', , grazing on young alfalfa growth in the early spring is essentiaFfor fair aid equitable adjustment of damage claims ~" ' -.:::'_Th~52~6~~};~~~il~~:m~be ~~esJ{v~d by i~~;~~tiO~ , ~ .. : . , following questions: ' ,', _ i: " .' , .'::::~ ,:,;;-~' Weather ,.'were' counted -:------:--;:;-" t:pe;:U:rage Windvelociti for 24~h~urperiod~~i~~i~l~f!~tnti';gdaYsc - each was recorded by use of an annemometer,' in order to ,determine if wind had any effect" " on deer numbersand movement.s ' ",;.:."." .:. ',:._,.'_: ::, -:..... ��-55-- METHODS OF EVALUATING DEER MTD ELK DAYJI.GE TOAU'ALFA IN THE SPRING RaymondJ. Boyd The procedures and equipment used in this study 'Here not all standard items. Each particular phase will be discussed under the appropriate heading. Alfalfa Plots The plots were 200 ft. x 200 ft. (40,000 square feet) in size.- The plots that were randomly selected to be fenced were enclosed "lith t1-w strands of 39-;.. inch wovenvlire hung on 10--foot steel posts. The posts 'tvere already in place, being hammeredinto the ground during the fall of 1957. The 1;;)'ire..houever , was not -put into position until just before growth started in the spring ~ . This" . allowed every plot to receive fall, winter, and early spring'use by the deer. The wire was not taken downuntil harvest of the hay was started. The field was marked or corrugated according to the general practice of' ranchers idthis area because of the soil types found here. Irrigation was accomplished by running water through two mai~'ditches and diverting it into the corrugates and through them to the whole f'LeLd, The field was irrigated no-more and no less--than---f,fie -a:vei'age-rancn:er-wQlild--cfc,-i t-~----Tfiis was'-accomplished-by- J:iaving-all-irrigation and ditch-.cleaning done by the laborer hired by the custodian of theBilJ_y"Creek GameManagementAr.ea. The writer did not assist in any way ,.•itJ:i. the irrlgatio:i1,-feeling that any'bIas'would be eliminated if an eXperienced irrigator" haridled--it- accor'df.ng to the general ranching practices. ---In fact; as--little jjiformation-as possible --was made available to the custodian and _the- ir:i'igator'-iri -order to Lessen brie chance of having local ranchers find out' the details of" the" study ; - - . as the study area is located in the center of a critical spring damage claim county. Whenthe hay was deemed ready to cut and bale, both the writer and the hay contractor began mowingthe hay. The Gameand Fish Department equipment consisted or a Ford Model 6.50tractor and Dearborn r-ear--mount.edsix-foot power take-off motrer , The' hay contractor used a Farmall tractor with a Farmall rear-mounted, seven-foot power take-off mower. • The hay was raked ,vith a John Deere side-delivery rake, and baled vrith a John Deere baler (See figures 5 - 12). The baler was adjusted to put out bales. loleighing about 70 pounds each. After the hay was mowed -it vTasallowed t.n partially dry in the swath before it was windrowedby the rake. The hay was baled almost as soon as it Has -;dndrowed in order to lessen the chance of leaf loss by the shattering of excessively dry leaves. After the bales Here deemed sufficiently cured they 'lh~ereloaded and hauled to Montrose where the pick-up, trailer} and hay \'Jere weighed on t.he electric scales at the Nontrose Potato Grower-sAssn. warehouse" The pick-up and trailer were weighed empty and this weight subtracted from the gross weight to obtain the net weight of the hay. The scale used in the weighings was accurate to 20 pounds and was the same scale used in weighing the hay from the 1957 experd,ment (Colorado Quarterly Report, October, 1957). �-56- Deer Counts The number of deer using the alfalfa field 'Were determined by counting them from the observation t.owe.rthat is located on the north edge of the field. The t.ower-floor is 18 feet from the ground, uhf.ch placed the observer and his binoculars about 23 feet up (Figurel2). From this vantage point it is possible to see the entire field and in no case can a deer be on the field IlTithoutbeing observed. ,During 'the daylight hour-s the deer wer-e counted every one-half hour ,-rith only the assistance of binoculars. After dark it .••. ras necess ry to use the'l;?50-,,;att' , spotlight mounted on the roof of the t.over-(Figure 12). Hith this light and a pair of' good binoculars it was very simp1.e to get an excellent count of t.h e depT' on the field: Whe'n'the light ..,.ras iised the doer did not' seem tO'be bothered to any g!'sat extent because H 'Has r-ere lv on for more' than one mi.nut.e, this beinG about the length of time it took to count t.he field .. The deer' were counted every hour after dark until midnight. The re af't.ert he counts wer-e made every other hour. The f'o Ll.owf.ngnight the deer 'Iverecounted on the hours that were skipped the previous night., and so forth .. Pellet'Group Plots . , :r~~ ,D:li_l'llQ~.!""gL I2~11~!-" gr-oups depo s i. te9- uponjthe fieJd 'I-1~re estim?-.tt;;d by .sampling the entire field by three different methods. Each method - circular plot, belt-transect, 'and step-point transect - are discussed under the appropriate headings below. 1; Circular Plot - The circular pellet group plots were 1/100 acre in size (11 ft. 9 in. radius). Each plot was perrr2nently marked at the center with a 'small stone, while a six-foot steel post was placed on the north edge of the plot for ease in location. Since the data gathered on the pellet group plots during the summer of 1957 did not produce enough data to be statistically analyzed' (Colorado Quarte:dy Report, July, 1957), it was decided to increase the number of plots on the field to 54$ " Each plot on a transect was to be two' chains (132 feet)apart, each transect to be two and one-half chains (165 feet) apart. The first 11 plots were put out on April 25, 1958, and the next day an additional 9 plots were located. On April 27th another 3 plots wer-e Locat.ed, on the 29th 6 more, on April 30th 21 additional plots were set out, and on May 3rd the· last 4 plots were set out and marked. The plots were last read on May 17, 1958. As each plot was located it was cleared of all deer pellet groups and then was examined each day until May 2nd. This day was skipped, and the plot.s read for t.he next three days (May 3rd, 4th, and 5th) and again on May 8th. No further readings were taken until the final count on May 17th. Whenever a group was located inside a plot it was tallied and then completely removed from the plot. Thus a day-by-day count was kept subject to the limitations mentioned abovee 2~' Belt Transect - With the help of 24 senior game management students from Colorado State University and Southwest Regional Educator Jesse Williams, two different methods of sampling the pellet groups on the field were tried on May 9 .• 1958~ �-57Each man lined up along the west end of the field with approximately 30 feet between-them, each manwalking in a northeasterly direction kee~ing the same spacing. Each man recorded the number of paces he took to reach the east end of the field, and also the number of deer pellet-groups he counted inside a belt formed by holding both arms extended to the side, maki:nga belt about six feet wide. Each manwas to count only groups that appeared to be one month'or less old. If- the pellets did not appear' to be shiny they Here not c cmt ed, Hhile -there- is a good-possibility of error Ln t.h i.s method, it was felt that the data so gathered wou'Id give" a very good eat imat,e of the sampled population. The data could then' be-slibjected'"to a" sample 'size formula which in turn would indicate whether additional wor-k was warranted on this sampling method. 3. - step-Point Transect" - At the same time that the- 26 menwere running the pellet counts on the belt transects-;' they were also to make a separate record of each group that they actually stepped on~ As was done with the belt transect, the number of groups counted l-lere fitted into"' the" sample size f'ormuLa to see if such a sampling or counting method could be usen to estimate the total population of groups on the field. Weather Observations During the course of the 1958 study period, weather observations were accurately taken by the use of two instruments. The air temperature was taken immediately before each deer count in order to make it possible to analyze the data and determine if there 'tvas any correlation between air temperature an deer numbers. The thermometer was hung outside the east I-rindowof the observation tower where it could be-read without bringing it inside. The particular thermometer used in this study ~~s,,~ufac~~:d ?!., The"Taylor In~trument Companyof R?cheste~, NewYo~k. " The-wind velocity was measured by an' annemometerthat was' mounted on the -' northeast corner of the roof of the tower. The dial on this particular instrument showed only total miles of wind, and could not be read at any time to get the-velocity at that particular moment.. The dial was read each evening at 5:1.5 P.M. The daily readings were subtracted from the readings for the folloWing day" which gave the total miles of wind during that particular 24-hour period. Simple division of these figures gave an average velocity in miles per hour. The instrument-used was manufactured by the J. P. Friez and Sons Companyof Baltimore, Maryland, and is their Model ML- 80. Findings: ANALYSIS OFDATA The various types of analysis that were applied to the data gathered at the Billy Creek GameManagementArea did muchtoward answering manyof t he questions that have arisen from spring damage claims submitted by ranchers and farmers. Each of the items of information gathered in the course of the damagestudy will be discussed separately under the appropriate headinge �-58- Alfalfa Production Plots Mowingof the alfalfa field and the plots contained in it Has started on June 30, 1958~ 'The hay, at the time of mowing,•.ras between one-half and tvlOthirds in bloom~ After the hay lvas baled it was weighed, plot by plot. The vleights of the hay produced from each individual plot are tabulated below. Table 1 - Numberof pounds of Alfalfa Produced from One-AcrePlots in 1958 at the Billy Creek GameManagement Area ~eplication -- 5 - 6 7 - 8 9 - 16 2,040 lbs. 2;360 Ibs. 8,500 Ibs , 4,680 lbs._._ 3,520 lbs. Total l6,7uO lbs. 21,100 Ibs. 3 - 4 - ... 3,320 Ibs. 2,660 Ibs~ 4,560 Ibs: 2,620 lbs. 3,580 lbs. 1 - 2 I Treatment Fenced Unfenced .. In determining if there is any significant difference qetween the total amount of hay prod.uced from each series of plots, .the data obtained can be subjected to an "Analysis of Variance" test (Snedecor, 1956). The resulting UFIt values taken from' the table "Points for the Distribution of Fit (Snedecor, 1956), are 7.71 for 95%accuracy and 21.20 for 99%accuracy with one and four degrees of f'r eedcm, . However, since we originally' determined that the yields of the eight p'lot s": differed under the same type of treatment (Federal Aid Quarterly Report, .October, 1957), it is necessary to use a statistical test which could take these original differences into consideration and correct the second year data so· that wheri·the differences in production between the grazed and ungr-azed plots wer-e compared,. these differences would be those caused only by deer use and not by the location of the plots. The test used is the Analysis of Covariance (Snedecar, 1956), which simultaneously uses the first year data to eliminate the normal differences in production caused by location of the plots. This test further considers howmuch variation there is in these data between plots for each treatment~ �-59Table 2 - Analysis of Covarience for Hay Weight Data, 1957 and 1958 Study Years Analysis of Covariance Sums of Squares and Products D.F. Source X2 XY y2 ~ota1 7 14,331,350 - 7,744,450 27,557,150 ['reatment 1 0 0 2,7:14,450 14,331,350 - 7,744,450 24,842,700 - Residual (Error) . ~-----.---- -...,----_.,_ 6 -----_,._.-. __ .._. -- -~---'-------' -.._. --- ..- ---_--_---- Errors of Estimates- ~.- Sum of Squares D.F. Mean Square Total 23,372,163.5 6 3,895,360.6 Treatment 2,714,450.0 1 2,714,450.0 Residual (Error) 20,657,713.5 5 4,131,542.7 Source .- ~ . -- _ .. _--_._- - F 0.657 F.01 = 16.26 for 1 and 5 Degrees of Freedom F.05 = 6.61 for 1 and 5 Degrees of Freedom In determining if there is any significant difference between the yields of the one-acre plots, we again go to the "Pod.nbe for the Distribution of FII table. The values taken from the table are 6.61 for 95% accuracy and 16.26 for 99% accuracy for 1 and 5 degrees of freedom. �-60- Deer Count Data The counting of the deer using the alfalfa field was begun the evening of April 21, 1958 and continued on a more or less regular basis, as is explained in the previous section, until May 19, 1958 when counting was discontinued because of the lack of deer coming on to and using the field. During this period of time a total ~ 3,250 deer were counted on the field. This-figure is an absolute minirrru.m because 6f the fact that the deer were not counted all night every night of the period. On the basis of 23 counting nights the above figure of 3,250 deer breaks do~rn into -an average of 141 deer per night; and further, if you consider- a 12 -hour night, an average of nearly 12 per hour using the field. Pellet Group Plots The number of pellet groups deposited on the damage study field were counted by three different methods. It was hoped that one or more of these methods would be applicable to use by a non-technically trained W.C.O. The three sampling-procedures used were: 1/100 acre circular plots; a sixfoot!T:i,.deb_~lt _trapsect; and a step-point transect. Each of these methods will be discussed separately. A. Circular Plots - There were a total of 422 plots read during the period April 26, 1958 through May 17, 1958, inclusive. Only 70 groups were found on these -plots. Because" of the manner Ln which the plots were counted- day-by-day; " as' exp'Iaf.ned in the -pr-eceedf.ng section, it was not possible to run a"correlation analysis on these data with the-deer count data. It was, however, possible to----take the nUmber of groups found, the total number of plots counted, and fit-these data into a-sample-siz9 formula (Grieb, 1958)." This formula allows us to deter':' mine how large a sample is needed in order to obtain a given degree of accuracy. . The analysis of data for ~o5 and .10 accuracy follows: Table 3 - Sample Size Data for Pellet Group Counts from Circular Plots -~Sum X 39 n = 216 0,,18 x = s = 0:48 t ~05 (215 D~F ~) = 1~972 t .10 (215 D.F.) -" L697 - 05) = 11,062. plots N (t.lO) 2,766 plots N (t. I * Based upon readings from 54 plots read four times during a 15-day period �-61Figure 2 shows the comparison between numbers of deer on the field with the corresponding number of pellet groups found the pext day. B. Belt Transects - There were a total of 26 transects, six feet' wide 'and averaging 1;440 feet in length, run on the field on May 9, 1958 •. A total of '397 pellet groups were found on all the transects. Again this 'data was fitted into the sample size formula, with the anlaysis tabulated below. Table 4 - Sample Size Data for Pellet Group Counts on 26 Belt Transects Sum X = 397' - = 26 15~27 05) = 543 transects N (t.lO) = 136 transects N (t. ri x = s = 8.64 t '05 (25 D ~F;) = 2.060 <10 (25 D.F.) = 2.787 C. Step-Point Transects - A total'of 26 of these transects were run on the field the same day as the belt transects. Only 90 groups were counted by this method, As.was done __1i:i.th the previous two methods, the data was subjected to the sample size formula and the analysis' follbws~' Table 5 - Sample Size Data for Pellet Group Counts on 26 Step-Point Transects Sum X = 90 n = 26 N (t.05) = 836 lines x= 3.46 s = 2~38 t 05 (25 D~F~) t :10 (,25D.F.) = 2;060 = 2.787 N (t.lO) = 201 lines Weather Observations During the course of the damage study various types of information regaralng the weather at the time of each individual deer count were recorded. The data so gathered will be discussed under separate headings. A. Air Temperature - The air temperature was taken just before each deer count was made. Since the thermometer was not in operation the first'night of counting, temperature-deer count data is available on only 3,083 deer. In order to determine if there is any relationship between numbers of deer counted and the air temperature at the time of the count, it is necessary to subject the data gathered to a Coefficient of Correlation Test (Snedecor, 1956). 'In Table 6 the calculation field •. of "r" is shown for the deer counts on the alfalfa �-62- Table 6 - Coefficient of Correlation on Temperature-Deer N = 135 Sum Fx • Dx = .:626 Sum f Dx • Dy = - 5,601 Sum Fx • Dx2 = 36,592 Sum Fy • D y = 203 Sum Fy • Dy2 = Count Data r = - 0.305 7,249 To further substantiate the calculated value for "r", Figure 3 shows a scatter diagram of the deer count-air temperature data. B. Wind Velocity - The wind velocity can only be approximated the way -- ._.~ in which the data on speed .. .... -. . was gathered. because of -.. There were a total of 3,782.9 miles of wind during the period April-21, 1958 through May 19, 1958, inclusive. This breaks down into an average of 99.38 miles of wind per 24-hour period, and further to an average of 4.14 miles of wind per hour. No correlation be setup. analysis can be run on this data, nor can a regression DISCUSSION equation .~. The prupose of this section is to discuss the results brought out in the ana1ysis'of data section and to interpret them with the idea of answering the questions posed in the objective, namely: (1) to determine if any actual loss in production occurs from spring grazing by deer or elk, anddf a loss occurs , how much; and (2) to correlate the actual amount of use -by game animals on the" ' test plots, as to numbers of animals and length of time, .with changes" in production so that estimates of game use may be converted to change in pounds of hay produced. Alfalfa Plots In most simple experimental work involving the use of replicated plots, 'the Analysis of Variance is probably the most useful test f'or= t he researcher" to use in order to test his data. In an experiment such as this'; however , where the final conclusions are to be used" in both boards "o f arbitratioii ani- coiii-tsor-law, it-is necessary to extend the analysis arid include data gathered previous years that is pertinent to the present year's work. During the first year of the study, none of the plots were fenced so that the production of alfalfa hay for each plot could be determined-under the same use, weather, harvest, etc:; thus, it would be possible to see what differences, if any, existed between plots. Results of the 1957 study year revealed that while there were different amounts of hay produced on each individual plot, the total amount of hay produced from the plots to be fenced was the same as the amount produced from t he unfenced or control plots (Federal Aid Quarterly Report, October, 1957). Probably the main reason the amounts of hay produced varied from plot to plot was because some plots were randomly selected in richer soils than some of the other p'Io ts , �-63- In going back to Table" 2 we note that the calculated IIFn value from the Analysis of Covariance is 0.657. In order' for the "FII value to be significant at the 95% level it would have to exceed 6.61"0 It is obvious, therefore; that the "F" value does not even approach significance. Thus, we can state that -.. there is no statisticallY significant difference between the amount of hay produced from t he unfenced and fenced plots. -, Deer Counts The methods used in this study to determine the numbers of deer using "the field were, in the opinion of th~s writer, the best available and gave very accurate data as to numbers and time of feeding. TnFd.gure :., the hour-IyT'Lucbuatd.on 'iii deer numbers is shown. The graph inaicates that the hour between 6:30 P.M. and 7:30 P.M. is the time of night that the greatest number of deer can be counted. It is the opinion of some ranchers that the greatest number of deer are on the fields after midnight, "bub a look"at the graph in Figure 1 indicates that for this study counting after 7:30 P".M;·will put the man doing the counting in a period of declining numbers of deer--using"·the"field. This decline continues on a more or less regular basis until daylight after which no more deer are present to be tallied. Pellet Group Plots It is obvious from looking at Tables 3, 4, and 5 that none of the sampling procedures tested in this study can give an accurate estimate of deer numbers using an agricultural field for such a short period of time. The expense and amount of time required to run enough circular plots to get even 90% accuracy is completely out of the question. The use of the belt transects at only the 90% level of accuracy still cannot be justified from the standpoint of time and expense involved. For the purpose of more accurately determining numbers of game animals on any particular agricultural field, based upon this study, it would seem advisable to' use only counts of animals and not even attempt pellet group indications of numbers. Weather Observations When the deer counts were correlated with air temperatures at the time of each count, an inverse relationship was shown. In other words, the higher the temperature at the time of each count the fewer deer were counted. Thfu would be what would normally be expected in a situation of this kind. The actual relationship between numbers "of deer and air temperature showed little or no correlation as indicated by a calculated "rlt of - 0.305~ To show very strong correlation a value above 0.8 should be indicated, whether negative or positive. The wind velocity data, while not the best that might have been gathered if proper equipment had been available, did indicate that wind might have an effect on numbers of deer on the field. Field notes taken during the counting periods also indicated that wind had an effect on the numbers because the deer tended to move around and be more nervous while the wind was blowing, and in some cases they completely left the field when strong winds began to blow. �-64- Conclusion Because the'experiment was designed to allow all factors such as weather, disease, insects, etc. to be constant on all of the plots, the only factors that might affect the amount of hay produced are soil differences and animalsgrazing on the alfalfa before it is movred , in this Case deer. Since it is the function of the Analysis of Covariance test to eliminate or take into consideration the differences we already know exist between the plots, due in' all probability to soil differences, the only factor not constant on all plots 'or' accounted for in the statistical anlaysis is grazing by deer. Since we have alreadydetermined that there is no significant difference between the yields of-the plots, spring grazing by deer had no harmful effect upon th~ amount of hay produced from the field. SUMMARY 1. Adequate knov'ledge of the effects of deer grazing upon alfalfa fields in the spring bas been lacking in Colorado ever since the problem began. 2. A two-year study was set up on an alfalfa field at the Billy Creek Game Management Area near Montrose, Colorado in order to determine if any actual reduction in hay production occurred when great numbers of deer grazed on the new alfalfa growth in the early spring. 3. The actual amount of hay produced fran 10 one-acre plots was determined by weighing all of the hay from each plot after it was baled. One-half of'the plots were fenced against deer use, the other five left open to grazing. 4. T6talproductionfor five fenced plots'was 16,740 pounds while 21,100'pourids were produced from five unfenced plots. These two figures were not statistically different from each other. 5. Deer were, counted from'an observation tower, with the assistance of a 1,250-v-latt searchlight, every hour' all night during the spring while the deer used the field. A total of 3,250 deer 1-Tereobserved using ,the field, an average of nearly 12 deer per hour during the night time period. 0·. _ 6. Analysis'of the time deer were counted indicated that between 6:30 P.M. and 7:30 P.M. was the best time to count deer as this was when maximum numbers were using the field. 7. Three different sampling methods of determining numbers of pellet groups on the field were tested, and none of them gave an answer that reflected the correct number of deer using the field the previous night. 8. Correlation tionship. of air temperature and numbers of deer did not'show any relaAn urI! of - 0.305 was calculated from this data. 9. Wind velocity affected deer numbers only slightly and was not too consistent in its effects. �FIGURE t 0 AVERAGE NUMBER OF DEER USING THE ALFALFA FIELD AT aui, Y CREEl< 1:00 ~OO ~OO COO 50 40 Q W IZ :;) 0 o ffiw Q ~ 0 a:: w i:;) Z 1&1 C) C( a:: w > C( 10 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 P. M. HOUR EACH COUNT 10:00 11:00 12:00 ~~ WA'?i ;TAKEN 5:00 6:00 �FIGURE 2- COMPARISON OF NUMBER OF DEER AND PELLET Legend: 4- 26-58 4-27-58 4-28- 58 4-29-58 4-30-58 COUNTED ON ~ NUI-48ER OF DEER COUNTED ~ NUMBER OF 1/100 ACRE NUMBER OF PELLET GJ DATE GROUPS 5-1-56 ~TUDY FIELD PLOTS GROUPS 5-3 - S8 ALFALFA IN PLOTS 5 -4 -56 5-5 -58 �Figure 3 - SCATTER DIAGRAM :SHOWING LACK OF CORRELATION BETWEEN AIR TEMPERATURE AND DEER COUNTED 70 67 65 64 63 62 I 61 '0 59 u. en w ex: w C!> W 0 • 58 56 54 55' • 53 52 51 50 .. 49 58 47 ~ W ex: 46 45' • 44 43 . 42 :::l 41 et ex: 40 w o, 39 ~ w ,38 I- I- 363T. 34 I- 0 4 9 7 5 3 I 6 8 12 II 15 18 20 22 '24 26 28 30 33 .35 39 44 57 60 63 ss 69 76 82 87 107 13 16 19 21 23 25 27 29 32 34 36 41 45 59 6l 64 66 72 rr 85 94 Number of Deer Counted \_ �Ffgure 4 -~ MoWing alfalfa-, Ford tractor and 6-foot-Dearborn mower. Billy Creek Game Management Area, 1958. Figure 5 - John Deere baler and Ferguson tractor used on damage study alfalfa field, Billy Creek Game Management Area, 1958. _ �Figure 6 Mowed alfalfa outside a control plot, Billy Creek Game Management Area, 1958. Figure 7 - Windrowed alfalfa inside a control plot, Billy Creek Game Management Area, 1958. �~""'"";.-"""'~'.""-'~-~:':'-~'''"''.'' .'.. ' ;-'"".-~.:!"-.-..,, .. --,. -_ . -Figure- 8-;;-Ba1ed hay -inside--a-control-plot, -Bil1~_ Cr-eek. Game Management Area, 1958. or Figure 9 - Control plot not yet narvested, Billy Creek Game Management Area, 1958. _ �Figure 10 - Weighing hay from a study plot. _MOE~r~~~ :t:.0~~!-~ .. ~--- _-_.- -Gr6wers--A~fs 'Ii ·-electfic···scale. ---- Figure 11 - Twenty-five (25) deer grazing around a fenced control plot. Billy Creek Game Management Area, 1958. �Figure 12 - Observation tower and spotlight used in counting deer at the Billy Creek Game Management Area. <, �-65~ Recommendations for Further Study: It is apparent that further study into some phases of this problem would be very desirable~ This study has shown certain relationships to be quite evident, while others are not"so clear or are ~dthout a complete explanation. Further investigation should, therefore, be directed to explanation of uninterpreted findings and confirmation of definite relationships revealed in this study. Specifically, 1. these phases should be more thoroughly investigated: In order to be confident in the hay production data, it 'Will be necessary to redesign the sample so that the resulting statistical anlaysis will be able to detect differences in production as small as 300 pounds per ac e. The data that is now available can be subjected to a Phi-square (¢ ) analysis (Dixon and Hassey, 1957) which will tell us the proper sample size, based upon the known variation of the plots, required to give us the confidence limits and accuracy needed to satisfy the requirement of being able to detect a 300 pound difference in production. 2 2" Correlation of deer numbers with certain weather phenomena. should "be extended into multiple correlation using air temperatures, barometric pressure, and wind velocity. 3. The degree to which deer" counts fit into the recommended hours should be worked out over several years to get any variation that might shm~ up~ LITERATURE CITED Boyd, RaYmond J."1957. Methods of evaluating deer and elk damage to alfalfa in the spring. Colorado Quarterly Reports, July & October. Colorado Game and Fish Department. Denver, Colorado. Dixon, Wilfrid"J. and Frank J. Massey, Jr. 1957. Introduction to statistical analysiS. McGraw-Hill Book Company. New York. 488 pp. illus. Grieb", Jack R. 1958. v.lildlifestatistics. Colorado Game and Fish Department, Federal Aid Division. Denver, Colorado; mimeo; 93pp.illus. Snedecor, George"W~ 1956: Statistical Ames, Iowa, 485 pp .•illus. Raymond J. Boyd ----~------~~~-----------~L-~~ Date: ____________ July 1959 methods. Prepared by: The Iowa State College Press. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��July, a..l~, qi 1959 -',,0, -61JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --~~~~~~----------------- Project No. W-38-R-12 Deer-Elk Investigations 6 '------~----------------~ Work Plan No. Title of Job: Period Covered: Methods of Preventing Job Nos 5 Deer and Elk Grazing on Alfalfa April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 Obje.ctlves: To determine methods of lessening on alfalfa in the 'spring. or preventing deer and elk grazing ~ Results: - The press of other duties concerned mostly with Work Plan 6, Job 1, did not allow any time to be spent upon actual field work• . ----.,However~- in the course of several conversations with Fish and WildlHe ----personnera-uring--the-pastsegment--some-new-ideas-have--been_broac_hed_wiQh_:haye been incorporated into segment 13 of this projectG It is necessary, Prepared by: Date: therefore, to submit a negative report ~Ra~ym~o~n~d~J~.~B~o~yd~ Approved by: July 1959 ------------~~~~---------------- at this time. Laurence E. Riordan ��'. -69- JOB COMPLETION REPORl' INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State af 00 C01orado ~~--~~~~~--------------'0 : __ 6---------------------__ -- Work Plan No. D_o _e_er_'_-E_lk,,_;.;.;.._I...;n_v_e_s_t...;i...!.g~a_t_i_ _ Job No. 8 Title :of Job I.'. oMethodsof Preventing Damageto Fruit : .. : Period Covered: Trees by Deer or Elk 0_0 April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 . Objectives:,' fo find methods of fenCing or spraying that will protect from browsing or rubbing by deer or elk. ° young fruit trees Results: with the Regional Manager and the Regional GameManager the Department had begun an extensive program of fenCing-entire orchards by furnishing "tJi.ewoven""·wtreand the Landowner' fiii-msmng -the posts ana-labor. -This program has been undertaken by several' growers-who"liave had-deer depredations in the past.· This should decrease the riiiinOer or claims on tree damage c onsdder-ab'ly , Also, several of the growers have reported good success with "basket s" around young trees. • ° F'encing - III talking for-the SouthWest-Regionqit developed that 00 • Since' there seems to be agreement amongthe growers that the'two types'of" fencing are doing some good toward alleviating the damage problem, this phase of . the job will be dropped. D:eraying'';''Tlie'orchard areas near Paonia and Hotchkiss were visited several Service research personnel who are working on repeI_:l:entstudies in t hose areas. -li.iiiies in the company of -Fish arid Wildlife The'Wildlife Research Laboratory, located in Denver, is divided into five . secfd.ons , one of which is the Controls Branch which is concerned with the repellent -a.spec~s· of" certaiIi chemical products and"by''';'products.' ' This lab is"" able'," tnroiigh--t1i9ir-screenin"g tests, to test and 'evaluate some 1,000 chemfcaIs 'a-year' :f~r repellency qualities. They also work with different chemical compounds that may be used as the carrier or adhesive for the actual repellent itself. ° ° • - When laboratory tests show a chemical to have good repellent possibilities, it is carried into very carefully controlled and designed field experiments such as those presently being carried on in the Paonia area. ,,·l �·-70.•• Recommendations: Since the· Wildlife Laboratory has several full-time biologists working on this problem,· and a very fine biochemical laboratory at Denver, their personnelarid facilities far exceed anything the Federal Aid Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department can devote to this study. . .. It-is recommended, therefore, that this job be dropped and that reports put (;ut- by tine··Fish- and Wildlife Service should be screened, and .repeLlente recom-' mendedl>y--themshould be bought by the GameManagementDivision to be used in our field work. Prepared by: Date: RaymondJ. Boyd -........;.;~~;_;_..;...:.-~;_;_---~J~u~ly~,~1~9~5~9 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid COClI" dinator _ \ J. �LlS2 July, 1959-"-' ,--:> -71JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --~----------~---------------- w- 38-R-12 P~:>~ec~ _~o. _ Deer-Elk Investigations 6 -----=------~~----------~ Work Plan No. Title Job No. 9 of_~??!_,,~,_Ex_,~p~e~r_i_m~,e_n_t~a~l_N_i~,g~h_t_~C_e_n_s=u_s_o_'f~D_e_e_r~ _ Period Covered: April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 Objectives: To find methods of counting deer and elk more accurately grazing on agricultural fields in t he spring. while they are }=>rocedtire: "-The' main' criterion the GameDamageOfficer has for determining the a.ilount ----o£use.::_on.::_alfa.lf.a_or__o_ther_cl"Qps_in:__the__~pr:iJl,g~:rt()1Tl gr_aztng deer or elk is the nightly counts by the local conservation officer. /' '-~Since"t:he greater 'part of the- counting 'is dons"at nightrfrom a' pic1{::';up -with tfie-'assistance--of a spotlight, 'there' are' certaiii-areas-'in f-ielda-that 'cannot-beseen-n'om- a -road.-' The counts can-be more accurately made if these "bLi.nd" areas could be counted along with the rest of the field. - .. ' _.', - An-armYsurplus "Sniper-Scope" has been obtained, areas to count the deer. and will be used in these Resuits: Since 'all of tne--work on this job had to be done at'night no work was accomplished-'Decauss or-'the' press of duties under Work Plan 6, Job 1. All of the nights :Cnat"iiiight--fiavebeen used to test the Scope were spent in the observation tower at Billy Creek. It is necessary, therefore, to submit a negative report for this segment. Recommendations: Should the opportunity arise after counting from the tower at Bil~ the Scope should be tested in areas having summeruse by game. Prepared, by: Daber -, RaymorrlJ. Boyd ----~------~~--------------- Approved by~ July 1959 --~------~~~~~------------------ Creek, Laurence, E'. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July, 19.59 72A State of JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Colorado --------------------------------- Project No. W-38-R-12 ----~------------------------ Work Plan No. Deer Elk Investigations 1 •__ J:..,:o::.;b:......:,N;,:o:..:.._::_3 _ ----------------------------, Title of Job: __ ~Mi~·ggr~a~t~1~·o~n~B~e~t~w~e~e~n~S~umm~~er~a~n~d~W~i~n~t~e~r~R~a~n~g~e~s _ FLAG CREEK TRACK COUNT Abstract: A total of 3,330 sets of deer tracks were counted on Fl~g Creek in 1958 as compared to 23,603 in 1953 and 20,072 in 1952. No mass migration or rush occurred this spring as in the past. There was considerable criss-crossing in the lower portion of Flag Creek indicating a desire to remain in the area. The past winter was open, feed was good, and the bulk of the deer appeared in good condition. I'1any: of these deer remained high and scattered on their winter range in 19.57-58. The harvest of the White River-Deer--Herd-was heavy during the previous hunting season, an estimated 25,319 deer. Techniques: The methods employed were virtually the same as those used in the past. A detailed description is found in the Colorado Quarterly Report, July, 1950. The same 1.5 miles of road was used although the condition of the road necessitated the use of a larger drag and a heavy log chain. An "I" beam drag was pulled behind a pickup truck and the chain fastened to the rear of the drag. The counter walked ahead or sat on the hood of the vehicle as the driver moved slowly along the road. TWo tally counters were used, one to record tracks headed toward summer range (plUS) and one to record those returning (minus). Tracks were counted daily during the early morning hours to avoid as much interference as possible. Findings: An aerial survey by Pilot Norman Hughes on April 15, 1958, revealed considerable snow on both sides of Flag Creek and Sheep Creek and no apparent migratory movement. He did notice a copcentration of deer about three miles south of Meeker near the Government Road. At this same time, 4,817 deer were counted during the annual Meadow Count on Piceance Creek. Another check was made April 24, by auto. Few tracks were visible at the .lower end of Flag Creek, and the road above the Sutton ranch was very muddy. Some deer and elk wintered above this ranch. A check on Strawberry Creek found early migrants moving in the lower portion. Nine deer were observed feeding in the afternoon on the R. S. Lough Ranch located near the Moffat County line, but Mr. Lough believed these were deer which had Hintered nearby. �aS4 _..l:..., •• _ 72B By May 6, it was possible to drive six miles above Sutton's Ranch before encountering snowdrifts. A total of 6 elk and 70 deer were counted on Flag Creek, Several days later, a check of road conditions at the south boundary disclosed a dry am graded road from t he Langstaff ranch to the head of Piceance Creek but no deer tracks were seen. The local people had seen few deer. Some sheep were already in the area. Early migrants were seen in the vicinity of Meeker, but we had no way of counting deer using this lower route. Deer were reported on L07 Hill, Oak Ridge, Big Mountain, Nine Mile Pass, and on the Upper ~Jhite River early in May. Some of them had wintered in these areas. The month of April was cold and wet, but May was warm and dry. Only 1.07 inches of precipitation was recorded in 1-1eekerduring May. The weather waS generally clear except for an occasional afternoon shower. The counties (Rio Blanco and Garfield) were asked to clear the road but other commitments and muddy roads delayed them. The snowdrifts at the higher elevations forced us to count one portion of the road first, then drive around and count the other end. Considerable time and much hand work was done by the counting crew to open the road by May 16. The actual count began May 11, 1958, end was terminated May 30. A total of _ _3,l3_Q__set:s __~f tracks were counted during this 20 day period. In 1953, 23,603 "tracks were counte-(rw:lthln--l~raays--reaching--apeaKI1ay 15. -·In--1952,-20:,072 tracks were counted in 21 days en d reached a peak May 18. Instead of the usual mass migration occurring within several days, the numbers remained fairly cons~ant throughout the month. The highest daily count was 269 which occurred May 20th. Early in the month there was considerable crisscrossing as deer and elk remained in the Flag Creek area. There were 20 elk staying six miles above Sutton's ranch and others were seen regularly on Big Mountain. We did not record elk tracks but estimated that at least 50 crossed the Flag Creek road. An earlier flight by helicopter was cancelled but a plane flight was made made May 22. By this time the Serviceberry leaves were out making observations difficult. The flight was also made a little late in the morning. A total of 91 deer were counted in the Biceance Triangle and 19 on the Ridge between Sheep Creek and Flag Creek. Most of these were seen at higher elevations. A wide sweep of L07 Hill and Oak Ridge revealed many deer there and also 21 elk on the upper portion of Oak Ridge. The usual problems of a road count were encountered, but their effects were not considered serious. Sheep trailing near Rio Blanco did not interfere with the count until the late migrants began using these higher routes. No tracks were counted where sheep had been on the road as these were usually for short stretches. Road maintainers and the consequent "hardpan" made track observation difficult in spots, but the uL _ntainers were not a problem until the final few days of the count. It seldom rained hard enough to obliterate tracks. There is sheep-tight fence from the Langstaff ranch on West Rifle Creek to Herb Jolly's property, a dist?nce of approximately four miles. , ",_ �72C During the first half of the counting period the bulk of tracks were seen in sectors I and 2, just above Sutton's ranch. Later, tracks increased in sectors 3 and 4 as the migrants began using the higher crossings at Thirteen Mile Creek, Fourteen ~file Creek, and West Rifle Creek. Recommendations: If this method is continued the Department of Game and Fish should assume responsibility for opening the road after obtaining the proper authority. Early work should be done ,nth the bulldozer and carbon black to hasten snow melt in the higher areas. A sno-cat could be used to spread the carbon. Aerial observation would reveal the location of herd concentrations and a closer check should be made of the migration across Strawberry Creek and the lower \fhite River country near Meeker. The deer are apparently changing their habits as many have been seen on their intermediate range this summer. Submitted Date: by: D_o_n_G __._S_m_~_·t_h Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan July, 1959 ------------~~~~~-------------- �72D TABLE 1. 1958FLAG CREEK TRACK COUNT Sector 3 Plus Minus Total Sector 4 Plus Ninus Total Date Daily Total Sector 1 Plus Minus Total Sector 2 Plus Minus Total 5/ll 70 137 124 13 108 51 57 5/12 124 206 135 71 121 73 48 4 1 3 2 o 2# 83 51 135 96 39 4 2 2 10 o 10# 103 ':58 45 220 138 82 Maintainer 19 5 14 5/13 83 5/14 141 5/15 94 us 76 39 90 59 31 9 6 3 27 6 2J# 5/16 77 92 69 23 141 112 29 9 3 6 24 5 19# 5/17 175 195 169 26 217 127 90 51 9 42 25 8 17 5/18 140 146 138 174 128 46 64 20 44 57 15 42# 5/19 231 171 133 38 240 129 111 88 41 47 46 il 35 5/20 269 197 119 78 315 214 101 78 19 59 39 8 31 5/21 168 199 179 20 158 101 57 97 40 57 57 23 34 5/22 242 168 118 50 238 ~6 92 115 37 78 35 13 22 5/23 261 179 108 71 178 101 77 150 57 93· 34 14 20' 5/24 265 113 86 27 291 165 126 120 38 82 44 14 30 5/25 156 106 79 27 199 144 55 119 54 65 16 7 9# 5/26 190 108 96 12 155 112 43 107 33. 74# 87 26 61 5/27 199 48 22 26 112 62 50 121 34 87# 48 12 36 5/28 192 24 17 7 96 56 40 120 34 86#~~ 81 22 59 5/29 46 43 3 137 94 43* 83 5o-:,~26 11 15~~ 40 30 10 99 39 118 48 70# 13 23# ill 5/30 142 8 6G * Road maintainer # Sheep on road Grand Total .••• 3,330 33 36 �Ju~, 1959 liiirlMtliimu -73- BDOW022366 , 'JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONSPROJECTS State of ->. COLORADO . '.... PJ:'0ject No.• ·· :,',. . 'w - 95 -. R - 3 . Aff'ecting . ..: ">j~:b No. "_.' :._1,--...,-.,....,., ; _, . Jot, No.', i~ .l-a . ". I.: . ~. Investigations of Diseases and Parasites Game Animals. study of. Lung Nematodes of Bighorn Sheep • Experimental transmission of lungworm. infections • Perdod Covered: '. March 1, 19~8to February 2R, 1959• . Abstract:' .. '!'he objective is to determine oharacteristics of iungworm .: infections ..which may be Significant in the management or control of :sucli infecti0n.s~ These are: the prepatent pez Lod or time 'between exposure " aniithe:s'tiedding.of larvae in.the feces, of the infected a.rti.mal,; the dur~tbn ofinfei;:ticins . uncomplicated by reinfection subs~gu~nt to the -C----'---;"--'-c:---'--original exPosure; .the syinJ;toms and pathological effects 0-£ infections varying, in 'irifensfty; the factors which may have bearing upon the degree ;0£' resistance or. suscept LbdH ty to Lungworminfections~ '. . ~ "0; •..•Tethniques, used toward attainment of the stated objectives will' , be; the expeJ,"imenta.1infection and observations of naturally infected ,animals confined for the purpose of study. Experimental Infection is . 'attempted by rearing the first-stage Protostrongylus larvae to the. infective . stage in su Lt abfe intermediate hos t snad Ls, and administering these ' .. infective .larvae either orally or by' Injec+Icn, Results are measured . ,primarily by 'fecal' analyses for larvae and by postmortem examination of the experimental host. .. _. . From the observations made the prepatent period for' protostrongylosis : is betwee.n,25 and 57 days as stated in previous report (data from this segment j. 30,' 35, 52, and 54 days). Infection in two confined bighorn ewes' has not subsided in a year' 5 time though reinfection is deemed unlikely because the snail hosts are absent in the pen. Lungworminfection has . been established for two bighorn lambs under conditions indicating that ":it was vacqu Lred prenatally. Inconsistent results in the attempted expe r Iment af , ;. ":~~rife~tions.can probably be attributed to individual resistance or . susceptibility whiCh is more pronounced in the abnormal hosts. There have .'been four observations indicating some infection of very young domestic rabbits with P•. stilesi. Continuation of the study is recommended, in order to obtain more conclusive results, especially with regard to the duration of an infectiOn and. the effects of such infections on the normal hosts.' . '.': ' .. '-.' ..' . " . '.' " ��-75- Experimental Transmission of Lungworm Infections .Richard E. Pillmore Introduction The extramammalian existence and development of the larvae of various species of the lungworm genus Protostrongylus has been studied in some detail, but very little is known about the development within the final host. A study of this phase in the development of lungworms was initiated, in order that, several things of importance to the future understanding and management of bighorn sheep populations might 'be learned. Knowledge of the prepatent period, or time required for the first-stage larvae to appear in the fecal pellets after exposure to the infection, is needed to determine quarantine periods or to date back from an upsurge of an infection to determine the when, where, and why for the increased exposure. By maintainine- infected animals under confinement away from the known intermediate hosts we may eventually obtain Iungworm-f ree animalS for experimental-use or for stocking unoccup-i.ed+r anges; furthermore,- it serves as a check on the possibility that other organisms might serve as intermediate hosts. Exoerimental transmissions may also yield information on the factors which affect the resistance or susceptibility to an infection, or on the pathological significance of varying intensities of such infection. In the Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly for october 1958, infections of New Zealand white rabbits and the Audubons cottontail rabbit with Protostrongylus sy1vi1agi, and Rocky Mountain mule deer with p. macrotis ",ere reported. The possibility of P. stilesi developing-in very young Net..• Zealand white rabbits was also Indicated. Continuation is reported here. Methods Essentially the methods are the Same as outlined in the previous report involving the administration of infective lungworm larvae to the prospective host. This is accomplished by giving the larvae orally either free or still in the snail tissues, or by injecting the larvae, contained in saline solution directly into the blpod stream or peritoneal cavity. Infective larvae of the different species of Protostrongylus are determined by using the infected lung material as a source of the first-stage ~arvae, assigning the larvae to the same species as the adult worms recovered from the same lungs. Fecal samples are collected and examined periodically from. each exposed animal by a Baerman process to recover any first~stage larvae which would indicate that infection had taken place. All rabbits have been slaughtered for postmortem examination of the lungs involving an examination through the pleura, dissection of bronchi and any nodular or discolored areas, follo~~d by masceration of the lung tissue and Baermanizing to recover larvae. . �459 -76- Naturally infected animals, namely three bighorn sheep in Denver and one in Colorado Springs, are confined for observation and fecal ana1ys('s. Precautions have been taken to be certain that no intermediate host snails exist within the enclosures. Fecal analyses have been used to study the trend and duratioll ::>fthe infections present. Lambs were born to the t wo ewe s in Denver during the summer of 1958 but neither survived through the sUl'1J1ler, so postmortem examination and culture for bacteria ':.712 remade. Findings· The r esu Lts of the artificial summarized inthc following Larvae attempts made are 1 Table Exp , Host transmission table: .Results Adm.in i.stered + Audubon's cottontail: 50 p. sy Lv i Lag L, IP .-ll-.P- • .sti.Les.i., -or·a1···--· ----_.. ~.rushi, IP 14 P. stilesi ,~ 36 P. sy Lv i.Lagi , oral (case 1Ir/,) 41 P. sy1vi1agi, oral (case 117) New Zealand wh i t e rabbit: x ...- .._.._-- ..- x···· --.-- x x x 91 P. stilesi, IP 153 P. sylvi1agi, IV 75 P. sy1vilagi, -P. sy1vilagi, IV 14 P. stilesi, IP (case #9) 17 P•. st i.Les i. , IP 41 P. sti1esi, IP (case !flO) 5 £.. bought on i , oral 32 P. s y Iv i Lag i , oral (case #11) x x x x ? x ? x x DomC'stic G02.t young : nOel:)' x x 90 P. sti1esi 8!. rushi,IV 26 P. macr o t i.s , IV i<o1..tntain mn Le deer, fawn : 10 P. macrotis, 5 tf " 52 " II 761+larvae or a1 - 7/ 9/58 10/ 2/58 12/ 4/58 " (case #12) " administered x 6 No. attempts 11 17 There is nothing of significance to report regardinr; the negative results other than the fact that they serve to point out the inconsistencies .obtained in such trar:.smission studies. More consistent results would probably be obtained if the natural host species cOllld be obtained for the experimental animals. Each Case where there was evidence of infection is discussed individually by case number ( the numbers follow those of the previous report in sequence). �-77- Case 7•. r'\11(~t1bon's cottontail rabbit Denver Federal Center. -- young female t r anpcd at t he On Atir i L 14, 1958 +his rabbit was given 41 infective larvae of sylvilagi, and on May 18, 1958 the first occurrence of larvae in the feces was noted. P'ir s t c-s t age Larvae were recovered regularly up to June 11, 1958 after \':hich no larval recoveries were made. This rabbit was ~acrificed on July 3, 1958, whereupon an examination of the lungs reve2.1ed several small pin-head lesions at the posterior of the ventral, or diaphragmatic lobes of both lungs, a few adult E_. sylvilag-i and small number s of first-stage larvae wer e recovered also. The observed prepatent period in this case was 35 days. I'. Case 8. Audubon'.s cottontail Federal Center. rabbit -- male trapped at the Denver On May 31,1958 this rabbit .was given 36 unsheathed infective larvae of P. sy1vilagi in water by means of a pipette, and the first recovery of larvae from the fecal pellets was July 24, 1958. Larvae continued to be recovered through August 9, 1958. Thi s animal was ---sacrif-icedon August-15, 1958,-\'hereupon-an examination-oLthe1ungs revealed a small brownish lesion near the posterior tip of the right ventral lobe. No adult worms were demonstrated but first-stage larvae wer e present. The observed prepatent period in this case was 54 days.• Cases 9 and 10 NewZealand white rabbits -- very young Both of these animals recieved Irit r ape.rdtoneal injections of the infective larvae of p. stilesi, one on June 10, 1958 which was slaughtered August 13, 1958 and the other on November 18, 1958. which was slaughtered January 27, 1959. no larvae were ever noted in the fecal samples nor were adult worms recovered; however, on Baermanizing portions of the lungs 4 first-stage Protostrongylus larvae were recovered from one and 9 from the other. Twoprevious Lnst ances reported as cases 5 and 6 have also been noted, and four such cases are to many to be dismissed as due to chance contamination and certainly merit further study. Protostrongylus.stilesi is the smallest of the species of lungworm being investigated and occurring as it does in the tis sties instead of in the air passages wouLd be over looked very easily. Case 11 Ne\'I'Zealand whi.t e rabbit on -- female March 10, 1959 this rabbit was orally administered 52 infective larvae of P. sylvi1agi and it was slaughtered May 15, 1959. Several fecal samples, all collected after the first of May, were examined but no larvae were recovered. Examination of the lungs revealed a small eray lesicn about 5 x 7mmon the diaphragmatic surface of the ventral lobe of the right lung and two gray pin-head lesions at the posterior tip of the left lung. No first-stage larvae were recovered by Baermanizing portions of the lungs, but dissection of the lesions resulted in recovery of an adult female worm, encapsulated by connective tissue and surrounded by granular deposite of ca.LcLumcarbonate ? The posterior part of a male was recovered from one of the· pin-head lesions. �-78- Case 12 R.ocky Mountain mule deer -- faNn raised in captivity As indicated in Table I this f awn was given larvae on three different occassions, 10 on July 9, 1958 when it was quite small, 5 November 2, 1958 and 52 on December 4, 1958. The first larvae were recovered January 28, 195.9, but no samples had been collected for two weeks just prior to this date because of a two-week training program; therefore, the observed prepatent period \'JaS 54 days but may have been any number between 40 and 54 had samples been obtained during the two week period. TIle above observations are consistent with the previous observations which indicated that the prepatent period for Protostrongylus is between 25 and 57 days. In addition to the evidence obtained from the artificial transmission of Lungwo rrns there is additional evidence from natural infections of b1ghorn lambs which in view of available etridence must have been acquired before the lambs were born. Prenatal -_._---_._-_ _ .----~---.-""-. __ Lungworm - _ Infections . __ ._-------------------_ .._-- -.- -------------:"----- Since the continued Grm·.ri:h of any population is dependerrt upon the recniitmellt of young, those factors which control the number of bighorn lambs produced or affect their survival to breeding age are exceedingly important to the management of bighorn sheep as a game species. Throughout the range of the bighorn, at some time in most places where studies have been made , a failure of the lamb crop has been recognized or sU:spected. This report shall not be concerned with a discussion of the many ideas and hypotheses advanced in the literature to explain this phetiomerion, but to stress the effect of mortality of lambs contrast the following statements by I-Ionessand Frost (1942) and Spencer (1943). "~\lhenthe death of lambs is considered in the light of the few known facts, that is approximately 50 percent of the lambs die in a few weeks after attaining the age of about six weeks; that in trwo Cases lambs were known by autopsy to be suffering from pneumonia, it appears that this loss is due to a contagion and therefore, is a disease entity." (Honess and Frost, 1942,p.l09 --speaking of the Crystal Creek area where lungworm does occur though not demonstrated in the two autopsies mentioned) •• "Based on the number of old ewes counted the lamb crop at that time (Nov.1940) was 78 percent. This was encouraging, since the critical period for the lambs had been passed. The increase for the herd, based on the 1939 counts, waS approximately 32 percent, a small portion of \\!'hich was the result of a better census. The count also showed that 70 percent of the 1939 lambs had survived as yearli~gs." (Spencer, 1943, p.9 --speaking of the Tarryall herd) All of the four lambs killed during the 1954 bighorn sheep, either sex hunting season in the Buffalo Peaks area were infected wi th Lungworm; Ogr en (1954) reported the first occurrence of lungworm larvae in the feces of marked lambs on l'IJhi te Horse Island, Montana at three months of age. However, fecal samples obtained from lambs in the �-79Buffalo Peaks area collected during June <111d July of 1955 when the IOI.1bscould have been scarcely more than 1. month of age yielded larvae (Colo. F.A. l_)Uart., Apr.I()56 p.59). It is known that first-stage larvae f:1i1.y be passed throLlp;h the intestinal tract of sheep a second time and these larvae may also pass unharmed thr·ough the intestinal tract of carnivores as well so finding the larvae in the feces is not positive proof of infection but it may be considered circumstantial evidence suggesting the possibility of prenatal infection. In 1940, 1·lr. Herbert \vallace, technician with the Colorado Game and Fish Department, reported that a lamb born to a bighorn ewe, "Clarissa" confined in Denver, on June 1, 1940 was coughing, had a rough coat, and breathed with difficulty on exertion when he visited the zoo on July 19, 1940. This lamb was found infected ~',ith lungworm, and because the pen was dry and no snail hosts were known to be present, Wallace believed that Proto_::_tronr:;yltlsstil_esi had a direct life cycle like that of DictYocanlus. In rvyoming, six bighorn ewes were trapped near Dubois in January 1956 and penned at the Sybille Station in an enclosure which hali had no, livestock use for several years. Five of the ewes produced lambs but these were found to be passing larvae in July. In February of 1957, I visited the Sybille Station and with Dr. I-Ioness found snail hosts within the .... "eiiclos-tiEe- a16rfg'-Ufe-creelf;;--·Eveil ,;Jifli·---tlie- sn-;iirJi6sts-15eing-· presen1;--ft-is unlikely that infection fDom the snails resulted in the lamb infection. Twobir,horn ewes, one caUGht January 23, 1958 --"Lucy" and the other February 4, 1958 -- "Alice", were obtained from the grounds at Glen Eyrie, Colorado Springs, Colorado and placed in an enclosure of about .3 acre where no snail hosts have been found. The enclosure is located ati the Denver Federal Center. where a third ewe was also placed but escaped over the eight foot fence. Both ewes produced lambs, Lucy on May 23~t i958 and Alice on July 2, 1958. Alice's Lambdied on July 7, 1958 and no Lungworm infection could be demonstrated in postmortem examination, but a portion of the lung has been preserved for histological sectioning. The other lamb appeared to be doing fairly well and was quite active untill about two weeks before it died. Four days before death it stood and allowed itself to be caught after running only twice ar round the pen. Thi s lamb was observed to cough when feeding, it became progressively weaker and died on july 13, 1958. From the time that this lamb was about a week old fecal samples were collected almost daily and, examined for larvae which appeared for the first time in the droppings l;~henthe lamb was about a 'month old or on June 23, 1958 and were recovered regularly thereafter through July 8, 1958 when the last sample was examined. Examination of the 'lungs a,fter death revealed a very heavy infection with lungworm confined to the diaphragmatic lobe, larvae obtained from only a portion of this lobe were so abundant that the staining dish into which they were concentrated in water became' more translucent than transparent. No bacteria were c~lltured from .the me~ia inoculated. from. the lungs. by Mr. George Post, di r ec t or of the \'lyom1ngGameand F1sh Laboratory at Laramie. Ano~her lamb was obtained from the Buffalo Peaks area while it was still .t o young to follow its mother on May 23,1958. Thi s lamb was penned at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs \\lith a domestic milk goat for a foster mother. In this way contact with infected animals has been avoided. TIle Cheyenne Mountain Zoo has not had bighorn sheep for �-80it nUMber of years. Numerous fecal samples from the hybrid, domesticbighorn sheep in the adjacent pen as well as those hybrids which have been used as experimental animals in this study have been examined for Lungworm larvae and none found. Only one of seven of these hybrids used as experimental animals and exposed to artificial infection has. ever shown any evidence that such infection occurred. The goat used as a foster mother for the lamb had purposely not been exposed to artificial infection to eliminate the possibility of its contaminating the lamb. No snail hosts could be found wi th-in the enclosure •. In spite of the precautions taken, fecal samples collected on June 23,1958 and each sample' thereafter have yielded first-stage lungworm larvae. Fecal samples were not collected so frequently from this animal as from the lamb in Denver; however, at a month of age in both Cases larvae were recovered. This fact is certainly significant in vi~w of the evidence presented. The most logical conciu~ion is that the lambs were infected in utero, and that the development of the larvae, as in the snail; isretarded "lhen the environment is unfavorable. The environmental requirement in this case' is probably the respiratory, function of the lungs. de rtainly the thirty day delay in appearance of the larvae in the feces is consistent with the observed prepatent periods in the experimental infections. 'These observations, therefore, supportboih the occurrence of-prenatil Inf~'cfr()11s-and-a'prep-a-ten-i 'b-erTo'dof aPlii-ox±m'a:tely -30--days or more. As a re~ult of the great numbers .of larvae 6bta.ined from the lungs and the larger number of larvae from the feces of the Denver lamb than wer e recovered from the Colorado, Springs lamb a great difference in the inten.sity the two infections' is suspected. Certainly prenatal infections depending upon their intensity would have some bearing upon the survival chances, of the infected, lambs. Reference to prenatal infection by Dictyocaulus is found in Monnig (1934) and prenatal ascarfd infections in dogs is well knoWn. Goldberg (1952) reports the presence of immature Dictyocaulus worms in the host 83 to 186 days after exposure this would suggest the possibility of mechanism similar to that described by Sprent ( ) for ascarid .infections in which pregnancy is a stimulus for immature worms unable to mature in the mother to infect the.fetus!) Shoupe ( in demonstrating that the lungworm larvae of the swine Lungworm may act as vectors of virus infections opens the door to other possibilities or means by which lungworm infection may affect the survival of lambs., of The importance of nutrition as a resistance factor may be indicated by the fact that the lamb which died not grow the way the one on a domestic goat did, and certainly the,milk goat had more milk available to the lamb than did the bighorn ewe to hers. The Denver lamb weighed only 14 pounds when it died but did not 'appear emaCiated, uhdoubtedly it lost some weight during its period of decline; however·it probably never weighed as much as 20 pounds. The growth of the other lamb is plotted in the following graph and probably exceeds the growth rate 6f wild bighorn lambs. There is a slight check of g rowth about the time that the first larvae were recovered when on Iy one pound was gained in· a week, The initial we.i.gh t was taken nearly 12 hours after capture on a bathroom scale which may account for its being under the weights given by Ogren (1954). ' �-81- GROWTH OF CAPTIVE BIGHORN 160 140 120 (J) 0 Z :::) 50 100 . ~ SODY . WEIGHT 0 CL z Z 40 80 :r: l- X i60 30 C!) (!) Z lAJ 3=. W 40 20 • / 20 ~o 0/ •............• .i>: f1j_";----O HORNS -. 20 AGE IN .: ~ .> ....J 10 .-------- 0~~~~----~--'_--~--4---~--~--_'--~~~ 5 10 15 25 WE 30 35 EKS 4() 45 ,50 �-82-: Duration of Infection One of the objectives of this study is the determination of how long an infection lasts when not complicated by reinfection exposure. Distribution of the quantatative fecal srunp1esfrom tlietwo penned bighorn ewes is indicated at the right Luc¥ of the page, each horizontal mark perpendicular Alice to the vertical line indicates from one to - + Feb several samples. Average counts of larvae per fecal pellet aridthe range is given in the following table: Table 2 Mar 23'samples 149 (5-530) Jan. 82 117 (2_801 ) Feb. " 173 (20-1073) 13 Mar. " 37 303 (0-720) Apr. Apl." May-June Scours ~ no fecal pellets, larvae. abundant 1145 (760-1530) 2 samples July 100.(0.... 180) 7 .--Aug." 5 40 (10-140) Sept. " Oct. May 55 (0-190) 19 Nov. " 5 Dec. 296 (4-710) 3 640 (580-720) Jan. " Ii ~- It Qua1atative samoles reveal that large numbers of larvae continued to be shed through March 1959. For the infected bighorn sheep the duration of infection is certainly more than a year in the naturally infected animals, but the experimental infection in the Audubon's cottontail (case 7) ~ May the duration of the infection indicated by fecal analyses was only about a'mounth, yet infection was demonstrated by postmortem - JUll examination nearly a month after the last recovery of larvae in the fecal samples examined. The duration of infection - Jul both for a natural infection .\,Tith Dictyocaulus viviparous and 'experimental infections of Protostrongylus is given in the following table (Table ·3 ). The figures in the table represent number of samples and not numbers of larvae. Additiona! information was given in a previous report (cases 5&6 Colo. F.A. Quart. Oct. 1958, p.ll) Note the reoccurrence of Protostrongylus larvae in the doe during July and August of 1958. JUlJ. Jul. Sept Oc-t �-83- Table 3--Duration of Protostrongylus macrotis Infection in Rocky Mountain Male deer Year & Month 1957, May 2nd Yr.male 2nd Yr.female + + 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 17 3 8 1 August 11 September 11 October 2 November 4 December 0 12 19.58,January February 6 March 3 April 1 May 1 June 0 July 0 August 0 4 4 8 10 12 10 .5 11 11 8 2 June July --S-epteinber o 8 12 12 13 12 8 o o 3 3 10 10 14 9 9 13 12 12 1 6 3 1 1 o o o o o Remarks male exposed to infect ion on May 9, 19.57(orally) female exposed June 6, 19.57larvae first demonstrrated' .5ll days-after eXposUre ror male, 40 days for female. 0 no samples during first ~ mo. scouring noted 14 reoccurrence of larvae ----~----- .5 -- -- -_.- .._-- ._-- l. ------ no samples for first 2 mOe no subsequent recovery of larvae from these animals through March 19.59 -(Duration of concurrent infection with Dictyocaulus viviparous) 19.57,June Yes Yes July 19 1 5 11 August 11 0 3 10 6 September 9 6 7 6 October .5 4 6 1 November 14 0 13 December 12 0 13 o o 19.58,January 13 2 13 February 10 1 9 o March· 11 0 9 o April 12 0 10 1 May 12 0 0 13 no Dictyocaulus larva.efrom June female after April 19.58 8 S July .5 3 August 8 1 September .5 0 October no Dictyocaulus larvae from 1 3 male after Oct. 3, 19.58 Prepared by: Date~ .5 Richard E. Pi1lmore Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator July 19.59 ----------~~~~----------------- �-84.LITERATURE CITED Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly Reports for October 1958, July 1957, April 1956, and Janua~ 1955 Goldberg, Aaron 1952 - Experimental infections of sheep and goats with mematode lungworms, Dictyocaulus filaria. Amer. Jour. Vet. Res. 13(49): 531-536. Honess, Fand Frost M. 1942 - A Wyoming bighorn sheep study Wyo. Game and Fish Dept. Bull. #1, 127 pp. Monnig, H. o. 1947 - Veterinary helminthology Baltimore. and entomology. Williams and Wilkins, Ogren, Herman A. 1954 - A population study of the Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis. Shaw) on Wildhorse Island. M.S. thesis - Montana State University. Shoupe, R. E. . 1943 ., The swine Lungworm a reservoir and intermedia te host for swine. influenza. Virus IV. The demonstr-ation of .masked swine influenza virus in Lungvorm La rvae and swine under natural conditions Jour. Exp. Mad. 77:127-138. Spencer, Clifford C. 1943 - Notes of the life history of Rccky Mountain bighorn sheep in the Tarryall Mountains of Colorado. Jour. Mamm. 24(1): 1-11. Sprent, J. F. A. 1954 - The life cycles of nemetodes in the Family Ascarididae Blanchard 1896. Jour. P.arasit. 40(5): 608-617. ' �.1 July" 1959 -8 r:',,· ,/.~.): ,'~"';'_'" .., JOB COMPLETtrn REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT . W•.. 95 .;. R - 3 •. Investigations '. '-. __;.-. ~-~--_:....----' p~~ject:NO.. - 9206388' of Diseases and Parasites . . aff' ec t ing game . Nc>. Job ····.···.·····.··.·Job.No, ••---::--=-"""; ···Pe~ibd -'C6vered: . -.' :.-,._;,' .. Study of Lung' nematodes of Bighorn Sheep. Study of lungworm infection trends in sheep. March 1, 1958 ,to'F~l)~uary 28, 1959 ..:;-._:;' .' . . <: :'>~:,' 'Abst'r~tt: _'.,. The objective of this Job>was to. establish, stand,ardize,: a technique for the indirect determination tl~~ intensity of "lungi'lOrminf ecti6n~~ " •... ,',-,':.,', -,'.-' , ' .., evaluate and of the trend in :-.,,', ':'.: __ , .• Th~methocL used was a modift~d Baerman technique in whi.ch the .-; ~.-'-,"c,.___,__,,~s_a.ntp~,e_sj_zci;,~s_:,a,rbi_trari1y_seLat~-'20Lf ec a1 pellets frapt_ a sing~e pellet _ gi'oup~ ....•. ,+he·sampies 1vere.soaked in;., ~:3_"'N Na OHso lut Ion from '3 to 16 hours, " thert thOI:oughly. comminuted and' dilute'd to :200nil from which one. or more : ," : ~iequ<>ts 9C 10ni1 'were withdr,awn . anct'fn t ered onto a moistened cotton pad 'C 0 , in,a p()r~elain funnel over an evacuated, fflter flask • ...... : -..-.-.,..•,.,!," .. ,-. " ,;' It .Ls c:onc!uded that basitly, thls method is Sound and that the . ;:'.:obseryed;discrepancies caused by fa.c:tors, other t han ~,he variability in :larval'. output,. can b'e reduced by fuffher refinenient in' the sampling procedure •• . ' < . <Quantitative results of· fecal analyse~f'by this method indicate that the '<, larval output in the feces of infected animals is exceeddng.Iy variable .: > and shows .a poisson distribution. ".' '.' It is r(i!commended.that furtlier experimetJ.t~. wOrk.'be c ar r Led on in , ~"l1ichtile ..sample size is increased .''and .the c;0llctitions:tif .handling and ,._ ;:::sarnl'liIlg be. further con+ref ted, The' use: 9£ s¢quentiai, ;:j!la1ysis for this ," type.Of data should be investigated.' ," .-. '.,'.j ��-87- Study of Lungworm Infection Trend in Sheep Richard E. Pillmore Introduction In the study of LungwormLnfec t i ons a 'technique which woul.d allow the comparison of infection intensity between individual animals, groups of animals, or the trend of the' infection ,,,Uhin a single group or herd is 'needed. A variety of obstacles have been encountered in trying to pe rf'ec t .such a technique. These .obstacles are largely concerned wi th the problems of time' and eff or t in s ampHrig, but are also due in part to a lack in basic information of r'es Is t ance mechani.sms and patterns of use or course' of infections. ' ,'I11e technique must reiy upon en examination ofJ:he lungs v..rhich vrould req~.ire the sacrifice of the animals being compared or upon the exammat i.on of th~ fecal p~ilets f01; the first-sfag'e larvae. It would be desireable to be ab.le to corapar.e Hnf'ec+Lons"ji,thout' killing the animals ----and-also:_to--knowhO\lJ"much-c;onfidence-cairb~-:placed-in.-the--comparisons----.-and this requires the application Of statistics \"ith which I' amId be more familiar. The first problem is' sarripl,ing'and the second is a standardization of methods, but the h.o are closely telated~' .. . .' .. " ,: , Collection of the fec~lsamples,'rliUstfirst,he accomplished, and for field studies' this wou.Idbe accomplished whenever"and. whereever pOGsible because of the time and effort required to IQcate and observe , host ani.ma.Ls , such as bighorn sheep. iti most areas; however, it will be clear 'that 'no valid comparison can be made on the bCl.s~sof a few , samples collected at anyone time of the year. Because of the detrimental effects of exposure ,in certain situations and the possibility of contamination of the sample wi th free-living nematodes the samples :collected should be fresh. The sample should consist of 20 more fecal pellets which may be placed .in a paper bag on: which the date and location should be marked. storage of samples collected should be a\'1aY:f.romheat '~d they may be placed in a freezer as samples have meen kent in a freezer without loss of larvae for over a year. . or The disadv~tages of a direct Baerman techniqpe were discussed in a previous report (Colo. F. A. Quart., Oct. 1958,1'.3), also some preliminary notes on the basic technique being investigated. This technique involves: 1. Weighing the s ampLe of air dried fecal pellets and computing the \"eight of single pellets in the sample. 2. Treating the sample with dilute sodium hydroxide solution (.3 N NaOH)to aid in breaking the sample down. 3. Comminuting the sample with the aid of a mixer and diluting to a measured volume, usually 200ml for a 20 pellet sample. 4. The sample is agitated to insure thorough mixing and even distribution of the larvae and an aleqtiot is taken with a pipette, usually only lOml per alequot. 5. This alequot is filtered on to a moistened cotton disc or pad, in a porcelain funnel over an evacuated filter flask. 6. The cotton pad is placed in a Baerman funnel and larvae concentrated" �470 -88- 7. TIle larvae are then counted or if the numbers are too large the concentration of larvae in water , usually 10 ml, is agitated to disperse the larvae evenly and a second alequot of 1 ml is taJcenfor connting. Exploratory Analysis of Results In the course of making such quantatative counts certain discrepancies have occurred which are probably attributable to the methods used but others would appear to be actual variations,unfortunately the.two can not be separated in the data. The actual technique has been varied from time to;time but not according 'to any exPerimental design; therefore, all data is not comparable. The follohring discussion is considered exploratory ruic1 the data used is selected to illustrate the sampling problems and sources of error • .The frequency distributioIi of larval abundance in the samples from, the two penned bighorn ewes is skewed; with the majority of the samples yielding from.0 to 100 larvae per fecal pellet, and theoretically the'means of such samples shou Ld show a more normal distribution, but _j;lj~ di_stribq_t_i_gn o_L_).arv,!e __j'~Qm~~i_I'lgle J2~1l_~t_s2.Jl1ples <l!ld~!_he distribution of larvae per pellet from 20 pellet samples would appear to be'about~the .... santewhere the twenty pellets have been'from the sam~ pellet group. Time of exposure of the sample to the sodium hydroxide may offer a partial explanation because some samples exposed' overnight or longer. failed to 'yield any larvae while samples from the same pellet group treated ,differently yielded good numbers of larvae; f'orvexampLe 12 pellets from a Single pellet group were placed singly in water in 12 Stender dishes and in each instance 40 to 70 larvae were counted; however, rio larvae were recovered from a 20 pellet sample exposed overnight ro the .3 normal sodium hydroxide solution. In general where paired samples have been run one treated wi t.hthe NaOH and the other no t the treated samples appear to yield the 'greatest number of Larvae , Some samples may be more susceptible to the soduum hydroxide treatment than others this may be related to moisture content or length of storage.or both. TIlerange of variation in larval output by the two penned ewes has been very large, for instance, in a single day when 11 samples were t aken the ,larvae per pellet per sample ranged from 30 to 815 while for all samples the range \'lasfrom 0 to 1530. Using the formula: N = . {t.05)2 (s)2 (.05 • x )2 To solve for N using only a portion of the data (23 conecutive observations) N - (2.074)2(278)2 •(.05 • 244)2 = (4.280)(77400) 149 = 330900 --~1~4~9------ N = 2,220 This constitutes a lot of samples especially if they must be obtained from \'lildbighorn sheep to determine a mean larval output at the 95 percent confidence level. By reducing the confidence level and refinement of the technique the number of samples should be reduced considerably. �'-""~ f~.. 4... 'i" '.'( -89- The Chi-square test was use to compare the analysis of paired samples of 20 pellets each from the same pellet groups. The hypothesis that there is no difference between such paired samples from the same pellet groups is examdried, Expected values were compu t ed by the formula:" l: 0' Et 110 130 60 230 470 117, 150 83 . 209 346 (Ot_E') (0'_E,)2 7 49 400 530 442 1540 (0'-E' )2 E Be c aus e 20 23 21, 124. the va Iues of the (0' -E' )2 .•04 2.67 6.40 2.11 44.50 column exceed the Chi-square .Os E value of 21.026 the hypothesis is rejected. The foi10wing sources of :e~rr~orl1av~e--been~oE"sertied-rD" tlie--~cour-se 6[ Conduct:tIigtne ~-analysesand· explain why confidence in the data already obtairied has been shaken; One. source of error became apparent in the use of the.cotton . f i Lter pad when it was discovered th"atIn some Cases the larvae passed through the pad. By varying the quantity of the ma'te rLa.L to be filtered and also the vacuumn pressure on the filter flask it was diSCOVEr ed that .Lf there was not sufficient pressure that some Larvae would pass through the cotton, also if the larvae were in clean water they were more likely to pass through the filter pad than when there was sediment from the fecal material present, but if too .much sediment were present material .including larvae might escape around the edges of the filter Pad. Checks on the passage of larvae through the filter pad should be made by concentrating the larvae, if present, from the filtrate in a Baerman funnel. . Another source of error has been no+eci,. especaafLy in taking the second 1 ro1 alequot. When the numbers of larvae in the 10 ml concentration of the sample small errors in the measurement or lack of proper dispersion of the larvae may result in significant sampling errors. In addition to the variations attribUted to technique, there'are discrepancies which have not been explainedsatisfactorilyo It appears that real variations are encountered when two or more samples are taken from Some pellet groups. The nature of this variation must be in the concentration of large numbers of larvae in a small proportion of the sample and whether this represents surges of larvae in single pellets of an effect of migration of the larvae within the sample under the condi tions of storage is not known. It is known that the larvae are very re resistant and can withstand prolonged storage, yet the effects of storage. have not been studied in detail. However the variation in the storage conditions is great and the development of uniform standards and specifications for the standardization of the !echnique is needed g -.,' �r~~;2 ':!!::. :/ , ...: -90- It is concluded that basicly this technique is sound and will give results which t'li1l make comparison possible between individuals or groups of animals.· The greatest dissadvantage is the time required to apply it j however , refinements in the 'sampling procedures should be able to reduce the time required but whether the technique can be made practical enough for its adoption by game management remains to be seen. It is recommendedthat additional experimental work be done, and the teclmique tested by statistical means to. determine how it may best be applied. The use of sequential analysis for this type of data waS suggested at a recent in-service. training program and shDuld be investigated further. E. Fillmore Prepared by: Richard Date: July, 1959 Approved by: Laurence.E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator �I." ::\ .. ; :." -91- ; ~.:; "'. ". (\" 06889 ;.J JOB COMPLETION REPORT' ,'-4 .' _, ' '. . " ., ,~ ..•. INVESTIGl\TIONSPROjECT' State of Project COLORADO ------~----------------No. h' - 95 -R Parasites. 'job No. . ". < :", Job No, '. 1 l-c . ... Period Covered: - 3 InvesHg~_tions Affecting Game ,". of Diseases and .. . Study of the incidence of Inf ec Hon and environmental relationships in snail" h()s'ts. .. <.. March 1, 1958 tOFet)I"~~ry:'.28,:.19S9' of '. Aqstract: The objectives of this job ~eI;e to;; ciet~:r;nll.ne.incidenc~ natur3.1 infection among'snail Irrtermeddafe- hosts ;"t~dtea,rn' more of the' --:----;-::--'---"-'---"~.~ ...env:i1'onmenta1-~equi remenr s. for ..'1ung\.rotDLtr_anim:i~§,.i_Q!iP; tel':st.!;dY_c.the: ..ef f ec t i vene ss ' or. a, met aldehyde-aeroso!' ~1.i$p~rision,;a,~:;;a:'rtto1lusd.cide . under simulated field conditions; and'to"tJse·th~:;inf~'~Iri#iongalned .. irom this, study in predicting the c~tirses,·:";b{infe¢tiprt;;;o'~ exer,'t'ing s~e .measur e of control. . '.'" ,,: ,c, ' , .,' . ",:, . .. '." .... " Snails ':were collected in the f ieid{<riiaitd:a±rie4 from' two to; fou~ :\'leeks in the laboratory then activated :and' e'xWned: 'f6i- i res'idual, :; ."infection. 'The uninf'ec ted snails were then. 'exP6~~d'.t6;;(:i.rst-stage ' ft!ngw6rm larvae and the resulting infected sn'ai1~j);-9y'~ci;i.'1.lginfective ,larvae for expe r.Iment af transmission s~ud:1es•... , :•... , '" . ariy ..:;. ,'. Of over 1400 Vallonia pu1che11~>f:rom Gi~~:EY:I:}~':':()Qiy 14'naturally" ; infected snails were found in contrast to th¢ large niui7.~eis found th~ . , '. preceding year.' Only 3 of 8 snails collect~d 911Pikes<~eak at site where :: >:,natural infections Were, first found were inf;~cted,{sOn.i~>,C9ntaii1ingpre~ ..' . ;;,i,,~<Z:iinfective s.t ages ,' None of 404 snails from,S,l(f:aio l>eak~,:'andnone of 5"i3;, ....'. ~.~' -from near Manitou Springs were infected. . " . '" ': ; ...,. " _..:. Some 4,056 snails wer e exposed to~t±fii:iai.infecti~n 'bUt lrin1y;'229 infective larvae for tr~s~isSioo studies, thi,S was ".' , ',the r.esu1t of poor survival of the exposed .<sIi~gs In 'the, 1abO~a1:ory. .":. of these yielded < ' ., It is ~oncluded that environmenta~:' ~onditiori§_fo~ transmission 'of . larvae to snails were less favorable at qJ.(!n".Eyrie dltring the 1958 season" ,tl_lan during 1957.' Summerinfection of the,. Pikes Peak'snails is' sitgg~$ted,. by, the presence of pre-infective larvae in the coilection which' was . Octc;ber 1, 1958. .'" . . , ':,:.' ' ... ��-93- Study of the Incidence of Infection and Environmental in Snail Hosts. Relationships Richard E. Pillmore One of the best aids to the interpretation of the environmental conditions or requirements for the transmission of protostrongylid lungworm infections is, the incidence and stage of larval development of infections of the intermediate host snails. Collections of snails were made in four are as during the spring, summer and fall, months of 1958. ,These areas, were : the alpine range of the Buffalo peaks area C see site no. 8 Buffalo Peaks Map, Colo. F.A. Quart., Jari.1954), site where first infecte'd snails were found on Pikes Peak ( see site no. (l Pikes' Peak Map, op, cit.)~ the lawns at Glen Eyrie (see Colo. F.A. Quar t , , Oct. 1958, pp.""T2':'15), and an, area near Manitou Springs,Colorado where a great many the eA'Perim~ntal aria.i.Lshave been foun previously but only one was ever, found infeCted. or hTith respect to 'the Buffalo Peaks area none of' the 404 living snails collected during Septemoer, 1958 .were infected. This is rather a small ~----s'ample bti-t-:-:-i.~as serec~e(Cfor' c-om:parisonwHJ:lpreviOU$-Cbl1e'ctions-mmle-fromthe same area in 1954 when 18 of 693 sna~ls were infeced (Colo. F.A. Quart. Jan. 1955) and in 1955 when only 11, of 2,190 snails were infected. ' From the Pikes Peak area, only 12 of .the snails were living but three .of these were .infectedwi th-pr eInfec.t ive stages ofi LangwormTarvae when collected on October 1, 1958. In 1954 when 49. of 119 snad.Ls were, collected from this same s Lte pre inf ec t i.ve larvae' were foUnd f:t;6in the April,.l6 th . collection and a Single ·snailon June ,10 th and only infective larvae were noted in the subs equerrt collections .that year. j , , Most interesting of the 1958 collections of snails was from the Glen Eyrie area to/here 428' of 1,360 snails collected in' August of 1957 were Lnf'ec t cd and only 25 of 1,312 coLe cted after November14, ,1957 were found infected in the same area. In 1958 14, ,of over 1; 33'9 (uninfected total tally of snails known to be incomplete). None eL"approximately 500 snails collected at Glen Eyrie prior to May1, 1959 we're infected None of the 513 living snails from near Manitou Springs wer e infected and none of approximately 100 collected from the oighoI-n sheep range along the Cache la Poudre River in Larimer Cotlnty,Colorado. In ail approximately 3,000 snails were examined for natural infections. Ecological Discussion All of the infected snails and most of the snails from the Buffalo Peaks area have been collected in the 'shallow basin on the alpine range in the upper part of the Salt Creek drainage. A thick mat of vegetation composed largely of alpine avens (Geum), alpine clover (TrifoliUm ~), and various grasses and sedges comprises the snail habitat. The soil is of volcanic origin (andesite) with considerable humus but patches of soil are interspersed with talus of the parent material and patches of Coarse gravelly material. ObserVations of this area indicate that snow accumu.Lat es in this basin but not at any great depth f �-9uuhile the adjacent ridges are kept relatively free of snow, Rains and other moisture conditions most favorable to transmission of the parasites occur nost frequently in July and August or are determined by the melting of snow. The presence of preinfective larvae in the 1958 collection from Pikes Peak in October would indicate that these snails. became infected as the result of late summer moisture conditions. The weather station at Lake Morraine was apparently unattended during this summer but the climograph for the normal conditions . is included here and iilustrates that the peak moisture period as was indicated for the Buffalo Peaks area, is July and August. From the above norm8~ precipatation Lake Morraine Station recieved in Colorado Springs .CHmogr aph durin,;May, June,. and July it might be assumed that above .50. normal precipatation occurred at Lake Morr.aine also. T40. \Vhen this area was visited in B october fresh sign of bighorn sheep M use was found and on the basis of P 30, previous experience in this area E it may be concluded that this area R is used throughout the summer. A20, T Matekin et. al.(l954) reported the most favorable conditions for u Protostrongylus transmission was R 80, found Ln the subalpine areas of B U.S.S.R •• o. PRECIPITATION s �-9,During 1957 there was a very apparent and marked increase in the population of Vallonia pu1che11a on the lawns at Glen Eyrie. This snail is a suitable intermediate host for protostrongy1id lOnglrorms and a high incidence of infected snails was found in August of 1957 • ..The Glen Eyrie lawns are visited frequently by bighorn sheep usually. from September or October into May of the f of.Iowing spring. During January of 1958 the highest larval concentrations in the fecal samples from these sheep ever obtained up to that time was found. The.reasons for the hicrh incidence of infected snails and subsequent increase in the larval cou~ts from these sheep was discussed in the previous report at readv cited. p 70 n E C I PIT PRE A T ION C I PIT A T ION - 60 40 J 20 _ , o 1 Colorado 2 3 4 prings, Colorado 1957 5 6 u R E o 1 2 3 4 5 Colorado Springs, Colorado 1958 The climographs above compare the two years, 1957 and 1958. Both years had above normal precipatation, but conditions resulted in the ·infection of many of the snails in 1957 but not in 1958; furthermore, there was not an apparent increase in the numbers of snails in i958 that there was in 1957. April of 1957 was one of the six wettest and May the wettest months in the .reather history of the area and the moisture was well distributed throughout the period. In 1957,therefore, there,was a compination of bighorn sheep use in conjunction with moisture con~itions which undoubtedly favored the infection of the snails as \rell as the snail population. The fall months of October and November were also much wetter than normal with the November moisture concentrated at the be beginningof the month and this period also overlapped use by the bighorns \'Ii'hich allowing for a 30 to 60 day prepatent period wouLd easily explain the Lungworm infection increase indicated by the larval counts made in January. '. �-96- A decline of t hc snail popuI a'ti on occurred in November of 1957, this month ,'/as much colder than normal ".rith 27 days registering t emper at ur es beLowfreezing and ranging from 69 to a minus 2 degrees Farenheit. Since, snails may be killed by freezing these. conditions undoubtedly had much to do 1'lith the decline of the sna.iLs, Along "lith the decline in the snail population the incidence of infection amongthe snails decreased sharply, indicating that the infected snails may be more susceptible to unfavorable environmental conditions or possibly Someinfection than the uninfected snails. The year 1958 did not result in any increase 1.n the incidence of Lnfcc t I on among the snails or any marked increase in the population. There was not the association of bighorn sheep use with a prolonged period of moisture, but such moisture conditions did follo\'l the period of sheep use whi ch in view of the contamination of the lawns by the fecal pellets of the bighorn and the resistance of the first-stage larvae it is difficult to understand why the Maymoisture conditions did not result in more snails becoming infected. Laboratory Maintainence of Snail Cultures for LungwormLarvae ____ . ..:E..ai;_1l y~_ar._.c:o_n_siderable __ ..t.i.me.has been.i Los.t in the ...study ..of ..lungworm.. infections of experimental hosts because of the mortality which occurrs among the intermediate host snails maintained in the laboratory as a source of the infective larvae •. This problem has probably been mentioned or discussed in each previous report, but this year better records have been kept on the actual numbers of snails exposed to infection and their survival. Some 4,056 snails are reported eh~osed to the various species of Protostrongylus larvae but of these only 229 yielded infective larvae for eh-perimental purposes, but each of the Lungwormspecies were represented. From 151 of the 229 infected snails 564 larvae were recovered, and virtually all larvae recovered were administered to experimental animals as indicated in table I of this report. Methods have varied but some good results were obtained by using unglazed clay flowerppots nested in the opening' of wide-mouthed quart jars containing water in the bot t om and having a cheese cloth wick extending f rom the hole in the base of the f lower pot in to the water of the jar. This made it possible to maintain relatively constant humidities in the pots. TIle substrates varied from several natural soils including washed sand to sterile potting soils nnd currently to no substrate material. Oat meal and .t.\i1 anthus. leaves have been used for f eed.ing vthe snails. Determination of infection was accomplished by examination of the foot under favorable light while the snail was active, or when the larvae were needed the snail shells were removed and the snail tissues, several snails at a time compressed between microscope slides and examined for larvae •• According to the kind of Lungwormlarvae exposed the results are tabulated below: LungvrormSpeCies Dead Living Infected Total K. sylvilagi .P. stilesi P. stilesi & P. rushi E_. macrotis P. boughtonli f. bou~htoni & stilesi 856 297 294 612 611 15 18 421 379 87 219 19 127 19 22 54 3 4 1594 331 334 1087 468 242 �-97- Assoc i at er' ~"Ii th the mort ali ty of the snails have been nematodes, fungus, ann. mites. The nematodes would appear to be saprophytic but are observed to multiply in the dead snail tissues to the point that great masses of such larvae fill the snail shells in place of the s anai l , ~llith r cgar d to the fungus the surviving snails are usually away from the mold while the dead snails are associated VIith it but this may be because the mold thrives on the dead snails; however, the cultures wlrich r ema.i.nfree of the mold \vill have better survival. Small mites have frequently been found ass oc i at ert ,d th the snails and became very abundant in one lot of snails which failed to survive a quarantine perion in a covered Stender dish -- no subs t r ate was present. It is recommendedthat some experimental design be adopted which to evaluate the causes of excessive mortality of snails and test particularly the effect of the source of snail lots on the~r survival also measurement of the actual conditions under which the snails are main t ained witIl re spec t to tempeJ~ a ture and humidity. wou l d help Prepared by: R.ichard E. Pillmore Date: July, 1959 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July .• 1959 -99- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO \III' Investigations 95 - R - 3 - of Diseases and Parasites Animals. · Job No. __ 1_; 1-d Study ')f Lung Nematodes of Bighorn Sheep. Compar~tiv~ studies of infection intensities laboratory populations. Covered: March . . . in wild and 1, 1958 to February 28, 1959 · Abstract: The objectives of this job "Jere to determine the incidence of iung\*>rm infections, their distribution, intensity, duration, and the ' .. ahsocl.ated conditions found through an exami.nat i.cn of the lungs of the ·natural host animals arid their comparison with condi Heims found in animals. _ Lungs of bighorn sheep "Jere obtained during the hunting seasons, deer lungs were obtained principally from highway deaths, while the rabbit lungs ",ere obtained whenever there was opportunity to collect. The lungs were examined grossly, dissected to recover adult wormSand chopped macerated to recover larvae by a Baerman technique • or .EXaInination of the balance of the 21 sets of lungs obtained from 1957, either-sex, hunting season for bighorn sheep in the Buffalo Peaks areclwas completed and the gross evidence for infection was confirmed in a11cases. Living first-stage larvae were obtained in spite of the deteriora.tion of the material through improper storage. From the 1958 bighorn hunting obtained: area September 18 sets of lungs " 1 set of lungs November 5 sets of lungs 5 " Peak area la Poudre area South Platte seasons the Fo l.lowi.ng specimens (Waterton) " material was obtained from other April 1 (sick •• preserved October 3 sets of lungs from illegal kills. November December 1 injured Platte area area It " sources: sheep) sample only animal ��I1QO . ""':2c,.'· -101- Conpar a t i, ve Studies of Lungwor'nInfection Intensities in \'Iilo. and Laboratory Populations Richard E. Pillnore Introduction This is a continuing study intended to learn more of the incidence, distribution, and intensity of Lnf'ec t Lcns of pr ot.ost r ongy.l.osi s , Through study of each set of· lungs obt ai.ned (f r on hunt i.nr; .seascns , accidental or illec;ally killed animal,s , by field collection when adviseable and the opportunity for obtaining sick animals is found, and also from penned cxper i.nent aL animals as the laboratory populations. )i5 made·in order that compar i.sons Can be made and the information related to stage of infection, intensities and significence of infections and the trend of the infection in areas such as the Buffalo Peaks. -- . . ~-.,--.---------J:.!-e.thQds- . .. _ Lungs are collected from bighorn sheep, mule deer, and. rabbits whenever possible as the onportunities or sources mentioned above arise. TIle procedure follo~'Jed is essentially the s ame regardless of the kind of Lung being exami.ne d and may be outlined as follows: 1. The ini tial ~ross examination made when the' lungs are first obtained includin~ color photographs when possible ( all of one 1'011 of such pictures Vilaslost because the sprocket holes tore out and the film failed to advance ) , The complete exami.nati.on is seldom possible at the t.imc of collection, but if pos r i.bf,e a section should be taken at this time for preservation in formalin. 2. Cne or more slices, perhaps a quarter of an inch thick should be t aken from the posterior tip of the ventral or diaphragmatic lobes of one of the lungs and preserved in 10 percent formalin. 3. l',lhen the material must be stored the preferred method is to place the lungs Ln polyethylene bags with identifying tags and freeze. 4. In completing the examination a more thouough examination is made of the gross lung whLch involves charting the lesions on the dorsal surface on a diagram, taking photographs, and examining through the pleura with a stereo-microscope the various lesions. 5. Culture media.may be inoculated from the lung material for bacterial study by Mr. George post, director of the WyomingGame and Fish Laboratory. . 6. Dissection of the air pass ages of the lung to recover' any adult worms'is then made, and then the further dissection of lesions is done under the stereo-microscope and tissues compressed between glass (this is also done to slices from the mediastinal and bronchial lymph nodes) and eggs, larvae and adult worms in the tissues can be demonstrated by such examination. 7. The lungs either entire or only portions from the postffior part of the diaphragmatic lobes are then chopped or macerated and then Baermanized to recover larvae, '~lich are used to infect experimental lots of snails after the identity of the adult wormSpresent in the lungs has been checked. �-J02- Results The results of this study are incomplete been sufficient time available to complete the material collected durin!": 1958. because there has examination of the not The exami na t i on of lung material from the 1957 hunting season vras completed in spite of the deterioration resulting from improper s t or ag c , The Lung s we r e too discolored to permit accurate charting of tbe lesions; resulted in however, c?nfirming in each case the positiv The 1958 - collections are -Bigi10rn Area Buffalo Peaks area Cache I.a Poudre Sou t h Platte (Water ton) Fikes Peak -------South-P-1atte-C'/ater-ton) Ceor g e t.own Area Rampar t Range (Glen Eyrie) Cache La poudre the the dissection field examinations. summarized in 18 5 5 1 ---1-- --------------3 1 material Mule Deer No. SamnLes E1 Paso Co. (Glen Eyrie) Jefferson Co. (Golden) Lake Co. (Malta) Grand Co. (20m! sw Kremmling) Park Co.(Grant) 1 1 hunting -., season " - September November " " " tt " September --Apri1-October NovemberDecember April - Sick .an imaj, Illegal kills Injured Injured-animal Infection + 1 1 1 x x Rabbits 1 1 1 2 1 3 Snowshoe 1 2 2 6 Lake Co. Park Co. (Round Mt.) White-tailed 2 1 (~. all 4 3 2 2 1 1 Buff al o Peaks Lake Co. (Lost Cam. Rd.) Mesa Co. (Grand Mesa )' Sagu ache Co. for How x 1 1 Total table: Obtained x x Cotto~tail 5 3 3 3 Chaffee Co. Park Co. (Tarryall) Las tmimaS Co. Clear Cr. Co.(Mt Evans) 51 Paso Co Saguache Co. Jefferson Co. following Sheep No. Samples preserved Area the and Bae rman i z i.ri= Hares 1 2 2 6 Jackrabbits sy1vilagi) rabbits 1 18 + 15 - �-103- DiscussioJJl Of the 23 animals killed in the Buffalo Peaks area lungs were collected from 18 by project personnel through cooperation of the hunters. All but one of the 18 sets of lungs exhibited gross lesions of lungworm infection, these were from a mature ram taken at the head of IOl'1aGulch; however, further study of this set of lungs may reveal the presence of the parasites also. In general there appears to be little difference in the intens1ty of infections noted since 1954 and therefore no trend either up or dO\'1Ilhas been established. During November hunting seaSons lungs were obtained from all of' the animals killed. The gross field examinations revealed typical lesions present in every cac;e. For both of these areas, Cache la poudre and South Platte, the incidence of infection appears to be 100 percent including the two' additional animals examined in April. In each case where the examinations have been completed both Protostrongylus' rushi . and P; stilesi were found. The animal from the Cache la poudre--area in April was autopsied by Dr. Robert Dav.i,sof the School of Veterinary Medicine at Colorado State University? but portions of the lung and some of the Lungworrns (rom the bronchi were .recLeved in formalin. _It_w_~~iD__:t~_l:_~_§_t:_iT!g __1_Q__110tE?_j,1r LQ._R. Till's obser vat Ion th~t frg~!!_~ _ ear tag data this, ewe was estimated to be 15 years of age and also that it was carrying a near term fetus •. , The Waterton animal was a coming y oar Li.ng and was 'obtained bef'or e it died. It was weak and . emaciated, hardly able to stand. There vias a heavy ~.nfestation with wi.nt e r ticks, and internally the pathology was largely confined to the lungs though spots, probably nec ro t i c areas we.re no.ted on the liver. The lungs had many adhesions, pneumonia was reported present, and there was a heavy Lungwormdnfec t.i.orr.wd th both speciei represented. The lungs from 1:;hePikes Peak .area were heavily infected with Lungwormand for the first time fr.om this area both P. rushd and P. stilesi were demonstrated. Gross evidence was noted--for lung worminfection from all three of the Georgetown area sheep. Concerning the Rampart Range area much has a.Lready been said about the 1957 conditions favoring the transmission of lungworm at Glen Eyrie. It was hoped that a br eed.ing ram m uld be obtained and that lambs might be produced by the penned ewes to determine if they might also be subject to pre-natal infection. Several attempts were made to capture such a ram at Glen Eyrie using the Cap-Chur Gun and the darts employing the nicotine preparation Cap-Chur-Sol.. Darts were placed in six different bighorn sheep including one ewe and. a . yearling ram was obtained and placed in the penns. The dosage used for obtaining this ram was 3••7 mg. per pound body weight •• The other four animals were rams in the 3 to 4 year class and the estimated dosages were about 3mgper pound body weight but none, of these were actually knocked down by the drug, but two were obviously affected and one of these fell and injured itself. At the time the injured animal did not appear too seriously injured and it "las confined at the Cheyenne ~lt. Zoo and treated by Dr. Arthur Hertzberger, the zoo veterinarian. It became apparent that it woul.d not recover and and it was slaughtered. In order to check further on the leathyl effects of the nicotine preparation, 1,000 mg. was administered intramuscularly in the neck, a dosage of 701 mg. per pound body wei.ght , but after 8 minutes it had �-ioirecovered from convulsions and was up on bis front legs (had he had the use of the hind legs he could have moved away from US)a ! assisted, Dr. Hertzberger in a postmortem examination. The lungs exhibited consolidation of the posterior portions of the diaphragmatic lobes and typical lungworm lesions extending along the dorsal margin of the entire lobe. Dissectionof the air passages of one of the lungs was made and the adults of P. rushi were found in the terminal bronchioles in the area of consolidation; dissection of the other lung was made after it had cooled and the adults of this species wer e found clustered in the lumen of the primary bronchus. In general the intensity of the infection was comparable to some of the lungs from the Buffalo Peaks and Cachela Poudre areas. Nothing signi(iccmt was found with respect to the infections found other than the distribution records obtained. One was from the Glen Eyrie area wl~ere sever a.L"years ago numerous fecal samples were examined without f ind ing any traGe of Lungworm larvae. Furthermore, it indicates that some of the infected'snails recovered from the lawns at Glen :Eyrie may have been irifected 0ith p.:macrotis as well as P. stilesi and probably rushi as \'lell. ' ' ' ~ . Irlith resp~ct to th~ information from the rabbit .Lung s examined ...._seve.r.a.Lv.ar.i.at ion s..we.rec.noted":~in~_'the_ inf ected-.lilngs-whi ch.ihad -not- been observed previously LncLudi.ng a. very marked emphysema and calcified deposits resembling clusters of the eggs and adult wormSwere recovered but no actual eggs or larvae, were recovered, and in another case the , adult p. sylvilagi were visible through the pleuraof the infected lung. From the Mount Evans GameManagement Unit" three cotton~ai1s were obtained in 1957 which were all Inf ec t ed, but only 1 of three.~obtained in the Same area in 1958 was infected. Gr~atei effort was re qu.ir ed to obtain the' , rabi ts from this" area in' 1958', suggesting t ha't the: popu'Lat-i.on may be down somewhat. P~obably more important in explaining this reduction in incidence is the weather as 1957 was known to be favorable in the Glen Eyrie instance and 1958 unfavorable, in thetransmissiori of the p aras i t es , 1:_ . v Nothing has been observed to' Lnd.i cate that any significant , 'change has occurred in the Lungwormintensity of the infections of the Buffalo Peaks herd of bighorn sheep since 1954. Weather conditions could affect the trend of the infection, howeve r , in one years time as illustrated by the observations at Glen Eyrie. Effect of the either-sex hunting seasons on the population of Bighorn sheep in the Buffalo Peaks herd should be given more attention during the Summerand fall of 1959. Counts of the sunnner concentration 06. the alpine range of the ewes and lambs wou.Ld be very des i.re abke, If the population is holding up certainly another either-sex season would be indicated if we' are to learn whether an epizootic can be prevented by control of the popUlation density. Information on the lamb crop and survival is needed also. �-10S- S1.1IlIf:J.ary The study of lung nematodes has continued under project W - 95 - R for three years involving the study of natural infections in both the intermediate and definitive hosts, and the experimental infection of both types of hosts" This report treats the accomplishments of the past year. 1. Additional evidence has heen obtained that the prepatent period for protostrongyHd Lnfect.Lon is between 25 and 60 days and probably ciosest to 30 days becaus of the chances 6f overlooking the first larvae in the light infections produced in the experimental animals" 2. The continued lack of consistency in the results of the attempted Lnfec t i ons is probab ly due to differences in individual resistance. 3. Evidence was obtained that prenat af Lnf ecc i on of bighorn sheep lambs does occur. 4. The difference in weather cortditions and otherfactors which influenced ..~ _ __ ,_~~_ _ihe i1!Creas_e_<i~i_!}_fJde~nc~~.9f j_!!f_~c::j:,io_I1_ ?!!long_1:.tl~_.~!l_'!.iJ·::;·.aj;_~!.e.!! ~y!,j~.i_s __ ~ ~_~ . discuse,cd. 5.,Exploratory analysis of the quantitative techniqe for fecal analyses revealed that a very large number of samples is needed but this may be reduced by further refinemE!nts in the technique. ' 6. Additional information on th.eincidence and distdbution of Lungworm infections has been obt adried and 1itt1~ change in the apparent intensity of infection within the Buffalo 'Peaks herd since 1954 is observed. Recomm:endations 1. That the numbers of bighorns usl.ng the lawns at Glen Eyrie be reduced. 2. That the technique for fecal analyses be tested further ust.1ngnew data. Prepared by: Date:~ Richard E. Pillmore ~~Juu~1~y~,_.1~9~5L9 _ Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��Ll,Q~ .....•.•~ ". July, -107- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ot: . Project COLOHADO No. W-s>5-R-3 ----~--~----~-------Affecting Job,No. 2 Period' Covered: Investigations of Disease and GameAnimals. Study of Cysticercosis March 1, of Mule Deer. 1958 through February 28, 1959. Abstract: Objectives of· this study .are to determine the incidence of Cysticercus tarandi, in deer and domestic sheep and of the adult tapeworm Taenia. krabbei in wild and domestic carnivores; also to make recommendations as to the steps which might be taken to control or manage this parasit.e • . •'. <" -., Methods employed-were-tne-aftificial transmission of the parasite in penned animals andrt.he examination of carcasses in processing plants or those collected in the fieid. Questionnaires were sent out to determine the" dis tribution of the infected animals. A dog was obtained May 23, 1958, kept in ~ enclosure and fed only on drj prepared food. .As an additional precaution the dog was ., ,treatedtwice with "Nemu ra.l," on October 8 and on October 20, to asau re . it was tapeworm-free before the cysticerci were f'ed, Gravid tapeworm proglottids .were recovered in the feces of the dog forty-two days after .it was. fed seventeen cysticerci recovered from deer carcasses ~ Gravid . :prdglcrttid, have been fed to a goat, two deer fawns, and one hybrid sheep. In examining a total of 562 skinned deer carcasses in 52 different processing plants, cysticercosis was established from surface inspection .. - oniy in 55 cases resulting in an overall incidence of 9.78 per cent. The distribution of the kill-locations for the established cases was obtained by a. qUestionnaire and the results indicate that the infection is widespread, probably throughou t the State of Colorado. Iijilmllij'ijl~'llil~irlilli[imijllijlfiliiI[I~II BDOW021603 19~9 /. ��-109Study of Cysticercosis of Mule DeeT John De Grazic Introduction As a result of an apparent increase of muscle cysticercosis in the mule deer and a demonstration that such infections could adversely affect the harvest of deer by hunters~ a study of the disease was initiated,in 1954 by ,the Colorado Game and Fish Department under the Federal Aid Project W-38-R. This initial work resulted in the demonstration that both the incidertce'anddistribut:ion of cysticercosis in Colorado WB,S widespread, that the, cysticerci were the larval form of the tapewol'lVi Taenia krabbei, and that such infection might also occur in domestie sheep (Olsen and Williatnsg 1959). This problem is felt to be of sufficient importance to merit additional attention~ consequently has been resumed under another Federal ,Aid Project w-95"'R. This report treats a secon,d 'experimental infection of a dog~ a further sear~h, for the adult tapeworm Taenia krabbei in'wild,carnivores, and a continuation of examinP -,-- --- -- - - ---stions-of skinned deer carcasses-fo"I'-the-larva1.-tapeworms--(-Cysticercus-----tarandi) in the musculature. Acknowledgments Appreciation is extended' fo the many processing plant operators throughout the state who have been most cooperative in t~ deer carcass check, and to W.C~Oo Cody Jordan who provided the 'bulk of predator intestinal tract ma.ter-i.a L, " Techniques Essentially the same methods and procedures were used for determining incidence of infection of cysticerci as ~eported in the Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly~ October 1958. Similar procedures were also utilized in the examination of predators for intestinal parasiteso For recording of information on examined deer carcasses, a Cysticercosis check sheet was employed~ Appendix Io When an infection was found, a letter (along with return addressed card questionnaire) was sent to the sportsman who killed the deer-, Appendix IIo A 5802% return on the questionnaire was obtainedo Kill sites of infected deer were plotted with map tags on a Colorado highway mapo �-110. I Results Experimental Transmission Seventeen live cysts taken from infective deer carcasses were fed orally to .an experimental dog wormed on October 8, 1958, and the dog was again wormed on October 20, 1958. The dog was judged free of any internal cestode parasites. The dog was confined constantly in an enclosure and was fed only dry dog food. Seventeen live cystecerci from infected deer carcasses were fed to the dog on October 28, 1958. Two gravid proglottids were observed in the droppings December 9, Proglottids appeared in the feces almost daily, usually numbering from three to nine gravid segments in a twenty-four hour period. 1958, resulting in an observed pre-patent period of 42 days. Daily observation~ on the ariimal indicateq no external complications from the Taenoid infection. The experimental dog was posted February 13,· 1959, and three adult Taenia .spp, were r-ecover-edfrom the small intestine. The adult worms were relaxed in normal saline solution for about eight hours or until little movement' was evident and then were killed _in_l'l1ke.w:arm_A.E.A._so~u tion_and_ pi:eser-ved-in-same.----.-"---,---~ ----One specimen was sent to Dr. O~ W. Olsen of Colorado state University and mounted at the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service laboratory, Denver Federal Center. From measurements taken and other noticable characteristics the specimens appear to be Taenia krabbei. The fairly large genital pores, the number of uterine, branches in the gravid proglottids, and the number; shape and size of the two rows of rosteIl,ar hooks fulfill nearly all of the description for Taenia krabbei. . A few, gravid segments taken from droppings of the experimental dog and from the adult worms were placed under refrigeration in saline' solution for use at a later date. On February 2, 1959, two female Mule, Deer fawns were fed orally one gravid segment, each; the ripe proglottids being filled with thousands of infective eggs. On February 13, 1959, a female hybrid sheep was fed two gravid proglottids; a young female goat was fed two segments, and a young domestic rabbit was fed one proglottido Oncospheres eggs from the gravid proglottids eventually find their way to the musculature via the arterial system, where they become the larval stage or cysticercosis. As of this writing none of the above experimental animals have been posted to determine if an infection has resulteq or just what is the intensity and numbers of cysticerci presento �-111- Incidence of Cysticercosis in Deer The major objectives of this phase of the study was to determine areas of highest incidence of infection by means of examining for infected carcasses of deer, and to gather information relative to number and looality of C,1sts present, other parasites encountered and general boqy condition. During the big game season of 1958, thirty-seven different processing plants were visited in north and southwestern Colorado as well as lockers .in the Denver and Colorado Springs areas. A total of 562 skinned carcasses were examined, resulting in 55 animals infected with oysticercosis, representing 9.78 per cent infection. Certainly this represents a minimum incidence due ,to large areas of fat present on skinned carcasses~ examination being also hindered by hemorrhagic areas as well. Variance in percentage of infected animals was well ii).. ustrated in the 1957 locker survey. In the October survey 5.8 percent of 151 examined'animals were infected, while in the Deoember survey when most of the fat covering the surface was gone, which resulted in a more complete examination, 16 of the 61 carcasses were found infected, or 26.2 peroent. A survey condUoted - ----by-Jesse-Will-iams-in-1954-had-·56-infecti ve -andma Ls -ou t-of-a- total-of--7-16,-or 1.96 percent. . Information from each infected animal was recorded on cards. (Tables 1 and 2). The larval stage or cyst seems to.Qe fairly well scattered throughout the musculature and no preferred locality' has been evident in this particular survey. The majority of the infected animals were mature, with no fawns- and only two yearlings found infected. Fawns seem to be relatively free of this parasite, however, in the 1957 survey, orie infected fawn was examined in the Cortez area. Most of the 55 infected carcasses had much fat present, 8 had little fat and two were without any fat at all. Eight of the 55 were infected with Sarcosporidia ap., a small protozoan parasite located in the musculature, and also S-Of the 55 were infected with legworm (Wehrdikmansia cervipedis), a filarid parasite being found on the hocks (Table 3). . 0 . From the hunter questionnaire return, ~ysticerco~is seems to be statewide and no "hot spots" indicated from this surveyor the 1954 survey conducted by Jesse Williams. (See distribution map.) No unfavorable hunter reaction has been encountered thus far~ however, this certainly poses a potential problem to the Game and Fish Department, should the disease become well known to the general public. No work has been done in relation to Cysticercosis of deer and domestic sheep raising; some effort should be made to contact USDA inspectors to determine if deer and domestic sheep are hosts to the same cysticerci and to what extent. �-112TABLE I Check 1958 Cysticercosis 55 CARCASSES INFEC. GRAND TOTAL--- 562 CARCASSES EXAM. Southwest No. Carcasses Exam. Infec. 9.78% INFEC. Northwest Noo Carcasses Exam. Infec. Gunnison 14 o Gypsum 4 o Delta 25 . 2 Glenwood 40 4 Montrose 30 Rifle 28 2 Darango 15 2 Meeker 26 3 Bayfield 17 2 Craig 13 2 Pagosa Spgs. 4 o Steamboat 29 2 Del Norte 15 1 Oak Creek 12 2 o 11. Saguache ------:-.-~ - - ~_ Monte Vista 6 o Salida 7 1 14li 12 Totar· % Infec. Idaho' Spgs. _ .•..._. ..~-.--- -.- ...• - -- ..........•.... ._..•.•... _ ..- Golden _._._._-_. 6 1 -_.-- .. -- 3 o 161 8.33% 16 9.93% Denver LOckers No. Carcasses Exam. Infec. Colorado Spgs ,_Lockers No. Carcasses Exam. Infec. Morvay's 16 2 Union 5 0 Englewood 25 2 Collins 15 2 Hughey's 16. 1 Quick Freeze 37 4 Arvada 22 2 Castle Rock 5 0 Oliver's 3 0 Federal 17 2 Dann t s 49 5 Harvey's 12 1 Mountview 13 3 Coldblast 9 1 Kings 12 1 Pvt. Res , Denver 'total 195 62 6 1 1 d T_ ~ __ 21 ••• __ JIll'''''' �490 -113DISTRIBUTION TABLE 2 Cysticerci - 1958 Survey Number and Location of Cyst Neck Ft. Qtrs. No:--Il 18 28.1 % 6.2 Ribs Dia1hram II 1.5 6.2 Flank Hind Qtrs. Loin r--r31 1.5 Sex and Age Bucks No:-a% 14.5 Mature Does --r- Yearlings 43 2 78.1 3.6 3.6 Fat Present Much Little NO:45 8 % Bl.B 14.5 Other Parasites Legworm Sarcocysts No. 8 8 % 14.5 14.5 Absent 2 3.6 Fawns -0- 3.1 4B.4 Others 3 4.6 �4~1 -llu- Inoidence of Taenia krabbei among Carnivores The object of this particular examination is to obtain intestinal tracts from the various carnivo~s and determine which are the reservoirs for Cysticercosis. Contents from intestinal tracts were stripped and washed and all helminths recovered, preserved and recorded. Most of the Cestodes encountered were stained and mounted on glass slides for checking of identification. The remaining parasites were saved should there be a fUture study or later identification by other workers. A total of eleven predators were examined during 1958-59 and only one of the carnivores was suspected of harboring T. krabbei; this was an adult Gray Fox taken in Cha.ffee County. No addItional attempt was made to identify this particular t,apeworm. A fUrther search of the preserved contents of the fourteen intestinal tracts examined 1957-58 failed to yield T. krabbei, although numerous other species or Cestodes and Nematodes iere evident. Results of the carnivore examina tion for1957 -59 appear in _'l'~~~~ ? _ �-ll~- TABLE 3 1957-59 Carnivore -Sxamination Carnivore 1957-58 Babcat, 1m. Coyote, Im. Collection Site Findings West Rifle Cr; Garfield Co. 26 Cestodes, 1 Nematode Tarryall area, Park Co. 15 Cestodes, 2 Nematode " " " 7 " " " 11 Currant Cr; Fremont Co. 108 Coyote, Ad. " " Coyote, A.d. Bobaat, Ad. Gray Fox, Ad. It " " " Bobcat, Im. Gray Fox, Ad. " " 'II 3 Nematodes " " " 112 II 16 " 12 " " " 300 " " 25 " " 65 " 4 " " 23 " Coyote, Ad , Golden Gate Can; Jeff; Co. 25 Bobcat, ? West Elk Cr; Garfield Co. 47 ---------_.- " - ._ .... ------------,. __ . _---- --_._--_._- --- ----_ .. Bobcat, Ad. Plateau Cr; Mesa Co. 229 " Bobcat, Ad. Dry Fork; Garfield Co. 77 " 4 " Bobcat, ? " " 52 " 4 " " II Bobcat, Ad. " " " " Same Vial Fox, Ad. Highway 6, Jefferson Co. 2 Nematodes Bobcat, Ad. Four Mile Cr; Chaffee Co. Bobcat, Ad. " 1 Taenia sp; 1 Nematode many Mescotoides'sp. 1 Nematode Bobcat, Ad. " " " " " " " Bobcat, Ad. " " " " " " " Bobcat, Ad. " " " " " 4 MesocestOides Bobcat, Im. " If " " 5 Taenia sp. 10 Nematodes Bobcat, Ad. " " " " " " 17 Taenia SPa 35 Nematodes many Mesocestoides SPa Bobcat, Ad. It " " " 4 Mesocestoides It 15 Mescotoides SPa 9 Nematodes 3 Taenia sp. 4 Nematodes many MescOtoides sp. 5 Taenia Spa 1 Nematode sp. SPa Gray Fox, Ad. Highway kill, Chaffee Co. 2 Taenia SPa ( T. krabbei?) 13 Mesooestoides sp. Gray Fox, Ad. Near Salida, Chaffee Co. Clean - - �-116- Appendix I CYSTICERCOSIo CHECK SHEET EnMINED DATE: 1958 BY: LOCKER PLANT: IIDNTER'S _ RES. OR NON-RES. LIC. NO. NAME: ADDRESS: ANIMAL INFORMATION DATE OF KILL: BUCK: FAWN:. DOE: MATURE: YEARLING: LOCATION OF KILL ---- -------------------- GAME MANAGEMENT UNIT FAT PRESENT: MUCH: LITTLE: FROZEN: YES: NO: EXTERNAL EXAMINATION ABSENT: Number of Qysts and Location: NECK: FUNK: FRONT QTRS: RIBS: HIND QTRS: MASSETER MUSCLES: DIAPHRAGM: LOIN: OTHERS: SAMPLE TAKEN: y~s: No: SPECIMEN NO: CYSTS ALIVE: Yes: No: PRESERVATIVE: SARCOCYSTS PRESENT: y~s: No: CHECKED FOR % Yes: No: LEGWORM PRESENT: Yes: No: CHECKED FOR: Yes: No: • REMARKS: �-117- Appendix II January 27, 1959 De~r Mr. During the deer season of 1958 a survey was conducted by the Colorado Game and Fish Department and your animal was one that was checked while hanging in a locker plant. The survey was conducted to provide the department with information to thus further our big game resource; and provide information as to the quality and condition of the deer as compared with the condition of the locality where the animal was killed. The animal was checked for fat present, quality of meat and overall condition. In order for us to complete this survey it.would be very helpful if you would complete the enclosed questionnaire and return it to us in the enclosed self addres~ed envelope. Your cooperation in this matter will be sincere~ appreciated. Very truly yours, /s/ It/ John W. DeGrazio Biologist Colorado Game. & Fish Dept. JWD:b January 30, 1959 QUESTIONNAI RE: The deer killed on my original license was killed in county, approximately ---- miles, (give direction) from ---------------------- (give nearest town). ��~Qt; '::it July, 19)9 -119- Jon C()~IPLETION REPORT H-IV:;STIGA.TIONSPROJBCT St2.te of COUYR'\.OO Project No. Investigations w - 95 - R -3 ~~~--~-----------"' , of Diseases and Parasites Affec t i.ng Game Animals. Job No. ' 3 ---- General This job Can be reported Investigations in abstract of Diseases and Parasites. form. The objectives of this job are to make initial investigations' of disease outbreaks when the opportunity arises, assemble information on ,:"ildlifC'diseases and p ar as i t e si.mport arrt to game management, encourage .wi.Ld.l i f e disease studies by students, to inform departmental personnel about the "!ildlife diseases they may_encoun._t~X. ~t!_c_l1__C'!: __pr og ram could \'oIell be a full time job but is carried out only as an' incidental part of the nroject as time permits. Disease file cards are prepared for each animal examined for luncworm infection on ",hich notation of other conditions or parasites arc recorded. and the parasites or affected tissues preserved in formalin for future study. No studen t 1iTaS found to abstract the information of wildlife diseases from the files of the School of Veterinary Mec1icine,Colorado State Univ0rsity at Ft. Collins. No projects with graduate students have been initiated in Parasitology under Dr. Olsen though several have been discussed. Informational leaflets were prepared fer intradepartmental circulation on the either-sex hunting season in the Buffale Peaks area, Rabies in 'l'lildlifeand the Prenatal lungworm infection 'Of bighorn lambs. Prl?pared by: Richard Dr.te: .,_., E. Pillmore Approved by: Laurence E. Rierdan Federal Aid Coordinator t-, '". ," ��July, 19.59 -121- State of Project JOB CmlPLETICN REPORTS INVTISTIGATI ONS PROJECT COLORADO No. W- 95 - R - 3 Affecting Job No. 4 Th~ stated ; Investigations of Diseases GameJ\ninals_:.:__ Publication and Parasites ..__.__._._ of findinGs -!.!.----- objective of the preparation of a manuscript covering in bighorn sheep for publication was no t :accomplished; however a paper was pr epared and presented at the Desert Bir:horn Council meeting in Yuma, Arizona dur i.ng April of 1958 this parer was titled: Lungworm Lnve s t i.rt a't i ons and disease . "Problems of LungwormInfection in l'lild Sheepj'and ...I:p~1.~lb::..::l~i~~~hed in the transactions of the counci..!..... _ will be I\lso two papers were prepared for presentation at the meeting of the Colorado - \'lyominc;Academyof Science meeting in Laramie in May of 1959. these will be published only in abstractc copies of which are appended to this report. In connection l'litIl the preparation of the planned manuscr i.pt references and notes are being placed on key-sort cards and some rough preliminary writing has been attempted. Prepared by: Richard E. Pillmore Date; Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator July, 1959 ------~~~~~~----------- illliiiili 8DOW017142 ��-123The Evidence for the Prenatal Lungworm Infection of Bighorn Lambs Richard E. Fillmore Colorado Game and Fish Department, Federal Aid Division ~ Colorado Springs, Colorado Lungworm infections have been implicated as a ~ortality of bighorn sheep and observations factor have been made indic::lting the possibility that prenatal infections might occur. This paper reports two observations supporting the occurrence of uterine infection of Lambs. One lamb was born to and confined with its infected mother, in a pen where none of the snai~ hosts were present. lungworm infection and died after 51 days. This lamb developed a heavy First-stage Protostrongylus larvae were first recovered from the feces .of this lamb .on June 23, 19.58, one month from its birth date. noted for The same .patte.m of Larval, recovery was a second lamb which was taken from its mother when but a few hours old and reared by a foster mother, a milk goat, away from contact with infected animals. After the lambs were a month old the first-stage consistently larvae were recovered froni both but not in the same quantd ty , The delay from birth to first recovery of larvae is in accord with observed prepatent periods in experimental Protostrongylus infections of deer and rabbitse It would seem that either the infection was acquired within a very short time after birth which is unlikely in view of the intensity of the infection and our knowledge of the life cycle of the parasite; or~ the infective larvae passed through the placenta, entered the fetus, but failed to develop before the lungs became functionale Certainly pren~tal infections~ depending upon intensity, would have some bearing on the survival of infeoted lambse ��/\lq~ ':1t c, .. ~~"J -125The Known Distribution of Lungworm (Protostrongylus) Infections in Colorado Richard E. Pillmore Colorado Game and Fish Department, Federal Aid Division, Colorado Springs~ Colorado Based upon lung examinations, the general distribution is plotted for 39 cases of Protostrongylus of infeotions sylvilagi, 26 cases of P. boughtoni, 8 cases of ~. macrotis, and 189 cases from bighorn sheep (~. stilesi or both ~. stilesi and ~. rushi). It has been reported that four of the abQve lungworm species utilize the same small terre~trial snails (Pupillidae & Valloniidae) as intermediate hosts (Pillmore, Jour. Colo-WYo. Acad. Sci. 4(10):44, 1958). Because of abundance, limited home ranges, rapid population turnover, and small size~ rabbits provide a means of obtaining basic information the factors influencing the distribution and transmission The data accumulated indicate that distribution on of protostrongylosis. of Protostrongylus infections is dependent upon overlapping of the ranges of the definitive and intermediate hosts. Such infections may occur throughou.t,the mountains of Colorado and at all elevations providing snail habitat. susceptibility, weatherg Probably host host population denSities, or any circumstances which localize or concentrate the hosts on the same areas also affect the parasite distribution. Viable first-stage larvae from the scats of predators, such as bobcat and coyote, suggests that these animals serve a transport function in the distribution of the parasites. ��July, 1959 -127- JOB COHPLETION REPORT , .. ' . INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT ~, . ". State'· of COLORAlX) Project ,No. \'1-79:""R':"6 Job Ito'~l" Title: Name: Wildlife Habitat Improvement Studies Study New and Rare \voody Species ..•Period Covered: Calendar' Yea~ 1958 ':.' , '>Abstr~ct: Seeds of 17 species of shrubs vrere planted at the Nursery, including several for, increase to put out: OIl te.st. '.•: Test ~plantings were made on eight Department properties and '. eleven 'private, farms and r-anches ,'. ,Pines up to 2·to 3 feet , were:~transplan'ted bare-root suc,cessfully after heavy pruning, as+Latie a,s July 17. ' .. , . Ob:'_j~~cti've-$:--·Tb~de-vi-se-pr'-6p-a.gation methods and stUdy- the ,'adaptability t o Eastern Colorado, growing conditions, of tree and, shrub species offering possibilities of improving wild:·,·life haba.tia t ," . . , Frogress· of \.,Tork: • ' G;ermiliation Studies--Seventeert species of shrubs and trees 'With which, most of the germination difficulties have been experi'enced in,the past, were'selected for'seedbed testing this year.' Several'other species also werepliinted tq secure seed'lings for more testplots. " . ; From three to four months 'st~a:1;ification was supplied to all, species except Caragana pYglilea; C.::inicrophylla and . C.~brevispina which wer-eplanted directly, in the' field •. The , Elaeagnus and Prunus species were also planted directly in the field after stratification. ' .... ",'.', ..' Data.on all seedbed plantings. have been reduced to tabular form as shown in the accompanying tables. ...All beds except Atriplex (saltbush) wi,ll be left until; tp.~ spring of 1959 in cCl.sesome seed :mayhave needed ,'longer stratification. No "".?-ttempt will. be made to explain the behavd.or- of the various "specre s 'as in. the past, for gueaae s have been wrong as often as righ~. ' "'. . . .. . •.. _.' ..Loss' of the per~p~ilUm' aeedliiigs' from damping-off was a ,; 'd:t.ssapp().:illt~ent•• It a~ hap:pened within a 24-hour period on " a: we'ekeI:ld;wheri.the seedlings were about; three weeks old. ,>' 'J: .: .. .,". " . >.' ;" '.. ... ~ " '.,' . - .: ,- ." . '.:: . �;, , i.,..;. " J"t,"::r, ':,<:'n.·' , L:,.;r~, "".";i" SEEDBED PL~iTINGS--1958 Days Germinat~on Showing Strate Species Atrip1ex canescens Crataegus a1taica " ambigua " arno1diana " doddsii " doug1asii " spp. (Yeager) Cotoneaster integerrima Cory1us ca1ifornicus * Juniper scopu10rum Lonicera maacki ~1ahonia fremontii Peraphy11Ul1lramosissimum* Elaeagnus angustifo1ia (LS) " umbe11ata " " Euonymus turkestanica nana Prunus armeniaca ansu " " " tenel1a " " " " " " Ribes 1eptanthum* " II * " Rosa laxa " " altaica Sambuccus neo-mexicana Vitis--beta Good to very good none none none none none none none none none trace none excellent excellent /1 none none fair /2 good good fair trace good fair fair trace trace none none good 125 101 101 101 104 10i 110 119 125 110 124 108 116 115 114 121 109 119 121 121 123 123 123 125 125 109 109 124 108 *--See footnotes on following page. ,) Remarks Ready for field Herbst. seed Chey. USDA 1953 Moran 1957 Chey. USDA 1955 Moran 1957 1957--Coll. by Yeager ColI. at Nursery Moran 1955 5 yr. dry storage Mandan USDA 1954 w. Slope (Crawford) '57 '57--p1anted wet CQ 11. at Nursery Herbst '55 Schumacher '57 Coll. at Nursecy Moran '56 Herbst '56 Schumacher '57 ColI. at Nursery Select at Nursery Coll. at Nursery . Poncha Pass 1957 Poncha Pass 1955 Coll. at Nursery Coll. at Nursery ColI. at Nursery Coll. at Nursery I j-J I'\) co I �-129;" *--Previous tests had failed under alkaline water so 1958 tests were made under frames in Kinghorn's backyard under city Hater. Peraphyllum germination was excellent, but damping-off struck over one week;end and took entire bed of seedlings. Squirrels burrowed under frame and took all the seed of corylus. Ribes germination was spotty, but hard seeds may come next spring. 1. Big-seeded Russian olive germinated very well, ,but driving rain plastered mud over Part of tiny seedlings and they never survived. 2. Most seeds had sprouted when hand planted and could not Hithstand hot winds. Two lots of seedlings of this species were lost in previous years, once from carelessness on the part of a wor-kman and once from lack of proper storage after being dug and processed in the spring. Crops of good seed are so infrequent ------with-this-t:oIorado:_-native--that 'f'ailures-are- cliscouraging.--·· Planting under shade with city {neutral} irrigation water gave far superior results to that secured with the alkaline water used at the Nursery. Lack of germination of the Juniperus scopulorum. with only 110 days moist stratification was no surprise, but the seed had been in dry, cool, stratification for over a year previously, which is reported to be necessary for some species, so early planting was considered worth a test~ vfuen it was found from the literature that seeds could "breath" through polyethylene, stratification was greatly simplified. Seeds were placed in cotton bags with vermiculite around them, and all placed in the plastic bags. The problem of maintaining opta.num moisture -cond.i tions around the seeds vias tl:ereby solved. The seed was clean and ready to plant when t.aken from stratification. A second planting of J. scopulorum seed was made in October after it had been in stratification about eleven months. The seedbed, after planting, was dusted heavily with sulphur, mulched to a depth of two to three inches with old sawdust and then covered with two layers of snow fence for winter protection. Several species of seed, including more JG scopulorum., were put into moist stratification in December in preparation for planting in the spring and fall of 1959. That work will be covered more extensively in the 1959 report. �-130- .Special mention must be made of the ease, rapidity, and efficiency with w.>,ichseeds of various kinds can be cleaned, . treated, stratified, tested and 'pr-epar-ed for planting in the new building, as compared with the old methods and working conditions •••• and about-all can be done inside-during the vlinter months or during inclement wea ther- except maceration and pulp removal. The latter process is usually done outdoors where pulp, hulls and other_outside seed coats can be washed away on open soil and gravel •. Care of seedbeds was no particular problem because the soil had been sterilized previous to planting and only certain \o/indbloioffi seeds germinated. Evidently the soil treatment was not deep enough because a few patches of bindweed· sho.wed up in midsummer. ']heyhad to be carefully sprayed by hand for even a reasonable- control. ---- \vork with the rose hybridization remained at a standstill because of the inability of the plants to self-pollinate. Seeds from some of the most _.:prolificf>roduc~rs we_:r_§_saveCi, - - --_. --::::'0 wever , and will be cleaned and prepared for planting sometime in the future. It is thought that there is a possibili t~{ that somewher-e in the several crosses made in the initial years of this work there might be one or more seedlings that would come true from seed and prove to be of exceptional value in wildlife plantings. _The sizes of the fruit (hips) varies greatly. Some of them are almost as large as English walnuts with lots of seed in them. Since many of the birds frequenting the Nursery, espec~ally the waxwings, seem to prefer these hips as food, it is thought that they might also prove of value to game birds and animals as food. Many farmers often ask for rose seedlings for their plantings, so there is always the possibility that any seedlings produced will find ready acceptance by those who are seriously interested in wildlife plantings. . �-131- Testpolots--Hew and Old.--Over six thousand trees and shrubs of 26 varieties wer-e d.iscr-Louted during the planting season. Plantings wer-e made on eight different Department properties, and on eleven farms and ranches where new plots vJere either Gstablished or additions made to old ones. Nost of the planting was done by the cooperators since project personnel Vias not available for much of that type o:f work. Considerable help was supplied, however, in designing and the loan of planting machines. In this connection it is interesting to note that there is less difficulty in gettir~ farmers to allow plenty of space in the rows betVleen plants and betVleen the rows, as compared with their wishes eleven years ago when the o·riginal habitat-development program was started. Survival in many of the plantings Vlhich were made too close has been very poor and apparently farmers and ranchers have noticed that the most successful plantings are those where plenty of ---------------space_has_been_alloJ.,ed_ for_the_i_n_di.Y_i..clJJJl.J_p_lants t9 grQ_'tL _ and survive. In addition to the species listed on the accompanying condensed table, nine species available _from previous years' growing wer-e distributed to supplement plantings already fairly well established. They included: Sambuccus neo-mexicana . • Rose species (Hanson rose) • Ano.rpha fruticosa . • • . • Lonicera tatarica .••••• USDA (select) Prunus virginiana Caryopteris mongoliensis • Tamarix spp. • • P. armeniaca ansu •••••. P. spinosa .••• 4 • • 24 · • 73 • .100 Hel. 265 40 •• 253 . . . 139 86 Total 984 The Elaea@lus augustifolia was all of the large-seeded variety which seems to have extra vigor, more tree-like habit of growth, and more ability to withstand late moisture. All species marked "P" were in a 2 x 2 x 9 inch pot and Vlell establisbed in a good soil mixture before planting. vlhen some surplus Pinus pondero sa wer-e lined out several years ago, it was plaruled to dig and use them in field plantings a year or two later. Even without lITigation they got too large for normal bare-root planting and it became a problem Hhat to do with them. �r r.. "': t .';) : I"'~ ;.!.;a-::l ! SUMHARY--Testplot Dis!tribution--1958 ro ,..; ro <1> ~ ~ JJfIl ~ +> OM 1=1 Gil Gil ~ ~ o Two Buttes lola Billy Oreek Little Hills Bonny Dam Ifyan-~Po-rids-~-~ Deer pens Sweitzer Lake Deines Farm Robinson Farm HartshoriiFarm Mead Farm Loveland Day Scouts Schuler Farm Brittain Ranch OharidIerJ:1iiiic!1 Siverly Farm Grimes Farm Goodwin Farm 0 Pl § P-i § ~ ~ 0 oM +> ::t<1> o ~ <1> <1> 1=1 +> <H +> fIl C/l fIl a a § ~ P-i. ~ P-. 100 200 100 10 50 150 150 200 50 30 100 50 p., H 16 C/l <1> H Q ~ <1> '"(j OM o o o o ~ <1> Gil ,..;, r.:li ro OM r-I o ~. OM +> fIl ~.a ~. 'ro . ro. cIS ,..; <1> Gil +> ~- ~ Gil +> ro H <1> OM a ~ oM r-I ill 1=1 ~ Vl .~ r-I ~. 20 70 20 10 ~ <1> o O'l o a Ul <ll <1> o H o r;tl . ro ,.a H H Ul ~ o o ~ C/l ro <ll .;:$ ,.a Ul ~ ill ~ :o::! +> ~ ,..; o q P-i F-I ,..; ~ o ~ I fIl Ul <ll r-I ,..; !=l o +> +> ;:$ Pl i 20 20 16 I °rl ill !=l <ll '"d I ro !=l ro o H oM H <ll '"d 't:I (I) ;j <ll o o Ul I ,..; ;:$ Pl OM OJ Q Pol ? o ;j !=l C) ro H <ll o ..q OJ Pl • ..q ~-i <ll QJ 15 I .20 20 200 100 15. 25 40 100, : I ill 90 15 8 ro P-i ~ Ul o o ; . 75 _ . 10 60 20 22 -~ 65 10d 40 40 50 15 ._150 25 1 10 Ul ro QD H 15 _SO 100 25 10 25 50 15 20 30 fIl 20 10 l5 20 15 20 10· 20 30 . 100 100 45 197 16 250 50 r:i fIl ~ ~ o o ill oM +> ~. ~ I ~ ~ o o Gil ~ 50 50 20 20 20 25 60 200 7 15 5 10 100 50 50 30 75 20 15 160 30 40 745 1042 386 Grand Tota1 ••5023 o c I P-i o cr.l ,..; P-i ,..; Gil +> <1> I Gil fIl o ro OM +> P-i <ll I ~ ~ r-i EPl P-i P-i 91 141 184 350, 80 275 115 25 457 110 177 125 640 80 I-' ro I \..oJ �Figure 1. Two selections of cottonless cottonwoods and three of tamarix were grown from hardwood cuttings. Figure 2. Nineteen Boy Scouts and their Leader turned out to help make plantings at Swietzer Lake near Delta, Colorado. The movement was headed by the local Lions Club, with assistance from two boating clubs and local sportsmen's group. �Figure 3. About 40 sportsmen and several Department men helped plant- and fence the area for test plants. Survival seemed to be good after 4 months,_but, the real test w~ll during tEe Winter-and~~nEix:t ie-i.r~ come Figure 4. Pines planted bare-root in 1949 near Platteville, Colorado, show excellent survival and growth to as muchas 12 feet. Wider spacing has allowed them to keep their lower branches. �5. The seeds of the big-seeded Russiano1ive are very persistent. This picture was taken March17, only a few days before the ----waxwings-and-rob±ns-made-a-c·lean-sweep-=-.-----·····-··--- Figure Figure 6. The broad1eaf squawbush (Rhus tri10bata canadensis) has very persistent seed, which is not often used by gamebirds. (taken March 17). ..-.. �Figure 7. Volga wild rye stools rapidly and makes a dense cover in a short time. �Figure 8.. Pampas grass stalks get tall, withstand the winds and driving snowstorms very well, and provide excellent cover for both birds and animals. �Figure 9. Elephant grass is even more sturdy and heavy leaved than Volga rye. At the __ ~Nnr_"." _se"l7.,_rQ~§_~lan_t_e_d_4:_!e_e_t_aparj,_have . almost "closed the gap" in 4 years. Figure 10. Potted evergreens (in foreground) and broadleaves are established in frames such as these for a year before field planting. �,..133-, To test a theory, about 1,000 of them were dug and the side br-anches pruned quite severely before placing them in cold storage. Four plantings were made on which records have been kept to test the potential value of extra pruning in securing survival. These four tests showed the following results the first year: April 15--33 plru1ts hand-planted lost 4 or 12.1 percent. May 12--40 plants hand-planted lost 1 or 2.5 perceht. June 7--100 hand-planted 7 or 7 percent. July 17--224 machine 15.1 percent. at the nursery-at Steve Goodwin at Dr. Hartshorn planted ranch-- farm--lost at Nursery--lost 35 or ----------------II'--the-Tof!fseI;'" do-not--increase-materially "'after--another year, the indications are that pines uP to two or three feet tall may be successfully transplanted ,bare-root if properly, pruned to balance tops and roots. Plantings made with the same stock treated the same way at several places in the' State will be checked for results in general field practice. In the early years of the· habitatdevelopment program the larger pines proved very difficult to transplant, with losses running from 50 to 90 percent some years. In 1949 when 9 to 12-inch pines were used and soil moisture conditions were about perfect, several very good stands were secured, especially around Platteville and Flemming in EasteTI1 Colorado. During the drought years which followed, however, losses climbed out of all proportiono ' ' It was this situation which prompted the \-lOrkunder Job 5 where evergreens are being potted and established under shadefor a ye=amor-;;_e Preparedby: Date: nd planting. ,.::/tir-Utt~2-u-) July, 1959 Approved by: Approved by~ Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��51.2 July, 19~9 .' .~: ~', "!' -135- " " ." JOB COMPLETION REPORT "." 9206893 INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of COLORADO Project No. W-79-R-6 Name: Wildlife Habitat Improvement Studies Job No.' 2 Title: Period Covered: Study Various.Herbaceous Species Calendar Year 1958 Abstract: Nineteen hundred clones of grasses and legumes and 262 pounds of a milk vetch were distributed during.the .year., .One new grass, Giant wild rye, was added to the Nurs'ery . testplots.. Combining the'Astragalus' cieer aeedpLo t in the ' ".late.fall further reduced the cost of harvesting seed to 19 .cents per pound. Observations on several grasses and legumes .aI!~ge.tcting-mor.e-intere s.t Lng. each--year-~ -,~~-, Objectives: Study propagation methods and adaptability of promising species for Eastern Colorado, especially their value 'for wildlife as food, nesting and escape cover" . ". " Progress· of \vork:Nineteen hundr-ed z-oo+s , .c.Ioneaand clumps of grasses and legumes were distributed ,for planting in nine. different .localities in Colorado. Also, 262,\ pounds of Astragalus cicer (milk vetch) seed were planted, j:n.ostly on State.properties. . ' .. Summary 1958.Plantings ' : , , ". ,' . .,Astragalus cicer seed.;..-to farmers • • • '. • 2 lb. Astragalus cieer seed--Department properties •••.• 260 lb. . ,', _"." Elephant grass clones • • • • , .,.. ..:~.,20 Volga rye grass clones 350 Hybrid crested wheat clumps ..•••••. 450 Pampas grass clones . ~ • • • 0." • • • '. 330,. Rhizoma alfalfa roots • •.. ''.• • • •...50, .. Asparagus roots • • • • • • • • 700 0.,....'. .. 0 .". , , ..... '.. .', ,.:.' .TotaL .:.. 1900" .:' .. Seed, of'. one more,grass, Elymlls condensa tus,pubems, collected at the Little Hills Experiment Statl.on, was planted �-136) in plot 64 at the Hursery on Hovember 3. This grass had been under observation for seve ra.L years and it W~J,S finally decided to have the seed collected and make a planting for observation at the Hursery. The origiYlal legume testplot at the Nursery was undercut to a depth of 16 inches and all the old roots removed. This plot wa s too close to other beds wh.i ch had to be irrigated once or t\-;iceduring the season, and winds often blew the water on to the alfalfa at the edges, thus Giving several strains an undue advan i.age ill the test for drouth resistance. Fifty of the Rhizoma roots wer-e salvaged and sent to Little Hills for planting. Another met ho d of harvesting Astragalus cicer seed was tried, ~lich reduced the cost of the clean seed to 19 cents per pound. 1;lhencompar-ed \'liththe cost of approximately ~~3. 00 two years ago, when it was hand-picked two or three times during the season and cleaned, and with the cost of baling and threshing last year--at 37 cents per pound--this year's work has brought the cost dovm to where anyone can afford to plant it for either a forage or seed crop. If planted at the rate used on the Nursery- seedplot--about 1 to It pounds per acre--it is much cheaper than alfalfa or clover. It seemed almost impossible to get a custom harvester to combine the Astragalus cicer field in September or October. One operator's equipment failed in two attempts. Finally, an experienced farmer with a large, heavy combine, after making adjustments for almost three hours, was able to pick up about 85 to 90 percent of the seed-bearing stems and do an excellent job of threshing. A few days later two men, using the proj e ct ' s seed-cleaning equipment, wer-e able to get 625 pounds of clean seed from the It acre plot. Considering that the rows were planted 4 feet apart and the plants blocked to 8 inch intervals, such a seed crop seems to be a very good yield. The following are the costs involved: Four pints Heptachlor (hopper spray) ••• $ 2.05 One pint Triton 1956 (spreader) •• 1.50 Six hours labor--spraying • • • • • • • • 7.50 Heeding--hoeing • • • • • . • • • 4.00 Combining • • • • • • • • •• 65.00 Labor, assistance combine • • • • • • • • 5.00 Cleaning--24 hours 2 men • • 33.75 0 0 0 • 0 • Total • • $118.80 �-137- kx: interesting expc rLence wh i ch proved to be a failure an attenpt 'cogrow a new par-'cridgepea frolllseed. Ferd Kleinsc.hni.tz secured the seed from Spain in connection with his work with the Red-legged Spanis:1 Partridge. vlaS The only clue he had as to the identity of this plant consisted of tHO vlOrds--"Algaroba" a.id "Car-o b "; The first could be found no where in horticulture books available, but since the seed appeared to be from a legume, a careful search of that family br-ought up the isolated note that "Ceratonia siliqua is often called Carob or st. -Johns wor-t ", This plant is said to be a native of the eastern Hediteranean region and was introduced in southern California and Florida for the pods ~lich are eaten by livestock as well as by humans. A special dehydrated product has been developed from them as a breakfast food and for other uses. "It is a legume, evergreen to 50 feet, sometimes wi t~l.----... ---·····-·-·_·stand-s--a-f'-e·w-degrees-e:f-i':...r-Qs·t·,-bu-t-i s-generally_a dap_ted_t_o_ the same range as the orange. It will grow on any Helldrained soil, according to the literature. In orchards it is recommended·that it be planted 35 to 40 feet apart. It is propagated from seed, preferably under glass, and then budded to secure the best strains." This last statement from the literature gives the apparent clue to our failure, because, even with stratification, the .seed apparently rotted and all life disappeared. It is about the same size as Caragana microplzylla and a little larger and flatter than Cara~ana PYgmea, but since all are legumes, it is hoped that the red-legged partridge will approve ,of these new "de s s " .which will be in his new American surroundings. ser-t ava'i Lab Le NoV! that a demand seems to be coming for more seed of this milk vetch, the Nursery plot was disced and fertilized in the fall and will be irrigated next spring to attempt to get a maximum of seed in 1960. Observations.--Not enough grasses and legumes have been : planted in plots over the. state as yet to be able to judge as to their potential value as nexting cover or for drouth resLs t anc e , but in the 2-acre plot at the Nursery several look better each year. The fact that several pheasants and 20 or 30 cottontail rabbits (plus worlds of field mice) found food and shelter in these plots much of the fall and winter, was very encouraging to project personnel until an inspector said it meant �-138- nothing to him. He said that only a definite increase in the bird and/or animal population would indicate a value. On such a small area, that is an almost impossible job, especially in view of the fact that stray cats and other predators are numerous in the communi tyo I-t;is planned to fence these plots and quite e large adjoining area next year to protect them from predators and give the wildlife safer quarterso Several of the more common grasses are proving their worth as was expected, but of the more exotic species, the elephant grass and Volga rye see~ to be especially vigorous growirig without irrigation. Elephant grass-_:PenisettiIIi purpureum-:--also known as Napier grass--was introduced into Galifornia and southern F~orida from Africa a number of years agoo It is said, in those regions, to grow to two to four meters tall~ but the __... _... _talle_st_i.t_ge_ts_here_is.__ about_lt_or~2 __ meters_a. The __ panicle __ is tawny arid Qften has a purplish cast.' The plants at the Nursery were grown from seed qollected.in 1951 on a visit to the Provincial Horticultural Station 'at Brooks~ Alberta 9 Canada. This grass "suckers'i rapidly and produce's a reasonable amount of ,seed larger than most of the wheatgrasses. No evLdence has been secured that any birds or animals eat it, m§,inly beeause most of the seed has been collected for further propagationo All three strains of Volga wild rye-~E'lymus giganteus-are apparently from the same original source, ,for there is no apparent difference in them as they are now growing at the ,Nursery. One plot came as plants from the old SCS nursery near Albuquerque, New Mexico. The others .came as seed, one from Pullman, Washington, and the other from Albuquerque. The seed produced here does not germinate9 apparently because it does not mature in such a short growing season" Inquiries indicate that it is germinated with difficulty in other nurseries, even at lower elevations and in warmer climates. Since it came originally from Siberia, it was hoped it would be a prolific producer herea Clones taken from plants in the Nursery start very readily in all places tried to date. Since that is the method used in other states for increasing this species, it will be continued until 'another and better method is foundo �-139- Pampas grass--Cortaderia sellonna--is a perennial reed with stalks often 8 to 10 feet tall. It is a native of Brazil, Argentina and Chile. It was planted in California a number of years ago as a supplementary dryland feed. Cattle are reported to thrive on it. Inability to propagate t}tis species from seed at the Nursery may be accounted for by the fact that it is dioecous since all of the stock at the Nursery has been grown from one single plant wh i ch survived from a shipment of 50 plants . pur-chaaed. Ln 1947 from a southern nursery. An attempt will .be made to.get another start of this species to secure plants which will cross pollinate with those now growil~ here and produce 'viable seed. . This grass makes· an excellent clump of tall, stiff folage which 'stands up very Hell during the heaviest snow storms. The stalks have been left standing on one plot at the Nursery-12 b~ 20 feet--for two years, thus making an extra dense thicket, even though the rcn;js--are-four-feetc-caIrart-* --,-.--------.Legumes.--A1Ilong the alfalfa strains to show the best early growth are the well known Vernal and Rha.zoma strains or varieties, and Plant Introductions froni Spain (P.I. 2l0763)? Afghanistan (P~I. 212861 and 212859), Turkey (P.I. 182229). The second Afghanistan strain (212859) is about a we ek behind the Spanish Introduction in starting i~ the spring, but has stayed greener longer during the hot part of the summer" Since the USDA Stations introducing these st:rains do not increase them for further distribution~ it is probable that individual plants of the selected varieties will have to be dug and planted in isolated places to get pure seed, or the rows at the nursery covered vii th insect-proof screens during pollination 0 ' Birdsfoot trefoil--Lotus cornicu1atus--seems to,be holding its own with the other legumes in the plot, but it is a slow starter in the spring ruld produces only a medium amount of seed as compared with severa of the other species. Date : by J_u--'ly •.... ,...__1,,;_9;;..;'9c..,- Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator _ ��1959 Ju1y!J -lh1- JOB COHPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of COLORADO Project No. \'1-79-R-6 Name: Hildlife Job No. _5__ Title: Habitat Improvement Studies Test various methods of establishing evergreens and broadleaf species for year-round transplanting. Abstract: Potting-equipment improvement was delayed pending new ideas being tried by others. Over 14,000 shrubs and evergreens were potted and established in frames. Idea of late.,..springand SUIllmerplanting is slow to "take hold". Objectives: To simplify and guarantee better surviva.l of those plants which have proved difficult to establish in ---------f-iErr-dplantJ.ngs. Progress of Hork: Inasmuch as two Colorado nurserymen and the State Forester were attem.pting to improve on potting equipment end methods, no new models or modifications were attempted during the year. It was decided to wait and observe the-other developments-before further work with present Department methods, although it must be admitted there is plenty of room for improvement. From 200 to 500 each of broadleaf shrubs and 9,687 evergreens of three species were potted and framed under shade. Potting was started March 25 arid continued to April 24~ with two machines going most of the time. Materials Potted 1958 Broadleaves Squawbush-Rhus trilobata canadensis • • Arnold's Havrthorn-Crataegus arnoldiana • • • • Succulent " " succulenta Nemeba plum-Prunus hortulana • • • Serviceberry-Amelanchier alnifolia Lilac-Syrin~a Vul~aris • • • Buffaloberry-Shepherida argentea •• • • • Mongolian cherry-Prunus fruticosa _" • • Snowberry-Symphoricarpos occidentalis • • • 0 • • 0 • 0 0 0- ••• 0 • 0 • • • 0 $ • • • •• • • • • • • 0 •• 0 • 0 •• 0 0 Total shrubs 595 194 576 501 608 600 580 540 575 4769 �S;,1Q -::-.JI< ~ _'. _ l' -142- Evergreens R. H. Redcedar-Juniper scopulorum • • • 7245 Platte Valley Cedar-Juniper virginiana • • • 223 Pinon pine-Pinus edulis • • • • ~ • •• 1314 Blue Spruce-Picea pungens • • • • • • • • • • 905 • 0 • material • • Total evergreens Total-all 0 9687 potted-14456 Some potted stock was transplanted at intervals throughout the summer with very small losses. The problem now appears to be one of getting others to realize the possibilities of extending the,planting season in this manner, tlJe same as commercial nurserymen are experiencing with container gro~~ nursery stock. ' 'Observations •,--Experience with last year's potted plants lndlcates that only small seedlings pfmost species ---.~-.... -~~can-be-potted--successful-ly-or" roots will-·sprElad-~so·-ra-pidly--~--··-·· that the plants cannot be removed from the frames without tearing the root systems apart. \vith only normal fertiliza ..... tion and irrigation even the smallest seed LLngs '. (4 to 6 inches) develop roots throughou,:t,the 2 x 2 x 9 inch tarpaper pots and often several inches into the gravel below. '\{i th most species :roots penetrate from pot to pot and form quite a compact mass, .requiring ,cutting to, separate the pots. ' It is, also apparent that broadleaf stock cannot be carried in frames more than one year before it ,becomes too large to move successfully. Evergreens, when slilallseedlings are used, Can be carried as much as two years. During the potting program it was found that tarpaper ,varies greatly in quality of the rolls and rolling. That bought because it was lowest in price cost much more in labor to cut to pot sizet,because the rolls had to be trimmed at the ends to fit the cutting equipment. Further, there was considerably more waste than with the few extra rolls of standard grade paper which were purchased later to complete the job. The difference in the original cost was only about 15 cents per roll, but the difference in labor to prepare the pots was considerably more per roll. ,Care of the plants while in the frames requires close attention to prevent red spiders, aphis and other insects from gaining a foothold due to the crowded conditions in the frames. Fertilization and irrigation, however, are easier and more direct f'or the same reason •. �Miscellaneous items.--Three amendments were approved for the project during the yearo Number one provided materials and labor to build two small carts for transporting seedlings to and from' the storage cellar. They wer-e constructed and serve the purpose very wello An amendment also permitted the purchase of a small fertilizer spreader which can be used either by hand or pulied behind one of the small "G" tractors 0 The third amendment provided partial salary for a graduate student to assist with the specialized work in seedbed germination. No student was secured, hence that ,part of the work had to be carried by the project leader and assistants, and was no t ad~ensi ve ?or as /ac;;rate as had been planned. . Prepared by ZJ{ect'''iL'~~tG , -, ------:--"Da~e-:-'-------Juzy,--'1959--' , -'-Appr6ve'd.--byh-Laure~E~~Riord8rl------'-~---' F'ederal ,Aid Goordl.nator Approved by --~------------------------ ,-" �� https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/bb9938a98ec07ad74a88db189a9e23cc.pdf 67ede18b513b7f9c3cff88b4dc2d3a9f PDF Text Text -145- State of JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO -----------~~.~~,.:~----------------- Title of Job. Period Covered: Waterfowl Kill Survey October through December, 1958. Objectives: To determine total kill of waterfowl by species. distribution of kill by county. To determine the distribution vals of the season~ To determine the of kill by inter- Value: The random kill survey permits us to evaluate the effect of the regulations on the kill county-by-county. This study has already given us a great deal of in-'---format±on-about-d±str±bution-of-huntirig pressures and kill throughollt--':-the-States,-'-' _._.'-.: and will be an invaluable aid in deterro.nirig the effect of special seasons that >, may be granted us in the future. In addition, it helps us weigh recommendations from sportsmen 0,[1 the basis of the importance of waterfowl, hunting in their particular area, so that hunting dates may be chosen on an equitable basis.' " Procedure: This random survey is conducted along standardized proceciures as recommended by the Waterfowl Biometry Office, Bureau of Sport Fisherie:;;and Wildlife, approved by the Central Flyway Technical Committee. It consists of randomly selecting a list of hunters, sending them questionnaires, and statistically ana.Iyaing the returns to remove the major bias to permit the best estimate possible,of waterfowl kill in Colorado. ;._ . �-146- ABSTRACT Results of the 1958 random survey of waterfowl hunters reveals that of the 36,397 Colorado duck stamp buyers, 33,773 hunted ducks bagging an estimated 206,015, and crippling an additional 29,048 for a total hunting loss of 235,063 ducks. The average season duck bag per hunter was 6.1 birds, and while mallards were still the most common species bagged, there was a large increase in the harvest of other species over past years. Hunting held up well throughout the season although the number of hunters decreased as the season progressed. Duck.kill estimates by county revealed that the eastern slope of Colorado again accounted for more than 75 per cent of the total state harvest as it has in the past. The high kill county was again Weld with Larimer second, and Logan third. For geese, an estimated 13,043 hunters bagged an average of 1.34 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 17,477 birds. In addition, another 5,016 birds were reported wounded b~t not retrieved for a wounding loss of 22.3 per cent, and a total hunting mortality of 22,493 geese in Colorado. It is believed that the increased average goose bag in 1958 was due to a later hunting season, and increases in water areas and numbers of geese wintering in the state. The southeast region again accounted for more than 85 per cent of the total goose bag with Baca, Kiowa, and Powers the high counties in that order. Species of Canada geese were reported to make up more than 90 per cent of the total bag. Considering all factors, it appears that the 1958 duck season was average or slightly above, especially in some areas; and the goose season was one of the most successful on record. I ~~~ ! I I I I ; : �-147WATERFOWL KILL SURVEY - 1958 B.Y - Jack R. Grieb This random survey of Colorado waterfowl is a cooperative venture between Federal Aid Project w-88-R and the Game Management Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department, Techniques ~ere the same as those used in the past, with selected hunters notified immediately preceeding the season, and a sample questionnaire included to show the questions that would be asked. After the season, the hunters were contacted a second time and requested to fill out "and return the questionnaire. One follow-up letter was sent to all non-reporting hunters after an interval of about two weeks, and the sample was concluded when the response to this followup had fallen off. " Questionnaires were sent to 6,000 randomly selected license buyers in 1958, and a total of 3,955 were returned for a response rate of 65.9 per cents Of the 3,955 returns, 3,021 reported hunting and 934 indicsted they did not hunt (probably fished only).. Thus, of the total license sales of 162,471 during 1958, it is estimated that 124,533 hunters, hunted one or more species of small game. To facilitate discussion, the remainder of this report will be divided into com~ ponent sections of waterfowl and upland game, '.;, WATERF01rJL HARVEST Colorado Duck Stamp sales are plotted -in Table 1 revealing that 1958 sales" of 36,397 were considerably below 1957 and more equal to sales in 1956 and 1955. No reason can be given for this decrease which occurred despite an increase in season length which resulted in the longest Colorado hunting season for many years. Table 1. -- Duck Stamp Sales for Colorado Number of Year stamps sold "per cent change from previous year ----------------~-~~~:-----------~----------------------~~-----------------------"-12.9 1958 - 36,397 1957 1956 1955 1954 ."" 41,794 ". 36,303 39,107 32,450 +15.1 - 7,2 " +20.5 -------------------------~-------------------------------------------------------Table 2 classifies Duck Stamp buyers by the type of hunting in which they engaged for the past four years. Thus, it appears that the number of duck hunters were -down slightly, and the number of goose hunters up slightly from norms of previous years. Average number of days hunted for waterfowl again drppped off from previous years, being the lowest recorded from the five-year period. No explanation can "'"':.be given for this decrease (Table 2). v ' �-148Table 2. -- Estimated,Number of Duck and; Goose ,Hunters, Averg,ge Number of Days Hunted and Season Length, by Year. " Bag and Average number Season length possession Number of Number of days hunted for limit (days) , goose hunters ducks and geese ducks geese Year duck hunters ducks geese' ~------------~-------~---------~------------------------~---------------~--------60 1958 13,043 90 2-2 33,773 5.78 4-8 1957 1956, 1955 1954 37,166 34,793 37,816 31,834 12,057 12,477 ,17,(S34 12,136 6.52 7.37 8.87 7.64 75 75 75 60 60 60 60 60 5-10 5-10 5-10 5-10 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 ---------------------------------------------------------------~-----------------, ' . Duck' Harvest Hunting statistics of the 1958 season are tabulated and compared with past ,years in Table 3. This reveals ,that the total retrieved kill of 206,015 was considerably below the record harvest of 1957. In addition, it was estimated that ,29;048 birds were knocked doWn but not retreived for a wounding loss of 12.3 per cent. This slightly below past years, and results in a total estimated hunting mortality of 235,063 ducks for 1658 in Colorado. Table 3. -- Duck Harvest Statistics, Year Number of Hunters Average seasonal bag 1954-1958. Total estiinated harvest Wounding per cent loss number Total est:imated - hunting mortality -------------------------------------------------------------_. __ ....._---------------6.1 206,015 29,048 235,063 1958 12.3 33,773 296,266 37,166 6.8 14.1 41,679 1957 254,587 221,932 16.3 36,195 1956 185,737 34,793 5.9 ,37,816 38,182 13.1 291,549 6.7 253,367 i955 . 179,856 1954· ' '5.6 210,252 30,396 31,834 14.5 ~., -----~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------,Tctble 4 tabulates the sp~6ies composa'tdon of the bag for 19~8 and compares it with the average of the four previous years. It is therefore shown that the total 1958 duck harvest was 6.5 per ,cent less, than the four-year average., There were distinct changes in species composition 'for the past' hunting 'season compared to the four-year average, '14allards, although still the most common duck bagged, decreased in per cent composition from the average, while other dabblers in- ' creased considerably. This is believed to be due to ,the early season which permitted a harvest of these spec Les while they wer~ present 'in pe~k migration numbers in the state. The take of divers we're decreased'during this past season, due to either the reduced bag on certain d:lver species, or to a reduced fall flight. Table 5, a tabulation of duck kill and hunting pressure by lO~day intervals of the season, indicates a high per cent of the total harvest occurring during the early part of the season which probably accounts for the increase in composition of earlier migrant dabblers. The harvest of ducks held up well all through the season, while the number of hunters decreased somewhat from the beginning to the end. Considering all factors, Colorado had a duck season which can be considered normal. Although there was some reduction in total number of ducks harvested, this was caused mainly by a decrease in the number of hunters, since the average bag remained the same as previous years. �-149Table 4. -- Species Composition of the Bag. "4-year average 1954-1957 Number percent killed of total 1958 ... Number Percent killed of total Species Percent change 1958 from 4-year average ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mallard 116,975 56.78 Pintail 8,241 4.00 Green-winged teal 23,464 11.39 Blue-winged teal 8,550 4.15 Cinnamon teal .02 41 Baldpate 7,767 3.77 Gadwall 11,290 5.48 Shoveller 2,390 1.16 Canvasback 1,648 .80 Redhead 1,710 .83 Scaup 1,277 .•62 Goldeneye .18 371 Bufflehead .18 371 Ruddy duck 62 .03 American merganser: .21 433 Ring-necked duck Wood duck Black ciuck Unknown & other kinds 21;322 10.35 103 .' .05 Coot Total 206,015 ioo.oo - 21 •• 4 + 18.9 + 27.6 +' ,1.1; 148,845 67.54 3.16 6,933 8.35 18,393 8,461 3.85 + 49 1,077 .49 1.18 2,592 1.36 2,996 2,172 .99 1.27 2,790 1,752 .79 501 .23 .16 354 .56 '1,235 256 .12 + 29 + 19 :13 + 21,919 9.95 + . 35 220,421 100.00 , 1/ '+621.2 ",' ':+335.4 + 20.2 - 24~1 - 38.7 .:.27.1 1/ II 11. Y y. 11 11 - 2.7- 1/ - 6.S .---------------------------------------------------------------------------------, " -1/ Estimates too small for accurate comparison. " Table 5. -- Ducks Bagged and Hunting Pressure by 10-day Intervals" of the Season 19 Estimated hunting Estimated "Average Birds bagged Pressure bag by Number of Percent of Number of Percent of periods Dates hunters total hunters ducks total kill -------~---------------------------------------------------~---------------------Oct. 10-19 32,282 8,680 15.67 25.7 3.7 20-29 30-Nov. 8 Nov. 9-18 19-28 29-Dec. 9 Dec. 10-19 20-29 30-Jan. 7 21,878 20,807 27,153 26,267 20,231 18,109 19,654 19,634 10.62 10.10 13.18 12.75 9.82 8,,19 9.54," 9.53 7",0257,329 8,713 8,612 6,957 ,6,180 6,349 5,370 20.8 21.7 25.8 3.1 2.8 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.6 25.5 20.6 18.3 18 .• 8 15.9 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------. " ,',' ". I' •• t' �-150Goose Harvest Hunting:sta,tistics of the goose. season are presented in Table 6 which reveals that an ·es1:;iIi'!:ated 13,043 (10,997 resident and 2,046 non-resident) hunters bagged an average of 1.34 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 17,477 birds. In addition, another 5,016 birds were reported wounded but not retrieved for' a wounding loss of 22.3 per cent. This permits an estimate of the total huntin€ mortality for Colorado during 1958 of 22,493 geese. Compariso'Il;withpast years reveals that 1958 had the highest recorded average seasonal bag per hunter, with a total harvest equal to the record ~ea:r of 1955. Comparison of the 1958 kill with the four.,.yearaverage indicated an increase of J5 per cent in 1958. Table 6. -- Goose Harvest Statistics, 1954-1958" .. Number of " hunters Year Average seasonal bag Total estimated harvest Wounding loss percent number Total estimated hunting mortality ------~~-----------------.:.-------.~----.---------.------~~--------------...;-----------5,016 22,493 19,062 4,473 3,116'" -------14~426-21,248 3,884 10,578 2,410 1958 :.' 13,043 1.34 17,477 22.3 1957 ,,12,057 1~2l 14,589 23.5 11;.310 2i~-6 1956 11,541 e 98 .1955 .. 17,364 1002· 17,711 18.3 1954 ,12,136 ""--. 061, 8,168 22.8 Four-year average: gocse.rharvest is 12,944 -- ).954-57. 'i \ . ----------------------------------..:.~---------~ •..~-----~~.;;.-----------.----------------- Species composition of geese killed were very similar. between all five years being 90 per cent or-above Canada geese. The remaining percentages for the five years were "other and unknown" species',of geese, and were actually probably Canada 'geese which the hunters were not able to corr ect.Iy identify. ' .r.:, The 1958 g~~se 'hunting season was characterized by excellent water and food conditions in t1;Ie:ArkansasValley during the fall.and winter periods" All reservoirs were brim-fuil with geese occupying most of them throughout the entire season. In addition, 'census figures indicate that a' record number of geese willtered in ·Colorado during'this interval. ".'This combinatj,on of larger numbers and 1-lide . distribution throughout the season undoubtedly m~de more birds, availaQle to more hunters resulting a larger than'normal average bag per hunter. '. ..in' Without questd.nn, Colorado l;tada highly successrul, goose season in 1958 which was well above the average;_. .'and approached record heights. . ~. . .' ,." ';l:' . . •.. Waterfowl Harvest £l CoUnty .. ..' .. t .. ,' The reader is cautioned that information presented in'thts section of the report is subject to a great deal more error in accuracy than es:U,:iiiat'es in previous sections, since the original sample has been broken down to a county basiS, thus decreasing the size of samples on which to base estimates. " ! �" .' " ....- .' " -151- Table 7. -- Duck Kill by Region and County. Four-year average 1954 - 1957 Waterfowl Region and County Number killed C6nt'd . 1958 Duck Kill. Percent of total Number killed . ' Percent of total Estimated 1958 hunting pressure Number Percent hunters of total ----------------------------------~------------------------------------------------WEST CENTRAL Mesa 7,968 .: Delta 4,316 .' Montrose 4,519 Ouray 397 WEST CENTRAL TOTAL 17,200 ,. 3.6 2.0 2.1 .2 7.9 3,502 2,266 4,120 412 10,300 1.7 1.1 2.0 02 5.0 2;8 i.4 1.3 946 473 439 68 1,926 .2 5.7 -------------------------------------------------~---------------------------------- SOUTHWEST -San Miguel Dolores Hinsdale Mineral Archuleta La Plata Montezuma San Juan SOUTffirJEST TOTAL 422 45 38 152 396 2,554 1,736 . 5,303 .2 186 T 34 .'.1 T T .1 412 .2 68 .2 .2 1.2 .8 2,060 206 1.0 .1 .338 135 1.0 .4 2.5 2,864 1.4 575 1.7 .7 .1 824 .4 135 .4 ~------------------------------.-----------------------------------------------------HIGH COUNTRY ., , Eagle, 1,622 Summit 127 Gilpin Clear Creek 6 Lake 310 Pitkiri'. 377 Gunnison 646 Chaffee 857 Teller' ' 60 Fremont " i,692 Custer '-: 560 North Park-Jackson 349. Middle Park-Grand .·331'. South Park-Park 732 HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 7,009 .. T .1 ~••2 .•3 '~4 .~ .3 T 412 412 824 1,854 124 1,236 ·1·-:tt30 . > .. . "i2, .'.618- .. ' .1 .3 3.5 206 --' . 7,540 .. -, _---' .. ,••. 2 .2 .4 •. 9 T ... .6 203 68 i69 13.5- .4,~ .. '34' el .2 .5 .5 .4 .i . 169 135 34 101' 3.7 1,183' 3.5 ~6 ..~5 .3 - ;.;', .- .1 .3 , '1 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .. , .. - Summary by Region NORTHEAST SOUTHEAST CENTRAL SAN LUIS VALLEY ... NORTHWEST ._ WEST CENTRAL SOUTHWEST HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 22.9 50,156 31,472 14.4 36.8 80,414 9.1 19,809 6,305 . 2~9 17,200 7.9 2.5 5,363 7,669 3.5 218,388 100.00 42,028 35,639 82,098 21,838 3,708 10,300 2,864 7,540 206,015 20.4 17.3 39.8 10.6 1.8 5.0 1.4 3.7 IDO.OO 0,315 ': 6,857' 13,845 2,363 709 , 1,926 575 1,183 33;773. . ....... I . IB.7 20.3 41.0 7.0 2.1 5.7 1.7 3.5 100.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------,------ '1' : I . I I -... I . "::"-'::-'_:'1.•. .' ," I I I I �-152- Table 7. -- Duck Kill by Region and County. Four-:yearaverage .... 1954 - 1957 1958 Duck Kill Waterfowl Region. Number P.ercent Ntlmber Percent. and County' . kil'led' of total killed of total Estimated 195/J hunting pressure Number Percent hunters of total --------------------------,;..----~------~----~-----~---.--------.-----------------------. , " NORTHEAST' ' Sedgwick Phillips Logan Morgan Was4:Lngto~ , .-. Yuma Lincoln Kit Carson Cheyenne 'NORTHEASTTOTAL 7,106 502 10,036 17,001 3,187. 5,4u3' , 2,754 3,182 985 50.• 150 3.2 .2 ' 4.6 7.8 1.5 2.5 "1.3 1.4 .4 22.9 5,975 412 15,246. 10,095 1,854,',, 2';884. 1,648 2,472 lo!442. 42,028 ~. 2.9 .2 7.4 4.9 .9 .L4 .8 1.2 .7 20.4 , . 946 135 1,553 1,824 405 439 372 405 236 '" 0,315 2.8 .4 4.6 5.4 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.2 .7 18.7 -----------------------~----------------------------------~------------------------SOUTHEAST Kiowa Prowers Bent Crowley Otero Baca Las Animas Huerfano Pueblo SOUTHEAST TOTAL 2,941 5,717 4,254 .5,345 2,304 '1,928 2,051 1,568 5~364 31,472 .. 1.4 2.6 1.9 2.5 1.1 .9 .9 .7 2.4 . 14.4 3,914 9~477 5,150 4,738 3,502 1,854 2,266 1.9 4.6 2.5 2.3 L7 .9 1.1 4;738 ' 35,039 2.3 17.3 777 1,520 912 1,013 . 642 608 372 34 979 0,857 2.3 4.5 2.7 3.0 1.9 1.8 1~1.1 2.9 20.3 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------. . CENTRAL Weld Larimer Boulder Adams Jefferson Arapahoe Douglas Elbert El Paso Denver CENTRAL TOTAL 35,916 17,220 10,75'1 10,247 2,018 2,057 93 799 1,247 16.4 7.9 4.9 4.7 1.0 ,80,414 . 30.8 .9 ' T .4 .6, . .' 32,345 19,984 10,507 13,391 1,648 824 103 15.7 9.7 5.1 6;5 .•8 .4 T '"4,559 .'2,904 ''1,992 :~-2, 702 439 540 101 13.5 8.6 5.9 3,,296, 1.6 608 1.8 82!098' ,., 39.8 13,845 41.0 -- B.O 1.3 1.6 .3 ---------------------~-----------------------~------~------~-----------~------------ SAN LUIS VALLEY Saguache Alamosa Rio Grande Conejos Costilla SAN LUIS VALLEY TOTAL 5,397 5,300 5,201 , 3,278 633 19,809 2.4 1.5 .3 7,417 . 6,387 4,326 2,472 1,236 3.6 3.1 2.1 1.2 .6 '743 '574 709 202 135 .1.7 2.1 .6 .4 '.9.1 21,!838 10.6 2,363 7.0 2e5 2.4 2.2 -------------------------------------~--~----~--------~----~------------------------ NORTHWEST Moffat Routt Rio Blanco Garfield NORTHWEST TOTAL 835 1,735 1,188 2,547 0,305 .4 .8 .5 1.2 2.9 412 1,030 824 1,442 3,708 .2 .5 .4 .7 1.8 101 101 135 372 709 .3 .3 .4 1.1 2.1 -------------------------------~---------------------------------------------------- �,5·;~O ... -153Table 8. -- Goose Kill by Region and County. Four-year average , _i9.54- 1957 .' , 1958 Goose Kill Waterfowl Region ' .':. Number Percent," Number Percent and County killed of total killed of total ...... ; Estimated 1958 hunting pressure Number Percent .hunters of total -----------------...• ----------------~---------.--..;.-.-•..-~~-------;.-..:...-------------------~ NORTHEAST- . .' .' .; - .- .. ....: ,Sedgwick Phillips' .Logan Morgan Washington Yuma Lincoln Kit Carson Cheyer1ne NORTHEAST TOTAL 122 6 84 464 19 174 4 51 32 956 .-'" . ' , .9 .1 .6 3.6" , ~2 1.3 T .4 .3 7.4 " < 39 .3 70 1,084' 87 70 35 87 .4 . 6.2 .5 .4 .2 .5 183 431 104 144 39 104 1.4 3.3 .8 1.1 .3 .8 1,433 8~2 1,044 8.00 -----------------------------------~----------------------------------------------SOUTHEAST Kiowa Prowers Bent Crowley Otero Baca Las Animas Huerfano· Pueblo SOUTHEAST TOTAL 1~806 14.0 1,973 15.2 955 7.4 303 2.3 •. 4 54 .,5,767 44.6 .... ~4 '51.· '._ ... .6 74 70 .5 11,05j 85.4 , 1,513 1,396 '1,043 613 287 4,956 ,_ 6.5 6.5 144 10,082 35 35 .2 .2 594 3.4 7.57 ",209 ',' 39 470 39 65 39 5.8 1.6 .3 3 •. 6 .3 .5 .3 .-,:1,618 12.4 , ,. -------------------------------------------------_._--------------.-.------------------ CENTRAL Weld Larimer Boulder Adams Jefferson Arapahoe Douglas Elbert El Paso Denver CENTRAL TOTAL 394 40 18 183 104 9 3.1 .3 .1 1.4 .8 .1 22 15 ' .,.2. .•1 785 6.1 .,.. !. 11.6 10.7 8.0 4.7 2.2 38.0 ' .5 .5 1~1 77.3 12.8 10.7 7.6 4•.5 3.8 4.5.6 .2 .9 •. 9' 87.0 . 2,237 - 1,870 1,328 .. ~.. ... 787 664 _.' .. 7,970 35 151 157 15,205 664 ' 3.8 . -.' ------------------.-----------------------~--------------.---------------------------- SAN LUIS VALLEY Saguache Alamosa Rio Grande Conejos Costilla SAN LUIS VALLEY TOTAL, . "': ,.", ~; - 5 T 9.1 14· .1 81 "6 - ~~ 5 86 T .6 -- ----.;..--------,-_-------::------------------------":""-------~-------~--,~----------.--------- NORTHWEST· Moffat Routt Rio Blanco , ' :-Garfie1d NORTHWEST TOTAL .--.-. -- �-154Table 8. -- Goose Kill by Region and County • . Corrt+d Four-year average .. :.. 1958 Goose Kill 1954 - 1957 Waterfo~l Region: .' Number Percent '. Number Percent··· of total and County killed of totai c· Killed Estimated 1958 . hunting pressure Number Percent hunters of total -----------.;..-.---------------.--_. .•.-----~.•..-~-------------'..•. _------,-_._--_._-------_ _----_---_ .. - '. . , .. WEsf CENTRAL Mesa Delta Montrose OUray WEST'.CENTRAL TOTAL 17 12 175 1.0 104 39 39 175 1.0 182 .2 T 29 .2 .•8 .3 .3 1.4 ------------------------------~--------------------------------------------------~-SOUTf!WEST San Miguel _ -- D610res .Hinsdale· Miiieral.. " Archuleta La Plata Montezuma San Juan SOUTHWEST TOTAL .. _ 6 T 6 -T .' . #_._ v-:-_r-: ---_ ;",,', .. -_ -. 39 ..•. 3 39 .3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------., r - 39 .... •3 39 Summary-by Region 956' . 7.4 1,433 11,053 15,205 85D4 6.1 664 785 14 .1 86 .7 29 •. 2 175 6 T _..-17· .1 12,946 100.00 17,477 ,:' NORTHEAST SOUTHEAST CENTRAL SAN LUIS VALLEY NORTHwEsT WEST CENTRAL SOUTHWEST HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL B.2 87.0 3.8 1.0 100.00 1,044 10,082 1,618 8.0' . 77.3 12.4 182 39 78 13,043 1.4 .3 .6 100.00 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------""" ... ; . ~,". \ �5~2 -155This is probably even more true of geese than for ducks, since there were many more duck hunters. Consequently, it is realized that in some counties, both duck and goose kill have geen over-estimated, and in other counties, underestimated. However, despite this error, these data represent the most accurate information on this subject possible at the present time. It is hoped to increase the accuracy of county data in the future. Table 7 and 8 compare the 1958 duck and goose kill respectively with the average of the previous seasons, by county within each waterfowl region. These regional divisions of the state were located on the basis of waterfowl migration, location, and topography, and permit a closer evaluation of kill, yearly changes in kill, and the effect of different types of hunting seasons on various portions of Colorado. Regional recap of the 1958 duck season as summarized at the conclusion of Table 7 shows that the Southeast, Central, and San Luis Valley harvest was slightly above the four-year average, with other regions similar or slightly below the previous years. The eastern slope again contributed to the bulk of the duck harvest being 77.5 per cent in 1958; 78.7, 1957; 71.8, 1956; 77.2, 1955; and 65.9, 1954 of the total duck kill. Weld, Larimer, and Logan were the high three harvest counties in that order. The 1958 goose harvest compared to the four-year average in Table 8 shows that the Southeast Region again accounted for more than 85 per cent of the total goose bag, with Baca, Kiowa, and Prowers first, second, and third in that order. Other regions were similar in harvest to past years. The goose season was closed in the San Luis Valley and Moffat County during 1958, so that no kill is indicated for these areas in the table. Jack R. Grieb Approved: ----------------------------------~~~~~~~----------Date: July, 1959 --------------~~~~------------Prepared by: ��-157- State of Project No. JOB COMPLETION REPORT LVESTIGJ.TIONS PROJECTS COLORADO W-__;;;.8,;;;;.8-__ R-.....,;.4 Work Plan No. ____~I~ ;Waterfowl Survevs and Investiqations ;_J~0~b~I~~0~.~_7~ Ti tle of Job: l'laterfow1Habitat Improvement _ Studies. Obiectives: To improve waterfowl habitat particularly on areas owned or controlled by the Game and Fish Department. To submit detailed habitat improvement plans for each area. Results: The work during this segment consisted of meetings with various agencies in the formulation of habitat improvement plans. Meetings were attended on the habitat improvement of Cobb Lake Management Area, the [:JellingtonGame Bird Refuge in Larimer County, and the Smith Property near Crook Colorado. The needs of waterfowl were proposed for the over-all plans of these State owned properties. Several meetings were attended with various members of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in connection with the Closed Basin Drainage plans in the San Luis Valley. Assistance was given the Colorado Cooperative l!ildlife Research Unit in the formulation of plans for extensive river bottom study on the Tamarack Ranch near Crook, Colorado. A meeting with U.S. Fish and ~ildlife Service Refuge personnel establishing the wetlands priority for Colorado and several others connected wi th the development necessary for wat.er-f owl. production in Brown spark were attended. I In all approximately Period covered: Submi tted by: 14 days VJere spent on this job. April 1, 1958 to Mar-ch 31, 1959. 7)1, G SM/d(}1~J Date: _'"-- __ J].lly, 1959 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��-159- COMPL'ET ION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS COLORjJ)O State of Project PROJECTS V!aterfowl Surveys and Investiqations No. _1~:J_:::..:8:::.:8::..;_::.:R..:.:;_;:..;4!__ _ Vlork Plan No. _~I _ Ii tle of Job: Survey of Potential Period covered: 9 Public \'Iaterfowl Shooting ',Teas in Colorado April 1, 1958 to I.iarch31, 1959. Objectives: (1) To develop a method for evaluating possible public waterfowl shooting areas in the State of Colorado. (2) To classify these areas. (3) ...To. summar i ze the findings into a list of t.he best potential public waterfowl shooting areas for possible lease or purchase. Results: No VJork was accomplished this segement due to a lack of time and personnel •. It is the plan for next year to have the student assistant spend a great deal of his time on this job in working up suitable forms for evaluation of tJ-ewetland areas. It is hoped to produce forms to be used by each Conservation Officer in his district resulting in a statewide cataloging of all waterfowl areas. Submi tted by: Date: le!. G. Sheldon Approved July, 1959 -------~~~~---- by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��July:, 1959 -16:tJOB COMPLtTION REPORT HNESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. __ .:..;.IV_=88~_;;;..R:..:._;;.;.11...:.. ; 1,JaterfowlSurveys and Investigations Work Plan No. II Title of Job: Experimental Populations. Job No. Studies on·Improvinq 2 Status Of Canada Goose Objectives: (1) Development and evaluation of techniques for initial establishment and/or increase of goose population on all major drainages in the State. (2) Perman~nt establishment of resident goose flocks on all large water impoundments and major river systems as determined by the preliminary survey of goose nesting areas in the State. (3) Retention of resident and migrant Great Basin goose flocks within the State for longer periods of time during the migration season. (4) Il1cre_9se_the size of the _Great Ba s i n. goose f Lock s wintering in the State. Procedures: Stated in past reports and will not be repeated here. Results: This report briefly summarizes the activities of 1958 in this phase of wor k , It is broken down into three portions for presentation; .(1) Status of past goose releases; (2) Release activities for. 1958; (3) Recommendations. San Luis Valley--No information was received in 1958, regarding 53 geese transplanted into the San Luis Valley in 1955 and 1956. the North Park--Forty-four geese have been transplanted into the Lake John area of North Park, of these--four band returns have been received from near :!alsenberg, Colorado. In 1958 one pair returned to the hay meadows near the original release site and were observed several times by Rancher ~'!alterBergquist. Another report of one pair on the North Platte River east of Lake John was received from Rancher Bill Riley. He sighted the birds on several different occasions. These could very easily be the same pair reported by Bergquist. In June the local W.C.O. Herman FJilson reported 7 geese on a small pond adjacent to Lake John and this report was verified by the writer the last week of July. Sometime between early August and mid-September this flock increased to sixteen geese. These remained until freeze-up, late in October. Another flock of thirty geese were observed in October on Butte Lakes by Conservation Officers. These geese also remained until the area was closed by ice. No new band returns have been received from this transplant and it is hoped they survived the past hunting season. Department personnel stationed in North Park reported seven geese in the Lake John area in April during the ice break-up. No further reports have been received. �-152- Cache la Poudre Valley--The experimental release of geese at College Lake near Fort Collins showed great promise. The 31 geese of the original plant were held in the College Lake are~ throughout the 1957 winter with grain, alfalfa and open water. In the spring as the birds paired-up, they began to scatter over the water areas just east of the foothills. This was very encouraging for it appeared the pairs were selecting breeding territories. It is not known that any were successful in nesting • . .. - A supplemental planting of 23 goslings was made 24 June 1958. The captive breediJ'}9flock at Bonny Darn produced_ eight of the young and 15 goslings were hatched at the Department's experimental Game Farm. Fifty egg~. (in.lieu Of goslings) were :takefl.fJ;'9In nests at Bowles Lake for this experimental hatching. The artificial incubation was not satisfactory because; a great many of the birds died in the egg a few days before pipping. Also seven young had upturned primaries on the wing tips and were permanently crippled. The .1958 reiease was leg-banded with the foliowing bands: 508-27880 881 882 883 884 885 508-27886 887 8$8 889 890 891 508-27892 893 894 895 896 897 508-27898 899 900 508,...27788 789 The supplemental planting increased the Collega Lake population, to a known total of 54 geese. Three pair of geese attempted to nest in 1958. All nests were destroyed by an unknown predator. A very big male raccoon was later.trapped and a large bull snake was seen near two of the nest sites. These are believed to have depredated the nests. Three of the current plants were found dead soon after release, (all crippled incubator goslings) apparently from compacted esophagus and .gizzards. \'Jhenlocated all had Green Needlegrass seeds. (Stipa viridula) tightly packed in the upper digestive tract. Another goose, a sub-adult, flew into a high voltage power line and was electrocuted. Late in July most of the geese returned to College Lake for moulting and stayed. through the 'fall and part of the winter .•..This was again highly encouraging because of the protection provided by restrictive regUlations of the area •• After the lake .was frozen over three geese Vlere killed by unknown hunters with 22 rifles. Five more were killed by feral dogs or coyotes, two being the mated pair that were pinioned. The others were believed to have been more of the crippled goslings. One young goose vias reported as found dead near Loveland Lake. This harassment by people and animals forced the geese to move to Reservoir No.8. This large body of "later is located northwest of Wellington and had a sizeable hole in the ice, kept open by the wintering ducks. . l �-163- As the break-up occurred the geese again appeared to attempt nesting as they redistributed on the water areas of the plains. The writer believes that the College Lake transplants show the most promise of all that have been made. Recommendation8: (1) A more complete search be made in North Park and the San Luis Valley, next year, to determine if any of the transplanted geese returne Because of conflicting investigations and a shortage of personnel during the past year very little time waS spent on this activity. (2) Since the Cachela Poudre experimental plants show the most success, all the available goslings be released at College Lake for the next few years. (3) By Commission regulation close all goose hunting on Larimer County west of U.S. Hi qhway 87 and north of U.S. Highway 34; all of Jackson County and the San Luis Valley to protect the released birds in these areas until they are established. Submitted by: M. G. Sheldon Date: July; 1959 Approved by:Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator ��-165- JOB COMPLETION REPORT 920G895 INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State Project ·of No. COLoRADO . W-I01-R GameRange InveSi;igation-s 2 --------------~------------- Job No.3 Work Plan No. Ti tiLe of Job: Rodent Effects Period April Cover-ed; on Deer Winter Range 1, 1958 to Jan. 1, 1959 ABSTRACT A study is being .made in southwestern Colorado by the Colorado Game and Fish Department to learn how rodent-s affect deer winter range in a pinon-juniper type. The study} located .Ln Mesa Verde National Park, is in its third ~ar-._ This, the third and the results Job Completion Report for the study, observed to date. '!wo ~hree-acre plots have been established; the:other is an unfenced control. presents th-e data one is a rodent-proof collected· :exclosure, and Rodent-s have been virtually exterminated .within the fenced plot by trapping. means of lirie transects and photographs the changes in vegetation resulting rodent controls will be determined. No'changes are yet evident. By from Deer have free access to both plots. Deer pellet-group check on the comparative use between plots. counts have been made to A part of the atrudy is a rodent census which is patterned after. the North American Census of Small Mammal s . The census will provide information about the number and .kinds of rodents responsible for observed changes in vegetation resulting from rodent controls. Six species of rodents were represented in thel958 census catch. Breeding.and reproduction were still in p:rogress in September. Plants comprising 4 species of browse were dug up and examined :for. evid-enees Of damage by rod.ents, insects, and disease. No rodent-damaged plants were found. ~y plants had been attacked by a fungus, and 'Vitches' broom" wag common. It has not been determined to what extent fungus is harmful to the plants, .birt it is suspected that some plants may be killed by it. r-, ��-167- RODENT EFFECTSONDEERWINTER RANGE Harold R. Shepherd INTRODUCTION Manywinter deer ranges in Colorado are deteriorating. They are often marked by the die-off of 'Woodyshrubs and by a scarcity of seedling shrubs. Gamebiologists have become accustomed to blaming over-use by big game and livestock. However, there is reason to suspect rodents may be partially responsible. In Mesa Verde National Park, in southwestern Colorado, it is reported that bitterbrush plants have been found girdled by rodents. Rodent damagedbrowse plants, have also been found elsewhere in Colorado. It is suspected that in some areas rodents may be largely responsible for the scarcity of bitterbrush and mountain mahogany seedlings. In any .sound program of game-range managementall of the factors :contributing to range use and deterioration .shou.Ldbe taken into consideration, including the effects of rodents. A study is needed to learn how rodents affect deer winter range. Such.a .stnrdy 'Was begun in August of 1956 in Mesa Verde National Park. It is expected that several years will be required to complete the study and accomplish its stated objectives . - .,------------_._--- ."._,-_. __ ._----_ _------- _--- - _,._ ... _- ------_, ---_----_ ... .._-_._ _ -_-------------._---------------_._--_" . ... .. . ---_._---._,., _ .. .... The first report on ,the St.udy was published in the Quarterly Report ,of the Fedeta1 Aid Division of the Colorado Cameand Fish Department for July, 1957; it is an '" account of the location and 'construction of the rodent exc losure. The second report, published in the same publication (July; 1958), is an account of the collection of the first data and the beginning of 'rodent controls. This is the third Job Completion Report on the continuing study. It reports the progress made during the period April, 1958 to Jan. 1, 1959 toward accomplishment of the long-term objectives of the study. OBJECTIVES The long-term, overall objective is to study how rodents affect ground cover, and reproduction of vegetation in a pinon-juniper with particular emphasis on browse plants. The objectives for the period covered by this report the :composition, type deer range, are as follows: 1. Collect plalit composition and density data from :established line intercepts. 2. Makepellet-group eourrbs, using e,stablished plots. 3. Continue rodent control inside the rodent exclosure. 4.. Makea standard trap survey of the small rodent population in an area similar to and adjacent to the control plot for the purpose of estimating .the population of the control plot. 5. In areas surrounding the plots determine the percentage of browse plants killed by the girdling 01' rodents. 6. Makephotographic records of vegetation from permanent photo stations. �-168- 7. Collect plants in the vicinity of the study, and press, identify, and 'mount them to provide a herbarium for positive identification of plants within study plots. PROCEDURE Line Transects Plant composition and density data were collected from 70 permanent line using the Parker-Savage method described in the previous report. Pellet':"group Plots Pellet-group data were collected transect'S, from 70 'Permanent 1/100 acre plots. Rodent Controls Rodent control was continued inside the Rodent Exclosure by trapping. The first period of trapping was begun April 29, and it was continued until July 15.. Both live and snap traps :were used. By May 26, enough traps had been :set to completely cover the plot with traps spaced 30 feet apart. Tp-appingwas discontinued until September 15. On this date the exclosure was covered with snap traps placed 15 feet apart over the entire J-acre plot, and trapping was continued until September 17; then all traps were taken up. Batt used;;:;;;Lfve trapc-s were-158,i ted with apples and dry oatmeal. Snap traps baited with a mixture of oatmeal, rais~ns, suet, and pean1,lt butter. Small MammalCensus Establishment of census of the Rodent Exclosure stations spaced 25 feet is comprised of a steel were area. --A permanent census area, Fig. 1, was .established south ';b.nJune. It is comprised of 8 parallel lines of 20 trap apart. Trap lines are spaced 200 feet apart. Each station or wood stake numbered with.an a.Iunrlnnm tag. Making the census. --The first census was taken September 10, 11, 'and 12. Three Muse1,lIIl Special .snap trap:s were set at each trap station, one at the station marker , one 5 feet north" and ore 5 feet south. A total of 480 traps were used. These were baited with a mixture of oatmeal, raiSins, suet, and peanut butter. DDTwas added t:o the bait to prevent insects from robbing the traps of it. Records were kept far: each animal .caught , showing the kind, location, sex, weight, total length, length of tail, ear , and hind foot. Records were also kept of the age Of each animal, and observations were made of present and past evidences of breeding activity and reproduction. Weather observations were made for trap days. Cooperating with N.A.C.S.M.--:Those in ,t,iliargeOf the study will cooper-abe with the M:visory Committee of The North American .Census of Small Mammalsby adopting its standard design and proeedures , and by reporting trapping data to it. Deposition of museumskins.--Museum skins were prepared of representative animals. A set of these was deposited with the Kansas Universi ty Museumof Natural History, another with the MeSaVerde National Park Museum,and a third was stored with other project data. Photographic Plots Photographs .01' the 4 photo plots were made as described in the previous report. �-169- Dead Browse Plants Examined To learn if browse plants are being killed by girdling of rodents, dead and partially dead plants were dug up and examined to determine the cause of death. From one to three-foot lengt.hs of attached main roots were included with each plant. "plants were closely examined for evidences of girdling, and the presence of fungus and "wit:c.hes' broom was noted. The plants examined in this manner included 97 dead and 18 live bitterbrush plants, 18 dead serviceberry plants, 23 dead sagebrush plants, 5 dead and 4 nearly dead mountain mahogany plants. II Plant Collecting Someplants not previously he:j:-bariumbeing maintained collected were identified :for the study. and pressed for the reference RESULTS,DISCUSSION .AND CONCLUSIONS Line 'rransect Data Number of species. --The summary of all line transect data for 1957 and 1958 is shown in Tables 6, 7, 8, and 9. Plants encounbezed along transects include 7 apecf.es of browse, 7 species' of grass and sedge, 29 -species of :forbs, and 2 species of trees. E.ffect of rodent control. --AB expected, there is no noticeable change after the first year~of'Iodent_control_ in plant density, composition, __and numbers. Slight differences between 1957 and 1958 data are attributed to sampling error and plant response to weather. Control and exclosure compared.--There are .slight differences in the 1957 data for plant density, composition> and plant number-sbetween the Rodent Control Area .and the Rodent Exclosure. However, these may represent only sampling error and not real differences in the vegetation. Pellet-Group Plots Deer pellet-group data for 1958 are shown in Table 5. Because of the great variation:' in the number of pellet groups per plot, the sample of 35 plots is not enough to indicate if there is a difference in deer .... use bet1Yeen the Control and Rodent Exclosure. Ei ther additional plots Should be established or all of the pelletgroups in both the Control and Rodent Exclosure should be counted in future years. Rodents Controlled Within the Rodent Exclosure rodents have been virtually exterminated, for although trapping was intermittently done from April 29 to September 17 the catch amounted to only 3 deer mice, 6 juvenile cottontails, 1 ground squirrel, and 3 chipmunks. In contrast, approximately the same number of traps set in the census area adjacent to the Exclosure caught 83 rodents in 3 days. Small MammalCensus The census was taken on three consecutive- days: September 10, 11, and 12. The results are shawn in Table 10. The kinds and numbers of rodents taken were as follows: white-footed mouse, Peromyscus maniculatus, 32; True white-footed mouse; Peromyscus truei truei, 13; Boyle white--footed mouse, Peromyscus boylii boylii, 3; Aztec Harvest mouse, Reithrodontomys megalotis aztecus, 29; meadowmouse, Microtus mexicanus, 5; Hopi chipmunk, Eutamias quadrivittatus hopiensis, 1. In all, 83 rodents were taken: 50 the first day, 18 the se-cond day, and 15 the third day. �-170- . . . .. . . .• .. .. .. . ~ TRAP LINes I TO1lIII ZOO ff. APART • • • • • • • • • • • • .• J::t . .. . . .. . . '.. ~. STATIONS Y-I TO J[-2.0 . \4-~I!!~-w~..... • • • " • • .• • • • • • • • • • • 145.9' cI'\. ~ ~ "I- ~ ':l Cj Cl ci. III -x. E-W ~..=.....;;.:_• ,. .. . .. .. E-W 158.3" .• .. ... . . . .• ... ~ ' . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . '.' ..~ RODENT CENSUS TRAP-LINE LOCATION MESA VERDE NATIONAL PARK FIG. 1 SCALE: I: e. 00 fI. 195'8 �-17~- 1 Table L --Evidences of Rodent and Fungus Injury to Bi tterbrush Plants, 1958 Dead Plants Plants Examined Rodent'; Girdled Fungus Present Only Witches' Broom Present Only Witches' Broom and Fungus Present Witches' Broom or Fungus Present Neither Witches' BXoom nor Fungus present 97 o 23 24% ,22 23% 14 14% 57 59% 38 39% 2 11% 6 33% 12 67% Live Plants o 18 1 5% 3 17% Number and percent of plants affected Table 2.-"'Evidences of Rodent, Insect, 1 Plants Examined 18 and Fungus Injury Plants. All j§tlants Dead, 1958 Rodent Girdled Fungus Present Only 0 Witches' Broom PreSent Only 0 2 11% of plants affected to S.erviceberry 1 Witches' Broom and Fungus Present Witches' Broom or Fungus Present Neither Witche,s' Broom nor Fungus Present Bark Beetle Damaged 2 11% 0 1 Number and percent Table 3 --Evidences J ,of Rodent and Ewlgus Injury to Big Sagebrush Plants, 1958 Dead Plants Plants Examined Rodent Girdled Pzeaerrt Witches' Broom Present RemarkS 23 o o o No other Fungus causes of death evident �-172- Table 4. --Evidences of Rodent and Fungus Injury to Mountain Mahogany, 1958 1 Plants Examined Rodent Girdled Fungus Present Only 5 a a Dead Plants Witches' WitChes' Broom Broom Present and Only Fungus Present a 4 Witches' Broom or Fungus Present Neither Witches' Broom hor Fungus Present 4 1 2 2 Nearly Dead Plants 4 0 0 2 0 Table 5. --Occurrence of' Deer Pellet Groups in .Ol-Acre Plots I:nside Rodent Exclosure and Control Area, 1958. Rodent Exclosure 'Pellet Plot Pellet Plot Pellet Plot Pellet Plot No. No. No. No. Groups Groups Groups GrouEs 8 1 0 22 1 15 29 9 1 0 16 a 23 30 9 5 24 0 10 1 17 31 3 5 10 18 8 11 1 4 25 32 9 12 2 0 26 a 19 5 3 33 6 0 20 0 1 34 13 27 3 2 14 6 21 0 28 0 35 7 Total No. pellet-groups= 95; Mean= 2.714; Range = 10; Standard deviation= 3.09; Standard error of Mean= •52 Confidence limits at 95 percent level: 2.7-+ 1.0 Plot No. 1 2 3 Pellet Groups 5 2 5 0 1 9 2 Control Area Plot No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pellet GrouEs 2 10 0 3 3 1 0 Plot No. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Pellet GroUps 5 1 3 1 1 2 .10 Plot No. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Pellet Groups 6 0 7 5 3 1 1 Plot No. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Pellet Groups 5 10 9 4 6 23 5 Plot No. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Pellet Groups 2 1 3 5 2 1 3 , L Total No. pellet-groups= 144; Mean= 4.114; Range = 23; Standard deviation= 4.334; Standard error of mean= .733 Confidence limits at 95 percent. level: 4.1 ~ 1.5 �Table 6.--Line Transect Data for Rodent Exclosure, 19570 Summar,r of 35 Transeets. I To;tal (em) Percent Density (cover Amelancn3:er~unrionaTse-rviceoerry) 6.92 2.5; Bo~2 . 13 .~rt.emisj_a I 2 .01 .02 2 2L07 ~Ol 10,15 6 88 .31 98 2 2.80 59 1.6e 2990 . 8.5JJ 22.73 1.oL 9.58 28.23 110 3.1L 21.19 004 70~02 291 oIL 11 '6 8.31 .31 .02. 1.32 bJ..jO .06 4.37 14.55 3 U6J 217 008 6.20 291 8.31 Speciee and Measurement.s Inte;rce.pt gnapha.Lode s Artemisia trirlentata (big sagebrush) Cercocarpus montanus (mountain mahogany) Cnrysot.hamnus depre ssua (rabbitbrus!:l) . Pur shi.a tridp.ntata (antelope bftterbrush) E.y;nphoricarpos spp, (snovbe r-ry) Total br-owse p'l~ropyron smithii (western. wheatgrass) C", ,ex spp. (sedge) . . !'-;-)elerin cristah (junegr<;iss) Pc;:;' lc>ngi.ligul~ (longtongue mut.t.ongrass FcC' nra tense (lientucky bluegrass) titipc c cmat.a (needle-ano-thread gr~5s) S:i tar,'; on hy s t r-Ix (souirreltan grass) rbtal grass an~ sedge ,~.s t s.r r ubr-ot.Lnc t.us ;;_s tr« ga 1'.11': sc cpul.or-um 11 nt.ennar-La spp. Ba Lsamor-lrl z..EJ. sagi ttata 1~16 115 ) 1St! r'L 0 2.90 Percent ~Mean Composition Number Number .Plants Plants 0• .31 .os .05 .0, 001 .0L 2 030 .18 .99 3 38 .08 1.08 6.11, 20.33 565 16.]~ !31l .10 .32 3 ,,08 1 T T 1 T 119 105 2]153 I .0, i18 .05 .17 6 .17 Con.andr-a : 4 .01 ~O)~ 3 .08 .07 .25 23 065 .03 3 .08 16 .45 33 .911 T frigeron divergens Er i ge r-on philade1ph:l.cus Erigeron Eriogonum spp , subalpinu.rn Eriogunul11 umbellatUJll He1iRnthu5 nut.talii Lupinus aduncus Li t.bc s pe rmum ancust.Lf'o l.Lum :Lin urr, levisii L",,..tuc ••. SPP •.• ~ I -4-- C:irsiw" f'lattense umbe LLa t.a I I-' '26 I : 3 ---.01 148 183 .lL .~2 0l!5 1.73 1 T T 1 L S .OJ .0L 1 T .01 .05 3 ~O) .03 3 3 .08 .08 I eJl ~~ , l.;i.:l �(~n :~hl' J'~ Table 6. --(continued) Total Species Intefcept (eM) and Mea,surements Lomatium simplex Hal vast.rum coccineum Opuntia spp, Penetemon comarrhenus Phace1ia heterophyla Penstemon caespitosus Solidago pe t radozLa Senecio sppo '"~ragopogon spp. UnknoWnforb Total forbs (perennials) Lappula sppo Orothocarpus purpureo albus Polygonum sawatchense Total annuals Total vegetation (except If - trees) Pinus edulis (pinon pine) Juniperus utahensis (Utah juniper) TotaJ. trees --_--------------r----- Perce~~rcent:---Total Density (cover) Composition .. Mean Number Number Plants Plants TTl T 2 i .01 -~1')'2 2 .05 9! 13 . 41:,12 .03 - .03 .12 039 2 3 .05 .08 363 i 229 l 1.04 .f>5 3.L3 70 2.16 LJ.l .:!.1 2.00 1.25 -- ...' --- : -.:.--- 2 990 .01 .02 2.f33 9.33 2 218 6.23 1 T T 1 --~"""T 39 Lo .11 .11 .37 .37 42 1.17 1.17 10591 30 26 100.00 1115 31.36 4103 i 326L 7367 11.72 9033 21.•05 55.69 Ll 1.17 41.:..31 2L .68 ' :)..00.00 65 1.35 .on _'-_.,. 0 4 - H .05 I ,~ -1 ,f.:.I �Table Species 7.~-Line Transect Data for rlodent Control and Measurements Amelanchier alnifoUa {servj_ceberry)-~---~72 Artemisia' gnaphaLodes . Arteinisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Cercocarpus montanus (moountain mahogany) Chrysot hamnus depressus (rabbitbrush) Purshia tridentata (antelope bitterbrnsr" Symphor.icaroos spp, (snowberry) Total browse Agropyron smitbii (western wheatgrass) Carex spp, ( sedge) . Koe l e r-Ia cristata (junegrass) Poa longiligula (lor.gtongue mut tong rass ) Pea pratense (kentucky bluegrass) 8tipa comata (needle-arid-thread grass) Sitanion hystrix. (squirreltail grass) Total grass and sedge Aster rubrotinctus Astragalus scopulorum Antennaria sppo . Balsamorhiza sagittata Cirsium plat tense Comandra umbel1ata Erigeron divergens Erigeron philadelphicus Erigeron spp , Eriogonum subalpinum EriogomlJTl umbellatnm Hel.Lant hus nuttalU'Lupdnus aduncus L1t..hospermum anguatdf'o l tum LinulTllewisii Lactuca spp. Area, 191)7.! ~umrr:ary fotal Intercept Percent iJJnsi ty (em) (~o7er) .:.-2135 299 13h9 3601 2.3' L.I{i ----. 6.10 .135 J.85 . 10. ':29 .07 8979 11 6. 20.3 939 25.6.5 1 81 T .23 l2hl .OJ M .5g 2.68 )5 Transects. of Percent Comoosition Total 'lumber !'''ean i'lumber - Plants Plants lh.'.O -- .- 33 .9L --2.51 .08 2.31 J~20 -l9.lu 2.6t3 12.10 32.29 • zi 80 .52 .10 0 .0.5 10132 8. '~2 -88 3 81 112 1 318 .9 "2 157 Lh6 .02 9.08 .25 .05 1~•.1"9 12.71..• T ). .02 39 loll 3054 073 11.12 65~ 19.69 29 • 013 0.,-0 6 ~17 . 8 .()2 0 tt5 1 .82 .13 01 owO "n .:::.v 6 .()~ 4 011 hI ~05 7 .12 .37 39 1.11 ..15 .46 13 .18 .51 ,J? 002 .02 -.-" .51 64 ')... 10 o()} .57 .09 4 .01 .'11, 13 1 1 1 T T 1 • -, ~ O·? I.. i~~q :.;.;. ~~ ".J �tJ1 ~.~'~.:::. :JO Table 7.--(continued) Total In t.e rce ot (em)' Percp-nt Pe~cen~-Tota~",an Den s.i t v Compos i t Lon Numoer :·;!.li11ber (~()vel")' flants ?13r.ts ~~--~-'-~---:-()l ~----~()) ~ 7 ---~-~ SpecLe s and Heasurements . r;omati~l1 simplex Halvastrum cocc Inaum Opuntia spp. :Penstemon comarrhenus Ptiacelia heterophyla Penstemon caeRpitosus Solidago petradorla Senecio spp. J 2')7 280 i Tragopogon spp, Unknown forb Total f'or'bs (perennials) Lappu'In spp, Orothocarpua purpureo albus Polygonum sawatchense Total annua Ls Total vegetation (except I .rn .03 2 • :i:; ',-> 2 66 --91 oRO 2.':;1 60 T 1 1 2),) 7 8.50 , T .02 2.1,3 --18 · 0 ~, ."1)(' 7060 .05 2~60 ., "71 •• I .J... ,,~ ~'.)t:: .()2 6.9L I !--' ~ .16 18 • OS .16 18 .51 (Ie: ...• , 18 .51 11152 ·... u.o.·~o reo, JO 1239 35.110 Pinus edulis (pinon pine) ;422 150 '~9 69 99 232) 6.6L .30.01 t!J 28 1.22 Juniperus Total 71 ~ utahensis trees trees) (Utah juiliper) .." 77h7 22~·13 I ----...-~-- _-- __ __ .. . »v , 0 lOO$CO 'lr; ,·...;v n •••• .c:ou~ "l.' , I �Table 8.--L1oe Transect Data for !t.,d~ntExc Iosur-e , 195~. Summary of 35 TranseetE •. , . Percent ~-------percent:---TOtil-~Hean 'Iotall . Species and Measurements AmelanchieralniToD..-.BTserviceberry). Artemis5_B gnaphalodes Artemisia tridentata (b:tg sagebrush) Cercoca.rpus monbanus (mountain mahogany) Chrysot.hannus depre ssue (rabbitbrush) Purshia tridentata (antelope bitterbrush) .Symphoricarpos spp. (snowberry) Total browse Agropyron smith!i (western wheatgrass) Carex spp, (sedge) Koeleria cristatli (junegrass) . Poa longiligula (longtongue muttongrass) Poa pratense (kentucky bluegrass) Stipa comata (needle-and-thread gr~As) Sitanion hystrix (squirreltail grass) Total grass and sedge Aster rubrotinctus Astragalus scopulorum Antennaria spp •. Ba.Lsamcr-hi.za sagittata . Cirsium plat tense Comandra umbellata Erigeron divergens Erigeron plUladelphicus Erigeron spp. Eriogonum suba1pinum Eriogonum umbe1latum Helianthu~ nuttalii Lupinus aduncus Lithospermum angustifolium Linurn lewis1:t . Lactuca spp. Lrlterce~t .Density ComposLt.Lon (em) I· (cover) --~.4 I 2.8LJ ~llJo05 1 T T . 2177 6.22 22.01 75 .21 076 916 2.62 9.26 3147 8.99 31.82 r Humber Plants 5 1 91 2· 65. 113 290. 6 7310 9 6 380 20.89 .03 002 1009 3~8L 2 206 1005 2.87 10016 378 7J~90 .09 .06 Number Plants -0~51 .02 2.60 .05 1.86 3.22 8.26 .17 .05 S.88 10.80 I I--' 2 001 .02 1 .02 -.:) 1'4 .21 1.10 ,li.22 .01 14.92 .03 .03 )8 6L3 .3 I 1476 .75 :3 3 81 .D1 .82 3 !23 .01 001 .03 .03 9 J 2. 6 2 3 3 18.39 .09 .07 .17 .07 .09 .09 .03 005 .09 16 016 16 046 9 .0.3 .09 8 .23 10 .03 .05 10 13 .29 17 72 .21 .10 .11 .73 17 .49 1 .02 007 5 .u, --- -~- ~l .37 (~J1 >'" , i;..·xi <t:.> f �(;n .j,':)";: (~ Table 8.--(continuad) Tota] Species Irrte rce'pt and Measurements (em) Lomatium s3mplex r~alvastrllm. ccccdneu= Opuntia spp. Penstemon comarrhe~us Phacelia heterophyla Penstemon caespitosus Solidago petradoria Senecio spp. I'ragopogon spp, Unknown forb Total forbs (pe renata l s ) Lappula spp, Orothocarpus purpure o albus Polygonum sawatchense Total annuals 'l'otal vegetation (9x~ept trees) Pinus edu11s (pinon Junape rus utahens1s Total trees pine) (Utah juniper) -.-- ._-_--- --- ! Percent Density (cover) Percerit -'-'lotaT- '~'~eari Number.: Comoosition NumberPlar.ts Fla!1ts i i! .01 .03 .02 2 .07 9 .09 2 .07 3 001 2 1 .02 267 .01 .76 70 2.00 218 .62 ~03 .• 05· 2.70 2.20 1 --733 T 55 ? 5 .07 n .91 ------- r 1 .O~ 2~1l 7.l'L IS8 5.72 ', •.•.v --c 0 -1.65 $5 .16 --58 .56 58 1.55 9889 28,.25 100.00 1188 33.9L 3865 33,51 l-l.:C'!, 53.56 7216 20.62 L6oL4 100.00 Lo 2L l~JL! 9057 6L J.• 82 --._-- -- -. --_._-------" .-. r 0 •••• -_ .. ---_ .._ .._------_._--_ .... _--_. I ~~ -.1 OJ I .68 _._._- �Tabll'! 9. --Line Transect Data for Rodent Control Total! Intercept (em) I Amelanch1er alnifolia {s'ervic€OercyT---~--~~-I5Ti9~rArtemisia gnaphalodes :-:-- . ."..rtenisj_a t r-Ldent.a ta (big sagebrush) 1940 i Cercocarpus montanus (mountain mahogany) 271 Chrysotharrmus depr eas us (rabbitbrush) 992 Purshia tridentata (a.ntelope biHerbrnsh) )652 Symphoricarpos spp. (snovber-ry ) LJ Total browse g5~7 Agropyron smithii (western wheatgrass) 25· Carex spp, (sedge) 5 Koeleria cr-Lst.at.a (junegrass) 284 Poa longHigula (longtongue nut.t.ongre ss ) lLlh Poa pratense (kentucky bluegrass) Stipa co~ata (needle-and-thread grass) ·114 Sitanion hystrix (squiI-reltail grass) Total grass and sed~~ 1842 Aster rubrotil1ctus 4 i Astragalus scopulorum Antennaria spp, 32 Balsamorhiza sagittata 2 .. 8 i Cirsium plat tense Cornandra umbe11ata 6 Erigeron divergens 57 Erigeron phf.Lsde Lphi.cus ---I Erigeron spp, EriogonulTI suba Lpdnum 1S Eriogonum umbellatum 3S Helianthus nuttalii 11 Lupinus aduncus 4 Lithospermum angustifolium 1 Linum lellisii 3 Ii Lactuca sppo Species 3.5 'I'r-an se c t.s , Area J 1958 • .sUJm~ary of .!lnd Measurements I Percent . Percent -- Dens Lty Conoos i.t.Lon (cover) G.7~-~rr;-:-7Jj --- n Total ~(.:ean Numoe r NumberFLant.s Plants 313 1.~iJ9 5.SL 17 ,_,4 82 .77 20 2"ll2 3 'u· 2.,9) 8.87 65 .09 1,,86 10.~3 012 32.65 108 3.09 oJe 76o~0 1 .()2 . 2.54 296 18 3' 196 B.!Al .51 1206~ L80 211040 .07 • en .131 . LoOt. .~2 (\1,,.. .09 5.60 )3.71 I oJ3 5.21 .01 .09 .30 .136 727 20.77 .•oL 1 a02 .11 .06 ,-' .23 1 02 0 16 M 0 .29 )-1 .oi 002. 2 002 .01 007 005 8 6 016 .51 57 1.63 004 013 .)1 .10 1$ .1.:3 .04 :r 1 1 .03 3 .10 .03 .01 T .01 I~ \ (_) I .17 17 .L9 3 .09 .02 .02 .09 tn ·"J~t· ..· , \: r:r.A~ \"_ . �'~)1 ")'1" '(,J' . , T D.;)J..l~ r-. 7, t·rnusn ~) ( --\con Lot.9_1 ---r~~-rcer~t - re-1~~2-ii-t Int,:'.:.:'c~pt Density ::;C'<'lDOSit ion (em) i (co~:er)' 'll'r;-o-r,-·la--T'"h"l"· -um--s-)_,"-' m-"-p.,,l-,"'-.x-------------------~-..l..:....!..---.:---:T~-:--T Species and Jv!ea~u:Mrnent5 -Tot.al -~~ean :';ufli~r ;:'lsats t~UJTIbeI' 1 Plants > 0,- 1 .02 2.l.IJ i. i~J ..•_- :-ialvastrum cocc ine um Opunt.La spp , Psns temon comar-rhenus 1 T T Phacalia het.ez-cphyLa Penstemon caespitoR~S 300 035 2063 85 269 i ~77 " 0 f!'1L. ;:; 1 1 T T 50, So 1idago pe t r-adorLa Sene~io Sppe Trl.igQPogon spp. unknown forb h .01 755 2t;>l3 Polygonum sawat.chense 1.11 II 1" Total annuals Total vegetation Total f'or'bs Lappula spp. Orthocarpu8 (~r8I"nials) , "':> .02 J. .r)2 , ." ,j. .oL L .11 ~: '7~ "")0 f ~ 26::. 7JO , ?urpureo albus .• __ lo,.,. trees) 111.35 .12 31.36 Pinus edulis (pinon ptne ) Juniperus utahensis (Utah juniper) Total trees 6 .•. " " -_ 17.75 3156 9370 9.02 2:$_ 77: (except . .,., • 1-: 037 037 I ~ Lu. l.l7 Ll 1.17 ):3. Cr2 1-:)0. (1) OO.~L l.' •.• 3Ja58 33 108 00 73 'r ~~ 0 )'32S ~,r) , ~I ...L., i.Ll .?L ~.o8 (i.· �-l~l- ,.~·..e;:.!.t.II€:C: ., 1. ... ~'rom tl'IT.E 0': se t.t.i nz._.. to fj .. r s i; visit: Cle.rcl' and \'!dl'":1~~ 2. from first t~ sEcond vjsit: Clear Bnd warm J. /!'(lT~, second .t.c t..hjd. visit: Cl.cai' and 'r,Erm t:h,rin;; d~'~'. ClGuLij ,3t ni;{ht. ::>1..3in 'T'vrninG of t.l':iJ.'(~ day , Type of' t.r-s o : ~:'nap t!.'G!p. ruse um ~,pE:cial TypE cf b<1it: :':ixturf oat.me a L, peanut but.t e r , r-a i.se ns , suet., (DllT) :-:;kins: :j~2.':erfitj of Kansa s !.Iuseum ~D ' ~\r~ crotus "-'pee) es t CJ k'en: -ce l'1.... ,or0, d OTll,C'nlYS mer.:"..,1~~ ti .a s , ?q '-'; ."..".. _ ___..,..-- mexf.canus ..,--_ , 5;. J'e r cny scus t.r ue i, 13; fer('!l!YfC'J~ ~(;'J],3ttlS, 32; L ;.ta '"j,<:! c; (iliad l'i vi 1.ta tu::; hq_-.j e n s Ls, 10~ ot.a l , ~3" F'Lrat. Day: Spec i.e s Loc'.)tion ·Sf'X i'.'eight (,,; v .:':;" I Toti!.l Tail Lengt.h ('11m) Foot (mm ) (mm) , Cmm) 1-3 r: R.p. I-I. P.!~ • 1-r; 13b H.- -2n:~-?'-'-:-'-l1i2' l()~l V 1.37 R.rr. R.r. 1-6 1-7 . P.:ro.) .l.-t,;.... :' '-..,'p:!:e~:--"-'-I-~-~- R.il:. ' PelT'. P.lT'. P.rr.. P.r.. P·.M•. TV\. m , R.lr.. P.rr.. P.rno P.b. P.m. ~ Q 1-13 1-13 I-UI 1-19 II-I Il-L 1I-f3 11-9 II-17 111-3 9 C; , ~~ F ~ b.l 115 ' 11.;. 136 .? 27.0 IS1 ~.~ 7.3 8.1 116 '21:.7 ri' 10.3 ' 167 133 F 19.2 ISh 155 !I.~ 20.8 25.0 11.6 18 5 152 F F 30. (1 IJ~7 29.7 164 },I, ~C.l 1l.2 15 1 TC'':) 1;1' 0 R.n'. Po t , III"7 III-12 III-20 R.Jl'.. 1\'-6 F H ~~ R.rr.. Po!!'. Iv-6 J'\1-7 IV-13 IV-17 M j'" F . 121 F ~\ir '" Ill-II lot F 1"1 0 62 116 109 ,-,.),.) 136 166 1'1,'-19 " 17.9 M H 19.7 ~ oIr .• 1:V-19 V-l 119 112 HI7 160 116 167 179 P.b. 17.2 lL8 V-7 1'1 23.1 :?mo '1-9 M m. V-IO V-13 v-16 TII-18 Vl-19 VII-6 . 1" F F 26.9, 24.5 13.5 147 166 127 139 17.0 2100 IP'o2 10.5 186 153 130 ~~.~ . P.t. P .b. P, t , ~.~ 0 R.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. R.m. 1"1 j :H -·M F 0 5.8 2l.~ 29.] 3303 boylij, 3; Se pt, 10, 1958 ;"~:r• L.7 Pe!'(.Jil',)-'SCU~ l.3R EHI" Hind Remarks 42 1L 16 juvenile 63 12,', 12 Adult lactating ..'$1--:---'19-'-'18 "-Kaillt-;-Tefstes-~rcrotal 59, ],9 18 !ldult~ Testes scrota.l II.; 12 Juvenile 64 15 16 Subadult. Testes scrotal t Lact.a ting 63 17, 18 .f.,d111 60 12 16 Juvend Ie 59 12· ' 16 Juvenile 71 17 Adult Lact.a tdng 19 66 13 16 Adult 66 19 19 Adult lactating 62 17 18 l~dult.· Teptes scrotal 25 J), Adult Testes scrot.al 17 52 12 1, Jm·enjJe 70 Adtl.1t 17 18 61 18 .Adult •. Embryos 4 19 68 19 16 Adult lactating ]8 60 18 Adult 0 Testes scrotal 68 13 16 AduU., Not lactati.ng 76 22 Adult 25 51) 12 Ie -Juvena.Ie 13 53 Juvenile 15 60 17 AduLt., Testes scrotal 19 10 20 71 Adt!lto Testes scrotal 29 13 18 Adult 0 Embryos 2 26 76 20 Adult 89 26 21 Adult 61 20 17 Adult. Test.es scrotal 18 20 59 Ad.ult. 'Testes scrotal 18 65 18 Adult Testes scrotal 26 13 20 .Adult 70 J6 Adult 1'-1 61 18 16 Adult 115 26 21 Adul t., Testes scrotal 69 15 16 Adult. Testes scrotal 65 16 Adult 13 ,6 0 ~/ 0 �-182- Table 10.--(continued) Species Location Sex \·.'eightTotal (gm) Length P.m. VII-l0 F P.m. P.t. VII-IS VII-16 VII-19 VIJ-20 VIII-1 VIII-!l VIIl-9 VIII-12 VIII-IJ VlII-IL VIII-Ill VIII-I6 11 F F ~; F F- (mm) P.m. P.M. ~ .•m.. R.m. R.m. H.• m , P.t. p.t. P.t. P.t. - 22.0 19.9 32.1 29.8 20.6 1'8.6 16.6 13.1 18.9 27.9 J,~ -F f .N 12.5 - ' ~f; 20.0 M 2L.o 163 153 182 161 161 150 1/,0 1Lo 1it8 20) 152 170 175 aind Remarks foot (mm) (mm) (rom) 69_ 21 21 AduR 20 Adult. Testes scrotal 69 17 22 82 s8 Lactating Cldult 18 6~ 19 Adult 72 - 18 18 Adult Not lactating Adult69 14 13 67 14 15 Adult. Not lactating 68- 15 16 Testes scrotal Aqu1t 70 15 17 Adult. lactating 22 Adult 101 28 26 Subadult 23 7L 21 Adult 79 25 21 Adult 26 83 Tail Ear Second Day: Sept. 11, 1958 -- ---~----R.m;-'---------I-3--c-~f ___ 5.-6qU P.m. P.t. P.m. - P~:n. R.m. P.m-. R.:n. P.m. P.m. p.m. R.:n. 1-9 1-20 II-6 III-18 IV-I6 IV-20 V-10 V-16 VI-L VI-16 VII-1 l'1.:n. VII-L P.m. VII-Ill R.m. VII-17 P.m. VII-19 P.m. VIII-2 P.m. VIII-20 i'~ F F F M F F F F F 149 192 151 127 147 166 133 lL7 6il 91 $9 33 68 68 59 21.2 17.0 14' 51 1.59 139 120 ILl 1L2 16_2 129 159 60 1u 17 18 19 68 21 56 66 73 57 65 14 18 13 20 16 19 M 1-1 F 22.5 f.,l M 11.2 19.9 F ----5-0- -12-- 17.0 32.2 18.1 19.0 -13.2 22.4 11.1 23.0 10.L 30.L 15.9 12.6 M --117- 54 : 122 1958 t SeEt. 152 73 18 26 16 16 15 la i2 ---16---Juvenile20 Adult 22 Adult. Lactating 15 Adult 18 Adult;. Part tail missing 16 Adult. l'e-stesscrotal 19 Adult 15 Adult 18 Adult 17 Adult 18 Adult 18 Adult. Testes scrotsl 11 Adult. J,mbeyos 2 19 Subadult 15 Adult. Testes scrotal 20 Adult 18 .subadult 19 Adult. Testes scrotal Third Da P.t. R.m. R.m. R.m. R.m. R.m. R.m. M.m. P.t. 1-L 1-13 I-14 1-16 JV-5 IY-6 IV-20 IV-11 V-1B R.m. VI-l R.m. VI-I.) R.m. VI-17 P •. t. VII-20 E --l.II. VIII-IS P.mo VIII-20 F 1 .9 F 5.6 6.7 12.0 M F .It' M F M M 'l' M F 9.6 14.1 29.5 13.7 1.).2 12.9 6.5 M lu.8 F M 55.4 21.0 115 118 Iho 120 56 60 65 ,5 25 12 12 15 13 23 17 lU 16 136 135 IS.) 147 11~2 115 154 215 155 65 )2 1S 65 70 58 71 91 15 11 2.) 16 15 13 25 16 14 21 16 17 15 21 27 18 19 64 16 20 Adult Juvenile Juvenile Adult Subadult Destroyed. Adult' Adult Adult. Testes scrotal Adult Adult Adult. Testes scrotal, large -Juvenile Adult. Testes scrotal, large Adult.. Placental Bcars 5 Adult �-183- Table ll.--Sex, Age, Breeding and Re~roductive Data for Rodents Trapped in Census Area September 10, 11, 12 of 1958 Species R.m. P.m. P.t. P.b. M.m. E.q.h. Totals: l. M F Adult Juvenile Sub-Adult Lactating 13 16 15 4 1 3 1 40 17 29 10 1 0 0 0 0 11 2 2 2 17 9 2 2 0 43 12 3 5 1 67 1 0 0 0 5 3 2 1 1 0 9 Testes Scrotal 6 10 2 2 2 0 22 Embryos 0 1 with 4 0 0 2 with 2 Placental scars 5 Only those females obviously pregnant were dissected. A summary of the sex, age, breedigg and reproductive data is given in Table ll. The catch was comprised of approximately half males and half females. Eighty-one percent were adults, 6 percent -were subadults, and 13 percent were juveniles. Twenty-six percent of the adult females were lactating. Not all females were examined for embryos, but some which were examined were found to be pregnant. Evidences of Rodent and Fungus Injury to Browse Plants No ---evidenc-e - of - !!odent- girdling was -found on-any of -the- plants -examined. --_Eovever-, as plants were being examined for signs of rodent damage some were found to have a fungus on the stem or trunk near ground level. In several instances fungus mycellia were found beneath the bark of the trunk and roots. Some, also, had grown a "witches' broom" proliferation of small stems near the base or crown. Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 show the occurrence of fungus, "witches' broom", rodent girdling, and insect damage. "Witches' broom" is often caused by a fungus. Either "witches' broom" or fungus was present on 59 percent of the dead bitterbrush plants,; while only 33 percent of the live plants were so affected. Either "witches' broom" or filngus was present on 4 out of 5 dead mountain mahogany plants, and of 4 nearly dead plants 2 had "witches' broom". Of the dead serviceberry plants examined .11 percent had "witches' broom". The fact that either "witches' broom" or fungus was found on so·many dead and partially dead plants suggests the possibility that some plants are being killed by fungv.s. However, further study will be required to determine if this is true. On only 2 serviceberry plants was there any evidence of insect damage; these we.re damaged by bark beetles. There were no evidences of fungus, or insect damage to any at' the 23 sagebrush plants examined. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Line transect data should be subjected to statistical analysis to determine if real.differences exist in the vegetation within the Control Area and the Rodent Exclosure. �-184- 2. Make total pellet-group counts of the Control Axea and Rodent Exclosure. If the count shows greater deer-use in the Control Axea, fence it with 2 strands cf smooth :wire strung at the same height as the Rodent Exclosure fence .so that deer will be subject to the same conditions in each area. 3. Collect home-range data for rodents animals per- unit area. 4. Collect food-habits stomachs :of rodents information. so that trap line data .can be converted to caught ani make an analysis of their contents 5. Examine all female rodents caught for presence of embryos and placental for scars. 6. Continue and enlarge investigations into the causes of browse plant .die-off, giving p:articular emphasis to the possible role of fungi. SUMMARY During the summer of 1958, additional data were collected for a long-term study to learn how rodents affect a pinon-juniper deer winter range area in Mesa Verde National Park. _Two_ three_~acre_plQts have.been ,established. deerj the other.is an unfenced .control plot. ext.ermfnat ed rodents within the fenced plot. .One is __fenced _ag§,:I,_rH:rt_1-"__Qq:~;tltf)_1J:tl1_p_Qt Intensive trapping has virtually Near the fenced plot, a rodent cansus patterned after the standard procedures of the North American Census of Small·Mammalswas run on 3 consecutive days in September. Using 480 kill traps, 83 rodents were caught. There were 48 white-footed mice of 3 species, 29 harvest mice, 5 meadowmice, and 1 chipmunk. The catch was comprised .of approximately half males and half females. Eighty-one percent were adults, 6 percent were subadul ts -, and 13 percent were juveniles. Twenty-six percent of the adult females were lactating, and some were pregnant. Permanent line transects have been established within the Rodent Exclosure and the Control kxe»: to provide a means of determining and measuring any changes which may occur in the vegetation as a result of rodent controls. No changes in the vegetation, due to rodent control, are evident at the end of the first year. The 35 deer pellet-group plots each in the Rodent Exclosure and the Control kxee: are not enough to indicate if there is a difference in deer-use. Dead and live bitterbI:'Ush, serviceberry, sagebrush, and mountain mahoganyplants were dug up and examined for evidences of rodent and insect damage and di-sease. None were found girdled by rodents. Either "witches I 'broom" or fungus was present on 59 percent of the dead bitterbrush plant; while only 33 percent of the live plants were so affected. Most of the dead mountain mahogany plants contained "witches I 'broom" as did 11 percent of the dead serviceberry plants. - There were no evidences of fungus or insect damage to any of the 23 dead sagebrush plants examined. Of all the plants examined only 2 serviceberry damage by bark beetles. plants showed evidence of insect The presence of fungus and llwitches broom" on so many dead ard partially dead plants suggests the possibility that some are being killed by fungi. However, further study is needed to learn if this is true. I �-185- BIBLIOGRAPHY Allemand, G. L. 1955. Howto anntrol gophers. Organic Gard. and Farm., 2l73~75. Barmann, F. H. 1953. Statistical efficiency of' sample plot size and shape in torest ecology. Ecology, 34:414-487. BiswellJ H. H. 1953. Managing brushland for game. U. C. College .AgrL AgrL Exp. Eta. Publleation:s -' Berkeley, Cal. Calhoun, John B. 1950. North Amer-Leanoensua of sma.1l mammal 5; !."e1ease No.3. Roscoe B.. J aekson Memori'al Lab., Bar Harbor, Maine. calhoun, John B. 1951. North Amerie'8.ncensus of 'small IDE!'I!lltBl s , release No.4. Roscoe B. Jackson Memorial Lab., Bar Harbor, Maine. Calhoun, John B. 1956. Population dynamies of yertebrates., compilations of research daba., release No.5. U. S. Dept. Health, Education, and Welf'are, NatL Institute Mental Health, Be'theada , Maryland •. Calhoun." JOhn B. and AnQ.rewA. Arata •. 1957. Population dynamics ot vertebrates, compilations o;e research .data, release N«.•.6. u. S. Dept .• Realtp:.J Education, and Welfare." Natl. Institute Mental Health, Bebhesda , Maryland. Ca.Ihoun, JOhn B. and Andrew A. Arata. 1957. l'opulation dynamics ,of ver-tebz-atres, compilations of rt;!.search data, release No.7. U, S. Dept •. Health, Education, and Welfare, Natl. Institute Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland. Calhoun, John B. andAndrew A. Arata~U1957.~--l'OpUIat1.cil':C~dyn8mf:cs~·df . __ vertebrates, compilaitiionB of research data, release No.8, V. 3. Dept. Health, Education, and Welfare, Natl. Institute Mental Hea.lth, Bethesda, Maryland. Calhoun;, John B. and And:rewA. Arata. 1957. Population dynamics :o·f vertebrates, compilations of research data, releaf;>e No.9. 1J. S. Depb, H~a.lth, E.ducation, and Welfare -' Natl. Tnat, Mental Health, Bethesda ~ Maryland. Ca.Lhoun , John B. 1959. Population dynamics of vertebrates_, rfHea:se No. 10, revised :sampling procedure for ·the north American census of small mammals. U. S. Dept. Health, Education, and Welfare, Natl. ..I:m:at.Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland. Ca.Ihoun, John B. -and: James IT. Casby, 1958. Calculation of home zange and density of small .mammafs . u. S. Irep:t;. Health, Educaf i on, and "Welfare, l)ngt. Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 24 pp. Canfield, B. H. 19410 Application of the line interce-ption -rne-thod in sampling :range vegetation. Jour. Forestry, 39:388-384. Clothier, B. 1953. Get rid of gopher-s, S;uecessf'ul Farming, 51: 74, Apr. C:rOJIch,W. E.• 199-2. Pocket gopher ·cqntrol. U..S.D.I. Conservat,ion B11l., 23. 2Opp .• Dansereau, P. 1951. Description and recording Of vegetation uponia struct'lll'al basf.s ~ Eca:l., 32: 172-229. Ellison, Lincoln. 1946. The pocket gopher in relation to soil 'erosion on mountiatn range. Ecol.; 27:101:.-114. Ellison, L. and C.M.• AldoUs. 1952- Influence of pocket; gophers on vegetation of subalpine grassland in central Utah. Eco.l, , 33:177:-186. H __ • _ �-186- Fitch, Henry S. and J. R. Bentley. 1949. Use of' Calif'ornia annualplant f'orage by range rodents. EcoL, , 30 (3) . Fitch, H. 1948. Ecology of' the California ground squirrel on grazing lands. Am. Midland Nat., 39: 513-596. Fi tzwater, W. D. 1952. Mewmethod for control of orchard mice. N.J. State Hort. Soc. , 33 :2460-1. Gillham, M. E. 1956. Ecology of' the Pembrokeshire islands, .ef'f'ectrs of treading 'and burrowing by birds and mammals. Jour. EcoL, , 44151-82. Geis, A. D. 1954. Rabbit damage to oak. reproduction at the Kellogg bird sanctuary. J. Wildlife Manage~nt, 18:423-424. GOdf'rey, G. K. 1955. Field study of the activity of the mole Talpa europea , Ecol., 36:678-685. Gooding, C.D. and 0:. ~. Long. 1957. Some fluctuations within rabbit populations in western Australia. Jour. Aus. Inst. Agric. Sci., 23(4) :334-337. Gunderson, H. 1952. Pocket gopher control. 180. Ag. Ext. Parn., 188: 1",4. Hamilton, W. J., Jr. 1941. The f'ood of small fOrest mammalsin eastern United States. Jour. Mammal., 22: 250-263. Howard, W. E. and L,., G. Ingles. 1951. Outline for an ecological life histOry of pocket gophers and other fossorial mammals. Eccl., 32: 537-544. Ingles, E. 1955. Adventure:s with mammalsat the Audobon camp of California.. Audubon Mag., 57:74-76, March. Ingles-, E. 1:955;-- Myst~ery-mice-of-the-sagebru::sh;- --Audubon-Mag., 57( 5) :206, 207, 238. Ing.Ies , L. G. 1952. Ecology of the mountain pocket gopher Thomomys monticola. Ecol. 33:87-95. Ingles_, L. G. 1954. Little plowman; mountain pocket gopher. Natural History, 63:134-139. Hlus. Lond. N. 1955. Animals which aid seed di-stribution and assist the spread of their own food ;P:jJlants. 226:74-75. Jameson, E. w., Jr. 195~. Food of deer mice Peromyscus maniculatus and P. boylei in the northern Sierra Nevada, Calif'ornia. Jour. Mammal., 33: 50-60 . ' Merkle, J. 1952. AnaJ-,ysis of a pinyon-juniper community at Grand Canyon, Arizona. Ecol., 33: 375. Mickle, Gordon. 1957. Pocket gopher control in Colorado, Agr. Extn. Her., Colo. Agr. and M. Co.l.Lege ;' Cir. 186-A. Miller, M. A. 1953. Experimental studies on poisoning pocket gophers. Hilgardia, 22(22):131-166. Miller, M. A. 1954. Poison gas testa on gophers. Cal. Agr. Exp. College Moore, P. 1956. Cal. Citrograph, 41:273-275. Moore, A. W. and E. H. Reid. 1951. Dalles pocket gopher and its influence on forage productions of Oregon mountain meadows. U. S. ~r. Circ ." 884: 1-36. Moore, A. W. 1928. Zapus ptmnceps princeps in utah. Jour. Mammal., 9:154. Oates, F. B. 1956. Menace of the mole. Jour. Ministry Agr., 63:79-82. Julander, Odell. 1937. Utilization of browse by wildlife. Trans. Sec. N. Amer. Wildlife Conf'erence, pp.276-287. Park, T. 1955. Ecological experimentation with animal populations. Sci. Mo., 81:271-275. Pelton, J. F. 1951. Outline for ecological life history studies in trees, shrubs, and stem succulents. Ecol. 32:334-343. Quimby, D. c. 1951. The life history and ecology of the jumping mouse Za~us hudsonius. Ecol. Monog., 21:61-95. s. �-187- Quinnild, Clayton L. and Hugh E. Casby. 1958. Relicts of climax vegetation on two mesas in western North Dakota. Ecology, 39(1):29-32. Reiman, R. Poison those gophers now. Hoard's D., 100:550. Scheffer, T. H. 1954. D.ealing with the mole. Wash. Agr. Exp. Circ., 246:1-4. Scheffer, T. H. 193;:1,.:... Hab i ts and economic status of the p-ocket gophers. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul., 224, 27pp. Scheffer, T. H. 1954. Conc.erning the pocket gopher in .mole range. Wash. Agr. Exp. Circ. 242:1-4. Scheffer, T. H. 1955. Life and love of the mole. Nature Mag., 48:411-413. Schmidt, F.J.W. 1931. Mammals of western Clark County, Wisconsin. Jour. Mammal., 12:99-117. Schread, J. C. 1955. Ground moles and their control. Conn. State Agr. Exp. Cire. 195:1-4. S. D. Agr. Ext. Leaflet. 1952. Co:t.tontailrabbit box trap. Leaflet 147. Successful Farming. 1955. Two slick ways to get rid of pocket gophers. 53:70-1. Sunset. 1956. Another way to thwart gophers. 116:258-259. Stewart, George and S. S Hutchings. 1936. The point-observation-plot (square-foot density) method of vegetation survy. Amer. Soc. Agron. Jour., 28:714-722. Storer, T. I. 1953. Controlling field rodents in California. Cal. Agr. Exp. Circ. 434:1-47. Sweetman, H. L. 1949. Further studies of the winter feeding habits --- -- ..... {)f-'cottontai-l~rabbits~--Ecol., 3 :371-316.. ~. Tevis, L. 1956. Pocket gophers and seedlings of red fir. Ecoi.~-37:-379-81 Tevis, L. 1953. Eff'ect of vertebrate animals .on seed crop of sugar pine. Jour. Wildlife Management, 17:128-131. Tissot, A. N. 1955. COlitt-olof the pocket gopher 'or salamand.er. Fla. Agr. Exp. Circ. 587:1-10. Tissot, An N. 1955. Control of moles. Fla. Agr. Exp. Circ. s86:1-8. Texas Agr. College. Thumbs down on pocket gophers with poisoned grain Texas Agr. Ext. Leaflet L192:(1). U.S.D.A. 1946. Judging mountain meadow range condition in eastern Oregon and eastern Washington" U. S. Dept. Agr. Circ. 748. Vandivert, William and Rita. 1957. American bestiary. Nat. Hist., 66:521-7. Wight, H. M. 1930. Breeding habits and economic relations of the Dalles pocket gopher. Jour. Mammal., 11:40-48. Olwen, Williams. 1955. The food of mice and shrews in a Colorado montane forest. The U. of Colo. Studies, Series in Biology, No.3, 6pp. Prepared by: Date: Harold R. Shepherd Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator July, 1959 ----------~~~~---------------- ��-189- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS "PROJECTS State of' Project COLORADO ----------------------~----------No. W~·~~l~O~l_-R~ : 3 ------~--------------------- Work Plan No. Ti t.Le The Value of Internode Period Govered: Oct. GameRange Investigations Job ,No.2 Counts in Determining B,rowse Utilization 1, 1958 to March 15, 1959 Objectives: Explore the possibility of determining 'an index-of-utilization browse annua.l, stem growth by a -compazLson of. the number of internodes left with a number typical for the species .. for uneaten Procedure: 1. A search of the literature vas contdrrued to learn what has been done of a similar nature. The proper techniques of staining, embedding, and sectioning were- frtu.died~----- ,-_.- - - -__ _ 24 Stems and terminal buds of browse plants were collected. -These:irlll supplement collections .from previous years and other sites .for fu:ture laboratory examine.t.ions . Findings: A. sufficient number of stems and buds have been collected over the past 3 years from different sites and plants for the laboratory part of the study yet to be done. Before any results can be stated or conclusions drawn with respect to the objectives of the study laboratory examinations must be made of the collected materials. Prepared Date: by: Harold R. Shepherd Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan. ----------------~-----------Federal Aid Coordinator July, 1959 ----------~~~~~------------- ��July, 1959 -19i1-- . JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State Project of COLORADO --------------~~-------------------------NQ. GameRange Investigations W-IOI-R WOrkPlan No. 4 Ti t Le of Job: Experimental Period April ------~-------------------------- Covered: Job No.3 Water Development 1, 1958 to March 30, 1959 Objecti ves : The purpose of the -st:tidy is to learn if better ·summerrange use in the pinon-juniper type ranges of southern Colorado can be obtained for deer by the development of sources of water in dry areas. Procedure: Lizard Spring in McElmoCanyon near Cortez, Golorado was developed. dur-· ing the summer of 1956, and a line of pellet-group plots -was·established to measure ..__j;'J::t~.n~f:r_§ct Qf_t!le S.p~1Ag_deye_J..gpment .Q._I:!_J:;he deer_I>..2pulation. Pellet-group counts were made iIllIl1ediately follOWing development of water. .------.-.-.----..... _-...--._ ..-.. For the next several years, pellet-group count's will be made in May and again in September to obtain data from which the effect of the water development on the summer and winter deer populations in the vicinity can be jUdged. The spring development already made will be repaired to .maintain water sui'f'i-ci.ent for the deer population. Literature A final pertinent repol1t·qf to deer water development will findings will and enlarged as may be required be reviewed. be made when warranted by results. Findings: Previous reports have described the development of Li·zard Spring, the location of pellet-gro1,lp plots, and have given the yearly data .collected since the beginning of the study up"to and including that for October, 1951. This report presents the data collected and observations made during the spring and fall of 1958. The spring maintained a flow of water all summer sufficient to keep the collection .reservoir full. However, the pipe 'Which leads from spring to reservoir developed a leak -which had to be repaired. Also, the gutter, cut into the face of the cliff to collect seep water, filled with sand. This had to be removed once during the summer. �-192- Table l.--Deer Pellet-group Plot No. Oct. 10 1956 Y Counts Vicinity Lizard Spring Development Pellet-Gro'U:ps ana. Dates Count-ed May 1 Oct. 3 May 1 Sept. 29 1957?} 1957 1958 gj 1958 ~ JJ 1 23101 0 2 2 1 3 7 9 5 9 2 0 000 .0 0 42112 51001 600 7 80000 9 2 2 0 10 .. 5. 1 .. 0 T¢als: . 22 16 8 The accumulation of :pellets present Winter accumulation.of 7 month'S. Bummeraccumulation of' 5 months . 1 Y Y 0 0 2 0 1 7 3 24 when pellet 0 0 0 0 3 counts first made. Y . .Table-2.""",SUIIlIlier-I'r.ecipitationat_Cortez" Year 1956 1957 1958 May 1.29 3~82 ·56 .June ·35 .87 .23 July .81 4.06 .21 Co.Lor-ado _ __ Aug. .81 3.80 -95 Sept~ .08 T 1.14 Pellet counts -were made May 1 and September 29. for 1956 and 1957 are shown in 'I'ab.Le 1. Totals 3~34 12.•55 3·09 These data together -with those DiscusSion: Summerand winter pellet counts have now been 'made i'ar two yearS since the development of LiZard Spring. It is thought to be too ~arly to 'be able to draw any -valid conc.Iusd.ons as to the effect of' the spring on deer "populations. However, it Ls int~esting to note that. the total number of pellet-grOUps deposited during the winter Of 1958 .-waB. greater than durilig,~the winter of 1957. CorrverselYj more than twice as many pelle-t-grou.ps were deposited during the summer'of 1957 than. during the :summer·qf 1958. This: latter 1I!.aY have resulted fr()m a ~rna.ller deer population in the law countzy generally during the aummer'of' 1958 beeauae or the extremely dry weather~ Dfily 3~()9 inches of rain fell in Cortez during the months of May, June, JUiy, August, and Se:ptember in .eont.rasf to ~. 55 tnenes during the same period .in 1957, Table- 2. There is no ;eyiden'C'ethat the development of' Lizard. Spring has R:ff:ected the Size of the summer-deer population in the vicinity of the spring. Recommendat.IonscIf' the winter of' 1958-59 damages the collection gutters they should be .strengthened with a masonry -wail to prevent f'ree-zing .and thaviing from 'causing leaks and consequenf water loss. Prepared by: Date! Harold R. Shepherd Approy.edby: Laurence E.• Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator --------~~~~~~-----------------July 1959 �.' COLd~DO.D'LV: WiLDUfEl · . Research Center'Librar;l ".' ·317W. Prospect: i .ft. Cc?llihS; co 80526 ' .....-;--: :"';::', JOB CO~LETIONREP9Ri" INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS :State of· '- . COLO RAOO , __ G;;;.;am;;. ..;.;e;....;,;Ran;.;;,;;.;~~e.;....;I;.;nv.;.;...;e_s..;;t.;;;;i.:iig Work Plan No~-: ... 2 ; Jo~' No. 1 ------~----------~------------~,~,----~~~~--~~~~~~~ '_"_" ·..:L:;;:i:.:t;.::t=l.;;;.e..:Hi=l:;;:l=s;...:;;Gr:;;.;a:::.:z::.:i::.:n;:s;;g~S;.::t.;;:.ud=:.y~· ----""7""'"---:":--:-~~---------~--- ~/JOb =__ ·Titie · . Period Covereel!·:. April 1, .~958 to April .: 1, 1959 ~ . '.' in lbstract1c:' l~':-A-'cfiaiige the 'proceaiire' of'stocking' the pasturss-"witli'"livestocf{ was .' . institutea-wliereoy-'the 'full compliment of' eleven' head or"cattle "ana"'tliirty::"l'our- head · or-sneep-were. placea-'iil' tlieir"'respective"pastures, ratherthan sp1itting··tliem~up iiito ·smalFgrolips'~- -:Aniiiial Unit' months' were .maintained" the"Baine~' "Advantages realizea'in ·tlP-s:-¢liange Will.cbe:-'-,(a.) Animals' are more docile arid easier to handle, 'hence time !s~ saved: ""\0) -Utilization estimates can be made imni~diately' after animals are removed ana-earlY enough to beat' regrowth in the spring and, 'we hope, snowta:J-l in the fall. . A aisadvantage of the change is the probable over-use of the most }?j ghly" palatable -,-'-'-. -' p-lant~:t.ri~a·1-1-pa:sture·s~·,-,-----·-· -------;.... .... -...:...._._':'~ . ~.' ",' .' , 2TUsing eighteen box traps almost continuously for, five months, two men caugfit'''185 '. aeer-;': or these deer, 128 were placed in the various pastures, 47" were" ear~taggeC! · aiid-released, and 10 buck fawns were' transported to Fort Colliiis--for'use -iii' another · proJect: ;'-RemovaFof deer' from thEf pastures' ran behirid schedule and resulted in slight over-stocking of four of the pastures. - Experimental work with a syringe-shooting, "Cap:..Chur Gun" loaded with a nicotine alkaloid drug resulted· in -no deer caught. Considerable work needs to be done"wi th this-tool,'-particularly to ·-obtain:a f.t:lster acting, y-et non-lethal drug. The aacuracy of the. gun could likewise stand some improvement. »: , J~ An ana1ysis of variance found in stem length measurements before aricCarter' .. - grazing for mountain mahogany (3 years), serviceberry (2yrs.), and"bittero:ru:sll (J 1r.) · is comple-Ged. Ranked from heaviest utilization to least, th~se tliree-plants-we?e' . .: consumed heaviest by deer, next by cattle and least by sheep, Without exception" bitterorush was more heavi1y used than mahogany and ~h6g~ more tfiaiF s'srviceberry (bi catp"e; sheep; and deer respectively. Quantities :are. sho,m. i~, Table 3. A t~rd ye~ls measurements of serviceberry ".. :~~,ana:cysed..'Two years measurements of bitterbrush . ".,':,,:<!.:; .: have' been comPleted but not remain to be taken~"" ... ·Ih ". The stfuldaro. utilj zat1oD_es.ti:matas...o.f.grazing and browsing of'all 'classes of : ..... ' forage liere completed in late June J 1958. For a varietY- of reasons' disoussed these ..};'l{p~rcehtage~ :ran cons:tderably below those made in earlier years. .' · r' :~.' " " .: '! :':~""'-.. " : >., .•..., _,:\: ," '_, ,- - ', '.~' '. . "''-' . ~.' ,', �-194- 5. Weather conditions and time permitted the taking of fall, after-grazing utilizatiori estimates in livestock pastures in October and No vember , 1958 rather than waiting until snows melted in early spring. For this period grasses were" consumed in order from heaviest to lightest by cows, then sheep, and then deer. Browse consumption in decreasing rank went from deer to cows to sheep. Forb use was inconclusive except for heavier feeding by sheep in 1958 than by cowS .; ! 4 6. A major part of the spring and summer of 1958 was spent in selecting and testirig a new method of estimating forage production and utilization in the pastures. The method- chosen fi:i"r trial was· the Ocular Estimate by Plot Method of Pechanec and Pickford (1937, a,b). A sample size test was conducted. This involved the f0110wirijf stepif:·(a) Setting out sixty"milaere plots at random. (b) Determining the plarit-coMposition- in these plots. (c) Selection of key species of sufficient abundance and palatability in these plotso Cd) Training in the estimating-clipping weighing procedure for forage production in grams per plot. (e) Collecting green plants, drying and figuring shrinkage factors. (f) Making the actual estimates. (g) Calculating the sample size needed. 7,. .All of-the fifteen species observed (5 each of grasses, forbs, browse) were so-high~ variable in their weight per plot produced that plot numbers needed ran into the thousands per pasture. This was tested at 5%, 10%, and 20% confidence levels using the standard sample size test formula. 8. Production figures obtained without benefit of statistical analyses showed totals of" 119 and 199 pounds produced per acre (dry weight) for pasture one" arid-two- respectively. In both pastures, over three-fourths of this forage weight was made up of browse plants. 9. Shrinkage factor calculations are listed for the major Little Hills plants~ They iI , appear to center around fifty percent. Objectives: 'To de"teritdile--the -amount and the kirid of- competitiori.-oetweendeer, sheep, and cattle in enclosures and under various intensities of grazing •. I i i �-195- Little Hills Grazing Study William McKean Pasture Stocking - Livestock All pastures were stocked with cows o'rsheep for the spring-fall grazing season on a schedule which was considerably different from that used in previous years. This change was made because of a growing dissatisfact~on among the neighborhood- ranchers who-ailriliallY: "Loan" their- cattle and sheep to 'the project. These' men comp'Iafned .that the-livestock r~turned to them were urlduly'wild, and hence hard to manage, due' to the fact that they were divided into such small bands throughout the six pastures. All pastures had been grazed concurrently. The change instituted was simply to recalculate the time schedules so that a full compliment of eleven cows and thirty-four sheep could be kept together in their appropriate pastures then moved to another pasture, etc. The stocking rates of each pasture are not changed appreciably. Apparently this change has helped keep the animals more docile. It has a further advantage in that after-grazing utilization estimates or measurements can be made immediately after the pastures are'vacated~ rather than having to wait until all stock are removed from all pastures. -In the fall this is especially important. It was possible this year, for example,- to .... complete all fall estimates in October and November, immediately after·the animals were removed, rather than waiting until the snows melted in the spring. Admittedly, an-unusually-~dry_'_a:ndwa:rm-fa:1.1-and ··early·'Winter····helped· out'great:cy-=in"getting-:-this job 'done so seen, This will be one year in the series in which weathering overwinter of the plants will not cloud the true utilization estimates. How this change in stocking procedure will affect the grazing habits of the animals remains to be seen. Presumably the "ice cream" plants will be even more heavily utilized than before and there will be less difference from pasture to pasture in so far as these few species are concerned. It was thought advisable to do more herding of the animals in all pastures to prevent more serious over-grazing and trampling along fences and in bottoms and corners than has previously occurred. Table 1. Pasture 1 2 3 4 5 A 7 8·· 9 Summary of stocking records for livestock grazing year 1958, deer grazing year 1958-.59. Spring Dates Class of No. of No. of Fall and Winter Dates Stocked' Removed Animals Animals Stocked Removed' Animals Sheep May 2, Nov. 2 , Nov. 24, May 24, 3.5 34 Noon noon a.m. a.mo Cattle 11 May 27, June 19, 13 & 12 Oct. 22, Novo 6, noon porno noon a.ma. Cattle' 11 May 16, May 27, Octo 1, Oct. 10, 13 noon noon a m a.m Deer Dec. 31 Apr. 10 to 27 to Feb. 3 Mav·l.5 Novo' 8 Deer Apr. 6 to 41 to Dec 28 An]'" 26 Sheep May 24, June .5 .35 34 Sept" 27 Oct. 9' a,m noon noon noon Apr .12 Jan 5't6 22 Mar' 2Bto .. lJeer 17 20 Deer ~v~ 22 Apr: 3 to .to Jan . It; Anr. I? --Deer cl6to 22 lfeo17 toMci3 At>r_ 17 Gattle Mav~ a m Mav16h 11 11 OctlO~a.m Oct 22 a m ."Ju Sheep 28h uct Ju5,noon 9,a.m~ Nov.2, a.m, 34 35 ; �,I ·-196- The sheep used during spring grazing were mostly yearling and'adult ewes, however, a few bucks and one lamb were included in the total of thirty-four Cattle used were eleven two-year old heifers. Again in the fall a very uniform group of thirty-five ewes- and the same heifers ,plus two, were stocked. One heifer escaped from pasture two after 5.5 days grazing, due to a gate having been left open near the water tank for one-half day (see Table 2). This animal was not returned to the pasture~ 0 The growing season was another very poor one due to low preCipitation. The winter of 1957-58 brought very little snow and subsequent spring, summer, and fall rainS were below normal. Had it not been for residual soil moisture from 1957; plant' groWth-'wo1ild"have been seriouslY reta:rded~ In spite of this condf.tdon,' the . stocking of livestock was maintained approximately as planned (see Tables 1 and 2). Pasture StOCking - Deer By mid-October, 1958, manY aeer were on the Dry Fork meadows at ~ignt. The weather was abnormally warm and dry and thei r presence was due to hunting on the public lands surrounding the Exp~riment Station, not due to hunger. Accordingly no attempt was made to capture them until abolitNovember first. The 'Wing traps, into which deer have been driven at night successfully during some years, were not used to any-appreciable extent this year eo· This was due to tfie fact that oattle were grazing the trap site areas ,and could not have been kept out of-t-he-tra:pS-;--By--t:ne-time-tne:r-were~ movefd-tlie -deer -a"lso naa-moved -'t6-0theirareas:--On~ five deer were caught during the entire winter by this method. Box traps proved to be exceedingly effective during 1958-59 in spite or-the fact that this was a mild winter. A total of 185 deer were caught (iiiciludini(,above) during the winter • Credit for this' sliccessful"work·· goes -to--Bernaro' Goetze, c.SoU.-temporary labor; Nelson Cain, labor, George-Granaell;-custodiaii~ a.na--ll. Mo Boeker, superintendent. Two of these men were engaged almost every day fi'on:i-' November first to March twenty-third with eighteen traps ~ Of 185 deer caught, twenty-four were recatches of deer tagged in other years. One hundred and twentyeight deer were placed in t he five deer pastures as sho-wn in Table 10 Of the remaining fifty-two animals, ten were buck fawns which were transported by truck to Fori:;Collins for- liseby the Veterinary Science Dep+b ,- Forty-seven deer were tagged and released, as part of the deer migration study. �-197- Table 2.. Pasture Further summary of:stocking records for'livestock and deer, . year- 1958 and 'eer d . grazJ.ng. grazang :'i ear- 1958 59 Class of Season Total No.- of Animal Acres Per Acres Animal of Use .Animals ._ Days Unit Months Animal Unit Month - . I. 1 2 77.•37 Sheep ; Spring Fall Season 167.25 Cattle Spring Fall 799¢0 787.5 34 35 11 258.5 13 for 5G~ 71:5 12 forlO 120,,0 Season 26.63 26.25 52088 1.46 8•. 61 2:38 4;00 14~99 11.16 20~53 1.74* .79 ..' 3 4 162.81 Cattle 11 13 121,.0 117,,0 Deer Spring Fall Season Winter 27 2,809.0 4.03 3.90 7.93 93.63 144.64 Deer Winter 47 5,478.0 182.60 86.42 Sheep 5 ------- .. ~--~~ ------ __ ... Spring Fall Season Winter --- .Lieer - ------ 17 13.60 13.42 3 :20---------~27002- - _-_-. ---11,472 0 49.08 1.76 34 35 -- -_-_--. - - 408~0 402.5 -- --.----------~ 0 6 99.93 Deer Winter 20 1,785.0 59.85 1.67 7 90.67 Deer Winter 17 919.0 30065 209~ ~ 206.43 Cattle Spring Fall Season 11 13 159.5 156.0 5~32 5~20 10•.52 19 62 Spring Fall Season 34 35 26.07 28~oo 54.01 2.90 9 156.55 Sheep 782.0 840.0 0 * Calculated as of May 15 1959 though 3 deer remained in pasture number three and j one deer in pasture number seven,.: �-198- NormalJ..yabout eighty-six deer are needed to f ill all the pastures. While' the total number of deer caught this year was high, the rate at which they'were-captured was slOw,'-due principally to the mild weather' and lack of snGw. Becau.se--trapping was slow a greater number' of deer had to be captured to attain the _desired deer days use in the various pastures. However, once in, these deer were equally hardtoo-remove'on schedu'l,e , Heavier use than desired occurred-in'pastures three; five, six and seven. This phase of the 1958-59 winter's work is summarized below. Pasture 3 4 5 6 7 Des i re d St oc ki ng Calculated Calculated Deer Days Removal Dates April.l0 2;442 April 6 5,785 March 26 1,296 March 27_ 1,499 April 22 907 Ac-ua t 1 St 00k'J..ng Deer DJay Dena. ti on .... . -..... '. Approx. Approx. Deer Davs Removal Dates Over Under 2;809 April 15 367 -April 26 5,478 307 April 12 176 1,472 ; April 15 268 1,785 April 22 36 943 , -- ----~ Since tagged deer which were driven out of a gate were not in hand for-recording tag numbers, the exact deer days tG assign to them-had to be deteriiIiiied randoirily from among t.he numbers remaining after all deer that had died or been shot were accounted for • .Nine deer were found dead and were judged to have died of natural Gauses. Of these bher-e.. were seven.fawns- (5 bucks, 1 doe, 1 unknown) and two does. This is a mortality of seven percent. The sex and age numbers of the deer trapped and placed in the pastures were as follows: Bucks 28 Fawns Does 30 Unknown Bucks 52 2 Adults Does 16 Presumably the 47% catch of fawns is a higher propo~on the field. Total l2E than actually exists in Removal of deer from the pastures was fraught with its usual difficulties. This work was started on March 26th in pastures five and six where alfalfa haY was placed inside the gates in -hcpes of baiting the deer out. Fresh dirt was applied to cleared areas outside of these gates and track counts made each morning. Warmweather and new grass appearing in the pastures soon caused the alfalfa to lose its appeal, though a few deer did leave by this route. It was discontinued on April 8th in favor of deer drives which were begun on that date. Several drives and shooting removed all deer in pastures five and six by April 15th. A special fence made of wooden panels was placed in pasture four'for a distance of about 150 feet and extend~d from a cliff down to the north fence. This was intended to prevent deer from running around behind deer drivers and to assist the deer in finding the open gates About twenty-five feet of woven-wire fence was also taken down near this panel fenee. During a drive by seventeen men on April 10th, -twenty-six deer went out of other gates. The new wooden fence remained untested as the remaining deer also went out of back gates or were shoto 0 �-199- On April eleventh a drive of pasture three by twelve boy scouts from Meeker and six department personnel netted fifteen deer out. Subsequently, at least ten d:i-ives'~ - and-some hunting, by department personnel reduced the number'of deer down tci--three head. - Tl1ese deer are still in the pasture as of this writing. This isthe -most-difficuTE of" aIr-pastures from which to remove deer. One eXtra deer-"got Into pasture three from pasture four about December sixth and thereby added 143 deer days. In pasture seven the entrances to five gates were carefully cleared of vegetation to mineral soil.. Track counts after two drives by three men showed seven deer removedbut ten still remaining. A panel fenoe similar to that built in pasture four was next constructed on April 17th. It extended for a distance of about seventy-five feet downfrom a cliff to a gate in the southeast corner of the pasture. Several more drives and some shooting removed all deer except one from thi~ pasture as of this writing. Cap..C hur GunExperiment Considerable time was spent during Novemberby the writer and crew in experimental attempts to shoot and immobilize deer by means of a special "Cap-Ohur' Gan"-produced and sold- by the Palmer Chemical and Equipment Companyof Atlanta, Georgia-.-- The-GameManagementDivision- had prevfoiie ly' purchased the gun--am··all nec-essary dart-syringes and one chemical. The cheniic-al-was'a---nicotine--alK:aloid nervs--blOcking agent-;- WEi- had it in only one eoncent.ratdon - -600 m~f~' per- cubi<;f___ .ceiJ.tinie_ter._:_The __ -Vete:dna.r~:Science._Deparlment_ of_::_Co_lo_radoState':'_Uiiiversity~nad . reconirilendeda trial dosage of about 2••5 milligrams per pound. Accordingly the syringes were loaded as follows: Fawns poes J3ucks ,Large Bucks Milligrams 125 - 200 Estimated Weight 50 - 80 150 200 300 Cuoic Centimeters 375 500 750 1.25 We had an opportunity to shoot at thirteen deer which were judged to 'he within range -of the gun (thirty yards or les-s). Wemrssed eleven of these shots. An adult doe was shot at night in a spotlight ~nd ran off with the syringe. She could not be found the 'next morning. An adult buck was shot in daylight-but he also escaped, no trace of hd.mbeing seen after a search of the area for almost a mile around. " -.. ., Three deer were shot in the rump while they were within deer traps. The first, a fawn showed n~ noticeable effect due to the fact, discovered afterward, that the syringe needle had:become clogged with sediment. At about eight feet away this syringe sunk into the flesh of the dee~ about three inches. The fawn was released into. pasture four in a highly _exhausted co:pdition.; it walked away. I A second fawn was shot in a similar manner. The first noticeable effect occurred in about ninety seconds - a definite relaxation. -Five mi.nut.eslater, when released from the trap, this fawn leaped to its feet but could not walk. It remained in this state for another ten minutes. The effect of the drug then seemed to-begin wearing off and within twenty~five minutes it was judged to be back to normal. Neither 6f these fawns were found dead in the pasture so presumably they have survived. An adult doe was shot similarly while retained in a clover net trap. It -wa.sin a highly nervous state. No visible effect of the shot came until three minutes; then the doe slowly coliapsed and in fifteen seconds was completely immobilized. It was then tagged, and placed in a weigh:-poxfor transportation to the eXperImental 'pasture~ On arrival at the pasture twenty-five minutes later the doe was dead. _ �-200- . .Our conclusions after this brief test are: 1. The gun is ineffective beyond thirty yards. '2~ syringes wobble and are easily deflected by wind or any vegetation. 3; Rate of pressure decline in the carbon dioxide capsule is hard to estimate. 4. The drUg at the dosage used was too slow in taking effect to be practical in field use. A deer can go a long way in three minutes. ,..... 5. Other drugs and otner methods of approaching deer closely may bring better results' with this gun. Utilization Measurements (by stem-length) History: During the period from 1947 to 1954 randomized measurements of annual growths on browse and leafculm lengths on grasses were taken on unmarked stems before and after grazing. This practice plus others produced data which were exceedingly variable and almost impossible to interpret. Begiiming Ln the'" fall- 'Of 1954, all stems wer.e marked- (no grasses measured). This'meaIit that'-l'ewer species could be measured each year, but the results were Detter. -(,See-·qriar'f.erly-. report- for July, 1955). However, this report cited was the last one pr-Irrted ," The re are)' analyses-at-'hand-fo'r"tliegrazing years~·····55-56~'·-56=57;·ana 57;;',58.-·In-the year--" 1955-56 mountain mahogany and bitterbrush 'Were measur-eddri pastures 1, 2, 4, and 10, the-- heaVy-use pastures and' a'control. In 1956-51 mountain mahogany orily"lias' -'---, measured in' all teln pastures. In 1957-58 serviceberry was measured in pasbureeT, 2~'li, and 10. Statistician, Jack R. Grieb, suggests that no less than three years data-on-a-ny-one-spec-ies·· be-considered .condusive., --..,-, To recapitulate, since the marked stem 'Work started in 1954 there have been three year's data on mountain mahogany taken; there have been two years data on serviceberry - a third year will be completed by May, 1959; and one year's data on'01 tterbrush' (1954 ••. 55). All this in heavy-use pastures only ,' This represents thOusands-of· man-hours' of labor, done principally by undergraduate student help and the various project leaders. The data shown in Table 3 comprise very useful information concerning the key browse ·species. They have been obtained by means of an analysis of variance by Statistician, Jack R. Grieb. There is a similarity in the data for all three species. The figures for mountain mahogany are the most reliable but the following state-ments seem to apply equally well to all threes 1. Deer consume significantly more of the three browses than do cattle. 2. Cattle comsume significantly more of the three browses than do sheep. 3. Deer bro'Wsing of the three' plants in the control area and in pasture nuniber four are apparently almost alike, with the'possible exception of serviceberry. These statements apply to animals under- heavy stocking rates, which would be nearer to the current pinon-juniper "normaL situt:ition"than would moderate and light stocking. �-201- shee Pasture 1 82.0 1/ - This is open range, hence rates fluctuate daily, but it is in an area of generally heavy deer winter concentration. Due to lack of water and inaccessjbility, cow use is almost negligible. 2/ ..After-grazing measurements were slightly longer than before':'grazing--riieasure::' ments "(difference between means -).1). This was evidently due to such'-n_gfit~grazing by sheep that the use did not off-set some of the error inherent in the method. Before-grazing, stem-length, measurements of serviceberry for the 1958~59 grazing season were taken as planned, with the assistance of Lloyd K. Hazzard and George W. Brown, C.S.IT. students. These were taken only in pastures 1, 2, "4;"and-10 ""-because-previous- studies -had - shown" no signific ant differences--between the moderate ----and lightly used pastures. After-grazing measurements of the above mentioned stemS we~e made interrnptedly .during-'the-pe:dod from April' 21 through May"7 by Ber-nard Goetz ~.H."-M~·Boe'Ker;--'Bert Baker, and William McKean. An 'analysis of variance between tnese -before -and . after' grazing measurements w.ill be made and reported upon in the job completion report for the year 1959-1960. . Utilization Estimates (Spring) In June, 1958 the usual,general,after:"grazing estimates were made in-all" pastures wherein cows or sheep had been grazed during the preceding fall grazing period (1957) and spring grazing period (1958). This was done by William T. McKean and George·W. Brown, neither of whom had had previous experience in this type of estimation, which involves all olasses of vegetation as observed in six very large rtplots" (50 to 100 foot'radius) in each pasture. The six -"plots" were spaced, -as verbally described by H. M. Boeker, Superintendent, and A. M. Greer, Custodian, --of the Little Hills Station, as follows: Four were placed in from the four corners of each pasture at distances varying from two to four chains, by estimation. Two others were located approximately midway between the north a nd south boundaries and from one to three chains in from the east and west fences. Previously existing, moveable, wooden and wire, meter-square hurdle plots had been established at most(but not all) of the above described sites. These were intended to facilitate identifications and presumably to mark the center of eacn "plottl. These hurdle plots were located and marked on new maps of each pasture. As was the plan, each was moved a few feet following the utilization estimate, for they are intended to show seasonal changes in the vegetation due to weather or grazing, not cumulative effects of protection from grazing. L �-202- Table 40 Average percent utilization and frequency of occurrence by pasture during fall grazing (19.57) winter grazing (19.57-.58 deer #3 & .5).. and spring grazing 1958., =1/ . She~p P 3 battle FOR4.GE SPECIES P~l -Sheep p.2~rtle ; • - 3er P. 5-Deer P .8-Cattle P. 9=··Sh.aslJ Fre~'t: % Freq. Av % Freq. Av % Freq·l>\:v% Frea·,rAV % FreQQ.rP..v% Occur til Occur Util Occur+Utd.L Occur Util Occur Util Occur Util __ .. Grass & Grasslike 6 12 6 Oryzopsis hymenoides 6 46 .5 9 .5 .5 .5 :3 .5 18 6 2 Agropyron inerme 10 2 1.5 .5 4 4 4 .5 4 -' 6 Koeleria cristata 14 15 10 11 30 .5 .5 4 5 4 .? 20 2 Stipa comata 1 0 10 40 23 3.5 4 3 3 3 Agropyron smithii 1 0 0 13 .5 ,3 .5 .3 3 4 2 2 Poa sp 2 1 0 8 17 50 25 .5 5 4 Oryzopsis micrantha 1 0 1 10 1 .5, -~ 1 1 0 .5 -= Carex spp. 61 4. 2 0 .51 31 14 4 4 4 .3 .3 Br01llllS inermis 2 -~ _a 1 0 0 4 I'll 2' Sitanion hystrix 6 10 0 1 0 0 3 -= .3 3 Bromus tectoruin 0 -~ 2 25 2 10 2 10 2 0 J 2 2 0 1 Elymus condensatus T .3 5 .3 Bouteloua gracilis I 0 =-~ == Agropyron cristatum 0 -~ 1 -= =~ -= Agr()pyron albicans ~-- ~~ 0 1 14.6 12e6 Average 32.6 6.9 3$5 7.5 ,. -- ------- -- ------ ------ -- ------ -- -~- -- -- -- ~- -- ~-' -- ~- -- ---_ ..--_._-_._-- - .-.- -----_--- ---------- -----_ .. ,----_._-_. -_.-------- _-_-_-_ .. _._-_-- ,-----~----------, Browse Artemisia'tridentata .5 Chrysothamnus viscid- 4 iflorus Symphoricarpos teton- 6 ensis Quercus gambelii 1 6 Pinus edulis Cercocarpus mo ntanus 3 flJmelanchierutahensis 6 ,1 ' Eurotia lanata ChrysothBJll.nus ,nauseosus-1 Ribes sp_ Hosa sp. Juniperus utahensis 6 Tetradymia canescens 1 l-iahoniarepens 1 Pursha tridentata 1 ~~ Rhus trilobata Ephedra sp , =Pachistima myrsinites Average -- 0 3 4 0 .3 2 4- 0 6 .5 T 3 6 4 0 1 .5 3 4 T 14 4 .5 11 4 T 6 0 6 1 6 0 1 1 6 0 0 1 6 == ~= 2 2 T 46 .5 3 43 26 6 .5 .3 .5 .5 4 6 3 6 0 15 .5 0 0 5 0 0 2 4 0 10 -= == == 3 18 4- 0 5 18 0 --~ 1 --.5 0 ~- --.. -= 0 6 1 .3 3 3 0 0 -- --I =- ----6 20 == 2 I " 3 0 -= --~= 0 .3 T 3 3 1 0 1 .5 -= -= == -= 0 -= I -= -= 0 0 0 40 --2 -~ --0 -1301 6 3 I == ~= 0 0 3 -0 -= 1.0 4.0 ~~ 2 T 3 == 1 13 uo:=t -= .5 0 0 0 4 6 3 4 1 1 0 .51 10 0 4 0 0 =~ 2 2 2 1 13 3 12 I 0 0 =~ == -= 2 _c. 1 5 2 ..,- , 01 -- == 0 -- 9~O 1/ Ocular estimates made June 2.5~30, 19.58 by William T. McKean and George W9 Bro~TO from six sites in each pasture, each site constituting a circle of approximately .50 foot radius. 2/ Number of plots out of a total of six in which each species occurs. 3/ In making averages a trace is considered as one percent. �-.•..203- Table 4. (Continued) Cattle Sheep P. I-Sheep P.2-Cilttle p.3-D eer P. 5~]Deer P.8...cattle P~ 9.:.sheep Freq. Av %, Freq. Av % Freq. A.v % Freq. Av % Freq-. Av % Freq-" Av--% occurlutil Occur Util Occur Util Occur Util· OCC'Il;\Util occ~1 Util SPECIES Forbs Castilleja cbromosa 2 1 2 Astragalus chamael'llce 3 5 3 Eriogonum umbellatum.3 ,0 .3 Cryptantha spp . 4 0 5 Antennaria dimorpha 5 1 --Gilia aggregata 4 0 3 Oenothera sp. 4 13 .3 ?hlo:j(-oaespitosa 5. T· 4 Sideranthus sp, .3 0 .3 Opuntia -sp:- 4 0 :3 EfiogorlUin-tfistichum 2 0 2 Senecio-~spp ~ .3 8 2 Corydalis aurea 2 0 .3 Taraxacu.m officinale .3 0 1:Heuohra parvafolia .3 0.1 Solidago - spp. 3 0-Artemisia wrightii 2 0 2 Lupirms greenii 4 0 ,~ Galium-borea:le- --- - ----2------ Q- - -'2Aster spp. 3 0 1 Caloehortus gunnison! 2 0 1 Penstemon fremontii 1 10 -Sphaeralcae coccinia 2 0 1 Cirsium sp, 1: 0 2 Achillea lanulosa 3 0·-Idrnrm lewisii 1 10' 1 Asclepias spp , l' 0 -Artemisia frlgida .3 ,0-Penstemn:' caespf.tosus 2 Hedeoma-drUmmoIidi -,.. -1 -« Lssquere'l.La sp. . _iOO Haplopappus acaulis -E~igeron spp. -';" Descura~a pinnata -Clematis spp. -Gutierrezia sarothrae 2 Salsola pestifer -Erysimum asperum -Lithospermum ruderale -Balsa:inorrhiza- sagittata -" Lepiaiiim montanum -Astragalus diversifolius· Sisyfubrium altissima -Astragalus lambertii -ChfYsopsis villosa Art'eIrdsia dracuhculoides Phaeelia serioea -Agoseris glauoa -Tragopogon dubius -Compositeae unid -Average '. ,i'> -- -- -~ ---0 -----_--------10.3 5 3 1 2 1 h 1 1 --.•.•. ---•.•1 -_•• -1 I o o 3 o 5 o 1 2 2 11' .3. 4 .3 2 2 o 3 5 o o o o 2 2 1 4 o o o o 3 T 4 4 o o .3 8 o T o o -- -- o 2 2 o o 2 o o .3 5 e- -- 2-- - 0:e o e -_ - 1 e o 2 .3 4 -- e 6 o o o o .•... 1 .3 o o o o 4 2 1 1 2 1 o o o 1 30 e '-- 2 o e --o b_ 7 o 1 1 40 2 T , e 4 16 -.•. o __ 2 5 3 o -- e _-=- o 4 o o 1 2 1 o o o 5 8 .3 o 1 o .--=;.--------.;-~ :3 :3 o o e 2 o --4 o o 2 o 2 2 T 2 5 o _Cio 2 2 1 2 o o 20 1 o o o 4 1 o _"" 1 4 o o 3 -_ 2 1 T 25 o o 1 2 2 3 1 5 3 3 .3 2 2 3 o 2 -.•. --4 2 2 -_0. ·1__ •..•.. -- . o 1 3 1 7 1 .3 o 5 O' o o -- o 3 4 0) o -;;.~ ~ -------~;.-- o 1 2 1 1 e .3 - 2 o 4 3 .3 o 1 e o o 25 T 16 -- --..... o .3 2 - 2 2 o 5 4 4 -- o ~.. -o 4 o o o T o o o 2 1 2 -_- o 3 .3 2 6 5 _ .•. 70 e o 1 1 1 o 1 1 - --__ 2 -... _ 8.0 8 3 2 . e 2 1 :3 .3 �--204- Table 5. Average percent utilization and frequency of occurrence by pasture during fall grazing 1958. 1/ _ - -, ~~ie --5-SB~~~ P. P.8-Cattle P. 9-Sheep P.2-Cattle P.3_C Freq Av % Freq Av % Freq .IAV % Freq Av % v % Freq ,IAV % til Occur Util Occur Uti1 Occur,Util Occur Util Occur Util I P. l~heep FORAGE srscrss Fre~ Occur Grass & Qrass1ike O:cyzopsis hymenoides Agropyron inerme Koeleria cristata Stipa comata Agropyron smithii Poa sp. Oryzopsis"mierantha Carex"'spp: Broir'riis -inermis Sn,airloiChystrix Bromus tectbrum E1ymus' condensatus Average " 6 5 5 2 1 1 1 4 6 5 5 36 16 41 40 0 30 15 2 86 92 94 93 6 5 4 1 I --5 75-- 4 40 50 46 30 50 45 5 5 3 1 1 5 8 6 63 5 J 5 6 6 16 8 4 16 1 1 1 6 24 --4 --:21 ---3 15-- 4 1 35 --4 24-- 2 ---1 56-- --1 -- --1 --0 --1 --5 -- -,1 --1 --0 1 50 -- 10-- -- --'1 -- ----- 68.0 "'-33,,8 32.8 12.6 -- 15.6 1 44 4 ,50 74 I 2 0 0 2 2 2 .. , Browse Artemisia tridentata 5- 19 6 Chrysothamnus -visc-idi- 4· - 83 ._ It florus Symphoricarpos teton •• 6 6 9 ensis Quercus gambelii 2 Pinus edulis 6 0 6 Cercocarpus mont anus 4 25 5 Amelanchier-utahensis 6 6 4 Eurotia lanata 1 75 Chrysothamnu.s nauseosus 1 90 4 Ribas sp. Rosa sp. Juniperus utahensis 6 6 0 Tetradymia eanescens 2 2 45 Mahonia repens 2 0 1 Purshia tridentata 80 1 3 Ephedra sp. I Pachistima myrsinites Sarcobatus vermiculatus Average 35.8 .. -- -- -I 3 17 21 26 -16 80 6 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 11.8 1 0 5 5, 0 4 1 4 41 5 5 -1- ---7--- --26. 4 6 0 6 0 5 0 7 0 1 0 2 5 -- --0 I 0 4 4 4 0 6 4 0 1 0 -- 2 1 5 7 2 4 0 5 47 4 0 0 1 0 -- 2 1 0 0 4 0 15 4 64 I .5 0 2 1 6 -- '--30 --.5 -- --31 3 ---- ---- ---- ---- --.5 -- ----3 ---- --5 20 0 1 4 35 4 1 3 --1 --0 3 1 23 53 0 1 0 -- ---1 --50 -0 --.• --1 -- I -- . --- 10.1 -- -- 18.5 4.0 , 2 I 22 2 40 I 2 0 0 0 2 I 2 I 0 0 0 0 2 3 --- -- 0 9 0 27 43 0 1 0 1 7 23 ---1.~. -- 9.1 -0 -- 11 ~stimates made by William T. McKean immediately after livestock were removed from each pasture varying from October 15 to November 7, 1958. Procedure similar to spring utilization but more time taken at each site. ' �-205- Table 5 (Continued) FORAGE SPECIES - Forbs Eriogonum umbe11atum Cryptantha spp. Antennaria dimorpha Phlox·caespitosa Sideranthus sp , EriogoDum tristichnm Senecio·mutabilis CorYifalis-··aurea - ._-Heucnra parvafo1ia 5-~S\B~~~ P. 1-5heep P.2-Cattle .P.3_C~~~~e P. P.8-Cattle P. 9~She.ep Freq Av % Freq Av % Freq Av % Freq Av % Freq Av % Freq Av % occurfUti1 occurlUt.ilOccur.Uti1 Occur Util occurlJJti1 occur\util 1 0 3 3 0 0 3 ;; h 39 --6 1 1 50 2 1 2 2 Llipinus greenii 3 Ga1ium boreale 2 Hap10pappus acau1is 1 Penbs bemon caespitOBUS 1 Achillea 1aIlillosa 2 r.esquerel1a sp, 2 Astrag·alus chamae1uce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 4 1 4· 2 0 5 0 4 2 I 50 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 ·0 15 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 2 0 h 12 4 1 2 1 3 0 4 3 0 5 0 3 4 13 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 -- 1 3 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 3 1 3 50 -- 2 2 -- 4 -- 5 I 1 3 1 0 0 7 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 ~._. _... _Opuntia_sp .• _ -~-3--0--1--0-2--01 0 1 0 1 0 Artemisia frigida 2 5 1 0 Artemisia wrightii 1 50 3 0 3 0 1 20 2 25 Artemisia dracuncu1oides-2 30 2 2 1 0 0 Gutierrezia sarothrae 4 10 4 2 1 Erigeron spp. 0 e 2 2 Sisymbrium linifolium 0 78 3 5 2 1 2 Astragalus diversifo1ius 0 0 1.5 1 1 0 Pentstemon !remontii -25 2 1 Sphaeralcae coccinia 0 .. 2 0 0 2 2 Lepidium montanum 0 10 0 3 Chrysopsis vi110sa 1 80 1 20 Sa1so1a pestifer 1 0 Antennaria dimorpha 0 3 Linum lewisii . o 1 0 1 Asc1spias·spp., 2 25 1 20 Descurania ptnnata Lithospermum rudera1e .•._ Kuhnia ch1oro1epsis Taraxacum officina1e Tragopogon sp. Aster sp •. 2 Weeds unid. 033 Ba'Lsamor-rhi.sa sagittata-Average 8.6 5.9. 2.• 2 11.4 Oenotiher-a sp , J 2 2 5 5 2 1 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 4 0 0 2 0 4 1 1 4 o. 40: 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 -0 43 ·0 60 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 -----------5---;:---1 ~ 0 4 3 1 1 1 0 -2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 I 0 0 0 1 1 13 0 0 -- 1 2 i I ...... 1 0&,09 0 0 5~3 I, ,i ! ' �July, 1959 -213- JOBCOMPIETION REPORT INVESTIQ~TIONS PROJECTS State of ---~------------------------------, Colorado Project No. v-ioi-n-i Work Plan No. Title of Job: GameRange Investigations Job No.2 2 Report Writing, Period Covered: ' April1, Lit tIe Hills Grazing Study 1958 to April 1, 1959 Abstract: . L "Due to the pressure of work planned under Job 1 of the above work plan only" about" one fifth of the time allocated f or Job 2 was available. 'There was tiine for a series of conferences about howto better attain the Little Hills grazing study objectives and a review of recent pertinent literature. 2. 'An initial condensation o fdat.a contained in utilization estimate tables for eight years was attempted by figuring an arithmetic mean for all species when grouped as grasses, forbs, and browse. o ,-_._--, -------_._------ ' --- 3.' utilization intensity ._--''0,-_ ..__ ._--_ .._,-_ ....,.._---_._--,--_ .._----_. of all groups of forage was directly .._.,,_.. _ proportional to the of grazing~ 4. Cattle utilized grasses heavier than sheep: whi Ie sheep preferred weeds to' grasses. Browse preferences between sheep and cattle wer-e not clearly evident. Averaging figures in the manner done tends to mask out differences of low degree o . . . ~ ., "5. A rather large variation in utilization estimates from year to year in' alrilost all pastures is surmised to have been due to one, or a combination of, the following factors : precipitation variances, changes in stocking rates; differences-in number'and qualifications of personnel making the estimates, and inconsistent plot sizes and locations~ Objectives: 'An-office job designed to: , 1. Study ana-'evaluate -all- data-accumulated up to '1958 at the Little' Hills'Experiment'Station lirider Project W-38-R. -More specifically, to--l'urtheriiIl"tlie --information available. 2. Prepare-'a progress--report in Which'all this Lnformatdorid.s condensed'and summard.zed, This maybe published in s orneform if the data compiled seems to merit publicationo 3'0 Plan the experimental procedure for the next several years. analYze Techidques Used: A series of conferences with gamerange men and others was held. -Officework consisted simply of calculating averages of data obtained from existing completion. reports of work done during the past eight years. Findings: Due to the pres sure of work connected with Job 1 and to. other departmental duties only about fifteen days actual work were available for this job. However, a number of valuable conferences were held with other membersof the Division, the Department, and other agencies; these meetings were planned for the purpose of finding better methods of attaining the stated �-214- objectives of the Little Hills project and better ways of evaluating the 'Work done up to this point. Among~hemwere: 1. A three-day workshop in Denver in Decemberon aerial photo interpretation: including uses of photos in planning and executing vegetation studies, 2. A series of private talks in Maywith the' following men: EO' If.• Reid, D. G., Pickford, Ralph R. Hill, and Mr. Blacker of the U. S. Forest Service; Leslie Robinette and Lee.Yeager of the Bureau of Sports Fishing and Wildlife; Dean Clinton Wasser of' the C.S~U. School of Forestry. These talks concerned principally the use of-the-ocular'plot method of estimatiilg forage production and utilization, but numerousother methods were discussed. ' 3. Two'discussions with ThomasL. Kimball', L. E. Riordan, Jack Grieb~ 'and R'.'--M. 'Boeker were--held concerning possible re"ana1ysis of the voluminous stem-length data using different statistical approaches., 4-~ A' review of recent' literature ment methods was made in May. Utilization on range production and utilization measure- Estimates! An'attempt"was made to condense erie manylong tables appear-ing on this subject -iifa11 quart-erly"reports since "'1950,' This wa.s done:'by figuring'sJJl1ple arithmetic averages of the' percents' shown in the utiliz.a.tion tables. Plgnts' '\.Jere grouped as grasses', f'or-bs" and bro~Jse by years and by cl.asses of stock Fhich [:;te them (Table 1) A'simira:r table for the deer pastur-es is shown in the completion report for .Joo 1 of 1;'>]'ork Plan 2. 0 Adinittedly any' attempt to average a series of averages tends to mask their true'meaning someWhat. There maybe better ways of appoaching this work. None-theless;' Table 1 affords a means of checking, in a general way, the efficiency of the utilization'estimate method as it has been applied in the pastures. Here it is evident'that forage in'the pastures has been eaten in direct proportion to the sto'ckiIig rates applied. A few exceptions are obvious. The'fact that cattle eat more grass than sheep is clearly reaffirmed; and conversely, that sheep are heavier weed-eaters- than cattle. Browsepreferences are less clearly shown. Up'to this point the method appears to be adequate to attai"n the stated objectives or-the project -concerning aminal preferences. As t ime permits, a more critical study of the results tabulated in the long lists of species and percents will be at.t.empt.ed , In so far as variation from year to year is concerned, obviously, changing amounts of precipitation have a great influence. This is particularly true- of forbs and 'grasses. Further study of this relationship is anticipated. A careful look at the stocking rates will show that these too have varied consfdez-ab'ly "but probably not significantly when considered over a twenty-year period or more. Thirdly, differences in the' number of estimators from year to year, their interest and application to the work, and other qualifications has undoubtedly caused much of the variation in the annual estimatesw Finally, the fact that each plot from which data was taken was not clearlY delimited as to location or boundaries and size would increase the variability. �-215- Rec ommendat ion: There is a need for more time to be spent. in analysis of existing data on tliis-project; this ~1a.s' the original purpose of the job. However,' actually doing tile an1aysis- is "quite-as tIme consuming as any other type of work, field or office, and =therefore it'is r-ecommended that when the assistant biologist vacancy can be ff11ea-ldth a. qualified person, that' the project be amended to add substantially the same job. Table 1. An eight year comparison of forage utilization estimates in average percents. Figures taken after spring grazing by livestock. 1/ ,'SFieep Uatt.Le 2 B Pasture 1 9 3 2 Heavy Moderate Dua1-1-1oderate Moderate Heavy Dual-Moderate Deer 1/ Deer 1/ GRASSES 19 12 19~O 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 Y 1958 7 19 32 29 1~ 195,0 1951 1952 1953 19.54 19.55 1956 1958 ' 1~ 16' 15 9 31 8 10 1 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1958 10 4 .3 11 .3 10 9 ----- 9 ----2 6 8 5 ,4 ' 3tl 20 16 20 32 22 33 36 27 '24 33 37 13 2 2 1 1 52 46- 86 FORBS tl 23 18 9 19 11 2 8; --------3 1 5" 2 2 I 1 6 6 1 1 3 4 0.2 2 BROWSE 4 8 6 10 8 16 3 11 3 5' 12 '6 04 4 -------- 1 1 2 4 9 9 7 2 4 8 3 5 1 10 13 8 7 9 8 8· 1 --------39 32 7 ----- ---7 1 2 ---- -----... , 2 1 .3 II Deer- liere added to pastures three, and five at a moderate rate (2 acres per deer , per month) from 1954..;.1958 inclusive ~ Y No estimates made in spring of 1957. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator Prepared by: William T. McKean Date: ~J~u~ly~,~1~95~9~ _ ��July, 1959 -217- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State Project of COLORADO ---------------------------------No. W~38-R-12 --------~--------------------- WorkPlan No. 2 ----------------------------- Title of Job: Check Station Deer-Elk Investigations Job No.3 Survey ------------------------~--------------------------------------------Sub-title: Period Covered: 1958 Elk Measurement Data. October 15 through November 2, 1958. Objectives: To obtain sufficient measurements of the height of the pelvic arch in adult elk to determine if sexes can be identified on quartered or hog-dressed carcasses. Introduction Supplemental work was done on the elk conjugate diameter measurements during the 1958 hunting season at the Rifle, Ahimas~ Del Norte, Monarch Pass and Idaho Springs check stations by members of the GameManagement,and Federal Aid Divisions of the Colorado Gameand Fish Department. In addition, measurements were taken on the length and depth of the aitch bone, as well as an attempt to age all animals measured by means of dentition. A total of 409 bulls and 204 cows were measured in 1958, compared to 747 bulls and 429 cows measured p~eviously. The 1958 data was analyzed by Dr. Elmer E. Remmenga,Chief, Computing Center at the Col~rado State University Research Foundation" Since he has indicated a need for further data on known-age anfmal.s, this report will only show the results of the 1958 data computations, and will not summarize or include previous work. Findings: All the correlations were found to be significant to the one perc~t level with the exception of the depth versus length. of the ai tch bone in cows, 1958 data. '. The c:orrelations performed follow their respective frequency distributions. A bar graph of the frequency distribution of the conjugate diameters exhibits the same general overlapping of' measurements as revealed in the 1956.... 57 data, . thereby supporting our contention that further supporting criteria .are needed. The frequency distribution between age and cop-jugate diameter indicated little or . no .correlation, apparently attributable to the large amourrt of unidentifiable data with respect to age. Age determination was difficult to ascertain in some cases, and impossible when the Jiead or 'antlers didn It accompany the animal. �..m-. ',. , . ~; ,6' ..ISD .. ~ - r ~ z r- ~ ,1- f. r-'. ~ .. ,r- ,I"" ,. ": .,~ IS'. , .r- rt", ~ t" r'- i- ..• ~ 1"-' . ~ r flI- po : I"" r- ~I$ rr- - t- F In ,01. ~ .. po a'.1 n t- ~ l- , '.:Iot: lI••. l- lII- '~-..:l ..Conjugate t- •.. ,... j 1- t- l- '1IIt- t- It-:- I1'1- rrr- r1-. fj>.t ~ameter, 'r" l- in 1 - f- " -. ... ·7.c .- ,,' Inches FREQDENCY DISTRIBUTION OF THE CONJDJA'l,'E DIAMETER OF COLORADO ELK, IN INCHES, 1958 DATA [] ..~. ~ 359 Total 8 Cows - 193 Total �-219" i'_, .... ----.-.' ! .'t .j . I _--_ : i' , I , ... _--,-,' I I , ,, 1 i / , I i .! . :1 i ! I ....._.-_.. .·····r'·I, . _. - - -"1! .,'/' . .. -"-'-"'-'l' I II I.I i , ,',. I i !I :·1 I , ~ I. I: II !l I I.' r~JJ- ~... .: -1-................... t-__."__~__ --·---1 I i..__ .._.__. _ ._. _,_ _-,._---- 1,· .. I',' '; ./ I,.: l. -:-~.__:.:..._. __:.:__~___. 1":':____ ~. .. ! : ' ,.': i ,', I ._._._ _; .--: U .: ..:..! " , " i , l ; . . ", , i;' . j :.j •• I i , i ; :. , : . '1"·': :i_j ! ~ 1-, : i ... : i i. ! !.)rl·- i't.;;,.,., . .-'-4...._.__;_..,. 1.""',:-, -;--, --:-I H-...l.-r++++f--L+H==:::";~;i-+-!._;~++-++H~'--H...;.'-.~ ; : 1 t ! T' .t . : :., ~"""i,:-.~~. ;. I , .-1 ;., .. ; ,_i -1':;.; i-"'Tl �-220- ---·-1' ------- - - --or .-._-. ---T - -------- i' ! : I I , - --- --..-- -. j --- ·-----·J---------------l--· I ! ' i I __ I I , i 1 I ,. 1 t '.; '.$. ._ •. . __ .• _ • I I I 1 J ••• .I. __ ~_ •• -':-' --'-'---,----i ! I I : I H I-I) i ; -, '! :.-:/, ~ ; . l' j i .1 ~.. I . ~. .! " r .•..--;-_ ! -----.-~+-,-. , ' ; ~'1; t·_ -: , i. '· . -.L:!-; i I _-'--'-__ [. ; , '--_c_'- ' , ----L-'-- _ _;_~_--'-_;_.L...:_.!._...:...,,L-!...L.LJ'-l-;--l,----'---!--c-l-:--'-J-~~-:---,-j-;--;--.:..JLC-;-j-!...J.-;-----'--j-J.l.l· ' ~... ' " : . I ,co. KEU Ff'EL a ';';£1-( Mlt:( IN . S.". �-221- . ~J_llrTTT:-I \ ' rr: -r'l. ! ,. ! : -r, '-, -, ~I-~_---:-- -------~I'-·:. ---...------- "1-----TII:-~_'- --- ----:. : ... -~~---,-:--~----- --4-, '. . .. :.. • .: ' I I : ~------_L:__ :__I~" . .} . I 1 ! i I i I J -- --j _J I .! . ,_i.. , f ~--+ !.J. __ ! ) ! -- --------f-I --"-. -.-..-_1r------ I I I I -- -J t I I .. , I -_ .. I "-". I ----- I i I . -- .. - -_ I I i I ,! I . Y I' . -. . ;- -. .' . ,------..t ..-----~--.-; --~---I.-~-~~---.----I l' --t:~-,'. --·-t1_-_i I-'f-~--~ I- ' . . .' ';": '. -' : I ; .. ,; -j .. j-' ! '1' :-1 I. i i; ; ! . ; :. I ; , I I 1.1 _,---,-~. i :':-1:::' , r: -j- \ . . 1 : . -. , .' .) .' -... __ . _.__-'- KElJf . :~ I ':.': ;. i ~ 'I I 1 : 1", i..~~_ ,. ;, 1 .__;_'--_L-..:..:....J FEL lII.l.l'l (I: E,=,SER CO, I" u.s.«. �422-' u¢~ n.c;. . -' ' : rf-...! ~L .rr~; i .~. !..!_ ~: .., : : ~ I . 1.. i . • • , : l 1.·· 1' .1 I I ; rr-:-: _,.----;-I..,.----T"7,. J : •. '.: : :. ',: '~,:!:7. ! .,. I.:~ I : i 'I . '! I ::':' ::.0 I. ':' ; '. ..' I Z_ .':: .. jO • I I." I / ' i ; .' '1:'. 0' l 2: O i . 1 . " I . ! i " -~ , :.5 I / ~ ":7 I ~ '" '~ --- , . _!..L , I L.'.' !'. " . . 0';: , I: , .' J- -----+-8 --.--,1.---L--J-~ ! .. ~ r . -1/ L - . - .. I •. ' ---c-~I' r, , ii' : ,.;.: ' . ; :-: ; .1fl.:',; i.; ~.~~+-,-'" I 1·'. -..~. ' .•... --- ... _ ..•.. _._ .. •• .. _l_~ ---- -~-- ---,,,"_', .: i i I ': Ii' 0 :.....: .1 ~ , : I . ' ' ' i :: : " .• . ( ! '!i!-J!I?t~,_ .,., .' '. ;..~l- 'i ! ! .: _ i" : ~. . . l~-----;-1--' .:'.;__' /, I I '-1--- ._--.-.-.. -i ---I • ·J·---·-·~--~--·~-t'..-·---· ··.. I I ' " ·---:1' .- "..-- ·.. ·- .. I __ --t i I .. . I' __I- - --I I !I I, , I. I / • ,. :.. i j ~_~ + _ _L~i~----:: I ..._~~_.I.,.lJ __ ~_. __ \J -----.....-?!:- --...- ._._-.. :' I' ~__:_,[ --,_) _+ I 0 I...~.l. .If, . ·1 / , 1 .,' ~~ .. 0. . ._....L_ . -.1.-- 1-' --t' ::, i ,I ,; . 10 X 1010 til<' inch • F ,'-i-'-.--:-J--~---- -~--.-;------ - - --1'-' .:--~~ j' . " , :, / ----~~--, -~--t-------:i -_c-~--r----~, --'" - •..• k i. . ._: :..._. 353·10 I I I i .--==-t--,----.....;..+-_-----+.-.- ....__ ~--------+---------------~~~--# s- I:; 7 J( / I / .i i ..&4e I....... I .. ' !.- ,/FJ .D,-~*;,6<A<>~",,,r ~~ j.n. Cc/o;r-O'%; C"_t:?~. ./ . v~Q';r-s I ' I -+ C-v·~lk .:2Z;.~~ #:/~., ./.?~ ~I -I -+. - _ --.--.j, I .-.~ --. : ! I ....J �~;:~" 'MLI1'I*~",,~'ttE:Eg:R=t+P:UO:::ITTT--;--J-r-~-__:_-223,; _~ ~~]t~BJlI-'-f-ti_ ~±I-'l'·+j-j 1~r1- !-i-:--~',i 11"'::-j n---:- , , l I jJ~m· inCh11 .',:!i'tl t ;.'.'p ttib!±B~'tf~Bttttij1lJ±V HT:IJ +D.l~Ir ILl ..r u+ -J- r-J:]J.' II' .j i I 'J--' {-l·fi K"E -1,1 --11'- --fl+R= ( ~-H ~J-j-i i-IT;~--r-. -H I·!-;., ,I -,i--" · +uJ h d ' r - J:, ,ti-tt:".J::J .... _ ft<- FE JJ~j~-_{T'_-+_l~-~--I-~~'{ll~±-t-J-rl __jl' i' ':'iL: :{'liJI ; ! ; l_i -i ~I'-t:rj+-il' :! :Tl,T~fri + H+~-. _ J1 ,,-,-, r ,.'1"-1 T'l ,:' -1LL,~· .!1.. 1~ ±__j Ht-a"i~:'++- 1 j .! 1 _j ,!j 1 I X ,1010 tho, 10 - I I , , • : . ' t -Ilf::i= _'-ftBlIiJt iJh II~ if:; 1'! t: + HH::; :f: i H:f~+ J-HT:,:ijfr~i:j~4~_lttl1rfrfr,iJf i r1 i j 'iiI1'!-r.:1 f! 1ht1ll: 1J1Jl tli-!··-ll;~fiJi :i1!:nl ii' ' . t H H"," iIi"- T '-/,++ ,_ tt tt l- _ _,WH__ ''--:-I . :1 1 j.,I I - - ]' .: t, ,I" I - _i - . .i.. ., ' I' It +-r y'"_ :1IT 'I I ~ ( Ti _;, +.iI, ,;:: '1 L I 1--< +l+lll :,.j,I,I[1 _I I ' ' i..,-," -,., " i1 J_ " ~i...:t:!:;_,t::f-j:,~:l--JtIt+-W-L_:I: r+t ' i l' ,I, " 1 ","" I 1 , I [_;i~:l:-·::; I , 1 , , fEjdM~lFEEEtfI~'-= -twi ~+[-I'IFJ + t'1rIJ~'+-+-:tLj-1"-I- _TJ J I"'~ i-l-JJ:I·I ~~i_0 • , '' ,:" I , :' .,'.'l' iI "':-:~I-'i I' I,I,-1:, l'-I r1: Ii. .:: " I. F~~tf±Hflt1~~=tif'l ~+-t!aI _.- ,_1:. _,_L:L j 1 T J.-~~tJf:-;-Lf.' H H~._. TI-'H-.f-~..w_L .~~ _ --' j~ _.I -ll~i-='1 _ ~ . I " !I ~' , i" ,_I ji ,~~. _$1-"r __ __. _ ___ __ H - _.. -- -1··· , "l"! " ., ." .if'-- :_1'\,-1 - - .+iJ Ii!':' : Wf 1 I,'· . '_.I=+..+,.I~"~_-I_-C,_;_ [i.~tl--~ :1+ .±fj-':H'j3'_, ~ r'-t~l~- ;__:~ ~ r}--: ----: H:1_ '-t-E:Eftt=R~l8[ft-~l-H ' H--!-Q~ . JLJ,.J '!T.. --I-.,- -~-t.:., "",." i I~ I .L 1Ir--t-i-+-W_l I I ::! ' , ~rUj~ J ' _ ,:\'4_L:;'O_-=I.?-·J[-·'-:~ , .' _ , " " -1-1 '_;_-:._ Ij_.-I--Jrr.:.'\.: _d '" " I' ' Ii;; ,I"" ...." .,", _ , ••• ' ' I' " :' it I ,i r;I : ; .. I'::;--;-'1, ' --,--~'--,--,--' i , i ' ' ,.', ' , . 1 !.. L- ' 1 j ii' 1 'I ti-r- _._~.-'i:.; '. _I _ i1 _ 1 j !_ I !_J' . , ., _ i-I ~ --'--ELI ± j' - r , 'I ~ • , I I ,,1 j 1-' T,'_ ': I ';."i -1, I"i ' ''" :: I: , ',' '-":,, ; , ' ,1 fl !i.·';-'-- j-fF i-t ilV-I·U- ::, i -'1 i',I :--,,' ," I '1 ,- - --I 1• 'I 1 i:! r : '.,' ': - i: J .!:!,:~"I_'II""'I-ii-: !:I __j ; . ,," ,1,',··_··""" I r r .]1 1 : J ' , ' ,'l_irl-I \ I ,TJ +l-y,_I:',-:-j -1-'(- I I " " I J : '" ~ L!. _" I ~:~-.,I " 1 I, '1", 'i _~ ~_. IJ"'! I i:· : 1:'.11 "I ' !-~.', : !' ,' I ' ! ' ," 'I ' , , ,14"+l=tj:±mq~r-Lt~ti:lfHtj~ll=!::I{J:_ ~il! j 11 ili_-I '.U-,,!~f) ~_±:~~~Ff±=R:-tj,l;-~f"8' ~l j i ,:; ,1 j; ,j 'f.·lt-I·-t, [ i --r--+-~.+--II--+~_Lfl--, Y ·: I : ; ' , , . j i : :, !JI.',;'i"1 .",,'.' ' '-0-0 : r I" !- ;,-!''_!,-: , ' ': .' "i!:;i'~I' . .,' .:",i'll .tl'. ,.:;1: ; I: " :;.' 11"", : I j- " I' 1I 'I : i· ,,~;" , ' , • ".' ,'t' ".,! ,'-II,!". ". ..,_ TI"'~II':.i,'I,J j I • ':! _ i t+ I' r i : ' l ~ -!'i ,I ! l.., -;-1,-LI1--·_j_ ! ..I·' • . ',eo'· "". ,:., EHt-tt-t~~tt~·1--¥:t++tiLfI-jj-!JIr-~k . 11 'E.f--=-Q' . __ 1-1. '_11lFmL~I'!I~j'Tlf ,_;' H-. . _ . ' 7J ". ttt+-V-~~--l_j]~-JJ.w-H i' I! I': i j.: ~J ",,!,;,' E _ _. I.' , 1- j ,; ; , : ~: ,I,' l.l .., ,i:: i' -! ~~~ ,:' ·~-II: .,' ! "" ~_", l_Jr , ~-l~--'--' _; _ +-_ ", I-~r+- -t-' 1 -- I' r Jt;+-::-'~l/·--t-- ~I-::- • I'J~ [] I-:-~.! 1:;1 ! ,: i ' :-i .~:- r " f""~' r .' ,. I j 1 1: I,· J! 1 i: ~;+'1 '" " ,- ' , ,: ' :;" ,;, J:, . ,1;'11,1-1 ~:\~f:-'~:-;-'~; '--1+r' -;.--~ :,,-- : r-'_IT1-t+-+-f---l~DIJ _'_IJ~l- ' .'T jl'-!ll!'I:-I!-'llj~t-:-i-i-;;i';-i': I.':" ' Il ,-. - - .-- " .-' : 1 I I ,I' I I' -li!I!~lj! I H-'- __ - Il 'j--1.,.1 I:, i: ,_,'\-1,' 1I I : ,--'----;-"1';-+-+'~ 1;+-'1' .-,'1 " i" '1'- - " ,'-:' .. " -l " '-'I-.,_.-t-+-b--I+--_j_-_j_+--~ 1r :i Ii- '-, ;-','- _I •.•,,-; -II i' i : j'i., 'L!, - ,-L", •• ' -+-1-- -'_ -_ _. .t I i::!!- ,_ l't", 1'1--1'.: -; 1'--' -1:'+~, -1't " i" ,!!'i i'!-jI '.1~"i!'l-,·!·I ~, ~'I __ 1 j:IJL-,It' '--j"'-' lt: ' ,.1,1 I, I'I'-"!-' I Ll -I~l----< T J. ;;.' ': i~.rf{' -j i -; .;: . i.! J: j'1.-tl j: I ·1 j j i-i .--i,: ,; tt .,-j ._ __ ..__ I L I ., I ,_I.,' I I I' 1 .~.'Ii.--__ -'-l-_1.~_Tl=+' \.i I~" j ',.'!'! i r ~-,;iIIJ_I -' Ji ;: !, i·' " ,.' J: ..'.r~ ... _'_. .. _.. ,.! I,; , !. 1Ti _. H"'1' I - U ; .., - ."1-., I _i. _. 1"- [ I ,. !1, I,'" - ' ,- -'',I ~ , ; ,-,. L 1 H1H-+~-J_I-j_I-Tl-ifrlT~J._ltH+-;-j-"··J-II-!_,_L.-_~',~_-:'l1+1 i·1 ct· .. 1[ rr 1 1.. I!' i r: !i" _;_ "1 -r+DU- :_~ - - - - j Ll _,_ l-._.!I. l- 1 -!- -r ,~_ J j' i- I 1. __ ,I.' :1- 1 l.t t~i:I'l jH": !-~+-.Ft -- -l-Jl-l-~- ~-,-:---~ , rll-'Ii~-H: "I __ ... .: -I' H- J_ L!1 ,.".", ,: J~-+ ..I'-:~l-i- LjjLI~,~,L:i--1 __ ..~,,'H..., ' :,' ,. t- ",',:lrj'--llt·;'_j'"!,,I,_:' ", - - ii] .. '.' 'Ii ;, ." ': I, r' -~i-ff£El-HttEEE-:-:--t' H~-l±R~ : :' : · :.',. : TiI . i '-I ' . ; :,.'I .. ,i: ' ,,' ;!:: J 11- t- I[ ffJJJ~i~t~ ._ jI' _. -+1' - ,_I'''' I Hr--r--H+--l-L- • _, _+ t1jjj-I++-+lr-tfj-t---ljjt~~~_L_T LL -L _ I H 1_ t=I , "i!l-., :-.t- ~ -I : i t : +- T ,_.:. ,. -t J 'I--~ J-- -.' 1_: ! I: f . " •. -I' . i; . ,-," i",: .i.! r: , ' .,' rt ,.,: II ", r, i ' ., ' ~U t ,-I-J ti r ' -1' 1- , ': ':" i ,,_ r-:I.... i I' rr" ,- i-I' ' ••L1"' l +-' I. ,,,' . r: r' :-, I· : ," :,,: .,.: I, ,," . I ,'1 "-,,, I ",' ' i.i. i' ,'" 'I' .. • -- " i' : I' I-~_ -j-.H ..j--:..• t1 :_,L1~_'. r "":" 1 .tr: ;:! i: j : ' . ,.Ii, _ ." 1 ... ., ". ,. ' I ' :! '• I. ', ' . .. , . , . ' . ., r Ii-Hjlf I'·' !.~_u ,_I : '".. , l;:rl,.::.'; .' " ' : ' , I -; • t , , I, : 1J , ,i +'1 f".J': : :'1"": I ' , ! I' ',L ..«. :'·l~" I,,,,. I i·" . i i..i -' I' ' j ['_,11-:-1.' ;'' t I -(:'-, ~._L.r"'i" .rru: '1 'I' ! -d 1-' - j l I : ' , ,-I I r t;, '-I ___ _ I I 1 J . ;: ; ii-!" :.'. . .., .,r ;: I. ::, I ._",' -.tttt.1--1~-r·f W -:-1 fJ - _~JAjf+J t:f'i ~I i:t li!' :.: 11! .(." i-/., .• ::... .: -,i&_. ,~",,,,,r.' .,.' Il~.-" -+R~+1 ':±:EQ rut r~:.;. bjl"~j, ~ ..., ~ ,r ..•..J.-: . c..· .. .. .' .' .. I j,::-ttt~f:Ff{~-il-tifd=-t~l:~r.~ !' T:i !~ F.;,<t~~:.z: ~2~'· . . J--:i8.: 'iii "-r ~+_+L -f=}'1 ' I ~t_±~. '~_I + 1= _' I 1 l' 1j h' _" '1, __ ~LJ::-:t i :j i rr r: i., .it.r .",,' .I ,I' I . ;':;;:6<6 -" :~).l~!. ' I ,'1'·"" I· -, '.,.: , •. '., ,/<11 ,' ! I ,!. "I·' '. . - I . c ';7~ Ii,, I-i-L. -l-- ___j,~,L ii-HI 't I +_, , .. ,~ __ .~~:-rr-. ,,-cr-- L _1__ 1 -t-+=t _I'-' ,_ ~ :::tifTI-I..• T- f:-il' _~h .-" _._! '1'-1 _ . li"I n Ti--.,.'r-j-t-'-j" ,-1"1--'_1,11·'·_·· ".,. ,;I--;-TI H 'I I-I j 1-; , !, , , .. I-T]'!' _. , , Ii', ."." 'I·'·~··'· .: T; i ;: .,_., ,~ . 1 . ,. --' ! j-' ,,-,., ",." .. 1 I ; . , · .'' • ,-:' : 1 ' : : : . ;-.': ' ,"1'1" , ..,.i .,,,, .. I ' ' .. .,,' . '. "I.: ., ' .• ,._.' ' ' ' .! 1I ' . ' --'-._- ' . - ,.I : I - ... ,. " .", --' ~_._. ..-~.' . 'I -, --, --- ' . . , .. .' . .... ' __~__l __ . K", -- -- , " I .' •, r ' :~I . :.ji-j: ::~ .....If· f EL t1 t:.:::,SER "-"II( I!'I u."i.... . ! ~ o. �3~J010 10 >: 10 to tI,,· inch. ~--.-:Lt~_~f ±'\=r' '_[m.I±~..~·~ [ : .r.: : t.~+t~L-~ -"!=!t~'f111t~t,--;:i'.· .1:' tfi qr~:~ ! !, ':•..• ,'-,.,,'.'.,; ;1.;:,'·~:·.·.ij!I·".;j:I:."... j:i ! ~~Tfi. :lj~F.~H r f ~~t1~-!-f1~ ~f-rfn:[-+\·':': 1 ;., ! If':::~tl.=J~-rl*!-h.H.·l-J:t.j: ". :,;;;:: I ; ': : , i.:" -_: ! ! :,! ..... '., iO,i,;.li.i "., ! : i ;., , • ; : :: L i iJT·I.! : ,,-,:", '~~~'~~-I-':'~' -:l: ., !: :;! ' ,, :." :' W-4-+-l--+--I-I4--I-++-1 ~:t:t'1t-:,,d11JFF-::t !:: , ' ! ! !,: 1 : : _;_L ~_' ._ I / :!j'. :,:', . " .~~_~ '~: I' i-:.'".j'i.;i,,)i~KI_( :., I~I: I,~';:-, .,'.' :-~---. - , i" ' , i_.~~~L~L_-~ i: 1":: i 1-Lr :(_1. -1·=·=T·t-,==·~·-L1-~·q.il·l-j.! .j,:-,l!!!.:·.!.~.; 1;':: " .,1 -' '/~ r /: r .. : -1~ L +~:_ ~t::-l. j i I . ~J!T i ! ! , ' ,' ,I ' '. . bJ!~l1F~~ --+--J=n !ul:1J I L; j :/\ '1-;; i:: -Ll,' '2,1 ;/'1:, , -l':H-tLl·j-i i IT 1 i ; , . ' .j.: i : .. ----. 7--' ._-:-\' I ~/i''1: :' :.:2 i .,,;:; •. .'.j; .rrrrr --ll-·.H·I- rl:!':·:l: ,;i f.'I):i:/~~:~!!', i:! 1:rj-·,:::=:::··:::-·,:_I<IL1' :·I;:;~··!: , 3..:?,tz_.z:1 1'/:,,~4 :(:I~: ..;·i·~.XL::,! I~it± ..'T~':: -:E-l·t! l].. j \;:; i i;' :': ' I'" . /'/' :/ r, .1:52: ,/;,; i'1 ,Jil !·Hi~:~L" J~- -. -.. -:-' j ..,j. i" i .: : '. i: . I':; ';. , , ;., " " , /': ;,.;, , J --&1+ -. '-Tl,- -- ('--I! "..3" ~Ll-;/', , ;., "1, .:,:~".,-, - __~_:!_~!"'!':Iljj:::\( '1:::::.:., ~::'-: .. .r ",:l::,>:: :·;Ji!-lt l:-;:::-'!,' J !\.r~~ . i" t.i, - 1,' . I · I /, , !' ,':_ ! .!,.'.:.'::,· ..,i:,' ... :.""I.",.· ..:::::.;;,.. (;....',';'.' i . '1' _I -.I.~-', 'I-'-'-'----!- It. i, :;! i" '~"'; : ",' i :. 1.' ; .......L:..J_~_J__ : -'ii' :/1/:;!r/'~:;': ?;Ii'~i,:,'~!I'1 I~I' 'ii"/'i'I:): ,:,,:. j I -~.=-:_ .r -- t= :_F~! II!:!;:i~' :~~::::li,:,,'i'l-i-'~i'~"l:: '-f!'1~ ~i.fL~:~: XL ::'FI'.tr i;:jj: liiji)Fi,!~r:;.:t'i~I; )rl.z!/(ij ,:'/.:21;; ;! ~~ f-J.'-I'li li jl·'.zt-Xi-..tL~;1.1-~,; ,1:,":j'!;;1IY:?1 'I!-" . j 1: y : ,'ji_Z!li;,fi ..s<A;.l: ~,/,/'1-~:, '.' :: i i-(_ T ],'-I+:~-LI"H-:-:-' W I; ,'1'~i.~!.z:13,~'! ~ 1'" '-J-'j""- I-i: 'l' '1-,'" '-'i-"I''', ,,1\1'1_._ .- -.. .:_. - - - --I::: ---- - 1---- ,1, I' I " :; i '~']~I~: I : i ----j_l--!-- . 'i';, - - T--II TJ,('o2.,I'4.:-::~;t2:1131·?' i : "::;' ','.',',:'.·.·I:".·i'/:I •.,·,,:,.,::', ·.i -.. ; :,-:, ..• ; •._:'.,...._f:.,·!·",· tJ .',/,·.,'1.,·, .".:,'.,i,·, '11'gi"'I ...:, "." ..... I- I, , • " ~ ·.-·~·-1'·1 It; - 111 'l-~' "'- "1';":,- --. Ii" ; , 1I ·['i-:-·· , "i : "!! i "'1 .1 1 I ' 1"-1"',' ' b', : i',: '::;" ;p!l: ,;" -.'" ~-~ -1-J.'r+·'l'i 1 i i'l . : ,. . : t ','j, tTi lJ-j" ,-:-. I' -. --1- 1 -·L. "" 1: r I Ii 1 I - j" ' 'f' ~ .j: 'I' JII.:.·.·-.~! ... ·.]1' l I -- .11" ':L -.-~ - -"'I LrTi~~-- ,- - I -n-' -I ' I -,--' L., o_ I" I .' 1 ,' i I . 1, -. . ! .'.:, :l: " , r: 1,':. ;,.,I:"J ::.: I!' ..,:,,: !-:. :.,; i·1_-!- "', I,.,)/.II·!:. i ',;,i: -I-! i i, 0' i,,' I; : ,:,.!, ", ': .~ :1' ', ",. ':. !.,. l ~_=.~tI·'_"'I,~JI;·!.:·!,l.i.·..~n,:~~!i,~t,=f,,1 !.·,~{.'-.J.',',·_,:l.',--l,:.J.I-),,=.··!l·.' i ~.i+!rlJ: :.!::;.!! -1"11J·.. :t1:~.:~r!t-[-j. : :., , r. 'i ':;, L T"':)-:" i !2: .. 1 i -i : : : ,. :'; I ".4J~v~ L)"ck:'·~ VI ·~-i ..~: ! 1 ! .•.. '. .. , :. ; I I ; , , " , , ' JR.' I ,---'1','-.-;;:,·' - -,.rr:t i : ~ ,. l'-r-,1 '1-,-',-;" ..J ";", . -r.• 1. 1.._.", ' 1. :.. :...., L .: :: 1! .__ r ,0- ~ --; ~, I I -,., -'['-11": !~:;-!-.-:.!, i j • ! ;.... ,.. ,' ! li ;, I : i . I I I : ; f I . j·nfv.p~·l~fij-,t! ~I-ifl.ro; +,j,=~j~'!'-:'-li-}J::- , : . ' 1' ' 'I Ii.': :- ~11~':'JTIf-~;'li:+,,~'-'J'-i="I:-~Jj-t-,,,t'--: i.' ': j,:-i~···,·=l·:-t,:-l' - _I....... ~ ':, -~I -+-!-I I I ,.._ , iFfd~ - i~t=i~~ft·i!r:·-i.{l:·j~~~ }rLJ+:i_r1"~: !::; i---~t- -j--I-'1' 1",'T 1-:- - -t--,.- .. '- •. ir: -II l-I i .., ..~. -.1. . : +" ~ '. _ T[- ... -I I- ' ..- - -.,--.~ '1.1'· ; T .JI - . - -H"li'! + j J; Ii J.; i ' ,-J -i r: .: i-, 1--\- '-:-1-+'1-1'1, ---·h·~:~.zrlt -; ._1[- -ii' 0110 ¥-t-- t- J*~-~~:~ti-Lt-l~Hf:-j'l~lll.tt,,:; j f.~!1f /i 1Jf. :; ~_.·,f.,- -'i- - j; : :.-]~- C , -1'''- i-'''[j·--- t B-1t ; j - "!' ~ --- ~r:'1,... 1:1 _; :-:~ll /i+1-1 j i 'l-i; j,i' rr~r): t,: : !' 1 T: I.: j,j J ii, ' I" i ; !-i ~ 'j-jl._:.l,:_Cil-:· ,-: "·-·-'rj·!"··I-'''-·l--I)I· ·, "'I""j ',"1" y'''!'Hi ,:::::" 1. I.;!- h hl-H~'~' i:.j·I12;4 r+-,1II:s ,! I ,-rj- 11 ~r ~!/:j__a~..i ,j::!" t-l LI-~..i, i-I- 1 II i21.tf·g~~:$i 1'1' 't I f !-11'1-1 i' ,::.; ! L j'" Li-:-·H·I,:.L: j-: ~.: 1'1'1 rr --/:.t-r ~J~L.. _! -!--1' l ! I! :;! i kj !; ! :".i" ·:' .. -i' '"J: ' il':H·I'.-ii ..:·:I-!,'.\ -_.- --,- "1-+ r- .- _.L 1 . - , 1 .' .1 ,1-+ I· " I ' .rr +tj+~:_ ~I-{I:jl' i~'~_I: .j':;: ifj,.1)+-:"i ,i i/{iy ! ,;! !'j i: l"::,' ·IJ·,'T···'-I~' .. '!:--1-1.. .. ;; - ,.' - 1", ~ .I.. ·i l' ~. i!;"1 .!I;,; _I I "!';':'jr-t:- 1 :,:, i ;. ! "';'T: I /-'1 ' ; _i ... "" •. , : '. : ' ~. , ,".:. I r! 1 ~ J: ' !' r ,;', ',:' ': I', J' , ,. I i!-' i' ,: I, : ·.1." I "r ,:, - i, :,:, , ,.", ,I'. . I' t' _P : 1 I "Ii 1 I.. I' 'I I -~ , 'I , I: -I, 1,1 '.' , : i ,'. ".. ' :, 'I ',: 1 'I ' ' �-225- 3~";·10 10 X 10 ttl tI!i' l nch. ,.O __ ~ , .... I '·. .... : . i I, ...:-- __ · c . : .. ,." . . , . , ... -~--f--~:-. · t.: , '. LL ", ... · / I ,---~J_' _ ,i �-226- ---- ....__ _--_ ,.. .... ..--.- , ---r--" i I. ! ,': "'-'-."-~ .. ;.-, I I i· 1 ..... "-'!-' :: .i i Ii , r""'-' _., - i -_._- --..,----- ; , ; ~ .•.t , .s :, : ~ . . ,., ,, ., , j " .: ' ' ''II ,: !,! : i: I : , : : : ; , ! : ! : ~ .. ' -+! -h-+_,_·__ L__-:....._.J._.- --_..!._, .._. : i i ; !.! i : i I ,." ' I , .. ' -~~~ ~ i. i -I' ,'11~.~,.:·1,,; !.1.: L: ' i ;'1 i. ,".: T' i ' I.1.j t ! ,, :, i '--'-~...;..' , '·'I·- :...c' I 'I' 1, I 1, iiI \ -I-:-I~"I' • ; • ... -- .. ,._. I : ! II i , - .. _, ! ' ;, " ' i , ! .', 1. j .. J..l . 'I '1 1 i! !! I 1:' I , I , 1. .I! ~i -','1 i ~"~,, , I! I·i , i i; :I"~"~.:.·~.,!!:.'·il[ -c..W.~....!.-.-. _.. 1 - ..- . , i 11' ! ,'1 I I I ; i : I I j ! I j' :,L: . .'-'-....:....,.....,......;-f--;-. .1 .. -..-,--.--.- i I " i ! 1 "'_', - ..-.~--.- "1"- .---.... ; 1-' I I i· ; , I . I ,. i I \ i, ! ~. , , I t l J , I ,.: I. --i~;~;.: :. : I iii, , ,,' , jc 1.1 '''7IL--'-+:'-'-!-+-~''''''''';'-C-+-. : ! "" ! , I j , I .. .1 ! L i ~ , l " I I '..i , ~-J _-:;.. 'i .. i I j i _ j :.. l.ii _j : I r. - ,L .: I •.! I ! •.I' !(EUFFEL" M.O( co. L:;St.:!-( 1!It u:s,." �-227- p- . ---T.- I ,; ....-C.."T"?"'----.~ 'I' .J ' .... ',' ....-'-. ···.. ·",7":-·- ..7'!;1'· ';' .. ! i .. ! . I . " . , _.• ,t ______ , _.tP. __ .... ., I ! • 1 i ! .. f j I. / I i i. ! , 1. /0 / I, .( / / I i / I 7 / ! . / , I -./ r ~-1' , I I / ,I I I I i . I I I { .I _YL_.l ..,/ 'I I .:. -..l ..f."- "~-·---~---II· ..:.-. ..---~.j_-""""-I---~-:.---:--I' .. ' , .,__:_,...-.._..._ -, .:: I -----; ----1 ~ , .. i , fr:l.liFFEL a "-SSER •••. C'(INU •••. co. �.586 <r· I{":E f-·--r··4 -l--I-I--l~I-+-i- r+- h.' - 10 X 10 II) lh~ inch, i ! ~- ;'-:"['r- _jl~-+-1'± "-1' -, T'-- j , , 1, -I I· t -j- --:-1i! 1-j;..-11iH-i i·1 ]-1 1--1 [: -:-,-., h- ( H~=-'--I~ i' x--';c:;;.,-;~' ~!·~.m - V~j1.11"'1~I-m?i-r1-: :_~-:r~\-: , l' j'l j--;' I n.::! , I ' , I " ' ,......., ~ I I' ,';':'1' ~ [Ti 1--'_ ~4--1--1-J -~-:-ll •.TTTl-~-----r: r-' - -l-~~y;",~'Jb-.JI I ' -. I ;·'-H-+-i--,I ; ~ -1+. . T'I" - + 1-+1-1 1-. tt . 3:;3-10 _ ~~_ +t -, - - -'-1'1-1- 1: J +- ,1-1--fI TT, I ~ I I ---'I +-'-L-r~-i -1--:--, .:::1-t--I::;-r-l~1-rJ' -: ; ri i" 'I i .- -I ~ ;-i i-I i-I'--j- -f l'-j:: I!: I I ii, -': lY'" :Yi.~, iD/",,.,.': ,~, O,;r.,~ :_J- -!: +i: i ~7:r r ' ;..r'il ' r r-: :. -]"-l1-H-, :-1'-; 1 i1 ,1 I , . 'I ,! -: - -: !!, . I il I I: ~'-bi..!-:+-+.,j .••••,.i,-w_ -l1"~ ,_ - rt+trt -r' ~: _,..,__ TI '.' ~ -: -. ; I: '_ ~._. : L--J . : 1 '_'.J! _~L,~_.T,,~,J 1-+1. -. i·---f-~JJ~t. +-i~~t ~t~'I'! ~:: I i I! 11TTT : -D ::t-t 1 -R-~--! t- -I j(~41~~11V.!---~;'1 ~-i iJ'Z;37 ,: 1:! ; :-1 i i ; ':. ,.1- .t _ I, _ C +- r- - " 'I :-; i 'I \ .L f-'-- -~m'FfJi"-"~--~R' - -~-~I-f--j-,"-j'\-' I ,:': •.... i:: : -~~ l _~,._·_tj"I(-fI"""bT' ._J~~ I : __'I.I';r. ·t1"''f--~'l'i,.J-.l~--~iJ; . 1 """': I, !!I' ',:, ': LI'\_ ," ,:, -H+-H- -: _. l' -e -. ':~ , "'--1- ~ .l_~i'I )I: -,.1.1. ____ . _ - - ,_, " -- - . ! --·~-=I-=@I-:j,71::-1+·'·~j-~lil!~:·:': ~b.lJ.~! 'i .:-~•. __ --I-.IzI;';"~~'r~ V . I -'~. '. -1--'-4 jaA' ]1,.;::1"'..,1::', 'I l' I 1 ! ,1 -.----1--1Iio. I ; ~ (J Z;..~~!'iL/~I"k~) · 'I''''' J. ---:"~1t.--- - - '--lI"'t, L- ----. j 111 . 'It It i " 1'1 : i': ".~,_AI' ..I·'7~f;-r/ '!';! : '~-!, " ".;.! ! I' I t I tr tr: '." i ,.,. L'·i.J,.,.' /..r77' i ,.': ,',' ,!:. :' .;' ~_2 : J'1 ; - !, : I 1.. 1-,-:·' 1'_1-1..l' ' . I ';1 t • i . , , j ' :,! '-',- :.,' :.~_L:.:_·_I·;1'1 -, -- I 'I!:' ;J.?;"7CV :-t-. ~-- •. •• •. :1'. : :~"•..---:--;i;-;-+il~' - ,,'? ,-, 'Tr-: :~.1,·!-·-.t--I·~ +>-,'- , •• '-"1- ~I:__~0~1~!"_I~-J I ' ,. •• .K.i ~ " .,,1 J : .:.._: - ,:~ i i: '1 1-.: I"! ,! II:'1, _1-+++-II.:j,~ ~ ---.. -. I ' -,." ,: I' I " I· .,.,..., 'I" ,I I '" -. ~+ __ ' . ....i...' ' ;": ~ ~' ' ' : ' ' ; , : I', l' II i' I", j · -- -.--.~ ---1-' T'-' , '·--r; lof"A "-1' JJS: 1..;1"""""-, 'or' ,i; "1'1 !".. r1-H-"·t-- -tTf t-j-H i I r~I'll~~.-~~t.i..A'. i .' Ili:"'; -- : don' i ,I .'. l I I 1I :.,-,. ", .;: --t~r--j:i.:tt~1 ---~i)~r~b~~-:-:~~~_.BZ __~__:~..I . , ._' i~.~ ~~j_L ' B_!~__ '_~ __ 1-~r-_~-_H,_Jjl~i r.1 !·j~ll:h'll'i·i . " I:,: ' !!! 1-:: L: U j ! .. ' f11 ·-l t'--t-'1ft -. Il.~t:: ;_-t,,, -:i-·lll--lli.-rt -1-' 'f;-: i :! : ~. '. ' . ' . :; , . ,: i-I 'l: :: q:::',. -. J'I i-1 I-j- '-1- j 1" 1., •••• 11 1 ' I!I I .-1=' - !I'~ -l-- "I' ,.1 , ;: i tI-+'~"--- j. - - --to i:tt~:~ -- 1 I r";-II .~ - '1 ;, " -,--I--"! 1 -- :I-~!J 1.1.; 1.1'. .r .,-! f,'--I,I~: l.l l. -I- t~i [-I ill- -l.;·i I'I-! i ;-I 1-1-1-1- l+lt+ : : . , . I , : ,; :'1:, III, : i·i-1! If: : !,\"lj!_ i j i -,' ',--t·, Ii' -III,,!ll-11il! _'~i', 1,,::11,',1 I)_I!:: "yi-~----[-'il' iTi II !:I I·i-J i '1"",1 ': .". i ,:; i,!, [-t!.,:, -;~-i""f-" - '-"J .;-. iH,-I-f,',I-j',-I'Lh: li::':: t i I·j, i:l i li :: It~ -'~.'I}'-,':Cj.i·1 i, ;~7J:!J,'lti-i:! i!i:!:' 'i,l-lt' ;.1"1 I!, ~. TJ. - - , .~.,'E,o!f), u ;:, ••..•. I.7i,I., .. ·III-I· idi-1-'J:,.I-;r l ~r/""-r-t-';~. l'l-:.-·I=" -j __'-+:-J' 1+: m -~~r;~ I --1II p-'I "I i+ ;i' 'lA'ITD~-Tl-'i .<.:t--f> :1-. -~Irt- -._ : jj.:, 1 -!-, /.l)v "1," J _ H- i 'i : --·I-':-'-i":: l-' 1 -I'. -'-'\'-i'i' -,1 ,-, 1 i fl'I'I' :1; irr~:-'" ·.ill-li'll,:-! : ,·1 j! I i::::t,=:.rJi-:j., ';--H+,"-': '.1 J ·f j i ,'- '1,-1-,: I i, II., :,f·l.... !.!-j! , ,-., i, :,'.'.',:. :,: :-'" ! :-i ,,4,." :!! i H !-:; i-i 'I" I:, ": _.:,' ',! ' " I ',.,I L! '',' : - I. i·: ._i'i:! I. i 1 -ITT .--~ :ir!:;J .' , : (~'1b ...~D -: :' j )~ 11J.;.l·IJ·i· I : i 1_: i f H·i i j :- H ! ' : ~, I v~. J~--[t'4-1-J71'.:'''I: H !-if'S~-'.Ll ,,_iFT-"'"Too,"'i<-of7. i :-! I _II ;.j,,:; I_j' ! " .! i IU.:_: '.-'- H-- T-~-' l! ,I. j'! ("~:'.1"":,, t' ; ,- -j .! : 'S). i ' 'rlc'i .:! : i ~ :"'i-~:'! i ;!! 11 .: J 'J:' '. U.·.:' i__ __ ~l). .1;; - -1- :: i f'..11-,.. ++: -- ++-t-f....-..!~i. 1 ; 2.• f t, " -I ~::' ,I ': ' If#!,,~ ,-:.~: .-- ,': "i', " • I-L-(L.! : ;, I 1,'!-I:··'" .]1- ·IJ-II:-:·I ,I Li-; _; -l/ -I:'~ t'- '-'-1' -..... '''d::..l ii?II.:~'f 1:1 ;. ,,' .:.. 1- .1· + I ·;J:,.,.__---t_:i-tt1-i--l+"-t~' -~i~~'- 1',-, i i l ~t"/: rt r ," i:: ': ' i !: ,. ~ : : !.; , IV i -; L i-iif! I1/.;= . -~~-l~~~rlJ j::::I-iTf :;:: :.rI:FlT!1 ,·::.' 1 1' li, Lr!!:i.!·!:': "s:-/~~:4<~i"" '-11" !' -,-,·, . r ~i = : : ,: ,'; " -== i;_.a3 cU : j j j :. ,i j i ! ! ' ; : : ,~., Ii"1T I i Ii,i--1+~=:+~~1:tr~Jl' 11'lfll_.rl~f-~J(~4''1-'--ll;'"f"I-,r-t' : j"" i j"-f -l+-I·~tl;Jf"I' -r::;"1"1" :tjl'l " 1/-!1-: i< Ii/fl..l, r: "'l·~··L"" ;""-1-'" -,rJ I"rll ' I': ;·1--,----·--:, .: !., :;. :" t ~ !l~: I-U-iT:' I '" -1-'H--.,,-,::.:j_-i-m~'-lti ++f-H-+-I';""'~~ ",'...LA-6''S' !i:; ...."'lr"7". ",' : i·' ',': I :'j!], -! -~i:.Ii-" I liLl.'" ~,- :; i : r! i' '1-1.1. ·,'-1" ''-~'''' •• ,.,1. J_,.: J. . ,1· '1 I T 1--- - 1 . '1__ -._ - - ;:: - " - - ---. -. h··-iT -II!; . 1 I -" I :-.! I : 1 !, +. -. - I n I -, -., • I l. . - -.I .. h'-H-t-H-tt+t+t+H+l+f-+++-!-1+4-H;...!'+.L...:..' 1',"1 rr - ,.1. I' i'" H- ~~ - -f±t~t}J'-ji.l ! - --I! ~.;:; , 1_ ~I--~_tT,._II':-!-"·!·i ,r ,-+' -, ; , . I1 'I I l-H +- .-. -1- -1'-- =JI+iT-_.,-"-r I Il1 '~: !._ 1 I ' I : • i. .l~' 1- Ii -!- -: I -,i-H ;. 'f +-1-J - - -1-T-r-!!- . -' 'I:=j-W=r~;tr' I-!::~-.:rP i: .:'" ii' +t't-j-rri=+1---j Il-ii-H-+i f-f-t[TfFH-+ -·1p-L i·J : -j. I r- -,--t III-r-'I-I- ~ !,; 1 ! -;-:- ,~~" _J•.... ·--'-I..;...· ...:..J.'m_'_:...-Tl,-~-~..i..t-!-i......:-i_--',-' .L.1'.!.., -t-,-, ·...L·i..L.:-j~t-.L.: ii, ',i ' _i i, j '.' '. do; ; : j .. -'.-'-':"-'''';'' i I' ,; i -. ; '- ! I.' , J : "",c, ,. ,-; I .: .-,-.-'---;-! :' i ""I ! i,' I' LC ... J I r-·····. ; -i\-; i . I , ' .r ~;:.IT!. 1,·-1- I. I,' :,'-,i.i ! : : ' I;'! ; i i j' , . . . ',..., ,, .I ",._,, , , ' 1 , , : ' " T i ' : : I j'1 i-; ;, i I -1,;-- ' ! ! i·j , -' ,-'------'--- !:., .1, i : ' 'i.1 . i :,.: :. ~ .. : I ~ i : ! ' ~I i j " , I:; ·'_i_._'; i-~'+--: : ; -' '----r-:-.:.--.-' -. -- __ ,::.. ", _. I .:!: ',' j L : :; ; i·I',' . ' " , i :';'1' ! I• I' '1' ", " -, ';,: . ' J : '" II I ' , ~'l: i ii i! ;'. :-J . ' ".. L; , ! : ,i:::' ;' i. i.! ! -,! j. '" ... . _.: ; : ! , ,L ! , I -I" ! i ;.:-11::; I :~i=j~ij!~:-tl:il:l:lmHj~". · ':1 JTI - I1 ,-' ,--;.: 1-; ~J-t-j; 'r' Fi~-1m-Tf'ti+lH.[t= -;-; ::!'i-I 1=1·: ii~ T ;- i: "i ' . Iii :],1 i '., J: .: f =r :l-~I." --1- H~-·_._'!'lf11=:·:-q-l; I: f! j: : t ~ ·-,-t' -I- +1 .. : I' +++++-++-1:'-1 rJ ,,'. _ -, I I, i~l',:f :.: 1- I, j 1,1; .: -il I 1:-1'-·'·l-~-l:! ;; I ; ~: : : I +H-'--I-;':! :,1"1---;,,'1""1U '-t-+!-+-~+++--I-.j. Tr '::r -+ r :; t; J..L 1 ,., -r-- i! . : I' " I '1 I .i 'T+- '" , . I 4 ~I.:.il=r~ -i.f _) I,--',':t'=~, 'i_:.i-:!:,~:.j i ! i :.' : I ,. -i-'.J_'_j,--,,!...l-' i.;..........;._;__'----'--.:......:._-W~~.L..t. i·-. l},:--- t,:+ '::: 1 I 1 i -,. . I - ..: Ii ;I ; . .;!!", "I' i" "I ',": 1 j-:: :-j 1-1-1- .~!: t, : ·:.ttlj ':1' ITI- I I· : I' 1 .I l""r-l- "j i: , , . I "., . . L~ __ . J l' . .. . KEUF.FEL", ._' E"",U-< , ~.•.t·( j~i :, 5 .••. " " co. ! �u IF- 353·10 -229- ~: : :'j'!i' I;::' . n<~E ~--'--I---':~-:-;-:~-~"----~-"-~J-~~-~-:-:-~1' -~rl'fr·HJ!,~·E;·±~,·~ '-"i-~ 2' . .: /' 10 X 10 (otJ,·. ',,(·h. 'I !~ 2, , :! i : !T ,--, i . I. ,, I.' t' :z I :. j: .L: ':... :.': .-: ---.-- '~--_:_--~ - -,-: "-. _'. ---rl' --,: -.-.-~:-' --. ---. -- -·....!...II ~--~·il· ,.~: ------- -- i=I.:·:~C:;:.-:~ H ~:-; r • .' : i . ~, .J.. '~ •. , , ,;. . i!: ,',," '/' .. ,' ~ " : , ----- - .--"':-' .; :~(J I ! .I ' ", ~ ' t · ..i-:...--- --_.:--:--~..; ---1--. ~- ~- -,~s ' .: I ...._~~ .. 1 ' __1__ ._"'__;_'-':1- , : j :_, J':T: .;.T 'j; i' " :i/ / -.. : :,:. .. ~ ...; r: 1:' '---. -., --:; !;;i-tlj~+ " J J»:! I::'.i:-; ,. .. v., I !_L~, : t· j 1-- ,-- ~ .. }.3 -!- f':-'l~-~'~~ :; ",., ~_j__~,:jj_: .~ J i! 1: ";' j / I:, /, I / ~ ':, (, i ;-' .[: 'j, ;. ,~f) !. "II '_~,: "--/' -".--'·ll·,'_--:-'~--'---l----'--I--.I·-:-, ! l;~ .__ ~ _ _j.-- . . ." . . .'1i.."" '., ''::'''1 :{.': i ;. I' '.' • :" ..! :' t .• ! . ,..--+--:_ __ ~_1_----------. ---.J i I : I / .J ;.: ,. ~ :1, j I .. ,'." . , I,'~. r I : :,Ifl.·r:-.t+ .; I • I / I .' q:r:r,l~'i- .rl .-..-------...-~r_--~---'--.----.-.-.-~, ' • f' i.! ,!_~ i' ~ L ''-'' i-1m... 1_ ~.. ~ i.,l i ... I" .~ .. ~ ~ ! 1i ..,-;- "li,:I, _!:.... ! :., .,1 l . ~ ! . .!. ~ ~ . " ! i'. .! : _. :_-];_'1'.:.. l ~.. :' ; ~ t·;- ..,; I'!, ,I. I I I._! L: i i.il-i !+il'''~j' .I~.;.!i-j; 1';-+ T 1:._1-....11.·•.·1i·'.. :] -oj!r'-i,~.IL~L ..:-t:~·1'i r I -I t:J . . . , ,_ 'Hi~c r'~~.I.=· ! .1' ',: ' ' ~r-~ '.:, , ,''': ..__. ~i' : :' 'J' I it: ., '. i, , !I , i. {!~/: )')' I I I I .. . ..~,:j' .~'I . I 'I: I ',..' j,2: , ' ,~ .:/: ; , ! -j ,,: ri+'.!·! --.--f --;---1 --7 -:'}-' J.,-. I y; 11/ ___ I 'J2.:1 :/: -I ..,2. 'i. ~ i I ____..__..__l-.!2. -._ . '4: ./; /' ~ I. . . •... !. . .•. , " , --·1 ----~-....--~---..·-1-- -- ,- ----:r- - --'2-'F--'2.~ .._ ·.1.', i ~ Iii .-- 1 . 2 , 'r; . !: 1 --'---·.:......;.h~ ; , �U"'E,353-10 n 10 X H !cUM Ineh. KEUFFEl. a ESSER .CO �-231•• 3.:-·.J· i o 10 x io {:! tho . KEUFFEL :1I,_.t1. 8t ESSER CO. IUDtlN 1),5 ..••• �-232- L KEUFFEL!l ""CI[ ESSER CO. 1M ·.L~.A. �-233';' . 3~-;.I.! c ie ;< 10 :u iL ·",·11. �BDtlJ' ~ _ KEUFFEL. 6: ~.SSEH CO. �-237- 3~·j.~~jO io ro--'- ~~~~"---~~!:--~--r:---'-----~ ---e;~;=~~f.-;-;;;;--- --1- "-'-"'-'~---:-T-' t· i, I ., " '. :Gw,s., /. • . , I . ~~j . '1 i H n-n : IJ::; i+.. I '-,!--~'-'~~-i .. ; , I, 1 ~ : • ' , I .. : 'j ,;- I .! i. I 'I ~< J[) Iv 1.1. J . ------ I I r i,1 '; , I ' r ' , I . :-"! L_~I_;_;_,.~;_. ~~~~~ __~~~~ .L..L..J..-'--'-~~_,...l~' K·UFFELd _' , J E~·:-='Eh!.CO. �-238- Conjugate Diameter ~. Length plus Depth of Aitch Bone: Th~ correlation coefficient for bulls is 0.577. A line was drawn on the graph where the ratio between the conjugate diameter is equal to the sum cf the aitch bone length plus the depth. All the bull measurements fall above this line, which would indicate that an ani.mal with measurements which fall below the line is a cow" but above the .line could be either a cow or a bull. On the cows the correlation coefficient is 0.398. The ratio here in relation to the line drawn on the graph is about one third above the line and two thirds below the line. When we break this down on our limited knowledge of age, we find that yearling cows are 83 percent .above the line and 17 percent below, while adult cows are about one third above the line and two thirds below the Ltne , Thus it appears that the yearling cows, for the most part, are responsible for the divergence over the line into the buD. area. As Remmenga suggests, much more 'data are needed with respect to age, bone measurements, and whether the cow is dry or vet for greater confidence in the data. Conjugate Diameter ~. Length of Aitch Bone: The correlation coefficient for buD.s is 0.602 and for cows is 0.495. They seem to exhibit the same overlapping of data in frequency distribution to the extent that no conclusions can be made as to determination of' sex between cows and bul.Ls 'with this data. Conjugate Diameter ~. Depth of Aitch Bonet. ) The correlation coefficient for bulls is 0.214 and .for cows is 0.197, and even though they are significant, they are of little value since the frequency distribution and coefficients show a large overlap of the cows and bulls. Depth ~ Aitch Bone ~. Length of Aitch Bone % The correlation coefficient for bulls is 0.395 and cows is 0.063. The coefficient for cows is not significant, whereas the bull coefficItent is significant. Again, no definite conclusions can be drawn. In conclusion, it appears that the most logical data to investigate are those of conjugate diameter versus length plus depth of the aitch bone. Remmenga thought that the results of the statistical analysis would not verify any direct statements concerning sex determination and was doubtful if further study along these lines would yield any criterion. After I found an error in the analysis and interpretation, he decided that data justified further measurements already mentioned, namely, age, bone measurements and conjugate diameter. Prepared by: Date: Richard.:w. Denney Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Federal Aid Coordinator July, 1959 ------------~~--~~------------------- � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/fd7dd1b6ad2924270dbf60eced9cec27.pdf b2b2dff8730c535918a5f3426c574382 PDF Text Text -1- JOB COMPLETION REPORT . DEVELOPMENT :PROJECT. STATEOF __;:C:..,:O.;::L;,.:.;ORAD;.;::.:;::..,:O_-:-..,--_ PROJECTNO•__ ..•... F;;..w_-_6_-_D_ .•. l ~ Fish and Wildlife Habitat Improvement " PERIODCOVERED:January 1., 1959 to June 30, 1959 Introduction: This project was 'Planned to include habitat improvement for any and all wildlife species. There undoubtedly "Will be a wide field for work of various types which eventually will be carried out by this project. 7. Fences: Three miles of fence were proposed i'or the south boundary of the Delaney Buttes Property (Fw-4-L), the line lying within sections 2, 3 and 4, Township 8 North, Range 81 West. Also, an additional two miles of fence were proposed for the Delaney Buttes property under Project AmendmentNo.1 (March 4~ 1959). Another one-quarter mile of fence (6strand, five' foot high with predator screen was proposed across the peninsula at .the north end of Lake John (Sec. 2, T. 9 N., R. 81 W.) to -----pFevent--or-diseo1ll"ag-e-t;)?espass-dtu"ing-:the·-goose--nesting-seasonc.--------------------, The above fencing was not accomplished i'or the following ;reasons: (1) Boundary lines had to be surveyed in order to determine Department land. This was done with the Department engineer and project personnel. (2) After determining boundary lines it was felt that the Department might trade some meadowland for water rights and some land for roads in order to. cut down on the number of cattle guards we would have to install. This. trading will probably take some time so the fencing has been delayed. It is felt that the above proposed fence will be constructed in Segment Number3. Under Project AmendmentNo.1, one..•. eighth mile of fence (3 strand) was proposed for the Wellington Numbe.r2 property and one and one-half miles of f'enee (3 strand) for the Baller property_. The fencing contract for both the Wellington No~ 2 .and Baller 'Properties was let on a sealed bid of $375.00 with the Department fUrnishing the following material: 578 steel posts, 8 end posts, 21 r~lls of barbed wire and ll56 stays. The work on these two properties was accomplished. At Carey Dam; a temporary 'fence was constructed i'rom old fencing material on the property.. The fence was necessary to keep trespass stock and Mr. Leibert's stock) 'Whoselease does not expire -until September, 1959" out of the managementarea below the dam in order to prevent damage to the tree seedlings and the grass and sorghum plantings.. This fence is 2.8 miles in total length and will be replaced with a permanent fence during the next project segment. Labor on this temporary i'ence was accomplished by 'Project personnel and a laborer hired to irrigate the grass planting on the dam and spillway. �-2- 11. Signs and Boundary Markers: Arrangements were made with the Colorado State Penitentiary at Canon City to make 282 metal directional signs designating various department properties at a cost of $190.80. Twenty-one or twenty-two large wooden signs also were ordered at a cost of $660.00. It is expected that these signs will be completed during July and August, 1959. All wooden signs will be erected by Fw-6-D personnel as soon as they are recieved, with the exception of those which go to Mt. Evans and Little Hills Experiment Station. Personnel at these two installations will erect these signs. The metal directional signs will be erected by individual Maintenance Sections of the Colorado State Highway Department in compliance with a directive from the Planning and Research Engineer of the Highway Department. Each maintenance section has sign crews, with each section responsible for the signing in their respective jurisdiction. Listed below are the wooden signs, 2 inches by 28 x 46: Atkinson Mesa Access Road If If Dry Mesa If Dominguez " If If Wolcott Divide If Wolfort Mt. " Piceance Creek Deer Range Poley Game Management Area Sand Draw Management Area Sedgwick Bar Management Area South Platte Management Area Setchfield Lake Management Area 1 sign 1 sign 1 sign 1 sign 1 sign 7 signs 2 signs 2 signs 1 sign 3 signs 1 sign Wooden signs for five areas listed in the P.S.E. were not ordered due to an error in making up multiple carbon lists. Since all of the funds provided would be used, the five signs were not ordered in this segment. 12. Planting Trees, Shrubs or Aquatic Plants: Trees and shrubs planted in 1959 included: Ponderosa.Pine (Pinus ponderosa), Blue spruce (Picea pungens), Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolia), squawbush (Rhus trilobeta), Chinese elm (L~us pumila), Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), Caragana (Caragana arborescens), Plum (Prunus americana), Rocky Mountain Juniper (Juniper~s scopulorum). Soil Conservation Districts planted 140,582; individual cooperators and groups planted 11,000 and project personnel planted 3,632 seedlings on State-owned properties making a total of 154,764. Potting of 85,000 evergreens consisting of 2-0 stock was accomplished by a contract with the Colorado State Forest Service at a unit cost of fifteen cents per live tree delivered in 1960. 26,050 potted Pine (Ponderosa) and 2,875 potted spruce were distributed in 1959. 682 potted Juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), obtained from stock grown at 79-R nursery were distributed. \, �TABLE 1 - SEEDLINGS PURCHASED z ON HAND AND TOTAL USED BY SPEC IES: .~. . SPECIES PURCHASED Juniper (Rocky Mountain) P. Pine Spruce Olive Squawbush Elm Hackberry Caragana Plum Sandcherry Bare Rooted Pine 32,000 35,000 42,000 9,500 9,500 3,000 3,000 TOTAL TABLE 2 - SEEDLINGS PLANTED ON STATE-OWNED (·'r NAME Smith Place Bonny Dam Wray Fish Hatchery Carey Dam TOTAL OLIVE SQUAWBUSH 200 200 100 350 400 450 TOTAL 600 682 35,000 2,875 2,217 682 26,050 2,875 31,785 32,050 34,950 9,175 9,430 3,050 2,500 2,217 40,824 154,764 1,200 250 COOPERATORS ClffiAGANAOLIVE SQUAWBUSH 500 4,000 200 500 350 300 500 700 100 100 50 150 , STJ""RPLUS 8,950 215 2,950 7,050 325 70 500 20,060 PROPERTIES: EIM PLUM SANDCHERRY WO 100 200 200 500 50 TABLE :,3 - SEEDLINGS PLA...Tfi1ED BY INDIVIDUAL NAME HACKBERRY 200 Salida For. Ser. Springfield For. Servo 100 IWLA - Burlington IWLA - Colo. Springs 300 Boy Scouts - Loveland Boy Scouts - Berthoud N. Sterling Res. PLANTED 50 134,000 ...... ON HAND 1,650 5,500 JUNIPER 532 50 50 100 TOTAL 1,532 900 1,150 50 682 3,632 PINE 400 200 450 AND GROUPS~ EIM PLUM SANDCHERRY 1;.000 -200 300 500 100 100 100 100 100 300 1,700 700 400 PINE TOTAL -5,700 1,000 300 1,250 2,100 300 350 300 300 11,000 �<;JJ ~"v; (~ :N) TABLE 4 - SEEDLINGS PLANTED IN .SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS ;S. c . D. Akron Big Sandy Black Sq_uirrel Branson Trinchera Burlington Genter Cope Eagle East Adams East Weld Flagler Hale Haxtun Horse Rush Kiowa La Plata Limon Loveland Meeker Morgan Northeast Yuma Padroni Peetz Platte Valley Purgatorie Rock Creek Rocky Ford Sedgwick South Platte Southeast Weld Upper Arkansas West Adams Yuma TOTAL Hackberry Caragana 50 100 400 1,000 1,000 200 50 500 50 600 700 100 200 100 100 2,000 350 100 800 25 50 900 180 750 550 150 150 1,000 350 100 150 400 800 200 200 200 2,000 8_,575 9,280 200 100 . 200 400 400 Olive Squaw ... bush Elm 400 200 100 500 1,000 530 1,500 100 1,600 1,250 500 1,000 500 200 600 170 1,700 100 1,900 135 700 1,200 700 1,400 6,000 800 200 400 800 1,400 750 400 1,000 1,000 250 100 1,000 1,500 1,000 1,600 500 600 1,250 1,300 400 500 1,000 2,200 650 300 600 2,000 500 700 100 1,500 150 1,100 100 500 1,800 1,900 600 4,000 600 500 800 2,200 800 300 400 1,000 29,735 26,200 32,050 2,600 50 500 1,550 500 1,500 1,000 250 600 250, 600 200 500 50 1,000 1,450 1,600 1,000 500 100 1,000 2,250 Plum Sandcherry 100 100 1,900 300 400 100 50 1,000 1,000 100 300 150 200 2,100 200 1,900 Pine Spruce 1,000 400 50 400 925 650 2,250 100 1,300 1,400 350 1,100 1,200 400 400 100 800 150 375 225 1,200 1,050 1,100 575 1,000 2,000 100 600 1,625 550 275 ·-:;L50 1,500 25,300_ Bare Rooted Pine Juniper 100 525 275 25 25 50 350 225 75 300 200 50 50 400 100 25 200 125 125 400 250 12 100 250 140 210 100 125 630 2,825 __ 2-,-211 400 Total 3,450 1,450 450 4,500 7,425 1,655 8,325 375 8,850 5,675 1,950 5,000 5,550 1,450 3,350 620 5,000 850 4,800 715 4,000 6,625 6,125 2,625 17,262 5,350 1,800 2,890 7,435 5,400 2,650 1,650 5,330 14~582 �-5- 13 . Herbaceous Seedings: Herbaceous species planted in 1959 included: . tall whe.atgr.as.s,. intermidiate wheat.graas, Pubescent wheatgrass, Astragalus cicer, Coors sargo sorghum, yellow blossom sweet clover, crested wheatg.r.a:s.s, Hegari ·7082 mil'let'; Martin I s millet, Westland millet and Echinochola drusgalli. .. Cobb Lake property - (3 miles south, 2 miles east Wellington) 15 acres of a grass and legume mixture were planted in strips. A mixture of tall wheatgrass (10 Ibs.), Pubescent wheatgrass (lOlbs.), intermediate wheatgrass (10 Ibs.), Astragalus cicer (10 Ibs.), crested wheatgrass (10 Ibs.), was planted with the aid of a cyclone broadcaster. The grass and legume were then harrowed in. The mixture is growing well in the approximately 15 acres planted. About 30 Ibs. of sorghum (Coors Sargo) were planted in lister rows in four different areas on the property. This sorghum is doing well and was planted to provide food for upland game and waterfowl which use the area. Wellington No.2 Property - (2 miles east Wellington): Five acres of sorghum were listed in unprepared land in the northeast portion of the property. The land was covered with perennial weeds of about .six inches in height which were providing no cover for upland game. It was felt that even if the feed crop did not grow, annual weeds would grow in the area and thus provide denser cover than that which had existed on the area. Carey Dam: Twelve acres were planted on the dam face and spillway with the hopes of establishing a permanent grass cover in order to prevent a serious erosion potential. The twelve acres were planted to a mixture of yellow blossom sweet clover and Crested wheatgrass by a crew of seven laborers who broadcast the seed and then raked it in by hand. The area was then irrigated and a satisfactory stand of grass and clover has come up. Several bare spots caused by wind erosion will have to be replanted next year. Ninety acres of Dottom land were planted below Carey Damin order to attract some of the Arkansas Valley Goose flock to winter in the area. The ninety acres were planted to the following varieties of sorghum: 100 Ibs. Hegari, 200 Ibs. 7082, 300, Ibs. Martin, 200 Ibs. Westland and 80 lus. Echinochola crusgalli. As originally planned only ten acres were to be planted. Whenthe planting date arrived, the regional tractor, which was to have been used to pull a borrowed drill, was unavailable, so approval was obtained to rent .a John Deere tractor and a twelve-foot drill. With the availability of this large equipment, it was felt that the entire ninety acres could be planted almost as economically as confining the wcrk to ten acres. The seed was on hand. The only extra cost was in the labor of planting. The total time on the planting took only two days, including taking the tractor and drill to the property and back to the dealer. The different varieties of sorghum-were planted in strips so that growth conditions and possible preference by waterfowl could be noted. �-6Baller Property - (3 miles south, ~ mile east Berthoud): It was originally planned to plant a food patch of three acres on this property. This was not done due to unavailability of a tractor to accomplish the job. A meeting of the Loveland Sportsmen's Club -was attended and tentative arrangements made for the Club to do this farming operation. The equipment which was to be donated was not available during the planting period so the plan was postponed. Summer fallow operations will be carried out during the summer to provide planting areas for food patches and tree plantings in the spring of 1960. Sedgwic.k Bar - (2 miles east Sedgwick): This property -was to receive five acres of herbaceous planting in the spring of 1959. Due to lack of a trailer to haul the Department's tractor, this job was not accomplished. The trailer -was bid on and delivery not made until after July 1. The land will be fallowed in the summer of 1959 to accomplish herbaceous seeding of area in 1960. There is good cover on the area .at present in the form of annual weeds. 14. Thinning .or Clearing: This project was carried on at the Cobb Lake and Wellington No. 2 Property. It was ascertained that where weed growth was fairly tall, as on the Baller Property, that it would be better to let potential nesting sites remain until after the young were hatched. The work will lie done after the middle of July on this property. The :Cobb Lake and Wellington No.2 properties had short, perennial weeds which were of little or no benefit for nesting cover. Approximately five acres were disced out on each of these properties. At present, it would seem as if jack rabbits are getting more benefit than upland game from this type of development. 19. Water Developments: Five guzzlers were purchased on segment one but none were installed. Personnel from Federal Aid Project 37-R were to determine exact sites for these guzzlers. The general areas were ascertained but not specific locations. A graduate student is at present working on a problem as to benefits of these guzzlers in different locations. Since he wasn't hired until the middle of June, this:phase of the project will be delayed until Segment Number 2. Project 'Personnel in the area aided in an installation of a guzzler so that future establishment will present no problems. Some work -was done on location of the guzzlers for information for the Bureau of Land Management. The materials and supplies (5 guzzlers) have been requisitioned and are 'on hand for use after the first of July. 20. Soil Bank Program: Information was gathered, reviewed and filed regarding the Soil Bank frogram, Agricultural Conservation Program, and the Great Plains and Water Shed Management Program. This material was given to the Game and Fish Department personnel at the In-Service-School held at Lowry Air Force Base, Denver, Colorado. A brochure was prepared from material on the Soil Bank. It was turned over to the Game and Fish Department Editor for printing. The distribution has been started on the completed brochure to our Wildlife Conservation Officers, Soil Conservation Service and Districts, A.S.C. Offices in each county, and to individuals who have shown an interest in wildlife practices, by writing the Game and Fish Department in Denver. The latter -was accomplished by a news release made by the Game and Fish Department Editorial Staff. �-7- Meetings were attended in five counties - Pueblo, Kit Carson, Yuma, Kiowa and Weld - to go over the wildlife series (G Series) of the Soil Bank and the possibility of putting the same series in the Agricultural Conservation Program. A meeting with Mr. TomShrader, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D,. C., was held to go over the Soil Bank Program in eastern Colorado in relation to wildlife populations. Assistance was given Mr. WayneSandfort, Project W-37-R, on the questionnaire compiled and executed by his~roject. Four hundred and thirteen, and two•... tenths (413.2) acres were planted under the Soil Bank and A.C.P. for wildlife practices. They are listed as follows: Acres 320 13·2 20 20 40 Program SB SB SB ACP ACP .Practice G-lA G-lA G-lB A••8 A-8 County Weld Routt Kiowa Kiowa Pueblo Plans were made for wildlife practices in three (3) Great Plains Contracts - two in the Wray area and one in the Flagler area. ;Initial contracts were made with parties who expressed an interest in ,wildlife practices through the A.S.C~,offices in each county, Our W.C.O's, S. C.S. personnel and those who wrote to the Department in answer to the news release made by the editorial staff of the Game and Fish Department. Great Plains Contracts are made on a permanent basis. Suggestions .and ideas are put into effect to make the farm and ranch unit a complet.e picture. If more land is needed, the money is made available to purchase the ,required amount. Whenthe size of the unit is sufficient and all the plans are followed through~ the farm and/or ranch 'will maintain itself. Wildlife is not forgotten in this program. Considerable time is spent in the field making the plans (such as contouring, dams, terrace, wildlife plantings) for these 'contracts. The three Great Plains Contracts that we are interested in at this time consist of plantings around dam sites and of odd corners to give the 'Optimumbenefit to wildlife. As was mentioned before, when these plantings are completed, the area will be maintained for wildlife· forever. It will always be part of the farm and/or ranch unit. The A.C.P. and Soil Bank plantings that were completed this spring took considerable time. The original contacts were made from a list of individuals who had shown an interest in doing :something for wildlife. The names were turned over to this project by the A.S.C. office managers or by the W.C.O's located in the area. Each individual was then contacted and his area was completely covered so that the optimum for wildlife could be obtained. The next step was to get the area signed-up for the right pr-actztce, Plans were then made on how the area should be planted, where and how much material should be obtained, and when the planting should be completed. �-8- Summ~and Recommendations: ject plans for the first segment were generally accomplished. It is felt that numerous false starts were made and that this was due, generally, because plans were made too hastily. In other 'WOrds, developments were planned before actual fundamentals had been discovered. This was especially apparent on the Delaney Buttes fencing project. Plans were made to fence an area before preliminary surveys. Whenthe latter vas accompLt shed , it became apparent that we had rr jumped the gun". It would appear that .a.Ll,future boundary fencing should be preceded by an adequate period of time which should be spent in surveys and mapping of properties to preclude any such errors in planning. ? The planting program was ancomp.Lf.shedwithout any trouble. This was due to the fact that previous experiences had made the program "routine". Workwas accomplished in a minimumof time - all plantings, with preceding distribution and planning were completed by May15, with the bulk of work accomplished before the end of April. Previous planting has shown that seedling stock planted before the first of Mayhas a much greater chance for survival than that planted later. The tree and shrub program has been stabilized at about 150,000 pieces of stock. There is still a shortage of evergreens, mainly Rocky M01mtain Juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), but the Colorado State Forest NUrsery is in the process of growing them, so future stock should be available. Development of State properties is going slowly. The difficulty is not on the larger parcels but on the smaller areas on which no Lease .can be, obtained. Included in the latter are: Baller property (160 acres), Cobb Lake (160 acres), Wellington #2 (160 acres), Sedgwick Bar (210 acres), Carey Dam(90 acres of farm land). This makes a total of more than 750 acres of which about 25.0 acres are usable crop land. About three-fifths of this 250 acres is being developed at the present time. There is much need of improvement on this phase of the project. It is felt that future plans must include a man to farm these properties. It 'WOuldbe a six-month job, during the spring and summermonths. At present, the two men assigned to the job are spread too "thin" to obtain maximumresults. For example, the Cobb Lake property, consisting of 160 acres, requires the following: summerfallowing operation on about thirty ac'res , spraying for grasshoppers, cultivation of seedlings, planting :of feed crops (5 acres) and rabbit control. Four more properties plus regular project assignments made for a rather full schedule. Segment number t'WOof the project will have sufficient time allocated for drawing up managementplans and maps of some of the State properties. This will make it possible to spread the work load over a period of time in a systematic manner so that optimum results will be obtained. The planned development, which might cover five years, has been needed for a long 'time. Approved by :_ ..• F. •.... :~,_. ,.C._J,~.,..,'K..,..l_e,...i .•. ..• n:.•.• 'S .... c_hn~i_,t,_z..--_ A:s:sls,tant Coordinator Prepared by :__ F_. ...;A~._M_e_t_s~g~e.;;.r Assisted Date: by: Cliff Moser - Eastern Slope Claude White - Western Slope Richard Takes .•. Soil Bank' O_c_t~ob __ er~,...;1~9~5~9~ _ �...:..- ..•...• ~H cu«. ~,... G~~ ~-h~ QU<vt-U<l ~r. DJ. lC;r, -9- tOLOr;ADO VIV. W:!.:-':-~;:-EJOB COMPLETION REPORT Research Center Lict"8r;t ~17 W. PrGspect ft.-Cclltns. ::;0 3C:::::::SINVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ----------------------------------- Project No. Game Bird Survey W-37-R-13 ----~~--~~----------------- Work Plan No. 8 ----------------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Job No.1 Habitat Requirements of Lesser Prairie Chickens April 1, 1959 to July 1, 1959 Abstract: The existence of a small resident population of lesser prairie chickens was established during the study when three booming grounds with a total of eightee~ birds were located in Baca and Prowers Counties. Typical occupied range in Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico was inspected. By comparison, most areas formerly occupied by the lesser prairie chicken in Colorado have less mid and short grasses intermixed with sand sagebrush and more weed cover ----"combined-wi th-the sand sagebrush. The presence of good quali-t-y-permanent-g-rasfrland----· is needed for prairie chicken survival and increase. Recommendations for lesser prairie chicken restoration work includes (1) development and management of scattered surplus Federal grazing tracts through fencing, reseeding. of preferred grasses and food producing species, water deve Lopmerrt; and liIIii ted tree and shrub planting; (2) reguLLar.cansus of known flocks through spring display ground· counts; and (3) further field checks to locate new flocks of lesser prairie chickens •. Objectives: (1) ':110 determine if existing flocks of lesser prairie chickens are present within their former range in Colorado. (2) To determine feasibility of restocking. (3) To determine feasibility of increasing present populations within their former range through habitat improvements. Procedures: L Basic habitat requirements. A. Review of literature. B. Landowner interviews. C. Inspection of occupied range in Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. II. Spring search of areas in Baca and F~owers Counties where lesser prairie chickens have been .reported in recent years. :..'_'..·:_~~_:FS 317 W. ~rospect R CoiUns,CO 30526 ��-11- HABITAT REQUIREMENTS OF LESSER PRAIRIE CHICKENS D,onald M. Hoffman Introduction The lesser prairie chicken Tympanuchus pallidicinctus is smaller in size and the general coloration is paler than in the case of either of its nearest existing relatives -- the greater prairie chicken Tympanuchus cupido ame.ricanus and Attwater's prairie chicken Tympanuchus cupido attwateri according to Lehmann, 1941. A distinct difference in habitat requirements ani, therefore, a distinct difference in former and present range exists between the lesser, greater, and Attwater's prairie chickens. In Colorado, the lesser pr8.lrle chicken originally occurred in portions of Prowers and Baca Counties. This range apparently coincided closely with the sand sagebrush belt along the Arkansas River in Prowers County and the sand sagebrush belt in southern Baca County. Flocks of 50 and 100 birds were reported lim southern Baca County by landowners as late as the early 1930's. Populations of lesser prairie chickens still occur in southwestern ~sas, western Oklahoma) eastern New Mexico, and the panhandle of Texas according to Frary, 1957. In most states in which the lesser prairie chicken is native, the range has been greatly reduced in size and the number of birds has decreased greatly f'rom f'ormer popUlations. It is well known that the greater prairie chicken is cyclic -- their numbers increase and decrease: periodically reaching highs every ten years (Hamerstrom and Hamerstrom) 1955). There .is some evidence to indicate that the lesser prairie chicken is also cyclic according t.o Copelin, 1958. The number of prairie chickens in sample plots in Oklahoma is determined by counting the males on display g:vounds according to CopeLf.n, 1958. Copelin, unpub . found that the maximum extent of thirteen movements was four miles. Purpose of Study The United States Forest S.ervice Land Use Prlject personnel of Baca County have been greatly interested in rehabilitating the lesser prairie chicken as a game bird in the southeastern part of the State. This federal agency supervised by Mr. Elmer Miller controls some 250,000 acres of grazing lands in southern Baca and southeastern Las Animas Counties. These lands were purchased f'rom private landowners during the dust bowl days of the 1930' s . The eastern portion of these lands lie wi thin the sand sagebrush type. formerly occupied by lesser prairie chickens. This preliminary study was therefore initiated to inventory existing populations of lesser prairie chickens and determine the feasibility of habitat manipulation to re-establish the species in the area. The U. S. Forest Service personnel have suggested that isolated tracts which have little or no value for grazing be developed through cooperation of the I:l. S. Forest �-12- Service, Department of Game and Fish, and local sportsmen's groups. Some of these tracts lie within historical lesser prairie chicken range and most all have populations of scaled quail and pheasants at present. These would be reserved as game bird habitat with no future stock grazing. The advantages of such a program are clear in that the areas will be open to hunting during open seasons. Two separate 160 acre tracts have been offered thus far and others are available if agreement can be reached. Development work such as reseeding of gtasses, fencing, water development, and cover plantings are proposed on a share the cost basis. Former and Present Distribution in other States '. , , Kansas Lesser prairie chickens are found only in the sand hills along the Arkansas and Cimarron River valleys in southwest Kansas. This area extends from approximately one hundred miles west of Wichita to the Kansas-Colorado line according to . Gasswint, unpub , Within the Morton County Land Use Project (U. S. Forest Service) the occupied lesser prairie chicken range is confined. to the area south of the Cimmaron River according to Atwood, unpub . Oklahoma Lesser prairie chickens were formerly abundant in Oklahoma prior to 1907 with 500 to 1000 or more seen in single fields of western Oklahoma. In the years that followed, the lesser ~rairie chicken apparently declined steadily according to Copelin, 1958. The distribution of lesser prairie chickens in eighteen counties in western Oklahoma was ascertained by Copelin, unpub. They were found in Beaver, Beckham, Blaine, Cimarron, Dewey, Ellis, Grier, Harper, Roger Mills, Texas, Woods, and Woodward Counties. Current investigation has shown that there still are several thousand lesser prairie chickens in Oklahoma but that the popUlation may be at its lowest ebb during the century according to Copelin, 1958. Copelin, unpub. found 4 males per square mile on display grounds where Verne Davison .in 1938 counted 16.6 males per square mile. He suggested that poor condition of the grasslands might be one of the most influential factors in the decline of the lesser ~rairie chicken during the past 20 years. New Mexico Prairie chickens formerly inhabited all of the sandhill type of country in eastern New Mexico from the Texas line in the south to the Colorado line in the north and west as far as where Buchanan is now located accroding to L;i.gon,1927. Project observations indicated that the bird was still abundant in southern Roosevelt County, northern Lea County, and eastern Chaves County. In addition, chickens were fO'Qnd to inhabit Nadine Refuge southeast of Hobbs and some were found in Harding, Quay, Curry, and Eddy Counties according to Frary, 1957. According to the same authority, the lesser prairie chicken population in New Mexico hit its peak between 1900 and 1915. �Figure 1. Male lesser prairie near. Arnett, Oklahoma. chickens on display ground �Figure 2. Shinnery oak type of vegetative cover f'ound within Okl.ahoma.iand...New_Mexico_lesser_prairie __ chicken range .•---. Figure 3. Mixed grass type of vegetative Oklahoma's lesser prairie chicken range. cover fonnd within �·_0- S?2 -14- Texas The lesser pralrle Chicken population in the panhandle of Texas has declined steadily since 1942 when the first d.rurmD.ing counts were made. The period of big decline was concurrent with the initial impact of the big drought and was a time when overstocked ranges were general and led to pasture depletion according to Maggard, unpub .• D.rumming ground counts in 1957 indicate only what might be called a relic pupulation according to Maggard, unpub .. Range Requirements The prairie chickens are highly selective of habitat preference -- the lesser preferring sand sagebrush or shin oak types of vegetative cover found in the southern great plains, the Attwater's preferring the coastal prairie grasslands of Texas, and the greater preferring the permanent grasslands of the great plains. Proper grassland management apparently holds the key to prairie chicken survival and increase. A number of persons have attributed the decline of lesser prairie chicken numbers. 'in Colorado to pasture depletion during the severe drought during the dust bowl days of the 1930's. During this period, the stands of taller grasses including little and sand bJ:.uestem,switchgrass, side oats grama, etc. were reduced to the extent that weed cover replaced these better grasses. Sand sagebrush Artemisia filifolia apparently became more dense as the grass cover was reduced. Remnant stands of bluestems and other climax grasses are found widely scattered throughout the area. One landowner presently living in the historical range stated that many of the lesser prairie chickens were eaten during the 1930's by hungry landowners • .. New Mexico The ~ollowing is taken from Frary, 1957: For the most part, prairie chickens in New Mexico are confined to the sandhills or "shinnery range" and the sand plains. The soils in these areas consist of deep, loose, unconsolidated, wind .reworked sand and some moderately deep, loamy soils. In climax or undisturbed condition, tall and mid grasses were probably the dominant vegetation with climax species being sandhill bluestem, big bluestem, little bluestem, Indian grass, sandreed grass, and grama graases, Shrubs commonly found in this association are yucca, shinoak, sandsage, mesquite, and skunkbush. Under overuse, two distinct shrubby disclimaxes develop. The loose, deep blowsand is charact.er-Lzedcby shinoak or sandsage. Other invaders are three-awn grasses, yucca, aand dropseed, snakeweed, and in rainY seasons a wide variety of annual weeds. It is quite possible that a climax type of vegetation never wholly ext.sbed in the region now occupied by lesser prairie chickens. Prairie fires and grazing by buffalo and wild animals probably caused this. Under present conditions, grazing by domestic stock causes a retrogressive succession. Improper grazing brings about a phys:tOlogical disturbance of the climax species resulting in loss of vigor, lack of production, or abnormal growth.· Continued overuse usually results in a change in composition of the range due to death and disappearance of preferred plants. �-15'" Following closure to grazing by the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, secondary plant succession has moved slowly. In general the most desirable plants such as bluestems and grama grasses have shown an increase in vigor, reproduction, and amount present on restoration areas following closure to livestock. Ligon, 1927 stated that agriculture, particularly where small grains are extensively grown,: favors prairie chickens where the cultivated land adjoins prairies' With rank grass in which the birds can live, nest, and raise their young. Oklahoma The basis of management for both the g;reater and lesser species appears to have a common denominator in that a high q_uality or climax to near-climax grassland is an essential pre-req_uisite. Such factors as food, water, soil type, and space req_uirement must .of necessity be considered secondary to q_uality grassland even though the inadeq_uacy of 8+J.yone of these factors may dictate the survival or 'extermination of the prairie chicken in any given area according to Jacobs, unpub. Copelin, unpub. found that all prairie chickens found in western Oklahoma were in regions where permanent grasslands existed. All grassland areas known to be occupied had some brushy Yegetation, shin oak, or sand sagebrush, and sandy top soils. Prairie chickens were not found in grassland areas which had brushy plants if grasses were of short variety only (buffalo grass and gramas) or grazing had been so intense as to eliminate virtually all vertical grass cover. Copelin, unpub. stated that three distinct types of vegetation were occupied: shin oak, sand sagebrush, and mixed grass prairie. The shin oak type was composed ,p~imarily of (1) mid and tall grasses, among them being sand bluestem (Andropogon halli) , little bluestem (Andopogon scoparius), sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus), and ;s,i~eoatsgrama (Boutlous curtipendula); (2) a variety of forbs; and (3) shin oak (Quercus havardii), a low growing 8•.20 inch oak. Sand sagebrush type had (1) short, mid, and tall grasses, with short and mid grasses, especially buffalo grass (Buchloe dactiY:Loides)., hairy and blue grama (Bouteloua hirsuta and B. gracilis) being more prevalent than in the shin oak type; and (2) sagebrush Which grew densely over the entire landscape. Areas which support shin oak and sand sagebrush type of vegetation have coarse sandy top soils. Mixed grass prairie type was composed of tall, mid, and short grasses (same as mentioned above), some forbs, and sagebrush. However, in this type sagebrush grew only in spots, primarily in draws. Top soils were mostly shallow, but were several inches deep and sandy in spots. Copelin, 1958 stated the habitat of the prairie chicken in Oklahoma generally appears to be broad expenses of lightly grazed grassland and perhaps some weedy cover or grain sorghums for feed. Lesser prairie chicken nests and hens with chicks were found only in some of the best grass cover in the locality. In regard to the use of trees and shrubs by lesser pra~r~e chickens, Copelin, unpub. found that when the maximum air temperature rose to about 90 degrees F. or highter at mid-day some prairie chickens used the shade of tall oak bushes or trees (motts) under certain weather and soil conditions. Clear weather, high air temperature, and dry soil were associated with their:use of matts. Their absense fIOm the shade of motts was associated with cJouayweather, air temperature, generally below 90 degrees F., and moist surface soil. �-16- . . . . . . . Greater Prairie Chicken Hamerstom, Mattson, and Hamerstrom, 1957 outlined a management plan in detail for the greater prairie chicken, principles of which apply as well to the lesser prairie chicken and is included for this reason. The following is taken from this reference. Prairie chickens must have large areas of open country-wide horizons. They must have grassland. They must have food. These are the basic requirements throughout the range of the species and cannot be compeoml.sed, Fortunately only a part of any -area need be under special management in order to meet these requirements. This we believe is the key to prairie chicken management. SPACE: Large sweeps of open country are essential to the breeding range, although chickens do use woods in autumn and especially in winter in Wisconsin. For best production, we estimate that an area should be not more than 20-25 percent wooded with the wooded tracts in scattered blocks. l GRASSLAND: Grassland is of vital importance to prairie chickens, the keystone in pra~rle chicken ecology. The prairie chickens are most abundant where there is the greatest amount ,of grassland, particUlarly permanent grassland. Such qualities as height and denSity of grass and the land-use practices in which it is involved seem clearly to he more important to prairie chickens than species composition. NEST - BROOD COVER: In general medium - dense stands of some of the mid grasses are best, for example b~uegrass, redtop, timothy, and quack grass. BOOMING GROUND COVER: These have two common characteristics: They are placed in open exposed places with wide horizons. They have short cover as on grazed or mowed meadows or no cover at all as on plowed ground. ROOSTING COVER: Grass is used for both day and night roosts from spring until early winter. Reed canary and some of the coarse sedges-much too thick for nest cover- offers excellent roost cover during early winter. For winter roost cover when the snow becomes deep prairie chickens commonly use the snow itself as roosting cover. Brush patches .and the edges of woods are often used for roosting particularly at night during the winter period. LOAFING .AND SHADING COVER: A variety of types are used for loafing at all seasons- grassland, the edge of grain or clover fields, clumps of cherry, aspen, and willow in summer; all these plus oak woods and aspen thickets and edges of cornfields in autumn and winter. ESCAPE GOVER: Grassland is used for 'escape cover during the warm months, although brushy thickets are used to some 'extent even by young broods. In autumn and winter brush and woods are used more and more for this purpose. FOOD: Summer and autumn- insects and greens, fleshy fruits, weed seeds, and small grain as soon as they ripen and for as long as they remain available. Autumn and winter .... corn, buds, and catkins are added to diet. Corn or other concentrates such as small grains or weed seeds are needed in central and northern Wisconsin in most winters (Hamerstrom, Hopkins, and Rinzel, 1941). �... 17- SIZE OF AREA: The prairie chicken is a wide ranging bird. Managementshould consider nothing less than half a township except as a last resort. Four sections (2560 acres) is about the smallest piece of land which could be considered for a management area. Only a small portion of this area needs to be managed, however. GRASSLAND RESERVES FORNESTING ANDREARING YOUNG:The first .and most important step in prairie chicken management.is to establish permanent units of grassland for nesting and rearing of young. These are grassland reserves. Grazing of usual intensity is over-grazing from the standpoint of best prairie chicken management. FOODPATCHES:Winter feeding would be beneficial occur in Wisconsin. wherever prairie chickens SUMMARY: Prairie chicken management in Wisconsin consists of' maintenance of (1) nesting and rearing areas e.stablished by means of a scatter-pattern of grassland reserves amounting to about one 40 per section, (2) booming grounds, (3) winter food, and (4) winter cover. Attwate:b's';Prairie Chicken:'.:' For. comparison purposes, the following chicken is taken from Lehmann, 1941: range requirements of the Attwater's prairie '! The preferred booming ground for Attwater's pralrle chicken is a short grass flat, an acre or so in extent, surrounded by an area .of mediumto h~avy grassy cover suitable for nesting. Of 19 Attwater's prairie chicken nests examined by Lehmann, 17 were in long grass pastures, 1 in a hay meadow, and 1 in a fallow field. All were in dead grass of the previous years growth. In Colorado County, favorable nesting materials were dry bluestem grass and paspalum. More than 95% :of the more than 500 Attwater's prairie chickertB observed from June 24 through September 4, 1937 were in heavy cover within a mile and generally within less than half a mile of surface water. The data at hand shows that late in fall, probably by about November15, the prairie chickens move to pastures where food and cover conditions are adequate. Having found such an area, they remain until spring. Probably the best way to attract a good breeding population, therefore,. is to provide suitable food and c.over conditions during the preceding winter. The coastal prairie grassland is the real home of Attwater's pralr~e chicken particularly in areas characterized by diversity of vegetation. Woodland, brushland, and cultivated land each furnish some food and cover at .certain times and certain conditions but the use of these types is optional with the prairie chicken, not vital. Properly ma.nagedgrassland prairie chicken. Pastures satisfies every knownrequirement of Attwater's should be grazed moderately by livestock. �-18- The balanced prairie chicken habitat .should offer a generous supply of surface water throughout the year. In summer, windmill pumps should be allowed to form puddles. ManagementPractices NewMe'x:ico NewMeltico stands out as the one state which has experimented extensively with different managementpractices in an attempt to restore the lesser prairie chicken. The following is taken from Frary, 1957; The NewMexico Department of Gameand Fish maintains 17 separate developed areas for the restoration of the lesser prairie chicken. These developed units may contain feeders, brush shelters, water, food plot.s, or cover plantings. BRUSH SHELTERS:Quail used these but not the prairie chickens. LIVESTOCK EXCLUDED .AREAS:These are the most important .single item in the attempt for restoration of lesser prairie chickens. During the period that the areas have been closed to grazing the vegetation has made considerable recovery despite a number 'of years of below average rainfall. Only continued ..exclusion of livestock will result in--the-·-increase of climax .spec Les such as big and little bluestem. Spring booming surveys have revealed an appareno increase in the number of birds booming at the perimeter of non-grazed restoration areas. Apparently the birds prefer the sparsely vegetated land outside the tracts for 'booming, but appreciate the proximity of abundant vegetation for nesting, brood rearing, and cover. WATER DEVELOPMEllN'.1' Prairie chicken use of water units is quf te limited although visits are considerably more freq_uent than those to feeders. Prairie chickens utilize water 1h~its primarily in summer. ELEVATED FEEDERS: The use of feeders by prairie chickens is extremely limited even in the late winter and early spring which appears to be the principal period of use. Frary recommendedthe maintenance of crib feeders and feeder cans be discontinued. Doves and qua.l L do use the feeders quf te heavily but he doubts that this contributes to an increased population. FOODDEVELOPMENT: Food plliots received little prairie ch~cken use because of their location in areas not presently occupied by chickens or because of limited yield due to drought and also to depredations by jackrabbits and kangaroo rats. It is recommendedthat attempts to supplement the natural food of the prairie chicken be discontinued. COVER REQUJ:REMENTS: Cover req_uirements seem to he satisfied by the presence of shin oak and sand sage combined with good grass 'cover. Tree and shrub plantings may take the place of mesquf, te and shinnery oak types . Activities of man including land practices such as overgrazing, cultivation, and burning appears to be the chief limiting factors. Water is utilized out the birds apparently can exist without the free form. The long term average annual rainfall in NewMexico's prairie chicken habitat is 17 inches or less and for the seven years prior to 1957 the rainfall was far below average according to Russell, unpub, . During the drought years there was much more cover on the restoration areas than on surrounding range lands (Russell, unpub.). �'," .. " ..,.. '". -19- S?'7.' Oklahoma Management :practices in Oklahoma have been directed largely toward improving the habi tat .of the greater :prairie chicken. Jacobs, unpub . mentioned that ten acre food :plots -were :planted in the big :pastures in 1955. These were seeded t.o combine maize. In 1956, p Lans -were to p.Larrtup to 25 acre :plots in the big pas tures . Also in 1956, 150 .greater :prairie chic.kens were live tra:p:pedand trans:planted in the State. kn intensive research :project is now in :progress in Oklahoma with Farrell F. Co:pelin working with the lesser :prairie chicken. A number of food :plots ranging in size from 5 to 10 acres have been established and are in use. These are located on :private lands with a coo:perative agreement with the different landowners. The :project leader does not however favor continuing their use since the years they have :produced feed have been too few to benefit the flocks of lesser :prairie chickens. He would prefer to contract fields of feed from farmers when needed. Texas Texas has conducted drumming counts since ~942 according to Maggard, unpub .. Kansas A pro:pagation study with lesser :prairie chickens was conducted at the State Quail Farm near Calista->'-Th:Ls was- star-ted in 1952. . The"prob'Lem of 'getting newly hatched chicks to feed on :prepared feeds, grains, mashes, and pelletized feeds was mentioned by Gasswint, unpub.,'; This study has since been discontinued. On the Morton County land Use Project (U.S. Forest Service)" the ratio of grazing over a 5 month :period was one cow to 35 acres of grass according to Atwood, unpub .. Habitat Ins:pection of Occupied Lesser Prairie Chicken Range in Other States Kansas The sand sagebrush vegetative type south of the C.imarron River in Morton County and south of Garden City -were visited with Dave Coleman of the Kansas Forestry, Fish, and Game De:partment. In Kansas, the lesser :prairie chicken range is confined to the loose sandy type of soil with sand sagebrush-grassland vegetative cover -while the greater :prairie chicken inhabits the areas where the ~ighter soils predOminate. Mr. George Atwood, Supervisor 'of the Morton County Land Use :?roject (U.S. Forest Service) has done much reseeding of grasses throughout the government lands in past years. He has reseeded little and sand bluestem, switchgrass, and sand d.ropseed according to Dave Coleman. On.the cultivated lands he secures in trade for isolated blocks of Federal lands he reportedly :plants broom 'corn the first year for a cover crop and then plants grass the next year. The habitat where the lesser :prairie chicken is now found in Kansas is characterized by a diversified type of cover including .sand sagebrush, yucca, weeds, mid grasses, and short grasses intermixed. The lesser prairie chickens apparently do not like straight grasslands even if entirely in the taller grasses. For booming grounds, rather bare knobs, cultivated .fields, and short broom corn cover wer-e observed to be used during the present season. �-20- By comparison, the Colorado areas in which the lesser pralrle chicken occurred in large numbers in earlier years now have less mid and short grass cover than that .observed in Kansas. Many of the sand sagebrush areas have a sand sage - weed cover ~th practically no grassland cover. In areas where grasses do occur the main grass species on lands which show over grazing in the past include blue grama, three awn, and sand dropseed. In these areas bluestems and other mid grasses are found only in relic stands as in blow-out areas. In the areas west of Campo the bluestems and other mid grasses are much more prominent than in the more eastern areas of Baca County. The lesser pralrle chicken apparently must have large amounts of permanent grasslands intermixed with sand sagebrush or other taller vegetation. The elimination of the better grasslands undoubtedly played a large part in the deCline of the lesser prairie chicken in Colorado. Along with the reduction or elimination of the permanent grasslands in Colorado, the sand sagebrush and yucca was apparently fa:vored and formed a much more dense stand than that found in any of the three states visited. It is conceivable, however that if the types of grasses needed are re-established, the sand sage and yucca will become less dense and more in the proport.ion of that in the diversified type of cover preferred in the other states. In Morton County, no trees or shrubs are available other than the clumps of sand sagebrush, yucca, and scattered wild sandplum thickets in much of the lesser prairie chd cken: areas. Apparently these birds thrive in areas without larger tree and shrub plantings. Dave Coleman expr'eased the opinion that the scaled quail and pheasants would benefit from any successful plantings of this type but they are not needed by the lesser prairie chickens for survival. The lesser pr-ai.ra,e chicken apparent.ly use the stock watering places such as windmills and pits in Kansas. Within the occupied lesser pralrle chic.ken areas south of Garden City, it vas seen that in the .overgrazed pastures there are more .short grasses such as grama grass and buffalo grass and much less of the taller mid grasses. In moderately grazed grasslands the mid grasses predominated. Oklahoma Several areas containing good lesser prairie chicken populations were visited with Farrel.Copelin, project leader of Oklahoma'S lesser prairie chicken investigations. Oklahoma has three distinct types of lesser prairie chicken habitat, only the first of which compares basically with the sand sagebrush type found in Colorado. These areas in Oklahoma according to Far-reL: Gopelin are the sand sagebrush belt along the Cimarron River, Beaver Creek, and Canadian Rivers in the Panhandle Counties, the shinnery oak type along the extreme western border ·of the State, and a mixed grassland type. Copelin stated that properly managed grasslands are needed to carry the chicken population through drought periods. The shinnery oak :type is found in a loose sandy soil type and consists of shin oak, most of which is iess than two feet in height but occassionally oak motts occur throughout the area. Bluestems (sand and little), switchgrass, Indian grass, side oats grama, sand sagebrush, wild plum, skunkbush , and forbs occur in this type. The average rainfall through this area is approximately 23 inches according to Copelin. Colorado has nothing to compare with this vegetative type within former lesser prairie chicken range. �-21- The sandsage hills typce is also f'ound with loose sandy soils and consists primarily of sand sagebrush, bluestems (sand and little), grama grasses (hairy and side-oats), yucca, wild plum, and miscellaneous weeds. Here, as in Kansas, the sand sagebrush is muchless dominant than in Colorado with the mid and short grasses forming more of the vegetative cover. The annual rainfall in the sand sagebrush type in Oklahoma exceeds that in the similar areas in Colorado. In the mixed grassland type, sand sagebrush and yucca are f'ound only along the draws. Dense grassland cover composedof the same grass specie.s as described above 'comprises the remainder 'of the area. Oklahomahas experimented with food plots for lesser prairie chicken habitat deve.Lopment . In a few instances where these 'are well located and where natural foods are deficient, it is felt that these have been beneficial. The majority of the food plots were not well located and many did not produce food in the drought years when the birds needed it most so Farrel Copelin does not favor continuing the food p,lots. He stated, however, that food plots might have value in re-establishing the species. Copelin has used drive trap nets and pull type support.ed nets lesser prairie chicken for banding .atrudf.es; in live-trapping the He has found that the lesser prairie chickens make.use of the taller 'oak motts in the shinnery type to shade-up during the hot, dry periods. These are used to a great extent during the brood rearing period. Watering sites are used most in Oklahomaduring the fall and winter period when green vegetation is not available. Water is not a problem on grazing lands where birds do not have to travel more than a mile to water source. NewMexico Ladd Frary of the NewMexico Gameand Fish D.epartment showed the -writer samples of the better lesser prairie chicken habitat north and south of Portales in eastern NewMexico. New Mexico has two distinct :tYpes of lesser prairie chicken range. The shin-oak type is somewhat similar to that in Oklahomaexcept the moisture is decidedly less resulting in a .dense cover of shfn-oak with extremely few oak rnotrus , . The vegetat.ion in this type consists of shin oak, yucca, sand sagebrush, mesquite, snakeweed., little and sand bluestem, sand and tall dropseed, switchgrass, grama grasses (blue, side-oats, hairy, and black), three .•.. awngrasses, and miscellaneous forbs. The better grasses are decidedly less abundant than in OklahomaI s shin oak type. This maybe attributed at least in part to less annual rainfall and the past .drought;period. The sand sagebrush 'vegetative type was different from that observed in Kansas and Oklahomain that the grass cover vas composedalmost entirely. of short type grasses (gtamas, buffalo, etc.). Here again this difference maybe in part due to the difference in annual rainfall. Grazing practices and soil make-up probably also playa part. The sand sagebrush type in NewMexico consists of sandsage, yucca, wild plum, bluestems (little and sand), sWitchgrass, grama grasses (hairy and sideoats) and miscellaneous forbs. �Figure 4. Sand sagebrush type of lesser pralrle chicken range f'ound in Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. This type basically compares with the historical range in Colorado. Farrel F. Copelin in photo. Figure 5. Sand sagebrush type f'ound south of the Cimarron River in Colorado. Note denser sand sage cover and lack of grass cover. Understory is weeds. �5.?·:1- Figure 6. Tepee brush shelter of a type used extensively by scaled ~uail but used very little by lesser prairie chickens in New Mexico. Figure 7. Elevated wat'er catchment devise used by New Mexico _to provide water for -game birds and antelope. ��Apparently lesser pr-aa.r-i e chickens can and do exist in the shin oak type in New Mexico in areas where very little grass cover is found. In the sand sagebrush type, the presence of permanent grasslands is considered to be essential as was the case in Kansas and Oklahoma. New Mexico attempted but had little success in raJ.sJ.ngcrops in their restoration areas. They had one crop in three years average in their food plots. They ~ound that in time of need the flocks of lesser prairie chickens will move to the farming areas to feed. They have since discontinued the use of food plots and are favoring natural food production through restriction of grazing. New Mexico uses guzzlers extensively -within the restoration areas for lesser prairie chickens. Shelterbelt tree plantings were tried in the earlier years thinking that the lesser prairie chickens needed these but they had very little success in getting the trees to survive. Population Status A number of landowners, Wildlife Conservation Officers, and others -within f'orrne.r lesser prairie chicken range were contacted during this study to secure leads in locating lesser prairie chicken populations. The one conclusion that can be drawn from these personal interviews is that when the population of lesser prairie chickens is as low as it is at present in CoLor-ado, very ~ew of the birds are observed. Through listening checks in the early morning, three -widely scattered booming grounds containing eighteen lesser prairie chickens were located in Baca and Prowers Counties. Table 1 shows the numbers of birds observed and the areas in which these counts were made. The birds on the display grounds near Holly were checked at close range with field glasses and were observed to be lesser prairie chickens. A speo18.1 effort was made with this group since past correspondence has revealed there has been some doubt -whether or not the lesser prairie chicken is native to this area. The habitat south of the Arkansas River in Prowers County and that along the Cimarron River in Baca County is simi1ar and both are historical lesser prairie chicken range. Table 2 shows observations of persons contacted during the study. Counts made by the writer on the booming grounds located were secured during the late breeding season when activity on the booming grounds appear-ed to be very sporadic. These counts and checks to locate new grounds shou.Ld be made in early May if possible since the booming activity is much more -vigorous at this time. In addition to the three booming grounds located, it appears that a small population of the birds are present in the two areas of Prowers County -where recent observations of lesser prairie chickens have been made by Lloyd Hazzard, William Hudson, and Hubert Dodge. The formerly occupied range in Baca County should be covered more thoroughly since more birds may be present than those found to date. �-26- Table l. Lesser Prairie Qhicken Booming Ground Counts -- Spring 1959 Date' Time County 4:30 Prowers 5-28-59 A.M. .Area 2 miiles E. & 5 miles S. of Holly Cocks Hens 4 2 Unclass; ,'Total',' 6 1 mile W. & 1 mile N. of 6,-2-59 5:55 Baca A.M. 6-3-59 5:00 A.M. Baca Howle Ranch S. of Cimarron River 3 miles N. of Side-oats grams patch SE .of Campo 8 * 2 2 TOTAL * ** The majority if not all of these thought to be cocks. These hens observed 1/2 mile north of booming gr01~d., 8 4 ** 1 �-27- Table 2. Reported Observations or L~sser Prairie Chickens Date County Apr. 6, 1954 Prowers Area Number' OQHerved George Wright Ranch 19 C.W. Clifton 3 V. Schnauffer Ohserver 3~ miles SE ,of Holly :' .. ~_ .. -' i Mar. , 1957 . , .. ~ , Baca 1.1. miles SE ,of Victor 2 Schnauffer Ranch Spring, 1957 Baca 2 .miles W. of' C .B.• Bright Ranch 1 C.B. Bright Spring, 1957 Baca W. of Eversoll Ranch S. of Cimarron R. (few) J. Eversoll Summer, 1957 Baca Bower Holt Range S. of Cimarron R. 2 :Mr. Wright Summer, 1958 Baca l~ miles N •.of Bower Holt hdq. 1 :Mr. Wright Summer, 1958 Baca Kahler Ranch S. of Cimarron R. 2 Mr. Kahler Fall, 1958 Baca 3 miles E. of U.S.F.S. 3 J. DeVore hdq. Nov., 1958 Prowers Win. Hudson Ranch 14 miles S. of Granada 1 L ..Hazzard Mar., 1959 Prowers Wm. Hudson Ranch 14 miles S. of Granada 2 V(n. Hudson Apr. 2, 1959 Baca Howle Ranch S. of Cimarron R. 2 Mrs. Howle Spring, 1959 Prowers 3 miles W. of Hubert Dodge hdq. 2 or 3 H. Dodge �-28- Recommendations A long range grassland revegetation and management program is needed to benef'it the lesser prairie chicken within ~ormerly occupied range in Colorado. The management of scattered tracts through the historical range of the species would do much to assist existing flocks. The emphasis should be to secure mixed stands of midgrasses, sand sagebrush,' and weed cover similar to that found in the better lesser prairie ranges in Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. A program of management practices to hold and increase existing populations of lesser prairie chickens should be a prime consideration. Regular spring booming ground counts should be made to determine the status of known floc.ks. New grounds should be located and mapped wherever possible. The use of supplemental grain during the wintering period would assist .in holding birds in desired locations and possibly help them increase. In the event that good populations could be built-up in any area the surplus could be live-trapped f'or'use as transplant stock. Any large scale restoration program for the lesser prairie chicken would be costly and necessarily long range in extent due to the habitat manipulations needed. The development of small surplus tracts administered by the U. S. Forest Service for lesser prairie chickens and other game birds has been suggested by this Agency. Some of these tracts are surrounded by large blocks of controlled grazing lands whiCh would furnish additional chicken range. Other game birds including scaled quail, bob-white quail, pheasants, and mourning doves would also benefit from a development program aimed at securing some first class lesser prairie chicken range. The f'ollowing steps should be considered if the tracts are to be developed for lesser prairie chicken range: 1. The tracts should be fenced where needed~ to assist in natural food development. no future grazing allowed 2. A grass reseeding program should be carried out. Recommended grasses include sand and little bluestem, switchgrass, sand dropseed, Indian grass, side-oats grama, blue grama, and buffalo grass. All of these are native to southeastern Colorado. 3. Permanent water development through the installation of guzzlers or other devices would be beneficial since the period when the lesser prairie chickens use the free water most (fall and winter) is the period when the government pastures are not st.ocked with cattle and the windmills are shut off. Summer and early ~all water would be no problem because of' the water developments already present for stock water. 4. Successful tree and shrub plantings would be helpful in a restoration program because of their use by chickens particularly during the brood rearing period. The annual rainfall in southeastern Colorado is low enough that a problem exists in securing survival, however. It is, therefore, recommended not to enter into any large scale +ree planting 'progr-am, Limited piJ!.antings using drought resistant species as locust, mulberry, wild plum, sand cherry, Chinese elm, junipers, and hackberry should be tried. 5. Any attempt to raise grain in food plots would likely result .in ~ailure due to uncertain moisture. Food producing species such :as sweet clover and black amber cane could be used in combination with a grass reseading program to assist in natural food production. �-29- Summary Three booming grounds with a total of eighteen lesser prairie chickens were located during the study period. One of these grounds was in Prowers County and two in Baca County. The total population of lesser prairie chickens in Colorado is considered to be extremely small bas~d upon field checks made but the presence of the hooming grounds located indicates there is a resident population within the State. Proper grassland management holds the key to prairie chicken survival and increase. The decline of the lesser prairie .chfcken in southeastern Colorado coincided with the period of general pasture depletion during the drought years of the 1930 IS. The first _of several surplus grazing tracts consisting of 160 acres and located southwest _of Campo which .has been offered hy the U. S. Forest Service to he developed primarily as game hird hahi tat is in a locality that offers definite possihilities for lesser prairie chicken restoration work. Recommendations suhject of approval of the Game and Fish Department for hahi tat improvements are made in another section of this report. The U. S. Forest Service proposes that these tracts he developed on a share-the-cost hasis hy the U.S. Forest Service and the Game and Fish Department. Much of the lahor involved would he done hy local sportsmens groups. Scaled quaf.L, pheasants, and mourning doves would henefit from the development of these tracts as an added henefit in addition to securing some first class lesser prairie chicken range. �-30- Literature Cited Atwood, George. 1956. Unpublished proceedings of first regional conference on the lesser prair±e chicken. Goodwell, Oklahoma. April 9 ... 10. Copelin, Farrel F. 1957. Unpublished proceedings of second regional conference on the lesser prairie chicken. Portales, New Mexico. April 15-16. 1958. A new era ~or the lesser prairie chicken. Oklahoma Wildlife. State of Oklahoma, Department of Wildlife Conservation. March. pp 8-10. 1958. Unpublished job completion report W-62-R,-3. Habitat use and survival of young .lesser prairie chickens. Federal Aid Division. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservat.ion. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 1959 Unpublished progress report. Distribution of lesser Prairie chickens in Oklahoma. Federal Aid Division. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Frary, Ladd G. 1957. Evaluation of prairie chicken ranges. Federal Aid Division. State of New MexiCO, Department of Game and Fish. Sante Fe, New Mexico. Completion Report Project W-77-H-3. 81 pp; illus. Gas swint , Oliver J. 1957. Unpublished proceedings of second regional conference on the lesser prairie chicken. Portales, New Mexico. April 15-16. Hamerstrom, F.N. Jr., Frank Hopkins, and A. J. Rinzel. 1941. An experimental study of browse as a winter diet for prairie chickens. Wilson Bull., 53: 185-195. • and Frances Hamerstrom. --------~~~----~-1955. Population density and behavior in Wisconsin prairie chickens (Tympanuchus cupido pd:nnatus). ...., Congr. Int."Ornith. 1954. pp. 459-466 . •, Oswald E. Matteson, and Frances Hamerstrom. ------~~~---~-1957. A guide to prairie chicken management. Game Management Division. Wisconsin Conservation Department, Madison, Wisconsin. Technical Wildlife Bulletin Number 15. 128 pp. ; illus. �Jacobs, Karl F. 1956. Unpublished p.roceedings of first regional coriterence on the lesser prairie chicken. Goodwell, Oklahoma. April 9-l0. 1957· Unpublished proceedings of second regional conference on the lesser -prairie chicken. Portales, NewMexico. A-pril l5,;.-l6. Lehmann, Valgene 'W. 1941. Attwater·1 s prairie 'chicken - its life history and management. United States Fish :and Wildlife Service. Wahsington, D.C. North American Fauna 57. 65 -pp .. ; illus. Ligon, J. Stokley. 1927. Wildlife of NewMexico ••.its conservatdon and management. NewMecico Department of Gameand Fish, Sante Fe, NewMexico. pp. l22-l25. :Magga.td,J. H. Unpublished -proceedings of second regional conference 1957· on the lesser -prairie chicken. Portales, NewMexico. April l5 •..l6. Russell, Paul. 1957· Prepared by: __ Date: ( Unpublished proceedings of s&P.ondregional conference on the lesser Jlrairie chicken. Port,ales, NewMexico. April l5-l6. Do..;,. .._n_al_d_· _M_._H_o ..... f_f_m;.,:_a_n Approved oy: Octob~, 1959 --------_-_~~--~~----------- F. C. IG.einschni tz Assistant Coordinator ��-33- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of' Colorado Project W-38-R-13 Deer-Elk Investigations WorkPlan No. 1 Job No: 3 Title Migration between summerand winter ----------------------------------., No. --------~--~~--------------- . •• ----------------------------- of' Job: Period Covered: April . . . . . .~. ~~ , ; •• ',' •• ' 'F ,' ", . . : . ••••••• ," ~ -. ranges 1, 1959 to July 15, 1959 FLAG .CREEK TRACK COUNT ....... Abstract: A total of' 2,4~9 deer tracks and 87 elk tracks were counted on Flag Creek· during May, 1959. This compares with 3,330 deer tracks in 1958 and 23,603 in 1953. No mass migration occurred although there was a noticeable increase of deer numbers in the area over last year. Someiinigrants were observed crossing all spring although the main migration didn It begin till the last of' April. Carbon-black powder >vorked very well ~or hastening melt of' snowdrifts. A definite change in the migration pattern was apparent. Manydeer remained high on their vinter range and old established routes were not used .as heavily as in the past. Most .of the migrants apparently f'ollowed the lower migration routes north of' the counting :strip. The FJ,;ggCreek track count cannot be used as a reliable index of' the herd population due to this change in migratory habits. It cannot be considered in setting big game seasons because these seasons are f'ixed bef'ore the count Ls f'inished. Its :only yalue would be in comparing numbers of deer using the higher migration routes. Objectives: To locate and determine the amount and pattern ter and summerranges of the White River deer herd. of migration between win- Techniques used: A detailed description may be found in the Co.Lor-ado Quarterly Report, July, 1950. The "counterfl walks ahead or sits on the front of' the vehicle as the driver moves slowly along the road. Twotally counters are used, one to record t.racks headed toward the summerrange and one to record tracks headed the opposite direction. Tracks are counted daily during the early morning hours to avoid as much interference as possible. Old tracks are obliterated by an "L" beam drag and a heavy log :chain f'astened to the rear of the vehicle (jeep or power-wagon). �Findings: A Sno-Cat trip in March showed very little use by elk or deer along Flag Creek although a few deer were reported crossing Highway 13 in February ~y W.C.O. Goosman. No intensive aerial surveys were made due to bad weather and conflicts in schedules. However, many deer were seen in the Piceance Creek area during a flight on April 10, 1959. The annual meadow count was taken at this time and showed a definite increase over 1958 (6,095 as compared to 4,817). Follow-up counts revealed even more deer using the meadows a week later. Night patrols during April in the Meeker area revealed considerable activity on the winter range but no definite movement toward the summer range. Deer continued to use the hay meadows several weeks longer than usual. Roadside kills were noticeable but did not seem excessive. Many people reported seeing more deer than the previous year although fewer deer were seen wintering on Flag Creek. The Sutton ranch was bought by Mr. Port Franklin and farming reactivated which might account for the scarcity of wintering deer on this ranch. Road construction was continued north of Meeker on Highway 13. Many deer remained high on their winter range again this year due to the mild weather. They were seen on Buford mountain, Rio Blanco mountain, and on Oak Ridge. Five years ago they were seldom seen east of Highway 13 during the winter months. The spring of 1959 was cool and vegetative growth was slow which probably accounted for the delay in migration. Early migrants were seen crossing the White River at Cannafax's ranch late in April. Reconnaissance of Flag Greek did not reveal any early migration although 10 wintering elk were observed several miles south of the old Sutton ranch. By the first of May fewer deer were observed using the hay meadows as they moved toward their summer range. Excessive winds quickly dried the Flag Creek road and snow drifts were not large enough to warrant the use of a bulldozer. Carbon-black powder was hand broadcast on remaining snow drifts May 2nd and 3rd to hasten snow melt. Four days later it was possible to drive the power-wagon along the entire route and to drag most of it. A total of 2,469 deer tracks and 87 elk tracks were counted during the month of May, as compared to 3,330 deer t~acks in 1958. The count began May 8, .reached a peak on May 18, and terminated on May 31 (a 23' day period). The count in 1953 was 23,603. Again there was no migratory rush to the summer country but a steady movement of small groups all spring. A ten-day total showed the 1959 count to be 28 percent higher than the previous year. Four days of stormy weather during this~p.eak period caused a sudden decline in tracks counted. Deer were observed crossing Highway 13 during this stormy weather and some tracks could have been washed out although most of the moisture came in the form of light showers. The antiCipated increase in tracks did not occur after the weather cleared. Deer did not use the higher migration routes as they have in the past resulting in a lower count. .. �"35- The usual :problems of a road count were encountered but were not serious. Only 0.68 of an inch of :preci:pitation was recorded in Meeker during May, 1959, as compared to 1.07 inches last year. Shee:ptrailing 'Wasfrequent in the Rio Blanco vicinity but 'Wasnot considered serious for few deer tracks were observed in this area. Maintenance of the road 'Wasseldom done. Reconnaissance on the summerrange during May revealed increasing numbers of deer as the month -progressed. Many:peop:Leremarked on the increased number of deer seen in the high country this year. The 1958 harvest of deer in the Piceance GameManagementunit was comparab.l.e to the 1955 and 1956 harvests which indicates that the herd is not near extermination. S"everal peopLe re:ported seeing quite a few large bucks this s:pring. Decreased use of the higher migration routes remained a myst.ery and a check of the up:per Piceance Creek and Rifle Hogback country revealed only a few resident deer in this area. A flight was made on June 4th and a three day jee:p tri:p taken June 6th, 7th, and 8th. Peop.Le in the area re:ported that most of the deer left the second week in May. Interviews with peopLe along the migration route and local W.C.0. I s indicated .an increase in the number of deer seen but a change in their migration habits. Upper routes near Rio Blanco were not used much·and a shift .from the old Cannafax crossing to Miller Creek is evident. No large increase of migrants appear-ed on West Rifle Creek or along Strawberry Creek but many were re:ported near Meeker... No mass movement or large groups were observed although small groups were frequently re:ported crossing Hi.ghway 13. Late migrants 'Were still crossing in June. Few deer were seen caught in the fences. Daily observations of tracks are given in Table 1·Conclusions: (1) The track count cannot be used as a reliable index of the herd ]:>o:pulation. (2) The migration :pattern has changed considerably f'rom the past. (3) Manydeer did remain high on their winter range although this amount was never determined. (4) There is still a large herd in the area although it has been reduced considerably. Recommendations: The Flag Greek track count should become.the res:ponisbility of the GameManagementDivision. Aerial survey time should be scheduled if the pr-opor-bLonof deer remaining high on their winter range is to he .o.etermined. Prepared by: Don G. Smith Approved by: --------~--~~------------- Date: October, 1959 ----~----~~~~~~~----------- F. C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator �-36- Table 1. 1959 Flag Creek Track Count Daily total Sector 1 Sector 2 S:ecto.r 3. ,Sec.tor .4._. Date Deer Elk Plus Minus Total Plus Minus Total Plus Minus Total Plus Minus Total 5/8 81+ 5/9 R.ainedout 17 56 17 39 82 35 47 o 5 -5 3 o 3 27 101 112 39 73 3 2 1 o o o o 5/10 175 3 128 5/11 141 8 293 164 129 83 68 15 1 4 -3 2 2 5/12 152 13 345 273 72 212 149 63 13 4 c}I= 21 13 5/13 173 15 435 339 96 254 195 59 17 7 10# 24 16 5/14 108 2 172 155 17* 197 150 47* 23 3 20 36 12 24 5/15 160 11 178 104 74 132 65 67 9 3 6 24 11 13 5/16 134 -1 140 70 91 47 44 18 4 14 6 o 6# 5/17 304 -5 285 134 151 151 43 108 46 9 37 9 1 a# 5/18 369 2 282 163 119 343 158 185 58 6 52 18 5 13 r 5/19 120 -6 125 37 133 68 26 12 14 5 4 1 5 169 131 -41 62 32 30 Road Maintainer 3 Rained'out 14 6 8 18 7 5/22'r 13 10 14 20 -6 44 33 11 19 13 6 4 2 5/23 49 5 10 4 6 83 60 23 23 8 15 7 2 5/24 68 1 22 14 8 68 26 42 25 11 14 7 3 o 64 50 14 160 97 44 6 3 50 35 15 95 50 Rained out 70 88 38 193 234 Rained out 1 11 1~ Rained out 5/27 48 0 16 9 7 70 37 33 8 5 1 rj 5/28 16 0 53 47 6 98 go 8 7 7 2 2 5/29 17 0 49 49 o 28 21 7 8 4 5/30 20 .0 45 35 10 75 .59 16 3 8 -5 2 5/31 41 1 108 82 26 102 90 12 7 5 2 1 Total 2,469 ·$7 1,029 1,034 r rain, * road maintainer,# sheep tracks on road 270 o �-37- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------~-------------------------- Project No. W-38-R-12 Deer-Elk Investigations . Work Plan No. 2 ----------------------------- Title of Job: The Pellet Group Count Technique --------------------~------------~--------~~~-------------------- Period covered: Note: Job No. April 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 A negative report was supplied for this job in the Colorado Quarterly Repor t , July, 1959, p. 17. Since that time, Mr. Harris has compiled the information resulting in this submission. Abstract: 1959· The pellet group census technique was tested on Cedar Ridge in 1958 and The pellet count data was compared with aerial and ground counts to deterIi:dne the accuracy of this technique with regard to trend and total population estimates. Sampling accuracy for both years was found to be to wi thin 20 percent with 95 percent confidence. Pellet counts correctly detected an increase in the 1959 wintering population on Cedar Ridge over that of 1958. Total population estimates from pellet counts were c.onserVative with the 1958 estimate being 23 percent, and the 1959 estimate being 33 :Percent below the known wintering populations for the same years as determined by aerial and ground counts. Intioduction: An intensive study of the pellet-count technique was conducted'on'a p.ortion of the Middle Park mule deer winter range illnorthwestern Colorado. This studyvras initiated in 1957 as a phase of recent big-game census investigations in Colorado. The development and use of pellet groups as an indicator of deer presence and abundance did not attain a scientific basis until the 1930 IS. It has been tested extensively for deer-herd studies since about 1938. The interest of'game ma.na~rs and researchers in pellet-group counts as a census technique and' indicator of range-use by game animals has inc.reased in recent years. A daily.defecation rate of 12.7 (number of pellet groups deposited by one deer in 24 hour s) has been widely accepted. Rasmussen and Dornan (1943) helped 'e:stablish this rate while working with a deer herd of known numbens on a 741~cre i>asture in Utah. Some workers use a conversion factor of 13, rounding-off figure given for ease in computation. Res.ults of five seasons of deer pellet-group counts in deertight pastures at Little Hills Game Experiment Station, Colorado, indicated.an overwinter daily defecation rate of about 15 groups on. good deer 'range.,and 13 . groups on depleted range or other areas lacking a variety. of forage species. .' �-38- Past studies by Ferguson (1955), McCain and Taylor (1956), Robinette, et. al.. (1958), and others, have resulted in a good deal of "basic information concerniiig the ~ersistency of ~ellet .grou~s, and sam~ling intensity and design. Colorado and several other western states are ~resently employing ~ellet counts in conjunction with annual forage-utilization checks on big-game ranges. These range-use and ~ellet-count transects are read and analyzed coo~eratively by Game and Fish De~artment ~ersonnel and personnel of the various other land-use agencies involved. Objectives: This investigation was designed to determine: (1) the accuracy of total ~o~ulation estimates by pellet counts, (2) the trend value of pellet counts, and (3) ~roper sample design and accuracy as regards terrain, pellet-group densities, and vegetative types on typical deer winter range in Colorado. Study Area: In selecting an area suitable for an adequate test of the above objectives, it was necessary to meet the following requirements: (1) well defined boundaries -- necessary for effective aerial counts and ground drives, and determining the time lapse of the deer on the area; (2) small enough to provide such visibility that ground counts could be made -with available man-power; (3) a relatively high ~opulation of deer; and (4) be representative of Colorado mule-deer winter r-anges. Cedar Ridge, the area selected, is located south and west .of Parshall, Colorado, in Middle Park. (Gilbert and Grieb, 1957). It is bounded on the north by the Colorado River, on the south and west by the Williams Fork road, and on the east by the Williams Fork River. The area is roughly four miles from east to west, and two miles from north to south; with an area of approximately 4,544 acres. The terrain consists of high rolling ridges with numerous rocky outcro~s. There are pockets of dense Douglas- fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca) timber on the north-facing exposure; and south-facing slo~es sup~ort sagebrush (Artemesia tridentata), with an open over-story of juniper (Juniperous monosperma). Patches of aspep lPQPulus tremuloides var. aurea) are scattered throughout. (Gilbert and Grieb, 1957). This area is a critical segment of the Middle Park deer winter range. Annual counts since 1955 have shown that Cedar Ridge winters an average of 626 deer, with 396 being the lowest, and 801 the highest number recorded. In addition, past studies have shown that the number of deer on the area remains relatively stable t.hroughout v the winter. The size, terrain and well-defined boundaries of Cedar Ridge were ideal for ma.k;ingaerial counts and ground drives, later compared with results of the pellet-count technique. Methods: During 1957, after a brief preliminary survey, the following sampling ~lan was established for Cedar Ridge. (1) The area was divided into 18 parts, and a north-south transect line randomally selected in each (Figure 1). (2) Twenty-five ~ermanent ~lots were established along the transect line, with the first ~lot randomally selected, thus establishing the location of the following evenly spaced plots. (3) Each p.Lot mid:-p6iiltserved as the center of both the lOO-square-foot and O.Ol-acre plots. The plots were cleared of pellet groups and data were kept separately for each size plot for each transect (Grieb, 1959). �./ L!OENO ---X ROAD IMPROVED ROAD UNIMPROVED OBSERVER'S POINT I PELLET COUNT TRANSECT o ~I, 1 i 3 ( / ! I \ ~ ~ \ J=. ===~ ~~========================================================~======~====.====~.==================================~======'\================~.~ FIGURE I. S AMPLE DESIGN. CEDAR RIDGE DEER STUDY AREA .i" ~ �-39- The transects varied in length ~rom about a .~uarter mile to slightly over two miles, and in distance, from 50 to 900 yards. Pellet groups -were st.ampedout or removed when the :plots were 'established and ori each succeeding :s:pring count. This insured correct determination of the time when groups 'Were de:posited on the :plot. Pellet counts were made in June, 195,8, and May, 1959, to determine the number of days of use by deer during the :preceeding -winter. Both the 100-s~uare-foot .and O.Ol-acre :plot sizes were counted in 1958. Plots were counted by two men, one doing the bulk of the counting and the other checking him and recording. Arrival and departure of the deer herd was determined by close observation of migration routes during the fall and s:pring. The number of herd-days on the area -was estimat.ed using the method described by Robinette 'et.a1. (1958). The standard defecation rate 'of 12.7 was used t.o compute the days oruSe on the area. Stra':1Ilout groups were recorded in fractions, according to Ferguson (1955). One aerial count was made in 1958 and three in 1959 for comparison with the :pellet-group :counts. These air com:its were adjusted, using correction factors. derived from aerial-ground correlations sin:ce 1955 (Gilbert and Grieb, 1957) and have shown that observers in aicylanes tally the same p.Eircentage of animals on tIE area, de:pending upon flying .conditions, .snow cover, and visibility. Twoground drives 'were made in 1958, one in February and one in April; one drive 'was made in February 1959. These 'Were-well-organized, close ..•. interval drives, as described by Gilbert and Grieb (1957). The result was acce:pted as the best estimate :possible of the total number of deer :present on the study area. It 'Wasthe :personal o:pinion of those :partici:pating in the drives that .a very accurate check was obtained of the number of animals using the Cedar Ridge area. Results: The 1958 and 1959 pellet-count data were analyzed relat.ive to the three major questd.ons ; (1) how manypellet groups were deposited on C.edar Ridge during each of these 'winters? (2) how did total :population estimates derived from the }lellet-grou:p data compare with the actual number of deer -wintering on the area? and (3) did the number of :pellet groups reflect the :population trend? The first .queat.Lonnecessarily re~uired statistical analysis .of pellet-count data to determine sample efficiency and to derive confidence limits, both for the pellet counts and total :population estimate. A total of 611 pellet groups were counted in 1958 and 717 in 1959. Both lOOs~uare-foot and O.Ol-acre :plots 'Wereused in 1958 to test the relative efficiency of' the two plot sizes. Table 1 gives a comparative analysis by year and :plot siz.e. Coefficients .of' variation indicate less variability for 0.01-acre plots; however, this could be due to the greater sample size. Sample-size -proj.ections indicate that 100-square-foot plots are the most efficient from the standpoint of total sample size. It is also obvf.ous, in comparing the O.Ol..;"'acre plot data for the two years, that the higher 'density of pellets in 1959 resulted in considerably less variability in the sample. Student IS t .•• test was a:pplied t.o these data to determine if there 'Was a significant difference in the numb.erof pellet groups between the two years. A t-value of 1.82 (445df) was derived (t .10, 445df 1. 64 and t .05, 445df = 1. 96), thus rejacting the hypothesis of no difference at the .10 level. This indicates that, unless we drew one sample out of ten, the :pellet counts correctly detected an increase in the deer population in 1959 over that in 1958. * �-40- Table 1 -- Cedar Ridge Pellet-Count .AIlalysis,1958 (lOO-square-:foot .and o..Ol-:ac.re plots), and 1959 (O.Ol-acre plots), 18 ']ransects, 446 Plots. 1959 195 Comparison .01-acre ~lots 100 sq.ft.plots .01-acre plots S.ize of plot (Radius) Sample size/transect Total size :of sample Percent of area sampled Total pellet groups counted Average groups / acre Av:e:r.ag,e. ,<l,e,er :d,ays-:of-use/ acre . . . 5 ft., 7.7 in. ( .0023 acre) .0575 acre 1.03 acres 0.02 610·9 171·7 136.5 165·0 8.43 12·99 . . . .. 11 ft., 9.3 in. .25 acre 4.46 acres 0.10 717 160 12.6 ... AnalysiS by transect Average no. groups/t~ansect Range Standard deviat.ion Standard error of mean Coefficient of variation Confidence interval t.05, 17df t.10, 17df Sample Size t.05, 17df, .05 Ac .10 Ac .20 Ac 33·9 8 - 21.8 16.4 3·8 48% 39.8 9.5 - 60.0 14.0 3·3 35% 33.93 ± 8.01 33.93 + 6.46 39.8 + 6.93 39.8 + 5.74 9·50 2 - 21.8 5·1 1.2 53% 9.5 ± 2·5. 9.5 + 2.0 427 transects 104 transects 26 transects 514 transects 129 transects 36 transects 221 transects 55 transects 13 transects Analysis by plot Average no. groups/plot Range Standard deviation Standard .error of mean Coefficient of variation Conf'Ldence interval t .. 05, 445df t..10, 445df Sample size t.05, 445·df .05 Ac .10 At .20 Ac 0.38 1.37 1.61 o ,- 5 o ... 13 o •.. 13 .78 .04 205% 2.13 .10 157% 1.98 .09 123% .38 ;!: .08 .38 t .06 1.37 ± .20 1.37 :!: .16 1.61 :!: .18 1.61 ± .15 7,800 Plots 1,671 Plots 423 Plots 3,486 Plots 968 Plots 235 Plots 2,496 Plots 599 Plots 156 Plots �-41- The data were also analyzed to test the relative efficiency of plots on north and south exposures. Of the total plots sampled, 34 percent were on southern exposures and 66 percent on northern exposures. Table 2 gives a comparative analysis: Table 2 -- Cedar Ridge Pellet-count AnalYsis, O.Ol-acre plots, Nbrth and South Exposures, 1959· Exposure . ...... Northern Comparison Southern . Number of plots Total pellet groups counted Average groups/plot Variance Standard deviation Standard error of mean Coefficient of variation Confidence interval t.05, 120+df t.lO, 120+df Sample S;i.ze, t.05, 120 + df, .05 Ac .10 Ac .20 Ac 292 422.3 1.45 24.96 4.99 .29 344% 154 295.8 1.92 31.45 5.61 .45 292% 1.92 + 1.00 1.92 + .74 1.45 + .65 1.45 + .48 13,130 3,265 822 18,075 4,562 1,140 The t-test was applied to these data to test the hypothesis of no difference in the number of pellet groups on north and south exposures. The calculated tvalue of 8.9 was strongly rejected at the .01 level (t.Ol, 120 + df = 2.57), indicating a significantly higher number of pellet groups on southern exposures. Exposures on this area corresponded roughly to the cover types, with southern exposures representing a pinon .... juniper and sagebrush aspect, and northern exposures representing an almost pure sagebrush type. On a few of the more level areas, near the Colorado River, sagebrush has been eradicated and the land seeded to crested wheat~ There was an average of only .36 pellet groups per plot in the crested wheat fields. Total Population Estimate: An aerial photograph of Cedar Ridge vas planimetered to determine the total acreage of the area .sampled, found t.ohe 4,544 acres. Close observation in 1958 showed that the wintering population began to move onto the study area about November 22, and almost all the deer were 'on winter range by December 20. Corresponding dates for 1959 were November 15 to December 31. A relatively mild fall and early winter condition in 1959 resulted in a slower movement onto the area. Deer began leaving Cedar Ridge for summer range in 1958 about May 1 and were gone by May 20. In 1959, the migration from the area was from April 25 until May 20. This information was graphed and the total herd days on the area were derived by equally dividing the intervals which deer moved onto and off the area. Thus, the estimated herd days for 1958 was 160j for 1959, 150. The formula used in estimating total population was, according to Olson (1955): Number of Deer = (pellet groups acre) defecation rate (total acres) herd days �-42- For Cedar Ridge these values were computed as follows: . . . . . 19.58 lOO-sq. ft.plots ........... Comparison Size oi' area .censused Estimated herd days D.efecation rate ,Ay:e,r,age pe,l1:et groups / acre Total pow~ation .estimates were derived as follows: 195 = (4,544) (160) (165.7) (12.7 4,544 150 12·7 160.0 4,544 160 12·7 136.5 4,544 160 12·7 165.7 100-sq.ft.plots No. D.eer , ,195;8, , , , , , ' ,1:95.9. ,, O.Ol-acre plots o .OL=acre -plots (136.5) (12.7 (4,544) (160) 1959 O.Ol-acre -plots (160) . (4,544) (12.7) . (150) 620,256 2,032 753,007 2,032 371 727,042 1,905 305 Confidence interval t.05, 17df = 371 ± 94 deer 305 ± 70 deer 381 ± 74 deer It should be noted here that the confidence limits placed on the population 'estimates express only the -variability due to s:am:pling. Other sources of variability associated with this formula are discussed later. Two ground counts were made of Cedar Ridge in 1958: 396 deer were counted on February 14 in conjunction with aerial counts j and 366 were counted on April 29, in conjunction with winter-mortality studies. Since the single aerial count in 1958 was done immediately prior to the February ground count , it would have no value in this study. Ground counts are presently considered most accurate. Two aerial.and one ground count were made in 1959 to compare with, and supplement, pellet-count data. Aerial counts were adljusted by correction factors derived from long-time studies on the ·area (Gilbert and Grieb, 1957). Results of these counts are as follows: DATE February 14 March 5 March 21 air air TYPEOF COUNT NUMBER ADJUSTED ground (helicopter) (fixed wing) 566 281 229 566 511 545 �-43- The gr-ound-count total of 566 was accepted as the sustained -wintering 'P0pulat.ion for 1959. Succeeding aerial counts were made mainly to determine if drastic changes in herd numbers occurred following the ground drive. Only one ground drive ·was made in 1959. The estimated population of 305 in 1958 (O.Ol-acre plots) was 77 percent of the knownwintering population of 396, and the 1959 population estimate of 381 was 67 percent .of the knownwintering population of 566. The 1958 population estimate, using 100-square-foot plot data, was only 6.3 percent below the actual population. The ground-count figure vas well within the confidence limits of this estimate. Systematic winter-mortality studies showed a 10.8 percent loss in 1958 and a 5.1 percent loss in 1959; however, since these mortalities probably occurred at varying intervals through the winter, there is no way to estimate their effects on pellet-count .daba, . Trend Value: As previously stated, the t-test, when applied to the two years of s.ample data, correctly detected an increase in the number of pellet groups in 1959 over that of 1958 (hypothesis rejected at the .10 level.).. According to the ground counts, there was ;a 43-percent increase in the actual wintering population, or 396 deer in 1958 and 566 in 1959. There was a 17.3 percent increase in pellet groups, 610.9 to 717, and a corresponding increase of 25 percent in the ·estimated population, from 305 to 381. The estimated population, however, has no ;comparative value regarding the trend since it is also dependent upon the number of pellet groups found. The sample size computations indicated that this same ·trend could have been detected to 20 percent .accuracy and to 95 percent confidence limits, using only 235 plots, properly applied. Further computation indi·cated that .only 97 plots would be sufficient to attain 20 percent accuracy with a confidence of 90 percent. Pellet-group data are commonlyanalyzed and expressed in terms of deer daysof-use, especially where pellet counts are being used in conjunction with range-use studies. The actual number of deer days-of-use were calculated in this case by multiplying herd days by the ground count. Thus, in 1958, there vere 396 deer on the area for 160 nays, resulting:in a total of 63,360 deer days,;;,of-use, or 13.9 deer days-of-use per acre. For comparison, the average number 'of pellet groups per. acre were -divided by the defecation rate to determine deer-days-of-use from pelletcount data. Results showed 13.0 .days•.... of-use per acre using Loo-aquare-croof plot data, and 10.7 days-of-use using O.Ol-acre plot data. Similar computations for 1959 showed a total of 84,900 days-of-use, or 18.7 days-of ..•. use per acre, and an estimated 12.6 days-of-use per acre from the O.Ol.... acre plot data. Discussion: The primary aim of this investigation was to compare population .and trend estimates from pellet groups with the best possible estimates of knownpopulations. Standard sampling procedures and techniques were used. Sampling intensity was somewhatgreater than usually recommended since it was desirable to obtain the best possible estimate of the number of pellets deposited on the study area. �-44- Sample data-was analyzed statistically to test its accuracy and to derive confidence limits which could be applied to the total population estimates. Results of this analysis ,s,ubs,tant iate , for the most ])art, the finding of others (Ferguson, 1955; Robinette, et.a1., 1958; Rogers, et.a1., 1958) that sampling accuracy is de:~ pendent upon such-v8xiables as (1) distribution and size of sampling plots, (2) density and distribution of pellet groups, (3) size of area to be sampled, and (4) the sampling accuracy desired. The degree of' accuracy attained in this effort (80 percerit, with 95 percent confidence) would be out of the question from the st.andpotrrtof _practical'management, especially if applied on a herd-unit basis. Robinette, et. al. (1958), used a 10 percent .samp.Lfngerror and 70 ])ercent confidence as a basis fordetermining sampling intensity and design on Utah deer ranges. D.ensity and distribution of pellet groups playa large ])art in determining sampling intensi ty. Thus, no change -was made in the sample from 1958 to 1959 even though the 1958 analysis indicated that cOIIJIlarable results could be obtained with a smaller sample. For management purposes, depending upon the accuracy desired, size of area, etc., one should base sample size on the minimum expected pellet-group density which would occur on an area. Another, and more logical alternative, would be t6 pre-saIIJIlle a representative portion of the area annually to obtain the average number of pellet groups per acre and adjust the sample size accordingly. Pellet-group counts are often used to detect areas of concentration and heavy utilization. linalyds by slope'exposure indicated a significantiy higher p.elletgroup density on 'south-facing areas. The variability and resultant sample size on either north or south exposure, however, expeeded that of the total sample. This would indicate that sampling efficiency could not have been increased by considering exposure on Cedar Ridge. It might be well to note, however, that the -winter of 195859 was a relatively light one. A hard winter would probably result in much greater use, and therefore pellet group on southern exposUres. The analysis by plot indicated that, although the O.Ol-acre samples showed less variability, the 100-square-foot plots were slightly more efficient from the standpoint of sample size. Robinette, et. a1. (1958) found similar results on Utah deer ranges, and recommended they be spaced4 to 12 cheslns apart on transects 20 chains apart for best results. The proportionally higher density of pellet groups on 100square-foot ])lots could have been due to either chance or failure of the observer to find all pellet groups on the larger ])lots. Assuming that ground"'count data accurately reflected the deer population on Cedar Ridge, the total population estimates from])ellet-group data were generally conservative. In anlayzing the components of the formula used for these estimates, it is evident that this discrepancy could have been due to a number of causes, some being more Lmpor-barrtthan others. Pellet groups per acre 'were derived f'rom the total number of'pellet groups counted as related to the t.otal sample size. The accuracy of thi.s figure 'Would relate directly to the accuracy of the sample. Since the conf'Ldence limits of the total population est.tmane express the variability due to sampling, this factor is accounted for. A higher number of _pellet groups per acre would naturally result in a higher 'popu.Lat.Lonestimate. . I " .. The total acreage of the area could be a considerable source of error since it was derived by ])lanimetering an aerial photograph of Cedar Ridge. The added acreage due to terrain conformation 'was not considered. This would lead to a low estimate of pellet groups and, consequently, a low population estimate. Leopold, et.al. (1951) stated that pellet-group 'census is conservative because map area i.1:> used when reporting the results of counts rather than actual slope area used for the plots. �Ferguson (1955) allowed for slope by keeping the radius rope level at all times when surveying circular plots. No correction of the slope factor has been a:pplied to Cedar Ridge. This could be one of the major suurces of error in the total population estimates. Defecation rate has always been recognized as a possible source of error. Studies by other, Dasmann and Taber (1955), Eberhardt and Van Etten (1956), Longhurst (1954), and Rogers et.al. (1958) have shown that the defecation rate ~ll vary according to age of animals-;-type of foods eaten, range condition, and season. Based on the findings and recommendations of others who have used this technique, the widely accepted.rate of 12.7 was considered satisfactory. The total number of days which the herd spent on the area was calculated by the method described by Robinette, et.al. (1958~. Admittedly this method is somewhat arbitrary; however, the error involved is believed to be minimum. When considering the total estimated herd days on the area (150) as compared to the total estimated deer population for 1959 (381), each day represents only 2.54 deer. Thus, a miscalculation of two weeks wo~ld only involve 35 or 40 animals. Robinette, et.al. (1958) stated: "Small errors in this regard are not serious", and added, "An overor-under estimate of a week, for example, in a 140-day winter period (about average for Utah conditions) would represent an error of only about five percent in estimating herd numbers". Since herd days are a component of the divisor, fewer total herd .days would result in a larger :population estimate. There are several other areas of discrepancy associated with population estimates using the pellet-count technique. Olson (1955) and Robinette, et.al. ~952) pointed out that error is introduced by die-9ffs of the animals during-rhe study period. Since intensive mortality studies were conducted on Cedar Ridge each year, this factor could have been we i ghed.". had-.Lt; been considered necessary. Winter loss was very low during the two years of study. Olson (1955) also warned that allowances b~ made for population changes during the time of study. < Ferguson (1955) stressed the importance of pellet-group destruction by biological agents, particularly dung beetles. The extent of such destruction on Cedar Ridge was not determined. Observations at the time counts were made indicated that very little, if any, destruction of groups had occurred. Also, nhe influence of such agents was minimized by making the counts as early as possible. Several authors list human error as a disadvantage of this t.echnique. Causes of such error was attributed to plot size (greatest on large plots), fatigue, and dense vegetation which make viewing difficult. Ferguson (1955) recommended making two .count.sof each sampling unit. No attempt was made in this investigation to test human error. AJlplots were counted by two men to minimize such error as much as :possible. Statistical anlaysis showed that the increase in wintering population on Cedar Ridge from 1958 to 1959 was detected by the pellet-count method. The indicated increase from the O.Ol-acre plot data appears to be out of proportion to the actual wintering popUlation increase. The known increase was 43 percent and the estimated increase was 25 percent. This 18 percent discrepancy is about the same as that known to be due to sampling error. �-46- This type of information would probably be adequate for managementpurposes where it is necessary merely to detect :whether the herd is up, downor stable. Criteria (degree of accuracy, etc.) for determining these herd changes could be set-up statistically. In speaking o.f trends, the question often asked is: How small a sample 'can be used and still detect the trend? The findings .of this -study has 'confirmed, for the most part, what others have found with regard to this question -- that it lacks a definite answer. Generally, a decrease in sample size increases the variability. -,Thesize of the sample for trend purposes will be dependent upon the same factors as those previously mentioned in discussing sampling accuracy if statistics are to be applied. The 1958 ground count of 396 was the mininrumcount .for a .four-year period since 1955. Sample-size projections from these data .for this year indicated that Cedar Ridge could have been sampled to within ~O-percent accuracy with 90"'percent conf'Ld» ency uafng about one-fifth (97) as manyO.Ol-acre plots as were originally employed. Probably much less than this would be .neceasar'y under an actual managementprogram since 'this area is only a segment of the Middle Park herd winter range. In addition" this decrease in sample size involves the problem of proper 8llPlication to obtain a representative sample of the area. Robinette, et .al. (19,B) found that one transect which contained 124 or more groups accurately reflected the true yearly herd trend within 10 p;ercent 3 out of 10 times, as related to the trend indicated by 7 transects on which' an average o.f 1,260 pellet groups were counted annually. Summaryand Conclusions: Total population estimates using the pellet-count t.echnique were found to be generally conservative. There are a number of variables associated with population :estimates from the pellet-group data. All of them need to be appraised and vreighed accordingly if any degree o.f accuracy is to be obtained. Proper appraisal of these factors requires factual information of a nature that would, for the most part, be beyond the 'scope of any practical managementprogram. The method does show promt.sej hcwever-, and would be of greatest use 'Onaneesbefng studied intensively. The pellet-count technique probably has its greatest value" from a managementstandpoint, in determining population trends, concentrat.ion areas, and comparison with range-use information. The data lend themselves well to statist.ical analysis if the sample is properly applied. Consequently, it is possible to place a measure of confidence on statements concerning the population under study. Recommendations: continue the pellet year. counts on Cedar Ridge for at least Count both O.Ol-acre and 100-square-foot 'efficiency of these two plot sizes. plots to further one more test the relative Determine the exact acreage of Cedar Ridge and adjust the total estimates accordingly. population Based on the results of this invest.igation" consider application of the pellet group technique .for d.etermining population trend on a herd-unit basis. �-47- Literature Cited Dasmann , Raymond F. and Richard D. Taber. (1955) A comparison of four deer census methods. California Fish and Game, 41(3):225-228. Eberhardt, Lee and Robert C. Van Etten. (1956) Evaluation of the pellet group count as a deer census method. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 20(1):70-74 Ferguson, Robert B. (1955) The pellet-group count method of censusing mule deer in Utah. M. S. Thesis, Utah State Agricultural College, Logan. Gilbert, Paul F. and Jack R. ~ieb, (1957) Comparison of air and ground deer counts in Colorado. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 21(1):33-37 Grieb, Jack R. (1959) Lab exercise in sampling and analysis of datia, Colorado Game and Fish Department. I:qE-erviceTraining School pub. 500. (mimeo) Leopold, A. Starker, Thane Riney, Randal McCain, and Lloyd Tevis, Jr. (1951) The Jawbone deer herd. California Div. of Fish and Game, Game Bul. no. 4, 139:Pp Longhurst, William M. (1954) The fecal pellet group deposition rate of domestic sheep. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 18(3) :418-419 McCain, Randal and Walter P. Taylor. (1956) Methods of estimating numbers of mule deer. In The deer of North America. Stackpole Co ., Harrisburg, Pa., ~ Wildl. Mgt. Inst., Washington D. C. 668pp. (pp.431-448) Olson, Herman F. (1955) Personal communication to Mr. Lester M •.Berner, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks , Rapid City, S.outh Dakota. Rasmussen, D. 1. and E. R. Doman. (1943) Census methods and their applications in the management of lnule deer. 'i'rans.N. Amer. Wildl. Conf'., 8:369-379. Robinette, W. L., O. Julander, J. S. Gashwiler, and J. G. Smith. (1952) Winter mortality of mule deer in utah in relation to range condition. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 16(3):289~299 B. Ferguson and J. S. Gashwiler. (1958) Problems involved ---- , Robert in the use of deer pellet group counts. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf. 23:411-425 Rogers, Glen, Odell Julander, and W. Leslie Robinette. (1958) Pellet group counts for deer census and range use. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 22(2):193-199 Prepared by: Date: John T. Harris Approved by: F. C. Kleinschnitz October, 1959 --------------~~~~-------------- ��COMPLET ION REPOHT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. F!-88-R-4 V!aterfowl Surveys and Investigations \"JorkPlan No. i Job No. 3 Title of Job: Analysis of \':aterfowlBanding Data OBJECTIVES: To analyze the large quantity of data obtained from banding ducks and geese in Colorado, and to make this information available for use in management. RESULTS: The waterfowl band recovery data vias entered on ivicBee punch cards and filed under the year banded. It appears, from the annual returns, tha,*.several more years will be required before an extensive analysis cari:be made. The goose band recoveries are counted and the area of recovery recorded for use in the Arkansas Valley Wintering Goose Flock report (Viork Plan II, Job 4). A duplicate set of punch cards was made for the bands recovered from the Two Buttes goose banding program. This is the first step in a cooperative goose band recovery analysis with the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Viildlife at the Denver Wildlife Research Lab. Submitted by: Date: M. G. Sheldon Approved by: October, 1959 ------------~~~~~--- F. C. IG_einschnitz Asst. Coordinator �~, .' '_' IiNESTIGATION OF THE ARKAtJSAS VALIEY rJIiJTERINGG(;OSE FLOCK , -. i.ii tchell G. Sheldon and Jack R. Grieb G20G002 .' Food and water conditions in the Arkansas Valley were ideal for ...... wintering geese for the second consecutive year. Initial migration into the Valley began Novernber 10 with additional large flights in mid-November and early December concluding the southern migration. An influx of geese in January apparently returned from wintering areas to t~e south, resulting in the highest inventory (44,660) of this flock on record. Food waS abundant in all directions from Two Buttes Reservoir, although the geese preferred to feed to the south. There was a ~oticeable decrease in feeding flights to the west probably as a result of lower water levels ieaving water only in the east end of the Reser. voir basin. The morning feeding flights lasted an average of two hours and five minutes, and peaked at 8:55 A.IiI. Good flights from the Reservoir occurred on 77 per cent of the days observed. An average feeding flight traveled 20.1 miles and remained away from the Reservoir 118.5 minutes. Flying occupied 33.6 per cent,· feeding 37.2 per cent 'and resting or vlatching 39.2 per cent of the time spent away from the Reser·voir. Harvested milo was used twice as much as winter wheat for feeding. The only deviation from the feeding pattern was during stormy weather when the geese would move all day; and during the full moon phase when ---£eed-ing-vJas-almost-exclusi vely- at-night.----The afternoon f lights from the Reservoir lasted an average of 87 minutes and peaked at 4:35 P.M • ..H}.lntersharassed the geese during 13 of. the 23 observed feeding flights; .however, in years of plenty it does not appear to present a problem. The estimate of 15,205 geese harvested was the highest recorded by the random survey since the start in 1954. The Southeast Region again accounted for more than 95 per cent of the goose kill. A near complete check of the harvest on the firing-line at·Two Buttes showed 7,343 hunters bagged 1,947 geese on the firing-line and when compared to the random survey estimate accounted for 20 per cent of all geese harvested in the Two Buttes·area. The wounding loss reported by hunters was 21.6 per cent, while that estimated by the random survey was 22.3 per cent. The shoreline dead goose count produced 11.4 per cent loss when compared to the hunter harvest of the firing-line. Hunters using 10 gauge guns probably wounded proportionately more geese than those using other ·gauges. Since 1951 a total of 5,194 geese have been banded at Two Buttes and have resulted in 1,220 band returns. This banding information indicates the geese collect in eastern Alberta and western Saskatchewan after leaving the breeding grounds, then migrate almost non-stop into western Nebraska, southeast Colorado and adjacent parts of Texas and New Mexico to winter •. The age composition of this flock from hunter checks was .52 per cent· young-of-the-year and banding data showed 58 per cent young in 1959. The sex composition of banded birds was 47 per cent males and 53pe+ cent females. Canada again harvested more than 50 per cent of all birds-of this flock and Colorado accounted for 29 per cent of the total harvest. Band return analysis indicated the annual mortality to .. be approximately 58 per cent of the calculated pre-season population of ....106,645 geese. Fluroscopd c examination of 500 geese during banding ·showed 247 birds carried body shot for 49.4 per cent of the total. The inc;idence of body shot was 65.0 per cent in adults and 35.0 per cent in ·yO\.lrig;_of-ihe~year bird~. �-51JOB COj,1PLETIONREPORT INVESTIGATIOi-..JS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Pro jec t No. _1;.;,.·}-'-'8:;,;:8:.....__ R...;:_-...:,4_ tat-erfowl Surveys and lnve stigations Work Plan No._..;:;I..;:;I Title of Job:lnvestigation _ Job No. 4 of the Arkansas Valley L'JinteringGoose Flock. INTRODUCTION: Background and need for this study is given in the job completion report of 1957. OBJECTIVES: The objectives remained the same as stated in last years' report and will only be summarized here: 1. To determine the fall movement of geese into the Arkansas Valley and the size of the wintering flock. 2. To determine feeding patterns and habits of geese wintering at Two Buttes Reservoir. 3. To evaluate hunter harassment of feeding geese. 4. To investigate wounding loss at Two Buttes Reservoir. PROCEDURES: ;,'Jith the exception of fluroscopic examination included in the 1959 banding operation and the establishment of a $.50 pit fee requiring all hunters to check into and out of the management area, the methods remained as stated in the 1957 report. RESULTS: Water, Food, and VJeather Condi tions.-Water conditions were considered to be excellent for wintering geese in the Arkansas Valley with the exception of Two Buttes Reservoir. Early in the fall, Two Buttes Reservoir was drawn-down for irrigation purposes to the lowest level in years. This caused considerable concern until the geese arrived. It was then noted that the birds used the lowered waters, increased sandbars and mudflats and were apparently satisfied with conditions as they existed. The only noticeable effect of the draw-down was that the geese left the Two Buttes Reservoir to feed more toward the east than last year. Possibly because the only water left was in the eastern end of the impoundment. However, a slight decrease in numbers of wintering geese at Two Buttes was noted but could be accounted for by the excellent conditions throughout the Arkansas Valley. Some areas of the Valley had water for the first time since the early 1950's and held geese until freeze-up. Food was plentiful throughout the Arkansas Valley in the form of harvested wheat and milo for gleaning, and winter wheat for grazing. Food conditions were considered to be equal to or better than 1957. The weather cooperated with the hunters by producing a number of stormy days. Beginning with the opening day blizzard it provided throughout the balance of the season numerous days of high wind, fog and storm. V:eather-wise 1958 was considered to be better hunting than the previous year. �~·S:R ~].. -.. -52All in all, water, food, and weather conditions were considered to be excellent for harvest of the Arkansas Valley wintering goose flock. It provided possibly a record year for hunting opportunity, enjoyment, and harvest. Migration Movement and Winter ina Popu1ation.--A total of eight aerial census flights were conducted at about 10-day intervals to determine the migration into, interchange between water areas, and the population wintering in the Arkansas Valley, (Table 1). The first census (November 5th) found less than 500 geese in all the Valley. The first large goose flight arrived at Two Buttes the afternoon of November 10 when about 2,000 birds landed on the Reservoir. The wintering population increased through November until about 35,000 geese were wintering in the Arkansas Valley. It then leveled out through December and reached a peak (44,600) in January. This last influx of birds possibly returned from wintering areas in the Texas Panhandle, as observers could not account for any large population north of the Arkansas River Valley. Table l.--Aerial Canada Goose Counts bv Dates, 1958-59. Number of·Geese -Nov Dec Nov Dec Dec Dec Nov Reservoir 5 15 3 17 22 19 11 Meredith 500 6 2.130 500 1050 59 390 Henry 30 40 97 Dyes 60 47 44 HOlbrook Horse Creek 215 150 150 Blue 3000 130 805 7080 8410 800 1900 Cheraw 1 6715 Eads 840 8030 10600 III 365 9000 John Martin 35 76 3300 3100 225 1520 6400 Two' Buttes 165 3100 15900 18100 16380 19300 21625 448 Total 5029 25285 37119 31730 37840 35030 Jan 8 3460 20 4250 14750 680 21500 44660 The interchange between water areas followed the same trend as last year. It may be explained, at least in part, by the geese leaving one water area to feed and continuing on to another water area to rest before repeating the procedure in reverse the next feeding foray. The ground count at Two Buttes Reservoir (Table 2) showed the same general pattern as last year. However, there was a greater fluctuation between the daily population figures than in 1957. This can be accounted for by an increase of geese using Rutherford Lake, approximately 15 miles southeast of Two Buttes. Many geese that fed south-east would terminate the feeding flight at Rutherford Lake and apparently fed out of there the next trip before returning to Two Buttes again. On several occasions 5,000 to 6,000 'geese were observed there and the minimum ground count was about 250 birds. �F-~Q c,; ":.; ~53Table 2.--Ground Count of Two Buttes Reservoir Geese, 1958-59 Number of Geese Date Date Number of Geese November December 12800 5 163 5 18700 125 8 6 19700 7 158 9 17600 8 14 150 16900 150 9 15 16400 10 2500 16 3500 14000 11 18 3800 18000 12 19 13 18600 2200 20 14 23800 3750 21 15 3850 19600 22 16 1870 17800 23 18 7900 24 16900 19 17300 15800 January 3 20 17500 17500 4 21 16550 19000 5 December 1 21500 20150 6 2 17700 7 24000 3 18500 12000 10 4 11800 16400 13 The ground count of goose numbers at Two Buttes in 1958 was generally the same as in the past with an increasing population as the advancing winter season pushed the geese south. About the first of December the last geese left the South Platte area in Nebraska and were reflected in the Arkansas Valley aerial and ground counts during the first week in December. Counts obtained from New Mexico Waterfowl Biologists show about the same trends as Colorado only on a much smaller scale. A comparison of January Waterfowl Inventories (Table 3) showed a substantial increase in the goose wintering population of southeast Colorado from 1948 through the highest recorded in 1959. Some birds undoubtedly remained north of the Texas Panhandle and northeast New Mexico in 1959 as they were reported to have done in 1958. Correlated counts in Nebraska, Colorado, New Mexico and the Texas Panhandle are sorely needed to determine the size and extent of the wintering flocks of geese in question. This would also indicate any significant interchange between these areas. It would determine whether or not this Lesser goose flock is increasing as Colorado's counts indicate or if the excellent food and water conditions are holding birds farther north. Table 3.--Januar~ Inventor~ of Arkansas Valley Geese~ 1948-59. Goose Count Year Goose Count Year 1948 4,798 20,280 1954 1949 12,286 25,110 1955 24,212 1950 13,170 1956 24,617 1951 1957 19,320 35,894 1952 30,463 1958 1953 44,660 20,236 1959 'J ., �Feedinq Characteristics.--Potential feeding areas existed in all directions from Two Buttes Reservoir again in 1958. Food conditions were considered to be very good and consisted of harvested small grain and green winter wheat. The feeding flocks again seemed to prefer a southerly direction when leaving the Reservoir. However, in 1958 a noticeable decrease was recorded in numbers that went west to feed. This can be attributed to extremely low water levels leaving water only in the eastern end of the Reservoir. A daily estimate of direction of travel showed the geese flew to the south 39.6 per cent in 1958 and 41.0 per cent in 1957; east 24.5 per cent as compared to 24.0 per cent the previous year; west flights made up 12.5 per cent in 1958 and 22.0 per cent in 1957; and they flew north 23.4 per cent this year and 13.0 per cent last year. Thus, it appeared that the lowered water level definitely influenced the feeding flight direction. This was again pOinted out by the hunter kill data from the five check stations around the reservoir. The stations northeast, east, and southeast consistently had the highest reported kill while the western stations had on many days no kill or feeding flights reported at all. Time and Duration of Fliqhts Leavinq and Returning to Two Buttes Reservoir.--Of all observed flights from the Reservoir, morning flights lasted an average of 2 hours and 5 minutes. This was 9 minutes longer than those observed the preceeding year. The average peak of the flights was 8~55 A.M. as opposed to 8:10 A.M. in 1957. The flight duration lasted from 20 minutes to 3 hours and 56 minutes. The latter being on Itgoodll days of foul weather while the first was approaching the full moon phase. The time interval was from 6:20 A.M. through 9:40 A.M. while in 1957 it was 7:10 A.jvj.to 9:15 A.jA. The evening flights from the Reservoir spanned a period from 1:00 P.M. to 4:40 P.M. with a peak average at 4:35 P.M. This was only ~ minutes later than in 1957. The average length of the flights was 1 hour and 27 minutes and lasted from 16 minutes to 4 hours in length. All return flights to the Reservoir lasted an average of 37 minutes, these peaked at 11.23 A.M. on the average. There is normally no return flight in the afternoon during legal hunting hours. Good flights over the firing-line occurred on 77.2 per cent of the observations while the preceeding year was 72.0 per cent. The only deviations from this flight pattern was during inclement weather when birds moved all day and during the phase of the full moon when they fed almost exclusively at night. This indicates why Two Buttes Goose Management Area has become so popular an area for goose hunters -- because the geese usually leave to feecl some time during the shooting hours and the hunters blast away at them no matter what the range may be. (There is a saying around the area that, geese never get too high to shoot at only to high to see!) �-55Feedinq Habits.--Useable observations of feeding flights (Table 4) were made 23 times in 1958 as compared to 8 times in 1957. These data showed the geese fed more than twice as much in harvested milo as in winter wheat, while in 1957 it Vias about equal for each food type. The flying time dropped from 53.0 per cent in 1957 to 33.6 per cent in 1958. This in part was explained by the use of the Department owned fields of harvested milo near the Reservoir. These fields were not used until after the hunting season the previous year. Another factor was the decrease of western feeding flights as this direction has a great deal more range land to be crossed between the Reservoir and cultivated fields. Table 4.--FeedinQ Flight Activitv from Two Buttes Reservoir, 1958-59. Activitv of Geese in Minutes Feedinq Distance Resting Winter Times flushed traveled (miles) Fl i oh t Latching i!iil0 j'Jheat Flying Total by hunters 1 2 82 3 252 92 136 95 45 36 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Total Average Per cent 30 17 6 14 40 42 5 23 28 10 50 15 25 30 19 21 27 24 10 37 14 32 42 41 46 49 22 22 4 22 16 26 20 26 21 12 94 1063 46.3 39.2 4 10 25 498 21.7 18.3 23 16 26 13 56 16 31 24 245 10.7 8.9 20 71 68 36 23 81 63 69 56 19 27 16 21 20 55 37 76 916 39.8 33.6 135 33 297 126 242l} 147 75 154 138 65 88 185 110 110 102 90 75 30 63 40 118 80 219 2722 118.5 100.0 Y 1 3 1 4 2 1 2 2 3 1 Y 1 1 1 23 1.0 12.3 10.7 10.7 6.1 36.0 8.2 34.9 41.3 37.3 10.8 12.8 31.0 28.0 38.0 23.0 5.5 13.1 4.6 17.2 17.0 24.6 18.0 22.0 463.1 20.1 !I Flight not followed back to Reservoir because of fog - (geese settled down to wait out weather). y Flight not completed because of road or weather conditions. �-56The average distance covered per feeding flight dropped to 20.1 miles in 1958 from 30.6 miles in 1957 while the average total time of observed flights remained almost the same at 118.5 minutes. Watching and resting made up a good deal of the time away from the Reservoir at 46.3 minutes of an average flight or 39.2 per cent of the total feeding flight time. Hunter Harassment.--Thirteen of the 23 feeding flights were harassed by hunters from one to four times per flight. Harassment included decoy hunters flushing close feeding birds away from their decoy set, fence-row hunters creeping up on the feeding geese, and road hunters trying to drive near enough for a shot. The only difference observed from 1957 was that no farmers working their fields disturbed the feeding geese as crops were for the most part harvested and abundant moisture prevented tilling or planting of the fields. Every observation of flushed geese revealed they would move only a short distance and set down again to feed or rest. The data of 1958 again pointed out that in years of plenty, hunter harassment was not a problem. However, before recommendations can be formulated regarding hunter harassment, observations during the lean years must be made to fully answer this question. -( Flock Drain.--There are many factors that substract birds from a population besides hunter harvest. iViostof them such as superannuation, weather, accidents, Indian or Eskimo plundering eggs and young, predation of nesters, etc. can only be speculated upon until surveys into the far-north are initiated for gathering such information. The following are factors where information is available. Hunter Harvest~--The harvest of the Arkansas Valley goose flock was again estimated by random survey (Table 5). These data have ranged over the years from a beginning of 7,372 in 1954 to a high of 15,205 in 1959. The Two Buttes area again provided more than 50 per cent of this harvest. The fluctuation between years can be accounted for by differences in hunting pressure, weather and/or available populations for the hunter. reather and hunting pressure apparently exert the greatest influences upon the harvest. A near complete check of the harvest by hunters on the firing-line was attained for the first time in 1958. This resulted from the hunters bing required to pay a fifty-cent daily pit fee. Each hunter was checked into the area and assigned a shooting pit. At the end of his shooting day he was required to check out of the area. The checking was done at 5 stations each of which controlled a given number of pits on the firing-line. As the hunters left the area, information was gathered on geese killed and wounded; gauge of gun, type of shell and shot size used; condition, weight and age of goose killed; residence of hunter and their feelings reference to the pit fee with enforced control of the area. The poll showed 78.8 per cent were in favor of the new management, 19.8 per cent not in favor of it and 4.4 per cent undecided. �-57Table 5.--Goose Harvest in the Arkansas Valley, by County, Three-year Average, 1954-1955-1956, 1957 and 1958; based on Results of Random Survev. Number and per cent of geese bagged Lakes within each Three-year average county influencing 1958 (1954, 1955, 1956) 1957 01 0/ Countv reported harvest. No. 10 No. No. 1:0 ~ Baca Two Buttes 5292 49.7 7188 56.9 7970 52.4 Kiowa Eads and Blue 1815 14.3 2237 14.6 1803 16.9 Prowers Two Buttes and Eads 1962 18.4 2005 15.8 1870 12.2 Bent John Martin, Blue, Horse Creek 833 7.8 8.6 1319. 10.4 1328 Crowley lvieredith,Henry 787 341 188 5.1 3.2 1.5 Pueblo 1.3 157 94 .9 Huerfano 1.3 ll8 157 59 .6 .9 Otero Horse Creek, Cheraw 664 4.3 Group, Dyes, Holbrook 64 23 .6 .2 35 .2 Las Animas 205 1.9 Total 10653 100.0 12656 100.0 15205 100.0 The harvest check data showed 7,343 hunters bagged 1,947 geese in 1958 while the partial check of 1957 resulted in 2,276 hunters taking 716 geese. This points up the continuing need for complete harvest information in the management of this flock as obtained through the enforced check stations in 1958. The bag check further showed 61 geese were classed as in poor condition (3.1 per cent of the total checked). The age composition of the harvested birds (Table 12) was determined by the notched-tail feather method, (one or more notched feathers was a young-of-the-year bird). This showed the harvest to contain 52.1 per cent young-of-the-year and 47.9 per cent sub-adults or adult geese. Goose season statistics in Table 6 compare the state-wide season dates and stamp sales, along with estimated hunters, average season bag and estimated kill for the Arkansas Valley from 1954 through 1958. The bag and possession limit has remained at two Canada geese, and season length has been 60 days for the same period. Table 6.--Goose Huntino Season Statistics, 1954-1958. Arkansas Valley State Wide Estimated Average goose Dates of Stamp season Estimated baq hunters kill Season Year Sales 7372 7071 32450 1.04 1954 11/ 1-12/30 13904 9054 1.54 1955 39107 11/ 1-12/30 10276 36303 9833 1956 1.05 ll/ 9- 1/ 7 12656 41794 9113 1.39 1957 11/ 2-12/31 15205 36397 10082 1.51 1958 llL 17- lLl5 �-58In past years there had been a relationship between stamp sales and harvest. Howev er in 1958 the stamp sales dropped 5,397 while the kill increased 2,549 geese. This may again indicate that weather was a very important factor as 1958 had more "good" hunting days than did 1957. Also, the goose hunting pressure increased which indicated the drop in sales represented mainly duck hunters. In substracting the known harvest of geese (1,947) from the firing line from the estimated total of Baca and Prowers counties (Table 5) it is estimated the firing-line hunter accounts for 20 per cent of all the geese killed in the Two Buttes area. This is assuming most of the kill in Prowers County came from Two Buttes, and points out that field hunters harvested many more birds than did the firing-line hunters. Flock Drain from Wounding Loss.--Management of any wildlife species must include some knowledge of the loss to wounding by hunters. Two methods were used in an effort to evaluate the wounding effect of the firing-line at Two Buttes. One method was a survey asking th hunters to report any goose knocked-out of a flight but not retrieved or one that returned to the lake because of a gun shot wound. The other was the dead goose count conducted within the high-water contour of the reservoir. -' \ The hunters reported a loss of 21.6 per cent in 1958 and 15.8 per cent in 1957. The wounding estimates obtained from the small game random surveys are shown for comparison and cover the past five years: 1954, 22.8 per cent; 1955, 18.3 ~er cent; 1956, 21.6 per cent; 1957, 23.5 per cent; and 1958, 22.3 per cent. The discrepancy in the 1957 figures was probably the result of an inadequate sample of firing-line hunters, as only 419 hunters were contacted. In 1958 the increased sample of 2,464 hunters questioned produced similar wounding loss percentages and comparable to the five year random survey. The shoreline dead goose count in 1958 was 222 birds, in 1957 it was 159 and 281 were found in 1956. Dates of the counts were approximately the same all years. The 1958 figure and the known harvest produced a wounding loss of 11.4 per cent. This figure was realized to be a minimum loss as the 21.6 per cent is possibly a high estimate because some of the reported wounded do recover or are later harvested as the poor condition birds that were checked. It was recorded that 5 of the "poor" geese were killed on the ground and were so weak they could no longer become air';"borne. fJianyothers were harvested when they passed over the firing-line much lower than the healthy geese and were within reasonable range of the gunner. Body condition was checked on 406 geese during the banding operation. This showed 9 geese in "poor" shape for 2.2 per cent of those checked. Good condition accounted for 67.3 per cent and fair shape was 30.5 per cent of the total examined. Gauge and Shot Size Effect on Wounding Loss.,...-The effect of pass shooting on a firing-line and it's probable increase of wounded geese could be harmful to a population. This is aggravated by some lucky hunter "scratching" a high flier which seems to redouble the efforts of all other hopeful hunters, compounding the probability of wounding. �-59An effort was made to determine which gauge and shot size wound proportionately more geese. Table 7 compares time used, birds bagged and birds wounded simultaneously for 16, 12 and 10 gauges. Again in 1958 as in 1957 the 10 gauge was the worst offender. It was used 18.9 per cent of the total times, bagged 17.9 per cent of the geese but wounded 22.4 per cent of all those reported by the hunters. It was again the only gauge that wounded a larger per cent than the per cent of times used. Table 7.--Shotqun Gauqe Use at Two Buttes Reservoir, 1958. Used Baqged t'Jounded Number Number Per cent Number Per cent Per cent Gauqe of times, of total of times of total of times of total 16 24 23 1.0 1.2 0.2 1 12 1973 77.4 80.1 1558 415 80.9 10 467 22.4 18.9 345 17.9 120 Total 2464 100.0 536 100.0 1926 100.0 -( Table 8.--Tabulation of Effect of Shot Size on Bagging and Wounding Birds for the 10 gauge Shotqun--Two Buttes Reservoir~ 1958. Bagqed Vvounded Used Number Shot Per cent Per cent Number Number Per cent Size of times of total of times of total of t_im~s of total 3.3 4 22 4.7 18 5.2 4 2 175 37.0 47 39.2 128 37.1 BB 38.3 194 41.0 40.6 46 140 All buck 82 17.3 19.2 17.1 23 59 Total 473 100.0 345 120 100.0 100.0 Table 9.-Per cent of Total by Shot Size of Use, Bagged and Wounded-Two Buttes Reservoir, 1958. Wounded Used Bagged Shot Number Per cent Per cent Number Per cent Number Size of times of total of times of total of times of total Smaller than 4 12 4 0.7 0.4 8 0.4 4 30 5.7 197 167 8.0 8.6 2 48.7 274 51.7 1225 49.5 941 BB 645 25.5 507 26.3 135 26.1 87 16.4 All buck 395 308 16.0 16.0 530 100.0 Total 2474 100.0 1931 100.0 Again the 10 gauge data were broken down to shot size (Table 8), with the same comparisons as in Table 7. Number 2, BB and all buck shot yielded the highest wounding losses, but were about proportionate to the times used. In 1957, number 2 and BB shot were the worst wounders. The same comparisons for effect of shot size regardless of gauge are tabulated in Table 9. This tends to remove some of the differences in the 10 gauge break-down. However, there appears to be a division �-fopoint between the small shot (4 and smaller) and the large shot (2 and larger). It appears that the small shot loses it's power before reaching the high flying birds and the heavier shot either kill clean or miss completely. Information on the effect of shot size is still sketchy and it is impossible to formulate generalizations to be used in educating the goose hunting sportsman to reduce this wounding loss. . Bandinq Information.-liintering geese have been banded at Two Buttes Reservoir from 1951 through 1959 with the exception of one year. To date 5,194 geese have been banded and 1,220 bands have been returned through 1958. The number of geese banded and the band returns, by years, through 1958 are tabulated in Table 10. The following is some of the information obtained from analyses of the band returns. Migration Routes and j,iovementDates.--Each band return is processed by plotting it on a North American map and entering all information on a McBee punch card, then placed in a master f i Ie ; The distribution of recoveries from the prairies of Canada south to the. wintering areas are almost identical for each year, (Table 11). The dates taken and the per cent returns for each area are also very similar year after year. However, the few returns from the far-north leave the breeding grounds a matter of conjecture and speculation. The apparent staging in the fall from the breeding grounds is in the prairie pot holes and lakes of eastern Alberta and western Saskatchewan. From here the birds evidently fly almost non-stop to the South Platte River areas of Nebraska and the Arkansas Valley of Colorado, then on south into northeast New Mexico and the Texas Panhandle to winter. This is evidenced by the paucity of band returns between the South Platte Valley and the Canadian border. The banding data again points out the need of coordinated information about these wintering geese and the dire need for exploratory flights into the North Country for production information from this wintering goose flock. Soecies Comoosi tion of liJinterinqGoose Flock.--During this year IS banding operation an attempt was again made to determine the subspecies composition of the Two Buttes flock. Again the overlap of the big and little geese into the Lesser classification was so obvious that no sure break-down was possible. However, gross observations indicated the Two Buttes geese are still approximately 90 per cent Lesser and 10 per cent Great Basin and Hutchinson •. Aqe and Sex Composition.--Age of all geese in this study were determined by the notched-tail feather method and supplemented by cloacal examination. Sexing was exclusively by cloacal examination. All available age data is in Table 12 and compared to the 1951 and 1958-59 check station information of harvested birds. It must be remembered that the notched-feather method lumps all birds above young-of-the-year into the adult class. The sex composition of the banded birds for the 1959 season was 46.9 per cent males and 53.1 per cent females, while the 1958 figures were 42.8 per cent males and 57.2 per cent females. �Table 10.--Number of Two Buttes Geese Banded and Return~Yea~ Returned 1951 Banded 1953 1955 1954 __l22_L_ rl No. No. Year Number No. % No~6 No. ~ t.o 32 644 81 12.6 46 7.1 25 13 1951 5.0 3.9 2.0 1952 1278 - 140 11.0 67 5.2 66 5.2 47 3.7 1478 134 85 75 9.1 5.8 5.1 1953 3 41 7.3 1954 1955 182 1956 1957 516 1958 529 526 1959 233 176 138 186 81 Total 5194 .a.; - - - - - - - - - - - ----.~--.- I v.t, - - - ------_ .. _----- - 1956 No. % 22 3.4 41 3.2 54 3.7 3 7.3 1957 c/ No. 10 8 1.2 12 .9 42 2.8 3 7.3 1958 cl No. 10 8 1.2 1.3 16 29 2.0 .2 1 20 17 41 9.3 7.9 - - 7 29 53 - - 11.0 - - 3.8 5.6 10.0 Total No. Yo . 235 36.5 389 30.4 419 28.3 10 24.4 44 70 53 24.2 13.6 10.0 -- -- 140 123 1220 143 Table 11.--Distribution of Two Buttes Band Recoveries b~ Date and Area. 1951-1958 Number of Bands Recovered by 10-Day Period 11 January Grand October November December September 3.· t ot a l : 1 . 2 •.3 .total. 1 .. 3 total . .1 2 ..total .total 2 ·.3 total 1 2 Area 1 2 546 3 3 132 46 30 10 86 Canada 11 40 81 127 129 69 325 i'liontana and 8 4 3 3 1 N. Dakota 1 1 2 - - 1 - 60 3 14 19 14 47 6 3 1 10 Nebraska - - 3 ~!yoming and 8 3 3 6 1 1 S. Dakota 1 - - 1 - - 19· 301 73 69 34 176 21 10 11 34 51 104 Colorado Texas, New Mexico, 83 28 44 10 2 26 15 11 18 1 1 9 Kansas & Oka1homa - 1 25 3 5 4 4 11 5 2 6 1 9 Other. Flyways - - - - - Total ._-- - - - -- 132 11 40 81 - - - 75 333 84· 93 107 - - - - - - 129 129 - - - - - - - - - 284 100 90 56 246 24 12 36 1031 11 Periods 1, 2, and 3 represent the dates 1-10, 11-20, and 21-31 respectively. Eleven band recovery dates unknown in 1958 O'J ".J7; "'.1 �-6~-- Table 12. year 1951 1952 1958 1959 Age Composition of the Goose Flock. Bandin Check Station Adult Young of year Adult Young of year r.! 01 No. No. No. No. % % /" 343 53.3 356 46.8 404 53.2 300 46.7 627 49.1 649 50.9 346 66.4 175 33.6 214 42.2 293 57.8 1010 52.1 929 47.9 (J The harvest distribution of the Two Buttes banded geese is tabulated in Table 13 by area and year. i'!lany Colorado hunters fail to realize that these wintering geese in the Arkansas Valley are shot at for several months each year. iAany do not know that Canada harvests an average of over 50 per cent of the birds banded at Two Buttes Reservoir while Colorado takes only about 25 per cent of the total each year. A large flock of geese wintering in the Valley does not necessarily mean we can increase the harvest here, for these geese are the ones that must return north to nest and return with the next seasons huntable population. Estimate of Flock Size.--It is possible by combining the band return data with the estimated kill figure to calculate an estimate of flock size before the hunting season for anyone year. It must be remembered that there is no way to check the accuracy of this figure and this must be considered when reviewing these data. A simple proportion of band recoveries in Colorado for anyone year is to the Colorado kill estimate for that year; as all band recoveries for that year is to x could produce an estimate of the total continental kill. This kill estimate multiplied by tre random survey per cent wounding loss could give a projected total wounding loss for the Flyway. These two sums added to the January inventory of this flock would then give an estimate of size of this flock before the hunting season. Substracting the January inventory from the projected pre-season flock estimate and dividing by the total further permits an estimate of annual hunting mortality. If these methods and figures can be accepted then the following may be true. In 1958 the fall population before the hunting season was calculated to be 106,645 geese and sustained a hunting mortality of 58.1 per cent. The turnover appears to be very high but is quite similar to past years and probably indicates many geese were wintering in other areas and were not included in the January inventory figure. The 1957 figures were 89,240 geese in the fall with a 59.8 per cent huhting mortality. It was calculated that 56,251 geese started south in the fall of 1956 and suffered a harvest mortality of 56 per cent. The estimated fall flock size was 70,545 with 65 per cent hunting mortality in 1955. A hunting mortality of 59 per cent and a before hunting population of 61,909 geese was calculated for 1954. All hunting mortalities are high because of incomplete population carry-over information after the hunting season. �Table 13.--Distribution of Band Returns by Area and Year, 1951-58. Recovery Area Alberta Sask. N.W. Terr 's, Manitoba Canada Totals. i M 'If 1951 1952 Uo._LL _No. 28 35.1 16 20.0 2 2.5 1 1.2 c/ ro - 52 28.4 37 20.2 5 2.8 1 0.5 1953 No. 0/ 77 32.7 53 22.6 6 2.6 /0) - .• 47 58.8 ..95 51. 9 136 57.9 1954 0/ l~o. /0 59 33.5 29 16.5 10 5.6 - - 98 55.7 1955 No. r/ 48 34.7 18 13.0 2 1.5 ~IJ - - 68 49.3 1956 No. /0 43 32.2 13 9.7 6 A.5 (I - - 62 46.3 1957 0/ No. /0 48 39.0 15 12.2 2 1.6 - - 65 52.8 1958 t/ No. /0 53 37.1 24 16.8 2 1.4 - - 79 55.3 Total ~I No. 10 408 33.7 205 16.9 35 2.9 2 .2 650 53.6 Colorado 20 25.0 49 26.9 49 20.8 43 24.6 49 35.5 53 39.5 36 29.3 43 30.0 342 28.2 Nebraska 5 2.8 10 4.3 5 3.7 11 8.9 6 7.5 64 9 5.1 12 8.7 6 4.2 5.3 Texas 22--12.0 21 8.9 11 6.2 8 6.1 5 3.6 6 5.0 6 4.2 79 6.5 3 1.7 South Dakota 2 1.1 2 0.9 1 0.7 1 0.7 10 0.8 1 1.2 New i:iexico 4 1.7 4 2.3 1 0.5 2 1.5 13 1 0.8 1 0.7 1.1 Oklahoma 5 2.1 1 0.5 2 1.4 1 0.6 0.8 9 Kansas 1 0.5 1 0.4 1 0.6 1 0.7 1 0.7 0.4 5 North Dakota 1 0.6 1 0.1 - - - ~'iyoming 2 0.9 1 1.2 1 0.5 1 0.6 5 0.4 - Montana 2 1.0 8 1 1.2 2 1.1 1 0.4 2 1.6 0.7 4 1.7 2 1.0 4 2.9 4 2.8 26 Other Flywa~. 4 5.1 4 2.2 2 1.5 2 1.6 2·1 33 41.2 88 41.8 99 42.1 78 44.3 70 50.7 72 53.7 58 47.2 64 44.7 562 46·1 !La.S.Totals GRAND TOTAL 138 134 80 183 235 176 123 143 1212 100._0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .• -- - - - - - - - - - OJ ]) (t) �-~However, these high figures may vie Ll indicate the maximum harvest is nearly attained. Again, the need for "far-north" production information and a coordinated flyway research program is strongly indicated if this flock is to be managed in a factual manner instead of a post-mortem manner. There have been many methods proposed for determining annual mortality but all require a great deal more work before a final method can be evolved. However, there is one (unpublished) recommended by Cecil V1i11iams, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which appears to have application to the Central Flyway Lesser Goose Flock. Calculations depend on continual banding year after year with sufficient returns to make the data work. The annual total mortalities calculated have ranged from 35.1 per cent to 43.8 per cent using the Two Buttes Reservoir banding data. More intensive work on total mortality is planned as the data continues to come in. Fluroscopic Examination.--In connection with the 1958 banding operation, geese were examined for body shot using a fluroscope. It was the first time a large sample had been examined in Colorado and the information will be sumnarized without comment. The author wishes to thank Dr. William Carlson, Radiologist, College of Veterinary i-ied i c i ne , CSU, X-Ray technician Bill Gray, College of Veterinary Medicine, CSU, and the Picker X-Ray Corporation, Denver, Colorado, for technical assistance and advice. A Picker portable X-Ray unit was used at 80 K.V. (Kilo-volts) and 5 iv~.A.(i,iilli-ampere)in a lead enclosed box with the f luroscope viewing screen built into the top. The equipment was set up in a blackedout house trailer parked beside the banding operation. The fluroscope operator used red-lensed adapter goggles to condition his eyes to the darkened area and all saftey percautions were observed. The lead box was checked daily using a gieger counter for escaping radiation and radiation badges were worn by all personnel working within the trailer. The geese were weighed, checked for body condition, aged, sexed and banded then put in a cloth sack before being placed in the light trap at one end of the trailer. The sacked geese were removed from the light trap and placed in the fluroscope box for examination. Observed body shot was recorded as to general location of head, neck, chest, abdomen, wings and legs on a duplicate band number sheet. Size of shot was not recorded due to the lack of experience of the observer. The geese were then placed back in the light trap to be released. Fluroscooic Results.--During the banding operation 511 geese were observed. This included 11 known cripples, which Vlere removed from the data leaving a corrected total of 500 geese observed for body shot. The examination revealed a total of 49.4 per cent (247 geese) with �-65body shot ranging from 1 to 13 pellets. The adult class (geese over one year of age) had 65 per cent or 139 of the total with shot in the tissue. The young-of-the-year class carried body shot in 109 birds for 35 per cent of the total examined. It appeared that some measure of the gun pressure on the Lesser geese wintering at Two Buttes Reservoir might be determined from the young-of-the-year class on an annual basis. Incidence of body shot is shown in Table 14. A few interesting observations should probably be included. These include the fact that three of the very poor condition birds had no body shot as it apparently passed through leaving an internal wound. Also several healed broken bones were found including one broken wing bone. The most interesting observation was that three geese were observed to have a pellet imbedded in the heart muscle. Each one was observed to pulsate with the heart beat. All three were in good body condition and were apparently heal thy birds. It is planned to continue the fluroscopic examinations in connection with future banding operations. Table l4.--The Incidence of Body Shot of Geese Banded at Two Buttes Reservoir by aQe and sex class, 1958-59. Number Number Per cent of birds Class with shot without shot with bodv shot Adult male 35 27.94 69 Adult female 28.34 70 39 Total adults 139 74 65.00 Immature males Immature females Total immature 51 57 108 79 100 179 20.66 23.06 35.00 All males All females Total geese 120 127 247 114 139 253 48.99 51.01 49.40 RECOMMENDATIONS: Because of the paucity of goose management information and the fact that the most-up-to-date data used in the management of the Lesser Canada goose flock in Colorado and the Central Flyway is at least eight months old, it is recommended that this investigation be continued for several more years. Further recommendations are as follows: 1. A coordinated population census be conducted on the wintering areas in Nebraska, Colorado, New Mexico and Texas to determine the size and extent of the Central Flyway Lesser Goose Flock. 2. A coordinated effort be made to determine the pre-season population of this goose flock in the probable staging area of eastern Alberta and western Saskatchewan. This to be followed by a coordinated �-66-pre-seas.on banding program In the staging area to determine the hunting season distribution, migration patterns and mortality of these geese. 3. Exploration flights be inaugurated in the far-north to locate the breeding ground for the Lesser Canada Goose of the Central FlywC!y, followed by production surveys and a breeding grounds banding program. It is felt the above recommendations are the minimum necessary for the factual management of the Lesser Canada Goose Flock wintering in the Arkansas Valley of Colorado and in the Central Flyway. SUBLiITTED BY: Mitchell G. Sheldon Senior Game Biologist Jack R. Grieb Leader, l'!aterfowlProject DATE: October ,.1959 Approved by: F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �-67JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ................ State .of Project No. COLORADO W..• 10l-R-l ------------------------------- Work Plan No. 1 ----------------------------- Game Range Investigations Job No.1 Title of Job: Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study Period Covered: July 15, 1958 to April 15, 1959 Objectives For sound winter game range management it is necessary to know the p.ercentage of annual growth game may be permitted to remove yearly from key browse plants wit.hout injury to the plants. Also, it is important to know the :effect of different intensities of use· on the amount of forage produced. The Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study is a long-term clipping experiment simulating different· intensities of game use on five key species of browse plants: big sagebrush, antelope bi tterb rush , mountain mahogany, .serviceberry, and oakbr-ush, The purpose of the study is to attempt to learn how the yearly removal of certain percentages of the annual growth stems and of old stems affects the plants and their forage production. Techniques Used 1. Twenty-four 10-foot square plots have been established for each plant .specLe s, and these have been fenced from game. 2. ·Plots were randomly selected to receive specific treatments. 3. Three replications are provided for each treatment. 4 .. Plants in the three plots of a replication have been subjected to the following treatments: (a) Yearly, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 percent of the annual growth stems have been removed in random fashion. (b) Three plots for each plant species 'Serve as controls, receiving no treatment. (c) Two years' stem growth was removed from each plant one year; Yearly thereafter, all stems falling within a maximum diameter were removed to simulate destructive use. (d) From tagged branches 2 years' stem growth was removed from a portion of each plant during late summer of 1956. Yearly thereafter, all stems falling within a maximum diameter are to be removed to produce the effect of destructive use on a portion of a plant. �-685 .. The following records are collected yearly: (a) Total number of annual stems removed from each plot. (b) .The lengths of 100 annual stems removed from each plot. (c) The green and air-dry weight of stems and leaves removed from each plot. (d) The number of annual stems produced and the .lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. (~) The number of live and dead plants in each plat. (f) Photographs of the plots are taken from es tab ld.shed photo hubs. (g) Observations are made on general plant vigor, disease, seed production, etc. Fiugings Field Work.--Work on the study for the year began July 15 with a crew of five men. During the first ·few days, plot fences vere repaired, bags for clippings were tagged and weighed, and alleyways between oakbrush plots were grubbed to kill weeds and underground oakbrush stems between plots. Field work for 'the year vas terminated with the clipping of mountain mahogany plants September 8. Data Collected.--The following ,data were collected for each ·of the 5 species: 1. Total number of annual stems removed from each clip 'p.Lo't. 2. The lengths of 100 annual stems in each plot. 3. The green and air-dry weights of stems and leaves removed from each clip plot. 4. The number of annual stems produced and the lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. 5. The number of live and dead plants in each plot. 6. A photograph was made of each plot prior to 'clipping. 7 •. Observations were made for each plot of the general plant vigor, disease, seed production, and effect of cli.IlPing. Data Analysis.--A new, complete, and detailed analysis of the data for 1958 and prior years is near compLet.Lon , It will be used in a comprehensive report being prepared to summarize all of the work and results of the study to date. This report should be 'completed during the winter of 1959. now Prepared by: Harold R.. Shepherd Approved bY:__~F_.~C_.~Kl __ e_in~s_chn~_i_t_z _ ----------------~-----------Asst. Coordinator Date: October, 1959 --~------------~--~~------------- ; / �-69- JOB COMPLETION REPORT :920G903 ,~ INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS , State of Project -. COLORADO --------------------------------No. W_-_l_O_l_-_R_-_l _ Work Plan No. 3 ------~-------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: GameRange. Investigations Job No.·1 Investigation of NewTechniques of Range.Analysis ----------~~----------------~~--------~~--~--------------------April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 .Abstract: The data from 60 meter square plots at the Sapinero Game Management 1Jnit was analyzed by the computing center at Colorado State University, for a compar-Ison between Modified New Zealand Point Frame data and know density and specf.es .com •... position as determined by planimeter. ______ .....:I_:_t_~~.§ ..~e::termined that it would be necessary 12 plots each in order to complete the analysis. to' run 5 more line series of for running the 5 new line series is :shov.n by the fact .that run in 1958 showed an extremely high correlation of .90, with a pooled correlation of .85. Justification 3 of the 5 line series Objectives: 1. .To develop new methods of range analysis vegetation. applicable 2 . To develop methods of range analysis grams of game management. can be applied that to browse tYI'es .of to current pro- .Procedure: Ln. conjunction with Work'Plan 4, Job No.1, of Project No. W-10l-R-l, 60 meter square plots were established and permanently staked with l-inch angle iron stakes in -t;he Development Area of the Sapinero Game:Mcciagerrienturi t . The .crovn densi ty of the vegetation in each plot was then drawn Ln on K.and E 10' by 10 to the inch graph paper. This was planimetered to determine .tihe density and species composition for each plot. Then, using a meter square Modified New Zealand Point Frame divided into l/lOth meter segments, and mounting a removable point frame, a point chart was r-un on each plot. The data was t~en ..compiled fOr ana'LyaLs. -._ ." . THEANALYSIS OF MODIFIED NEWZEALAND POINTFRAME DATA The data secured in the fall of 1958 was subjected by the computing center at Colorado State University. to ~tatistic,al . .arr.alysiS. It was agreed by personnel at the computing center .that there *re not :enough plots run in the initial study to complete the analysis.' They have deternri.ned that at least 5 more lLn.e series of 12 plots each must be run to complete this analysis. �-70Justification for running the new line series is determined by the fact that 3 of the 5 line series run in 1958 showed an extremely high correlat~on coeffi- cient. On l i ne series 3.4. and 6 the correlation· coefficient was .90. This is in direct contrast to the cor re le t Ion for I ine series I and 2. which .was .213 for line series I and .33 for line series 2. This poor showing in line series I and 2 could be because the dominant plant species in these two line series was grass, whereas in Iine series 3. 4. and 6 the dominant species was browse, primari Iy sagebrush. It is possible that the Point Frame will reach its highest point of efficiency in a pure browse type. The pooled correlation for all line series was .85. The data gathered on the line series was also subjected to an "Analysis of Covariance" test (Snedecor, 1956) to determine if there was any statistically significant differences between the Individual line series. The en~lysis is shown in Table I. TABLE I - Analysis of Covariance - Line Series Data Sap inero Game Management Area, 1958 Devi a tions from Regression Source Sum of Squares D.F. Tota I 8,272,522.76 54 Mean Square F 153,194.87· ------------------ ~----------------------- ~-------------------------Residual 50 109.939.40 5.496,969.90 ~;..----.-;..---fo-------- ~--------------..Ser -------------------------------ies Means 693,888.22 6.311 2,775.552.86 4 ** F .05 = 2.56 for 4 and 50 Degrees of Freedom F .01 = 3.72 for 4 and 50 Degrees of Freedom We can state, on the basis of the calculated 'IF" value, that there Is a highly significant difference between the means of the five line series. This further bears out the calculated correlation coefficients mentioned above. Recommendat ions: It is recommended that the 5 new line series suggested by the computing center be run in 1960 and the analysis for this data be completed at that time. This will then complete the first phase of this study. Pr epar ed b y :__ Datel .......;C;..I;..;a~u;..;d;..;e;..,,::E.:... _1;,,:.Vh;.;.;...i t;_;'e:;__ Approved b Y :_---,,;F~.';::':!:'"C_. -;K1'r-':::e~i~n'7's:::'chn=_r.i=_=t::_z--- October, 1959 --------------------~~~~-------- Asst. CoordInator \ ! �·-71SAMPLE POINT c:a:AA~ RANGE COMPOSITION AND DENSITY DATA POINT METHOD OF RANGE ANALYSIS Line Series* EXaminer __;Date. County Drainage_------Section~-----Twp.- Range. Plot Number. ., 1 : 2 : 3 . , 4 : 5 : _ __,,;State. __ __.- _ 6 : 7 , , a ,. 9 10. 1 2 ., 3 .. . .. . __ . 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Hits ----~------------------~~----~--------------~---------Total Hits Per Species. _ Plant Density by Point. _ .Density by Planimeter _ Difference in % Litter Hits. per Plot;..._ Hits per Plot _;,___ �(:YJ \;~" SUhWAAY OF ·PO t, NT METHOD. OAT A FROM Et~ CREEl<. METER ..QUACRAT$. .• LINE I SERIES NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 TOTAL AVERAGE I 30.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 17.0 21.0 17.0 22.0 15.0 20.0 19.0 20.0 238.0 19.83~ -_._---- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------ ------- -------- 1-------- ------2 9.0 7.0 1.0 5.0 6.0 4.0 1.0 3.0 12.0 115.0 . 10.0 ------- ------- ------- 1-------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------3. 20.0 48.0 1.0 31.0 29.0 22.0 20.0 13.0 30.0 24.0 ------- 5.0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 4 31.0 15.0 22.0 24.0 20.0 22.0 8.0 18.0 48.0 26.0 21.0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------ _------ ------- ------- ------- ------5 44.0 9.0 18.0 . 12.0 32.0 24.0 21.0 22.0 24.0 11.0 25.0 11.0 96.0 8 "OO{{ -------- ------- 1------.-31.0 286.0 23.83% -------- ------- fo------9.0 210.0 22.50,£ ._------- ------- ------- 13 19.0 261.0 ·22.25% ------- ------- ------- ------- ---;..--.- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------- ------6 11.0 17.0 24.0 18.0 19.0 12.0 8.0 1.0 1.0 32.0 1.0 29.0 tOTAL 151.0 115.0 91.0 109.0 123.0 105.0 81.0 19.0 136.0 134.0 87.0 125.0 191.0 15.91% ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --_"---- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------- ------- Ave-..RAGE 13.50 .. 26.11 * DATA. COLLECTED 19.17 16.17 1N SEPTEMBER. 18.17 1958 20.50 17.50 13.11 22.61 22.33 14.50 20.85 18.72% I �LINE SfRlES ;.REA "B" f , PLOT NO. 8gr Mallow EI~ 1 19r ,o 2 822.5 7.5 5·5 3 181.0 103.0 34.5 4 85.0 96.0 35.5 5 224.5 72.0 6 450.0 35.0 29.5 7 685.0 60.0 110.5 8 155.5 45.0 9 76.5 10 584.6 189.0 I1 916.5 23.0 --- 103.5 132.0 52.5 707.5 42.5 922.0 15.0 525.0 9.0 39.0 419.5 18.5 70.5 43.0 666.0 80.0 84.5 6.0 99.0 - 57.0 40.5 1.061.5 _5.5 20.5 5.0 546.0 44.5 17·5 29.5 2.0 163.5 1.5 26.5 24.0 88.0 38.0 5.0 184.0 12.5 41.0 1.0 68.5 73.0 12.5 2.0 Atr Car-ex 76.0 37.0 53.5 Shy Cna Lesq. CasH Ile]a Seo Phlox AIr Cia Ohy Aster 14.5 Total 844.0 ~ 9.5 47.0 227.5 40.0 32.5 135.5 11.5 217.5 9.0 81.0 32.0- 16.5 3.0 29.0 61.5 67.0 54.0 3.0 19.0 15.0 36.0 169.0 299.5 30.5 9.0 60.5 " 1,033.0 1,005.6 12.5 20.5 1.115.5 ! 12 373.5 TOTAL 4,745.6 36"6.5 49.0 ! , 100.5 61.5 6L~I.5 354.5 968.0 17.0 43.5 29.0 48.0 105~5 601.0 476.0 18.0 403.5- 515.0 .- .- 16.5 1.148.0 143.5 73.0 14.5 20.5 ~: - AVERAGE ":/:.'> 16.5 10.053.6 - 8.3~ I I - c.." �i,)J Ll 1\E SER I ES 2 - N{EA "B" }) ,:J Bgr Ohy Afr Lesq. Castilleja Cia 186.5 3)4.5 56.5 38.0 33.0 4.0 2 24.5 16.5 17.0 11.5 3 19L...5 48.8 35.0 29·0 19.0 16.5 16.0 151.o 509.1: I ':1'71-. 37.5 " .0 2].0 29.1) 167.0 510.0 65.0 570.0 PLOT NO. I fAa II o.v Seo Ela TOTAL 35?5 "'-.) " t_J;...J • c_ ..,.," 5 398.5 21.0 6 210.5 18.0 7 197.5 16.0 149.0 61.0 8 140.0 12.5 40.0 2.5 9 109.0 3.5 17.0 10 237.5 180.5 30.5 II 130.0 127.5 45.0 12 1-00.0 99.5 57.0 104.0 5.0 50.0 11.0 11.5 11.5 112.5 270.0 2.5 20.0 1.0 13.0 52.0 ZJ7.5 104.0 613.5 5.0 200.0 57.0 277.0 111.0 37.0 S07.5 - TOTAL 1.60}.0 859.8 779.0 307.5 3.5 ,0·5 36.5 " .0 24.0 150.5 12.0 -'--1- 6.5 112.0 491'.0 80.0 16.5 79.0 432.0 215.5 302.0 138.0 889.5 5.136.8 Iveragi 4.2870 - • ~ • �LlHE SERIES 3 ---- PLOT NO. Atr Ohy Seo I 925.0 87.5 92.4 2 4,592.5 5.0 4.0 3 51.0 " 2,022.0 55.5 76.5 85.0 ./ t: 1,241.5 o c:; .; ." . 16.0 ~.o 47.5 6 591.0 2.5 70.5 237.0 , 271.0 169.0 l,04.t:-' ..,.'" '"T ...• j 851.5 10 1,891 .0 " r--" ...; J ; \"- 4.9 50.0 45.0 1.5 2.0 9.5 158.9 Lesq. CastUleja 1.5 "~a110w Aster Phlox 9.0 : Afr· . Shy . ..se t. TOTAL Pse ,.219.4 4.0 14.5 4.619.5 -~ 2.5 34.9 11.0 .9 82.5 140.5 32.0 .33.0 2.0 52.5 267.8 2.5 2.324.9 3.0 31.0 51.0 10.0 7.0 L~o1.0 54.0 0 12 Ela 9.0 1.501.0 40.0 1,005.0 I v' ~ Bgr CIa -- 3,)0.5 t .0 199~0 50.0 40.5 97.5 159.5 13.5 8.0 115.0 28.0 2.Q42.0 6~O 16.0 93.5 71.5 3.•5 2.5 16.0 '3,7~C).S 2Sj.G ~81.•9 1,~U.9 I ,3G~I' C 2.0 310.9 1.;.5.0 1,005.0 -4 'f 6.0 2C?O 11.0 10.0 5.0 62.5 45.8 644.5 70.5 712.0 284.5 74.0 11.5 93.0.·494-c 1,604.0 1,772.0 18,166.1 , Average - 15.13% .~~ 87.5 " •••j) ( "1' , .. I .-I ' /A::;.. �-76- . o C\J C\J t- u, .0 -:t o . U\ . C\J o -o C\ C\J .:g. o . o C\J -o 1'<"\ "" C\J" 3: o . o -7 "" o Ln co " (\J o o 0\ 0" U\ U"\ • Ln ""C\J X OJ \.. 10 (_) >- Cl u\ o Li"\ 0) s: -o .. c, o U\ Ll\ 1'- "" C\J . . o Lf\ {i'\ v- ..'1 ...:~ cr (J') ~, W ..J U, U\ LI'\ o t1 q "" .['- . . . o U\ '-0 C\J . L'\ (\1 -_J o o LC\ co .3 o III C'J u . o -.. U\ ['- u" lLl lLl Z . 0. 0: (J') t- (\/ U\ t- LI\ o ll\ o '-() 0;) N\ . ..J -I' U"\ U\ o s: (/"I . . o 0'\ -:.~ C\J C\J . o LI\ -r C\J (\1 (,J U\ (\J o co U\ CJ (\J x o s: CL LJ\ ('J U\ o C' - o: '-i) (:1 () Li\ IlJ ,I) [._ n LI\ L\ (.') C"- C'J r- \ 'U . -:".., 1.:\ o -J . U\ o (\1 U\ N'\ I'" "" o () C\l 0, L~\ 1I\ U\ o U\ ..~ -.J . c.: c· C Li\ c· \ Co t'-- 1'<\ (\I (\1 ('.! <'" f'-- o 11\ (\1 1- 1- o ..JO CLZ CJ , ...J \ « ') ( , q o 1-- �LINE 6 SEHIES -~ PLOT NO. Sle I Atr Bgr 253. I 735.6 As r er 901.0 85.0 L~ 788.5 33.0 5 258.0 101.0 125.0 6 Ely Ohy Shy 12.7 10.0 L I L<:!sq. 69.0 53. I 70.0 7.0 91.0 133.8 12.0 47.0 16.0 2.0 43.0 553.5 Phlox Chry. ',\a Ilow ?se Weed TOTAL 1,126.3 9.5 ~ I 5 5.01 s: 3 Ele 2.21 2 2 Afr ------_ 303.0 1,199.6 412.5 241.5 1,834.0 15.0 121.5 974.0 22.0 216.5 18.0 7.0 88.5 19.5 245.0 1,115.5 18.5 713.5 ~ 78.0 7 13.5 376.5 ~. I t,6.o 8 I 9 189.6 28.5 18.0 1,206.5 68.5 II 5·0 232.5 22.0 12 2,955.0 41.5 9.0 • TOTAL 134.0 6,160.6 4.145.7 645.0 sea - 69.5 922.0 1O 29.0 93.5 .~ 2.2 40.5 30.5 23.0 16.0 140.2 167.0 .....:.o.'••.•.•, L24.6 2,285.5 207.0 416.5 3.0 52.0 938.0 29.0 •• ~_ 35.0 74.5 135.5 1,310.3 160.6 1,356.5 95.0 52.0 3,125.5 13,81}.O (~tJ ";1) tveragi - 12.01% ,~;f>,' 23.0 ��October, 1959 ~6S4 -79JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PRO.mCTS State of' Colorado ---------------------------------- Project No. W-IOI-R-l ----~----~------------------- GameRange Investigations WorkPlan No. 4 ~ : ,__~~~o~b~N~o~.~, ~l~~ _ Ti tIe of' Job: Evaluation of Rese'eding and Range Development Techniques Period Oovered: April 1, 1958 thrOUgh March 31, 1959 Abstract: Forty-eight (48) meter square plots were established in developed and unde•.. veloped areas at the Sapinero GameManagementlTnit . These plots were analyzed as to total crown density and species composition. This data 'will be analyzed with a .comparative study to be conducted in 1961. Five (5) more line series will be integrated Permanent photo hubs have been establiShed with this study in 1960. to supplement this study. Objecti ves : To complete an ana'Iys Ls of range development methods performed by the Game ManagementDivision. Procedure: Forty-eight (48) meter 'square plots were :established in the Sapinero Game ManagementUnit. These 'Plots were installed, in line, on both developed and undeveloped land and each line series adjacent to the other. Each plot was per= manently staked with 1 inch by 18 inch angle iron stakes. 'Each plot was then divided into 100th-meter segments and the vegetative density drawn in on K and E 358 graph paper. These areas were then planimetered to determine the density and species composition. These plots will be re •.. run every three years to secure a comparison of' actual vegetative change. Permanent photo hubs have been established in order to record larger changes in vegetatiye cover~ �--80EVALUATION -OF RANGE RESEEDING AND RANGE DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES This study -was initiated to determine more specifically the changes brought about by the latest methods of range development on destrnctively used range land. The 4 line series of 12 :plots already established will be supplemented by 5 line series o;f 12 more Jllots in 1960. Then, in the summerof 1961, these plots -will be re-r'Ull both with the NewZealand Point method and by planimeter. The data co.l.Lectied in 1958 is included as a part .of' this report. .No at.tempt will be made at this time to analyze the data .for each line series. The data which will be collected in 1961 will be-compared stati'Stically with the 1958 data to detiernrine the actual change in 'vegetation brought about. by the development methods used. Becommendatifons : series It is recommendedthat the st.udy be re--run in 1961 and that the 5 new line to be 'established in 1960 be integrated with this study. Prepared by: Claude.:B}.White Approved by: F. C. Kleinschnitz --------~~~--~--------Asst. Coordinator Date: October, 1959 ----------------~~~------------ �October, 1959 .. ~~<~ ·.C~~ ~.~ ~;.); -81- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Project Colorado ----------------------------~--No. W_-_l+O_l_-_R_-_l _ 4 ---------------------------- WorkPlan No. GameRange Investigations Job No.2 Title of Job: Experimental _Conversion of AgricultUral Period Co:vered: April Lands to GameRanges 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 .Abstract: Two three-acre plots of farm land at Billy Creek were planted to three browse species: 4-wing saltbush, Atriplex caneEtaens; Russian olive, Elaeagnus angustifolia; -.and aquawbush, ~ trilobata. . . .. Twomeasurements each ·were made on 123 saltbush plants, and 245 squawbush plants. The use by deer on 4-wing saltbush The use on Russian olive ~s plants, 134 Russian oli:ve was 45.435% for both plots. 15.015% for both plots. The use on squawbush was 2.60% for both plots . .Objectives: 1. To determine the degree of deer use on art.ificially of big game brcrws.e. 2. To determine the degree of use between species 3 • .To determine the value of' artificial hay and small grains • established areas of Dig game browse. browse over cr-op lands of .Procedure: Artificially propagated plants of Russian ol:ive (Elaeagnus angustifolia), 4-wing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), and squawbush (Rhus trilobata) were ~established in two three-acre plots of land adjacent to alfalfa lands .at; the Billy Creek Management Area south of Montrose, Colorado in Ouray C01lllty. These plants vere planted in alternating groups of species in order to approximate as close as possible the homogenous structure of adjacent native browse land. After two growing seasons , it was determined that the :plants vere firmly established and native forbs and grasses were firinJ::Yestablished between the rows. �-82In September of 1958, Area A, nea.rest the headquarters buildings, and Area C, at the eastern '.edge of the ManagementArea, were inspected for 'use and condition. Each row of seedlings in 'each area were numbered and staked for row identification. Then, on each seedling the terminal shoot and the longest lateral were measured to the nearest tenth-inch and tagged at the base of the measurement with '8 metal . twist-on tag .. -On each tag the species, plant number, and row number were printed with a grease J)encil provided by the Forest Products Laboratory in Washington, D•. C. The tags 'were made of soft :Monelmetal, roughed to. makewriting with the 'grease pencil more lasting .and efficient. No loss of identification was noted over the winter using ·this method. In the spring of 1959, the 'measurements that were made ,the preceding were :duplicated on all plants. fall THECONVERSION OFFARM LANDS TO GAME :BROWSE RANGES AJ3illustrated by Table 3, .the 'average use for 4-wing saltbush was 45~435% .for- 123 plants in bobh areas , .The average ~USefor Russian olive was 15.•. 015%:for 134 plants in both areas. The average 'use for squawbush was 2 •.60%for 245 plants in both areas. These figu,:t"eswere the result of compar-Ingthe total inches mea•• sured with the total inches grazed far each species", ,All measurements were to the nearest tenth of an inch. In both areas the- use by deer follo'Wed similar 'Patterns. ,The intersp'ersion of the plots and adjacent fields and the prOXimity of native .cover- allowed the deer to use the plots on their way through from one side of the valley to the other. Use 'Patterns as determined by observation and tracks indicated that the deer rarely stayed long in the 'plots, but grazed through. Thd:!s:: was particularly evident in Area C. Area A received the heaviest use and in the spring, when the deer 'Were on the alfalfa, they frequently used the plot for a resting place. Deer observed here 'at night were nearly always lying down. Nouse 'of the plots was 'observed during the daytime during March, April, o.r May. During the ''P€riod of heaviest snow cover, some use of the plots 'was observed during the day by deer crossing from one side o.f the valley to the other. The results seem to indicate that, at Billy Creek, the 'use of exotic species of browse in the corrverafon of farm lands is not justified by the .expense involved • .This is .due first to preference on the part of the deer, and second on the volume of native forage available. On the basis of this one year's figures it is prob ...• able that the 'Planting of a native species like 4-wing saltbush is not justified either. This would be particUlarly true if it involved the tearing up of alfalfa or native hay lands. ·At Billy Creek the deer used the al.falfa much IllO):'e than the browse that was artificially planted. Recommendations: that It .is not recommendedthat this study be carried on at Billy Creek, but it be shifted to an area where c'ritical winter range is involved •. Prepared by: Date: Claude E•. White Approved by: October, 1959 --------------~~~~--~------------- F. C. IG.einschnitz . Asst. Coordinator �TABLE' Ar ee tIC" - Row No. 2 6 7 10 13 14 Ie TCHIL Inches T6tal r\\easured 324.~ 279.2 258.5 461.5 380.7 310.6 22t:..2 2,241.2 Arp.a Row No. 4-1'11 ng Sa Itbu sh Tota I Measured Use 89.6 138.0 112.5 180.0 ·241.8 147.0 55.0 963.9 "c" - Russian Totc I Inches Nl01l=:urod % Use Per Row 27.61 49.LJ2 43.52 39.00 63.51 47.32 24.31 43.009" .. Olive Tota I :llc:lsurod Use % Use Per Ie..,] ·22.74 ROi~· 9 03.1 G7.7 '5 228.0 16 73.e 4.4 31.0 23.0 17 58.0 0.0 20 38.6 '). I 22 II C.2 9.~' 6.h9 13.:;9 31.16 0.00 23.57 8.71 TOTA.L 6~) .Ij 96.0 15.18 T C' Li 1 I nc r. esT c t ~I 2,26e.o ~.h . .IO~ ':'" I')(.r. r-. L,. J •... _ •• J "'..• I-r • I G:; 5 Row No. All TCV.L �TABLE 2 Area _ Row No. .. "A" - 4-~Ning Saltbush Inches Total NlI2'1l5ur·ed Tof a I Measured Use 408.9 li>.73 50.06 20 21 22 478.0 287.3 219.3 223.4 145.2 TOTAL 1,174.2 587.9 Area Row No. 1 2 3 ,4 15 16 17 ,8 19 TOTAL "A" Tota 1 Measured Use 211.9 3e7.1 447.5 31.8 59.9 294.9 268.0 174.0 213.3 2,088.4 18.9 12.8 . 39.4 ,.5 4.3 9208 53.3 3009 6304 316.6 Row No. Total Inches Measured "A" Total' Measured Use 10 II 91.5 12 '3 211-.0 89.3 5.3 13.5 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 22.9 ~4.2 12.1 4.2 824. i 78.1 5 6 7 8 9 TOTAL 50.53 % Use Per Row 8.91 3.30 8.80 4~7S 7.17 3V.23 19.98 17075 29.72 15.159 - Squawbush 11707 162.4 19.0 64.8 28.0 39.0 168.4 4 53.63 - RussI an Olive Inohes Total Measured Area % Use Per Row % Use Per Row 4c50 083 o~oo 0 00 2U .07 0 00 i 021 ~5052 5004u 4070 9.h7 0 0 �-85'. .' TAGLE 3 4-'.'!i ng Sd Itbush Total N,I?Olsu'r,=dUse ArcCl Tc.ttl I Inches ",,·,a5urcd A 1,174.2 537.') 50.06 c .2,?1_~1.2 j63.') 1+3.009 Tot!)l:;. 3 41t: I 1,551.C 45.435 I ,,,I• .t....r o.ussian % Use Per Row Olive Area Inches Total ""easured Tof e l Measur.ed Use % Use Per Row A 2,088.4 316.6 15.159 c 65').4 ·96.0 15.180 Totals 2,747.8 412.6 15.015 Squawbush Total Inches N.~asured Area Total Measured Use % Use Per Row A -321+. I 78. I 9.47 c 2,2,':8.0 2.4 .105 3,092. I 80.5 2.60 Totals I �-86- \ ''__ "'\.. .. . .' ~ ( . . ... '--~. " ... .~ ----. __'' Lo c I{T/O N .. OF ." \ �October, 1959 goG?, ' .. l.l:~ :'.~ JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Project COLORADO --~~--------~-----------------No• W...;_.-..::;3_,_7_-R_-_1_2 _ . . . . GameBird. Survey Job No.1 Work Plan No.1 . .-.-,Pr=-.-e-...;n--e-st":-:"in--g-:·'::S-:-tU--::-di":'"·.-e-s"""'T(p-r--ep--ar-ation for application of the pheasant Title of Job: drowing count census method .and sex ratio counts in management) . Period Covered: April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959. Objectives: (1) To establish permanent, representative, crowing-count census routes. (2) To establish permanent zones or areas for making sex ratio ·counts. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in the standardized crowing count and sex ratio count procedures. (4) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information . . ( 5) .To eventually turn pheasant crowing counts and sex ratio counts over to management. . (6)-To_cprepare--a-finaJ. report-on-this·phase ·01'- study. -- - ..... - .... Procedure: Involves routine techniq_ues in: (1) selecting crowing-count routes and sex ratio count zones 'Within general and sp.ecific units of pheasant range, (2) describing and mapping these routes and zones, (3) designating procedures for making these counts, and (4) assembllng record books for systematic recording of all informat.ion . .Resu'Lta: This job was relatively inactive during the project year, with some work done on final preparation of record books for District and Regional personnel, and on statistical analysis of data obtained from 1955 through 1957. To date 39 census units have been selected in important -pheasant areas throughout the state. .Within these census units, assistance has been given to District Wildlife Conservation Officers and Regional GameManagers in .establishing stations and zones for use cturing cro'Wing and sex ratio count s . Maps of crowing-count routes and stations and sex ratio 'count zones have been prepared for 'each of the 39 census units. Record books for District and ~gional personnel have been prepared for systematic recording of census data on a Long=bermbasis. .A total of 45 District record books and eight Regional record hooks has heen assembled and distributed. The pheasant census system is in effect on a statewide basis, and annual data on pheasant populations are being assembled and recorded. Recommendations: It is recommended additional time on this job be provided to: (1) establish a file in the Denver office which will contain plates of maps for sex ratio count zones and crow-count routes for 39 census units; also st.encils for various record forms to be used during censusing and recording date" (2) assemble and complete additional Regional record books for use by the State GameManager, (3) as af sti Regional GameManagers in modifying or changing maps of crow-count and trrood count routes where human activities necessitate changes, and (4) prepare the final report and publication on this investigation. Prepared Date: by: wayne W. Sandfort . Approved by: October, 1959 ------~------~~~~------------------ F. C. Kleinschni tz . Asst. Coordinator ��October, 1959 -89- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Project COLORADO --------------------------------No•__ _;W.:..·--'=3::..!7_-..:..R:.....-.::l.::.2 ~ G.:.,aIne;;.;,.· _._B_ir_dSurv_;._e_,y'-- Work Plan No. Job No.3 1 ----------------------------- Title of Job: Pheasant Brood Surveys Period Covered: April _ 1, 1958 throUgh March 31, 1959 Objectives: (1) To standardize methods for ascertaining annual pheasant product.ion. (2) To 'establish "permanent, representative brood count routes in all Colorado pheasant .range. . (3) To instruct other Department personnel in the standardized brood count procedure. (4) To "prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. ( 5) To eventually turn pheasant brood surveys over ·to management. (6) . Preparation of a final report on this phase of study. Procedure: Involves routine techniq_ues in: (1) selecting bro~d count routes within general and specific units of pheasant; range, (a). describing and mapping these routes, (3) designating procedures for making brood counts, (4) assembling record books for systematic recording of all information, and organizing and analysing all data in preparation for a final publication on this job. (51: Results: As with WorkPlan I, Job No.1, work on this study was relatively inactive during the project year. .Somework was carried out on final j);reparation of record books for District and Regional personnel and on statistical analySis of data obtained from 1955 through 1957. Eventually, all data gathered on this job will be incorporated in a final report on pheasant inventory methods in Colorado, and is not given in detail at this time to eliminate unnecessary duplication of work. Recommendations: It is recommended additional time on this job be prOVided to: (1) establish a file in the Denver office 'which will contain plates of maps for brood count routes for 39 census units j also, stencils for various record forms to be used during .censusing $'Ld recording data, (2) assemble and complete additional Regional record books for use by the State GameManager, (3) assist Regional Game Managers in modifying or changing maps of crow-count and brood count routes where human act.ivities necessitate 'changes, and (4) prepare the final report and pubLf,••. cation on this investigation. Prepared Date: by: Wayne W. Sandfort Approved by: ___..;:_F~.~C_._·.::Kl~e.::i~n~s~c-hn~i-t. Asst. Coordinator October, 1959 ----------------~~~---------------- ��october, 1959 . 'PO'" L~_ for" ~ "_. M~~ :.:. s; -91- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W"'37-R-12 Work Plan No. 1 Game Bird 8m"Vey Job No. ·5 Title of Job: Pheasant Hunter Check Period Covered: AIlril 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 Objective: To IlreIlarea final reIlort of Ilheasant check station activities, 19471954, and to incorIJorate data gathered from 1955 to the Ilresent time by the Game Management Division. Results: Due to committments on many other jobs in Project W-37-R-12, no work on the final reIlort for "Pheasant hunter checklr was accomplished during this p:Iloject !~egment. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be carried as an active Ilart of the Game Bird Survey Ilroject so that this important information may eventually be summarized and made available for use by management. Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandfort Appr-oved by: ----~------------------------Date: October, 1959 ----------------~--~~-------------- F. C. Kle ins chni tz ��October, 1959 -93- JOB.COMPLETION REPORT 'INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of :::Proj~ect No, ___;;C_o~L;;.;.O.;;;..!RAD;:,;;_._O_ ......•. __ __.__--.....,... W"'37-R •.12 ------~------------------------ WorkPlan No. Title of Job: 1 Game" Bird Survey ....... Job No. ·10 ----~-----------------~~~~~~~~~~~~-------------------------Mapping of' Pheasant Range Period Covered: .April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 Objectives: (1) To assemble all available information on pheasant range and distribution. (2) To complete pheasant range mapping. ·(3) To compile data and prepare :distribution and density mal's of Colorado :pheasant -populations. ·(4) To show correlation between pheasant .distribution and density and soils, ·elevation and precipitation (by use of overlays). (5) To prepare'a final report on this activity. .Procedure r Procedures in pheasant range mappLng have involved: . (1) determi2li,Jilg.: the lle:rimeter of this range by county, through gathering of information from Department personnel and local reSidents, observations of birds, calls of' crowing cocks, and inspection of habitat capable of holding :pheasants, (2) t.racing the outline of range. on overlays to county maps, with a scale of 1/2-inch per mile, (3) determining density of pheasants within the range of this s:pecies, based on the spring breeding population index, (~planimetering 'Wor~to determine -total square miles of range by county and for different density classes, (5) preparation of written descript.ions of this range, and (6) photogra:phing various overlays to reconstruct distribution and density maps to a smaller, statewide scale. A follow-up to this work involves preparation of overlays on SOils, elevation, and precipitation to show correlation between these factors and pheasant distribution. Preparation of the final report on this work involves assembling and orga;nizing all data for publication. . Results: The outline of pheasant range in Colorado, pheasant; densities within this range, and irrigated and ary ••farmed areas, as they existed in 1957, have been accurately mapped on county maps with a scale of 1/2 ••inch per mile. Kodachrome photos have been taken of all map.sections in preparataon for reconstruction of maps to a smaller scale. .The final outline map of pheasant range has been prepared and printing will be possible following completion of several technical details. .In addition to actual map work, detailed written descriptions have been prepared of pheasant range in all counties where these birds occur. �-94- Detailed irrformation is not given h-ere to eliminate unnecessary dUIllication of work. All data will be contained in the final r-epor-t ~or this job. Recommendations: It-is recommendedvork be continued to construct the state-wide 'pheasarrb density mall, a mall showing irrigated and. dry-farmed por-t lona of pheasant range, and overlays to show association of soils, Ilrecipitation, and elevations, and pheasant ]?opulations. Construction of these mapa will entail considerable detail in projection and reduction of kodachrome trans:parencies, and in preparatd.on of maps for final printing. Prepared by: Date! WayneW. Sandfort ~roved ----~------------------------- October, 1959 ----------------~--~~-------------- by: F. -C. Kleinschnitz --~--~~--~~~------------Asst. Coordinator �October, 1959. ,n~;""'j 't:t;.->! :; -95- JOB COMPLETION REPDRT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State 'of' COLORADO ----------~~~------------------ Project No.__ ......;W......;•.• ...::::3;..:.7_-~R_-12 .__ GameBird Survey _ Work Plan No. 3 ------~--------------------- Title of' Job: Experimental Habitat Development f'or Sage Grouse ------~----------------------~~--------~--~--------------------- Period Covered: April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 Objective: To determine the value of water developments in relation ing or increasing the numbers of' sage grouse. to maintain- Procedur-e: Prescribed procedures f'or this job involved selection and mapping of' f'our to six study areas j half' of' these to be developed and the rema:t.riiitg. to be used f'or control areas. In the initial phases of' this project, plans had been made to conduct pre-development observations within the areas to be developed and within the'control areas. Results: on other This job was inactive sage grouse ·work. during the project segment because of' time needed .:Recommendations: It is recommended this job remain inactive until such time as work has been .completed on the more urgent development of' sage grouse census techniques. Prepared Date: -,, by: Glenn E. ·Rogers ----------------=------------ Approved by: October, 1959 ------------~~~~~~~---------- F. C. Kleinschnitz ----------------~-----------Asst .. Coordinator ��October, 1959 6~18 -97- JOB COMPLETION REPORT , : INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of' COLORADO --------~----~--------------~~ Project No. W-37-R-12 --------~--------------------- Work Plan No. 6 ----------------------------. . . . . . . . ~. . . . . . . . . .' Game Bird Survey 1 . . Title of Job: Experimental Habitat Improvement for Sealed Quail Period Covered: April 1, 1958 through March 31, 1959 Objective: To determine the value of water and cover developments the range and numbers of scaled quail . . - in increasing .. . Proceaure: Recommended procedures have involved a review of literature, selection and mapping of study areas, and pre-development surveys to determine populations of quail on study areas. Results: Very little work vas accomplished on this job because of committments on other phases of scaled quail investigations. Preliminary surveys were made and several sites have 'been tentatively selected for experimental habitat improvement. The exact nature of developments or design for the eValuation study have not been .determined. Recommendations: Additional time is needed to successfully determine possibilities for habitat development work for scaled quail. The importance of'this species as a game bird should justify research along this line, and it is recommended work continue throughout the period extending from April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1962 to accomplish this goal. Prepared by: Date: Donald M. Hoffman Approved by :_-..,.F_. ---,-C_. _Kl.",.._e_J.n_· ::-s:-c_hn-:-i_t_z _ ----~--------------~------~Asst. Coordinator October, 1959 ----------------~--~~--------------- ��Qct.obe~_,.1959 699 -99- JQB COMPIETION REPQRT INVESTIGATIQNS PRQJECTS · State Project of CQLQRADQ ----------------------------------No. .GameBird SUrvey W-37-R-13 4 ------------------------------ •WorkPlan No. Title of Job: .rob .NQ~·2 --~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------~----------~Chukar Partridge Period covered: Production Studies .July 27, 1959 through August 8, 1959 Abstract: A total of 697 young chukars and 428 adults was' 'counted dbiring reproductive checks in Delta, Garfield, Mesa, Moffat, Montrose and Rio Blanco counta.es , in Western Colorado, giving a ¥:o1lllg-per-adult ratio .of L63:LOo. •. 'rb,ese .countis were made during the period of July 27 through August 8, 1959. During the period of J1llle 9 through August 18, a total of 82 broods :containing 728 young 'Were .seen, giving an average of 8.9 young-per'...brood. A 'very dry fall and "Winter, .al.ong with .a very small insect population during the spririg and summerof 1959, were believed to have contributed to the poor reproductive Su.ccess by chukar partridges --~.this-yea.r.--Lowered reproduction may have been cau.sed~by-the--1ack-of-green-.-food------which in turn appears to affect mating, egg laying, and hatchability. Qbjectives: (1) (2) To determine annual production by chukar-s. To determine the factors or conditions responsible reproductive success by chukars. for Techniques Used<!_Two types of data were collected and used in determining production by chukars in Colorado. These were the average young..• per •.• adu'Lt ratio and the aver= age brood size. Young-per-adult data were collected during a period starting July 26 and extending through August 7. During this period help --wasobtained from ~other personnel in the Gameand Fish Department, and intensive surveys 'Were made in areas of chukar inhabitation, where the birds were concentrated by cropland, agriculture, and water. Most of' the counts were made in the mornings (5:30. avm •. ·to:1Q:QQ_:a.m.) or in the evenings (5:30. p.m. to 6:30. p.m.). Binoculars and spotting scopes were 'USed to observe chukars and to identify adult and juvenile birds •. Information on the average brood size was collected during the. period starting .June 8 and extending through August 14, 1959, during routine. field checks .for · chukars. Only definite broods were count ed, i. e ., isolated broods with the accompanying adult or adults. The approximate age and location of broods were recorded. These data were helpful in determining the actual number of broods within an area. Climatic data were obtained from the U. S. Weather Bureau at Walker Field, Grand Junction, for use in determining possible reiationships between mof.s tuz-e, temperature, and reproductive success by chukars. -: ;' . �-100CHUKAR PJ.RTRIDGE PRODUCTION STUDI~S Jim ~.(iller Fd.nd.i.ngs r Three catagor-Les are used to summarize findings from this Lnve st.i.gat.i.on r (1) youne:-per-adult ratio, (2) average brood size, and (3) factors responsible for reproductive success. Information pertaining to these catarories is presented in the following sections. Youn~-Per-Adult Ratio Information obtained this year st.rengthened the opanaon of the writer that the young-per=udu l t. ratio is a be t.tercriteria for judging the reproductive success by chukars than the average brood size. In calculating the youngper-adult ratio, all birds observed are con~idered, including non-successful, as well as successful, breeders. Only young birds and successful hens are considered in calculation of the averap:e brood size. Table I summarizes data collected during 1959. As shown-in this, 1-)06adult arid 696 young birds were tallie6, givi!1g a ratio of 171 younc-per 100 adults. Table 1. -- CI-IUKAR PAP.TRIDGE PP.ODUCTION COUNTS, i'vESTERN COLORADO, JULY 26 TEROUGH AUGUST 7, 1959. county-. Delta Area Angel's Eanch Escalante Canyon Dominguez Little Peach Valley Oak Creek Peep.Le"s Panch Smith Fork Date of Birds Observed Count Young AduIt Tatar 8-5 7-28 7-29 7-30 7-30 7-30 8-3 42 55 30 3 17 0 27 34 50 21 5 32 19 20 76 105 51 8 49 19 47 GarfieLd Camp Gulch Dry Canyon Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon 7-27 7-29 8-4 8-3 20 0 25 2 6 4 12 11 26 4 37 13 ~;esa Gat.eway Kannah Cr. (Lower) Kannah Cr. (Upper) Plateau Creek Stove canyon I'.-atson Creek Lapham Wash 7-31 7-26 7-26 7-27 7-29 7-27 7-31 87 11 11 38 56 0 1 29 116 20 41 53 71 Brown's Park Bull Canyon Irish Canyon Sterling Place 8-6 8-6 8-6 8-6 39 40 88 6 ~:offat 9 30 15 16 2 16 11 7 24 3 2 17 50 47 112 9 YounffAdult Ra io �-101- Table 1. -- CHUKAR HRTRIIXJE PRCDUCTION COUNTS, V\ESTERN COLORADO, JULY 26 THROUGH AUGUST 7, 1959 - Continued Young! Adul t Date of Birds Observed Ratio count Young AdUlt Totar Area county Red Rocks Ranch Montrose 8-3 37 32 69 Roc Creek 7-31 40 16 56 Rio Blanco Little Hills 8-5 22 4 26 . 406 ·1102 TOTALS . 1711,100 In previous years, data have been collected and analyzed in such a manner as to show the difference in young-per-adul t ratios between areas of new releases and areas with established populations. During these years, dates of release were used as the criterion for establishing an area as one with new release or as an area with established populations. As sho~~ in the Colorado Quarterly Report, Federal Aid Division, October 1955, PIl 85-88; July, 1956, IlIl 23-27; October, 1957, IlIl 55-60; and Janv.ary; 1959, IlP 67-73, ~ any new area ~eceiving a winter or spring release of chukars was considered as a new release site for that year. During these calculations, however, no attempt was made to separate data obtained from areas receiving initial stocking, from areas that had received previous releases •. This being the case, it is not always possible to determine whether reproduction in an area came from the recently released-birds or from birds that had been placed in the area during a preceding year. Since the purpose of comparing reproductive success in areas of new release and in areas of established populations is to determine production capabilites of recently stocked birds, data are recalculat.ed and given in Ta,bles 2 and 3 to show comparison between: (1) areas which received the original releases durine the year considered, and (2) areas where all birds had gone through at least one breeding season prior to the season reproduction counts~ were made. Table 2. -- County Garfield Uesa DeLt,a CHUKAR PARTRIDGE PRODUCTION COUNT COYIPARISON, BETWEEN- AREAs WITH NEW RELEASES AND ESTABLISHED POPULATIONS, WESTERN COLOFADO, JULY 26 THROUGH AUGUST 7, 1959. . . Date of Birds Observed Young! Adul t Area Count young Adult Total Ratio ABBAS vvrTH NEW RELEilS.t;S DURING 1959 Dry Canyon 7-2"9 0 4 Ii Lapham Wash Vlatson Creek Sub-totals 7-31 7-27 1 16 o 2 2 22 23 I POPULATIONS ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO 1959 Escalante Canyon 7-:28 55 50 Dominguez 7.;.29 30 21 Oak Creek 7-30 17 32 Smith Fork 8-3 27 20 Peeple I s Ranch 7-30 o 19 Angell S Ranch 8-5 42 3L~ Little Peach Valley 7-30 3 5 17 105 51 49 47 19 76 8 5/100 �•• 102•. I ! Table 2. __ CHUKAR PARTRIDGE PRODUCTION COUNT COMPARISON, BETWEEN ilREASWITH NEW RELEASES AND ESTABLISHED POPULATIONS, ~ESTERN COLORADO, JULY 26 THROUGH AUGUST 7, 1959. - Continued •. Date or .BirilsOEservea: Young/Adult A.dult:TotaI Ratio Young Count Area County POPULATIONS ESTABLISHED PRIOR.T.O19~9 Garfield Camp Gulch Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon 7-27 8-u 8-3 20 25 2 6 12 11 26 37 13 Mesa Gateway Kannah Cr. (Lower) Kannah Cr. (Upper) Stove Canyon 7-31 7-26 7-26 7-29 87 11 11 56 29 9 30 16 116 20 ul 72 Montrose .Red Rocks Ranch Roc Creek B-3 7-31 37 uO 32 16 69 56 Moffat Brown's Park Irish Ccmyon Bull Canyon Sterling Place 8-6 8-6 8-6 8-6 39 88 6 11 24 7 3 50 112 u7 9 8-5 22 658 059 u 391 413 26 1049 1072 -- Rio Blanco Little Hills tiuo-f:ota1s ALL AllliAS 40 .I087Ioo 1597100 Table 3. -- CHUi(ARPARTRIDGE PRODUCTION cousr COMPARISONS, AREAS WITH NEW f RELEASES AND ONES WITH ESTABLISHED POPULATIONS, WESTERN COLORADO, 1955 TEROUGH 1959. Established Areas New Release Areas NUlTloerNumber Youngj'Adu1t Number Number Young/Adult:All of young of Adults Ratio Areas Year of Young of Adults Ratio 140 63 .222/100 117/100 46 80 597100 1955 o 27 0/10(){,c 131 108 121/100 133/100 1956 38 21.· 181/100 186/100 17 3 567/100~~ 1957 18 29 62/100· 1005 192 523/100 u88/100 1958 1 22 5/100-;< 678 391 168/100 163/100 1959 ALL YiARS 82 161 SI/IOu 1992 7'15 2577100 222/100 . Average Brood Size Data collected from brood-counts, Table 4, show that broods this year averaged 8.9 young. This is the second highest figure on record, as shown in Table 5. From data in Table 3, however, it can be seen that the third highest young-per-adult ratio was recorded this.year •. Thus, it can be seen that even though a high brood average is obtained, unless an idea of what portion of the population is represented by the brood sample, one cannot draw a very sound conclusion concerning reproductive success. +Samp Les inadequate and not felt to give a true young-per-adult r'at.Lo , �Table ~. -- CHU?CAR PMaRIWE SHOOD-DATA, WESTERN COLORADO, 1959. ;.ionth Humber of Broods Observed Number of Young Average Brood SrzeJune 22 10;0" July 39 322 8.3 August 21 185 8.8 A1:'L:"v.mTifJiS - 82 728 8.9 =---_ zn - Table 5. Sill':'MARY OF CHVKAR BROOD-COUNT DAT~ESTii;::.:'RN:;:· :..._;,CO;.::L~0:.:.:R1::;;tD::..0:..l,~1.:;.:95:::..6 .Year Number of Broods Observed Number Of~·Y~o~u=n2g~===A=v=e=r=ag~e;:B~r~0~0~d==S=i=z= 19~6 1957 1958 1959 ALLYEARS 53 14 52 82 201 448 8.5 116 568 728 8.3 10.? 8.9 9.3 --rnoo~' Upon checkinG dates in Figure 1, it can be seen.that in 1959 the peak of hatch was durinr, the period of June 8 through June 16. It follows that if a huntinf, season is held during the second week of November, a fairly large number . of the young birds shot would be at least 20 weeks old or more. Chukars reach a stage of development almost equal to that of adults, in regard to size, between the twelfth and fifteenth week of growth. Thus it can be seen that even the young hatched after the peak, from June 17 through August 1, would have completed their twelfth week of growth and so would be huntable birds, from the standpoint of size. . Factors Affecting Reproductive .Success As would be expected, reproductive success of the chukar partridge, is dependent upon a complex of related conditions. These relationships are described somewhat in detail in the Quarterly Progress Report, January, 1959. The relationship between moisture and growth of succulents, primarily cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), appears to be prominent upon comparisons between 1957, 1958, and 1959 data. The fall of 1957 and winter of 1958 had an abundance of moisture (Table 6) and the resultant cheatgrass crop was very lush. It was theorized that the ample supply and high quality of feed was in par.t responsible for the excellent reproduction by chukars in 1958. A look at Table 6 shows that the fall of 1958 and winter of 1959 were exceptionally dry. Comparisons show the young-per-adult ratio was conSiderably lower in 1959 than in 1958 (Table 7). �-104- Figure 1 -- PEAK OF CHUKARPARTRIDGE HATCHING, western Colorado, 1959. 28 26 24 22 20 18 ~ 8J..4 16 rn fo..l 0 14 J..4 Q) § 12 z 8 6 4 2 0 May 30 June 7 June 8 - 16 June 17 ... 25 Hatching June 26 - July 4 Interval July July 5-13 14-22 July 23August 1 �:."\ ..... ,n..~ r/,,-¥7·.~ -105Table 6. -- HONTHLY WEi,TrER RECORDS, GPJ,ND JUNCTION, AUGUST, 195h THROUGH JULY, 1959. Precipi tation Departure Uonth Year Inches from Normal COLORADO, .Temperature Departure Average from Normal August, 195& through July, 1955 , \ 195h August September October November December January . February: March April 1,lay June July . AUGust 1955 September": " " " October November De-cemoe"i:' . January February: IAarch April 1.1ay June July AUf,ust September October Ilovember December January: February March April r~:ay June July August September October November December January: February March April Y..ay June July " " " " 1955 " " " " "" " 1956 " " " " " " 1956 " " " " 1957 " " " ." " " 1957 " " " " 1958 " " " " " " 0.59 2·.51 ·0.83 1.69 0.36 0.61 1.05 0.17 1.13 1.30 0.2h 0.48 -0.61 11.49 -0.01 11.14 -0.32 ,LO.Ol /0.42 -O~70 10.J8 /0.62 -0.21 -0.31 74.5 67.1 55.0 42.6 26.1 23.9 21.5 38.5 48.9 60.9 69.6 79.4 August, 1955 through J~ly, 1956 . 0.85 -0.35 . 76.0 0.38 -0.64 69.9 0.02 -0.82 55.9 -0.21 0.34 35.1 0.18 -0.50 35.8 1.70 ,L0.47 36.7 .0.70 10.05 30.9 0.07 ~0.80 42.3 0.24 -0.51 52.4 0.26 -0.42 64.5 0.30 -0.15 75.4 0.53 -0.26 77.1 August, 1956 through July, 1957 0.04 -1.16 . 73.5 0.01 -1.01 70.6 . 0.54· -0.30 56.3 0.18 -0.37 34.3 0.47 -0.21 24.9 ,Ll.86 2.46 25.0 0.00 0.63 31.0 0.73 -0.14 43.2 1.51 ,L0.76 48.9 ,Ll.11 1.79 56~8 0.61 1-0.16 69~9 0.57 -0.22 76.1 August, 1957 through July, 1958 ,L2.28 3.48 72.9 0.09 -0.93 65.2 2.24 ,Ll.40 54.3 1.15 ,L0.60 36.3 0.43 -0.25 31.5 0.55 -0005· 29.8 0.70 ,L0.07 39.9 0.84 -0.03 40.2 0.06 -0.69 49.2 0.34 -0.34 65.6 0.76 ,L0.31 75.5 0.06 -0.73 78.0 -1.1 -0.2 10.6 14.0 -2.4 -o.i -10.5 -2.7 -2.9 -1.7 -1.6 fl.2 ,Lo.4 ,L2.6 fl.5 . -3.5 ,E7d 12•.3 -1.1 ,L1.1 ,Lo.6 ,L2.4 ,L4.2 -1.1 -2.1 ,L3.3 ,Li.? -4.3 -3.6 ,L1.0 fl.0 ,L2.0 -2.9 -5.3 -1.3 -2.1 -2.7 -2.1 -0.1 -2.3 1-3.0 1-5.8 ,L7.9 -1.0 -2.6 f3.5 th.3 -0.2 �AUGUST, Table 6. -- !'0rTPLY \',tJTHZE J(C;CO::1DS, GH.iI!'JD JUKCTION, COLORl'.DO, 1954 THROUGH JULY, 1959 - Continu2d. Temperature Precipitation Departure Departure from Normal Average Inches from Normal Year Au[ust, 1Y58 through July, 195? 78.6 1-3.0 0.70 -0.50 AUfust 1958 II -0.1 67.2 1-0.)2 1.34 September 55.8 1-1.4 -0.51 October 0.33 " 1-2.0 40.6 November -0.03 0.52 "II 1-7.1 0.11 35.6 :Cecemb~r -0.57 0.36 .January -0.24 29.4 1-5.4 1959 0.90 February 35.7 1-3.7 1-0.27 " 0.10 41.3 1-0.1 ~~arch -0.77 " 1-0.8 -0.30 52.6 P.pril 0.~5 " }.:ay -0.29 62.9 1-0.8 0.39 " 0.09 -0.36 June 1-4•.5 75.7 " .Iu Ly 0.88 " -0.71 79.5 1-1.3 Table 7. -- s u:.~:,l], HY OF YOUNG- PER-ADU LT R.AT1OS , '~ES...;.T..;_ER_.N_C_O_LO_RJ\._D_O.:.., _1....;.9~5..;...5_-1-'9..;;.5...;...9_ No , of Young No. of Adul t.s Young/lOa Adults Observed Observed Year 19~5 186 1>9 102 ,1956 219 186 165 100 132 186 488 169 1957 1958 1959 1424 292 676 400 Another condition which appears to have an effect on reproduction success is the abundance of insects, especially Grasshoppers. General observation. in 1958 showed the Grasshopper population to be very hi.gh, Chukars were observed partCikinr;of them occaSionally. It was believed that. the chukars utilized this abundant insect crop to a large extent for moisture, as well as for food; especia.lly the young chukar-s , This year, 1959, the grasshopper crop was sparse in most areas and corresponded with the low reproductive success. P.nalysis and Recormnendations: During the period July 22 through .August 8, 697 young chukar-s and 428 adult birds were observed on production counts, . givinci 8 young-per-adult..ratio of 163:l00~ During the period of June 9 through fmcust 18, 82 broods were counted with a t.otaf, of 728 young, givinG an average brood size of 8.9. Lack of moisture and growth of cheatf,rass, alonG with a lowered insect population, are .believedto be partially, if not wholly, responsible for the lowered reproduction by chukars eluring 1959. It is recommended that !,rociuctionstudies be carried on for several more years as a research project. Emphasis should be placed on: (1) methods for making more accurate young-per-adult ratio counts, (2) further studies of the correlation between precipitation and ter.1peratureand their effect on vegetative erov/th, especially cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and consequent reproductive success, (3) studies of the correlation between �-107- weather and the peak .of hatching, and (4) relationships between chukar production and.the presence of free water. Additional surveys -could include studies of predator relationships and determination of optimum release dates for game farm birds. Prepared 'by r Date: Jim Miller ------------------------------- Approved by: October, 1959 ------~----------~--~~------------- F. C. Kleinschni tz --~--~~~----~--~----Assistant Coordinator ��Gloo })~r_ G~ !Jh'sh_ October, QJ~A'U7 ~t. 1959 -109- OJ, [1S'1 JOB CC.' _':'1~TIO)i ::;'::;PORT State of CCLOPhDO -----------------------GameBird Survey 5 Yvorkplan ~:o. IV Job ~lO. Title Release Sites. ------------------------ of Job: Location of Chukar Fartridee Period Covered: June 1, 1959 through September 30, 1959 Abstract: Six r,eneral areas within the state of Colorado were selected for the release of game-farm chukars during the sprin;:- of 1960. These areas Wtre determined through ins~~ction of potential range, primarily during reproduction studies and adaptability, survival and population checks. Within the six major areas containing potential- chukar range, 16 specific sites 'Were selected for thp. release of approximately 1,575 chukars during late March -e;:;:rrYAJJI"il, 1960.---- - -- or (\hjectives: (1) (2) To locate suitable areas within the state for the release of wild-trapped and game-farm chukars. To obtain necessary agreements or permissions f:rom landowner-s (private or f'eder a.L) to assure' necessary protection for bi.rds released. Techniques Used: General areas wi thin the state, where chukar-s have shalom the best aevelopment, were determined from studies under Job No.2 (Chukar Par tr-adge Production studies), and Jab No.8- (Adaptability, SUI"vival, and Population Checks) of the chukar par t.r-LogeWork Plan (IV). These areas, in general, are limited to 101"er elevations in the west-central portion of the state, in GarfiEld, Mesa, Delta, and j;nontrose counties; in the northwestern portion of Moffat County, in the northwestern po.rt of Colorado; and in the Canon City area, Fremont County, alonf, the eastern foothills of the Rocky I,';ountains. The three general areas, mild winters and contain just mentioned, are characterized by relatively rough canyons or hillsides necessary-for the chukar. Surveys to date indicate potential chukar--development areas are restrict.ed primarily to the areas described above, and searches for release sites were made within these general localities. Consideration was f,iven to-the policy of placing chukars within a release area for a minimumof three consecutive years, and supplemental releases will be made during the spring of 1959 in several areas containing previously released birds. During the selection of new release sites, attention was given to environmental factors, such as food, water, and terrain, to human disturbance, cmd to fillinr.; gaps in presently occupied ran2;e. Plans also were made to release specific numbers of marked birds in specific Local.Lt.Les within the Well's Gulch study area, to aid in the evaluation of artificial water developments for this species. �-110- ~here necessary, landornlers were contacted to obtain permission for re.lea<.ies, to Gain ,their support in proe ct.Lon of birds, and to obt.aan verbal approv[11 for puhlic huntinr in the event chukars develop to huntable numbers. findinrs: Six reneral. areas were selected for the release of approximately These areas include: (1) the Grovm's Fark area in nort.hwest:ern Colorado, (2) the lower t.h i t e Tliver dr ai nar-e in Rio glanco and IJoffat Counties, (3) the Bookcliffs· :\~ountain r;:mr.e aIonr- the northern side of the Grand Valley in Mesa and Garfielo counties, (4) the foothills of Grand S~esa, (5) the Dolores River drainare near the Colorado-Utah line in Mesa and Montrose Counties, and (6) thE'! Canop- City area in Fremont County, eastern Colorado. Specific release ar-eas w i t.hin t.hese ceneral locali tics, Viith legal descriptions and the approximate number of birds to be released, are shown in Table 1. r,-srs r,ame-farmHchukars during the early sprinr, of 1960. Table 1.-- LOCi, TIm! OF CHUKfI"!1 RELEi\SESITES FOP TEE SPBHTGOF 1960 .• Appr-ox, No. of Name of Release 5i te Birds to be Legal Description Released General Specific County Broy.n's far < ~pitzie Dra.w 200 Moffat Sec. ll, T8N, RI02V~ Moffat Jac~ SprinEs Sec. 34, TIlN, R103W 125 I'.bite River ----villite H1. ver (1',arde I Ranch) Skull Creek \hllow Creek Rio Blanco Sec. 25, TlN, RI04w Moffat Sec. 31, ToN, R1001'{ Moffat Sec. 5, TLN, Rl02W 100 100 100 Bookcliffs coal Creek (Cameo area) \'{. for k Lapham VI ash Mesa Mesa Sec. 20, TlOS, R98VI Sec. 27, T8S, RIOlW 150 150 Mesa Delta Sec. Grand ll'!esa. V!atson Creek i',ell's Gulch kl Guzzler #6 Guzzler #7 Guzzler Alkali Creek (Control V\indy Creek (: 2, ri S, R2E, Ute PM100 ) Sec. 10, T11s, R97W Sec. 0, '1'l1s, R97W Sec. 2, R3E, T4s, ute Sec. 13, T11s, R97W Sec. 5, T14s, R97W 50 SO PM SO SO So j_;olores Pi,VEr Fer-acox ·".alley Montrose Sec. 28, TL8N, R19W 100 Canon Ci tv are a -v:TIson Creek Priest Carlyon Fremont Fremont Sec. Sec. 100 100 " area) " 24, Tl7S, :R71W 13, T18S, H71W �-111• '" ~" -,. - - 'r,_' .... :.;: ,'--~ _.•-" ..__._, .-, ...,~;.:,,::..'" Figure 1. Irish Canyon, Moffat County -. One-hundred chukar-s were released in this· locality in 1958 and 1959 populations are conservatively estimated at 150-200 birds. Note lush growth of cheatgrass and rugged terrain. Figure 2. South face of South Twin Mountain, Canon City area, Fremont County. Chukars occur here from recent, nearby releases. Birds are among the few occurring in eastern Colorado. �:""~~ /il rl." •....." _ ...'1 _ -112- Figure 3. Coal Creek Canyon, CameoArea, Mesa County. The 1960 release of ehukars will be made to fill a gap in the BookCliffs chukar range. Figure 4. Proposed 1960 chukar·release site at Jack Springs, Moffat County. Grasses (cheat and ricegrass) are. abundant in old burn. Establishment of chukars here would extend chukar range in the BrownI s Park area. �-113- The release of chukars within the areas oescribed above should make the best possible use of the exi.st.angsupply of b tr-cs , in attempts to increase the ranEe and !1l.!1Tlbers or this species. In the Brovm' s Park area, J;';offat County, good development of chukar populations appears to be occurring, par t.i.cu.Lar Iy in the rugged Irish Canyon area (see F'i[ure 1). Felease of chukars in the Spitzie Draw locality will be made in an attempt to extend chukar populations westward, toward the Utah line. The Jack .sprinf,srelease will be made in a..'1 attempt to extend colonies of these birds farther southward. The lower "\~hiteFiver area has shown fair development of chukars, in spite of the limited number of birds released to date. Three additional releases will be mace, one on the V',hiteRiver proper, and two along the south face of Blue ,',loun t.a i.n, The Bookcliffs i\,;ount.ain r-ange extends from the ColoradO-Utah line for a distance of approximc:.tely80 miles to the town of Rifle, and is believed to be one of the best popential areas for chukar development in western Colora.do. ' Over 2,000 chukars have been placed in various canyons within this range, and hurit.i.ng of cbukar-s occurred in several localities last fall. Release of birds -in Lapham \':ashwill supplement a previous release, and the Coal Creek relense will be mac.1ein an attempt to fill a fap within the Bookcliffs chukar ran::;e. ,J I The V,c:, tson Creek release, along the base of the Grand Mesa, will supplement a Chuktirs released in the Well's Gulch study area, also in the foothills of the Grcmd Mesa, will be marked in various ways in attempts to detect t.he movement of chukc"r pa.rtridges between dry areas and areas containinE art.ificial water developments. 1959 release. In the Dolores River area, a release of 100 chukar s will be made in Paradox Valley. This release supplements a 1959 release, and will be made to develop chukar populat.ions farther up the Dolores River Canyon. Huntable populations have already developed in the lower port.ion of the Dolores River Canyon near the tow!: of Gateway. Development of sizeable groups of chukars a.Long the eastern foothills of the Rocky Mountains has not occurred to cate. The Canon City area, with rugged terrain and ~enerally mild climate, however, appears to offer the best possibilities for establishing the chukar in this portion of the state. Some croups of c hukar-s are present in the Twin j;10untainarea, west .and north of Canon City. '11>0 supplemental releases will be made in. Priest Canyon and 1,!,ilson Creek, in the eeneral vicinity of Twin Mountain, to experiment f'ur-the r wi th esta.blishing the chukar in e ast.ern Colorado. Recommendations: It is recommended this survey be continued as long: as gamefarm or .... lild-trapped chukar-s are be Lng r-e Ieased to aid in p'Lac ing birds in t.hemost suitable areas. Present plans call for development work with the chnkar throufh the sprinp: of 1962. -)/~..r.. ' Pr-epar-ed by: Date: /~,/: ,-- Approved by:"" L /),.: ,.1...; '.£.-c>//' ,'"_,,../ Assistant Federal Coordina,tor zra October, 1959 -' »' '_-'" ��Ocbober-, -115- I~iIl~lli'~I~n~lrlili~~fliillllllrl]illilijll 1959 7:l3 BDOW022382 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State Project of' COLORADO ----------------------------------W.__ •.•3:::..7.:_ •.•_R_••_13~ __ No• ~ _ .4 ' ,Work Plan No. ----------------------------- Title of' Job: Popu'latrton ----~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~--------------~--~~ Adaptability, Period Covered: June Survival, and Checks 9, 1959 through August 18, 1959 .Abstract: Field checks were conducted in 53 areas in ten -courrtLes to ,'obtain information on the population status, adaptability, .and. survival of' chukars in Colorado. Surveys were made during the period of June 9 'throUgh August 18/ 1959. A total of' 1,698 birds was observed and a maximumpopulation estimate of' 6,850 -was derived on the basis of birds and sign observed, and report.s f'rom local reSidents and Department personnel. .The popu.Latd.on estimate of' "1959 'Was'so~ha.t lower than that f'or 1958. An exceptionally dry year '"Withvery low f'Q9d.production -was b.e-liev~dto:;be the cause of' lower chukar reproductive success 'during the .curr-errt .seaaon , ~---------------.------.-.--- A _total of seven chukar releases was made this year, ,with f'our- 'of these-~being in areas 'uninhabited by chukars prior to 1959. A general Lncrease -in -range -occupfed by chukars 'was observed and several movements of' d]istances of' two miles 'or more -were noted •. ,Somepredation investigation. and the f'irst definite case of poaching -wasnoted dUring thi::; It is suggested that po:pulation checks be continued and that ,consideration to transf'erring these rou.tine surveys to the management division. be- giv~ A chukar season of f'our days, with a three-bird bag and possession limit, recommended, to coincide with the first four days of' the-pheasant Jilunt" was :Objectives: (1) (2) (3) To determine the adaptability and survival of' chukara in areas of' new or recent releases, and in areas of' established "populations. To determine dispersal of' birds f'rom the- -point .o,f original introduction. To evaluate the environmental factors in relation to the 1ncr~as~ or decrease of this species. Techniques Used: Field checks were conducted from June 9 thro'Ugh August 18, 1959, in areas of' chukar inhabitation to obtain inf'ormation on th~ general stat:u,s of' chnkar-s, These checks were made in 53 chukar ar-eas, containing both established populations and new release groups~ in ten counties in ColoradO. 'Surveys.''Ilsti.ail.y -were carried oub with a vehicle and on foot during the -early mornings --or Ln the �e-venings around cultivated. fields, waterways, reservoirs, and other areas where birds commonlyconcentrate. Methods of determining the -presence and numbers of chukars included actual observation, calls, tracks, droppings, dusting areas, and reports by Department personnel and local residents. General data on weather, ·condition of cheatgrass and other food sources, the amount ot water, predators and predation, insect populations, and evidence of poaching 'Were also recorded during these checks. �-117c}~JK.itF Ph!-<.TRIDG~ hDilPTilBILITY, Sl,RVIVAL, ANDPOfULhTIOI~CI~'::;KS Jim :.1il1er FindinGs: Findine;s from this survey can be broken dovm into the followinc: c at.agor i.es r (1) chukar census and population estimates, (2) dispersal and ranf.:e of chukar s , .and (3) fact.ors responsible for success or :ailure in chukar development. These are discussed under appropriate headines be Low, Census and Popu La.ti on Estimates 1,698 chukars vias observed dur-i.ng the: summer of 1959. From this fiGure Clnd accompanin[ data, the total population within areas surveyed was estimated to ranee from 3,205 to 6,850 birds. These estimations Ylere derived by takinG the maximum number of chukars seen during a single observation or survey and compar-i.ng this with s i gn of birds in the area, results of other surveys, and reports of local residents and Department personnel.' Estimated populations for counties and specific areas are shown in Table 1. I, t.ot.al, of Table 1. -:-..CHUKl~R PflJi:TP..IDGE OBSERVATIONS 1',NDSU~.n\liER POPUU-\TION _ . ESTIYJ;Tt:S, 1959 ~laximum No. of Estimated Birds Observed, Number of county Area Chukars Summer, 1959~'" DeTfa Ancel's Ranch (Gunnison River) Slack Canyon (portion in Delta Co.) Br-ou gh ton's Orchard (Gunnis on River) Escalante Canyon Harrra'le 's Ranch :lotchkiss Ranch Little Dominguez Little Peach Valley Smith Fork (tribl..,tary of Gunnison ~{i.ver ) l;orHJ For-k 0: Cunnison ni ver CCl.1<: Creek (west of Eckert) Fee p'l.e t s Orchard (Gunnison River) Foint Creek I'ongue Creek (west of Eckert.) 1,\e11's Gulcl: ~~est Eedlands !I~esa Fremont Red Roc Canyon Priest Canyon Twin ~;ount.adri SUB-TC'l'l'lS :~~'a;~i!T;UlT'. number of birds made. o 182 o 15-25 51 8 60 75-125 50-100 75-150 51 19 22 0-25 100-150 35-90 25-50 64 0~25 64-75 25-50 --"'5""'5"""2 ---~l-..,J 1b9-2, 065 SUB-TOTAL::> -~··:c r:o survey 250-400 25-50 15.,..25 400-700 15-25 95 o 5-50 10-50 75-150 5 observed during a single 90:250 survey. �-118- T,-,hle 1. -- '::;!~l!:J!~ ff·YT'~E(£ i,STI;"j'.T!c.:J, 03=r::F.Vi,T:i:m,:;-; 1,~!r::::i"IJ-R -1:0. of Bir<is Observed, Sur:n::er, 1959~~ j.:axilmm County . l.re t: =G=&r=f:;:l.=· e:=;r=d===-::::"'_' _.-.-.- ..-...... POPUJ..,i'·Tlm\ 1)'59. - ContiEued. :2;stil!lated Number- of Chukars -=======:::::.::============== Camp Gulch Co t t.onwood Gulch (e as t, of Grand V.) T;ry C;anyon East 5~lt Creek (Dou~las Pass Pd.) Farachute Creek Fr-a i.r i.e Canyon Prince Creek Pifle Creek-Graham !\';eSil t.re« Roaring fork (near Carbondale) S UP,-TCTl\ 1;) 47 4 108 37 17 21 2Jfi Las JI.nimas l\pishipa 75-125 0-25 25-100 .110-200 100-200 25-50 0-25 25-50 0-25 360:800 0-25 :.:'23 a DiG DominGuez 0ridf,cport Coal Gulf!i' .... . Coon Ho.LLow cottonwood Canyon (tributary of Dolores Ti'iver) DeBeque Canyon East Creek (Uniweep Canyon) Gateway Area Gunnison River (between Br i.dgepor-t ('; Y,hitewat.er ) Horsethief-Hul)y Canyon kre« Hunter Canyon (Little Salt \'vash) Kannah Creek (Lower) Kannah Creek (Upper) King Creek (Indian Creek) Lapham V'ash Plateau Creek Stove Canyon V~;atson Creek \'<indy Creek (nortb of V;e11, s Gulch) S UB- TOTh LS ~.;offat Blevin 's ranch Bull Canyon Ca.Ll.ov.ay Fl.ace St.er1inC flace Irish Canyon SD3-TC'Ti,LS 0 33 .6 .2 .. 167 57 20 46 0 17 53 71 2 0 10-20 60-125 .... 6-15 0-15 10-45 . 0-25 250-350 15-50 25-100 75-100 25-50 25-50 50-100 10-15 50-150 100-200 100-250 25-50 10-25 -'-fi'7'74r-· ------rr81ir600~lr,;...,7""'3 •.•5,....._,. o 47 50 14 120 231 10-15 50-100 75-150 15-25 150-200 390-1,060 �. _ .. '~(~:~.I? .. -119- Table 1. CHUKAR J:'il.RTRIDG:::: OBSERVATIONS AND SU~R. ESTIM.iITES, 1959. - Contim:.ed. Maximum No , of Birds Observed, Summer, 1959* Area County Montrose Billy Creek Black Canyon (portion in Montrose Co.) Dlue Creek Bostwick Park Dry Creek .Duckett's Draw (west canal area) Mesa Creek Olathe Gap (tributary Black Canyon) Onion Creek Paradox Valley Red Rocks Ranch Roc Creek South Canal South Shinn Park SUB-TOTALS POPULATION Estimated Number of Chukar-s -.,.. 36 o 84 '56. 176 50-100 10-25 50-75 0-10 0-10 20-50 25-75 0-25 25-150 100-150 75-100 20-40 . 10-25 385-835 . Pueblo 0-15' . 0-15 0-30 . . Beu Lah-Rye Arecf .. Turkey Creek SUB-TOTALS Rio Blanco Lit t.IeHills 26 30-50 Saguche Curtis Ranch Area Saguche Creek Area SUB-TOTALS o o 0-50 ALL JlJiliAS O. 1,698 0-50 0-100 J,205-6,850 As shown in Table 2, the population estimate for this year is approximately 40 per cent lower than t.hat for 1958. This s~e table also shows that the number of birds observed was down .. about 40 per cent. It is believed that a fairly accurate census of chukars was obtained this year due to concentration of chukars around areas of agricultural 1and.or water due to the drought , This was the case during 1958, also, as shown in the Quarterly Progress Report, of the Federal Aid Division, January, 1959, pages 59-65. . Table 2. -- FOUR-YEAR Sm1MF.RY POPULATION ESTIMATW, COLOF.ADO, 1956-59. Year Maximl.lJ:l Birds Observed Population Estimate 1956 936 4465 1957 375 2255 2673 10440 1958 1698 6850 1959 ' " �-120Dispersal and Ranr.e FolloYlin;::: introclust,ion of chukar s into an area, it is important to know whether the bircls establish themselves or not and t.he amount of r-anee they wi.Ll, eventually occupy. i\ c ons Lder-ab Le amount, of tims and effort was spent in checking land be t.ween and around release sites, during t.he summer of 1959, to determine dispersion of chukars from the point of original release. Several movements of chukars fro~ original release sites were noted during this survey. These movement's include dispersion of chukars into the Blue Creek, in southern Niesa County, and Mesa Creek, in northern Montrose County, presumably from the poe Creek release. This represents a movement of about five miles up and dosn the Dolores River Canyon from the confluence of the Dolores River and Hoc Creek. Another movement of several miles from the Gateway release ,. on the Dolores River, to the lower portion of Vvest Creek W2..S noted. In Brown's Park (Moffat County), movement was noted from Blevin' s Panch to Vermillion Creek. Tbis entailed movement of birds for about two miles in a southwesterly direction over relatively flat terrain with saltbush (Atriplex spp , ) and sagebrush (Ar temes La spp , ) cover. Chukars in Brown's Park also moved from the~'Calloway Place :to the Sterlinf, Place, a distance of about three miles in a southerly direction~ In Delta County, some movement from the' 11\ell' s Gulch area probably occurred. It is not known exactly where these,J?irds went, but it is believed they moved laterally, around the base of Grand Mesa, or in a westerly direction to the G'lnnison River, a distance of about six miles. Pres':' ence of chukar-s in several drainages near I've11,s Gulch indicates- at ieast a port.ion of the birds spread around the base of Grand Mesa. In Prairie Canyon, located in western Mesa County, movement of birds for about. three. miles up the canyon from the orig:inal release site was noted. General dispersal of many of the f,roups of chukars was believed to have occurred during the sum:ner of 1959. This belief is supported by information gained from sicns and reports by local residents~ Causes for chukar movements are not known, It is believed, however, that movements were influenced by a search for better feed, water, or more suitable habitat from the standpoint of terrain. In several instances, high popul.at.Lons of predators appeared responsible for chukar movement. Luring the early spring of 1959, chukar releases were made in four new areas in ~esa County and Garfield County and three releases were made in areas previously planted in Mesa County. This was a continuation of the present program of chukar planting, which is scheduled to continue through 1962, and added to the established range and number of chukar s , The largest portion of the chukars in Colorado, occur in the west-central portion of the state. General distribution of these birds and areas of concentration is shown in Figure 1. Factors Responsible for the Increase or Decrease of Chukar Populations A number of factors are undoubtedly responsible for the success or failure of a chukar population. Included are such factors as topography, climate, food, predation, and as in the case with any wild creature, the influence of man. Topography can be considered as one of the most important factors inestablishment of a chukar population. In this respect, steep slopes, with rocky outcroppings, at low elevations (gener-al.Iy be Low 6,000 feet in Colorado) �-121-· seem to be preferred, and all-important, in ~stablishment populations. of chukar Perhaps equally important in chukar survival, is climate. A warrr~dry climate is preferred, where adequate precipitation occurs to insure a sufficient supply of succulent feed during the winter and early spring periods. It is believed that a shortage of green feed contributes to lack of matinG' lowered egg production, ~d consequent poor reproductive success. Another factor which influences chukar partridge populations is the severity of winters, primarily in respect to snowfall. It appears that the chukar can withstand a small to moderate amount of snowfall, but that heavy or accumulative snow that covers the ground for long periods of time is very detrimental. It is this factor, coupled with the shortage of suitable food, which seems to produce unsuitable chukar habitat in eastern Colorado. In west-central Colorado, where chukar populations have shown best development, winters are mild with little snowfall. �-122- (See map of chukar distribution) l\PLA Im.:Bt;R t/esa County 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 1J2 46 NM:[E OF ARB;A Bridreport Coal Gulch DeBeqlle Canyon Gateway Gunnison River (between Bridgeport and l\'hi tewater ) Hunter Canyon KaIU1ah Creek, lower Kannah Creek, upper Plateau Creek stove Canyon Big Dominguez Lapham Vlash V;atson Creek Delta County 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Angell s Ranch .Black Canyon (portion in Delta County) Broughton I s Orchard Escalcnte Canyon Hargrave I s Ranch Hot.chkiss Ranch Little Dominguez Little Peach Valley Oak Creek (west of Ecker-t ) Peeple's Orchard Smith Fork Tongue Creek Yie11,s Gulch West Redlands Mesa Montrose County 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 31J 43 Black Canyon (portion in Montrose County) Bostwick Park Dry Creek Duckett's Draw Olathe Gap Red Hocks Ranch Roc Creek South Canal South Shinn Park Paradox Valley Garfield County 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 44 45 Camp Gulch Graham Mesa Parachute Creek Prairie Canyon Prince Creek Rifle Creek Roaring Creek Douglas Pass (East Salt Creek) Dry Canyon �----~ ---------- _j GARFIEL D t-xj ...,. ~ '1 (I) I-' I I V" 11_'1 0 :I: c:: .-,-- ~ ::u ~ ~ ~ N MESA H e f"j t:1 H (J) ;;3 H to q I ~ >-3 H 0 Z ... ~ H If en ~ r.:-l ~ ...::u I-' '0 V1. '0 W I I I lEG f NO I Appro)(jlhote.. I bour1tIQf'Y' I r4 119 e I C 0 h c ~n t r II l' ;0 n of ttretlS. In CD to Cf _______ qe)( number COl1cefltroTiora rea . .,f MONTROSE ~.~ ""~ 'til, �-l24- Considering food as another important factor in chukar development, it .can easily be 'under-sboodwhy.reproduction was poor this year in 'most areas in Colorado. Very little precipitation occureed during months prec:eding the 1959 reproductive period and little or no 'cheatgrass sprouted in the spring of 1959 in most of the areas. 'Growth of this important chukar 'food appeared poorest in Delta County, within the heart of Colorado I s chukar range. Most .01' the chukar habitat is located on heavily used winter 'sheep range. .Follo'Wing winter grazing periods, there vms little food left for chukars. ·One·exception to this was the Irish Canyon Area, located in Moffat County, ·where a lush crop of cheatgrass was produced and an excellent chukar hatch res11lted. Very little can be said concerning the influence -of predation on chukar develop ... ment due to lack .of definite information. Several instances have been noted, however, .wher-eRed-tailed hawks (Buteo borealis.). have been observed killing young chukars. One'case of predation on 'eggs by a bUll snake -was a.ltso reported. Other predators p:robably include the bobcat, skunk; and the house cat. D'ur'ing the past summer,.the first real ertdence of poaching 'Wasfound. .Neatly severed wings, from five chukars, were observed near an abandoned cabin in Hunter Canyon, Mesa County. Prior to -this incident , it was the general opinion that some poaching :was being done, but no ·defini te proof had been found. One case of a chukar being killed during harvest was reported in Esca'larrbe when a brood of '~mungbirds was 'encountered during mowingoperations. Canyon, .~ J ' Recommendations: Data collected during chukar popu.Latd.onchecks are 'useful in evaluating the success of the -chukaz-development program and in fromulating z-ecom •.. mendatrtons for hunting seasons. It is recommendedthat these studies be continued indefinitely, ·with consideration given to transferring these rout.Lne surveys to managementpersonnel. Preliminary to t.ermination of these surveys as a research proj:ect, it is recommendedthat all chukar areas be mapped and described in detail, that local personnel to contact for special information regarding the status of local chukar populations be listed, and that methods for conducting chukar 'counts be adequate1$" described. Prepared by: . Jim Miller Date: __~ Oc_t_o_b_e_r~, __1~9~59~ Approved by: _ F.. C. IQeinschnitz ---As7--s7i-st~·-an-t~c~oo-'-r-din~--at~o--r~--- \ � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/6b95865daf7bf211cf3a049e7b20925c.pdf f2390d457d55dea8753fd413df80c85b PDF Text Text January, 1960 -1- JOB C:OMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS state of Project ---:.C.:,o,;;;1;,:.o.;;;.r,;;;8;,:.d;,:.o _ No._---.:W..:...~...;:·1:.;;0...;4_ ..• ;:.;R....; ••• 1~ _ , Name: Inventory and Analysis of Wildlife Populations Job No.. 1 Period June 25 to September 30, 1959. and Habitat,South . Platte ~. VaD..ey , " , .. Title: -----------------------------Covered: Mapping ---------~~-~~---------------~ Abstract: 1. Two study areas of about 4 linear miles each were established in riverbotton habitat. One area located near Crook is closed to grazing by domestic livestock. The other area is located near Iliff and receives moderate ,to heavy grazing from cattle and horses. 2. OVerlays were traced from aerial photos showing ground cover-types) landuse patterns and present ownerships of Department-controlled and adjacent private lands . 3. Map coverage included an 18 mile length of bottomland averaging :aboutl~ miles .Ln width, extending from Proctor on the west ) downstream ,to the Logan•.• SedgWick county line. Also mapped was the grazed study area • Project Objectiyes: 1. Inventory 2. land-use of riverbottom Determine wildlife 'categories. habitat, population species and production 3;. Major factors 4.. Major foods and cover requirements 5. Establishment ment use. limiting including success levels by species and major on the area. of important .of permanent transects 6. Evaluate opportunities for habitat and natural marsh or .water areas • cover and Land=use maps. and trend game species. routes for subsequent manage•.• .tmprovemerrt, as determined by terrain .Job Objectives: 1. To Show spatial privately-awned lands. 2. 3.. densities relationships To show cover-types between Depar-tmerrb=managed tand adjacent and land-use patterns. To provide a means of showing graphic and characteristics betweenungrazed and measurable differences and grazed bottomlands. in cover �•.. 2- Methods: Two'study areas of about 4 linear miles each were selected in riverbottom habitat. One area, located near the town of Cr-ookis mostly on Department .owned land and is closed to grazing by domestic livestock. The other tract, about 12 miles upstream near Iliff) is on privately-owned land and receives moderate to heavy grazing from considerable numbers of cattle and horses. 'Ii OVerlays) showing recognizable ground cover types and land ...use patterns were traced f'romaerial photographs taken in 1950 and then field-checked to show changes that have occurred since 1950. It was found that because of the mixed nature of the understory vegetation, only the shrub cover-type could be accurately delineated f'romthe·photos. Present ownerships of private lands adjacent to Department holdings were determined and noted on the overlays. Croplands were field-checked and 1959 crops together with their approximate acreages were also noted. Results: Overlays have been cornpletedcovering Department..awnedormanagedbottomlands f'romthe town of Proctor on the ''West) downstreamto the Logan-SedgwickCounty line) a distance 'of some 18 miles. Width coverage includes the area between the Union . Pa.effic Railroad tracks on the north and the south edge 'ofc~opped or meadowpasturelandsonthesouth ) and averages about l! miles. Also mappedwas the grazed study area of approximate.ly 4- linear 'nrl.Les, Appro'Priate methods will be used to determine total areasofd<elineatedcover •.• typesan.d land-uses and f:i;'ni.shedmaps will be drawn.and submitted in January, 1961-.; Prepa.I"edby: G~le..;.;nn=....;L;;;...;-..;C;.;;r....;ou=c~h _ Allprovedby:.__ Date: ...:.r;;.;:,an.;:=uary~~,~1.:::..96.:..0:....._ ~F.;..'* _C;;,.*;..,' ....;KJ..~ ..•.• e... in;.;"...:.s..;;.c...;hn~. _it_z....;..._ Asst. Coordinator �January, 1960 -3JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS 'PROJECTS State of ColoradO --------~~~~~---------------- 'Project NO. W~-1~0~4~-~R~·~~1~ ~_ Name: Inventory and Analysis of Wildlife Populations and Habitat, South Platte Valley Job No • 2~ Title: Wildlife Habitat Inventory Period Covered: June 25 to September 30, 1959 • .Abstract: 1. Twenty permanentlymarked transects were installed on each study area. Transects extend across the riverbottom one-fifth mile apart; are variable in length according to the width of bottomland habitat, and have a total length of .about 8 linear miles on each area. 2. Vegetation vas sampled with a continuous crown-intercept method on4 linear miles of each study area. Measurements, to the nearest foot, were made of ground cover composition according to overstory, shrub and herbaceous classes. 3. a simp~e Relative densities and average heights of plant cover vere estimated and profile map of each transect was drawn during sampling. 4. 'Pr'eliminaryanalysis of ground-cover composition data (excluding density and height factors) showed no significant difference in total vegetative ground-cover betweenungrazed and grazed transects at the .05 level of probability. 5. Significantly more forb cover occurred on the ungrazedand more water on the grazed transects. No explanation is apparent for forb differences, but less water vas encountered on the ungrazed area probably because of water diversions from the river between the study areas • Objectives: 1. To determine and compare vegetation composition and density on grazed and ungrazed bottomlands. 2.. To .determine the current status of variable environmental may affect wildlife. factors which �-5Wildli:fe Habitat Inventory. Glenn L. Crouch Establishment .o:f Transects Twenty llermanently marked transects were installed on each study area to :facilitatewildli:fe habitat and population inventories. Transects extend across the riverbottom on true north and south bearings and run in alternately opposite directions, one-:fi:fth mile apart. Transects vary in length:from 1600 :feet to 3000 :feet depending on the width o:friverbottom habitat, and have a total length o:f approximately 8 linear miles on .each study area. All distances compass. were determined by pacing and bearings vereobtained :from a hand Transects were marked at each end by 6 by 6 inch altlminurnplates. Plates were also placed along each transect at intervals approximating .one-third its length. Thus, a total o:f 80 plates were located on each study area .. Vegetative ,Inventory , Vegetative 's~ling was accomplished by using a 'continuous crown-intercept method on all ten south-running transects on each tract. Four miles o:f line on each study area were measured to determine composition, relative density and average height o:f vegetation. Composition was classi:fied according to trees, shruhsand herbaceous levels or by various combinations o:f these classes. Sections o:f line not intercepting plant crowns were 'described by sttr:facecover. Line measurements were made to the nearest :foot. Relati vecoverdensi ties were estimated :for shrub .and herbaceous levels Five classes were used todescrihe .relativedensity. only . Average heights o:f vegetative growth were estimated plants o:f less than 8 inches in height not .recorded. with to the nearest:foot Measurements necessary to construct a simple profile mapo:f each transect were recorded du:r'ingsampling. Estimates o:f elevation changes were made along each transect.usingthe beginning point o:f each as a base. Results: A s11.IlUIlBXY o:f ground-cover compositiondata Tables 1 and 2. has been completed and is shown in �-6Table L--A SUMMARY OF THE GROUND COVER COMPOSrrIONONUNGRAZED SAMPLED T~SECTS CoverClassif'ication C:ottonwo:od (cw) CW"'Shrub CW-Shrub-Grass CW•.• Shrub-Forb CW-Shrub"'Grass"'Forb CWwGrass-Forb CW-..G:rass CW •.• Forb :J:otal Percent of' total t.ransectlengjlIl Percent ·of'total plant cover Ungrazed L~gth eft) 470 157 175 141 23 1299 859 474 3598 Shrub Shrub:.-Grass.-Forb Shr~rass Shrllb-Forb Total Bercent of' total transect length Bercentof' total plant cover 883 529 1688 755 3855 Grass-Forb Berc:entof't~ Bercent of'total 4716 931 64 1322 330 2647 Bareground Bercentof' 4033 6579 1771 7·90 10.29 9.63 3930 17.83 17.49 1327 2.87 22617 17936 length 29.28 38.21 T~64 648 Total transect length Total plant gro1ID.dcover Bercent ,of'total transect 14.43 18.83 16.02 20.21 1728 length 11.78 15·39 3242 3624 of' total transect 2.05 2.68 20.85 26.29 Forb Bercent of' total transect length Bercentof'total plant cover Water Bercent 87 69 6 0 78 182 39 461 17.04 21.49 of' total transect length of' total plant cover % 11.20 14.61 1.83 2~31 transect length plant cover length 412 158 177 6 3 409 1222 129 2516 15·91 76 14 2 11 142 98 72 415 total transect Grazed length ef't) 200.06 Willow (W) W-Shrub W...shrab"'Gr.ass W"'Shru.b:o-Forb W..oGrass••Fo.rb W~Grass W-Forb Total Bercent of' total transect length Bercentof' total plant cover Grass Bercent Percent % AND GRAZED 5·90 22473 17216 79·29 76.64 �-7- Table 2.--A SUMMARY OF SAMPLED TRANSECT PLANT COVER BY GROWTH FORM Ungrazed Classification Tree Overstory Shrub Grass Forb Percent of Total* Plant Cover 22.37 24.41 73.34 54.73 Length (ft) 4013 4378 13155 9817 (.-.. Percent of Total: . Transect length 17.44 19.36 58.16 43·41 ") Grazed ~ ••••, •••• j,_ •• ", I , •..•.•• -. ; Classification Tree Overstory Shrub Grass Forb *Percent Lengbh (ft) 2977 3063 13284 6047 Percent of Total Plant Cover 17·29 17·79 77.16 35·12 totals are greater than one-hundred because Percent of Total Transect Length 13·25 13.63 59·11 26.81 of overlapping classes. Simple comparisons with a "t" test show no significant difference in total vegetative ground cover betweenungrazed and grazed transects at the .05 .level of probabili ty (s.ee Table 3). A preliminary analysis of the cover-composition data .is Shown in Table 4. Comparisons of confidence intervals show ungrazed and grazed percentages offorbs to be significantly different at the .05 level of probabilityj the ungrazedarea having more forb cover. Why this difference exists is not apparent at this time. Also, a significant difference occurred in percentages of waterj the grazed area having more water. This difference probably exists because of water diversions from the river between the study areas. Two irrigation dams divert water during the surnmerand fall months causing a .decrease in water flowing through the ungrazed area during those seasons • During :the winter seaaon , head .... gates are removed from'~ the dams and no diversion takes place. Analysis of data concerning the relative density and average height of plant cover is expected to reveal differences and similarities between the two areas that are not now discernible. Prepared by: Date: __~ ....;G:::.;1:::.;e::,;:nn::;.......:;L:..;,.--=.C;:.r,:..o1.l;:.;.c:::.;h::..Approved by: .'F,~ C. Kleinschnitz .Asst. Coordinator ~J~an~.:::.;u:::.;a:::.;r~y~,~1~9~60~· _ �Table 3.--A Study Area Ungrazed Grazed COMPARISON OF THE TOTALPLANTCOVERONill'JGRAZEDAND GRAZEDSAMPLEDTRANSECTS Number ofTransects -Mean % of Total 'JilantGroUndCover' 10 10 Standard. "neviat'i'on% 'o'i Va:ri'atio~% ' ' Coefficient Calculated . 'net" ' , . 11.23 7·72 14.10 10.11 ·77 79.67 76.35 "t" .05= 2.101 , 1 'table 4. --A COMPARISON OF GROUl'ID COVERBY CLASSESONUNGRAZED ANDGRAZEDSAMPLED TRANSECTS Classification Cottonwood Ungrazed Grazed Willow Ungrazed Grazed Shrub l1ngrazed Grazed Grass Ungrazed Grazed Forb Ungrazed Grazed Bareground Ungrazed Grazed Water ungrazed Grazed *Significant1y --- Number of Transects Mean % of Ground Cover per Transect Standard Deviation 10 10 16.56 11.26 % Coefficient of , Variation Standard E.rror of X % 4.35 4.84 26.27 42.98 1.38 1.53 Confidence Interval % It".05 13.44 •• -19.68 7.80 •.... 14.72 J CP 10 10 1.94 2.08 1.77 1.63 91.24 78.37 0.56 0·52 0.67-0·90-- 10 10 18.69 13·30 24.34 6.71 130.23 50.45 7·70 2.12 1. 27 - •.• 36.11 8·50--18.10 10 10 58.87 59·03 13·20 8.71 22.42 14.76 4.18 2.76 49·41- •.. 68.33 52.79- •• 65.27 10 10 44.67 26.74 11.81 4.63 26.44 17·31 3.74 1.47 36.22- •... 53.12* 23·41--30.07 10 10 17.86 17.89 12.12 7.42 67.86 41.48 3.84 2·35 9.17--26.55 12·57--23·21 26.77 27.47 0.24 0.51 2.38-4.71-- 10 10 different at the 2.92 5.86 .05 level 0.77 1.61 of probability. 3.21 3.26 3.46* 7.01 J �JOB COMPLEl'IONREPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS state of Project -=C:..:o:.:l:.:o;:.:r.;;::.a.;;::.d;:.o •...•... ~ No•__ Name: Inventory ---:.W.:-.'-.:;:.1:,:.0..;.4.....;-R:,:.-....;1=-_ and Analysis of Wildlife Populations Job No•....... ....;3==-- ~Ti tle: Period June 25 to December 31, 1959 Covered: and Habitat, Wildlife South Platte Population Valley study Abstract: 1. Wildlife population studies were begun using modified time-interval pro ... cedures on established transect routes. The first two 'counts were made during the summer work period and plans were made for monthly counts throughout the year. 2. Ten-minute faunal counts were made at 16o stations, 80 on each study area. Also counted was wildlife seen from transects while the observer walked between stations. 3· Monthly ungrazed count totals adjusted upward to compensate for better of deer and upland game species were visibility on the grazed area. 4. Four counts completed from August through December showed no high concentration of game species in the bottomlands. However, weather conditions during this period were very mild and there was no need for game to seek the protective shelter of bottomland cover. 5. Also ,recorded during ,count periods were the numbers of domestic livestock seen on the grazed area; routine sex-ratio data; and mean daily temperatures. Objectives: 1. To determine population indices for important animals on ungrazedand grazed bottomlands. birds 2.. To compare use by and conflicts on ungrazedand grazed areas. 3. status basis vild, between important feral, species and domestic of' mammals and To determine the genaraf. effects of annual water cycle and the general of predation on ~ldlife populations on ungrazed versus grazed areas. 4. Toesta,blish procedures for determining (fo,r management purposes ) • population indices on an annual �-10- Methods: Wildlife population studies were begun using modified time-interval procedures on established transect routes. Ten-minute faunal counts -weremade:at 160 stations , 80 on each study area. The field of observation from .each station was confined to an area 90 degrees left and right from the direction of travel. Recordedalsowas wildlife seen from transects while the observer walked between stations • Not tallied was fauna .seen while passing from one transect to the next. Plans were made to carry out .monthly inventories throughout the year in order to mak-eseasonal comparisons of bottomland use by -wildlife. Preliminary examinations of the study. area suggested that COunttotals from grazed and ungrazed areas could not be directly comparedbecause of better visibility on the grazed area. More intensive field investigations 'showedthat .quails, pheasants, rabbits and squirrels were definitelyeasierto.Bee in the grazed bottomlands. The same was true for deer but to a lesser degree. To compensate for visibili tydifferences, two .adjustmentfactors were' formnlatedand applied to count totals fromtheungrazed area, one factor for :small•.• sized s:pec.ies.andanotherfor deer. Because the degree of Visibility is changeable with yearly seasons, data for adjustment factors were collected during .each set o1~counts and count totals were adjusted each t.ime by the factor obtained from the current data •• �-11- Wildli~e Population Study Glenn L. Grouch Two wildli~ecounts were completed during the summer 'Work periodj one each in August and September. Additional counts were made in 'October and December. No count vas matte in November because of' open hunting .seasons in the study areas . A summaryof count data is shown in Table 1. Numbers o~ upland game species during the summer 'Period were relatively low as might be expected because of' the desirable f'ood supply and abundant cover supplied by f'arml.andsadjacent to the riverbottom. Increased use iof bottomland habitat during October and December is not noticeable probably due to mild weather :conditions prevailing thus ~er in the winter season. It is expected that more severe winter "Weather "Will occur later in the sea;~onand subsequent counts will show greater numbers o~ game species in the shelter o~ the bottomlands. Domestic livestock counted on the grazed area were ~ewer in December than in previous months because owners had moved them to recently harvested corn~ields ~or ·~eeding. A minimum o~ sex •• ratio data were collected dur-tngcountis because of the low numbers o~pheasantsand deer that were counted. These data are summarized in Table 2. Progressively greater visibility was noted on bothungrazed and grazed study areas at most count stations,except those overlooking dense shrub vegetation. Good visibility up to 600 feet "Was common on much o~the grazed area. Mean daily temperatures recorded at~ield headquarters station during count periods are shown in Table 3. at the Tamarack check �Table 1.-~A SUMMARY OF FOUR WILDLIFE COUNTS MADE FROM AUGUST THROUGH DECEMBER, 1959 . '-" §;Eecies wcks Pheasants Quail Doves Deer Rabbits Cottontails Jacks Squirrels '- '- - - - . August' Grazed Ungrazed . - - . SeJ2tember Ungrazed Grazed 475 October Ungrazed Grazed 301 455 7 40 2 8 December Ungrazed Grazed 84 18 2321 2 15 23 8 49 255 4 396 17 >- 1 220 1 15 162 6 43 140 8 5 3 1 ... . .,. 5 3 1 2 1 12 6 5 8 6 8 2 ... 6 2 2 - .- 2 -- --2 6 1 7 5 2l 4 23 2 ••• 1 2 1 6 .- - •.. 3 ... 1 •.. -- 60 163 37 121 .. 175 Domestic livestock .. 1 1 2 - Hawks Owls Eagles Crows Magpies Coyotes Raccoons Muskrats Shorebirds Small l;>irds '- ... 10 5 3 •.. 3 3 •.. 10 ; ... -7 6 .-.. - •.. 3 10 -.- 29 26 - ..•.. - 4 - .-1 8 1 3 1 .-.•.. ..•.. 11 282 15 92 13 102 99 97 10 409 13 105 107 - 138 ....• '40 -,.. I ••••. - ..• -' Adjusted ungrazed counts: Species Pheasants Quail Cottontails S.quirrels Deer .. August. Factor 2#01 SeJ2tember Factor 2¥01 'October Factor 2.26 December Factor 1.79 16 98 16 4 2 30 2 4 16 90 7 11 4 27 18 2 Factor 1.16 Factor 1.16 Factor '1.20 Factor 1.20 5 7 10 .4 f ~ ,- �-13- Table , , , 2."'''A .. RATIO DMA COLLECTEDON COUNTROUTES OF SEX..•• SUMMARY - - - Species Pheasants Cocks Hens Total Gr. 2 6 ...• '- 8 Deer Bucks Unidentified Fawns Total Table August Ungr. September Ungr. Gr. _October Ungr. Gr. 2 18 20 4 1 2 .•.. 6 10 3 4 1 2 7 3 4 4 •.. 2 2 4 1 1 3 6 .•. 8 3. - ..• MEANDAILY TEMPERATURESRECORDEDDURINGW1LDLIFE COUNTS Month . _Minimum OF August September October December Prepared Date: 3 1 1 2 1 1 3 December -Ungr. Gr._ 92.0 94.7 66.3 54.-5 by=- GlennL. Grouch 56.3 52·5 30·5 18.2 Approvedbyr --------~~~~~~~----------January, 1960 F,,, C.. lG.einschni tz Asst. Coordinator ��January) 1960 -15- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of' COLORADO ----------------------------~--- Proj:ect No, Work Plan NO. Title ot Job:. Period Covered: W-88-R-5 l Waterf'owl Surveys and Investigations _ Job Noo 1 Waterf'owl B,reedingQround Survey in Colorado) April 1959 1) 1959 to July 1) 1959 The 1959 breeding-pair surveys -were conducted within the period May 8 to May 290 During this time, ground counts were made in the YampaValley and Brow.n1s Par'kj and aerial counts werecond>ucted in the South Platte, Cache laPou.dre, and S.an Luis Valleys) and North 'Park , As f'orthe past several years, intensive brood surveys were not conducted this year due to a lack of'time. Thus, this f'inal breeding ground report considers only the breeding-pair surveys with last minute notes on weather and water conditions~ accompanied by gross observations of'early nesting .success in the breeding:areas. :METHODS All surveyrrrethods and sample areas remained the same as in the past years , with the exception of aerial transects in the San Luis Valley and thety,pe of' airplane used. In 1958 a super-cub -was used which carried only one observer thereby reducing the sample size by one half in North Park and the San Luis Valley. In 1959 one observer was again used in the San Luis Valley) while the North Park transects returned to two observers with the use of a Cessna 175 airplane, Personnel cooperating on the 1959 counts were:. KenardBaer, Charles Hayes and Roe E.. Meyer) DoS.•Bureau of Sport Fisheries .and Wildlif'e; Sam Clifford, Jack Grieb :and Mitchell Sheldon, Colorado Gameand Fish Department. �WE.ATBER AND WATER COl'ifDITIONS Weather and water conditions in Colorado during the spring and early summer were considered to be good for waterfowl nesting and production. In general, water levels in eastern Colorado were above average while in the rest of the state conditions were much drier than last year and below average. This was due to above precipitation in the eastern slope and a "dry" winter in North Park and the west slope. The snow pack in the high ...• country appears to be near or below normal in= dicatingshortwater supply for mi.d-vsummer.. The writers believe, however, that the overall weather and water conditions in Colorado were and are favorable for waterfowl production and brood reari...'1:gthis year. REs-ui...TS Examination of the duck breeding.,;pairestimates by area reveal the 1959 counbs are dawn 3.8 :percent from 1958, bilt 2.6 :percent above the six •• year average. (Table 1) Table lo-Summary of Colorado Duck Breeding Ground Conditions, 1959 with 1958 and the Six~Year Average for Compar-Lson , Total Estimated Breeding Pairs 6-year 1958 1959 Area aver%e :g== A • San Luis Valley North Park S~~th Platte Valley Cache la Poudre Valley YampaValley ,~r0WI1.'8 Par-k ':!!OTAL 6966 3708 1648 1507 2658 125 16., 612 . 8720 3534 1782 1419 2077 199 17,731 7433 4767 1386 819 2586 62 17,053 Comparison of indiVidual breeding ground estimated between 1959 and 1958, show that North Park and YampaValley are above last year rr-Lltthat San Luis Valieyand North Park are the only areas above the stx-year average" Tbis is believed to he caused by the below average "Water conditions in the west slope areas. Thea;verage or above lVater levels in the Platte and Poudre ri vex areas are believed to have spread the paired waterfowl LYJ.toother wet areas not included in the sample. Tbere were 'du.cksobserved in areas where no water has been found for several years and all reservoirs in eastern Colorado are filled to near capacity even at this late date" Goose breeding condi tio:n.s show 8..YJ. increase in 1959 over 1958 and a satisfacJ;jory increase over the three...:year average" Crable 2)" 'Eheupward trend is encouraging as it reflects the succeas of the htmting restriction and protection program ir it ...,. iated for the Great Basin Canada Goose in parts of the Gentraland Pacific flyways. lJ.ILeclosed season and redu:c:~edbaghave reduced the kill of oreeding and mat~tring s:ib=adt,lthirds of this flock.. HoweverJ populations are :s·1:;il1critical and there appear-s to be a need for con+Irraed hunt.Lng :restriction .. .o �-17Table 2 •--Comparison of Colorado Goose Breeding Ground Surveys--1959j 1958 ani Three-year Average. Total Observed Breeding Pairs Three-year average 1958 1959 Nesting Total ,Nesting, Total Nesting , ,T,otal Area' , pairs 'Young birds ,"pairs Young 'birds" "-pairs Young' bi'rds Yampa River 12 42 11 74 18 42 90 106 63 Green Riyer 4 32 47 64 76 10 40 81 5 TOTAL 16 121 16 74 106 166 103 Species composition of the breeding duck population was similar to past years. (Table 3).. Mallards made up the bulk of the breeding birds (57.5%). The teal and redheads showed a marked increase whilepintails indicate the largest decrease, however there is little change from the six-year average excepting again the teal and pintail. Any changes may in part be due to the late spring and varying 'Water conditions around the state. Table 3.--Species Composition of the Colorado Breeding Population 1959j 1958 and Six-year Average. Species Composition Number of Ducks Per cent Species 6"'Year 1958 6-Year 1959 1958 1959 Mallard 61.7 10,290 10,030 9,812 56.6 57·5 Blue-winged teal 880 651 927 5.4 5·3 3·7 Pintail 2,800 1,173 879 7.0 5.2 15·7 Gadwall 1,361 '1,270 1,526 8.2 7·2 8·9 Baldpate 1.8 1.4 140 298 231 .8 Shoveller 1,181 563 672 3.4 6.5 3·9 Cinnamon teal 418 1,101 649 2.4 6.5 3·9 Green-winged teal 1.5 260 390 364 2.1 2·3 Redhead 581 544 933 5.5 3·5 3·1 Scaup 1.8 1.4 1.7 294 294 245 Ruddy duck 81 45 87 .2 ·5 ·5 Bufflehead 2 .1 Canvasback 22 .1 134 .8 American merganser 125 151 56 ·7 ·3 ·9 TOTAL 1,6~673 17,731 17,052 100.00 100.00 100.00 FALL FLIGHT PREDICTION ConSidering the varying water and weather conditions and the rather stable breeding population it is believed the fall duck flights from Colorado's production will be average or above . Geese still present a critical, although improving picture and indicate a definite need for continued hunting restrictions for the breeding flock in northwest Colorado. Submitted by: Date:~, M. G. Sheldon ~ __ ~J~an::.ua~'~ry~,~1~960~,~_ Approved by!_....;F~ •....:C::..:.:......:,Kl,:=.:e:.:: t~z=-_ Asst. Coordinator ��January, 1960 -19JOB COL;PLETI'"'t\j tmpORI INV~STIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. \.-88-R-5 ~aterfowl Surveys and Investigations \"lorkPlan i~o. II Job No. 2 Title of Job: Experimental Studies on Improving Status of Canada Goose PopUlations. Objectives: (1) Development and evaluation of techniques for initial establishment and/or increase of goose population on all major drainages in the State. (2) Permanent establishment of resident goose flocks on all large water impoundments and major river systems as determined by the preliminary survey of. goose nesting areas in the State. (3) Retention of resident and migrant Great Basin goose flocks within the State for longer periods of time during the migration season. (4) Increase the size of the Great Basin goose flocks wintering in the State. Procedures: Stated in past reports and will not be repeated here. Results: Based on previous years work, it was decided that all efforts in 1959 should be directed toward the establishment of a resident goose breeding flock in the Fort Collins area. The following is a resume of these activities. Crirry over of Qeese from previous years.--In January, 1959, geese from previous plants quit using College Lake. This WaS caused by harassment from dogs and boys, aggravated by the lake freezing over which removed the last safe resting place from harassment. iv10rethan one dog was observed in the vicinity chasing the geese over the ice, and there was evidence that three persons (idenity unknown) shot at least two geese with 22 rifles. i~ch publicity was given this event in the local paper, and the Northern ~od and Gun Club offered a reward; but the damage was done, for the birds left the area and went to Reservoir No.8, about five miles northeast of Fort Collins. Reservoir No. 8 was apparently chosen because there was a flock of geese already using the area plus numerous ducks. This mass of waterfowl kept a hole open in the lake, and combined with good feeding fields in the immediate vicinity, provided an adequate wi nter i nq area. ~~en the wild geese migrated north in the spring of 1959, they apparently lured many of the young College Lake birds along with them. However, it appeared that most of the older geese (yearlings and adults) remained in the Fort Collins area because wide-scattered reports were received of geese in this vicinity throughout the spring and summer. It �-20is difficult to estin:ate how many geese did remain, but judging frorr. reports and the birds actually observed, it ViaS probably about 20. According to the age classification of College Lake geese planted in years prior to 1959, it was known that some birds would be sexually mature and would probably attempt to nest. Two pairs did nest successfully at College Lake; and undoubtedly other pairs made the attempt elsewhere in the Fort Collins vicinity, but there is no knowledge of their outcome. The two pairs at College Lake laid two and three eggs respectively, and brought off a total of five young. This is the first known Canada geese hatched in the wild in this area, and therefore is regarded as a significant event in this project work. An intensive predator control program was carried out in the vicinity of College Lake to protect the nesting geese. Coyote-getters and steel traps baited VJith live chickens resulted in several large coon being taken. In addition, some coyote and at least one bobcat were removed from the area. The local JviammalControl Agent, Mr. Gern B. Terrell, cooperated in this work with Officers Crawford and Palm. It should be po i rrted out at this time that most of day-to-day chores have been carried out by Game and Fish Officers Crawford and Palm. Both of these men have done a great deal of work, much of it on their own time. It is largely through their efforts that we can report the successful work of this project. Release of geese in 1959.--Under Propagation Permit No. 2-408, 50 eggs were taken, April 20, 1959, from goose nests at Bov.Le s Lake near Littleton, Colorado. These eggs were transported to Fort Collins and placed under VJhi te Rock hens by Officer Crawford. A total of 34 goslings (68% hatch) were hatched with one bird dying during the first week. Crawford kept the remaining goslings with hens in raised wi re pens until they were four to six weeks old. As the goslings became older, they exhibited a tendency to pluck feathers from the mother hen, until many of the hens were in sad shape. To combat this, Crawford removed the hens from the individual brood enclosures during the day and placed them back in at night for bz-ood i nq purposes. At about six weeks of age, the 33 geese were moved to a one acre holding pen to begin conditioning for release into the wild. At the same time 16 goslings were removed from the Bonny Lake Captive goose flock and placed in the holding pen with the hand-reared birds. The birds were held there until the oldest ones ere ready to fly (10-12 weeks of age), then they were released at College Lake July 14, 1959. Upon their release they immediately began associating with the two pair and their broods, already present on the Lake. This was undoubtedly a very good thing, and probably helped to hold the goslings on the area, and teach them to take care of themselves. By late August all goslings were on the wing and frequent training flights were observed. The geese would make a flight almost every day to Dean's Lake, about one mile northeast of College Lake. This lake had much tender, green grass immediately adjacent to the shore which the geese used �-21- heavily. In September, the geese also started 'Jsing Dixon R.eservoir, two miles south of College Lake. Again, green feed seemed the reason for this movement since it was plentiful at Dixon and close to the reservoir shore, while COllege Lake had very low wa ter levels as a result of repair to an outlet valve resulting in a long distance between water and green grass. Protective measures.--~ost of Larimer County including those portions we st of U.S. 87, and north of U.S. 34 v.e re closed by Commission regulation to goose hunting. In addition, no hunting of any kind was permitted in the vicinity of College Lake. The result is that no birds have been lost thus far, and it is hoped that now the hunting season is over, the present number of 61 geese will be retained throughout the rest of the winter. A side effect of the closure of most of Larimer County to goose hunting has been to greatly increase the number of geese wintering in the closed area. Lakes that never wintered geese before contained birds this year. fs near as can be estimated wintering flocks in the closed area increased from a usual 100 birds to well over 400. Although a general increase has been noted in wintering birds along the front range, this increase has not been in proportion to that in the closed hunting area. To prevent harassment of geese on College Lake by dogs and other animals, and thus to keep them on the area where they could be fed, and protected, it was decided to experiment with some type of air compressor to keep a portion of lake free of ice. After discussing the problem with Department Fish Biologists, an Air-!\qua unit vias purchased from the Hinde Engineering Company, 224 Linden Park Place, Highland Park, Illinois. The equipment wa s installed November 14, during the first period of cold weather. As soon as the system began functioning, it cleared ice off an area of the lake roughly 150 by 30 feet. During the two months of operation, this area of open water has become larger at times because of wind action or warm weather, but has never become smaller. To date, it appears that it will effectively do the job for which it is intended. All geese are now using this open area for drinking and resting purposes. Additional information.--Because of Gurney Crawford's success in hatching geese, a brief outline of the methods he used follows: He selected only those hens that wanted to set, and before the eggs were obtained he had the hens setting on dummy nests. The nesting boxes were placed side by side on the ground, with a trench dug all the way around. The ground under the nesting boxes was thoroughly soaked with wat er before and during incubation by filling the ditch with water. Hens were kept on the nest by having a cover on the box which prevented them from leaving. Crawford plucked the breasts of the hens to provide more heat for the eggs. Once a day the hens would be removed from the boxes for a half to one hour. During this interval they would water and feed. hs the birds began to hatch they were closely watched. If the night was very cold all new-hatched clutches would be taken into the house for protection. Feeding of young seems very important. A mash of green wheat (roadside volunteer) and boiled eggs (shells included), chicken lay mash, shorts, and bran was ground together in about equal parts in a food grinder. The �-22- mash Was dampened and fed to the birds wet (Crawford cautions that great care must be taken when using wet mash to prevent souring and molding. Feed should be ground once a day and stored in the ice box between feedings). Birds were fed this mixture twice a day, and growth was excellent averaging almost a pound a week on ganders up until six weeks. After six weeks weight gains slowed down because it was taken up bY, feather growth. Recommendations: The following 8re recommendations for next year's work based on the results of the past five years experiences. 1. Goose eggs should again be taken from Bowles Lake and hatched wi th V!hite Rock hens by Officer Crawford. 2. All goslings obtained for the 1960 program should be released free-flying at College Lake. 3. Effort should be continued to hold the breeding flock of geese on College Lake through feeding and maintaining open water especially during the fall and winter months. 4. The College Lake area should continue to be closed to all hunting, fishing, and trapping. 5. That portion of Larimer County north of U.S. 34 to the State line, and west of U.S. 87 should continue to be closed to all goose hunting for the 1960 waterfowl hunting season. It is the considered opinion of this writer, that the Colorado Game and Fish Department is very close to success with the College Lake goose flock, and every effort should be continued to develop this flock. Submitted Date: by: Jack R. Grieb January, 1960 Approved by: F. C. K1einschnitz ---A~s-s~t-.~C-o-o-r~d~i-n-a~t-o-r~------ �January, 1960 -23- JOB COMPLETION REPOR~ INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W~-~3~7~-~R~-_1~3 ~rkPlan No. Title of Job _ 7 --~-------------------------- Game Bird Survey Job No. 1 Effects of Insecticide Applications on Confined Ring-necked Pheasants Period Covered: June 6, 1959 to September 15, 1959 Abstract: Pheasants were subjected to three applications each of aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, and toxaphene at ten-day intervals to determine whether insecticides would accumulate. The insecticide storage did not appear to be great enough to cause long-term damage to the test pheasants. However, the technique of testing was not highly accurate. Future tests should be conducted under conditions of better control. Objectives: To determine the effects of repeated applications of insecticides on pheasant populations. Acknowledgements: Supervision of this project was by the Colorado Game and Fish Department, Laurence E. Riordan, former Federal Aid Coordinator, and Wayne W. Sandfort, Principal Game Biologist; the Colorado State 'University, Harold W. Steinhoff, Associate Professor of Forest Recreation and Wildlife Conservation; and the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Lee E. Yeager, Leader. The investigator is grateful for the assistance of Willis Mansfield, Superintendent, and John Stevenson, Assistant Superintendent, of the Experimental Game Bird Farm at Rocky Ford; Drs. Lynn A. Griner, J. S. Orsborn, and Joseph A. Mollelo of the Department of Pathology and Bacteriology, Colorado State University; Dr. L. B. Daniels, Head, Department of Entomology, Colorado State University; Ferd Kleinschnitz, Assistant Federal Aid Coordinator, Colorado Game and Fish Department, Denver; Dr. Robert B. Finley, Vnited States Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver Federal Center; and William A. Marlman, owner of the Valley Aviation Company, Las Animas. Techniques Used: The study area was located on Colorado Game and Fish Department property immediately south of the Experimental Game Bird Farm at Rocky Ford. The insecticides were chosen before the field work began. The spraying was done by the Rocky Ford Flying Service at five dollars per flight. ~he application rates were those normally used in the course of crop spraying in the Arkansas Valley near Rocky Ford. Holding pens constructed for the previous study in 1958 were used to confine the birds for spraying. Panels from the collapsible 4 x 8 x 8~foot pens were assembled to form two test pens 4 x 8 x 32 feet and two control pens 4 x 8 x 8 feet. Water and feed were placed in the pens in containers offering a large surface area. After the loss of one set of birds to a badger, the pens were floored with oneinch mesh poultry wire. �One adul. t male, two adu.L t females, and twelve yo-mg (six ma.les, six females) wer~ placed in each t.est. pen. One adul.t male, two adult females, and six young (thr::2 males, three females) were placed in each control pen. Prior to placemen+, in the pens each bird was weighed in grams and marked with an a.Lumi num leg band, Additional weights were taken immediately upon return of the birds to the Bird Farm. however, only the endrin-, heptachlor-, and toxaphene-sprayed birds were weighed due to a fa'llty balance. Shortly prior to the initial applications of spray in each ~est, the holding pens were placed in the study field with the con+ro.l, pen suf'f'Lc Lerrt distance from thS test pen to prevent cont8!l.inatio~ by drifting spray. The pheasants were confined for approximately 20 days .•and at tien-day intervals the birds were subjected +'0 an app.l.Lcata.on of insecticide, providing three repetitions. The birds were observed for one month following spraying C~able 1) 0 Five birds were transported to Colorado State ~niversity where they were killed with massive doses of each insectic:ide used in the field spraying. l ibservai~ions on their reactions to the insecticide were taken every half hoar until death (V·>~-~.J:T2;::' They were then autopsied by personnel of the Department of Pathology and Bac+er-Lo.Logy, �-25Effects of Insecticide Applications on Confined Ring-necked Pheasants James R. Tigner Findings: Statistical analysis of the weight changes appear in Tables 2 and 3. Only the adult pheasants sprayed with endrin lost significantly more weight than the control birds (Table 2). Adult pheasant weights were tested by anlaysis of variance to determine whether chemicals would produce different weight losses. The weight loss of the pheasants sprayed with heptachlor was significantly less than the losses suffered by the endrin·- and toxaphene- sprayed birds. There "Was no significant difference in weight loss between theendrin- and toxaphene-sprayed birds (Table 3). The pheasant losses during each spraying test are illustrated in Table 4. It is believed that the control birds were killed because of stress due to crowding. The rates of application, theoretical and actual, appear in Table 5. The filter papers, supplied by Dr. Robert B. Finley of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, were not available for the first two aldrin and dieldrin spray tests. The birds in the dieldrin test were killed by a badger before the third spraying. The chemical analysis of the filter papers shows consistently less chemical per acre than the theoretical amounts. The amount determined by chemical analysis may not be entirely indicative of actual amount received, but the analysis definitely indicates contamination by toxaphene in two tests. This contamination could only come from carelessness on the part of the spray pilot. Table 6 illustrates the approximate time elapsed until death of pheasants subjected to massive doses of insecticides. The birds were autopsied at Colorado State University and examined for gross lesions. Dr. L. A. Griner could find no lesions that could be attributed to insecticide poisoning. Parts of the liver, brain, kidney, spleen, and fat from each bird were analyzed chemically at the Denver Wildlife Research Center, United States Fish and Wildlife Service. However, the fat contaminated the other parts and the chemist was unable to determine which organ stored the greatest amount of insecticide. �TABlE l-.,INSECTICIDETREATMENT.S OF :PHEASANTS, 1959 Dates of Spraying Insecticide Rates of Application . :p:er :Acr.e : :Firs:t: .Second. ..Thfrd July 2 Aldrin 4 ounces June 11 June 23 Dieldrin 3 ounces June 18 June 27 Endrin 6.4 ounces July 16 July 27 August 8 Toxaphene 12 ounces July 16 July 27 August 5 Heptachlor 4 ounces August 12 August 14 Septembe.r 3 I ro e 0\ �TABLE 2"'"-COMPARISONSOF WEIGHT CHANGE IN TEST AND GONI'BOL BIRDS ,1959 n Treatments Mean in grams sa:: t t.05 174 40.4 1.336 2.12 161 188 41 .658 2.14 6 84 94 35·1 .284 2.12 3 262 139 36.6 3.36* 2.45 Test Control Test Control .. Endrin chicks 12 6 228 Toxaphene chicks 11 4 Heptachlor chicks Weight Loss 12 Endrin adults 5 ... Weight Ga.in Toxaphene adults 5 3 272 302 20.1 L492 2.45 Heptachlor 5 3 125 91 8L3 .36.90 .2.1+5:. * adults significant difference n ro ~ I �'rAELE 3-=ANALY"SIS.OF VARIAl'JCE FOR WEIGHT LOSSES OF TEST ADDLT~ n mean. s." .x 5 262 24.6 Heptachlor Toxaphene Endrin n mean s~ .x 5 272 24.6 LSD = 76,1 n mean F F,05 F,Ol Sx 5 125 24.6 11.096* 3.88 6.93 i ro (X) G .J(- significant difference �TABLE,4",-PHEASANTLQSSESIN .A ,25-DAY:pERIOD,IN THE 1959 ,SP,HAYING ,T,ESTS Insecticide Number o;f Bi.rds Per Pen Test Oontrol ' ~ . . , , ' . , Number of Dead Birds , :Test,Oo;ntrol Aldrin 18 9 1 iil Dieldrin 18 9 182/ 0, Endrin 17 9 0, 0, 'roxa:phene 17 9 1 Heptachlor 17 9 0, 0, '1; severely pecked killed by a badger I I\) \0 r 2.J} - , �TABLE 5=='r.mORETICKG AND .AG'ruAI, RA:J:ES,OFAPPLIGATIONS, ,OFINSEGTICIDES~1959 Insecticide Theor;etical Rate of A;pplication Per Acre Tl9sts 1 23, Actual Rate of Application Per .Acre Tests . 1, ':2:::' .. 'f! :::J:;; =t: Aldrin 4 oz. 4 oz. 4 oz. Dieldrin 3 oz. 3 oz. 3 oz. Endrin 6.4 oz. 6.4 oz. 6.4 oz. 1.5 oz. 0fJ. 0.2 oz. Toxaphene 12 oz. 12 oz. 12 oz. 1.4 oz. 0.42 oz. 0.19 oz. Heptachlor 4 oz. 4 oz. 4 oz. 0.54 oz. 0.44 oz. 2.2 oz. 0.2 i w 0 n Ll Obtained from chemical analysis of filter paper ~ l1. Also contained 2.9 oz./acretoxaphene Also contained 0.73 oz. /acre toxaphene �Fig. 1. Pheasants in a spray pen placed in natural vegetation. •SfJI?' ... Fig. 2. Piper J -3 Cub spraying pheasants with aldrin. �Fig. 3. Equipmentused in applying insecticides pheasants to kill them for autopsy. Fig. 4. Collecting insects in an alfalfa field. to �Fig. 5. ·Technique for killing insects in a box contain ..• ing potassium cyanide. Fig 6. Sorting insects prior to pinning. �Fig. 7. Pinning, labelling, and boxing insects to preserve them for identification. �-31- TABLE 6--APPROXIMATE ELAPSED TTMEUNTIL DEATH OF CONFINED PHEASANTS SUBJECTED TO MASSIVE DOSES OF CERTAIN INSECTICIDES B:Lrd Number Insecticide 407 E.stimated Dose Approximate Elapsed Time Until Death endrin .8 ounces 3 hours 410 dieldrin .75 ounces 6 hours 409 toxaphene 4 ounces 9.5 hours 408 heptachlor 1 ounce 27 hours 411 aldrin 1 ounce 51 hours L! killed by pathologists Prepared Date! by ;__ J_am_e_s_R_. _T_l...:" gn=--e_r ~ L! for autopsy ~ Approved!_~G.,..i_lb.,..e_r_t---.:N_. _H..".u_n_t_e_r _ State Game Manager January, 1960 ---------~~~~~~------------- F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��January, 1960 -33JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of ~C~O~L~O~RAD~~O _ Project NO. ~W~-~3~7_-R~-~1~3~ _ Work Plan No. 7 ----~------------------------- Title of Job Period Covered: Game Bird Survey Job No. 2 Effects of Insecticide Application on Insect Populations June 9, 1959 to September 15, 1959. Abstract: Insect populations were sampled in fields before and at approximately one week intervals after spraying until the season ended or the crop was harvested to: (1) Compare insect populations before and after spraying. (2) Determine the recovery period of the field. (3) Compare chemicals in their effects on insect populations. Objective: To compare insect populations before and after spraying, by specific fields and chemicals. Technique Used: The fields were selected by contacting aerial sprayers in Bent County. The:fields and chemicals were determined by availability (Tables 1 and 2). The spraying dates appear in Table 3. The fields were sampled immediately before insecticide application and at approximately one-week intervals following spraying. One-hundred sweeps of a net through the field constituted the sample. If insect numbers were particularly high, 50 sweeps were taken and the n~bers of insects doubled. Insects were pinned, labelled, and transported to Fort Collins where they were identified to family by personnel in the Department of Entomology, Colorado State University. Findings: The numbers of insects in each collection are graphed in Figures 1 through 13. The recovery periods for the sprayed fields appear in Table 4. ~e numbers of the families of insects were graphed, and it was found that certain patterns of response appeared. These patterns were grouped into categories (Table 5). The families appear in greatest frequency in categories 6, 12, 13, and 14, indicating generally that the populations in low numbers disappeared or remained low, and that a popUlation of new families appeared after spraying. Categories 17 and 18 indicate only one observation after spraying. The study fields ranged in size from 10 acres to approximately 80 acres. A loss of insect life in a particular field should not serioasly affect adult pheasants or their young, because they would move to a nearby field where insects are abundant. However, if large areas were sprayed with the mare toxic insecticides, such as parathion, a severe food shortage could result with the subsequent starvation of young birds. �TABLE l-M)WNERSHIP, Field CROP, AND L'.)CATIONOF 1959 INSECT ST-JDY FIELDS Owner Crop A Loyde P. Gardner seed alfalfa 4 miles southeast of Las Animas B Jim ,Jefferies cantaloupes 12 miles west of Las Animas C Fred Marlman seed alfalfa 8 miles west of Las Animas D Same as Field A E&E1 Roy Gardner seed alfalfa 4 miles southeast of Las Animas F&F Loyde P. Gardner seed alfalfa B. E. Gholson tomatoes 1 G Geographic Locat Lon " 3 miles northwest of Las Animas H Lawrence Feik corn 8 miles east of Las Animas 1&11 Gerald Verhoff seed alfalfa 4 miles southeast of Hasty J " " JK John Kiniston seed alfalfa 2 miles north of Las Animas K Loyde P. Gardner watermelon 4 miles north of Las Animas L " cant.a'loupes 2 miles east of Hasty II . LA! +' I �350 300 250 CI) E-4 0 r:il U) lOO !'Z; H ~ 0 U) t:C; !Zl ~ 150 ~ 1(\0 50 o~--------~ GI4 ~ _ i,,11~' DATES OF COLLECTION Figure l.--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net following spraying on June 10, 1959, Field A. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �120 tIJ E-i o !Xl tIJ j;Z; H P4 0100 80 DATES OF COLLEOTIONS Figure 2.--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net following spraying on June 23, 1959, Field D. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �30.· 25 20 rn I~ 8 0 ~ U2 :z. H ~ 0 CI.l 10 0:: pq ~ 5 o~ __• ~~ ('jll, ~~ 1./2 J _ (,,/30 DATES OF COLLECTION Figure :3•-·-F1uctuations in numbers of insects per 100 eweeps of a net f'o LLow.Lng spraying on June 16, 1959, Field B. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �200 180 (J) 8 0 I':u ~ co ~ H iii 0 r:n p;:1 100 ~ ~ Z 1l0> 6C! DATES OF COLLECTION Figure 4 .--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 swe.eps of a net following spraying on July 7, 1959, Field C. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �400 J50 300 co E-t 0 M ,\)0 Ul :z:; H I'Ll 0 ~ 150 M ~ "'""' 100 50 o "----~7.j~/(----~~----~rl~-----~~----~~'-------~u1~,u--I '" 7/L3 '11l.<i 151':1 'O/I'l u/ I DATES OF COLLECTION Figure 5.--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 SVleeps of a net following spraying on July 17 and July 28, 1959, Fields E & Elo Vertical line indicates spraying date. �7,-,0 SOu 400 en E-t 0 ILl Ul Z H rz.. 0 JO Ul fa ~ LOa 100· DATES OF COLLECTION Figure 6.--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net following spraying on July 17 and July 28, 1959, Fields F & Fl- Vertical line indicates spraying date. �35 0') 20 8 0 ~ Z 0') H IX4 0 15 0') ~ ~ ~ 10 5 'I/LO 8fJ 1-;/10 DATES OF COLLECTION Figure 7.--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net follovling spraying on July 27, 1959, Field G. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �15 5 DATES OF COLLECTION Figure 8 .--·-Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net following spraying on July 30, 1959, Field H. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �co £-1 0 1'4 (f) JVO Z H ~ 0 f@. :;q e3 x>o 8 Iz. 100 o --- --,;;-/IJ--- .••. T!r SI)o DATES OF COLLECTION Figure q .--Fluctuations in number-s of insects per 100 svleeps of a net following spraying on July 31 and August 24, 1959, Fields I & 1 " Vertical line LndLcat ee spraying dates. 1 �G,OC 'jOO 400 ro 8 0 1%1 3"~ C1) Z H rx. 0 C1) ~ pq 2QO ~ 100 o~------~i~----~'~----~t~----~'~----~'~----7 ,0 8/{' 1:;/13 ~//O 8/28 DATES OF COLLECTION li'igureIe .--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net following spraying on July 30, 1959, Field J. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �,lOO rJ) 8 0 r~ o: , 2~O .. •-< H r:r; 0 U) P:< r.il Joe f.:S ..:!:..j ~ ,ooL------::7/-:':2-Lt----~g/7':J~-------8/~, 7.':/q---;;g;7;/27:""4-- DATES OF COLLECTION Figure ll,--Fluctuations in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a ne t before and after spraying on August 30 p 1959, Field JR. Field sprayed with Dow General Weed Killer (dinltro). Vertical line indicates spraying date. �,00 Ci) E-i 0 ~ Cf.l Z H "'" 0 50 Cf.l ~ ~ e ~ ° Dll2. DATES OF COLLECTION Figure l~'.--Fluctua tions in numbers of insects per 100 ewee ps ofanet following spraying on Au.gust l3t 1959, Field L. Vertical line indicates spraying .date. 100 (j) E-I 0 1=4 Cl) Z H ~ 0 50 DATES OF COLLECTION Figure 1~',•--Fluctua tions in numbers of insects per 100 sweeps of a net following spraying on August 13, 1959, Field K. Vertical line indicates spraying date. �TABLE 2- ... APPLICATION RATES OF INSECTICIDES USED ON INSECT,S'rUJ)YFIELDS, 19.59 Rate of Application ~er Acre Insecticide parathion 0.5 pounds parathion and toxaphene 0.5 pounds and 1.0 pounds parathion and dieldrin 0.5 pounds and 3 ounces DDD in rhothane 1.5 pounds ) Dinitro •.. o... sec-butylphenol, "Dinitrofl 15 ounces co \.Jl- ,! �'lIABLE3=-INSEC1: COLLECTIONJ 1959 -.. Dates of Collections Spraying Date Ll Insecticide F"le.L-d , A EE C D E El F&Fl G H I I 1 J JK K L , , , , , ,; parathion toxaphene parathion dieldrin parathion toxaphene parathion toxaphene parathion toxaphene parathion Same as E&El DDD parathion dieldrin parathion toxaphene parathion parathion toxaphene dinitro /6 parathion parathion , ; , , , , , , , 1 , , , .' , 2 , , , , , , , , 4 3 , , , , ' , , , , , , , , I, , 6 5 , , _ , , , , , . , , ;, . , .. , ; • , , 7 , , " 6/10 6/9 6/17 6/16 6/16 6/23 6/30 7/7 6/22 6/20 7/27 8/8 7/24 7/17 7/21 7/28 8/4 7/29 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 8/10 8/12 8/17 8/24 8/25 6/2312. 7/17 7/16 7/23 7/2~ 7/27 7/30 7/20 7/29 8/3 8/5 8 w 0\ u '7/31 7/30 8/6 8/13 8/20 8/24ll.. 8/28 7/31 7/30 8/6 8/13 8/20 8/20 8/13 8/13 7/24 8/12 8/12 8/3 8/18 8/18 8/19 8/25 8/25 8/24 8/28 CorrespondS. to Fields in 'lIable3 Sampled with an aspirator bottle only Field A after second spraying Field E after second spraying Field I after second spraying Dinitro is a highly toxic weed. killer used to defoliate seed alfalfa prior to harvesting. �TABLE 4--RECOVERY OF TOTAL INSECT NUMBERS FOLLOWING SPRAYING, 1959 Field Initial Collection Spraying Date Recovery Period A&D 6/9 6/10 & 6/23 27 days B 6/16 6/16 more than 14 days recovery not observed C 6/22 7/7 27 days one-half prespray population 7/16 7/17 & 7/28 18 days F&F 7/16 7/17 & 7/28 17 days G 7/20 7/27 o no decrease in insect numbers H 7/29 7/30 more than 25 days recovery not observed 1&1 7/30 7/31 & 8/24 more than 4 days one collection only after second spraying and recovery not observed J 7/30 7/31 11 days JK 7/24 8/19 more than 6 days K 8/11 8/12 o L 8/11 8/12 7 days E&E l l 1 /1 /2 Remarks fl. Lg no decrease in numbers for all fields sprayed twice, recovery period is measured from the time of the second spraying field defoliated and harvested six days following spraying ~ ~ �TABLE 5 Order Orthoptera •--PATTERNS Family OF RESPONSE -TO INSECTICIDE'S 1 Acidiidae Gryllidae 2 3 C' 4 6 J C 7 8 S;iQWN E'!, CERTAIN FAMILIES Category 10 11 12 13 9 OF INSECTS Odonata Coenagri onidae K Coreidae J ,K cor-Lz adae Cydnidae Lygaeidae K C J;," E,I Pentatomidae K C J Aphidae Cicadellidae .[.'ulgoridae Neuroptera Chrysopidae Nymphalidae Pap Lj.Lon i dae I'ha.Lae n i.da e E Coleoptera I " E " J K C " JK JK E G,E G,U E JK J>' J J G J C E 1 C C H,J ,1 H E " L C ,'(H) I,K }',J ,K G G,1 :·',G,l. G,J,i<. .i!',G J JK S " ii,H) JK JK JK JK F(H) JK JK 1.0',1 E J E J E Pi:orde llidae JiJylabridae Scarabidae Tenebrionidae K I D H J " Andrenidae Anthophoridae Apidae Bombidae Braconidae Chrysididae Formicidae Halictidae Ichneumonidae Megachilidae Pompilidae Scoliidae Sphecidae C,J F H,L t:(h) JK E C,J F C J JI 1 J L E I,L " G,.J ,K ",; lo',H E J,K E E JK J!, F " H I F F,J,K 10' ,G ,J • K, l. F,J Anthomycidae Asilidae Bombylidae Calliphoridae Chironom1dae Chloropidae C::mopidae Do Lf cho pod Ldae Empididae Micropezidae Muscidae Nye e t.oph Ll.Ldae lJrtalidae Ot.Lt Ldae J JK £,1 F I H,I,K C E," K I,K L 1 G r, I,J L ,K JK E H F,H,I,J JK H Sar-c ophag Idae ,',L Sepsidae Stratiomyiidae oyrphidae Tachihidae Te tanoceridae Therevidae 'l'rypet1dae L Spider JK I f;jeloidae Class Arachnida JK nti< L E G,H,1 " C ~elyridae Diptera G J G ,I G J Carabidae Hymenoptera JK Kt K Anthicidae Chrysomelidae Cicindelidae Coccinellidae Our-cu Lt.ont dae Lampyridae Lucanidae G,1 F F G,L .Pieridae Pyralidae Tineidae 'l'ortricidae JK JK G,J E C,l Reduviidae Lepidoptera " C J ,K J E,I i,G,H,I,J,K " J C,J ,1 E K L F ,- H,K G,I J I G,J,K E J 18 F F E Nabidae Neididae 11\ 17 F- E Hemiptera Homoptera 15 l!1**~ E,I 'l'ettigoniidae Miridae 14 E,1 letters deslgnate study fields ca)i tol (H and (L) dee Lgna te high (more than 15) or low (less than 15) populations ?iclds E, F, and I include t!-:€ f'Le Lc s E , 1 !"l' an:! II for ~urposes of a t m-n.t c ity. EY.;'·1:::.nat1ons of categories arv.eu r- on t:-;e f'nc j ng a.ieet.. JK E JK ,'(L) JK C(lI) JK �CATEGORIES OF RESPONSE 1. High (15 or more) prespray population; drastic reduction after spraying with population recovery to or near prespray level. 2. High (15 or more) prespray population; population disappeared or nearly so. 3. Moderate (6 to 14) prespray population; drastic reduction after spraying with population recovery to or near prespray level. 4. Moderate (6 to 14) prespray population; population disappeared or nearly so. 5. Low (5 or less) prespray population; drastic reduction after spraying with population recovery to or near prespray level. 6. Low (5 or less) prespray population; population disappeared or nearly so. 7. Same as (1), but sprayed second time. 8. Same as (2), but sprayed second time. 9. Same as (3), but sprayed second time. 10. Same as (4), but sprayed second time. 11. Same as (5), but sprayed second time. 12. Same as (6), but sprayed second time. 13. Prespray population absent, but appeared after spraying. 14. Prespray population absent, but appeared after second spraying. 15. Population little altered, high or low. 16. Population increased after spraying. 17. Population reduction; only one observation after spraying. 18. Population increase; only one observation after spraying. �Recommendations~ The food shortage caused by spraying should not adversely affect pheasants because of their ability to move to v.1lsprayedareas. However) large~area spraying, as in grasshopper~control programs, should be discouraged since birds wo~ild be unable to move to unsprayed areas. Prepared by~ James R. 5.gner Approved by: Gilbert N. Hun:ter State Game Manager F. C, Kleinsclmi ~z Asst. Coordina.tor �Appendix Orthoptera Odonata Hemiptera Homoptera 1- Common A.cridiid~e short-horned. ,,:ra&shoppers tree cric'-::ets Phaf3lllidae Te i.tigoniidae Coenagrionidae Coreida.e Corlzidae Cydnidae Hiridu.e walking sticks long-horned grasshoppers stalk-winged damself'lies squash bugs eorizid buge Negro bugs leaf bugs t~a.bidae damsel bugs Neididae Pentatomidae Reduvii~ Aphidae Cicade11 idae stilt bugs stink bugs assassin bugs aphids leafhoppers lanteY."llf'lies Chr.ysopidae Nymphal Ldae Hc!pialida.e Papilionidaa Phalaenidae Pieridae Co l.aoptera green laceW'ings bl"Ush-!ootad '\:I;;l.tterflios hcpialid.moths slallowtaUs @eQwotrid moths ~ttlf1U'8 and PyralidlllJe 13l1.o'U.t TineidM tineic,1 moths leafrollere Tortri'J:idae Anthicida.e Carabidae ChrysomelidM Cioindelidae Clarida® Coccinellida.e Curculionidae Lampy"l.'id,s.e Lucanidae J!.le1oadae loIelyridae Hord.ellid.ae Myle.'bridge Sce.rabid.c.te 'Pene brioniu<il.c Hymenoptera Insect Families Gryllid<\:,. Fulgol'idaa Neuroptera Lepidoptera. Nr1!J1HlS of Andreni<u\e Anthophoridae Apidae l30mbidae Braconidae Chryaididae FormicidaG Halictidaa Ichneumonidae Meg&chllida.e \.;hitea moths D~t~like flo~er beetles beetles Pl.' .daceous grOlmrl lea.i" beetles ti~l" beetles cht~cke:red beetles laf~bird beetles eovUs 1;' ti flies st;mg beetles 10lirster beetles 1~oft''''winged flower beetles tu.r;;.bling flOWer beetles P88'. and bean 'heetles June be~~tlee da:dd~~' grOUl~d. beetles acut~~tongued burrowing bees anthophorid bees honey bees bumble bees braconid fliea cuckoo ~ffaspa ants swea.t bees ichneumonid flies leaf-cutting bees �-~-l- Appendix Hymenoptera Diptera Pompilidae Soo~iida.e Sphecida.e AnthomyUda.e Asilida.e BombyUdae Calliphoridae Chironomidae Chloropidae Conopida.e Doliehopodldae Elnpidae Mioropezidae Musoidae Myoe tophUid8le· Ortalidae Otitidao Saroophagidae Seps1dae Stratiomyiidae Syrphidae Tetanoceridae Thervidae Trypotidae 1- continued spider wa.sps aooliid wasps thread-waisted wasps root maggots robber flies beeflies bottle and blow fUes midges frit flies thiok-hea.ded flies long-legged flies danoe flies micropezid flies house flies fWlgtlS gnats orta,lid flies otitidae flies flesh flies sepaid flies soldie.l!." flies flower or sweat flies tetanooerid. fli~8 stiletto flies fruit flies ��January, 1960 -~JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------~------------------Project No. W-37-R-13 --------~----~-------------Work Plan No. 7 ----~---------------------- Game Bird Survey Job No.3 Title of Job: Effects of Insecticides on Pheasant Reproductive potential Period Covered: June 9, 1959 to September 15, 1959 Abstract: Pheasants subjected to insecticides under Work Plan 7, Job Number 1 were held overwinter at the Rocky Ford Experimental Game Bird Farm. In the spring and Summer of 1959 their productivity was investigated. There appears to be little effect on the reproduction potential of pheasants when they are sprayed with insecticides at the rates used in this test (Table 2). However, the sample was small because of numbers of birds availablej with a larger sample greater differences might occur. With the data present though, unless insecticide rate of application is greatly increased, pheasant reproduction should not be adversely affected. Objectives: (1) To compare egg production by pheasants subjected to certain insecticides in 1958 and 1959 with that of unsprayed birds. (2) To compare fertility and hatchability of eggs produced by sprayed and unsprayed birds and of sprayed eggs. (3) To compare survival of young hatched from eggs produced by sprayed and unsprayed birds and of sprayed eggs. (4) To determine which chemicals are most influential in affecting the above reproductive processes. Procedure: Sprayed pheasants from the summer of 1958 were segregated into pens according to insecticide at the Experimental Game Bird Farm. The control birds were kept in one large holding pen (Table 1). Eggs were gathered daily, marked with the appropriate pen number, and placed in a cooler. When a sufficient number of eggs had been gathered for a hatch, they were placed in the incubator. At 15 days the eggs were candled and the culls discarded. At first these culls were examined in an attempt to age the embryo, but the operation was later abandoned as inaccurate. A record was kept of the number of eggs pipped and hatched, the culls, healthy birds, and birds dying within three weeks after hatching. The chicks were toe--clipped soon after hatching to identify them according to test. Although it was originally thought that spraying eggs would be of value, by the time the field work was started the fertility of the eggs was so low that this portion of the work was deleted. The adult hens were to have been examined individually for egg production, but pen space at the Bird Farm proved inadequate. Three laying hens from the Bird Farm breeding stock were subjected to insecticides in the aldrin and dieldrin test outlined in Job No.1. However, again egg production and fertility were so low that �TABLE l--NUMBERS OF PHEASANTS IN EACH PRODUCTIVITY PEN Pen Number Insecticide Roosters Hens 1 aldrin 2 oz. 2 7 2 aldrin 4 oz. 2 10 3 dieldrin 2 10 4 parathion 2 10 5 DDD 2 10 I 6 endrin 6.5 oz. 2 10 7 toxaphene 1.5# 2 10 8 toxaphene 4# 2 10 9 endrin 13 oz. 2 10 10 control 2 17 +:+:I �·.C[IAB.LE ?<"~E.GG:pRODTJGTIONOF PHEASANT HENS IN 1959 FOI,LOWING VARIOUSTREATMENTS Treatment Total Eggs Produced Per Bird 10 control (expected) 1 aldrin 2 oz. 2 aldrin 4 oz. 3 dieldrin 4 parathion 5 DDD 6endrin 6.5 oz. 7 toxaphene 1.5# 8 toxaphene 4# 9 endrin 66 42 44 53 40 48 35 50 42 43 Pen E Eggs (O~'E)2 Collected E Per Hen 8~7 t: 7·3 2.6 10.2 4.9 14.6 3·9 8·7 8.0 64 48 58 64 48 58 42 61 50 52 (O-EL:' E == 4 0.6 0.00 4 0.6 7.6 0.1 3.1 2.2 Eggs Eaten Per Bird 0.4 2.6 0·9 1.1 1.2 0·3 3·2 0.1 1.6 3·0 (0=E)2 E- -12.1 0.6 1.2 1.6 .02 19.6 0.2 3.6 16.9 WITH INSEC:r.IGIDES,1958 Cull Eggs Per Hen (0=E)2 E 1.8 1.6 1.0 0·3 0.2 1.8 0.8 1.2 0.6 2.0 0.02 0·35 1.20 0.14 0.00 0·56 0.20 0.80 0.02 =- Number of Chicks Per Hen E 18 16 16 19 17 16 16 18 16 13 .22 .22 .05 .05 .22 .22 0.00 .22 1.39 ·2 (O-E) I Mean Chi-square 8 d.f. P (Probability) Chi-square .05, 8·· .. d.i f", * L! is 44.1 1.5 53.4 68·9i<o 22.2* .r=- 1.1 .\J1 16·3 I 55.82* 3.47 2·59 .001 .006 .001 ·90 ·96 15·507 15·507 15·507 15·507 15· 507 significant difference Those individual (0~E)2 values contributing the greatest amount to the chi=square indicate the greatest E deviation from the expected or control value. Fowl cholera occurred in this pen, possibly in other pens as well. �T.ABLE 3--HATCHABILITY Pen }I{umber .. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Number Infertile ar Dead af .. Cheml.ca.L.. .Eggs..Set ..Embryo .15.Days .. :aldrih 2 oz . aldrin 4 az. dieldrin parathian DDD endrin 6.5 az. taxaphene 1.5# taxaphene 4# endrin 13 oz. cantra1 (expected) 7! Dead at H~teh.iIlg..Eggs ... Bir.ds. 12 11 4 3 10 10 9 12 6 2- 3 1 2 8 3 5 3 3 7 '7 0 2 3 3 2 1 2 0 2 1 0 4 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 2 Birds Dying Birds Alive at after Hat.ched .. Hat.ch.Lng, ....Thre.e..W:e,e.ks (\ 10 18 14 12 11 13 12 13 10 1 8 15 13 11 9 10 9 11 7 2 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 - -L ----- - - 86 42 16 10 121 25 96 Mean 8.6 3·9 1.6 ·9 12·3 2.6 9·4 Percent af Tata1 Hatch 28.7 14 5·4 3·3 40.3 8.3 79·3 Chi-Square 10.4 18.6* 14 13 11.1 51* 13·9 .012 .06 e, 18 .13 .005 P (prababili ty) ~ 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 .11 12 .A Pipped Crippled - Tata1 ~f OF EGGS AND SURVIVAL OF PHEASANT CHICKS FROM THE 195BTES.T AND C.oNTHOL BIRDS 300 .24 - significant at .05 level of prababi1ity alive in shell but withaut sufficient strength to. escape fram the shell escaped fram shell but ma1farmed in same manner birds dying within three weeks after hatching percent af hatch (121) I +:- .0\ I !!i .06 �the birds were not spr-ayed in the toxa:phene, endr-Ln, and he:ptachlor tests. eggs :produced by the s:prayed birds :proved to be infertile. The few Findings~ The egg :production of the :pheasants s:prayed in 1958 a:p:pearsin Table 2. Where significance occurs, endrin~s:prayed birds deviate the most from the control. This wo~ld indicate that endrin at 6.5 o~ces :per acre is more detrimental to egg :production than the other chemicals. However, the birds s:prayed with endrin at 13 ounces :per acre :produced close to the average of the nine test :pens in total eggs :per bird and eggs collected :per hen. Table 3 illustrates the hatchability of the eggs and the survival of the pheasant chicks hatched from eggs :prorulcedin 1959 by :pheasants s:prayed in 1958. However, except for :parathion, all other chemically-treated birds had the same as or f'ewerdead at hatching than the control. 'l1b.e egg :production rate decreased in the :parathion-s:prayed birds 'because of fowl cholera. The chicks from the aldrin~s:prayed birds at two ounces :per acre had a greater mortality rate than the other test or control birds. Recommendations: There are no recommendations forthcoming .at this time exce:pt to discourage high rates of a:p:plicationof insecticides. Pre:pared by:_.,.....;.J...:.a_m_e_s~R_._T_i.::=g:...n_e,_.r Appr-oved by: Dat.er C~ ,January, 1960 ~~~ Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator ��January, 1960 -49- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of ~C~O~L~OR~AD~O~ _ Project No. ~W~-~3~7~-R~-~1~3~ _ Game Bird Survey _ Job No.9 Work Plan No. ~4~ Title of Job: Chukar Hunter Check Period Covered: November 7 through November 8, 1959. Abstract A check station was established to check hunters, birds, and hunting activity in Escalante Canyon, Delta County, during the 1959 hunt. Additional information was gathered on hunting activity in other open areas. A letter was sent to Department field personnel, within areas open to chukar hunting, requesting that crops of chukars be collected for food habits studies. Several weeks prior to the hunting season a general movement of chukars from their regular range occurred. Success of hunters during the open season was very poor; the known kill being 36 birds. It is probable the total kill did not exceed 100 chukars. Checks of 57 hunters, who hunted a total of 148 hours in Escalante Canyon, show only six birds were bagged during the first two days of the season. This gives figures of .11 birds per hunter and .041 birds bagged per hour. Weights of six chukars averaged 1 lb. and 3.96 ounces. Two of the six birds checked were males and only one of the birds in this group was a juvenile. A total of 14 chukar crops was collected for food habits studies. Analysis of these crops are currently incomplete. General inspection of these crops, however, disclosed some of the chukars were eating pinon nuts. Additional reports were received from hunters who had shot chukars with ninon nuts in their craps. One report indicated chukars are feeding on p~non nuts during mid-winter, 1960. Indications are that the excellent pinon nut crop and desire of chukars for this food resulted in movement of the majority of chukars to vast and generally inaccessible pinon-juniper type areas during early fall of 1959. This appears to have been the cause of the low chukar harvest. It is recommended a check be made in the event a 1960 chukar season is held to further study the effects of food availability on chukar movement. Objectives: (1) To determine success of hunters during the open season on (2) chukar partridges. To collect various data on chukars in Colorado, to include: (a) crops for food habits analysis, (b) weights, (c) molting characteristics, (d) sex and age ratios, and (e) incidence of parasitism. �-50Techniques Used: An open season for the hunting of chukar partridges was established by the Game and Fish Commission for the period November 7 through November 11. Hunting was permitted in all or portions of Garfield, Mesa, Delta, and Montrose Counties, in west-central Colorado. The hunting of pheasants and Gambel's quail also was allowed during this period. Shooting hours were from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Surveys were conducted during the summer months to determine the status of the chukar population (Miller, 1959a and 1959b). Immediately prior to the open season several checks were again made in major chukar areas to determine availability of these birds to the hunters. Also, prior to the chukar season, labeled, paper sacks and a special letter requesting chukar crop collections were sent to Department personnel within chukar areas. Arrangements were made with Douglas L. Gilbert, Assistant Professor of Wildlife Management, Colorado State University, to have contents of chukar crops analyzed. Special hunter check forms, which were prepared for use during the 1958 hunt, were used again this year. One road block was established immediately east of the Gunnison River bridge near the confluence of Escalante Creek and the Gunnison River, Delta County, to collect data on chukars and hunting activity in Escalante Canyon. Checks at this point were made only on November 7. On the second day of the season, a roving check was made within Escalante Canyon and on Dry Mesa which lies south of this canyon. Spot checks were conducted during the afternoon of the second day in the Well's Gulch and Kannah Creek areas, in Delta and Mesa Counties respectively. In addition to routine checks during the open season, findings from field contacts by Wildlife Conservation Officers, reports from other Department personnel, and reports from sportsmen and landowners were recorded to give an idea of chukar hunting pressure and success in areas other than Escalante Canyon. Personnel: Glenn E. Rogers, Wayne W. Sandfort and Wildlife Conservation Officers. �-51Chukar Hunter Check Wayne Sandfort Findings: The 1959 chukar hunt was generally disappointing. Reasons for the low hunter success, together 'With a summary of various data collected, are described below: Pre--season Surveys and Availability of Chukars for Hunters Miller (1959b) reported findings from chukar :production studies in westcentral Colorado preceding the 1959 hunt. Data on the number of young-per-hen show reproduction by chukars during 1959 was much lower than during 1958. Brood sizes, however, were good and reproduction compared favorably 'With that for years other than 1958. The 1958 season was an exceptionally good year for chukar repro~ duction. During the months .of June-August, chukars were commonly observed in valley areas. Reports on population checks by Miller (1959a) show a total of 1,698 chukars was observed during the summer period. This represented only a portion of the total population of birds. The total population estimate (6,850), however, was lower than this estimate during the preceding summer. Approximately three 'weeks prior to the opening of thechukar season, reports were received that chukars had disappeared from several major areas where they can be commonly observed. Two checkso.f Escalante Canyon proved this to be the case, with nochukarsor signs of chukars found. The exact cause of movement of birds from valley areas was not known at this time, although itwas believed lat.e summer rains and improved food conditions (green grass) in the hills may have caused this movement. This hypothesis did not seem logical, however, as precipitation was below normal during the months of June through September. Even during 1957, when precip'" itation was above normal,chukars exhibited little movement from their regularly inhabited areas. Regardless of causes for movement, it was apparent few chukars would be access= ible to hunters during the open season. Some publicity was given t.othe fact that birds had generally moved from areas commonly frequented, and that hunting would he poor. Hunter Success ABanitcipated, the majority of hunters realized thatchukar hunting :would be poor during 1959, and light hunting pressure occurred in Escalante Canyon and in other areas. Predictionso.f a very light harvest of birds also were correct. Results .of the hunter check in Escalante Canyon for the first two days of the season are summarized in Table 1. �-52Table l.--CHUKAR ,PARTRIDGE HUNTER CHECK, ESCALANTE CANYON, .DELTA C01JNTY" NOVEMBER 7-8, 1959. Number of Hours Birds Bagged Number Birds Birds} Birds! ... Date Huhters Hunted Adult' Young Total Crippled Hunter 'Hour" No;v. 7 46 .11 129 o 415 .039 Nov. 8 11 101 o 19 .09 .053 148 TOTAL .11 o .041 51 6 57 . -. Additional information obtained on activities of hunters in Escalante Canyon pertains to the locality where birds were shot (in the valley or on hillsides), and t.o the estimated total birds observed by individuals while hunting. Data show the few chukars taken during the first two days of the season were bagged on hills or benches above the valley floor. Five parties, containing 19 hunters, reported seeing chukars; two of these groups reporting flocks of 100-150 birds in the pinonjuniper type on benches about a mile above and out from the bottom of the valley. No accurate check was made in Escalante Canyon during the last two days of the season. A brief check and reports, however, indicate three additional chukarswere shot, one of these in the bottom of the valley. There were approximately 35 areas or valleys open to chukar hunting during the 1959 season, in addition to Escalante Canyon. Very light hunting pressure occurred in these areas also and only a few birds were taken. Table 2.--SUMMARY OF KNOWN CHUKAR PARTRIDGE KILLS, WEST-CENTRAL COLORADO, NOVEMBER 7-11, 1959. Kill Area County Bag Checks Reports Total Garfield 2 Parachute Creek 0 2 Mesa Kannah Creek Plateau Creek Stove Canyon 1 5 9 0 7 0 1 12 9 Angel's Ranch (Gunnison R. ) Escalante Canyon Tongue Creek 2 7 1 27 0 2 0 9 2 9 1 Delta TOTALS - ALL AREAS 3 Miscellaneous Data Weights.--Six chukars were weighed; five that had been bagged in Escalante Canyon and one that was taken in Kannah Creek. �-53Table 3. -·-CIful\AR PARTRIDGE 'WEIGHTS, WEST-CENTRAL COLORADO 2 NOVEMBER 7~8, 1959. Minimwm Maximum Average No. of Weights Weights Weights Age Sex Birds Lbs . ozs . los.0zs. los·.ozs. Female Immature 1 15·52 15·52 15·52 1.56 Maturey 1 1 1 4.31 3·28 3 All females 4 1 1 4.31 15·52 2.37 Male Immature Mature 2 6.46 6.21 1 1 1 5·96 All males 2 1 6.46 6.21 1 1 5.96 ALL BIRDS 6 6.46 1 1 15·52 3.63 !l One adult female checked in Kannah Creek area weighed 1 lb. and 3.96 ounces. The remainingchukars were bagged in Escalante Canyon. Sex .•.. -The occurrence and appearance of spurs, in conjunction with general appearance of the birds, was used to sex birds from which weights were obtained. Of six birds classified by this sexing method, two were males and four were females. Age.--Only one chukar, of six birds checked for age, was classified as an immature bird. This bird was small (15.52 ounces ) and contained a bursa 16.0mm. in depth. Food he.oits.--Fourteen chukar crops were collected during the 1959 season and taken to Fort Collins for analysis. As of this date (January 28, 1960) data from this analysis are not available. General inspections made during collection of crops indicated that some of the crops contained pinon nuts. Additional reports were received from individuals who had shotchukars in the pinon-juniper type and had found pinon nuts in the crops of these birds. A report .from Jack Peters, Fish and Wildlife Service trapper stationed at Fraita, Colorado, was received on January 26, 1960 which indicated large flocks of cbukar s are wintering on pinon nuts in the Bookcliff Mountai.n range in the soutih •.• west portion of Garfield County. Movement of chukar partridges from regularly frequented areas into the pinonjuniper type at higher elevations, was coincident with one of the largest pinon nut crops in recent years. There is strong evidence that the bumper pinon nut crop and not green feed was the principal factor which caused movement of birds into gen~ erally inaccessible areas dGITing the 1959 hunt. Recommendations ~ A general movement of chukars from their regular range to higher elevations in the p Lnon-cjunf.pert.ype , resulted in very low hunter success during the 1959 hunt. Information indicates that this movement resulted primarily from the excellent pinon nut crop during 1959 and preference of chukars for this food. �As of this writing (January, 1960), many chukars still have not returned to their regular range in the valley areas. It is recommended that additional hunter checks be conducted in the event of a hunt during 1960, to evaluate the success of hunters and possible effects of food availability on chukar movement. Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandfort Date: January, 1960 Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator Literature Cited Miller, Walter J. 1959a. Chukar partridge adaptability, survival, and population checks. Quart. Report of the Game Mgmt.-Fed. Aid Div., Colo. Dept. of Game and Fish. Oct., pp. 115..;.]:24'. 1959b. Chukar partridge production studies. Quart. Report of the Game Mgmt.-Fed. Aid Div., Colo. Dept. of Game and Fish. Oct., pp. 99~107. �January, 1960 -55JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~~~---------------- Project No. ~W~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~3 Work Plan No.__ ~2~ _ Deer-Elk Investigations _ Job No. 5 Title of Job: Determination of Winter Loss Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to May 31, 1959. Abstract: Earlier studies in determining winter loss were restricted to the Green Mountain Reservoir deer winter range. The past two years a corresponding vinter loss check has been made on Cedar Ridge. The loss on the Green Mountain area has varied the past eight years from 69.9% to a low of 1.8%. The 1958-59 winter loss was 4.3%. The average for the past 8 years has been 18.01%. The loss on Cedar Ridge for the 1958-59 winter was 5.1%, which checks quite closely with that of the Green Mountain Area. Objectives: To improve the techniques for determining deer vinter losses. Procedures': Students from Colorado State University assisted in a winter loss count, checking the technique designed to give a comparative winter loss check on the Green Mountain Deer Winter Range, the Cedar Ridge study area, and the Sapinero Deer Winter Range. ��-57DETERMINATION OF WINTER LOSS Paul F. Gilbert The Green Mountain Winter Range loss field work was done on April 28, 1959 with 17 counters. B:eforechecking the study area, the counters were checked out ,on a half mile strip :containinga known number of dead deer that had been planted there--losses from highway kills, etc., on known dates. Counters were asked to list .only current loss. After each counter has a chance at the sample strip, the group was taken back over the area and shown how to distinguish the current winter loss from that of previous years. The results of the ground count is as follows: Total live deer observed: Total dead deer observed Winter Popu.Latrl.on 4,654 acres 3,364 acres Size of total area Sample size Average sight distance this year 10.58 yards The sample size is based on a predetermined sight distance of 26 yards. This figure was determined in an experimental sack count and has been used in all the work done on this job. The projection for percentage mortality was made as follows: x : 4.,654 79,118 x = 23,519 or 24 Dead Deer Projected Loss. 17: 3,364 3,364x Therefore, 558 divided into 24 = the p:ercentage loss or 4.3%. Year 51-52 52..• 53 53-54 54-55 55"56 56-57 57~58 58-59 Live Deer Observed 263 Y 714 1,094 1,129 1,276 498 553 541 GREEN .MOUNTAIN WINTER LOSS SUMMARY Av. Sight Projected Est. Dist,ance Winter Loss Dead Deer In Yards 612 28 17 41 79 243 48 24 69·9 3·8 1.5 3·5 5.8 46.8 8.2 4·3 36.26 28.15 26.06 22·53 10.58 Kill From Previous Fall Unit 37 601 260 500 923 472 893 369 The Cedar Ridge Winter loss field work was done April 27, 1959. The system used here was similar to that used on the Green .Mountain mortality count. Per~ sonnel consisted of two biologists of the Colorado Game and Fish Department and 16 game management students. Emphasis was not placed on counting live deer in 1952, therefore, winter loss is probably high. �-58The counter interval was selected by guiding on randomly located pellet group trranaectiawhf.chare laid out .on a north-south direction. The predetermined sight distance of 26 yards was again used in determining sample size. An effort was made to maintain at least 300 yards between observers to avoid duplication. The 18 observers made two passes through the study area--south t.onorth, then north to south. All live deer were counted (259); however, this figure could not be used as a total population as a total ground count was made over the study area ,earlier giving a total population of 566. The projection for percentage mortality Was made as follows: Total dead deer counted Live deer count (Feb., 1959) Size of Area Size of sample 6 566 4,544 acres 952.6 acres The projection for percentage mortality was made as follows: 6 : 952.6 952.6x x x : 4,544 27,264 28·51 or 29 dead deer, Pro.ject.edLoss Therefore, 566 divided into 29 = the percentage loss or 5.1%. Last year was the first year winter mortality was checked on Cedar Ridge: at that t.ime7 it was calculated to be 10.8%. The Gunnison Dead Deer Count was made May 9, 1959 with a crew of 19 consisting mostly of students. There -were 21 dead deer counted on the area, which were determined to be a loss from the winter of' 1958-59. By proj.ecting the figures, a total of' 82 dead deer are in the study area. Add to this 12 road kills results in a total herd drain of 94 animals. This compares with 210 deer from the 1958 study. No percentage loss can be figures as no total populations are known. Elk Winter Loss A spring survey for elk winter loss was run on the lower portions of the South Fork elk winter range. Three men spent eight.days searching for dead animals. Local residents were also asked to report .dead or sick elk. E.ight carcasses were found. Conclusions: Ridge, 5.1%. respectively. Winter loss on Green Mountain deer winter range was 4.3%; for Cedar Last year the two areas also checked closely with 8.16% and 10.8% Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date: January, 1960 Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �;January, 1960 -59JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~--~~~----------------- Project NO. Work Plan No. W~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~3 _ 2 --~--------------------- Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 7 Title of Job: Collection of Data on the White River Elk Herd Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to September 30, 1959. Abstract: Five weeks were spent on the White River elk survey during the summer of 1959 in which 291 elk were seen. Two hundred elk were observed in Lost Park during the calving season although no range damage was located. An aerial count in July indicated a cow-calf ratio of 100:67. Nearly 1200 elk were counted but only 674 were classified. Herd concentrations and distribution are presented in Figure 1. The six summer study areas were permanently marked and described. Pellet group counts were mad~. The total number of elk days of use per acre was 1.74 as compared to 2.13 elk days last year and 2:.13 days in 1957. Statistical analysis reveals no significant difference in elk use during the past three years. The period of use lasted from June 25 until August 7, 1959. The review of historical data was not completed and will be continued during the following segment. Objectives: To gather historical and present data on the White River elk herd. Techniques Used: Historical information was derived from libraries, office records, and interviews. Present data was collected by air and ground reconnaissance. Elk use was determined by counting pellet groups and analyzed statistically by the Analysis of Variance Method and the Student!s "t" test. ��COLLECTION OF DATA ON THE WHITE RIVER ELK HERD Donald G. Smith A limited survey was conducted on the White River Plateau during the summer of 1959. Six study areas were permanently marked, a pellet group count was made, a cow-calf ratio was determined by an aerial count, and reconnaissance trips taken. An inspection of Lost Park during the middle of June found the range in fair condition although it was dry. Nearly 200 elk were observed using the north end of the park where utilization was judged to be moderate. Twenty calves were counted. An aerial survey was made July 23-25 to determine the cow-calf ratio, elk distribution, and herd concentrations. The Bell H-13 helicopter from Helicopters, Incorporated was used with Dwight Owens observing. The base of operations was Sweetwater Lake and counts were made during early morning hours between 4:45 and 7:30 a.m. Evening counts proved unsatisfactory because light conditions were poor YThen the elk moved into the parks. The portable tape recorder YTas used to facilitate counting and recording procedures. The collection of sex and age data is made easier and more accurate. Aerial photos were taken of large herds to determine composition. This technique needs refinement. It is difficult to obtain sex ratios at this time of year because mature bulls are usually found in small groups off by themselves. Spikes are difficult t.o separate due to their short antlers and light color in the summer. Nearly 1200 elk were seen as compared to 960 last year. Of these 674 were classified as follows: 362 cows, 242 calves, 40 bulls, and 30 spikes. The cow~calf ratio was 100:67 as compared to 100:61 last year. Largest concentrations were found on No Name Creek, Big Marvine Peak, Shingle Peak, and the Lost S.olarPark area. The largest herd seen numbered between 250 and 300 elk while several others contained one hundred each. Their distribution is shown in Figure 1. Six study areas on elk summer range were permanently marked by attaching aluminum plates to live trees at the ends of transect lines. These lines were recorded on aerial photos of the areas and a detailed description given on a master sheet. Pellet group courrts were made to determine elk .daysof use before the arrival of sheep. Relative information was also recorded on individual areas. Doe Greek Area (62t acres) The pel1etgroupcot-mt was made on July 29, 1959, indicating 0 .92 elk days of use per acre. Four deer YTere seen along tihetrail. Sheep were crossing this area enroute to the Wall Lake allotment before the count was finished. A check on August. 8 revealed little additional use and no sheep were located. The range appeared to be in good condition. �Big Marvine Area (31t acres) The pellet group count was made July 30, 1959, indicating 2.92 e-lk days of use per acre. There were twenty elk watering at the pond on this area and ten large bulls in the timber nearby. Seventeen deer -were seen along the trail from Lost Solar Park. No sheep use this area. The range appeared in fair condition. Park Creek Area (40 acres) The pellet group .courrt was made on July 31, 1959, and indicated 1.85 .eLk days of use per acre . Three deer 'Were seen along the trail. The sheep moved into the area July 30, and remained until August 4. A late check revealed only moderate use and good range conditions. Lost Solar Park (355 acres) The pellet group count was made between August 5 .and 8, 1959, and indicated 1.84 elk days of use per acre. A few elk -were observed using Round Mountain and three large bucks were seen at the opposite end of the park. Robinson s sheep were moved into the area August 5 and remained twelve days, a week longer than usual. Utilization was moderate and herding practices satisfactory. The range was in fair condition. I Trapperls Peak Area (45 acres) The pellet group count was made August 10, 1959, indicating 3.54 elk days of use per acre. Twenty-seven elk and four deer -were observed in the timber nearby. A yearling buck -was found dead along the trail. It was a summer loss although cause of death could not be determined. There -was no evidence of sheep use. The range condition was fair. Shingle Peak Area (62~ acres) The pellet group count was made August 10, 1959, and indicated 0.31 elk days of use per acre. Mr. Rappasardi, .sheep owner, reported finding a dead yearling .deer just 'West of Mr. Luark I s cabin near Turrent Peak. It had been dead several weeks but the cause 'was not determined. He also reported a coyote kill of a yearling deer near Sheppard Lake. There were 1,200 sheep on the area from August 8 through the 13th in addition to camp horses. This area receives additional use from sheep using the driveway. Utilization usually appears heaviest in this area .and the range was judged to be in a poor t.o fair condition. Combined Study Areas The total number of elk days of use per acre for all the areas was 1.74 days as compared to 2.13 days last year. This represents 1,037 elk days of use on 596 acres compared to 1,234 in 1958. However, when this data is analyz~d statistically no significant difference is found between these two years. �Fi,l;Ure 1. Distrihution of White River elk on July 23-25, 1959 �-63Table 1. Year No. of Plots 1956 1957 1958 1959 TOTAL Number of pellet groups Analysis of Elk Days Sum of pellet groups squared 719 473 827 840 406 131 229 190 928 205 405 326 2859 956 1864 Elk days of Avg. No. of pellet groups/plot Use/acre = 0.565 0.277 0.27'7 0.226 4.34 2.13 2.13 1.74 0·334 avg. 2.57avg. c= (Sx)2 = 320 N Sum of Squares of Total= Sx2- C = 1,91-4 Sum of Squares of Years = (Sx)2 + (Sx)2 + (Sx)2 Nl N2 N3 51.9 Analysis of Variance Table Source of Variation Degrees of Freedom T'otal (N-l) 1) Years (4••• 2858 3 1544 51.9 17·3 Residual 2855 1492.1 0·5226 Sum of Squares F .05 with 3 .and 2855 degrees of freedom F .01 = 3.78 Mean of Squares F 33·1 = 2.60 Since the "F" value for the Analysis of Variance (33.1) is greater than the "F" value at the 99 percent level (3.78) it means that .a significant difference does exist between years. By using the studentts "tlltest we find that the only significant difference exists between the year 1956 and the others. The value of "t" between the years 1956 and 1957 was 5.70 which is greater than the value .of "t " .05 which is 1.96 and "ti" .01 which is 2.58. When the years 1958 and 1959 were compared the "t" value vms 1.69 which is less than lit" .05 which is 1.96. The years 1957 and 1958 had identical days of use and do not show any difference (lit = 0 .11) . Therefore, the number- of elk days of use has remained constant the past three years. 11 Discussion Elk utilization of the range forage remained light and no abused areas were found. Sheep use continued to be heavier although it was not detrimental to the range. Sheep are now competing with elk in the Oyster Lake vicinity where the elk concentrate early in the summer. Elk use of the parks lasted from June 251IDtil Augus t 7, 1959, after which most of them remained in the timber. A reconnaissance trip by Harris, Grieb, and Rermnenga lat.e in August failed t.o find any elk in the parks. Elk observations are given in table 2. Dry conditions prevailed early but vegetation made excellent growth following late summer rains. �-6~More deer were noticed this year than for several years. A total of 4.4 deer sexed on the Wilderness Area were comprised of 13 bucks, 30 does, and 1 fawn. An additional 51 deer were obselrvednearby. A reconnaissance of the southern portion of the White River Plateau was made in September to learn the courrt.ry , the road system, and to make wildlife observations. Most wildlife use appear-ed to be in the Grizzly Creek and Elk Creek drainages. There are not many elk on this side of the Plateau. An unseasonable storm late in Septembar left three feet of snow on the Flat Tops and forced the elk down to their winter range. Warm weather preceded the hunting season allowing the himters to reach the elk. In spite of these conditions, hunter success remained virtually the same as last year. Date Cows Bulls TABLE 2. ELK OBSERVATIONS BY GROmm SURVEY Yearling cows Spike bulls Unclassified TOTAL Area and Activity 200 200 1 3 Lost Park; feeding and loafing Nichols Creek Round Mtn. Big Marvine; feeding & watering Lost Solar Creek feeding Elk Park (camp) feeding Upper South Fork moving Lost Solar Cr; bedded down Grizzly Creek; feeding East Elk Creek feeding Main Elk Creek feeding (Harem) Meadow Creek; feeding and bedded down Calves June 16 July 21 July 22 July 30 1 1 8 Aug. 4 2 1 10 Aug. 4 Aug. 9 1 8 1 30 2 4 4 4 2 3 5 12 5 2 1 1 Sept. 9 3 Sept. 10 4 1 Sept. 12 1 1 23 24 27 4 4 Aug. 12 Aug. 31 3 1 4 3 3 9 1 1 4 4 20 216 291 (total classified 91) Recommendations: 1. Discontinue the summer study until the situation warrants an investigation. 2. Continue to record elk distribution and concentration during census studies. 3. Complete the history of this elk herd. 4. Evaluate all work done on this herd and plan an investigation of the most serious problems. Prepared by: Date: Donald G. Smith Approved by: January, 1960 --------------~~~------------------ G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �January, 1960 -65FINAL REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of ~C~O~L~O~RAD~~O ----------- Project No. ~W_-~1~0~1~-~R~-~2 ~G~am~e~R~an~g~e~I-n-v-e-s-t-i~g~a-t-i-o-n-s--- Work :Plan No. ------------------------------4 Job No.3 Title of Job: Experimental Water Development Period Covered: July 15; 1955 to January 15, 1960 ABSTRACT A seep spring vas developed in pinon-juniper type deer range in south-western Colorado to learn if the development of water in dry ranges would result in better summer-range use and less damage to mellon crops on adjacent farms. The seep from the base of a sandstone cliff was collected and made to yield a constant flow of water, even in dry summers. However, deer made very little use of the spring. It is suspected they did not use it more because the asphalt paint with which the metal reservoir was coated may have given the water an objectionable taste or odor. The development of the spring, therefore, had little or no effect on the use deer made of the area during the summer months nor lessened deer damage to crops. Because spring development sites are scarce in the pinon-juniper deer ranges of south-western Colorado, concrete check dams and guzzlers seem to be more promising as a means of water development for deer. cottonwood trees often indicate the presence of seep springs. ��January, 1960 -67EXPERIMENTAL WATER DEVELOPMENT Harold R. Shepherd INTRODUCTION Much of the pinon-juniper type deer range in south-western Colorado is comprised of arid mesa and canyon country. Springs.8lld running .streams .ar-e scarce. During the summer, deer are mostly deIJendent .on IJotholes filled by infrequent rains for drinking water. Whenthese dry UIJ, the deer concentrate more in the areas where water remains. In McElmoCanyon, near Cortez, much fruit and garden truck, including water mellons, are raised. The irrigation water used to raise these croIJs is obtained from McElmoCreek, the only live stream for many miles in an area of' rocky, sandy, canyon country . During the summermonths, deer concentrate near the orchard and garden country and do considerable damage to mellon crops . If IJermanentsources of water could be deveLoped near the heads of the canyons tributary to McE.lmoCreek, more deer might remain there, resulting in better summer-range use and less damage to mellon crops along McElmoCreek. 'I'berefore, it was decided that .a source of water would be develoIJed near the head of one of the dry canyons tributary to McElmoCreek to learn what .effect it might have on the deer IJoIJulation. PROCEDURE Locating the SIJring.-""Duringthe summer of 1955, a search was begun for a site in McElmoCar:t/von where water might 'be cdeveLoped. Several seeps were dugout to learn if they would run enough water, and shelfrock areas were searched for suitable si t.es for the construction of small concrete dams. None were found that warranted deve.Lopmente The following s~, a very slow seeIJ was located at the base of a sandstone cliff. Attention to the site was directed by alone cottonwood tree, the only cottonwood in an area .of IJinon and juniper timber. Extending fora distance of about 45 feet along the base of the cliff, was an accumulation of fine, moist sand erroded from the cliff (Fig. 1). Roots of the cottonwood tree had formed a close network throughout the accumu.Lat-edaand.; and seeking water , they were pr-eased against the sandstone. Growing upon the sand and over t.he moist face of the cliff, were mosses and lichens. DeveloIJment.ofLizard Spring. --When the sand and t.ree roots had been cleared away from tre base of the cliff , a seep was found suf'f'Lcd.errbto keep the cliff face moist but not .sufficientat anyone pLace, to run a stream. To collect.enough water from the seep to IJiIJe to a reservoir, two groove~like gutters were et.•.. t .into t.he rock for a combined distance of about 30 feet a.longthe base of the sandstone c.liff (Fig. 2). 'I'he glltters were sIoped vjus t .enough t.OIJermit the collected water to drain into a basin c rt into the rock at the confluence of the two gutters. To IJrevent water from seeIJing ~lt .of the gutters and basin, they were coated with concrete. From thecollect.ion basin, water wasIJiIJed across a draw to a 55-gallon oil d.:rwnburied with its top edge near the level of the ground (Fig. 3)· The barrel was pad.rrbed inside and O:1.t with an a.spha.Lt=baaeIJaint to keep it .from rusting. The sIJringwas named l~zard SIJring. �-68Lo.catian.-~Lizard Spring .is.at the base af a sandstane cliff near the head af Sand Gulch, a tributary to.McElma Creek. The canfluenceaf Sand Gulch and McElma Greek is appraximately 11 miles belaw the 0.S. highway 666 bridge acrass McElma Gre.ek. The spring .is appraximately three-faurths af a mile narth-eastaf the second carbon diaxide gas well at the end af the gas well .road up Sand Gulch. Establishmentaf Pellet-Grau.-pPlats. --On October 10, two. days after water was develaped, 10 pellet-graup plats were established an a line running 45 degrees N.W. of thereservair to indicate if the develapment ,af the spring increased the number of deer in its vicinity (Fig. 4). Each pellet -graup plat was a circular plat having a radiusaf 11 feet 9 inches and an area of' 1/100 acre. A numbered, red, steel stake marked the center af each plat. The first plat was near the reservair, and the athers were located in a straight line 150 feet apart, except plats 8, 9, and 10 which were lacated 247 and 190 feet apart because af tapagraphic features. Callectian af Pellet-Graup Data.--When the pellet-graup plats were established, the pellet-graups were caunted and thrawn aut. Later, they were caunted and thrown aut twice yearly, in spring and fall, to. determine winter and summer use. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Effectiveness af Lizard Spring.--Althaugh the summer af 1956, when the spring was develaped, was hat and dry, Lizard Spring praduced enough water to. fill the reservair in 24 haurs. The spring has cantinued to. flaw atabaut the same rate since its develapment. Hawever, cansiderablemaintenance has been necessary to. keep a canstant supply of water during the summer manthsj the sandstane af the cliff in which the seep is lacated is so.saft that it kept slaughing o.ff and filling1.lP the gutters, ca1.lsingthe water to. averflaw them. This tendency was aggravated by rains. Therefare, it was necessary to. visit the spring several times each summer t.a clean the gutters. Cleaning was needed less ~equently, however, as lichens began to caver the seed area and checked the erasian af sand fram the cliff. In the winter, the waterftrJoze in the gutters and cracked their cancrete linings away fram the cliff, neceSSitating repairs the fallawing spring. The galvanized iran pipe which canduct.ed the waterfram reservair rusted thraugh, requiring repair. the spring to.the Although the type af spring develapment attempted in the study was successful in praducing and maintaining a canstant flaw af water, it Efuauld be considered anly ane af several methods that ,cauld be used successfully to. supply water to. game in the pinan-juniper ranges af so.uth-western Calarada. Arizana and California, mare .arid than Calorada, have successfully used spring develapments and athers to.pravidewater far deer and bigharn sheep (Biswell and Schultz 1958j Weaver, Vernay, and Craig 1959j Hallaran and Deming 1958). It is likely that cancrete check dams built an bedrack and undergraund starage tanks ar guzzlers wauld be the mast effective in sauth-western Calarada, where spring develapment sites are scarce. �-69Effect of Water Development on Deer-Use of Area.--The spring was visited several times each summer to clean out the gutters and to check on the use being made of it by deer. The ground around the reservoir was sandy clay which readily took the impression of tracks. About a week after the spring was developed, the tracks of 2 deer were found at the reservoir, and it appeared that the deer had drunk from it. However, at no time during the following 3 summers was evidence seen that deer were making nruchuse of the water in the reservoir. The pellet data collected is not sufficient to detect .any small change in use of the area surrounding the spring (Table 1). To have det.ect.ed such use, considering the exceedingly small deer population, would have required such a large number of plots as to have been prohibitive with respect to the time and money required to run them. Pellet plot 1 includes the reservoir. If deer had drunk often from the spring, it seems logical to assume that this plot would have contained many pellets. However, it contained only 2 at the end of the first summer, 3 at the end of the second summer, and none at the end of the third summer. Deer Pellet-Group Counts Vicinity Lizard Spring Table l.-.... Plot No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Oct. 10 1956 Pellet-Groups and Dates Counted May 1 Oct. 3 May 1 Sept. 29 May 14 1958 1957 1958 1957 1959 Y ?J 1/ ?J 1/ ?J 0 3 7 2 1 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 9 2 1 0 2 1 9 1 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 7 3 0 Oct. 6 1959 1/ 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 Totals: 22 16 8 24 3 6 4 1/ The accumulation of pellets present when pellet counts first made "2/ Winter accumulation of about 7 months Summer accumulation of about 5 months II Table 2.--Summer Precipi tat.ion at Cortez, Colorado Year May June July Aug. Sept. Total 1956 1957 1958 1959 1.29 3·82 ·56 .14 ·35 .87 .23 .28 .81 4.06 .21 .64 .81 3·08 ·95 1.94 .08 T 1.14 ·99 3.34 12.55 3·09 3·99 �Figure 1. A lone cottonwood tree,growing in sand erroded from the base of a sandstone cliff, attracted attention to the site of Lizard Spring. �Figure 2. After the sand and tree roots were removed from the base of the the cliff, .a gutter was cut into the rock to conduct water to a collection basin. �Figure 3. Water from Lizard Spring was piped across a draw to an oil drum buried in the ground. �.---_._._ _. -' _--_. __ ._-------_._ - .._-- --' ... _ ..... - _ ..._... FlG.4 r: SPRING PLOT LOCATION LIZA~D_ PELLET-G~OUP 0, PLOT 10. . ''-''oS> ..f" 0" PLOT 9 , . .,~, -, '~'il "-, PLOT o~ 8 ,~ "'-, " 'il" . "0 PLOT . LINE OE PLOTS _ TRENDS 45° W. OF N. ''''''<, '\ 0_ 7 . 6 PLOT o-, "oS' " 0•• ''0 PLOT ,~ 5 ,0, '0 PLOT 4 -, ,0, "'" .. -, PL OT 3 o -, "ot "0. -, o PLOT 2 '''".",,0. -, PLOT 0)7 LIZARD SPRING H~R. SHEPHERD 2-27- GO I �-74CONCLUSIONS It can only be concluded that the development of the spring had little or no effect .on the use made of the area by deer during the summer months. It seems likely that there was something about the site or the reservoir that kept the deer from drinking from the reservoir. The fact that the reservoir was of metal should not have kept ,deer from using it, for metal tanks are used freely by deer elsewhere. Possibly the asphalt-base paint used on the inside of the reservoir gave the water an objectionable taste or odor. Seep springs, although they yield no running water, by proper development .can sometimes be made to yield a flow of water for game in dry summer-range areas. Because spring .development ,sites are scarce in the pinon-juniper deer ranges of south-western Colorado, concrete check dams and guzzlers offer more promise as water development means for deer. Cottonwood trees often indicate the presence of seep springs. BIBLIOGRAPHY Biswell, H.H. and A.M. Schultz. 1958. Effects of vegetation removal on spring flow. California Fish and Game, 44(3):211-230. Elder, James B. 1954. Notes on summer water consumption by desert mule deer. Journal Wildlife Management, 18(4): 540-541. ----. 1956. Watering patterns of some desert game animals. Journal Wildlife Management, 20(4):368-378. Glading, Ben. 1947. Game watering devic·es for the arid southwest. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf., 12:286-292. Halloran, Arthur F. and Oscar V. Deming. 1958. Water development for desert bighorn sheep. Journal Wildlife Management, 22(1):1-9. Meinzer, Oscar Edward. 1987. Plants as indicators of ground water. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 577. Weaver, Richard A., Floyd Vernoy, and Bert Craig. 1959. Game water development on the dese!t't.California Fish and Game, 45(4):333-342. Prepared by: Date: Harold R. Shepherd --------------------~-------------------- Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager January, 1960 --------------------~---~----------------------- F. C. Kleinschni tz Asst. Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/d1c67ea1fd5179efaea1bb9aa0d38f62.pdf 8e3d8793e3be69681347677f4df79e0c PDF Text Text April! 1960 -1'-,. JOB COiv1PLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS State of COLORADO Project No. rl-88-R-5 'tlorkPlan No. FROJECT Waterfowl Surveys 3nd Investiqations I Job No.2. --~~-------------- Ti t~e. of .Job r Trapping and Banding Ducks and Geese Per-Led Cover-ed] April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Objectives:· (1) To trap and band ducks and geese for the purpose of obtaining migration and life history information. (2) To trap the Great Basin Canada Goose as a means of securing brood stock for transplanting in suitable nesting areas throughout the State for the purpose of enlarging the breeding range of this species in Colorado. Scope:: North Par-k (Jackson County); (Larimer, rJeld, and other counties); the Cache la Poudre-South Platte Valley and Two Buttes Reservoir (Baca County). Personnel: Ken Baar , Roe f',!eyer, Charles Hayes, and Ray Buller, Bureau of Sport--Fisheries and Wildlife; -Elvy- ~'Jagner,-Pat Zimmerman, G. L,' Crawford, i'/alterSchuett, Lloyd Hazzard, Mitchell G. Sheldon, Robert Kitzmiller, and Jack R. Grieb, Colorado Game and Fish Department. Introduction: This report summarizes the banding activities of Project W-88;_R;..5for the fiscal year, April 1, 1959 to April 1, 1960. Since the analysis of band recoveries will be done under another job (Plan I, Job 3), little interpretation will be made of these data. The report will be limited to a factual description of number and location of birds banded, with comments on goose weight data collected at Two Buttes Reservoir. Methods: Banding activities have been roughly divided into two phases -summer banding and winter banding. Summer banding took place on the breeding grounds and emphasized the banding of young ducks and adults which bred in the vicinity of the banding site.· Winter bahding was done on the wintering grounds at Two Buttes Reservoir.· Three methods-were _used to trap and band ducks and geese during 1959 and 1960 •. _. (1) Drive trapping using the Hawkins drive trap, where the ducks were driven into long wings extending out from the Hawkins trap, and finally into •the trap -itself; (2) run-down method, where broods were scattered and especi.ally along road-side ditches where each brood observed was chased and captured by hand or with a dog; (3) the cannon-net trap, where the birds were baited into the are a covered by the net. Results:·. A total of 1593 ducks and 492 geese were banded during the past fiscal year •. Table 1 lists the number of surrrne r banded ducks, by species andTocat.Ion , while Table 2 lists the number of Canada geese banded by location. . - _-_.--- -------------1 COLO DlV WILDLIFE RESEARCH eTR LIB i 111I~J~~~ll]l!~'rnll I ._-_ .._-----_.-._--_.- _.- . _.- - --_. -- �-2Table 1.-- Number of Ducks Banded by Species and Location, July-August, 1959 Total by Species Species north Park Poudre Mallard Pintail Gadwall Baldpate Shoveller Green-winged teal Cinnamon or Blue-winged teal Lesser Scaup Redhead Ring-necked Canvasback Arnerican Merganser American Coot Total 72 235 95 504 307 599 3 84 3 3 81 3 71 1 4 125 196 33 330 363 5 9 9 1 1 4 9 1 17 1593 1 16 389 1 1204 No summer duck banding was attempted in the San LUiS Valley this year due to high water levels and conflicting work assignments. Table 2.--jJumber of Geese Banded by Location in Colorado, 1959 1960. Location ~rumber Banded Remarks 12 Transfered 12 geese of captive breeding flock to Sta~ Fish Hatchery, Wray, Colo. April, 1959 Experimental plant at College Lake, Larimer County, Colorado. July, 1959 Released immediately after banding; includes 1 V,rhi te-fronted goose. Januarv, 1960 Bonny Reservoir How Captured Captive flock 48 Poudre Valley Two Buttes Reservoir Cannon-net trap 432 . Total 492 The 48 geese banded in the Poudre Valley were Great Basin Canada Goose goslings raised from the captive flock at Bonny Dam and the result of artificial hatching of wild eggs at Fort Collin~. These birds were released to supplement preceeding plants to investigate the possibility of establishing wild breeding flocks. This was covered in more detail under another job; (~'JorkPlan 2, Job 2). No Great Basin geese were trapped for transplant this year. �-3All geese captured at Two Buttes Reservoir were weighed, sexed, aged, and fluoroscoped. The purpose of this operation was fourfold: (1) to determine, if possible, the sub-species of white-cheeked geese using this area for wintering purposes; (2) to investigate weight differences, if any, between the birds trapped in anyone year, as compared to past years, and thus determine whether undue harassment during the hunting season had affected the general well-being of the flock; (3) to determine, if possible, the age and sex ratio of the wintering flock at Two Buttes Reservoir; (4) to determine the incidence of body shot in this flock. (reported under Work Plan 2, Job 4). The results of this incidental investigation revealed that it was very difficult to tell the differences between the sub-species of white-cheeked geese wintering at Two Buttes Reservoir. It Vias fairly certain that three sub-species were present; namely, the Richardson's, Lesser, and Great Basin Canada goose. However, considering weights and external characteristics of the birds, while it was possible to determine sub-species of the small birds and the very large ones, it was impossible to separate the Lesser from the Richardson's where they overlap, particularly in weight, and the same for the Lesser and the Great Basin goose. During the 1960 banding, Mr. Richard E. Marquardt, a Doctorial Candidate, Oklahoma Cooperative Wildlife Re search Unit, Stillwater, Oklahoma, took several measurements on a sample of the geese trapped at Two Buttes Reservoir. These measurements were taken to supplement the field data of Mr. Marquardt's study dealing with the species variation of the small races of white-cheeked geese. The sample indicated the Two Buttes geese were slightly larger on the average than the geese of the tall-grass flock flyway to the east. This further clouded the picture of sub-species determination of the Two Buttes flock. However, it still appears the wintering birds were composed of at least 90 per cent Lesser Canadas and about 10 per cent of the large and small goose in aggregrate. Results of the 1960 weighing study are given in Table 3, where it is compared with information from 1952 and 1953, 1957, 1958, 1959 and 1960 banding operations. Table 3.--Average weights of Geese at Two Buttes Reservoir, during banding o erCltions. Average weight of birds that No. birds Average Year weiqhed weioht, pounds weiqhed 4.5 to 7.0 pounds 1952 6.28 1269 6.16 1953 1481 5.97 6.05 2 yr. average weight 1957 527 1958 521 1959 516 3 yr. average weight 6.68 5.88 5.45 5.83 5.79 5.58 1960 5.54 5.49 440 �G1 1.'- _""'_ -4Excepting the 1959 average weight, it was evident the 1960 average is slightly below that of the preceeding years. This was probably due to factors other than hunter harassment affecting the birds' opportunity to feed~ The following were. some of the possible reasons for this average weight differential: 1. In 1952 and 1953 there was a time lapse of two to three months before the last,birds were trapped, banded and weighed. This interval provided the healthy birds with the opportunity to feed at will and put on weight. It also allowed enough time for the wounded-starving geese to pass out of the picture. During these years the geese were heavily baited as long as forty days before the initial catch was made. Thus average weight differences may have been due to the time interval between the end of hunting season and weighing time. 2. Heather conditions may have been an important factor in average weight differences. It was known that food was scarce in the winter of 1956-57. Prolonged snow cover of the food supply could have conceivably caused a loss of weight in the birds. 3. Changes in the sub-species composition of the wintering flock could have greatly influenced the average weight comparisons. For example, those years when a greater number of big geese were present in the trapped sample of the wintering pOpulation the average weight would go up. The converse would be true if there were an influx of small geese. In an attempt to off-set the composition changes of the flock the last column of Table 3 shows the average weight of those geese that weighed,between 4.5 pounds and 7.0 pounds. This tabulation showed a downward trend in average weight for each year. This trend remains unexplainable at the present time. Age and sex ratio changes will affect the average weights between years. There was a substantial increase in immature birds weighed Ln 1958-59 ammounting to 24.2 per cent over the previous years' figure. Immature females increased 15.3 per cent in 1958-59. Thus, an increase of birds-of-the-year along with an increase in the smaller females may have caused a considerable weight difference between years. 4. A change in numbers of wounded birds in the wintering flock could have also changed the yearly average weight of the geese. All geese banded were checked'for·body condition by the prominence of the keel bone. fA starvingwounded goose Was so emaciated the bird could· be picked up by the protruding keel bone. It is known that the geese handled in trapping operations have been mostly in fair to good body condition. 5. Considering all of these factors, it was impossible to detGrmine exactly what caused the average weight differential between years. It w?S believed to be a combination of' possibly all of these factors rather than anyone. Submitted by: Approved by: M. G. Sheldon, Sr. Game Biologist G. N. Hunter, Game Manager Date: April, 1960 F. C. Kleinnchnitz, --~~--~~------------------- AGst~ Coordinator �April, 1960 I~~llllllij'~I~'llil~imlli~iil~illl~1 rl~II[llijll -5- BDOW022395 JOB COMPLErION REPORT " t"'1 •: "., ".! ;-', ' /"\ ,.; 'j-' .' 1""\ INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT state of o ;~~_v • 4.J Colorado --------------------------------------w_-_88 __-R __-5~ Project No. Hork Plan No. 1 _ -----~--------------------- lfaterfmll Surveys and Investigations Job No.3 Title of Job: ~An~al~y~s~i~s~o~f~W~a~t~e~r~f~o~w~l~B~an~d~i=n~g~D~a~t~a~ Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 _ Objectives: To analyze the large quantity of data obtained from banding ducks and geese in Colorado, and to make this information available for use in management. Results: During this segment, current waterfowl band recovery reports of both ducks and geese were entered upon McBee punch cards. These cards were filed for later analysis, after several years' data have been gathered. The current goose band returns will be analyzed only to the extent needed for the Arkansas Valley wintering goose study and will be reported in the current report for Work Plan II, Job No.4 in July, 1960. In the past this report was deferred until late July before submission to include all waterfowl band recoveries. The current recoveries will be reported upon under the next segment report. Submi tted by: M. G. Sheldon Sr. Game Biologist Date: AEril, 1960 Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. IG.einschnitz Asst. Coordinator �April, 1960 -6JOB COMPLET ION RE peRT INVESTIGATION State. of Projec t ,No • PROJEct COLORADO. Vlaterfowl Surveys and Investigations Vl-88':"R-5 ----~.~~~------------ Work Plan No. I Job No. 4 .~~-----------------~ Ii t Le of Job ~ ~'I,nerfowl ililiqrationStudies Objectives: To determine the movement of waterfowl species into and through various portions of Colorado, during fall migration as an aid to: (1) Gather information for use in determining the best hunting season dates to choose for each a rea. (2) Gain data for use in regulating future kill by species, if this should be necessary. (3 ) Better interpret the results of waterfowl kill surveys, and thus the effect of the regulations on the kill for each area. Methods: Migration .records, by._species, were obtained during the aerial waterfowl population counts in the Arkansas River Valley. This study was run concurrently with the Arkansas Valley wintering goose f lock project. The study area included the following reservoirs and lakes: Black, Blue, Cary, Cudahy, Dyes, Henry, Holbrook, John Martin, Meredith, Rutherford, Timber, Two Buttes, the Cheraw and Eads groups of lakes. The waterfowl population flights were made at apout lO-day intervals between October 27, 1959 and January 5, 1960. Species were observed and recorded for each water area .as the duck and goose counts were made. Results: Species of ducks present on the various water areas were noted in' an effort to obtain the most accurate migration picture possible of waterfowl movements in southeast Colorado. This report will confine itself to a few brief comments about Figure 1 and the time of movement of waterfowl through the study area. Figure 1 isa graph showing the migration period for each species observed in the study area between October 27, 1959 and January 5, 1960. The length of the line denotes the period species were observed. The interval between the asterisks 'shows the heavier migration flights by species. The 1959-60 species da t a.may be erroneous after the second week of December as the duck hunting season ended December 14, 1959. The ducks then scattered throughout the.stream bottoms and were extremely difficult to count. l~ Mallards were present in substantial numbers throughout the entire study, with the larger flights occurring from the third week of November .through the second week of December. The wintering concentrations then remained more or less constant during the balance of the study. �-7Figure 1. -- I:ligration Canada Goose Rate of Waterfowl, Arkansas Valley, Colorado, 1959-60. ~~~-----------------------------------* Coot * * Merganser Buff lehead ""------~~ Goldeneye -r.. ~,,-< Scaup Canvasback Redhead *_.---)~ Shoveller Baldpate -"- Gadwall .":::"" ) ~~------* Teal ~~---* Pintail ~i_ "i>-- Mallard 4 1 _o_c_t_o_b_e_r Species 2 observed Heavy flights 3 4 N_o_v_e_ffi_b_e_r __ VJeek s ~~'---------* 1 4 3 2 D_e_c_effi_b_e_r 2 1 J.;_a_n.;_u.;_a_r.._y _ �-82. The pintail population reached a high in mid-November, then redu(~d ·substantially·the balance of November and were. absent through Decembpr and January counts. 3. The southern flights of teal had apparently started before the initiation of this years' study but some were noted until the middle of November. The shoveller migration coincided with the teal migration during the 1959-60 counts. 4. The gadwall and baldpate migrations we re under way before the first count on October 27, 1~59, with peak numbers remaining until midNovember and a few were observed until the first week of December. 5. Redheads were seen from the first aerial count through the first week of December, with the larger flights in mid-November. 6. The canvasback migration coincided with the redhead's except that a few were observed throughout the balance of the study peri.ode 7. Scaup arrived vri th the first canvasbacks and redheads but larger flights lasted two weeks longer. A few also remained throughout the balance of the counts~ 8. American goldeneye was the last migrant to arrive in the Arkansas Valley. The first were observed in mid-November increasing in numbers the balance of the month, then reduced to a stabilized winter populatioh for the rest of 'the counts. 9. A few buff leheads we observed on the first count w ith .peak populations early in November. The migration then apparently ended as none were observed the balance of the study. 10. Mergansers were recorded from mid-November throughout the entire study with heavier flights from late November to mid-December. 11. The 1959-60 migration surveys showed the coot migration to be underway by the first count but noticeably absent after mid-November. 12. A few Canada geese were observed until the second week of November when the large flights arrived in the wintering areas. Wintering goose popul at i ons of 30,000 to the peak of 54,300 {late rn ..November) were recorded with the wintering population leveling at about 35,000 during the balance of the study period. 13. No sandhill cranes were observed this year as during the 1958-59 counts. 14. Food and water conditions were considered to be good to excellent in the entire area, as they had been during the past two years of the study. Submitted Date: by: M. G. Sheldon, Appr-oved by: April, 19GO ---------~~~~~~--------- G. n. ilu:nter State Game Manecer F. C. Kleinschnitz. Asst. Coordinator" �A:prl. "1 , 19b"'O -9JOB COMPLET ION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No. w-88-R-5 Haterfowl Surveys and Investigations 1 Job No.7 ----------------------------- Hork Plan No. ------------------------- .Title of Job: Waterfowl Habitat Improvement Studies Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Objectives: To improve waterfowl habitat particularly on areas owned or controlled by the Game and Fish Department. To submit detailed habitat improvement plans for each area. Results: The activities during this segment have been confined to an advisory capacity. Meetings were attended with various agencies of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in connection with the Closed Basin Drainage plans in the San Luis Valley and the resultant loss of wetlands. Also involved were the proposed plans to establish nev waterfowl refuges to mitigate these losses. The effect of other proposed water storage projects upon ,vaterfowl habitat has also been discussed. Several meetings wer-e attended in connection with wetlands plantings under the Soil Bank. Recommendations were made relative to the better species of aquatic and emergent plants for waterfowl use in these areas. Crop planting schedules ve.re discussed at several meetings 'i-ri th the share-farmer and game manager at Two Buttes Reservoir. It was recommended that several varieties of maise be planted (some to go-down early and some to remain upright) to provide food for wintering geese. Experimental planting of field crops should be tried to provide food for the starving crippled ~eese near the Reservoir shore. In all approximately five days were spent on this job during the period April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960. Submitted by: Date: M. G. Sheldon Approved by: G. N. Hunter --~--~----~~--~~---~~~~----~-----------Sr. Game Biologist State Game Manager A~~~r_i_l~, 1~96_0 _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �.======~~~-------=-~------~------ I~illllllij' ~I~'~il~jrllI11[~fl~illl~1 rl~~lliijll BDOW022397 April; 1960 . :"10- '.: JOB COMPLEtION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of '__ ~~C~O~LO~R~A~D~O~~__ ~ Project No. Work Plan ,', _ lfl-88.•.. R-5 .' Waterfowl No. -=.1 ·; Td tle of. Job: ·Survey of Potential ~J206 0 0 1 Surveys and Investigations Job No.9 Public Waterfowl ShootinQ Areas I in Color;i,do. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Objectives: .(1) To develop a method for evaluating possible public waterfowl shooting areas in the State of Colorado. (2) To classify these areas. (3) To summarize the findings into a list of the best potential public waterfowl shooting areas for possible lease or purchase. Procedure: (1) Formulation of a form to evaluate areas for possible lease or purchase considering: .Size of the area; distance from centers of populations; water rights; the carrying capacity for waterfowl and location in regard-to shootable~waterfowl_populations; the effect of winter weather upon the area; the present and future status of the area for lease or purchase; and the additional benefits of fishing, upland game and recreation that may .be derived. (2) Classification of areas will be by field inspettion, working with .the ~'JildlifeConservation Officer in his respective district. (3) Summarize the information gathered and present a listing of the best possible areas for lease or purchase , Results: The main accomplishment of this job during 1959 was the production of a workable field form. This form was formulated from J.llany sources. It was believed necessary that the field form gather all pertinent information about ~ specific area. Conferences were held with lands managers, fisheries biologists and managers as well as game managers and conservation officers. 'All phases wer~ incorporated into early forms and condensed or eliminated by field checking untiLa workable field form evo lved , (Figure 1). 'The finalized field Fort Collins, Colorado. of wet-lands •. The field '.Snyder, Summer Assistant form was then checked on a pilot area north of The. study' area consisted of many different types' work was conducted, under supervls1on, by Warren of the ~'/aterfowlResearch Project. A total of 98 wet-lands in parts of 11 townships were evaluated. The work consisted of an on-the-ground survey to describe the area accurately upon, the' form, and contactof the landowner (s) involved to determine the possibili ties for lease or' purchase. \II.'here possible, photos were made of each area ·for further clarHication. Acreaqe s were calculated from maps or obtain,ed in some cases by contact of local residents. Landownership was obtained by· contact and from the County Assessor Of f Lce , . .' . .. �C.]Q. c, -11Before classification of these areas into a priority list for lease or purchase can be made, additional information is needed. This information will have to be gathered during seasons other than the summer period. Additional wet-land evaluations as well as evaluations of stream and river bottom areas are needed. An instruction sheet explaining the use of the field form and its terms is needed before it can be turned over to the district men. It is felt such a sheet will standardize the collection of viet-lands information in all areas. Conclusions: 1. A workable field form was evolved covering information for fish, game, land, and recreation managers in addition to the public waterfowl shooting area evaluation. 2. Ninety-eight wet-land areas in parts of 11 townships were evaluated using field forms. 3. Evaluation of additional wet-lands and stream areas as well as seasonal information on all areas are needed before p~iority ratings can be established. 4. A standardized explanation sheet needs to be formulated to gather the data using the same evaluation procedures in all areas. ) Recommendations: Further field checking of the Wetlands Habitat Evaluation form is necessary, especially on the stream bottom types. An instruction sheet is needed to explain the form and it's terms for the District Conservation Officer. This will tend to standardize the evaluation in all areas. The use of McBee punch cards should be investigated for cataloging the information of each area. Submitted by: Approved by: M. G. She Idon Sr. Game Biologist G. N. Hunter, Game iAanaaer Date: F. C. Kleinschnitz, Asst. Coordinator April, 1960 ) �Figure 1.-~:JETLANDSHABITAT EVALUATION Loc at i on 1. Area n ame 2. Date of survey T....._N; R__ Vl; S _ Observer(s) _ 3. Type of area: -Reservoir A-Estimated Lake Marsh Slough River Stream acres of water area__ Estimated acres of adjacent marginal land__ B-Type of surrounding area: Agricultural Etc. _ Grazing Rolling Flat C-Use of surrounding area 4. Ditch from, Source of water: Spring fed A-\'ihenfilled __ Ever go dry --,._ \!hen used How often B-Water av~ilable: Spring 5. Cwned now by ~ 6. ~ccess controlled by 7. _ Use of area' now: A-Recreation: Fall Stream (name ) _ Fluctuation in vertical feet Season of dry period _ _ Every year _ ~----------------------------_ Irrigation Hunting Fishing Boating Stock Private Private Private Recreation Public Public Public None None None None Leased Leased Leased ~'1aterSki__ B-Lessee and cost/year C-Hunting records available: Yes No 8. Acres of public land contained 9. Federal funds used in construction or improvement: 10. Type of waterfowl use: Ducks (show location on sketch) Yes No Geese -:-_ A-Species and numbe r seen during survey_. Number B-Ducks: days _ Spring: Species and number__________________ broods _ Summer: Species nesting Species and number days _ Fall : days _ ~'}inter : Species and numberC-Geese: Number days _ Spring: Number of geese Number broods __ Number moulting _ Summer: Number breeding-pair Date arrive Number of geese Number days _ Fall : Number days _ \"'linter:Number of geese �11. Production benefits: A-Nestin9.~over: 12. ~Jater in spring P~*-S~n.t of area Every year _ Types _ B-Brood cover: Per cent of area Escape cover Hunting benefits: Species and number using: A-Natural foods Type (s ) Type. (s) B-Distance to agricultural crops ~-------_ _ _ .C-Distance to Refuge area Name of Refuge area__ -----------D-Vlater in: Fall t'Jinter Freeze over yearly __ Time of freeze up E-Cover for blinds Number of possible blinds _ _ F-Number of hunters will accommodate at one time__ name of area of hunter supply _ ---"Distancefrom and 13. Potential for other hunting: A-Dove: Good Fair Poor None. Pheasant and Quail: Good Fair Poor None. Rabbit and squirrel: Good Fair Poor None. 14. Recreational Potential: A-Fishing: Trout \'!armINater Now Possible _ Boating: Type Now Possible _ Camping and Picnic areas: Now Possible Facilities --15. Observer's opinion of area for recreation and waterfowl use and need for public use. ------~--------16. Available for lease (long term) or purchase: 17. 18. Lease Purchase Now (term of current lease) (term of possible lease) _ Future Never (attach photo to final form) Photo: Yes No Film pack# __ Negative# __ Jlddi tional comments. 19. Sketch of area: ~--------------- �-13- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Project No",_, __ WorkPlan No. ..:.:W_.-...;83:::..-_;R_,-_6 2 ----------------------------- Title of' Job: _ Beaver Investigations Job No.1 Location of' Experimental Streams ----------------~~------------------------------~--~~~~~ Period .covered: ,Januar;y- 1, 1959 to December 31, 1959. Objectives: . To locate streams having habitat suitable f'or beaver occupancy (present status of' heaver population immaterial), and accessibility suitable f'or .LntiensLve management-practices, which can be used as additional study areas f'or Job No.5, ..Experimental Harvest Si;:tldies. ,Procedure: Reconnaissance trips were made to a number of streams which had been indicated by 'Wildlife c:onservation Officers and Forest Rangers to have suitable beaver habitat and to be reasonably accessible. Techniques developed under Work Plan No.7 f'or determining suitability of the physical environment were applied in evaluating these streams, both as beaver habitat in general, and as -possible additional pilot areas for WorkPlan 2, Job No.5, Experimental Harvest Studies. Findings I O.fthe streams -which were evaluated during the :current segment, six were found -to be suitable as beaver habitat, and to meet the additional requirements of ease of' accessibility and habitat' .corrt ro L needed for "pilot area" streams. These six streams will be added to the ,original pilot areas, making a total of' 13 streams on 'which experimental harvest studies -will be conducted. Table 1, follOwing, -presents the data on environmental six streams: characteristics of these �l_ (~~j~?~. -14Table 1 """c, t. jl Environmental Characteristics of 6 8tudy Areas Located During 1959.·, Stream County Legal Description Valley Width Gradient Jakes Creek Saguache 819,29,30, T45N,R4E, 825,T45N, R3E,N.Mex :PM 1.5 ch . 2-4% basalt Major Food . Species aspen Middle Fork Swan River Summit 825,T68,R77W S21,28,29,30, T68,R76w,6PM 3.5 ch. 3-6% granite willow North Fork Michigan River Jackson 821,23,24, 25,26,27,28, T7N,R77W,6PM 2.0 ch. 3-6% granite willow :Pass Creek Grand 81,12,13, T4N,R78w 86,7,18, T4N,R77W,6PM 1. 5 ch . 3-7% sandstone, schist willow Four-Mile Creek :Park 818,T108, R77W· 83,4, 7,8,9,10,11, 12,13,24, T10S,R78w,6PM 2.0 ch. 3-8% granite aspenwillow mixed 83,4,7,8,9, T7S,R75W,6PM 2.5 ch. Beaver Creek Park Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Date: Approved by: April, 1960 --------~~~~~---------------- 3-8% Rock ,Type granite , ' <, ./ l aspenwillow mixed Gilbert N. Hunter --~~~~--~~------------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �COLO DIV WILDLIFE RESEARCH CTR LIB 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022399 -15'" April, 1960 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State o~ Colorado --~----~----~-----------------Project No. W-83-R-6 ----~--~~~----------------,Work Plan No. 2 ~--------------------------- Title o~ Job: Experimental Harvest Stud.ies Period Covered: Calendar Year, 1959 Beaver Investigations Job No.5 Objectives: To determine the optimum number of beavers that can be harvested according to habitat quality in order to maintain beaver colonies in balance with growth of food plants. ,Procedure: Additional habitat appraisal and census work'will be done on 7 experimental streams which have already been set up as study areas for this job. Techniques developed under Work Plans 5, 6, and 7, for determining carrying capacity, censusing beavers, and determining habitat suitability will be applied to any streams which are located under Job No.1 of this Work Plan. It is planned that Regional ']fur'Managers'andWildlife'Conservation Officerswil1be'responsible for carrying out the actual surveys, with Federal Aid Personnel cooperating in all phases. Information will be recorded on forms and maps, and will be available to the Federal Aid Division, Department Regional personnel, and the Forest Service. Control of beaver populations on these streams, t. e., trapping or restocking, will be based on the recommendations submitted to the Game and Fish Department by project personnel. ,Findings: During the summer of 1959, habitat appraisal and carrying capacity deter •• minations were completed on five of the six additional streams which were located under Job No.1. In the fall of 1959, beaver census and management recommendations were again made for the seven original study areas, and were also made for the five new areas .. There is.now a total of 12 streams on which experimental management and harvest'studies are being conducted. Table 1 presents all data on habitat and beaver populations on the five new study areas, and Table 2 presents the 1959 census data for the original seven streams. Habitat eVaIuation data for these seven streams are given in the Quarterly Report for January, 1959. In all cases, the Wildlife Conservation Officers responsible for carrying out the evaluation and management work on study areas located in their districts accompanied project personnel on trips to the study areas. In one case (the evaluation work on the two streams in Park County) the trip was set up as a field training session, with Wi'ldlife Conservation Officers from other districts in attendance. This system worked so well that it is proposed to hold more of these field training sessions during the summer of 1960. Again, as in 1958, aerial photographs were extremely helpful in determining distances and areas of features which must be measured. Appreciation is expressed to the U.S. Forest Service, through the Supervisors of the various Forests on which the studyareae .are located, for the use'of aerial photographs by project personnel. �A t--', ,cr ,.t~;.t~.L~J~ -16Table 1 -- Beaver Habitat and Populations North Item Fork Michigan River Area of aspen None Stand condition on 5 Pilot Streams, Fall, 1959· Beaver Middle Pass FourCreek Fork Creek mile Creek Swan River 24.8 A. 13.1 A. None None Ave. Ave. Area of willow Stand condition 112 A. 40.8 A. Ave. 27 A. Ave. 96 A. Ave. 38.4 A. Ave. Competition Light None None Light None Gross carrying capacity: colonies beavers 6 24 10 21- 2 8 9 36 4 16 Deduction for competition 10% 0 0 10% 0 Net carrying capacityY colonies beavers 5 21 10 21- 2 8 8 32 4 16 Census (fall, 1959)?) colonies beavers 1 4 2 6 3 10 4 13 . 6 19 .'\ .-' , 'r Ave. - <, \r Y Based on an arbitrary average of 4 beavers per colony. ~/ The number of beavers recorded in census is the number which, in the oplnlon of the investigators, were actually present, rather than an arbitrary assignment of an average number per colony. Table 2 -- Beaver Carrying Capacity and Census on 7 Pilot Streams, Fall, 1959. Stream Big Willow Cr-eek' Net Carrying CapacityY colonies beavers Census?) colonies beavers 8 32 5 14 Two-bit Creek 13 50 16 44 Squaw Creek 12 48 1 4 Cebolla Creek 6 26 8 34 Henderson Creek 4 14 3 10 Oak Creek 8 32 3 12 Castle Creek 3 12 4 16 !/ Based on an arbitrary average of 4 beavers per colony. ~ ) ./ gj The number of beavers recorded in census is the number which, in the oplnlon of the investigators, were actually present, rather than an arbitrary assignment of an average number per colony. �... 17Management Recommendations: Big Willow Creek; Live-trapped beavers were released on this stream during 1959, and the population has now begun to build up again. Carrying capacity determinations should be repeated when the population reaches a level approaching the present carrying capacity. Two-bit Creek: The population increase on this stream since the 1958 census has been considerable, almost enough to bring the population up to carrying capacity. Cropping and re-det.ermination of carrying capacity should be done during 1961. Squaw Creek r This stream is unique in being the only stream in the series which had no beaver population present at the beginning o~ the study. The beavers which were released during 1958 succeeded in establishing only one colony. It is recommended that further releases be made from time to time in an attempt to establish 3 or 4 active colonies. Re-determination of carrying capacity should not have to be done until a good population becomes ~irmly established. Cebolla Creek; Again, as in 1958, this stream was ~ound to have a beaver population in excess of carrying capacity. It is recommended that further cropping be done during the spring of 1960. Re-determination of carrying capacity should be done in 1961. Henderson Creek: This stream was extremely deficient in water during 1959, and the population o~ 3 colonies present during the fall was about maximum for the meager amount of water. It is recommended that re-determination of carrying capacity be made in 1961, with more consideration being given to the lack of water. Oak Creek: The beaver :population on this stream has increased through natural build-up, without having t.obe supplemented by transplanting, after suffering a heavy die .... off. Recommendations are to let natural build-up continue, census annually, and re-determine carrying capacity when a good population becomes established once more. Castle Creek: The Wildlife Conservation Officer in charge of this study area has held the beaver population at the indicated carrying capacity since the study began. The annual cropping was done again this year. Annual census, cropping if needed, and re-determination of carrying capacity in 1961 are recommended. North Fork of Michigan River: This stream suffered a heavy die-off of beavers. It is believed, however, that the residual population is large enough that transplanting should not have to be done. Recommendations are to let natural build-up occur, census annually, and re-determine carrying capacity when a good population becomes established once more. �-18Middle Fork of Swan River! A considerable part .of the beaver population once present on this stream ·drifted away after many of the dams were breached by high water. Transplanting may be necessary to bring the population up again, and re-determination of carrying capacity should be made again when the pop\.llationapproaches the present indicated carrying capacity. Pass Creek: This stream should not be allowed to have a beaver population in excess of carrying capacity because of the small amount of habi tat present. Recommendat.ions are annual census, cropping when needed, and re-determination of carrying capacity in 1962. Four-Mile This stream has a good beaver population, although well under the carrying capacity. :Annual fall census is in order, with cropping in the event the population increases beyond carrying capacity. Re-determination of carrying capacity should be done in 1962. Creek: Beaver Creek: Prepared Date: by: This stream offers good beaver habitat .and good fishing, and it should be kept that way. It was found to have a beaver population in excess of carrying capacity, and the Wildlife Conservation Officer in charge planned to crop in the spring of 1960. Annual census, cropping, and re-determination of carrying capacity in 1962 are recommended. W_i_l_l_i.;_am __ H_._R.;_u_t_h..;_e.;:_r_f'..;_o.;:_r_:.:d Approved by: _--=G-:-i_lb-:--e_r-=:t.......;N_. ~H"""un_t_e_r_ State Game Manager April, 1960 F. C. Kleinshcnitz Asst. Coordinator -----------~--~--~-------------------- �-19~OBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State 'of Colorado, ~------~------~----------------- Project No. W.orkPlan No. W_'-_'8.;::3_'-'_R_-6 _ 3~ _ Beaver Investigations •• ,.' Job No.2 , 'Title I. , , o~ Job::__~E~m~~~r~y~o~C~o~un~t~s~~~r~o~m~Pr~e~g~n~an __ t~B~e~a~v_e~r_s 'Period Covered: Calendar Year, ~ _ 1959 ',Abstract: 1. Reproduction data were collected during April, May, and June, 1959, from 32 ~emale beavers examined by proj.ect personnel, and from 271 female beavers examined by Department .f'Le Ld personnel. The two sets of' data are presented separately in tabular form as Tables 1 through 10. 2. Estimated ages o~ beavers collected by project personnel were again based on the arbitrary carcass -weight classes which have previously been established. Estimated ages of beavers collected by Department field personnel were based on iP.:dividual obseJ:"va~i?~"by_ these men. , . .. , 3. The sample collected from the San Luis Valley by project personnel showed a population increase considerably lower than last year's sample from the same area, ,but within the range found for similar elevations during previous years. Pregnancy rates, number of mature animals, and average number of embryos were also lower than iast year's, but about the same as those of previous yeaTs. The implication is that last year's sample was not typical, and should probably be discounted in the overall interpretation. 4. If it is true, as assumed from the interpretation of last year's data, that a shift .in population composition existed then, it appears that this shift has had only temporary effect and that populations have now returned to normal.. 5. The productivity data collected by D.epartment .f'Le Ld personnel exhibit so much variatiCln, and presumably "personal bias, that they are incapable of statistical analysis. In .some cases they conform fairly well to the expected range in values, and in' other cases they are widely divergent. They are interpreted with this in mind., 6. It Ls felt that this job has now supplied enough datia that values and trends can be 'easily recognized, and that there is no point in adding further data. It is recommendedthat this job be dropped in future segments of' the proj,ect. Objectives: To.determiile the reporductive rate of beavers in Colorado. Procedure: Collect reproductive tracts from female beavers taken by state trappers in as many areas of the state as possible. Record and compile pregnancy and reproduction data for all samples collected. Sample the catch by trappers as to age-sex composition. Allalyze' (statistically if possible) and interpret these data to determine repnoductive rates of beavers under, varying habitat conditions. ��-2l!- Embryo Counts from Pregnant Beavers William Rutherford In 1959, this job was broken into two parts in order to expedite the collection of data. The customary trapping by project personnel was done in order to secure additional data to add to that already on hand from previous years. In'addition, a form (see Fig. 1) was prepared for distribution to Trappers and Wildlife Conservation Officers. It has long been felt that the sample obtained each spring by project personnel is inadeq_uate for statistical analysis, and that the addition of data collected by Department field personnel might mean the difference between whether statistical analysis can or cannot be made. Accordingly, the aid of the:se men was enlisted in the collection of data. As is so often .the case with data collected by a number of different individuals, the data referred to above are not capable of being statistically analyzed. A considerable amount of time was spent in breaking down the data in a number of different ways in an attempt to isolate the factors which make one man's data not comparable with another man's. Bias of different types and varying degree -was found all through the data, to the extent that it was decided to interpret .on the same basis as the statistically inadeq_uate samples of previous years. Reproduction data were gathered from 32 female beavers taken during April and May, 1959, by project per sonne Lj and from 271 female beavers taken during April, May, and June, 1959, by Department Trappers and Wildlife Conservation Officers. The collections made by project p,ersonnel this year were from the San Luis Valley at altitudes of 8,000 to 10,000 feet. The collections made by Department field personnel came from various areas of the state -which had received insufficient coverage by project personnel in previous years. Table 1 presents the information gained from all samples from above 5,000 feet examfned by project personnel to date. Table 2 presents the data on age composition and sex ratio of the 1959 spring catch examined by project personnel. Tables 3, 5, 7, and 9 present the information, by administrative Region, gained from the samples examined by Trappers and Wildlife Conservation Officers during the spring of 1959. Tables 4, 6, 8, and 10 present the data on age composition and sex ratia:s of the 1959 spring catch examined by these field men. �-22- FigUre 1 BEAVER ~RODDCTIVITY DATA Colorado Game & Fish Department Record all beavers caught .during spring trapping, regardless of age or sex. Use one line for each beaver. Use check or X marks in appropriate boxes. If female has already given birth (lactating), record the number of placental scars on the uterus. Date , Stream Food Supply (aspen, willow, or mixed) Sex Estimated age Mature females only Number of Non- Preg- Lacpreg- nant tating embryos 0r placental nant scars , , ' , , , , ' .. WCO O.r Trapper _ �-23Table 1 -- Reproduction Data from 391 Female Beavers Taken During Spring Trapping at Altitudes Above 5,000 Feet. 1954, 1955, 1959 Totals above for 1956, 1957 Item 5,000 above and 1958 5,000 above 5,000 feet feet feet Total number of females 32 391 359 Estimated ages of females: I 18 Mature (carcass wt. 30 lb. or more) 174 156 8 Two years (carcass wt. 19-29 lb.) 145 137 One year (carcass wt. 10-181b;) 66 6 72 86 No. of definitely pregnant females 11 97 Percent of definitely pregnant females 24% 34% 25% 2 No. of post-partum females 37 39 Percent of all females definitely pregnant or post-partum 34% 35% Percent of mature females definitely pregnant or post-partum 78% 79% Number of pqssibly pregnant females 16 17 Percent of definitely pregnant, plus postpartum, plus possibly pregnant females 40% 44% 39% Number of embryos in all definitely preg244 224 20 nant females Number of placental scars in post-partum 104 100 4 females Average number of embryos (pregnant and 2.6 1.8 2.6 post-partum females) Number of embryos in pregnant females with data .on corpora lutea 2.18 20 238 Number of corpora lutea in definitely 26 pregnant females 292 266 Number of corpora lutea in post-partum females 130 125 5 Number of corpora lutea in definitely 422 pregnant plus post-partum females 31 391 Resorption rate (definitely pregnant plus post-partum females) 17% 23% Rate .of population increase, assuming 100:100 sex ratio 45% 37-~% Table 2 •....• Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch, 1959. Mature 22 Males 2 yrs. 1 year 8 9 Total 39 Sex Ratto (number of males: 100 females) 122. Mature 18 Females 1 year 2 yrs. 8 6 Total 32 �-2~Table 3 -.•. Reppoduction Data from 101 Female Beavers Taken by Northwest Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959. Eagle Frying Pan, Yampa Total and River Roaring White Fork, and Item Crystal R. River Total number of females .Estimated ages of females! Mature Two years old One year old Number of definitely pregnant females Percent of definitely ~regnant females Number of post-partum females Percent .0£ all females definitely pregnant or post-partum Percent of mature females·definitely pregnant or post-partum Number of embryos in all definitely pregnant females Number of plac-ental scars in post-partum females Average number of embryos (pregnant plus post-partum females) Ratie of population increase, assuming 100:100 sex ratio Table Mature 44 28 26 47 101 19 3 6 15 6 5 23 13 11 57 22 22 10 7 15 32 36% 2 27% '0 32% 4 32% 6 43% 27% 40% 38% 63% 47% 83% 67% 24 18 47 89 6 0 7 13 2·5 2.6 3.6 2·7 54% 35~ 57~ 50~ 4 =-- Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch by Northwest Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959. Males 2 years 1 year 27 Females Total 25 Sex Ratio (number of males 1100 females) 95. Mature 2 years 1 year Total 57 22 22 101 �-25Table 5 -- Reproduction Data from 121 Female Beavers Taken by Southwest Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959· North Total San Gunnison San River Juan Fork Luis Item Valley Drainage Basin Gunnison River Total number of females Estimated ages of females= Mature Two years old One year old Number of definitely pregnant females Percent of definitely pregnant females Number of post-partum females Percent o£ all females .definitely pregnant or post-partum Percent of mature females definitely pregnant or post-partum Number of embryos in all definitely pregnant females Numbe:r of placental scars in post-partum females Average number of embryos (pregnant plus postpartum females) Rate of population increase, assuming 100:100 sex ratio 43 121 28 13 .72 4 24 o 34 6 6 15 11 12 18 10 51 1 o 5 1 22 18 38 15 16 2 3 4 4810 5910 43 37 59 23 3 o 12 2 3.1 2·3 10510 3·1 7510 10310 Table 6 -- Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch by Southwest Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959. Mature 51 Males 2 years 1 year 33 30 Total Mature 114 72 Sex Ratio (number of males=lOO females) 94. Females 2 years 1 year 34 15 ·Total 121 �-26Repti:'oduction Data from 36 Female Beavers Taken by Northeast Tables 7 and 9 ,;;.Region Field Personnel, and from 13 Female Beavers Taken by . Southeast Region Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959. Table 7 Table 9 Northeast Southeast Item Region Region Total number of females 36 13 Estimated ages of females: 8 Mature 19 1 11 Two years old 4 6 One year old 6 11 Number of definitely pregnant females Percent of definitely pregnant females 46% 31% .0 Number of post-partum females 5 Percent of all females defini t.eLy pregnant .o.rpost-partum 46% 44% Percent of mature .females definitely 'Pregnant or 'Post-partum 84% 75% Number of embryos in all definitely 'Preg..• 41 18 nant females Number of placental scars in post-partum 0 females 23 Average number of embryos (pregnant 'Plus 4.0 post ... partum females) 3·0 Rate of population increase, assuming 100:100 sex ratio 89% 69% Table 8 - Mature 13 Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch by Northeast Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959 Males 2 years 1 year 20 8 Total Mature 41 19 Females 1 year 2 years Total 6 11 Sex Ratio (number of males:100 females) 114. Table 10 -'-Age Composition and Sex Ratios of Beaver Catch by Southeast Region Field Personnel, Spring, 1959. Mature 8 Males 2 years 1 year 2 3 Total Mature 13 8 Sex Ratio (number of males:100 females) 100. Females 2 years 1 year 1 4 Total 13 �-27The estimated ages of the beavers shown in Tables 1 and 2, as in previous years, were again based on arbitrary carcass weight classes of 10-18 pounds for yearlings, 19-29 pounds for 2-year-olds, and 30 pounds and up for mature animals. The estimated ages of the beavers shown in the succeeding tables are the ages assigned by the trappers who took the animals, and are based on individual observation. There may be some error here; its possible influence on the accuracy of the data will be discussed later. The two sets of data collected this year will be discussed separately and, insofar as possible, will be compared. The discussion and interpretation of data collected by project personnel is presented immediately following: The sample size this year is amal1, but within this limitation a direct comparison with last yearts sample can be made because both samples were taken from the same general area and because last yearts sample is also small. The pregnancy rate based on all females in the catch was slightly higher than the average of the previous 5 years, but was lower than last yearts rate. The pregnancy rate based on mature females only was lower than the 5-year average and considerably lower than last yearts rate. Thd:s suggests that the unusually high pregnancy rate determined in 1958 was atypical, and that this yearts rates are more in line with what should be expected. Again, as in 1958, males outnumbered females in the catch (Table 2). These San Luis Valley samples, from much the same areas, are unique in that they are the only ones so far which show a preponderance of males. The small samples involved are not considered to be indicative; therefore, a sex ratio of 100:100 will continue to be used as the basis for calculating annual population increase. The average number of embryos per pregnant or post-partum female in this yearts sample was 1.8, as compared with an average of 2.8 in last year ts sample, and an average of 2.3 for similar elevations in the Gunnison River drainage (see Colorado Quarterly Report, January, 1959). The rat.e of resorption of embryos in this year ts sample was 23 percent, compared with 26 percent in the 1958 sample and 24 percent in the Gunnison sample. These resorption rates are all considerably higher than the 15 percent calculated for northern Colorado. It appears that last yearts reproduction data (high average number of embryos coupled with high rate of embryo resorption) were not typical, and that the 1959 data are actually more indicative of the true population status. The rate .of population increase, as calculated from this year ts sample, was 3T~ percent, compared with a rate of 56 percent for the 1958 sample, 28 percent for the Gunnison sample, and 42 percent for the Northern Colorado sample. The discussion and interpretation orf data collected by Department field personnel, by administrative Region, follows: Northwest Region (Tables 3 and 4) The pregnancy rates, based both on all females in the catch and on mature females only, are about the same as those .determined previously for the northern part of the state, with one notable exception. In the Roaring Fork-Crystal River drainage they were very much lower, which suggests the possibility that .many beavers listed as mature, non-pregnant were actually immature 2-year-01ds, and that these beavers made up a relatively large part of the catch. These low pregnancy rabes are re.•.• ..; flected in a fairly low calculated rate .of population increase (35%). �.A n ... ';;,;_. -2$The average number of embryos per pregnant female are about the same as those found in previous years by project personnel, with one exception. In the YampaWhite River drainage, the number was 3.6, cOnsiderably higher than the expected number. This could be due to chance, or to personal selectivity in the sample. No other explanation can be made. No data on corpora lutea were collected, therefore, it is not possible to calculate rates of embryo resorption. The sex ratio of the catch was 95:100, which is practically the same as the even ratio used in calculating rate of population increase. With the exception of the low rate cited above for the Roaring Fork-Crystal River drainage, rates of population increase were found to be slightly higher than those of samples taken by project personnel. Southwest Region (Tables 5 and 6) The pregnancy rates, based on all females in the catch, were somewhat higher than expected, with the exception of the North Fork of the Gunnison sample. The pregnancy rate of this sample was very low. This particular instance is explained by the fact that the sample consisted of a very large number of immature animals taken from irrigation ditches during June. The higher than normal rates for all the other samples may be due to personal selectivity, especially since the pregnancy rates based on mature females only, including the sample from the North Fork of the Gunnison, are considerably higher than expected. The average numbers of embryos per pregnant female vary greatly by location, with the San Luis Valley sample being much higher than expected, and the North Fork of the Gunnison sample somewhat lower. The others are slightly higher than the expected averages. At least part of the disc~epancy is due to the chances inherent in trapping. The project leader had opportunity to examine a large part of the catch taken by field personnel in the San Luis Valley, and was satisfied that the data were accurate. For example, several female beavers carrying 4 fetuses each, and one carrying 5, were taken by these men. The catch taken by project personnel in the same areas consisted of females carrying 1 or 2, and only one female carry~ ing 3, fetuses. j]:t~ishighly possible that these two samples represent two extremes. It is notable that the average number of embryos from females taken in 1958 from the San Luis Valley was an exact median between the two 1959 samples. The calculated rates of population increase for most of these samples are excessively high, due to the high pregnancy rates coupled with high average numb~r of embryoa.; The exception again is the.North Fork of the Gunnison sample, Mowing a very low rate of population increase for reasons directly opposite to those of the other samples. The sex ratio of the Southwest Region catch was 94:100, very close to the 100:100 ratio used in calculating rate of population increase. Northeast Region (Tables 7 and 8) The sample from the Northeast Region is from North Park only, and is not broken down further. Therefore, only one set of data is presented. The pregnancy rate based on all females in the catch is about the same as that found in other areas of the state, but the rate based on mature females only is considerably higher. There may have been some personal selectivity in this sample, or possibly some improper assignment of age classes. �-29The average number of embryos per pregnant female in this sample is the highest of any sample thus far collected from above 5,000 feet elevation, either by project personnel or by Department field personnel. This discrepancy cannot be explained other than to offer the possibility that trapper selectivity is exhibited. The calculated rate of population increase is much higher than expected, due primarily t.o the exceedingly high average number of embryos. The sex rat.io of the North Park catch was 114: 100, showing a preponderance of males, while North Park samples from previous years showed a preponderance of females. This difference is probably due t.o the chances inherent in the sampling method. Southeast Region (:'l'ables 9 and 10) The sample from the Southeast Region is so small that .Lt cannot be compared on the same basis as the other samples. The animals in the catch came from the upper Arkansas, Apishapa, and Purgatoire Rivers. The data presented in Tables 9 and 10 will not be discussed, but will simply be offered as tabular data. Recommendations: In spite 'of the ~ollection of a great deal of additional data from sources other than project personnel, it is felt that few significant additions which would help in interpreting beaver :population status .and trends were made. The mass of data now at hand seems to be sufficient for gross recognition of productivity trends, and unsuitable for statistical interpretation. Accordingly, it is recommended that this job be dropped in future segments of the project. AcknC!lwledgements: For assistance in the collection of this information, appreciation is extended to the 4 Regional Game and Fish Managers, their respective staffs, and especially to Wildlife Conservation Officers, E. F. Cochran, William Go 0 sman, Clarence Gore, )Don Gope, Millard Graham, Philip Hawker, Lloyd Hazzard, Harold Hood, James Houston, C. A. Hurd, Don Lengel, Richard McDonald, Alfred Orlosky, Charles Roberts, W. G. Schultz, Marvin Smith, Robert Terrell, K[enneth Wagner, Herman Wilson, and Keith Wilson; and to Trappers, Tom Barnes, John Betz, Lyman Curtis, and Lester Evans. Prepared by: __ W_i_;l.:;.l_;i.:;.am.;:::_.::H_;.~R;.:.;u:..:.t.::h:..:.e..::.r..::.f..:.o..::.r.:: __ Approved by r , Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Date: April, 1960 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ---------~~~~~~--------------- ��l." April, , 1960 JOB COMPLEl'ION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS l'ROJECTS State Project of' . Colorado ------------------~------------No• w_.-_8.;::3_-,;;.;R_-6 _ Beaver Investigations Work Plan Nq. 6 ---------------------------- Ti tIe of' .Tobt Aerial Beaver Colony Counts --~~~~~~~~~~~~~---------~~~-------- Period Covered: .Calendar Year, Job No.7 1959 Abstract: 1. The aerial beaver colony trend connts on .routes established in 1955 were again f'lown'this yero: ,to C'ontinue the 'collection of aerial trend data. Infor" mation recorded for each route :consisted of the rrumber of fresh beaver food caches, plus Lncf.derrba.L. information on beaver activity. 2. All trend .routes were i'lown and conrp.Letied , but .counting .condt+Lons -were not ideal. The Taylor River count is believed +o be in error on this account. . 3. . Data .r-ecor-ded are presented in Table 1, and compared with 1958 data. 4. The trend in beaver populations is up for the second consecutive year, after a period of low populations and decreasing" harves t . A leveling ..off in another year or two is pr-edf.cbed . . 5. It is .recommended that aerial trend count information and techniques be turned over to management, and that the two forks of the White River be dropped from the list of routes. . Objectives: To continue the year-to-year routes previously established, as a basis numbers. . 'aerial beaver colony count s over the for estimating the annual trend in beaver Procedure: ':Cheaerial trend routes -which were established in 1955 were flown this year for the fifth time, to continue the collection .of' aerial beaver colony trend count data. 'J:'heflying this Year -was done by Department pilot R. W. Betts in a Cessna 175 plane, with William Rutherford as observer. The plane was flown between 300 and',l,OOO feet :above the .streams, depending :on t,opography, at an air speed of 90-100 miles per hour. Data were recorded on standardized forms. �-32Table 1 -- Aerial Beaver Colony Counts on Sample Stream Sections, 1958 and 1959· Route 'Percent miles of in1958 1959 colonies miles colonies miles Stream crease or per per decrease colony colony Big Grizzly Cr. & N.Platte R. 21 19 1.95 37 Jack Creek and :+ 84.6 1.40 24 Illinois R. 13 2·57 33~ 1.48 Laramie River 21 1.63 31 19 9·5 8 4.44 Blue River 20 +150.0 1. 77 35~ Williams Fork River 10 1.90 6.33 19 +233·3 3 Troublesome Cr. 20 12 18 1.11 + 50.0 1.67 Big Muddy Cr. 24 12 1.25 - 50.0 30 2·50 Rio Grande 4 4.17 +125·0 37~ 9·37 9 South Fork of 8 Rio Grande 4.08 1.53 12t - 62·5 3 San Juan River 4 1.86 11 20~ +175·0 5·12 Los Pinos River 4 1.00 +225·0 13 13 3·25 Bear and Yampa 86 Rivers 19 15 + 26·7 5·73 White River 26 +100.0 4 2 13·00 South Fork of White River 4 0.0 4 15 3·75 3·75 1.62 Cochetopa Cr. 21 1.36 34 25 + 19·0 2.21 Tomichi Creek 11 3.41 + 54.5 17 37~ Slate Creek and 8 8 East River 0.0 30 3·75 3·75 1SJi-2 Taylor River 6 1.23 60.0 15 3·08 W. Mancos R. 6 8 14 1. 75 2·33 + 33·3 44l 10 2.62 Dolores River 4.45 + 70.0 17 2 South Fork of 10 S. Platte R. 11 + 10.0 3·00 3·30 33 Michigan Creek 12 20 0.45 + 66.7 0·75 9 Jefferson Creek 2.00 10 + 40.0 1.43 5 7 Arkansas River 14 1.36 12 1.58 19 - 14·3 QEagle River 8 0.89 0.78 + 14·3 7 TOTALS 250 326 2.08 + 30.4 All 1959 flights were completed, unlike the flights of two years ago when weather conditions forced the termination of flying before completion. However, the .;.: excellent flying conditions of last year were not encountered, and in order to complete the trends it was necessary t.otake odd days and half-days spread out over a considerable period of time to coincide with airplane availability and breaks in the weather. As a result, snow and cover conditions were not the same throughout the time of flying, and added care on the part of the observer was necessary. However, on only one trend route, as explained later, was it felt that these conditions affected the accuracy of the counts. ) �-33The most important information recorded for each route was the number of fresh food caches, since the:se are used as the criterion for colony centers. Other incidental .information on beaver activity was also recorded. Findings: Total stream miles covered was 978, on which 326 beaver colonies were recorded. The data are summarized by individual streams and compared with 1958 data in Table 1. The trend counts show, for the second consecutive year, a general statewide increase in beaver populations. The low point, indicated in 1957, was attributed to the combined effects of epizootic tularemia and habitat disruption by spring flood waters. Recovery from these effects seems to be complete, and populations' are rapidly building up again. The combined landowner - Game and Fish Dept. beaver harvest in 1956 was 9,297; in 1957 it was 6,253; and in 1958 it was 5,088. Figures for 1959 have not been compiled yet. These figures give some insight .into the factors responsible for the trends. Thus, harvest understandably went down as beaver populations decreased. Then, as populations began to build up once again, the harvest continued to decrease as fewer landowners were interested in trapping, and landowner complaints to the Department had not yet built up to the level of former years. It would seem that this trend should begin to level itself in another year or two, and annual harvest should again approach the 9,000 mark. Most of the trend routes which show a decrease in beaver colony numbers in 1959 are on streams which received individual attention by Wildlife Conservation Officers during the spring trapping season in.an attempt to mitigate specific landowner complaints. The one exception to this is the upper Taylor River, where it is believed that the trend count was in error. This was one of the group of streams not flown until late in the season, when a pronounced snow cover existed. In most cases, this was not a severe handicap; extra alertness on the part .of the observer in picking out food .ca.ches,and sometimes a second pass by the airplane, was required to assure an accurate count. However, at the time the Taylor River was· flown, it was done so in the face of an impending snow squall. The air was rough, and the pilot was unable to put the plane close enough to the grormd to assure a good count. It was a matter of flying the route and getting out as quickly as pOSSible, with no opportunity to repeat the flight under better conditions. Had better conditions been encountered, it is almost a certainty that a greater number of beaver food caches would have been observed. Recommendations! There are now enough data at hand to establish reliable beaver population trend bases, and routes are well enough standardized, that this job is not longer experimental in nature. It is recommended that all techniques and information be turned over to management personnel for continuance as a highly desirable beaver management aid. It is also recommended that the trend routes on the White River and the South Fork of the White River be dropped. The count has conSistently been so low that it is felt that the trend in population has little meaning when compared with the counts from other routes. Prepared by: Willi.am H. Rutherford Date: April, 1960 -------------~---~---~--------------------------- Approved by: Gilbe.rt N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��A ril, 1960 1fO -35JOB OOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State· of' Colorado ------~~--~~-------------------- Project No. w-83-R-6 Work "Plan No . 6 ------------------------------ Title cifJob: Reaver Investigations Job No.8 Refinement of Census Techniq_ues Period C:overed: Calendar Year, 1959 Objectives: To determine the number of beavers occupying winter colonies. Procedure: Census techniq_ues have been perfected to the point where rapid and highly accurate counts of beaver population indices (primarily the fall food cache) can be made. The resultant figures are the number of individual wintering beaver colonies- occupying the streams-which have-been censused;------------In order to provide management with useful techniq_ues for determining proper beaver harvest, it .is necessary to go one step further with cenSUSj namely, the development of a means of determining the number of beavers present in individual colonies and the approximate total number of beavers living on a .stream or watershed. With this goal in mind, project personnel have collected data from certain beaver colonies over the state, by live- and steel-trapping dur-ing the fall after beavers have concentrated in colony centers for the coming winter. To ,date, the only sources of such data have been trapping operations carried out by, or under the control of, project personnel. Any time that reliable data can be ,secured from state or private trappers, such data will be includedj thus far, however, these trappers have not concentrated upon the removal of entire colonies, which is absolutely necessary for reliable data . .Since studies over the past .six years have shown conclusively that the number of embryos per pregnant female beaver, and conseq_uentljy: the rate of productivity, . varies according to altitude and habitat q_uality, it is reasonable to assume that the average number of beavers per winter colony will also vary in this manner. It is, therefore, necessary to collect data on the number of beavers per colony f'rom. each major habitat j;ry;pe and altitudinal zone, in order to arrive at any differences which may exist. . It is recognized .that a comparatively large sample will be .necessary for analysis. The.exisi;;ingsample is inadeq_uatej therefore, the data will be presented as such. Tables Lvand 2, .immediately following, present the accumulated data, to date, on numbers of beavers in various colonies located in aspen and willow habitats, respectively. �.~ ;0~ ~u... ., -36Findings: Table 1 _.Numerical Composition of 18 Beaver Colonies in Aspen Habitat. Trapping Altitude, Year Number Stream feet, trapped history of estimated Beavers N. Platte River untrapped 9,000 10 1955 N. Platte River untrapped 9,000 1955 7 N. Platte River untrapped 8 9,000 1955 N. Platte River untrapped 9,000 1955 3 N. Platte River untrapped 11 9,000 1955 N. Platte River untrapped 9,000 1955 7 Spanish Creek 4 8,500 cropped, 1956 1958 Spanish Creek 8,600 cropped, 1956 2 1958 Elkhorn Gulch 4 cropped, 1956 9,500 1958 Los Pinos Creek cropped, 1956 9,500 1958 5 4 Trail Creek 8,600 cropped, 1956 1959 Pinos Creek untrapped 4 9,000 1959 Burro Creek untrapped 9,500 1959 5 Burro Greek untrapped 2 9,500 1959 Bennett Creek 4 8,500 cropped, 1957 1959 Shaw Creek cropped, 1957 8,500 1959 5 Alder Creek 4 8,600 cropped, 1956 1959 Clover Creek 8,600 cropped, 1956 1959 3 Average number of beavers per colony: 5·1 Table 2 -- Numerical Composition of 19 Beaver Colonies in Willow Habitat. Altitude, Year Number Trapping feet, trapped Stream history of estimated Beavers Williams Fork R. untrapped 9,000 7 Williams Fork R. 8,800 trapped previous 4 year, new colony. Lost Creek untrapped 4 9.,000 1954 Lost Creek untrapped 9,000 1954 7 Lost Creek untrapped 9,000 6 1954 Nutras Creek 10,500 untrapped 1955 3 Nutras Creek 10,500 untrapped 1955 5 Nutras Creek 10,500 untrapped 1955 9 Little Muddy Creek untrapped 8,500 4 1956 E. Troublesome Creek 9,000 untrapped 6 1956 E. Troublesome Creek 9,000 untrapped 1956 3 Lost Creek trapped clean, 4 9,000 1958 mated pair released, 1955. Los Pinos Creek 9,500 1958 cropped, 1956 6 v.TillowCreek 8,500 1959 untrapped 4 Willow Creek 8,200 2 1959 cropped, 1956 Buf'f'a.Lo Creek 8,200 4 1959 cropped, 1956 Buffalo Creek 8,200 1959 cropped, 1956 3 Blacktail Creek 8,500 4 1959 untrapped La Garita Creek 8,200 2 1959 cropped, 1957 Average number of beavers per colony: 4.6 Prepared by: Date: William H. Rutherford Approved by: April, 1960 --------~~~~~~-------------- Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordlnator / 'I / �April, 1960 '0? -37- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of' Colorado --~----------------------------- Project No. W-37-R-13 ----~--~--~~--------------- Game Bird Survey 1 Job No.1 -.. ""'Pr'=--e---n-e-s..,..t"="in--g--"S'"'"t-u-=di"="·-e-s---,.(-p-r-e-p-aration f'or applicat ion of' the pheasanf Title of'Job: crowing-count census method and sex ratio counts in management). Work Plan. No. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960. Abstract: Changes in the location of crow-count stations within two pheasant census units were made during the project year. Overlays for pheasant distribution maps were prepared which show names and locations of all crow-count stations and sex ratio-count zones within the 39 established pheasant census units. Data on sex ratios and crowing counts were assembled for the period 1955-1959, primarily f'or.the purpose of'preparing sample state-wide reports of' these census data. Suggestions for evaluating and using pre-nesting census .data have been prepared to aid in obtaining reliable information and to aid in insuring maximum.use of this informatlon. General analysis of' sex-ratio and crow-count data show pheasant populations have about doubled in Colorado during the five-year period, 1955-1959. Winter sex ratios in 1959 were the most divergent of the f'ive-year period, indicating progress in ef'f'ectivemanagement of the pheasant resource. �-38Objectives: (1) To establish permanent, representative crowing-count census routes. (2) To establish permanent zones or areas for making sex ratio counts. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in the standardized crowing-count and sex-ratio count procedure. (4) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. (5) To eventually turn pheasant crowing counts and sex ratio counts over to management. Techni~ues Used: Procedures on pheasant pre-nesting studies during the period covered by this report relate primarily to objectives 1, 2, and 5, as shown above. Work on the other two objectives has been completed, and is described in previous completion reports. Objectives 1 and 2 also are essentially completed on a state-wide basis. Improper selection of stations and extension of home-building in the Lamar and Cortez areas, however, necessitated modifications in the location of crow-count points within two management areas. New maps of crow-count stations were made following consultation with local Wildlife Conservation Officers and Regional Game Managers. The majority of time on this job was spent on activities connected with objective No.5; turning routine crowing and sex ratio counts over to management. Final duties connected with this transfer have involved: (1) preparation of overlays which show locations and names of crow-count stations and sex ratio-count zones, (2) assembling data for use in the preparation of sample, annual, statewide reports on the breeding population status, and (3) pointing out, by means of printed instr~ctions, ways by which pre-nesting data may be analyzed and used in management of the pheasant resource. �-39.... PHEASANT PRE-NESTING STUDIES Wliyne IT. Sandfort ChAnges !!! the location of crow-count stations.--New maps were prepared of pheasant crow-count routes-rn the Lamar-Holly &rea, Prowers County, and the Cortez-Lems area, Montezuma county. These new maps incorporated suggested changes in the location of 10 and 2 stations for the Lamar-Holly and CortezLewis areas, respectively. 'Ihelocations of stations in the Lamar-Holly area WEre changed to sample better pheasant range in the cultivated area along the irrigated, Arkansas River Valley, east and north of Lamar, as opposed to the previously sampled area containing much. river bottom and gra salands , In t he Cortez-Lewis area, crow-count points were changed because of housing development in the northeastern por-t.Lon of the town of Cortez,. Preparation of overlays showing the location of crow-count stations and sex ratio-count zones.--overlays for pheasant dIStrIbution maps, shown below, have been prepared to show'the locations from which pheasant census data are obtained. An outline map of pheasant range (which matches these overlays) is shown under Work Plan 1, Job No. 10, this report. Pheasant denSity maps for Colorado have not yet been printedo Sample reports on the pheasant breeding population status.--All data on pheasant sex ratios andcroWiIig counts from 1955 through 1959 have been assembled and are being srummarized as a portion of the final action in turning routine pheasant surveys over to management personnel. At present these census data are summarized and analyzed within the region, but no state-wide compilation of data exists. As suggested in a memorandum to regional and other supervisory personnel, dated December 4, 1959, the state-wide report on pheasant pre-ne~ting studies would be due July 1, and would contajn the following types of information: ".! summary of winter and spring sax ratio counts and & summary of crowing counts for each of the 39 census units wi thin the state. Data to s how the status for individual census units, region-wise, and statewide. Thi 5 report would include snrf ng breedf ng no ouLatd.on indices based on sex ratios and crowing counts, and an analysi IS of over-wintering success as related primarily to snowfall and temperature. Notes on specific storms of unusual occurrence or severity would be ~iven. Climatic data would be su~arized for key stations within pheasant range of major importance. II Although sample reports have not been completed at this tjme, data are shown in lables 1 through 5 which summarize the most significant information which has been g.athered to date. Actual reoorts for management work wjll contain more detail than djsplayed in these tables. �,f~~ \ r--------- I ..... I ®...: ./ i LEGEND NOP1A~~\t~HD' AND NAME .MHUAIT - PAOL I lONNY MANAUMENT eURLINGTON ~ ~ ~ K ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ II .I~ ~ " ~ ~ R 'OUTHWf.:8T " n' u, "" JI.WIIII.!LU1 ./ INDICATES '-IRIT r.'\ : •• ~. ~ ... (4\ :,/ '@' '0/ :'.,/ .. :@ @:; ..... .... : ...o..... e:.. .0/ ~" ( ... ".. NORIAN : v ': :gJ :'/0 g VIITA I MONTE,. V1IU-NO'!.GAN-80U'1TIFUL n NUCLA .1• ORA.ND JUNC}'ON-F"..UITA-1UfK ITATtON .... ® / ,,- ... nUN LAOA""'TA-CE"J"ER-"ONT~ ..""••, '••@> t': "-e ..~i1 • fiOI. IAYP'IELD-ALLI.ON IlDROCK-PARADOX CORTEZ- LEW" OlL TA- CI:OAREOII OI",TA -OL."THE" MOHT"ItO'£ M' MI .,,- ./ :Yo CHERAW-ROCKY 'OftD-HAWLEY FORT LYON-LAI ANIMAl-KELLER KONANTZ-IrONINOTON-NIOWAY LAMAR-HOlL Y IT. CKARLEI MlIA-AVONDALE-VINELAND H -, / . I .~: / ~ ® ~ .j ~ : ./ ". II ••• .,/ : .", WOODltOW-a,.uIH-FORT H H ~ , AflEA (NORTH) ~~~~!.ir.:T,,1~3r-~~lLX=~MONT (.~ PflOCTOR-ITEltLIHI ~ :fJt~~~IA'~::~!~ELL!N'TOH:. ~, " al .l2llI!!liII • \!!I ... :;.@ :'. ",~ :. ." SAL ZAC-INYDER-NARROWS 8RI0"TOH-'IRElrON£ DlltBY-AURO"A-LtTTLETQN lEVAHI-I'LCftEIY-MILL It< EN ORIElEY-l ATOM- Irvl""NC! JULEIIUftI-CltOOK KEEHUIU"I-,".OSP'ECT YALLEV-HU08Ot1f,';\ m u !.~ AREA ECKLEY- YUNA 'LEIIING-LIENor HOLYOKE-flEMING oIULEleU"I-AtiHURST' LONE ITA"-AKRON I[tllE:lt'T-,u.eLr:R WAOES-CLMKYILLI:-HA WRAY-Va:ftNON 7 ORAIHAOE) .. .. . ....-: I •• PLATTE .. "'®.L--- ROUTE £,UT~CEJfTRAL' •• •• • (lOUTH OF 0···· ... :fv. .. Jii).: ".~: ~ REOION 0.:' i oo. .:_,/ ~~ I ,')~~ ~:Cl -::'~~ Gf-:-;-;-;-r--;-l RIFLE-liLT OM ROUTE i: ".iIi\ .••:>t ~....•• @;-:'" .' ~.r....... oo.:,;" :".~ 'CI '. i...® :~:~r \iaj: i : I 'J I i L "."1 ••... _ J. ""f?. _ ~~ @': .. @):':I fo~ .. !. : I . i .;_.. '. PHEASANT ------_j CROW-COUNT STATIONS IN COLORADO OVERLAY 'OR PHEASA",T OISTRIBUTION MAPS "'I;_~.I.0 �r------- I I I (3] __ LEGEND ..B.UJ.Q.Ii AND Un-CENTRAL) , •s •• •, •• '0 (IOUTH "-ATTE DRAINAOE) " 12 II '4 115 ,t ~ ~ ~ lIIIIIlIUIl IT 'I 18 20 tl U U 14 r!1 ~~ "WHURITPAOLI BONNY MANAQEMENT AnEA 8URLItiOTON AREA (NORTH I ECKLEy-yU ••.•• FLENINO-LEROY HOLYOKE-FLEMING JUL[lIURO -AMHURIT LON! ITAR-AKRON IEIIUT-flAGLER WAOEl-Cl"AJlKYILLE-HAXTUN .rt"Y-VEitHON IALUC-INYDER-N"RROWI IRIIHTQN-,.REITON£ DERBY-AURORA-LITTLnON EVANI-QlLCRUT-IIILlltCEN ,R[[lEYEATON-IfYUANCE JULES.URI-CROOK tcEENE'SU"t-I'AOIPECl' W.tLEY-HUOICl\I LAFAYETTE -LONIMONT-VALilIONT IIIEAD-IERTHOUD-LOYELANO PROCTOft-ITERLINO WATEltTON-IIIOfIRIION WINDSOR-TIMHATH-WELLINorON WOODROW-IRUIHPORT MORI ••• ••••., •••• 51 •••• •••• •• 51 I"YPULD-ALLI,OH .EORaCIC-PARADOX CORTIU-LI!"' • ·OEU'A-CI!DARe:Dle DElT A· OLATHI!-NOHTROif: lAIARITA - CENTER-MOHTe VIIITA NOfff! VISTA- MOfNAH-lOUNTIf<Ul NUCLA 51 ,. IRANO "UNCTION-FRUITA-IllACIC .,n.E-'LLT !IO !.2l!.I.!!m! NAME _Df'___ZOH£. ..MAe....t& IIWIIlAir (TAti.!LANO, .~ t1J ~£l c!J G1 CHERAW- ROCKY FORO-HAWLEY fORT LYON-LAS AJfIl •••.S-KELu:n KQNANTZ-ITONINIITOH·.,IrN/AY U.-_AR-HOLLY IT. CHA"LEI N!:IA"AVONOA.t.E-VIN[LAHD tJ ~ ~~d D b J <r:J \8 ~D 1 C®[] I I I i L 2) _ I®~ ~ --------_j ~ PHEASANT SEX RATIO-COUNT ZONES IN COLORADO I t-=1l -i,] ;,"/) OVERLAY FOR PHEASANT OISTRIBUTION MAPS oIAH. 1810 W.\I1I. �-42- Table 1.--WINTER PHEASANT SEX RATIOS IN COLORADO, 1955-1959. Area Northeast Region Tablelands and East-central South Platte Drainage southeast Region Southwest Region Northwest Region STATE-WIDE 1955 Hens-per-cock 1956 1958 1957 2.83 1.42 1076 1.99 1.79 1.BO 1.91 2.08 2.60 1.66 1.02 1.61 2.08 1.91 2.87 1.70 1.31 2.15 0.80 2.39" 1929 = 2.54 2.34 2.16 2.09 1.91 2.40 Table 2o--FHEASANTS OBSERVED PER MILE DURING WINTER SEX RATIO COUNTS, 1955-1959. Birds-per-mi1e Area 19» 19~B 19>b 19~9 19>7 Northeast Region 'lablelands and East-central 2.96 2.39 4.29 10.93 South Platte Drainage 0.46 0.78 0.85 2.34 Southeast Region 0.28 0.64 1.54 2.06 Southwest Region 2.15 2.45 3.19 3.64 Northwest Region 0.87 0.69 0.63 0.27 1.45 STA'lE-WIDE 2.09 5.18 1.19 1.51 1.43 Table 3.--PHEASANTS OBSERVED PER MINUTE DURING WINTER SEX RATIO COUl~'lS, 19.55-1959. Birds-per-minute Area 1955 19~6 1957 1958 19~9 Northeast Region T.ablelands and East-central 2.826 .740 .707 1.215 South Platte Drainage .102 .266 .272 .975 Southeast Region .150 .098 .364 Southwest Region .511 .879 .542 .973 ·470 Northwest Region .218 .322 .178 ~185 .064 STA 'IEWIDE .416 .618 .336 1.379 .431 Table 4.--PHEASANT CROW-COUNT INDICES FOR COLORADO, 1955-1959. Average calls per two-minute period Area 1955 195b 1957 1958 1959 Northeast Region lablelands and East-central 29.2 60.6 29.3 47.0 south Platte Drainage 26.1 24.1 23.9 38.4 southeast Region 10.2 20.6 11.5 SOuthwest Region 16.2 22.0 17.1 17.3 14.7 Northwest Region 11.2 8.8 8.3 11.9 9.9 STA'IE-WIDE 16.3 22.4 20.5 27.2 31.0 �-43- Table 5.--PHEASANT SPRTIW BREEDING POPULATION INDICES, 1955-1959., Breeding popul.ation indexY 1955 Area Northeast Region Tablelands and East-central south Platte Drainage Southeast Region Southwest Region Northwest Region STATE-It'TDE h8.9 33.5 45.5 1956 1957 1958 1959 111.8 58.3 105.5 63.6 20.6 181.9 70.5 27.3 69.3 21.h 92.2 214.5 128.3 65.1 50.1 28.8 48·4 24.7 69.0 3B.u 27.1 59.7 105.4 = !!spring breeding pop~lation index based on the formula: p C f CH p • spring breeding population index C = average cock calls per two-minute Jeriod H • average number of hens per cock (from winter sex ratio counts). Anal;)'sisand use of :lheasant ~ex ratio and crow-count data.--An outline of the analysis ano-llse-of oheaEant census data was ~reparea-ror use at an In-Service Training School in Denver on v.arch 18, 1960. The following excerpts from this outline show suggestion~ for evaluating and uFing sex ratio and crow-count dataa 1. Evaluating and analyzing findings. (a) Completeness. Statistical anaf yse s of pheasant census data for 1955-57 were made by Hamann (1958). The report of these analyses shows crow-count data to be the most reliable in indicating general trends in pheasant populaticns. Sex-ratio and brood-count data generally were best for areas with highest pheasant den sftd e s, Throughout the report shortages of data were indicated, and the need for complete data on all phases of inventory was stressed. Complete data, suggested as minimum requiren~nts for each census unit include: (1) at least 500 birds sexed in each census unit, particularly in areas 10 th good populations, (2) four cr-owi.ng counts for each sta tion, and (3) t.hr-ee morning brood count s during August. (b) Accuracy. The main purpose of establish~ent of a pheasant inventory system ha~ been to eliminate as many variables as :lossible in the eathering of data. Procedures have been used which have been generally croven and acceDted. In the development of these techniques, variability in pheasant behaVior has been considered, and partially compensated for. Use of suggested techniques and methods will do much to eliminate the one factor over which we have some control -- human variation or error. The follOwing points should be considered in determining accuracy of data obtained: �-44(1) (c) 2. Sex ratioso a. Sug~ested counting times ~hould be adhered to, particularly on irrigat~d-land areas. Deviation from prescribed times within intensively-farmed com~unities should render data invalid and unuseable. b. Were birds flushed? c. Ware count s made ·when.flIlOW was on the ground? d. In t.he spring, were counts restricted to the mcrnfnga, as they should be. e. sex ratios, where hens exceed cocks, are unrealistic and should be checked. (2) Crow-counts. a. Time schedules and countjng conditions in reSDect to wind, mainly, are highly important. b. A delay of five nrlnutes, or a maximum of ten minutes, should render counts invalid. . Correcting data. Although all sex ratio-count data have been lumped in the past, and used in ponulation formulas, it is suggested Game Managers con sf dar use of only that da ta ' obtained during optl.mum counting conditions and times (snow cover during winter or spring harem counts) to determine sex ratios for use in pooul.atden formulas. Where only a oortion of sex ratio data is used, footnotes should be placed in record books indicating BUch. Use of data. The following uses and int€roretations are possible, using data as gathered from t~e presently established pheasant inventory system. (a) Determini,ng S;'JringBreeding Population Index. (b) Determining Fall Population Index. (c) Setting seasons. The orimary purpose of pheasant inventory data is to set sensible and proper huntdng seasons, with liberalizations or restrictions proportionate to upswings or declines in Jheasant numbers. (d) Determining effectiveness in harvest. In addition to "birdsjhunterll and "birds/hr." data obtained during the hunting season, the Dost-season sex ratio informatjon gjves ideas on effectiveness in harvest. Generally speaking, the more divergent sex ratios are, the more effective harvest has been. At least four out of five roosters (and perhaps nine out of ten) can be safely harvested without impairing the reproductive potential. If our post-season sex ratios are around two hens per rooster, we have left sunpl.us cocks. (e) Calculating pre-season populations from kill data and sex ratios to determine accuracy of pre-hunt data, and to detect general changes in populations. (f) Determining general trands in populations, based on youngcock per adult-hen ratios. 1hi~ determined from bag check age ratios and sex ratio data. �(g) (h) Public relations. Seasonal publicity on the changes and status of our pheasant populations would aid in gaining public support and confidence in our pheasant managementprogram. Trend analysis. The following npheasant trend analysis form" is suggested as a method for recording all available data for a ~ecific portion of oheasant range. Through use of this form, most data and factors will be considered during analysis of pheasant population trends. �1 -,~, -46PHEASANT TREND ANALYSIS Nameof area Year FORJ( --.,.( c-e-n-su-s-u-n-:i:"'lt-,~c-o-u-n"':'t-y-,-JI!II-n-a-g-e-m-e-n-:t:--"a-r-e-a-,-r-e-gI"T""o-n-,-o-r- ------~-------we of data Analysis by Data for current year _ Change from past year (%) Chan~ from 5-yr. 8VEage (%) Sex ratio counts Hens per cock Birds per mile (winter) Birds per mile (spring) Birds per minute (winter) Birds per minute (spring) Crow-counts Average calls Spring breeding population index Brood counts Young per hen Young per brood Birds per mile Birds per minute Broods per mile Fall population index Kill data Birds per hunter Birds ner- hour P·~r cent juveniles TOtal kill (from random survey) Pre-season population data Total popUlation Young cocks p:;r adult hen Miscellaneous data Winter losses: severe J average , light • Tem~)era tures (April and May): above ----, -a~v-'erage ---( -,.....•. below Preci pi ta tion (April and May): above , aver~ge , below---First cutting of alfalfa: early , normal , delayed Peak of hatch: early , normal , delayed Temperatures (June, July, Aug.): above , average---, below Precipitation (June, July, Aug.): above , average , below Hail losses: none , light , heavy ----_ _ ------ OYar-all appraisal of population Main reasons for trend: trend: up ----, static ------- , down----- • �-47- Analysis and Recommendations: Routine pheasant surveys were terminated as a Federal Aid Activity in 1953 and work was directed toward developing an inventory system whereby District field men could obtain uniform data to determine seasonal and annual pheasant trends. This system was devised through the cooperative efforts of Regional Game Managers, Wildlife Conservation Officers, and Biologi sts, and was in effect on a state-wide basi s tn 19570 Findings from sex-ratiO and crow-count work from 1955 through 1959 indicate the pheasant population has about doubled in Colorado during this five-year period. Winter sex ratio counts in 1959 were the most divergent of this period of record, indicating effectiveness in management procedures designed to harvest surplus cocks. . It is recommended that work continue on final assembly of all sex-ratio and crow-count data and that sample, state-wide reports be prepared to show the manner by which data may be put to the most effective use. 'lhese reports, and preparation of a final publication, ineorporating methods and procedures used in the pheasant inventory system, will be given consideration during work under Segment 14 of the Game Bird Surveys Project. Literature Cited; Hamann, Hans. 1958. Statistical analysis of Colorado pheasant population data from 1955 to 1957. Colorado state University, Fort Collins, 91 pp. typewritten. Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandfort ------~---------------April, 1960 APproved by: Ferd C. K1einschnitz Assistant Coordjnator ��I~fllllllij' ~I~'llil~iilil~[~fl~[~~1 II]illlfijll BDOW022404 April, 1960 -49- JOB C01!PLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS STATE 01" PROJECTS COLORADO -----------------------------w-37-R-13 ; Game Bird SUrvey Work Plan No. -=1~,~Ph~e=a~~~~a=n~t=s~ ~; J~ob~N~o __.~3~~~~~---- Project No. Title of Job: .Pheasant Brood Slrveys. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Abstract: Changes in the location of brood-count route~ were made within two pheasant census units. New maps were nrepared which incorporated these changes. An overlay for »hea sarrt di stribution maps was prepared, which shows the Locatd ons of all brood-count routes 1'lith:in the 39 eatablj shed census units. nata obtained during brood-counts for the period 1955-1959, in conjunc--t:ionrlth--liiformatlon-·on -coUnts, show state-wide pheasant populations during the fall of 1959 to be the highest of a five-year period of record. Some reduction jn pheasant populations occurred in the main, tablelands,pheasant range, however, as a result of low reproductive success during the sumrr,erof 1959. -s9x·ratIos-··ancC-crOW1ng Work Will continue on final assembly of brood-count data for use in preparation of sample, state-wide reoortE and population trend analyses.' These data will also be used in the final publication of information obtained during brood survey work. Objectives: (1) Tb standardize methods for ascertaining annual pheasant production. (2) 10 establish permanent, representative brood-c~unt routes in all Colorado pheasant range. (3) TO instruct other Department oersonnel in the standardized broodcount procedure. (4) 10 prepare forms and record books for systematic r-ecordrng of information. , (5) TO eventually turn pheasant brood ::>urveysover to management. (6) Pnepavat.rono r a final r-eoor-ton this phase of study. Techniques Used: Activities on Job No.3 of the pheasant work plan during the project yeBr involved: (1) changing the location of brood-count routes within two census units, (2) preparing an overlay for pheasant diEtribution maps ~ich shows the names and locations of 39 brood-count routes, (3) assembling data on brood counts for the period 1955-1959, for use in preparatioA of sample state-wide reports, and preparing suggestions for analysis and use of brood-count data. en) ��-51PHEASANT BROOD SURVEYS Wayne W. Sandfort Changing brood-count routes.--Brood-count routes in the L'lrnar-Holly census uIiit, Prowers County, and in the Cortez-Lewis area, Montezuma County, were changed to insure better sampling of the pheasant population in these two localities. The route in the Lamar-Holly area was moved farther northward into better range along the north edge of the irrigated Arkansas valley north and east of Lamar. In the Cortez-Lewis unit, slight modification in the course of the route was made to escape housing developments in the northeast portion of the town of Cortez. New maps of these routes have been prepared for use during arulua1 brood-count work by District and Regional personnel. Brood-count route over1ay.--Names and locations of 39 brood-count routes within Colorado pheasant range are shown in the following overlay. This overlay for pheasant distribution maps has heen prepared to ~how relat10nships between ?heasant densities and the brood-count routes and to orient personnel working with the phea~ant resource. The outline map of pheasant range is shown under work Plan 1, Job No. 10, this report. As exolained in the report on oheasant pre-nesting studies, the Dheasant density maD is not ava11able from the printers at this time. Sample reports on pheasant brood-count data.--Brood-count data for the period ~955-1959 have-been assembled for use-rn-the preparation of a sample, annual, state-wide report on this phase of pheasant census. A summary of data which will be included in this report is shown in Tcibles 1 through 5. Specific data for jndividua1 census units will be included in the actual state-wide re90rt. Toable l.--PHEASANT REPRODUCTIVE Area Northeast Region Toable1ands and East-central south Platte Drainage Southeast Region southwest Region Northwest Region S TA 'IE- WIDE SUCCESS IN COLORADO, 1955-1959. 1955 Young-oer-hen 1956 1958 1957 1959 6.45 3.75 5.09 5.11 5.38 2.50 5.46 4.23 3.22 4.52 6.63 6.79 5.53 3.57 4.33 5.62 4.95 7.03 6.93 3.36 4.91 5.31 6.15 5.66 4.20 2.94 5.75 �-_ ..._ .._, r-··---·- ~d~ .~~J yr= 0~i i Y~·I\ f j j~ I LEGEND .J!UJ.2f! IIKIMlffAIT (TAM...ELMOI AND IAiT-CrNTftAL) I .,• •• •• 4 I." T ~'OUT" . P\.Anl DRAINAIE) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U H !!!!!!!!.!!!! ~ II!!!IIII!W "" " " " " " ~ II j@ " A M • " • • ~. JIIIlI[IIDIl NAM! Of ROUII .fII6e..l!:!l.. ANHuw.T-PAOLI 10 •• " •••••• 'IINI"' AM' IUftLINITOil '''IA INCftTH) ICKLIY'-YUM, ' FL,MINa-LEROY HOLTOICI-'LaMIN, oIULI"UM-AMHUMT LONI ITA"- "leIU* IIIIUT- '-LAILIR WAIlI-CUftK'IILL!-HA'ITUH WItA't-YI""ON IALI.AC-INYDIft-HAfU'OWI 'lftIITOIIE OI:".'t-AUIIIOM-LlTTL!TOM 1V•• -tILCflltT •.•• ILLltcl •• IlItII.LIY-IATOtt-IIVI"A ••CI .JULI •• U••••• CROOK KII"I.tUIII-PRO"ICT 'lALLIY-HUDeOII LA'"YITT!-LOtfaMOMT-YAUtONT . •••• O-.III:THOUO-LCWt:L •••ND PftOCTOft-ITlltUHI W,TlflTOJl •••• OR •••• ON WIJlDeOft-TINNATH-WILLINITON WOOOIIOW- I"UIM'ORT MOMA" "'''NTON- ~Ji tt I~~ -gv/ ~~ 'l®~ ~ 0J Yn ~ ~ tJ ~ ~, .~ CHlft.W-ItOClCY rOftD-HAWLIY P'OIIT U'OII- LAI NU.U-KILLIR KOIIANTZ-ITONI.'TOII-JIIID'lMY LAIIAft-HOLLY ,IT. CHARLI. MIIA-.otIDALI-VI~AND t "'P"ILD-ALL,'ON IIDROCK-P •• ADOX COItnZ-LIWI. DeLTA-CIDAUD" PELTA-OLATHE-MONTNOI' u.eA"ITA-CINTI"-IiONTE: YIITA IIOIITE YlITA-IIOMA"-ICl.INTIPUL IlUCL. 'rlG .uNO ·.•UNCTIOII-I'fIUfTA-NACIC "'P'LI:-'ILT ~ ~ ® """- ~ .Ce ~ @~ . ~ I I ~ I L.._. _ 8\ PHEASANT r i 1 BROOD-COUNT ROUTES IN COLORADO I I ____ J OYI!IILAY'011 PHI_NT D'.TII'.UTIOII MA••• .••.••.•• eo w.•.•. �-53- Table 2.--BROODS OBSERV~D PER Area Northeast Region Tablelands and East-central South Platte Drainage Southeast Region Southwest Region Northwest Region STAlE-WIDE HILE DURING AUGUST CENSt.5 IN COLORADO, 1955-1959. Broods-per-mile 1956 1957 1958 1959 1955 .254 .058 .187 .089 .096 .061 .•126 1.330 .106 .131 .248 .094 .034 .096 .148 .422 .152 .039 .696 .076 .280 .395 .157 .054 .112 .039 .205 Table 3.--PHEASANTS OBSERVr.:DPER MILE DURING AUGUST SURVEYS IN COLORADO, 1955-1959. Birds-per mile Area 1956 1958 1959 1955 1957 Northeast Region 1.22 2.19 1Bble1ands and East-central 2.03 4.09 3.57 1.32 South Platte Drainage .42 .65 1.31 .57 .21 Southeast Region .36 .35 .78 Southwest Region .76 2.84 5.16 .53 .78 .32 Northwest Region .43 ·49 1.03 1.20 1.76 .98 STATE-WIDE 2.43 lab1e 4.--PHEASANTS OBSERVED PER MINUTE DURING AUGUST SURVEYS IN COLORADO, 1955-1959. Birds-per-minute Area 1956 1957 1958 1959 1955 Northeast Region .1ab1e1ands and East-central .868 .483 .303 .536 .916 South Platte Drainage .119 .190 .158 .390 .394 .061 .098 Southeast .114 .288 SouthweE·t .185 .192 1.336 .516 .120 .093 Northwest. .135 .197 STATE-WIDE .258 .498 .324 Fall Northeast Region lable1ands and East-central South Platte Drainage southeast Region Southwest Region Northwest Region STAm-WIDE 532.4 233.2 216.5 89.2 20fi.8 180.1 11.3 279.6 EOPuli tion indices g 388.1 288.1 64.3 108.0 284.9 107602 371.8 111.3 238.2 62.6 457.6 976,4 760.0 373.5 163.9 121.6 500.& . p. C rJ CH rJ CHI -V Fall population indices based on the formula: P = Fall population index C • Average cock calls per two-minute period H - Average number of hens per cock (from winter sex ratio counts) Y Average number of young per hen D �-54Analysis and use of pheasant brood-count data.--As explained in the Job Completion Report for Work Plan 1, Job No. 1, publication, an outline of the analysis and use of pheasant census data was prepared for use at an InService Training School for the Colorado Game and Fish Department, held in Denver on March 18, 1960. Excerpts from this outline which apnly specifically to brood-count procedures are given below: tnrs 1. EValuating and analyzing findings. (a) Completeness. Three mornin g brood counts during specific periods and along specific routes in August comprise the minimum requirements for this census procedure. (b) Accuracy. (1) When oroper speed adhered to, minutes should be about four times the miles. (2) In the better pheasant range in the state, four birds per mile (observed) is very good. (3) In the better pheasant range in the state, a minute/bird or a bird/minute is very good. Anything less than this becomes unreasonable. (4) If any sample at all is obtained during brood counts, the young/hen will be lower than the young/brood (never the same, particularly with corrected data). (5) All counts should be re~orted whether positive or negative information is obtained. (6) Total miles driven during brood counts within a specific census unit should be multiples of the route mileage. Descrepencies in this indicate nrocedures and routes are being ignored. (7) In better pheasant range in the state and during better years, about 2.3 miles of driving will be required to observe a br-ood , (8) In the better pheasant range during a normal year, about mile s of driving will be required to ob serve a pheasant brood. s.o (c) 2. Correcting data. In the past total hens observed and total young observed have been used in calculating "young-per-hen" ratios. Occasionally broods are ob ser-ved without hens and no hen is tallied. For great~r accuracy, a hen should be considered in each case where a brood without a hen is found. Use of da t.a, (a) Determinjng Fall Population Index. (b) Interpreting causes for reproduct[ve success. (1) From hay-mowing and hatching dates. When peak mowing dates are early, compared to the peak of hatch, reproduction is generally impaired to a greater degree than when mowing dates occur late, as influenced by rainy periods, etc. �-55- (2) (c) (d) (e) As related to precipitation. Normal or above precipitation in Colorado generally appears to enhance reproductive success. Settjng seasons. The primary purpose of pheasant inventory data is to set sensible and proper bunting seasons, with liberalizations or restrictions proportionate to upswings or declines in oheasant numbers. Public relations. Seasonal publicity on the changes and status of our pheasant oopula tions 'WOuld aid in gaining support and confidence in our oheasant management program. Trend analysis. The oheasant trend analysis form, shown in the Completion ~port for ~ork Plan 1, Job No.1, this publication, is designed to contain nertainent information obtained during brood counts. Complation of these forms for specific cansus units, management areas, and state-wide would provide annual records of change s in pheasant reproductive success, as well as records of general trends in the population status and reasone for such changes. Completing these analysis forms for major management areas and state-wide for the period 1955-1959 will be a oortion of the orocess of turning pheasant surveys over to management per sonnal., Analysis and Recommendations, Findings from brood-counts during the period 1955-1959 friajcate pheasant reproduction was highest in 1957. State-wide populations, however, reached a high in 1959. As ehown in Table 5, fall populations in the tablelands area declined somewhat in 1959, compared to 1958, but still remained the second highest of the five-year period of record. This slight decline in the main pheasant area resulted from low reproductive success, as indicated in Table h. It is recommended that work continue on the final assembly of pheasant brood-count data and that samp'Le state-wide reports and trend analysis forms be prepared to insure maximum 'benefi t from oheasarrt census data currently being obtained. Prepared by: ~yne W. Sandfort April, 1960 Approved by: Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator ��COLO DIV WILDLIFE RESEARCH CTR LIB 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022405 -57i / JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE OF C_OLO..;;;..;..RA...;._OO Project No. If-37-R-13 ,. Game Bird Survey Work·Plan No. 1, Pheasants ; Job No.5 Title of Job: _ Pheasant Hunter Check. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March )1, 1960. Abstract: Pheasant check station data were accumulat~d for the 13~ear period, 1947-1959. Final analyses of these data are incomplete. An example of some of the more significant info~ation being recorded, howe~er, is given tor the Delta-Uontrose area. Objective: Tb prepare a tinal report of Federal Aid pheasant check station activities, 1947-1954, and to .. incorporate data tor the period 1955....... - -.. 'T959~'-' - - -_..- ------.. - -._ . Procedure: ?brk during the fiscal year, A.pril 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960, has involved gathering data on all pheasant check station data from 1947-1959. Activities on this job are continuing and final analysis of this large volume of data is pending. Findings: A portion of the type of data being assembled for eight major check points Within the state is shown in Table 1. SUmmarizati on of harvest statistics in this manner will enable rapid evaluation of hunter success, general population trends, and effectivene·ss of management procedures. Recommendations: Use of pheasant check-station data obtained during the oast 13 years Wil! be possible only when these data have been completely compiied and analyzed; It is recommended that wOrk continue on final assembly of these data and that a publication of findings be prepared. Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandfort April, 1960 ./ Approved by: Ferd C. lO.einschnitz Assistant coordinator �f'Tj~ , ____ ~_Table :p s:: 0 ~Cf] rn ~ '8$ ~ ~ <I> rn gQ b.O s:: 'S >-. t+-t>-. oQ rn a>~ ..c:~ g Cf] .p b.D g Nov. 16 Nov. 21 Nov. 6 Nov. 26 Dec. 1 Nov. lS Nov. 7 Nov. 6 Nov. 11 Nov. 3 Nov. 9 Nov • .8 Nov. 7 Sun. Sun. Sun. Sun. Sat. Sat. Sat. Sat. Fri. Sat. Sat. Sat. Sat. ~ tE b.O r:: 'M " .p 0 _g H C/) 3 Noon to 5 :00 It 5 11 3 15 " 11 14 15 " 23 " 9~ " 1O§i 911 " It ~-;110:00to 5:00 IJl~ 13!J1 II II .p -g ;j ~ r:: 0 'rl Cf] Cf] b.O (l) (XI Cf] Cf] rn 0 p.. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 (l) .p rei rei a> .p t+-t OCf] H Ha> (l).p ~~ Z 199 126 211 468 561 394 381 289 210 241 240 273 251 ~ fIl 8 :£ 733 675 631 1,692 2,169 1,548 1,322 1,144 766 922 1,086 1,144 1,229 Cf] .-I cq 'S Cf] (l) Cf] .p ~ < 55 57 39 88 78 50 68 37 29 48 35 72 62 (l) (l) :::- oS IBI 159 146 262 264 296 210 149 124 123 128 163 103 -r-I fIl b.O &l ro r-i C) .p .--I rn § g -- 236 216 185 350 342 346 278 186 153 171 163 235 165 ------- ------ ---- £ H H a> P. ~ ~ ~ b.OH Cf] (l) .-I Cf] .p a> p.. ~ ~ 'Sa> ~ <I! t-;) ~ ~ Z; 26.4 23.3 76.7 73.6 78.9 74.9 77.2 B5.5 75.5 BO.l 81.1 12.0 78.5 69.4 62.4 H 'M (XI 1.19Z; 1.71 .8B .75 .61 .88 .73 .64 .73 .71 .68 .86 .66 .32 .320 .293 .207 .158 .224 .210 .163 .200 .185 .150 .205 .134 21.1 25.1 22.8 14.5 24.5 19.9 18~9 2B.0 21.5 30.6 37.6 roa> aJ.p 1>3 rn~ ~~ (l)H ~.8 lJ\~ .85 .82 .74 .12 .71 .75 .70 .72 Y Data collected at Hoover's Corner west of Olathe by Paul Gilbert (unpublished in detail). Sf Data collected at Hoover's earner and on the California Mesa road at Delta. Data for Delta Station adjusted for the opening day (Nov. 26) using percentage calculated from Hoover's Corner data. Data collected at Hoover's Corner and on California Mesa Road at Delta. Data collected at Delta Station only, California Mesa Road. 6/ Split season, Nov. 6-8, Nov. 20-22, and Dec. 4-6. ;r/ Split season, Nov. 11-14, Nov. 26-28, Dec. 10-12. 21. Split season, Nov. 3-5, Nov. 17-19, Dec. 1-3. ~ 5-year average computed 5 previous years to hunting season with which comparison is made. Check of successful hunters (parties) only. ~lit season, Nov. 9-11, Nov. 23~25, Dec. 7-9. ,~/Split season, Nov. 8-11, Nov. 22-25, Dec. 6-9. ~Check of successful parties only --corrected data using ratios for unsuc~essful and successful hunters for 1957 and 1959 ,~/show .86 birds/hunter and ,.205birds/hour -- 273 hunters and 1,144 hours. =.:::.t Split season, Nov. 7-11, Nov. 21-24, Dec. 5-8. ~ ~ to ,,~J I ':~) J..l ·rl Cf] r:: a> 194~ 1949¥, 194 gj 19~ 19 19S~ 195 3 195 19S~ 195 19S7 1958 1959y .: 1.--00HPARATlVE PHEASANT CHECK STATION DATAl DELTA-MONTROSE AREAl 1947-1959. '.__./ r \J1 co I �1111~~IIl~)ill~il~~mllililnlml~ ~~uIMII BDOW022406 -59JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS, State of Colorado --------~~~~----------------- Project N6. __ _.;.;W_-:::.37.:-,-...,;;R;:.,.-..;;;.1;:::3 • . Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. l ~J~o~b_..;;;.N~o_._..;;;.l~O ~ Title of':.JObI Pheasant Range Mapping Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960. ~-- Abstract: Pheasant range mapping within Col~rado has essentially been completed, and a variety of maps have been prepared to show the extent and density of pheasant populations, and correlations between range and densities and irrigation, elevations, .and -precipitation .._-Square'm±les .have been calculated for counties, regions, and state,:-wide,by density classes, for the following categories: (1) total range, (2) irrigated and dry-land range, (3) range within specific precipitation belts, and (4) range at various elevations. Pheasant density maps are still at the printers, and some work remains on determination of correlation between pheasant range and abundance and soil types. Future effort on this job will be directed primarily toward final publication of findings. ~'Objectives: (1). To assemble all available information on pheasant range and distribution. (2) To complete pheasant range mapping. (3) , To compile data and prepare distribution and density maps of Colorado pheasant populations. (4) To show correlation between pheasant distribution.and denSity and soils, elevation, and precipitation (by use of overlays). (5) To prepare a final report on this activity. �-60- Procedures: Pheasant range mapping has been carried out as described by the following outline: A, B. C. D. Determine perimeter of pheasant range by county. 1. Information from Game and Fish Dept. personnel. 2. Inspection of habitat capable of supporting pheasant populations. 3. Interviews with ranchers and farmers. 4. Observations of pheasants. 5. Calls of crowing cocks. Trace outline of range on overlays, placed on county maps, scale 1. h per ml'1e. 2"-lnc Determine density of pheasant populations within the range of this s~ecies. (Density determined by indices to spring breeding populations. These indices determined by information from sex ratio and crowing counts within census units. The indices to breeding populations, not within census units, determined by general information and comparisons with known densities.) Ma~ various units of population densities, according to the following key: Class of pheasant population density 6 5 4 3 2 1 E. F. G. Spring Breeding Population Index 0-15 16-30 31... 60 61-120 121-240 241-up Planimeter various units of population densities to determine square miles of various densities, and total range for each county. Prepare a written description of pheasant range for each county. Prepare distribution maps of pheasant range. 1. Photograph pheasant range on county map sections in kodachrome. 2. Project photos of pheasant range, reducing these to a suitable scale on a state map. 3. Trace outline of pheasant range; reproducing distribution to the smaller scale. Prepare base maps,. showing outline of pheasant range and density within this':range. . .. 4. Prepare soils, elevation, and precipitation map overlays for use with pheasant distribution and density maps. Findings: Objectives of the pheasant range mapping job generally have been fulfilled. Work yet to be done includes: (1) final printing of the statewide pheasant density maps (now at the printers), (2) planimeter work in the northeast, northwest, and southwest regions to determine square miles of pheasant range within specific precipitation belts for irrigated and dry-farmed areas and for various population densities, and square miles of range for various densities and elevations (1,000foot contour intervals), and (3) preparation of the final publication on this activity. ) �-61Since work is continuing on o~ganlzlng materials for inclusion in the final publication, much of the detailed information is withheld in this annual completion report. A summary of products of this study, and examples of some of the types of data, however, are given below: A. B. C. Written descriptions of pheasant range. Twenty-five single-spaced pages of script have been prepared and edited which describe the distribution of pheasants throughout the~r range, point out relationships between denSities and occurrence between geographic regions of the state, discuss general relationships between pheasant abundance and soils, precipitation, land-use, human disturbance, predators, etc., and show some of the problems involved in harvesting the pheasant resource within specific sections of pheasant range. Maps and overlays. (1) Shaded map, showing total range. (2) A map showing relative densities as they existed in 1957. (3) An overlay depicting irrigated and dry-farmed portions of range. (4) An overlay showing precipitation zones withi:n pheasant range. (5) An overlay showing relationships between elevations and pheasant range. Tabular data. (Available for counties, regions, and statewide) (1) Sq_uare miles of occupied range. (2) Sq_uare miles of range for various densities, as they existed in 1957. (3) Sq_uare miles of irrigated and dry-farmed range for various densities. (4) Sq_uare miles of range within specific precipitation belts for irrigated and dry-farmed areas, and for various population densities. (5) Sq_uare miles .of range for various densities and elevations (l,OOO-foot contour intervals). Recommendations: Since pheasant range mapping has been essentially completed, it is recommended effort within the new project segment (14) be directed toward preparation of all materials in form suitable for publication. Remaining planimeter work should be done and attention should be given to determining general correlations between pheasant distribution and density and soil types. Prepared by: Date: W_a~yn~e __W~._S~a~n~d~f~o~r~t~ Approved by: __~G~il~b~e~r~t~N~.~H~un~t~e~r~_ State Game Manager April, 1960 --------~~~~~~------------ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �OUTLINE OF PHL-p-\~~I RANGE IN COLORADO PREPAREO .JANUARY. BY W, WAYNE SANDfORT 1959 �( , . ,'... , .' ..:.. '. ':,. ';'\' • •. \ .' ' .:. ..;t. • of' . .~:..', ... ','. : :: '. "\ '.' '. r· 11 ' o ~ .' ~ a:: t. 9 o , o z - ( t .. ..' .•"' .•..... _ .. .~, ,( , ~.•. , . , . 1 I, , \ o l" " .1 I , \ ,.:' _" " . " \. L .. , ,, \ ,, _j �~$0' , \.~ <, / .. ..•--- / ,'\ ,II' -_ /',/ / /// I / ,/ / / ,/ ,/' /,/ I / I' , ,/ , ,"' / . "' ,," /.. ,;'''', ..•'- " ""'... <. "''''''' I / I / I I ' \\ \ \ \ I," ,:; /,' .•...... -; __ ' ,' ,..... ••........... _ •••••.......... ..' ," - ----------- I \ I' I .•• \\ " \ \ \ \, I,_,' <, ,_ i' ' (' .•.. __ ... --- .",.,.,,_ IT .••..• , " \ ': I I \ , I I I , ..._,. I I' I _.... I I \ \,' \ •• " ',- --_ / " ( \ I •.... ' •• \\ \ to ___, I " I ,/' \ .....----- •.... I , 1\•..,": ••/-', ' I ' / I I I I / I \' I \: '\ / .....•..... \ '\. " \ .•..•• I ',".. ---------- ~'O ___ _ _-------- -// _----,' ----..• _... / '_', • \ _, \ \ : \ --< I '. " \ ,: \:,f ,'-', --------,~:'\ \ .:> \ ,/ ,,;, ../ ,, I \A •..... - / I I ff \ 1 I : ,/ : '. '---" : '. .> <., I \ /,/' ,," " '~ \ ~ ~ : '. \ "-........__/ \ / \,~-"---" ,,-,,- r "":"""" "'. ",. ", '\ "" , I:: "",-,-;:>:::</~=:::_::::"-" ""'--',: "':~'" -: .,I' ~ \, 1& .i->: - 16,'----' -. • I _-------// ,// I .I'I ,'-', '. \ ,I .; II I' "I' ,,' •••••••••~~•• /----'" I. .s-: ,."., ..•. / I ~' ,-/_----'", ,,' I ..." \, ',_ ( -- ~\ .••••• / " / /" ..••..... ---.... -, I ,,' I ,I' II : ,-~ ' / I I , ,\ \, '\ , , I / ',/ I I I J i \\'\ .•.•.•.. _. __-- ,I .--- -,, ~ ,- " .._ \ ---_ ' /,,/ .....•••..... \ /' '-__ ~_--- It-- \._, •• __--------' /~1-.." , \ I f " , , f I I I \ ~ \ \.._..' }I '. I I I / .... ..." \ i L ! I ------- ------- DISTRIBUTION '~., -... '" \ OF PRECIPITATION--LOWER ,\ ', --- I I ELEVATIONS ~ IN COLORADO I ", '... ,_..... ...___ I ",,' -, r">; / I '0 •• ' ; •• I.. ... _' •..... ,'/ I ..J 1 I \ ~ I ,.. ,.. \ \ \ ~ \ \ \ , I I \ \ ' _-- ---- - ------ .. . •• ' II /,'" I \ \ ,fA \ \' .•...... -: " __ ..•.,'" .' I -: ! ------ _ _j OVERLAY FOR PHEASANT RANGE MAP FOR COLORADO AOAI'TfD fOft un "'OM A MA••, ·OllTRIIUTION Of' PfII!CIltITAno. In CQLO"ADO~ f'III!'AftI!O IY THE COLORADO ITAT! ••..A""'N. :.;>~ ()~J , : ~ ("""'''' '\ \ :(' ,I I I \ // / I I """ '~\ ---- ,,--------"-- \ " " .. -, ," ..... .... _-- - IT _"'-, <, \\ \ I I. '>, '''''''' <, --:...;,.-~----, -. -~ -, ,1'" ,'" \, <. DIYIIIOIi. eouRC! or INFORMATION: U.S. MPT. 011 ,COMM!"C!. WIATHEIt .u"UU. .rAN. IlIa ..w.s. �( ,--------I ~ ..•~ -·------------1 .,.~ ~ iI \ I \ . \_ " ~ Vl 1 ~~7 ~ . ~~ . r I I I I I I ELEVATION CONTOURS--LOWER ELEVATIONS IN COLORADO (CONTOUR INTERVAL.--I,OOO FEETl J ~~ OVI!RL.AY FOR PHEASANT DISTRIBUTION 0" COLORADO, ADAPTED 'Ofil UIE "OM: aTAn: CDIITOUR MA'. ,Oft 1.l.1 IY U, I. IU."IY, DIIYI. I~ eOLOIADO. HOL08ICAL MAPS ....... JAW. 11.0 f~.h :~:.~ 0' ��Ili~IJllllrl'llllfl'llll~lllllllnrlilr~iilfliliilrr~11 BDOW022407 April, 1960 -67JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATECF Project COLORADO No. W-37-R-13 Work Plan No.3; GameBird Survey ; Job No. 2 ~-------------------------------------------------------- 'f,itle Mapping of sage grouse range. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960. Abstract: 'There are 726 square miles of sagebrush range and 224 miles of complementary range in the Northeast Region, and 61 miles of sagebrush range and 16 miles of complementary range in the Southeast Region of Colorado. There are 7,232 square miles of sagebrush range and 1,593 square miles of complementar,y range in the State of Colorado. Not al.L of this area is, or could be, inhabited by sage grouse by reason of terrain, elevation, size of area, and secondar,y range types. Other areas not listed could be, or are, sage grouse habitat because of their proximity to, or inclusion of, some sagebrush. A good sage grouse population is present in the Butte Lake-Lake John area, west and northwest of Walden in Jackson County. A fair sage grouse population is present in t.he Four Comers area of Laramie County, and in the 1lrOublesome and MuddyCreek drainages of Grand County. The remainder of Jackson County of suitable elevation, the lower Larrunie River drainage of Laramie County.9 the Colorado River valley and adjacent valleys from Kremmling to above the tolVllof Granby in Grand County, and the Blue River valley from the Grand County line to Green Mountain Reservoir in Swmdt County, has a light population of sage grouse. There are no recent records of aage grouse in Lake and Chaffee Counties of the Southeast Region. Objectives: (1) To assemble all available information on sage grouse range and distribution* (2) To complete mapping of sage grouse range. (3) To compile data and prepare distribution and denSity maps of Colorado,sage grouse populations. Techniques Used: The sage grouse distribution and density classification were hYPothesized for a fall population from number of birds observed and place of observation. Data an occurrence and relative abundance were obtained during strutting ground counts, brood counts, hunting season checks, ground and .aerial big game counts, interviews with r-ancher-a and Department personnel. The amount of range available provided insight into possible range and densities :in some Lnstances , Where data were limited, pure guesstimates were made on numbers and densities of grouse. Tracing and planimetering of sagebrush range was made from Soil Conservation Service range type maps. ��-69Mappillg of Sage Grouse Range Glenn E. Rogers Findings: The distribution of sagebrush and its complementary dry-farmed and irrigated lands was traced from range-type maps of the Soil Conservation Service. These maps were not checked by us for degree of accuracy, but the Soil Conservation Service stated that they were accurate to within twenty acres. River bottoms, irrigated, and dry-farmed lands where surrounded by sagebrush, were included in the report as areas useable by sage grouse. It a.ppears that these lands, particularly when in alfalfa, wheat, or native meadow,are used by sage grouse at least part of the year. Other range types--grass, aspen, mountain brush, or miscellaneous-were not included, although sage grouse may inhabit these types where they are either surrounded b,y, or adjacent to, sagebrush, or have sagebrush as a secondary type. While sagebrush is essential to a sage grouse population, many sagebrush areas are not sage grouse habitat, due to roughness of terrain, elevation, and size. Sage grouse seem to prefer large, continuous areas of sagebrush in flat or genUy rolling terrain not exceed:ing 9,000 feet in elevation. Square miles of sagebrush and complementary range by county for the Northea.st Region are shown in Table 1. Jackson County in this region is third, outranked only by Moffat and Gunnison Counties, in square miles of sagebrush range in Colorado. Square miles of sagebrush and complementaryrange by county for the Southeast Region are shown in Table 2. While no sage grouse have been reported or observed by Department persormel for a number of years in either Chaffee or Lake Counties, it is believed that a small sage grouse population was once present. This area has not been checked by the author except as to general habitat appearance. Square miles of sagebrush and complementaryrange by region for the State of Colorado are shown in Table 3. Sage grouse populations by regions probably rank accordingly, but not proportionately, to amount of sagebrush present; for example, kill figures indicate that there are not five times as many sage grouse in the Northwest Region as in the Northeast, nor three times as many sage grouse in the Southwest Region as in the Northeasto Depar~ent personnel were interviewed and old reports reviewed in the Northeast Region and in Grand and Summi. t Counties of the Northwest Region, to obtain a general idea on sage grouse distribution and density. A map showing estimated denSity of sage grouse is being prepa.red for the census baadbeeks, A fair population density and the heaviest concentration of sage grouse in Grand county are in the Troublesome and JluddyCreek drainages from the tmm of Kremmlingto about fifteen miles north. A light population is present on the lower Blue River just south of K.reimnlingand east of Krenmling in �-70Table I-SQUARE COUNTY MILES OF SAGEBRUSHAND COMPLEMENTARY RANGEBY COUNTIES FOR THE NORTHEASTREGION SAGEBRUSH IRRIGATED & RIVER BOTTOY* Jackson 610.64 214.64 Laramie 115.56 9.68 TOTALS 726.20 *OD1y that Table land 224.32 surrounded bY sagebrush 2-SQUARE MILES OF SAGEBRUSHAND COMPLEMENTARY RANGEBY COUNTIES FOR THE SOUTHEAS T REGION COUNTY SAGEBRUSH Chaffee 10.16 Lake 50.84 TOTALS "My that Table DRYLANDFAmaNG* IRRIGATED & RIVER BOTTOM* DRYLANDFARMING* 15.68 61.00 rand surrounded 6y 16.44 sagebrush 3--SQUARE MILES OF SAGEBRUSH· AND COMPLEMENTARY RANGEBY REGIONS REGION SAGEBRUSH IRRIGATED & RIVER BOTTOM* DRYLANDFAIDUNG* Northwest 4,184.84 468.80 174.32 Southwest 2,260.20 680.34 29.64 Northeast 726.20 224.32 Southeast 61.00 16.44 TOTALS 7,232.24 1z389.90 GRANDTOTAL ALL REGIONS *Orily that land surrounded 203.96 8,826.10 by sagebrush �-71the Rock Creek drainage. A few birds are present in the Williams Fork drainage south of Pa.rshall and all along the Colora.do River from Parshall to just above the town of Granby. A few sage grouse are found in the Blue River drainage from the Green Mountain Reservoir to the Grand County line. In a fall population, only one general area of Jackson County could be listed as having a good population density. This area is west and northwest of Walden from the Roaring Fork drainage south of Butte Lake, around Lake John, to the Big Creek Road on the north and Colorado Highway 12$ on the east, within the main drainage of the North Platte River. The rest of the county, within elevational limits, contains a light population density of sage grouse. A good population density was present in the Canadian and Michigan Rivers drainages east and northeast of 'Walden in the past. Very few birds are seen in this area now, perhaps due to the noise made by the gas releasers on the many oil lr-ellsin the area. A fair population of sage grouse is present in the Jimmy Creek-Laramie River area on the McCarthy Ranch. A light population is present in the Laramie River drainage from just south of Four Corners to the Wyoming line. Mr. J. D. Hart, former Deputy Director of the Department, in a report written in 1937, stated that fair populations of sage grouse were then present on Lone Pine Creek and Sheep Creek in the central part of Laramie County. Present personnel have no observations or reports of sage grouse in these areas. Recommendations: Maps showing the distribution of sage grouse and the distribution of sagebrush should be completed. A comparison of the two separate distribution maps, along with a field study of terrain and other habitat factors, could give an excellent idea of sage grouse potential and possible sage grouse transplant sites in the state. Prepared by: Glenn E. Rogers Date; April, 1960 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinscbnitz Asst. Coordinator ��Ijilillll~'BDOW022408 ijl~llil~iflilli~iflij~~~1 iliillliijil -73JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATEOF Project COLORADO No. W.;.;,-..;:3:;.,:7:,..-,.;;R;_-1..;:3:;._..::;:.__ Work Plan No.3 G.:;,.a_m_e_..;:;,B_ir;_d__;;,s_urv_e..zzs _ _.;;.;.....:...~~ 3 ~----------------------~--------------------~------~~ Title. Breeding season studies, sage grouse. ------------~------------~--~~~------------------~~-------Period Covered: j April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960. Abstract: A total of 2,069 sage grouse, 1,443 cocks, was counted on 65 strutt, irig grounds in the Northeast, Northwest, and Southwest Regions. Of this total, 835 sage grouse (476 cocks) were counted on 25 previously mapped grounds J and 1,234 sage grouse (958 cocks) were counted on 40 grounds not previously mapped. Of the 12 grounds previously counted in Jackson County by Conservation Officers, only two were active, two were not located, and e~ght had apparently moved from one~half to three miles. Good results were attained in locating new strutting ..,'-plane' thiS ye-ar';--'Cfew--colint::i--on -a'-Iarge-ii1.iinoer-6f- strutting grounds from an airgrounds were tried and found successful. Objectives: (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) To locate and map as many sage grouse strutting grounds as possible. To select permanent, representative strutting grounds which can be counted annually; these counts to be used in determming changes in breeding population from year to year. To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. To instruct other Department personnel in a standardized method for determining trends in the sage grouse breeding population. To eventually turn over sage grouse strutting ground counts to management. Techniques Used: Department personnel arid local ranchers were interviewed as 'flo location of strUtting grounds. Roads were cruised from before dayl.ight to about one hour after sunrise in sage grouse range, with stops at apprOximately one-mile intervals to listen for strutting birds. Aerial flights were made over sage grouse areas. Al.l strutting grounds were counted at least once. Whenpossabte , several counts were made with varying times, personnel, and methods. Maps were made of the strutting grounds from aerial photographs obtained from the Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service. end the Comodity Stabilization Service. Written descriptions of the roads used and mileage traveled' were attached to the maps•. ��-75- Sage Grouse Breeding Season Studies Glenn E. Rogers Findings: A total of 6.5 strutting grounds was checked in. the Northeast, Northwest, and Southwest Regions in 19.59. Of these 6.5 grounds, 40 had not previously been mapped, but possibly, eight of the 40 had been counted by local Conservation Officers. Only preliminary mapping has been done on two strutting grounds on Pinon Mesa and 1.5 grounds in Jackson and Laramie Counties until a re-check can be made on their locations. The first observed strutting activity, with sound, was in Moffat County on March 20th. At the higher elevations of Grand and Gunnison Counties, birds observed on the 19th and 24th of March were not actively strutting. Only light and erratic strutting was observed in Grand County until the 16th of April. Conservation Officers J. Hogue and E. Wagner located and counted 12 strutting grounds in Jackson County (Table 1) between 19.56and 19.58. Although both men have movedfrom the county, it was possible to determine the location of all grounds except two, Araphahoe and west Side Road, during the 19.59season. Location of the 13 grounds found in 19.59 (Table 2), however, did not correspond with those determined by Hogue and Wagner except in two instances, Ridge Road and coalmont. Even the Ridge Road ground was much larger and/or more scattered than described by Hogue. Because of this lack of coneaatency, specific maps and written descriptions for strutting grounds in Jackson County have not been completed. A total of 6.53 sage grouse, 632 cocks, was counted on the 13 strutting grounds located in Jackson County in 19.590 The one strutting ground in Laramie County was found from the airplane. The other ground listed for Laramie County is actually about one mile in Wyom;i.ng, but the birds on this ground probably range into Colorado. A total of 73 sage grouse, 69 cocks, was counted on these two grounds (Table 2). William Rutherford, fur biologist, was assigned to the sage grouse project during February and March of 19.59, and interviewed ranchers and Department personnel in Grand and Jackson Counties The Yust Ranch strutting ground in Grand County has been counted by Conservation Officer J. Waldron for several years. A sketch of the grounds location was prepared for the project by Officer Waldron at the time of discovery. Paul Gilbert, game biologist, had counted two strutting grounds in Grand County and pointed them out to the author. Twostrutting grounds, Antelope Pass and Ritschards, in Grand County, were round from the airplane. A total of 48.5 sage grouse, 209 cocks, was counted in Grand County in 19.59 (Table 3) •• 0 Educator Jesse Williams and Mr. Sandburg of Montrose, helped with the location of the two strutting grounds in Montrose County. Only 17 sage grouse, 7 cocks, were seen on the two grounds (Table 4). Conservation Officer, R. Mangus and GameBiologist, Bertram Baker, assisted with the location of the four grounds in San Miguel County. The two Greagor Flats strutting grounds are in the main, and only hunted, sage grouse area of the county. A total of 62 sage grouse, 41 cocks, was counted on the four grounds (Table 4). �-76- Table 1-HIGHEST COUNTSON STRUTTINGGROUNDSIN JACKSONCOUNTYBEFORE1959.* Name of Strutting Ground 1956 Highest Counts of cocks 1957 1958 Arapahoe _2. Coalmont -9 ..2.§. Cowdrey No. 1 _12 Cowdrey No. 2 80 Delaney Butte Lakes Rand Road, Allred -30 32 Ranch 5 Rand Road, Hampton Ranch -7 _!2_ Ridge Road 10 22 87** Wattenburg No. 1 8 Wattenburg No. 2 14 west Side Road 10 west Walden 20 TOTALFOR ALL GROUNDS * All counta made by Wildlife **)(ain ground found in 1958 45 Conservation 98 Officers 1959 291 J. Hogue and E. Wagner �-77- Table 2--STRUTTING Date Counter(s) 5/7 5/1 5/7 5/1 5/1 4/25 5/7 5/1 5/8 5/1 5/7 L/25 L/24 4/25 5/8 Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Sandfort Rogers Swope Rogers Rogers Rogers Sandfort Rogers Rogers Rogers Tota! Jackson County GROUNDCOUNTS FOR THE NORTHEAST REGION, 1959. TJJIle High Count Cocks Name of Ground J.s.ckSonCounty Alkali Lake, wattenburg Boettcher Lake Jct. Boettcher Lake Jct. Cowdrey No .•1 Cowdrey No. 2 Cowdrey No. 3 Cowdrey No. 3 Coalmont Deer Creek Delaney Butte Lake John Road Oil Well Ridge Road Rileyfs, west Walden Spring Creek~ Owl Ridge GroundS 13 5:05 5:40 5:20 6:25 "* TO"'taI' **214 ~ 6:27 146 U 1 5:05 5:35 4:54 '4 In 6:15 "2j 4:.55 ( '-:-:55 6:20 Birds 216 >0 146 ~ "6 -r "6 ~'4 - TI' l~ 111 n -'1 -; -.; ( J 5:45 6;05 5~O5 -~ Ti1 - li1 Highest counts only 632 653 5:10 4:55 25 38 30 40 6:10 )I n 69 7) 701 736 ~ Laramie county 4/30 5/6 5/6 Hughes, Rogers Airplane Rogers Rogers Total .Laramie County TOTAL NORTHEAST REGION Four Corners Four Cornere Wyoming GroundS 2 Higliest co~ts only 15 -Includes hens and unclassified birds as well as cocks. **under1ined number is highest count for specific ground. �-78Table 3-STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1959. TIIDe Date 4/28 5/12 4/23 4/16 L/22 4/22 4/16 4/22 4/21 4/21 4/28 3/19 4/21 4/11 4/22 4/23 4/22 4/22 Counter(s) Hughes, Rogers, Airplane Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Rogers Sandfort Rogers Hoffman, Sandfort Hughes, Rogers, Airplane Rogers Hoffman, Sandfort Rogers Greer Hoffman Sandfort Hoffman Total Grand County 3/12 Jerome, Rogers 4/11 Jerome, Rogers 4/20 Jerome, Rogers 5/3 5/13 Rogers OWens, Rogers Totar Mesa County Sub Total Northwest Region Name of Ground High Count Grana County Antelope Pass 5:20 Antelope Pass 4:40 Back of Junction Butte 5:35 Back Troublesome No.1 5:37 Back Troublesome No. 1 6:20 Back Troublesome No.2 6:44 Back Troublesome No • .3 6:10 East Fork, Rock Creek 6:32 Mitchell Ranch 6:55 Pinto Creek 5:12 Ritzcharda, Parsons 6:10 Sheep Creek 9:30 Sheep Creek 5:12 Troublesome No.1 6:30 Troublesome No.1 5:30 Troublesome No.1 6:10 west Fork, Rock Creek 6:05 yust Ranch 5:30 Grounds n Mesa County Glade Park No. 1 Glade Park No. 2 Glade Park No. 3 Glade Park No. 4 Glade Park No. 1 Glade Park No. 2 Glade Park No. 3 Glade Park No. 4 Glade Park No. 1 Glade Park No.2 Glade Park No. 3 Glade Park No. 4 Glade Park No.1 Glade Park No. 2 Glade Park No.3 Glade Park No.4 Pinon Mesa No. 1 Pinon Mesa No. 2 GroundS 6 19 *Tot81 Cocks Birds 20 48 m m I2' 25 ~ ~ 4'0' cr , j 12 20 49 ~ jB rr ,. 42 j9' 14~ J:9' ') 6! 26 -r ') 19 IS' 26 21 22 :5I. Highest counts only 209 485 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 6:30 7:05 4:55 5:30 5:10 -r 0 :ro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 17 17 n 0 u 5:55 6:45 rs rs Highest counts only 36 37 245 522 �-79- Table }--STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1959 (continued). Date Counter(s) 4/8 4/8 Roland Denney 4/8 4/8 Sandfort Sheldon 3/20 4/8 4/8 4/8 4/8 Rogers Sandfort Morgan, Rogers Sandfort Sheldon 4/8 4/8 Morgan, Rogers Davidson 4/10 4/10 4/10 4/10 4/10 LllO 4/10 Sandfort Sandfort Sandfort Sandfort Sandfort Sandfort Rogers Totar Mofl'at County TOTAl: NORTHW~sT REGION' J.JDe High Count Name of Ground .Ilol'l'at County Axiil BaBin 6:00 Big Gulch No.1 5:45 Big Gulch No. 2 6:20 Big Gulch No. 3 6:35 Bord Gulch 6:08 Cross Mountain No. 1 6:15 Cross Mountain No. 2 5:50 Fortification No. 1 7:00 Grassie's Res. 5:46 Greasewood No.1 6:25 Lay Creek No.1 6:58 Nichols No.1 6:30 Nichols No. 2 6:45 19 Road 5:40 N. Fork Big Gulch No.2 5:30 . Blue Mountain Bear Creek Cow Camp Escalante Haslam's Haslam'S pasture Karren's Stateline GroundS 22 zr "-".'."-~oTa:r Cocks Birds **25 25 15 !7 -g 12' ;9 m ~ "0 '24 .jO lin 15 4' '4 '24 54 5'5' 71 :ro "0 2 ::m 10 39 -0 2 57 l~ 9 5:55 5:45 6:68 6:40 6:30 6:08 5:45 -; j Dr Highest Counts only 44J 742 *Includes hens and unclassified birds as well as cocks. **Underlined number is highest count for specific ground. 9 :! l~ rs rr ;5:! 1I rr :ro 588 I,2b4 �-80Table 4--STRUTTING GROUND COUNTS FOR THE SOUTHWEST REGION, 1959. Date Counter(s) 3/24 Rogers Rogers Rogers TotS! GUririisoncounty 4/13 4/14 Rogers Williams, Rogers TotilO Montrose County 4/3 4/2 4/3 4/4 Mangus, Rogers Baker, Rogers Mangus, Rogers Mangus, Rogers Total San Miguel County TOTAL SOUTHWEST REGION Time 'i4'TotaI High Count Cocks Birds Name of Ground GUiiriisonCounty Gold Basin lola. No.1 Ohio Creek GroundS OJ o o -5 Higbest Counts only 0 5 6:15 5:15 **5 "2 "4 Highest Counts only 7 17 Montrose County Bostwick Park Cerro Sumnit Grounds 2 San Miguel County Dry Basin No. 1 Dry Basin No.2 Greagor Flats No. 1 Greagor Flats No. 2 Greagor Flats No. 1 Greagor Flats No. 2 GroundS 4 o 5:45 8:30 6:30 6:20 o O. 13 4 7:00 -S- -S- 6:15 6:05 PM 6:30 6:16 """5' """5' 13 13 13 18 ~ ~ 41 62 54 79 Highest Counts only 9 *rncludes hens and unclassified birdS as well as cocks. **Underlined number is highest count for .specific ground •. 4 �i t:;Q ..~!_" -81- Dwight Owenaand WayneSandfort located a sharp tail dancing ground ~h.. Pinon Mesa in Mesa County from the airplane; and a later ground check of its location led to the discovery of two sage grouse strutting grounds with a total of 3.3 cocks (Table 3). A ground trip and an aerial flight over Blue Mountain in Moffat County showed a lower count, 38 cocks, on the three previously mappedgrounds, and led to the discovery of at least four new grounds with 83 sage grouse, 30 cocks (Table 3). A Super CUbairplane with Nol'J!l, Hughes as pilot was used again this year to locate new strutting grounds. Goodresults were attained by flying at an elevation of approximately 200 feet, at an indicated speed between 55 and 60 mph and at 1700 to 1800 rpm for quietness; with the observer looking only downsun, .scanning at a low oblique, and by covering only a small, well defined area. After the initial Sighting, the pilot circled away from the birds and made a re-run at a slightly higher elevation while the observer counted the birds through 10 x 50 binoculars. Another run was then made at a lower and closer range to check the count, and to ascertain at what distance the birds flushed. The small field in the 10· x 50 glasses caused the observer to miss birds outside the perimeter of the main strutting ground. Counting was done on previously mapped strutting grounds to check group use of maps and descriptions, to check beginning date of strutting activity, and incidental to the location of new grounds in the saae area. A group of Northwest Region and Federal Aid personnel, who were gathered in Craig on a big gamerange check, volunteered to spend two mornings checking strutting grounds in Moffat County. The weather failed to cooperate one morning, but results the remaining morning showed the feasibility of using large crews for extensive coverage of strutting grounds (Table 3). The lower count on the established strutting grounds on Blue Mountain in Moffat County may have been due to a wider dispersal of sage grouse onto more grounds than in 1958. A check was made of three established strutting grounds in Gunnison County near the end of March, but no strutting activity was observed (Table 4). Mapswere prepared from aerial photographs for all the strutting grounds. Written descriptions of the exact location· were prepared for all grounds except those in Jackson, Laramie, and Mesa Counties. Mapa and descriptions are printed on the reverse side of the strutting ground counting forms, arid together with a description of the methods and time of counts, will 'be placed in the sage grouse census handbooks. Recommendations: A re-check should be made of the strutting grounds already located in Gunnison, Jackson, Laramie, and Mesa Counties. Further attempts should be made to locate additional strutting grounds in Eagle, Delta, Garfield, Grand, Jackson, Laramie, Mesa, Montrose, and Moffat Counties. All possible strutting grounds should be located, mapped, and counted for future census reference. Prepared by: Glenn E. Rogers Date: April, Approved by: G. N. Hunter state GameManager 1960 F. C. IG.einscbnitz Asst. Coordinator ':_;l ��-83- . JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE. OF COLORADO Project W,;,.;.-....:3;;..:7:....-..:;R;;_-_1::...3 ~; No. Work plan No.3; __.;.G_am_e__;;;B;...i.;.rd_S;...urv __ e.:..y~~~~~ 5 ~--------------------~--------------~----~~~~----~ Sage grouse brood surveys ;: Title Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960. Abstract: A total of 420 sage grouse was observed in 959.? miles of travel in Jackson, Grand, Laramie, Mesa, and Moffat Counties, from the last week in June, through the first week in September. or the 420 sage grouse observed, only 125 were young birds. Brood-count trips in Mesa and Moffat Counties were run to check distribution of sage grouse and size of young birds. Forty-one brood count trips totalling 884.2 miles were made in sage grouse areas of Grand, Jackson, and Laramie Counties. On 18 of the 41 trips, no sage grouse were observed, and on 28 of the trips, no young sage grouse were seen. No reason is given for the poor success on the roadside brood counts in Grand and Jackson Counties. No brood count routes were established in these counties. Objectives: (1) To standardize methods for ascertaining annual sage grouse production. (2). To establish permanent, representative brood count routes in all Colorado sage grouse range. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in a standardized brood count procedure. (4) To prepare forms and record books for ~stematic recording of information. (5) To eventually turn over sage grouse brood survey to management. Techniques Used: Departmental personnel and local ranchers were interviewed to ascertam location of sage grouse. As many trips as possible were made in the· early morning and in the late evening on roads through sage grouse range. Records of sage grouse observed, age and number of birds, time of observation, and.mileage traveled were kept for each trip. ��1Lf:-:;1. -85Sage Grouse Brood Surveys Glenn E. Rogers Findingss A total of 420 sage grouse was observed in 959.5 miles of travel on brood count trips in Jackson, Grand, Laramie, Mesa, ~nd ~offat Countiese Of the 420 sage grouse observed, only l25 were young birds Trips through sage grouse brood areas were started the last week in June and continued through the first week in September. The first broods observed were in Moffat County on the first of July. It was July 8th when the first young bird.s were seen in Jackson County, and none were observed in Grand County until July 20th. 0 Most of this year's work on brood surveys was concentrated in Grand County of the Northwest Region and Jackson County of the Northeast Region. A total of 17 trips covering 362.5 miles was made in Grand County (Table 1). Only 41 young and a total of 184 sage grouse were seen on the 17 trips, but on 7 trips, no sage grouse were observed and on 11 trips, no young sage grouse were seen. On 24 trips, covering 489.9 miles of travel in Jackson County, only 36 young, and a total of 166 sage grouse were seen (Table 2)£ On 11 of the 24 trips in Jackson County, no sage grouse were seen, and on 17 trips, no young sage grouse were observed. The reasons for the low number of sage grouse observed in Grand and Jackson Counties, is not known at this time. The hens and their broods appear to migrate to native meadow hayfields shortly after hatching, where they are difficult to see. Wampole's work, reported by Boeker and Tester (1953), showed a much higher number of sage grouse during roadside counts in 1951 and 1952 than found in 1959 (Tables 3 and 4). The miles or roads traveled by Mr. Wampole are not known, but most of his work was primarily on waterfowl in the Cowdrey, Lake John, and Butte Lake areas where brood count efforts were concentrated this year. While Wampole observed the majority of young sage grouse in July, 1951, most of the young seen this year in both Grand and Jackson Counties were in August and September after some hay had been cut. The three brood count trips in Mesa County were made to check on distribution of sage grouse (Table 5). The one brood count route run in Moffat County with Conservation Officer Roland, was to check age of young on July 1st (Table 1). Notes on the brood count form list most of the young as half-grown with one brood of three as two weeks old. Only one brood count trip (Table 2), was made in Laramie County. No brood count routes were established in Grand, Jackson, and Laramie Counties, due to the small numbers of sage grouse observed. If the 1960 check of the various brood areas is more successful, maps will be prepared of brood count routes in these counties for inclusion in the sage grouse handbooks. Recommendations: Another Sllilli~er should be spent in trying to establish suitable brood count routes in Jackson, Grand, and Laramie Counties. Counts should be attempted between the hours of 8 A. M. and 5 P. M.; a period of the day not tried in 1959. �-86Table l--SAGE GROUSE COUNTED ON BROOD COUNT AREAS OF THE NORTHWEST REGION, 1959. Date Area Counted Time Grana county AM AM 6/18 7/1 7/19 9/14 8/10 9/2 6/30 Antelope Creek Antelope Pass Antelope Creek Antelope Creek & Hfiy. 40 Antelope Pass &·Hwy. 40 Antelope Creek & Hwy. 40 Back of Junction Butte HA AM PM AM PM Sage Grouse Adults Young Ilnc , Wiles Traveled 39 0 1 0 7 hI 0 0 0 3 0 14 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 ·0 14.0 28.7 12.4 13.3 25.7 28.1 24.6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 26.1 18.5 22.5 13.9 23.4 21.3 6/17 Back and Main Troublesome 7/20 Back and Main Troublesome 7/23 Back and Main Troublesome 8/10 Back and Main Troublesome 9/1 . Back and Main Troublesome 9/13 Back and Main Troublesome PM AM PM R!: PM FY 1 .1 1 5 3 0 9/14 Pinto & Red Dirt AM 0 0 0 10.9 8/11 Rock Creek AM 5 11 0 9.7 8/11 Williams Fork AM 0 0 0 22.7 7/24 Kremmling to Dillon AM 0 0 0 46.7 104 41 39 302.5 2 7 0 8.6 2 7 . 0 8.5 17 36 0 34.7 123 84 39 405.8 Totat Grand County 6 2 Mesa County 7/11 Pinon Mesa m Total Mesa County Mol'l'atCounty 7/1 Big Gulch-Timberlake PM TOTAL NORTHWEST REGION Table 5--SAGE GROUSE COUNTED ON BROOD COUNT AREAS OF THE SOUTHWEST REGION, 1959. Date 6/26 7/14 Area Counted Dominquez Dominquez TOTAt SOUTHWEST REGION Time Mesa County AM .AM sage Grouse Adults Young Unc. 1 o 1 o o o o o Miles Traveled o 32.0 �-1 .0..~.... ~.t.... ~~..•. ; -87Table 2-SAGE GROUSECOUNTED ONBROODCOUNTAREASOF THENORTHEAST REGION, 1959. Sage Grouse Time Adults Young Inc. JaCKson County lliles Traveled Date Area Counted 8/13 Big Creek Road AM 0 0 0 16.5 8/13 Continental All 0 •0 0 23.6 8/12 8/12 Highway 14, south Highway 14, south AM HI 0 0 0 0 0 0 16.4 4.6 8/12 Highway 125, south AM 0 0 0 17.1 7/6 7/21 8/11 8/13 9/2 Lake John Lake John Lake John Lake John Lake John HI: AM AM AM 7 27 19 2 0 17 10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 24.4 43.8 37.2 17.2 18.9 7/21 North Fork Platte IM 1 2 0 17.4 7/8 7/23 9/4 Owl Ridge Owl Ridge Owl Ridge AM AM .AM 1 0 3 4 0 3 0 0 14 24.0 17.4 24.8 7/22 Peterson Ridge to Rand Cutoff AM 0 0 0 32.8 7/7 8/12 9/3 Rand Cutoff Rand Cutoff Rand Cutoff to Peterson AM .AM 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37.5 li.3 li.S 7/7 7/21 8/12 9/3 Ridge Road, Ridge Road, Ridge Road, Ridge Road, Delaney Butte south south south AM PM PM AM 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 37.2 14.7 7.8 15.9 7/20 Sand Dunes, Dwinell Ranch H.l 0 0 0 17.9 Oil Ridge PM 0 489.9 Total JacKson county Laramie County 7/22 Lower Laramie River TOTALNORTHEAST REGION PM 2 5 0 31.8 77 41 55 521.7 �-88Table 3-SAGE 1 GROUSE BR09D COUNTS, NORTH PARK, COLORADO, 1951-52/ No. of Broods No. of Young Average No. per.Brood 1951 27 109 4.04 1952 18 95 5.28 Year /1 Table4-ROAn5IDE Date Marc COUNTS OF SAGE GROUSE IN NORTH PARK, COLORAIQ 1951- Males Females 25-30 Sex or age.not Determined Young Total 152 152 66 131 April 1-15 16-30 48 17 1-7 . 8-15 16-23 24-30 22 58 46 44 15 1-7 B-15 14 128 16-23 24-30 24 May 1-31 June 26 25 22 73 46 95 7 37 54 13 8 18 29 12 29 183 83 49 13 54 74 19 5 83 75 75 July August 1-7 8-15 16-23 24-31 September 1-7 TOTALS 1 / 2 5 9 7 50 1 ~ 15 406 14 199 Taken from Boeker and Tester (1953). 397 ll7 1,119 �-89From the one check on a brood count route in Moffat County, it appears that spot checks should be made through the month of June in this area. Officer Davidson made fifteen brood counts in 1959 on the Big Gulch-Timberlake route. These counts were fairly evenly spaced between the 15th of Ju17 and the 20th of August. Total birds observed and young birds observed dropped of! sharply just before the end of July. Prepared by: Date: Glenn E. Rogers Approved by --~--~--~~----~--April, 1960 Literature Cited: G. N. Hunter State Game Man~er F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator Boeker, Harold and John Tester, 1953. Game Bird Surveys, Quarterly Progress Report, Federal Aid Division, Colorado Game and Fish Dept., Denver, Jan., pp. 115-117. ��April, -91- 1960 _ l JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATEOFCOLORADO --------------------------- Project No. ; W-37-R-13 GameBird Survey --=;.._~~~---- Work PIClllNo.4; Job No. 6 --------------------~------------------ Title Trapping and Transplanting Period,Covered: Personnel: (including release --= of game-farm.birds). March 23 through April 6, 1960. Little Hills personnel, Wes Bates, SamClifford, John Howlett, Willis Mansfield, Dwight Owens, Glenn Rogers, Ross Russell, WayneSandfort, Preston Steel, Kenneth Wagner. Abstract: A total of 1,205 game-farm chukars waS released during the period March 23-April 6, 1960 in 15 pre-selected areas. Twoareas were stocked in the Canon City area, Fremont County, to determine possibilities for adaptation of'chukars in the eastern Rocky Mountain foothills. The remaining-release-sites~occur--in- western-Colorado.------ ---) Plain, aluminumleg bands were placed on 300 chukars released in areas where a 1960 hunt may be held. Colored leg bands and neck tag~ were used to mark 250 birds placed in the Well's Gulch study area. These colored markers will aid in determination of the movementof birds in relationship to artificial water developments. One hundred and sixty-nine chukars were stocked from the Department's Beaver airplane in the Spitzie Draw and Jack Springs areas, northwest Colorado. This was the first attempt to stock birds from the air in Colorado. No knowncasualties occurred and this release method appeared satisfactory. Objective: To increase the range and number of chukar partridges. Teclmiques Used: Chukar releases during the spring of 1960 were restricted to' the' .stock:mg of game-farm birds from the Rocky Ford Experimental Bird Farm and the Little Hills Experiment Station. Birds were distributed in previously selected areas (see Quarterly Progress Report for October, 1959, pp. 109~1l3). Numbered, plain aluminumleg bands were placed on 300 chukar partridges ,which'were released in Mesa County, within or near areas which may be open to chukar hunting during the fall of 1960. 'An additional 250 birds, place€l ~t six sites within the Well's Gulch ttguzzler study area", were marked with various colored leg bands and plastic neck tags to facilitate study of the movementof these birds_and determination of the role of artificial watering devices in chukar partridge development. The majority of the chukars were transported to release sites in vehicles, where crates were set on the ground and birds were allowad to walk or fly to their new surroundings. Tworeleases, however, were made in the =---------------_ .. ,.. - - .. �-92semi-remote Brown's Park area from the Department's Beaver airplane. Three crates containing chukars for the Spitzie Drawand Jack Springs areas were placed in the Beaver at Meeker, Colorado. Flight was made from the Meekerairport to the release sites. Specific points were selected for dropping of birds and small groups of chukars were dropped during each successive pass over pre-selected areas. During the actual release 8-12 chukars were grasped by the legs in one hand and lowered to an "lB"-diameter hole in the floor of the plane. Uponcomnandof the pilot, birds were thrust gently downwardand released. Chukars were dropped at elevations between 100 and 200 feet and at air speeds of 60-75 m. p. h. ......._, �-93Chukar Partridge Trapping and Transplanting Wayne W. Sandfort Findings: A total of 1,205 game-fam chukars was released during late March and early April in 15 areas. Two-hundred birds were placed in the Canon City area, Fremont County, in eastern Colorado, and 1,005 chukars were released in 13 areas in western Colorado. Releases in the Canon City area supplemented previous releases and were made to further test possibilities for adaptation of this species to the eastern foothills of the Rockies. In western Colorado, 479 chukars were distributed in five new areas to extend the range and numbers of chukare , The remaining 526 birds were placed in eight areas to supplement existing popUlations. Of the latter group, 250 chukars were distributed at six selected pOints within the Wellls Gulch Study Area. One-hundred and fifty chukars were placed in the vicinity of artificial water development and 100 birds were released in two dry-valley (control) areas. Trapping of birds and observations to detect various colored neck tags and leg bands will be carried out by Ken Nicolls, graduate assistant, Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, during the forthcoming summer, to evaluate artificial watering devices in chukar development. in efforts Table l.--RELEASES OF CHUKAR PARTRIDGES, GAME-FARM STOCK, MARCH 23-APRIL 6, 1960. Name of Release Site Dolores River Drainage Paradox Valley County Date of Release Number of Birds Montrose 3/29/60 126 WeIll s Gulch Study Area Alkali Basin (dry) Guzzler # 1 Guzzler # 2 Guzzler # 6 Guzzler # 7 Windy Creek (dry) Delta Delta Delta Delta Delta Delta 3/27/60 3/27/60 3/27/60 3/27/60 3/27/60 3/27/60 50 50 26 50 24 50 Bookcliffs Area Coal Creek Lapham Wash Mesa Mesa 3/23/60 3/23/60 150 150 ~hite River Drainage SkUI! Creek White River (Wardellls Ranch) Moffat 3/20/60 80 Rio Blanco 3/30/60 80 Brown I s Park and Vicinity Jack Springs Spitzie Draw Moffat Moffat 4/6/60 4/6/60 120 49 �1.. PS -94Table l.--RELEASES CF CHUKAR PARTRIDGES, 6, 1960. (continued) Name of Release site Canon C~ty Area Priest Canyon Wilson Creek GAME-FARM STOCK, MARCH 23-APRIL County Date of Release Number of BirdS Fremont Fremont 4/5/60 4/5/60 100 100 TOTAt ALL AREAS 1,205 --Previous plans called for the release of 1,575 chukars within 16 selected areas (see Completion Report for Work Plan 4, Job No.5, Quarterly Progress Report, October, 1959, pp. 109-113). As the number of chukar available for release was less than anticipated, releases were withheld in watson and Willow Creeks, and numbers of birds in release groups were reduced for Spitzie Draw, Jack Springs, the White River, and Skull Creek. Most groups of chukars released during the spring of 1960 contained equal sexes, as determined by the presence of spurs and general appearance of birds. In the Paradox Valley release group, sexes were undetermined. A total of 19 males and 30 females, 42 males and 38 females, and 45 males and 35 females constituted release groups for the Jack Springs, Skull Creek and White River (Wardell's Ranch) areas, respectively. The first aerial release of chukar partridges in Colorado appeared very. successful. The release of 169 chukars was accomplished in about two hours, whereas the same relea~e by vehicle and packing would have required about two days. During release of chukars , birds dropped about 10-15 feet from the plane, recovered satisfactorily and sailed to the ground. Distribution of the 169 chukars released in the Spitzie Draw and Jack Springs areas appeared to be restricted to areas about one-half-mile in diameter. No known casualties occurred. Recommendations: Game-farm chukars were successfully held over winter and released under f~vorable spring conditions during late March and early April, 1960. Although the 1959 hUnt was somewhat disappointing, general success in further development of the chukar in Colorado appears to be occurring. Continuation of the propagation and release of chukars through the spring of 1962 (as included in long-range plans) appears justified. Aerial release of chukars currently appears satisfactory and should aid in stocking several additional, and relatively inaccessible, localities. Field checks should be conducted to determine the results of the aerial stocking procedure. Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandfort Date: April, 1960 Approved by __ ~G~._N~._H~un t_e~r~ state Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. coordinator _ �r •... 95- April, T9bO COLO DIV WILDLIFE 1 ~O RESEARCH CTR LIB 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 BDOW022411 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No.-.... W_-~3~7_-_R_-_l~3 Work Plan No. 4 Job No.7 Experimental habitat devel-op--m-e-n~t~(p--r-ov~i~di~·-n~g-wa--~t-e-r~t~hr-use of gallinaceous guzzlers). ---------------------------------_ Game Bird SurVey . . . . Title of Job: . . . . .. ~. . . . . . . ----~~~~~------~~~--~~---------------------------- Period Covered: " . . , :March 19, 1959 to September 15, 1959· " Abstract: Data were collected from five study areas in Mesa and Delta Counties and six guzzlers, three in Garfield County and three in Delta County. The predominant vegetation type on the five study areas is galleta grass-shadscale. The mean percent slope gradient increases from 14.1 on Area I, the fUrthest north, to 24.5 on Area V, the furthest south. The mean exposure for Areas I, III, IV, and V is southwest, while that for Area II is west. Twenty 200-f'oot loop-frequency transects read in Area I and 24 read in each of the other areas showed the following mean hits on live" overstory vegetation, per 100-foot transect segment: (1) 29.30, (2) 33.44, (3) 27.92, (4) 18.56, and (5) 26.13. In general, the mean hits on the grass growth form is higher than on any of the other five growth forms sampled. The mean hits on galleta grass (Hilaria jamesi) increases from north (Area I) to south (Area V), while the mean hits on saltbushes (Atriplex spp.) decreases in the same direction. Chukar distribution,. as determined by sampling fecal droppings, was indicated to have a significant relationship (confidence level .70) to exposure, slope gradient, vegetation type, distance from the nearest guzzler, and distance from the nearest gul;ly. The hottest period was from June 29 through July 27 and the coolest period was from August 24 through September 14~ The east exposure had the highest average mean maximum temperature and lowest mean minimum temperature. The inverse of this was true for the north exposure. During June and July, rainfall occurred in trace form but 1.31 inches fell during 11 days of August. Period and intensity of guzzler use decreased from July 5 through September 13. This decrease may be correlated with increased precipitation and increased vegetative growth during August. Checks in the vicinity of six esilablished guzzlers, between :March 19, 1959 and August 3, 1959, revealed that range and food conditions were poor for the most part, water level in the guzzlers was satisfactory, and guzzler use was moderate to heavy. Two 700-gallon plastic guzzlers with shed roof catchment aprons were installed in the WeIll s Gulch Area. One was placed on the North Fork of'WeIll s Gulch and a second on Wellls Gulch proper. ��-97E:x:PERIMENTAL HABITAT 'DEVELOPMENT Ken E. Nicholls and WayneW. Sandf'ort Objectives: 1. To find the extent. of gallinaceous guzzler effect on chukar partridge population development and dispersal in western Colorado. (a) To determine the chukar population without guzzlers. indices on areas with and (b) To .determine the amount of movementby chukars between areas with and without guzzlers. (c) . TO.determine the amount of movementby chukars between guzzlers within one area (Well I s Gulch proper) . (d) To determine the distribution without guzzlers. of chukars on areas with and (e) Tq,determine the survival and increase of recent (March, 1960) chukar releases on (1) uninhabi-ted range in the vicinity of a newly established (June., 1959) guzzler, (2) inhabited range in .-.- -the-vicinity--of---a- newly--established-~November, 1959) guzzler, (3) inhabited range in the vicinity of previously established (1953 and 1954) guzzlers, and (4) control areas without guzzlers. ) Cf) To determine the relationships between intensity-periods gUzzlers use, weather conditions, and forage conditions. of 2. To.determine the use of other water developments (exclusive zlers) as time permits. 3. To determine the chukar partridge to those in WeIll s Gulch. use of gallinaceous 4. To construct for use by chukar partridge. gallinaceous 5~zzlers of guz- guzzlers additional '.Delimitations:' Data .descr fbed in this report were collected from five, approximately, 0.8~sq~are-mile study areas situated, mainly, in the salt-desert-shrub biome along the lower western slopes (general exposure) of Grand Mesaj between Kannah and point- creeks in Mesa.and,Delta Counties res:pectivelyj and f~m six guzzlers, three in Garfield Countryand three. in Delta C'&runty'. In order to more adequately describe the areas selected for study and possibly account for some of the variations within factors of .an ensuing investigation (summer, 1960) which will endeavor to fulfill objective one above, two factors . (additi()nal to the presence or absence of guzzlers) were selected for measurement. Thes~ factors were the vegetation cover and the topography of each area under study. '\ i This report. entails study area selection and layout, description ison of study areas, chukar distribution by sampling fecal droppings, period and .inteJ,lpity of guzzler use by chukars, checks of established construction o·:f;guzzlers. and compar-local weather, guzzlers, and �-98Teohniques Usedl Study area seleotion and layout.-- Of the five study areas. two have "gallinaoeous guzzlers" and for these two there are cOJIlparableeontroIs without guzzlers. The fifth study area i. traversed by a small intermittent stream Which fluotuates diurnally fram flawing to dry. The two controls were subjeotively seleoted from aerial photographs on the basis of gross topographic and vegetation type similarities. The ztudy arsas were laid out with the aid of 1954 aerial photographs having a scale of about three inohes to the mile. All areas are about 1.Smiles long by 0.5-m1les wide. Each area was 'divided into four about equal blocks. The northern boundary of eaoh area 'WaS established by paoing along a compass line, in an easterly direotion, and marking the initial point. of dropping transeots with small rook piles. Description and oomparison of study areas.-- This phase s based, in part. upon measurements of topographic and vegetation cover charaoteristios. The percent slope gradient and exposure reoorded on dropping plots in eaoh study area were also taken as descriptive measures of topography. Peroent slope gradient measurements were taken primarily with an Abney level and those taken. in degrees. with a Brunton type staff complss were converted to percent. Rea.dings were taken up or down slope on the nearest shrub. tree, or rock. Exposure observations were taken approximately perpendioular to the slope gradient upon whioh the dropping plot was located. All slope gradient and exposure readings were taken to the nearest one-percent and one-degree respectively. The vegetation types for eaoh area were adapted from 1940 and 1943 Region 8 Grazing Service range survey maps of the Kannah Creek Unit (Rifle Grazing District) and the Alkali-Well'. Gulch Unit (Ouray Grazing District). Vegetation type area - in acres - was determined from aerial photographs with the aid of a dot grid having 121 dots per square-inoh. Both permanent and non-permanent 200-foot loop-frequency transeots were used to measure vegetation cover on the five study areas. In each of the two areas with guz~lers and their respeotive oontrols 10 permanent and 14 nonpermanent transects vere read. Twenty non-permanent transects ere r-ead in the area with an interudttent stream. The transeots were oombined in cluster. of one. two, and three 200-foot transects in eaoh~ the four blocks of the two areas with gu:~lers and their controls. In the area with an intermittent stream only two clusters were read in eaoh block. Those olusters with two or three transects had lOO-feet between subsequent transeots. The beginning point for the clusters in each block were located a random number of ohains fram the north boundary. Two of these clusters were located two to four feet w~st of the dropping transects and the third oluster was not adjaoent to a dropping transect. The loop frequency sampling method used in this iuvestigat10n consisted of recording plant speoies. moss. litter, erosion pavement, rock, and bare soil at one-foot intervals along the right side ot a lOO-foot steel tape stretched tautly between two height adjustable tape holders mde of ste.l. (These holders are an inovation of Mr. George Turner. Leader of the Rooky �-99Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station research oenter in Grand Junotion, Colorado.) The tape was stretched a second tiDe, beginning at the end of the first lOO-feet, to a.tta!n a 200-foot transect. A 3/4-inch brass loop was used to define the.observations. Both annual and perennial plant speoies ware recorded when any part of the living root crown or aerial parts occurred within the limits of the looPe Hoss, litter; erosion pav~ent. rook, and bare soil were recorded when they made up more than one-half the ar_ inoluded inside the loop. Permanent loop-frequenoy transects were marked with approximately onefoot lengths of giS-inch steel reinforcing bare The markers were drivGn in the ground at three points along the right side of eaoh lOO-foot segment of the stretched steel tape. Chukar partridge distribution.-Chukar distribution was determined by sampling fecal droppings be~een August 4, and September 9, 1959. With the aid of aerial photographs, a millimeter soale, and a table of random numbers, the beginning point for two dropping transeots, in each block of each area, was established$ Each transeot was aligned 90 degrees to the north boundary and at about a right angle to the major gully in the immediate 5tudy area. All transeots oontained 20, permanent, 10O-square-foot oircular dropping plots established at two-ohain intervals as paeed , Droppings found on the plots were removed and the center of eaoh plot was marked with a small pils of rocks •• Distribution of ohukar droppings by exposureD slope gradient, and vegetation type was obtained by recording the three factors and number of droppings simultaneously for SOO plots divided equally among the five study areas. Dropping distribution, by distance - in miles - from the nearest of two guzzlers established in Well's Gu10h during 1953 and 1954,. was determined with the aid of 1954 aerial photographs and a millimeter sca Le , The airline distanoe from 640 plots to th~ nearest of two guzzlers was measured in millimeters and oonverted to miles' by a constant 000132 miles per millimeter. Only the total of 640 plots established in the two areas with guzzlers and their respeotive control areas were used. Dropping distribution by distanoe - in miles - fran the nearest gully was determined by the same technique as used tor distanoe from the nearest guzzler. Meamurement of this relationship involved only 104 plots with droppings, divided among the two oontrol and experimental areas. The t$chnique used to determine the latter two distribution characteristics is more preoise than the actual location of plots on the groundg bu~ it does provide a praotical and relative means of measuring these relationships, otherwise quite difficult under field eonditionse Because the rate of ohukar dropping disintegration is unknown to the investit9ltor, distri"butional observations apply to an indefinite period of time prior to the summer of 1959~ �-100- _8 Period and intensity of guzzler use.-- Some indication of period and intensity of guzzler use by chukar partridge obtained from. six long period guzzler observations. These observations were spaced at 13 to 14 day intervals. Guzzler Number One in Well's Gulch was observed for periods varying trom to 15 hours in length" during the da-,n-twilight hours. Binoculars and a. spotting secpe were used from a point above and about 200 yards a_y from the guzzler. The time of arrival at and departure from the guzzler were noted for individual groups of chukars. ei Local weather.-Looal weather oonditions were measured in the vioinity ot Guzzler Number One in Well' 8 GuIoh , MaxiDI.UD. and minilru:m. temperatu~8 were obtained frail four Taylor maximum-minimum thermometers hung 12 to 18 inches above ground level in the partial shade of shrubs or small trees. These ther8lllometers were placed on representative north" south" east. and west exposures. Temperatures were read at weekly intervals" between 12:00 p.m. and 7&00 p.m •• beginning on June 14 and ending on September 14. All temperatures were read to the nearest one-degree Fahrenheit. The ooourrenoe of precipitation in Well's Gulch between June 10 and July 26 was recorded as the depth to which moisture had penetrated the soil. During the period from July 6 to September 14" preCipitation aooumulation was measured with a Bytru direot reading plastic rain gauge. Aooumulation was reoorded to the nearest 0.01 inoh within a few hours after oessation of storm aotivity. Cheoks of established guzzlers.-Periodio observations in the vioinity of six established guzzlers (throe in Delta County and three in Garfield County) were made between March 19, 1959 and August 3. 1959. Observations were primarily during the months of May" June" and July. These observations inoluded sueh elements as. water level in the guzzler, range and food oonditions, numbers of ohukara at the guzzler and in the surrounding area, and general . abundance of droppings in or adjaoent to the guzzler exolosure as an indioation of guzzler use. Construotion of guulers.-Two 700-gallon plastic guzzlers with shed roof catohment aprons were installed in t}:leWeIll s Gulch area during 1959. One was located on the upper',North Fork of Well'. Gulch in the sEt, swt of Seo. 4, T35. R3E, Ute Prinoi'pal Meridian on June 24" 1959. The seoond was located on the rocky south faoing slope of Well's Gulch proper in the N"lft, NWt ot Seo. 2, R3E. T4S, Ute Principal Meridian on November 24 and 25. 1959. Findings I Desoription and Comparison of·Study Areaa.-- Same of the general descriptive charaoteristios of the five study area8 are summarized in Table 1. beginning with the furthest north. in ~sa County and ending with the furthest south" in Delta County. Ocourrenoe of vegetation types and their approximate aoreage in eaoh study area are shown in Table 2. The predominant vegetation type on all five areas is galleta grass-shadsoale. Tbe otber seven typel are oommon to four or fewer of the areas. �Table l.·-Some descriptive characteristics pertinent to eaoh of the five study areas in Mesa and Delta Counties, Colorado. Bearing of Water Misoellaneous Name Develo~entB Count,l North Bd!l:. Vefietative TlEes Mesa. N 740E greasewood-juniper I. Indian Inte~tent There is a "sheep-tight" utre I Creek pinyon-juniper exolo8ure in the northshadsoale gra ss west corner of the area. galleta grass-shadsoala big sa.gebrush-juniper II. County Line Mesa Delta N 620E pinyon-juniper shadscale-grass galleta grass-shadscale four wing saltbush-juniper County Line Reservoir (Dry) III.North Fork: Well's Gulch Delta N 4SoE shadscale -graBS galleta grass-shadsoale four wing saltbush-juniper ga11eta grass-l/2 shrub Guzzler installed June ,1959 IV .Well' s Guloh Number One Delta N 450E galleta grass-shadsoale four wing saltbush-juniper galleta grass-oactus big sagebrush-juniper Guzzler installed 1953 Heavily stooked with sheep during winter and early spring. V. Big(Deer) Basin Delta N 430E galleta grass-shadsoale four wing saltbush-juniper galleta grass-oactus Deer Basin Reservoir (Dry) A large seotion of this area was burned during the fall or winter prior to the summer of 1959. Transaoted east to west by a barbed wire fenoe. Cattle graze on north side in Mesa Co. and sheep graze on south side in Delta Co. Control for Area 3 below. I I-' 0 I-' I y The water has been diverted from the normal course of Indian Creek into a ditoh whioh oarries it thrQugh the study area to its lower end where the water re-entera diurnally from flowing to dry. the stream course again. The flow fluotuates t~~\ I <£ ';11 �-102- Table 2.--Appraximate acreage of eaoh vegetation type on five 0.8-equaremile study areas in Mesa and Delta Counties, Colorado. I Study Area Ve£ietat ion T;n~e greas8Wood-juniper pinyon-juniper shadsca1e -grass galleta grass-shadsoa1e four wing saltbush-juniper gal1eta grass-caotus big sagebrush-juniper ga11ata grass-l/2 shrub Totals - II III IV V 349.65 44.'13 148.05 25.20 226.17 195.93 145.53 567.63 667.63 2838.15 Acres 145.53 106.47 21.42 250.74 45.99 41.58 340.73 120.96 98.91 185.22 120.33 567.63 163.17 567.63 43.47 567.63 A general statistical desoription of slope gradient is given in Table 3 which shows an increase in the mean peroent slope gradient from Area I, the furthest north. through Area V , the furthest south. Table 3.--Statistical description of slope gradient on five 0.8-square~ile areas as reoorded on 800 dropping plots. Statistio Sample size Mean slope - % Std. deviation - % Std. error of mean Coeff. of variation - f. Confidence Interval - % Samples needep for accuracy w1th~30% of tr.ue mean at 0.30 C.I. . A general statistical 92.3 II 160 15.9 9.7 0.8 61.0 rea III 160 20.8 15.3 1.2 73.6 :!:l.l zo,s 10.1 4.4 I 160 14.1 13.0 .1.1 description IV V 160 !1.S 160 24.2 ' 17.8 1.4 73.7 !.1.5 12.2 6.5 24.5 18.0 1.5 73.4 :1.5 6.4 of exposure il given in Table 4. Table 4.--Statistical desoription of exposure on five 0.S-square-ml1. areas as recorded on BOO dropping plots. Statistic Sample size Mean exposure-bearing Std. deviation-degrees Std. error of mean-degrees Coetf. of variation - % Cont. lnt.-degrees Additional samples needed for aoouraey within 30% of true mean at 0.30 C.I. I 160 S37.1OW 59.6 4.7 27.5 tl.O II 160 S7ge4OW 64.5 0.9 OeY 5.1 24.9 t5.3 study rea III 160 S4:1.00w 72.9 5.8 32.9 S42.6o" 82.5 6.6 37.1 t6.0 ;t6.8 S26.9OW 87.8 7.0 42.6 t7.2 1.3 1.6 2.2 IV 160 V Iso When the compass is divided into eight 46-degree segments, enoompassing the eight major directions, the mean exposure in Areas I. III, IV, and V �""~'".I~f;~j ..•.'"'_., -103fall into the southwest category while the mean exposure for Area II fall& into the west category. In general, the other five statistios (Tabl. 3) increase in mgnitude from Area I, the furthest north, through Area V the furthest south. A second factor chosen for description and comparison of study areas was that of vegetation cover as measured by the loop.frequency transect method. According to Huthings and Holmgren (1959) the loop.fre,quency method of sampling plant populations overrates vegetation caver because the loop includes plants or part of plants which would be missed by a point at the loop's center. In the present investigation a "hit" was recorded when any portion of the base or crown of both annual and perennial vegetation occurred within the limits of the loop. Thus, Tables 5 and 6 might be considered descriptions of overrated vegetation oover. Sampling desi91 and hits on sampled living vegetation for all five areas in Table 5. are summarized Table 5.--Summary of sampling design and hits on living vegetation 0.8-square-mile study areas. on five Area Category No. of clusters No. of ZOO-ft. transeots No. of 100.ft. segments Total hits on live overstory vegetation Mean hit s per segment I 10 20 40 II 12 24 48 III 12 24 48 1172 1340 1605 29.30 33.4:4 27.92 IV V 12 12 24 24 48 48 891 1254 18.56 26.13 The highest mean hits per 100-foot segment was in Area II and the lowest was in Area IV. The high mean for Area II may be correlated with the mean western exposure and its interaoting faotors. The low mean for Area IV may be correlated with heavy .heep use during the winter and early spring. A general statistical description of vegetation on five study areas as to vegetation growth form and/or speoies in Table 6. i. classified Table 6.--statistica1 description of vegetation OD five O.S-square-mile areas as sAlIq'ledb;t 1161 200.foot loop fl:".3uenoltnn.ect.11959. rArea.1:/ category I II III IV V GRASSES Galleta grass, Hila.ria jamesi Mea.n No. hits Std. devia ti on Std. error Coeff. of variation-% Confidence Interval 20.50 19.85 4.44 21.17 12.60 2.57 27.50 15.82 3.22 19.04 13.37 2.73 30.96 l3.En 2.78 96.82 '!:9.29 59.51 !s.22 58.00 70.22 :.5.65 43.95 !B.SS !.s.TS d �i :--"'1[:',")~"'"..~a '_'. _ ,.f -104- I ,P III IV V 1.84 16.79 13.96 2.84 9.61 12.85 2.62 2."2 5.92 1.21 10.SS 10.60 2.16 151.00 !2.80 80.40 :'5.88 132.00 :'5.42 246.00 !2.60 102.00 0.95 3.32 .74 9.00 4.29 0.88 1.79 3.61 0.14 4.92 10.24: 2.09 2.21 2.91 0.59 349.00 ~1.65 47.67 :.1.82 202.00 :'1.53 208.00 !4.82 132.00 :!:1.22 0.60 1.50 .34 1.00 1.10 0.22 1.29 1.80 0.37 2.50 ~.12 0.64 2.082.51 0.61 250.00 :!:0.71 110.00 :!:0.45 139.00 :!:7.66 125.00 :!:1.32 121.00 :!:1.06 0.70 2.67 0.60 1.50 3.40 0.69 2.00 0.32 0.06 0.50 1.50 o.si 2.00 8.61 0.75 381.00 :1.26 226.00 !1.~ 16.00 !0.12 300.00 !0.64 183.00 :1.56 0.15 0.48 0.11 1.71 3.16 0.64 0~25 0.44: 0.09 0.4:2 1.01 0.21 0.29 0.16 0.16 3~0.OO !:0.23 185.00 !1.32 176.00 :0.19 240.00 !0.4:3 258.00 !4.l0 1.55 3.42 0.17 1.00 1.89 0.39 2.71 5.11 1.06 0.58 1.38 0.28 0.33 0.65 0.13 221.00 !1.61 189.00 :0.81 191.00 :2.19 238.00 !~.58 197.00 !O.27 I Cheatgrass, Bromus teotorum Mean No. }lit. Std. deviation Std. error Coeff. ot var1atioa-% . Confidenoe Interval other.!! Mean :No. hite Std. deviation Std. error Coeff. of variati on-% Confidenoe Interval CACTUS Pr ick1y pear. Opumt ia spp. Mean No. hits Std. d ev iati on Std. error Coeff. of varia t1 on-% Confidence Interval ~.95 28.88 toi.'" FORBS Russian thbtle, Sabo1a kali llean No. 'ii'It8 Std. d evia tion Std. error Coeff. of variation-% Confidenoe Interval oTHERS!! Mean No. hits Std. d evia ti on Std. error Coeft. of Tariation~ Confidenoe Interval . RALF-8HRUBsY Mean No. hits Std. deviat ion Std. error Coeft. of variation-% Confidence Interval �-105- SHRUBS SaltbuBhes2i Atriplex app , Mean No. hits Std. deviat ion Std. error Coerf. of variati on-% Confidence Intern.l I II III IV v 3.75 1.19 4.75 5.10 1.04 4.34 4.52 0.92 2.17 2.77 0.57 0.79 1.86 0.38 142.00 107.00 104.00 127.00 236.00 :2.49 :2.15 :1.92 :1.18 :.79 11:'.0 0.25 0.73 0.15 1.54 3.32 0.68 1.71 3.51 0.72 1.71 3.98 0.81 129.00 +6 40 . 292.00 :0.41 216.00 :1.42 205.00 :1.49 232.00 :1.68 9.70 11.31 2.53 15.75 29.92 6.10· 3.71 12.59 2.67 0.92 2.20 0.45 1.46 4.96 1.01 116.00 :6.29 189.00 :1.26 339.00 :6.32 239.00 !.0093 340.00 :2.09 9.70 10.25 2.29 1.00 4.49 0.92 106.00 :4.79 449.00 :1 90 5.33 OTBE~ Mean No. hits Std. deviation Std. error Coaff .• of variation-% Confidenoe Interval TREES Rky. Mt. Juniper, Juniperus 8copulcrum Mean No. hits Std. deviation Std. error Coetf. of variation-% Confidence Interval Pinyon-pine J Pinus edulis Mean No. hits Std. deviation Std. error Coefr. of varia ti on-~ Confidence Interval !I !I 15.00 3.06 - 0 _y 0.25 0.89 0.H3 ~ 71 -- 356.00 :0.37 Twenty-200-foot transects were read on Area I and 24 on each of the ether areas. Includes threeawn (Aristida spp.), ricegrass ( iao sis 8PP.), bottlebrush squirreltai1 (Sitanion hystrix), dropseed Sporobolus spp.), and unknowns. ~ Includes scarlet globemallow (Sphaera1cea coocinea) and unknowns. Includes winter fat (Eurotia 1anata) and snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) • Includes fourwing saltbush (Atriplex oanescens), shad.eale (Atr1plex nut ta lrii )• Includes big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus sPP.), Mormon tea (Ephedra trifurca), blaok greasewood (Sarcobatu8 vermioulatus), and Yucca (Yucoa glauoa). No observations of pinyon-pine were made on Areas III and V. !I 57 !I 17 �-106In general. the mean hits on growth forms can be ranked in the following order. £ram lar~est to smallest. for the five study areas, (1) grasses. (2) shrubs. l3) tree •• (4) forbs. (5) oactus, and (6) halfshrubs. The mean number hits on the dominant galleta graB. shows a general incr.as8 fram Area I, the furthest north. through Area V. the furthest .outh. An exception is Area IV which.is and has been more heavily used by sheep during the winter and early spring. The largest and smallest mean awaber of hits on oheatgrass are shown to be in Areas II and IV resp8otiv.ly. The largest mean hit. on prickly pear caotus ocour. in Area IV. The highest mean hit. for forbs ocours in Area II while that for balf-shrubs ooours in Area III. Saltbushes show a general decrease in the mean number of hits from Area I through Area V. A .ample size test of the galleta grass data, for aoouracy within 30 percent of the population mean at the .70 confidence level. showed that these requirements bad not bean met by the sampling intensity used. AdditioDa 1 2oo-foot transect. required to meet these limitations on each area are as follows, (1) 12, (2) 4, (.J) 4,(4)li.,-'(5) 2. Chubr partridge distri bution.-- Chukar partridge distribution in relation to exposure, slope gradient. vegetation type, guzzlers, and gullies was determined by sampling fecal droppings. A ohi-square test of ind.pendenoe (confidence level .70) indioated a significlUlt relationship between exposure and the number of plots with droppings. The number of plots with droppings. expressed as a peroent, in each exposure olass was highest for the north and northeast and lowest for the .outh and southwest. Northwest and southeast exposures were about equal as were the east and west (Table 7). Table '1.--Distribution of chuka r'droppings by exposure on five study areas in Mesa and Delta Counties, Colorado. Exposure Total No. of Plots 34 9 N NE E 33 122 SE S 112 171 141 178 SlY W NW Totals 800, Plots with droppings 7 3 4 18 11 1'1 Number of plots with dropping. as a percent of total plots in class 20.5 33.3 12.1 14.7 9.8 9.9 29 12.7 16.2 10'7 129.2 18 �i R:1; ... ~ ..... ".~" -107- A chi-square test of independence (oonfidence level .70) indicated a significant relationship between slope gradient and the number of plots with droppin~s. The number of plots with droppings make up a greater proportion of the total number of plots sampled in each gradient class as steepness of slope increases. The proportion increases from zero to 39 percent slope gradi ent, where it is the greatest, then decreases from 39 percent to 99 peroent slope gradient. This decrease is probably correlated with sample size and may reflect the lack of steep slopes within the sample area (Table 8). Table 8.--Distribution of plots with chukar droppings as related to steepness of'slope on 800 lOO-square-foot plots. Percent slope Total plots 279 188 123 101 83 24 0- 9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-7~ 80-G°1 90-99 Plots with droppings 22 Number of plots with droppings as a peroent of total plots in class 6 5 0 0 7.8 8.5 17.8 23.8 22.8 16.6 0.0 0.0 1 0 0.0 Totals 800 107 97.3 Means 88.8 11.8 10.8 16 22 24 19 4 1/ No observations were made in the 80-89 peroent slope olass. A chi-square test of independence (confidence level .70) indicated a significant relationship between vetetation type and the number of plots with droppings. In Areas II, III, and V the number of plots with droppings as a peroent of total plots in the vegetation type is highest for the four wing saltbush-juniper type whioh occurs primarily within the bounds of gullies. In Area I the droppings were found in the greasewood-juniper type along Indian Creek. The greatest percent frequency for plots with droppings in Area IV was in the big sagebrush-juniper type (Table 9) which occurs mainly along gullies. The four-wing saltbush-juniper type in this area was not prevalent along gullies but occurred on a gentle incline with a general south or southwest exposure. The low percent slope gradient, exposure, and distance from the nearest gully may account for the absenoe of chukar droppings. �~ ·R? .!,j.• ~._ '., _' .:-j -108Table 9.--Distr1bution of chukar droppings by vegetation type on five areas in Mesa and Delta Counties. Colorado. Plots wi~h drop~ Total plots Plots with pings as a p.roent Area in type droppings of plot. in type Vegetation 'lzRe I II III IV V shadsoale -grass ga1lata grass-shadsoa1e big sagebrush-juniper pinyon-juniper greas.wood-juniper 2 0 64 19 14 61 a a a :5 sha.dsoale-gra.ss gallata grass-shadsoale four-wing saltbush-juniper pinyon-juniper 118 30 12 1 4 .had8oale-grass ga1leta grass-shadsoale four-wing saltbush-juniper galleta grass-l/2 shrub 33 62 21 44 1 a 3.03 9.68 23.81 0.00 galleta grass-shadsoale ga1lata grass-prickly pear big sagebrush-juniper four-wing saltbush-juriiper 99 36 36.36 41 7 13 1 6 0 2.44 85.71 0.00 galleta grass-Shadsoa1e galleta grass-priokly pear four-wing saltbush-juniper 56 38 66 10 4 30 17.86 10.53 45.45 800 107 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.91 _.Y a 6 5 0.85 13.33 0.00 !I No observations were made in the shadsoale-grass vegetation type. A chi-square test of independenoe (confidence level .70) indioated that there was a significant relationship between distance from the nearest guzzler and the number of plots with chukar droppings. This relationship is that of a general deorease in the number of plots with droppings as dil· tanoe from the nearest gutzler increases. The greatest number of plots, which appears in the 0.96-1.91 mile class, is not indioative of this general cline. This large number is due to sampling two areas, eaoh of whioh had a majority of all plots falling in this distance class. The general decrease in the number of plots with droppings i8 olarified by the peroent frequenoy of plots sampled in eaoh distance class (Table 10). �-109- Table 10.--Relationship between distanoe from the nearest guzzler and the number of plot;8 with ohukar droppings. Number ot plots with droppings as a percent of total plots in class Distanoe from the nearest guz zlermiles Total Plots Plots with droppings 0.00-0.95 0.96-1.91 1.92-2.87 2.88-3.83 160 295 145 40 43 26.8 55 ll.l 6 0 4.1 0.0 Totals 640 104 42.0 Means .160 26 10.5 Chukar dropping distribution and the number of plots with droppings along gullies seem to be influenced by distance to the nearest guzzler. The number of plots with droppings decreases with inoreasing distanoe to the nearest guzzler and with inoreasing distanoe outward from the nearest gully bottom (Table 11). �f'''\ .;~'fJ it:::iJ Table ll.--Relation between the number of plots with chukar droppings and distances from the nearest guzzler and nearest gully on four study areas in Mesa and Delta Counties, Colorado. study Area Total plots Plots with droppings Mean distanoe from plots with droppings to nearest guzzler Distribution of plot. with droppings gully - miles .• 04 0.0 .06 .12 Well' 8 Guloh proper 160 43 0.29 20 13 6 Big Basin 160 44 1.36 27 11 6 North Fork Well's Gu10h 160 12 1.50 5 4 from near.st .20 .16 .24 4 1 1 1 I , ~ County Line 160 6 2.43 4 1 Totals 640 104 6.58 56 28 13 6 1 1 :Means 160 26 1.40 14 9.3 .4.3 2.5 1 1 �-lll- Local Weather.-- Maximum and minimum tEmperatures reoorded in Well's Gulch at weekly intervals for the period of June 14 through September 14 are summarized by exposure and time period in Table 12. The average of period mean maximum temperature is highest for June 29 through July 27 and lowest for August 24 through September 14. The average of period mean minimum temperatures is highest for the period of June 14 through June 29 while the lowest is August 24 through September 14. The average exposure mean maximum tamperature is highest for the east a.nd lowest for the north. The average exposure mean minimum temperature is highest for the north and lowest for the east. Table 12.--Summary of maximum and minimum temperatures in Well's Guloh for the period of June 14 through September 14. X Period N Fran 0 Maximum temp. F Ex:Eosure S E W of X for Period r Minimum temp. OF 94.1 97.4 95.1 92.7 58.6 58.3 58.3 57.6 59.0 56.3 55.5 55.8 57.8 57.5 56.5 57.5 56.0 54.0 50.6 53.3 X N Ex~osur. E W X of r for Period Thru 6/14 6/29 6/29 7/27 7/27 . 8/24 8L24 9/14 91.3 96.0 97.0 92.0 96.0 94.0100.099.5 93.3 96.8 97.8 92.5 90.0 94.0 95.3 91.3 58.2 56.7 57.3 53.5 r of X by Exposure 92.7 95.2 97.5 93.8 57.9 56.5 55.2 56.1 Rainfall during the period of June 10 through July 31 oocurred primarily in traoe form. During the month of August rainfall occurred on 11 days with a tota.l aooumulation of 1.31 inohes. The average accumulation for the 11 days of occurrence was 0.12 inches. There was no rainfall between August 24 and September 14 when the study period was terminated. Period and Intensity of Guzzler Use.--The results of six long period guzzler observations in Well's Gulch are summarized in Table 13. Table l3.--Summary of six long period guzzler observations in Well's Gulch. Delta County. Colorado. Total period of Date of Period of ohukar activity' Total number of Observation Observation near guzzler during chukars seen during observation the observation A.M. P.M. 9:38 5:05 - 8:00 5:05 64 7/5/59 62 5:45 - 10:38 5:10 - 1 :30 7/18/59 4150 7:30 11) 23 9:55 - 10:38 / 8/2/59 2 12) 4:30 4:3s=r 4:55 •• 7:00 7:08 - 10:20 13 8/16/59 None o 5&15 - 7:00 a/30/59 5:30 o 6:30 None 9/13/59 !IActivity occurred during afternoon. The total number ot chukars seen at the guzzler (Table 13) was leas for eaoh successive observation period. being zero for the last two. This decrease in guzzler use is probably related to the increased preoipitation and subsequent increase of green vegetation available to chukars. Galleta grass (Hilaria jamesi) was the most apparent speoies increasing in vegetative �-112- growth. Also following the inorease in vegetative growth was the appearance of ohukars on areas without guszlers where none were seen during dryer periods. Checks of established guzzlers.--Information obtained from periodic observations in the vicinity of six established guzzlers between Maroh 19, 1959 and August 3, 1959 is given in Table 14. Table l4.--Guzzler che cks , Western Colorado, Date Guzzler #1, Well's May 11 .•1959 June 8, 1959 June 11, 1959 June 12, 1959 June 16, 1959 June 17, 1959 1959 Observation Gulch, Delta County (guzzler nearest highway on knoll) Guzzler full. Range oonditions extremely dry and food oonditions very poor. Use being _de of guzzler by chukars, and at least 7 adult birds flushed fram vioinity of water development. No birds observed during brief cheok of unit, but traoks and droppings indicate heavy use being made of this development. Pair of chukara and 5 adults observed later between guzzler #1 and #2. Forage conditions appear very poor in the Well's Gulch area. Approx. 20 adult ohukars observed about 1/2-mile below guzzler. Group of about 12 birds flew to guzzler and others heard calling on surrounding hillsides. Minimum of 8 adults southwest of guzzler. 16 adults observed by ditch bank around point of hill northwest of guzzler. Forage oonditions oontinue to be very poor in Well'. Gulch. During cheek of guzzler from 5aOCa.m. to 6a3Ca.m. no birds were observed at unit. Several birds were heard calling on hillside south of guzzler. Approx. 20 adult chukars were observed in the vicinity of guzzler during early A.M. One adult eh.ukar am 9 young .•appr-ox , one day old, were seen about one mile below the guzzler along small draw. Range conditions sti1l extremely dry and food conditions appear poor • ...;.Gu..;;.;;;.z.:;.z.:;.le.;;..r~#:!.-2-4' _W_e.;;..l...;;l.;;..'_s_G_u_l_c_h..ce~De....;.;.l_ta __ Co_u_n_t...L.y (gul de r in flat south of gu Leh , north of #1 unit) . May 11, 1959 During brief check no birds were observed. Some fresh droppings and tracks indicated some use of this unit by chukars. Range conditions very poor. Seven adult chu1alrs observed at the mouth of the June 8 .•1959 guz~ler and one additional bird in wash north of unit. Guzzler full. Range conditions poor. Light use of the guzzler being made by chukars. �-113- June 11, 1959 June 17, 1959 July, 1959 No chukars observed. Two fresh clocker droppings found on apron. A few traok. observed. indioating light .use by chukar-s, No chukars observed. Several droppings indicat. a few chukars using this unit. A check of #2 guzzler indicated one brood of ehukars may be using unit. Not verified. Guzzler #3, Prairie Canyon, Garfield County June 9, 1959 July 3, 1959 July 10, 1959 August 3, 1959 Guzzler #4, Camp Gulch, March 19, 1959 June 8, 1959 June 9, 1959 June 18, 1959 Guzzler full. No use of unit by chukar-s, Food oonditions fair to poor with little green vegetation to be found. Water, other than that in guzzler, now available for ohukars in the oanyon and traoks of chukars indicate a fair number of birds present. Three adult -, chukara flushed. . Five adults observed in the vicinity of the guzzler. Numerous chukar traoks along water seep in Prairie Canyon, about one mile above guzzler. Flight. in airplane over Prairie Canyon showed water to be ample in this area starting about one mile above guzzler. Eight adult ohukars observed below guzzler. Two adults, 5 unclassified chukars and 2 young observed in canyon considerable distance above guzzler. Garfield County Guzzler full. Cheatgrass greening and abundant food for ohukars in area. Heavy sheep use in area. Two adult ohukars observed in bottom of gulch about 1/4-mile below guzzler. One fresh dropping about l/2~ile below guzzler. Moderate to heavy USe of guzzler being made by chukars. Eight adult ehukars observed at Taried distanoes from guzzler. One adult and 3 young observed about one mile below unit. water level in guzzler from 4-5" from top of unit. Food conditions appear poor. Very dry in area. During check of guzzler pair of adults and one adult with 5 young, 3-4 days old observed at unit. Heavy use being made of guzzler. Other birds heard calling above and below guzzler. Minimum of 45 chukars in vicinity of guzzler, consisting of a ppr'ox, 15 adults and 30 young. Guzzler reoeiving heavy use by ohukars. Food C onditi ens poor. �-114July 1, 1959 July 27, 1959 July 29, 1959 Guzzler A minimLun.of 42 ohukars observed in Camp Gulch at and at varied distances fram the unit. This total comprised of approx. 15 adults and 27 young. Guzzler receiving heavy use. Food oonditions appear poor. Guzzler reoeiving heavy use. Guzzler use Le ss than during previous dates due to cloudburst in area. Approx. 30 chukara observed in Camp Gulch area. #5, Dry Canyon, Garfiel~ County :March 24, 1959 May 13, 1959 June 8, 1959 July 27, 1959 July 29, 1959 200 adult chukars released in vicinity of guzzler. Only appr ex; 3" of water in bottom of unit. Approx. 300 gallons of ~ter hauled to this guzzler and plaoed in unit. Guzzler receiving moderate to heavy use. Range very dry, although some green grass at base of large rocks. Heavy use being made of guzzler by ohukars. Nine adult ohukars observed in vioinity of unit. Guzzler receiving heavy use. 11 adult chukars (all banded) drowned in water due to slick ramp on plastic guzzler basin. Galvanized wire mesh laid on slick ramp of guzzler to prevent birds fran drowning. Four adult chukars observed in Dry Canyon proper, approximately l/2-mile southeast of unit. Guzzler #6, North Fork of Well's Guloh, Delta County June 24, 1959 This plastic unit installed. No water placed in unit and no chukars released in this area during 1959. Construction of guzzlers.--The cost and labor of installing two plastic guzzlers with shed roof catohment aprons is itemized in Table 15. �-115- Table 15.-Cost of materials and amount of labor required to install two experimental water developments for chukar partridges, June and November, 1959. COST Guzzler fF)"auz z?:!:_Ul_ MATERIALS AND RENTALS Catchment bas in : Plastic guzzler • • • • • • • • • • • • Freight charges for guzzler • • • • • • Metal screws ••••••••••••• Tar for coating ramp ••••••••• Excavation aids (dynamite, fuse, and caps) .•••....••••.•• Sub-totals Shed-roof collecting apron: Corrugated roofing (160 sq. ft. ea ,)•• Materials for wood frame 4·x6"xlO' (3 pieces ea.) •••••• 2"x6"xlO' (6 pieces ea.) • • • 2"x6" x8' (4 pieces ea •.) • • • • • • • Nails (lOd-& 20d) ••••••••••• Galvanized roofing nails •• Creosote ••••••••••••••• ... Sub-totals Small apron at mouth of guzzler: Pre-mix concrete ••••• • • • • • • Fencing: Split-cedar posts • • • • • • • • • • • Steel posts • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Barbed wire (approx. 50 yds. ea.) ••• Woven wire, "32- (approx. 50 yds. ea.). Staples 20d spikes •••••••••••••• Sub-totals Tool rental GRAND TOTALS LABOR 245.00 8.38 .68 .50 . .... .... ... . .. . 7.70 7.40 $262.26 $261.96 25.97 25.87 6.60 5.70 3.05 .95 .40 1.10 $ 43.77 5.10 5.20 3.54 .95 .40 .55 $ 41.61 $ 2.00 $ 9.60 1.60 10.50 .51 .34 3.80 6.44 12.00 1.60 10.50 .51 .34 $ 22.55 $ 31.39 $ $ 1.50 $340.26 3.00 8333.$8 MAN-HOURS Guzzler #6 Guzzler #7 Gathering and loading materials, excavating hole for plastic unit, installing guzzler, constructing small collecting apron and shed-roof collecting area, and fenCing ••••• • • • • • • • • 37.0 .. r' 245.00 8.38 .68 .50 28.5 �-116Reconnnendations: Seven experimental water developments have been installed for chukar partridges to date, and it is recommended that construction of these units be discontinued within chukar range until the evaluation of these habitat improvements is completed. In regard to the intensive guzzler investigation, it is recommended that a sixth study area, containing two guzzlers, be laid out and described as to topographic and vegetation characteristics. This area is in Well's Gulch proper and includes one guzzler installed in 1953 and a second guzzler installed in November, 1959. This new area and Areas II through V, described in this report, would provide a complex of three areas with guzzlers and two without (4 guzzlers total) within which chukar populations, movements, distribution, survival and increase, and period and Irrtensft.yof guzzler use can be studied. Description of this sixth area would also provide for the more favorable uniformity of treatment and better comprehension of the various factors to be measured. Literature Cited; Hutchings, S. S. and R. C. Holmgren. 1959. Interpretation of loopfrequency data as a measure of plant cover. Ecology. 40(4):668-677. Prepared by: Ken E. Nicolls and Wayne Sandfort Date: April, 1960 w. Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschni tz Asst. Coordinator �i I I I April, 111~llllll~'liliil'lljl~ii Ilili mfl~~~111 ~1111[i~" 1960 1!lt BDOW022413 -lr7~--C----------------~ JOB'COMPLETION REPORT 'INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State Colorado --~----------------~----------- of' Project No.__~_W_-~3~7_-_R_-l~3~ WorkPlan No. 6 ~-------------------------- _ GameBird Survey Job No.1 Title of Job: Experimental habitat improvement for scaled quail ~--~----------~--------~------------------~~----~~---- Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 15, 1960 Abstract: Five sites for the establishment of experimental cover plots near U.S. Forest Service windmills in Baca County along with five control site Locatifons have been selected. All but one of' the controls· have been staked. These plots when fenced will range in size from acre to one acre and will be of square or rectangular shapev The_~c?Y~!f.:hQ:!l:_f!"9_!Il __ ~!J:£~e _~~:L~ _ ~:Ll drain into the cover plots .and into open pits from the other two wells. t A pre-development winter census of scaled quail on the one square mile study areas has been completed. This showed that there were no over-wintering populations of scaled quail on either the development site study ar~as or controls. Future work on this job will depend upon the eompletion of the required fencing of the experimental cover plots by the Habitat Improvement Project (FW-6-D) and the planting of experimental cover species within these plots. Objective: To determine the value 01' water and cover developments in increasing nUmbers of scaled quail. the range and -Procedures: (1) Selection .of.areas for experimental habitat improvement for scaled General.area to contain area to be developed.and a control area. (2) Map study areas. . (3) Conduct :pre-development .surveys to determine populations of scaled study areas (if any). quail. quail.on ��-119- EXPERIMENTAL HABITAT IMPROVEMENT·FOR SCALED QUAIL Donald M. Hoffman Introq.uction Earlier plans for studies to experiment with methods of improving the habitat of scaled quail were designed primarily towards the development of water. Extensive field searches 1n the southeast region failed to reveal any area large enough in extent having a distinct lack of water which would be suitable for a scaled quail water development and evaluation study. The development of cover for scaled quail near already existing stock watering sites appears to have merit in increasing the range and numbers of scaled quail. The large blocks of Federal grazing lands in southern Baca County and southeastern Las Animas County offers an excellent area for the development and evaluation of cover plots for scaled quail. Acknowledgements Assistance was received in the locating and staking of the cover plot sites and control plot sites in the field from Clifford A. Moser of Federal Aid Project FW - 6- D and Carl Coates of the U.S. Forest Service. The latter individual also assisted in part of the pre-development census work. Elmer Miller, Supervisor of the U.S. Forest Service Land Use Project assisted in supplying information for inclusion in this report. Results of Study Five sites for the establishment of exclosures near windmills on U.S. Forest Service lands in Baca County to experiment with methods of establishing game b~.rd cover have been selected. These five sample plot locations along with four of the five control plot locations have been staked. The sites chosen for the experiment were originally selected by U.S, Forest Service personnel primarily for their lack ot �-120- scaled quail cover at present. Another factor was the feelings of the ranchers which lease the grazing lands for pasture in regard to an experimental study such as this. The site locations of the five control sites were selected by the writer. Consideration WaB given as to nearness to development sIte, similiarity in site factors as cover type, soil, and exposure, and whether the overflow from the windmill drains into the plot or not. The five plots are either of a square or rectangular design and range from 1/4 acre to one acre in size. Present plans are for the Habitat Development Project (FW - 6- D) to fence the five plots in March, 1960. Tree and shrub species for experimentation in the plots including Russian olive, red cedar, wild plum, skunkbush, sand cherry, caragana, Chinese elm, and lilac will be secured from the Departmental nursery near Fort Collins. It is also planned to do limited experimenting With cholla cactus and New Mexioo locust which can be transplanted from local areas to the plots. Future work on thi~ job will depend upon the completion of the fencing of the five plots and the planting of the trees and shrubs within the plots. Periodic brood counts and wintering population censuses are planned for the next segment. Pre-development census of scaled quail. Field searches to determine populations of scaled quail were made in January and February ,1960. The results of the"se surveys are' shown in Table ~. No scaled quail were found to be wintering on any of the development site study areas or the control site study areas. During January, grain was distributed at locations where it was possible that coveys could be located and follow-up searches .were made. The field checks in February were made following a snow so that any scaled quail present could be easily located. A covey of forty scaled quail were located approximately .8 miles southeast of control number four and a covey of four scaled quail were found .7 miles south of control number five. These coveys were outside the stu4y �194 -121- areas. Tracks of a covey of quail were observed at windmill number three during November, 1959 but these had apparently moved from the study area before the winter census was made. Tracks of several pheasants were found approximately 1/2 mile east of wjndmill number one during the field seBrches but no scaled quail could be found. �i-:''l· ",15 ';n Table _!_ DESCRIPTIONS OF SCALED QU.IL HABITAT DEVELOPMENT SITES AND CONTROLS ON U.S. FOREST SERVICE GRAZING LANDS, BACA COUNTY, COLORADO Leasee Pasture Well No. No. SEl S24 TWP32S R45W C.Thompson 17A I lC NWi s24 Twp328 R45W C.Thompson l7A 2 Plot Control N o. No. I Legal Desor1:Qt1on SW; S34 TWP3lS R46w 2 J.Patterson l3C 2C NEt 533 Twp3l5 R46W NWi S20 1;WP33S R47W 3 J.Hioks Teeters l6C I 3C NWt S33 TWP338 R47W 4 5 50 Cover Plot Vegetation Size ShaRe Loo. Overflow Sparse Slightly YuocaInto tA Sq. BE Sandy Grassland Plot Well Sparse Slightly YuocaInto -fA Sq. NW Well Plot Sand;l Grassland Sparse Tight Into YuccatA Sq. IE Grassland Well Plot Sparse Yuoca Sq. SE Into Tight tA Grassland Plot Well Sparse Yuoca Sandy Into -a-A Reot.SE Grassland Well Plot Sparse Sandy Yucca Reot.NE .Into iA Grassland Well Plot H.Shelton R. Kirkpatrick L. Irwin l6F H.Shelton R. Kirkpatriok LL-!rwlJl__ l6F - SEt S28 TWP33S R49W F. MIzer N. Tight S30 ~WP335 R49W W. Dunlap 8Et 829 TWP33S R48W 4C Soil T;n~e 834 TWP33S R48W 3B FaIrly TIght Fairly -_ T1ght Tight Mixed Grassland tA Reot.8W Well Into Pit Mixed ;A Reot.SW Into Gr~~_sl_a_nd__ _ W_ell_ _Pit Dense YuooaIA Sq. S Into Grassland Well Pit Dense Yuooa LA Sq. SW Into Grassland Well Pit I ~ I\) I �Table 2 PRE-DEVELOPMENT CENSUS·OF SCALED QUAIL ON EXPERIMENTAL HABITAT DEVELOPMENT AREAS AND CONTROLS BACA COUNTY -lfen. Loc.* SE B1sonte Size of Dates Grain Remerks Study Area Counted Used? 1-Bq.Pheasant track-a-.-;tr:- e. weT1#l; No 1-7-60 Grain put out 4 sites. Mile 1-12-60 Yes 0 Pheasant tracks i mi. e. we11#1. 2-16-60 No 0 Ground covered by snow. BE .1 Sq. 1-7-60 No 0 Grain put out 2 sites. B1aonte Mile 1-12-60 Yes 0 2-16-60 No 0 Ground covered by snow. NE ---1-g-Cl.-:--~ -1.:.8-::-60---No-------0---- Gra1n-put--ou.t3--s1tes.---------Project Mile 1-12-60 Yes 0 Hdq. 2-15-60. No 0 G~ound covered by snow. NE - 1 Sq. 1:'13-=00-· -No----0 Grain put-out 4 sites. Project Mile 1-12-60 Yes 0 No quail at Project Hdq. for seve years Hdo. 2-15-60 No 0 Ground covered by snow. BE 1 sq. - - l;..-a~OO--No--0 -Track-a of quail in area Nov. ,1959 l-:' .Edler Mile Grain put out 3 sites I\) W 1-11-60 Yes 0 2-16-60 No 0 Ground covered by snow. l--g-ocf- -}fo------O---Graln pu-t-out-3- sItes. 1 Sq. BE Edler Mile 1-11-60 Yes 0 Ground covered by snow. 2-16-60 No 0 SW 1 Sq.1-8-00 No 0 Grain put out 1 site. Prater Mile. 1-11-60 Yes 0 Barn 2-16-60 No 0 Ground covered by snow. BW------ -1.5q~-----1-B-6-0-- No- ---~O--- -Uraln put out 3 sites. Prater Mile 1-11-60 Yes 0 Covey of 40 at ranch .8 miles SE of well Barn 2-16-60 No 0 Ground covered by snow • .BE 1 S-q -;----1-F-60 No 0 Grain put out 4 sites. Kirkwe11 Mile 1-11~60 Yes 0 . __ __ ~ 2-160-_6Q_ _N_Q_ _ 0 Gro_Wlg._Q_o_v_er_Eld._ Qy snow. SW 1 5'1-.--- 1-8~oo No 0 Grain put out-YSTtes. Kirkwell Mile 1-11-60 Yes 0 Covey of 10-12 reported .7 miles S of well 2-16-60 No 0 Covey ot 4 seen .7 miles S ot well (Ormsted_f_Brml._ Ground covered by snow. Plot Control No. No. 1 1C 2 2C , , 3 3C 4 4C 5 50 ~\ 0«\ ·'.u~ • See Table 1 tor specl.f'io locations. ,;;lJ �Figure 1. Site of proposed experimental cover development plot number 2 before fencing. Baca County. Figure 2. Site of proposed experimental cover development plot number 5 before fencing. Baca County. �i €)Q .-_.,_::-_ . ,'! -125- Summary Pre-development population surveys in January and February, 1960 showed no scaled quail were winter~ng on any of the five development site study areas or any of the five control site study areas. All of the study areas are one square m1le in sjze. Two coveys of scaled quail were located near two of the control site study areas but not actually within them. A small population of pheasants Was observed to occasionally range within one of the development s1. te study areas from near-by cultivated n.elds. Plans are for the Habitat Development Project (FW-6-D) personnel to fence the five experimental cover plots of from 1/4 acre to one acre in size during March, 1960. Following this fencing work, experimental tree and shrub species will be planted within the plots and follow-up checks will be made to determine the value of the cover plots in increasing and holding scaled quail populations. Submitted by:Donald M. Hoffman Approved by: F.G. Kleinschnitz Ass~stant Coordinator Date: April, 1960 ��April, 1960 0 ,-=-:--_.._~_1!-tJl Ilj'Ij'il~imrjl~ -127- BDOW022414 JOB C;OMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS :PROJECTS 9~)'l6018 ,_v U.,L Colorado Pro ject; No.__ .•.. W___ 3,.:.7_-R_-_'1...,;:3;;.._ _ 6 ----~--------------------- Work Plan No. Title of Job I Period Covered: Mapping of scaled quail GameBird Survey Job No.2 range April 1, 1959 to :March15, 1960. Abstract: The mapping of' scaled quad.L range through the delineation of' major cover types 'WaS acconrp'Lfshed in portions of Huerfano, Otero, and Las Animas Counties during the present. report period . ..Tbe,.~veget,atiye_caver,_types.in ..which,scaled-quaiLwere observed along the established routes during the brood courrtIng period were recorded. Most of the 1536 scaled quail observed during the period from July 20 through August 31, 1959 along the .ten established brood .courrtIng :routes were found in (a) sands age , (b) dense cholla cactus and lor yucca grassland, or (0). cedar breaks vegetative types. , Objectives! (1) To assemble available information on scaled quail range and distribution. (2) To ,c9mplete mapping of scaled quail range. (3) To .compf.Le.datia and prepare distribution and density maps of s.caled quail populatiqns. Procedures: Field :inspections of scaled quail ranges in southeastern Colorado pro~essed as time, permitted. The 'eleven major vegetative types .as desoribed in tb,e April, 1959 Job Completion Rep;():rt(scaled quail) were drawn on .counby highway map sheets, seale 1 '. '. '2 :ip.ch 'Per, In1.1e • The vegetative ,COVertype in 'Wh:i,chscaled quail were observed during ·the brood. counting pe:riod £'rpm July 20 through August 31, 1959 'Werer~oorded. This data. has been analyzed for Laber- 'comparison with the'veget,ative composition of the r-ange along the'routes where the scaled :quailwere counted. ��-129- MAPPING OF SCALED QUAIL RANGE Donald M. Hoffman Densities of scaled quail appear to be closely related to the vegetative cover types in which they occur. d.a't e , the following scaled quail range mapping through cover type delineation has been completed: '1'0 County Baea Huerfano Las Animas Otero Approx. per cent of range mapped. 33 100 50 50 Tables 1 and 2 show vegetative cover type occurrence of the scaled quail observed during the brood counting period from July 20 through August 31,1959. Observations of scaled quail made by Wayne W. Sandfort, Jim Miller, and Walt Schuett when assisting with the brood counts are included in the data. Most of the 1536 scaled quail observed on the ten brood count routes were observed in the (a) sandsage, (b) dense cholla. cactus and/or yuccagrassland, and (c) cedar breaks vegetative types •. Other vegetative types in which scaled quail were observed during the period include dryland farming areas, greasewood-saltbush washes, irrigated farming areas, tree plantings, sparse cholla cactus and/or yucca- grassland, .and intermediate type grasslandS. It appears that during periods of extreme weather conditions such as was common in the southeal!t region during the past Winter, the sca.led quail move from their summer range to sites affording better cover. The birds concentrated near farmhouses particularly where tree plantings and/or other cover was available, at scattered tree plantings at old homestead s1tes, within cedar breaks, and within sheltered pockets of dense cholla cactus during the past w:lnter. Many sites in the large pastures which normally contain coveys of scaled quail during �1i"\1 -, .'~ '.,~) ~··:C)l '1' a. bl e _l__. COVER TYPE OOCURHENOE Type of Count Dense 011011a OF SOALED QUAIL OBSERVED DURING BROOD OOUNTING PERIOD JULy 20 - AUGUST 31,1959 HaJor Cover 'J.:;lpe GreaaetwodTree Cedar Saltbush Plantings SandD~~e Breekg W~Bhea Total Dryland lrriagated Mid- Sparse Farmland Farmland Graes Oholla Ten Brood Routes (No. birde) 407 690 214 56 17 122 27 1 2 1536 % of Total 44.91 13093 3.65 1.11 7 .. 94 1.76 .07 .13 100% 26.50 • Area count S.of Cimarron R. (No. birds) 10 246 2 258 % of 'J.'ote.1 3.88 95.34 .78 100% ~ .. Random brood Counts 228 (No. of b1.rds) 169 99 18 41 TOTAL (All Oounts) 635 869 313 74 304 124 27 1 27.02 36.97 13.32 3.15 12.94 5.28 1.15 .04 1 556 :3 2350 % of :.cotal (All vounts) • 1-:; ,..! ., .a.. 00% v r 0 I �Table 2 • NUMBERS OF SCALED QUAIL BY COVER TYPE IN WHICH OBSERVED ON BROOD COUNT ROUTES JULY 20-AUGUST 31,1959 * Route No. & Name e Total Dryland Dense Cholla Far-ml.and Irrigated Farmland Mld':"---Sparse Grasses Cholla No.1 Smith Oanyon 37 26 1 64 No.2 Ce..reyDarn-Higbee 132 98 9 239 No.3 Apishipa oandsage 15 No.4 Le Sage Ranch 18 145 26 2 1 188 19 ( No.5 Campo Sandsage E. 74 9 No.6 Campo Sands8ge w. 245 8 No.7 Carrizo Mtn. ~ 164 No.8 K1rkwell-State 11ne 39 No.9 C F & I Ditch 690 219 19 32 296 47 19 ~_ ___ 214 56 , f-J 253 10 20 407 106 1 45 26 2 No. 10 Holly Totals ** 206 22 17 • Repeat observations disregarded. ** See Table _l_ for percentages of total for each cover type. 58 27 122 27 105 1 2 1536 N ,;;J ";\ '\ '.',\:J �-132- the summer period were tound to have none ~uring the past winter period. The movements noted during the past winter period were not over long distances and never approached the accepted limits ot the cruising radius ot the species. Summary In order to compare scaled quail summer period populations with vegetative cover type co~position, the numbers of scaled quail observed during the past brood count period trom July 20 through August 31, 1959 have been analyzed by cover type. Of a total ot 2350 scaled quail counted during the period, 1536 were counted along ten brood counting routes. Future analysie ot cover composition along the individual routes Should indicate summer vegetative cover preference of sealed quail within the cover types sampled. . Prepared by:Donald M. Hoffman Approved by:F~C. Kleinschnltz Assistant Coordinator April, 1960 Date: �Apr:i:l, 19~04 -133JOB COMPLErION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Project Colorado ----------------------------------No. GameBird Survey W-37-R-13 6 ----------------------------- WorkPlan No. T1,tle of JObI Period Covered: Development of census techniques Job No.3 for scaled quail April 1, 1959 to March 15, 1960 Abstract: Three tria;L methods of securing ,scaled quail population trends including call counts, roadside wintering covey counts, and .area wintering covey counts were experimented with during the report period. Winter roadside counts along established routes have been dropped since a true picture of population levels vas not secured using this method. Roadside counts during the brood coUlfting--period--1lB.ve proven feasible--and-~Wi.ll be continued. Area wintering ;covey counts using .census units .of from .sLx to eight square miles in size holds definite -Promise in securing the desired information on population trends. The use 'Of call counts during the late spring period to .secure information on over-wintering population levels is uncertain at this time due to lack of dat.a. Trial call counts .a.Long,:established routes will be .made during the coming ,spring tio further test the method. Objectives: (1) To determine mehhods for ascertaining annual changes in scaled quail populations. (2) To establish permanent zones, areas, or routes for counting scaled quail. (3) To prepare'forms and record books for the systematic recording of ini'orIIiation. Procedures: Trial roadside 'wintering covey counts were made on three brood counting ;routes. The datia from the Carey Dam-Higbee route were compared with populations as indicated by locating and .count.Lngas many coveys as possible along the route during the census period., Trial call counts vere made along three different routes to determine the period of peak calls and determine sui table procedures for making the call count.s . Trial area wintering covey counts vere made on three census units of from six to eight square miles in size. Whole maize and repeated .checks were used to locate and count .as many'scaled quail as possible during the time available. ��-135- DEVELOPMENT OF CENSUS TECHNIQUES Donald M. Hoffman Call Counts The use of scaled quail call counts during the late spring period to Indlce.te over-wintering population levels, if reliable, would be ideal in the management of the species. The heavy spring snowstorms wh~oh occur occasionally in the acuuhe e.st region ordinarily are over before the period when calling appears to be most frequent. The deep snows and high winds during the past winter closed most of the little travelled roads through many areas of good scaled quail populations. A census method which does not depend upon the travel of routes during the winter period would be helpful in the management of the species. Ten trial call counts were InS.defrom March 17, 1959 through May 28, 1959 along three different routes. These trial ca.ll counts were exploratory in nature to determine the period of most caLl.s and to experiment with methods of making the counts. It wa.s found that the scaled quail were calling more dur' ng late Ma.y and into early June than es.rlier. The scaled quail used a one syllable II squawk I call more frequently during the latter part of May and early June as well as their regular two syllable call. Bobwhi te qUB.iI, pheasants, and wild turkeys were heard calling along the routes travelled. It is pla.nned to test this method more thoroughly during the coming spring along the ten established routes on which broods were counted last summer. Roadside Winter Counts Trial winter roadside oounts were made along three brood counting routes during the past winter period. It was origina.lly planned to make roadside wintering covey counts along all of the ten established brood counting routes to further test the method. Drifted snow closed most of the routes from January 13, 1960 to early March ,1960. Most of these routes follow �-136- little used roads since it is in these places that highest scaled quail populations have been found. Since preliminary work with roadside wintering covey counts was done in the Carey Dam - Higbee area, a comparison ot roads1.de counts with a minimum population count was continued for the second winter along this route. Tables I and 2 show data from the replicate roadside-counts and the minimum population census. Three replicate A.M. and three replicate P.M. counts were made along the route. Following the completion ot these counts, an intensive count Was made us:1ng whole maize to locate and hold the individual coveys. The minimum scaled quail population along the route was calculated from these counts. Results showed that in three replicate A.M. counts an average of 82.33 sealed quail 'tlerecounted compared with an average of 175.60 counted in five repli.cate A.M. counts made during the previous winter period. In the three replicate P.M. counts an average of 50.33 scaled quail were counted compared with an average of 104.60 counted in five replicate counts during the previous winter period. Thus, from the roadside winter counts alone it would indicate that there was over a 100 per cent reduction in the scaled quail wintering population along the route. By locating and counting all scaled quail coveys possible along the rOUT,e, it was found that there was a minimum popUlation of 547 during the past winter compared wi th a. rninimtun population of 592 for the previous winter period or a deorease ot 7 60 per oent •. 0 The absence of scaled quail cover and teed along the road due to late Bummer and fall road grading by county maintenance crews is thought to be the main reason for the lower scaled quail roadside counts rather than an actual large scale reduction in numberso Early morning roadside wintering covey counts were also made along the Campo Sandsage E. route and the �...137- Kirkwell - State Line route. Table _1_ shows the results of these counts. Here as with the Oarey Dam Higbee route, the roads travelled had been graded. The lack of weed cover along the roads appeared to be the main reason for the small numbers of scaled quail counted. Random checks along other routes showed that the coveys were not ranging along the roads as is normal during the summer brood rearing period. During the Winter period, the coveys apparently move from the cover found along the roads to the better cover afforded at many of the scattered farmhouse sites, cedar breaks, and scattered tree plantings. Ooveys ot scaled quail were observed to congregate along cleared paved highways when the remainder of the country was covered b,y deep snows. It would, however, be difficult to make periodic counts of these coveys at these times because of the large amount of traffic on the paved highways. The little travelled side roads did not hold the scaled quail populations except where sufficient cover was available. From the studies conducted over a period of two winters, it is apparent that roadside counts do not yield themselves to estimating wintering population levels accurately and other methods of counting must be tested. The established trend routes which have been described and mapped will be used for the counting of scaled quail broods. It has been found the brood count data can be most easily gathered using established routes. ~ Covey Oounts It appears at this time that area wintering covey. counts tor scaled quail have definite possibilities for use in securing population trends. The area covey count i~ a direct census method. Counts of coveys are practicable in quail because of the low mobility of the coveys accordIng to Leopold, 1939. During the present report period, the size of the census units was reduced so that they could be more inten.!ve17 covered during the time available. Areas of six to �-138- eight square miles each appear to hold promise of yielding the desired information on population fluctuations. Whole maize was again used as an aid in locating and counting coveys on three etudy areas. Tables _!_ through ~ show data from counts made on three area census units with a comparison of the previous tiinters counts where data is available. It is planned to eventually locate and describe at least ten area census units within better scaled quail range for wintering covey counts to further test the method. The main drawback encountered to date with the method has been the time element involved in locating and counting as many scaled quail coveys as possible within a unit. The areas used for census units must be accessible particularly during periods of poor weather conditions. Suitable permanent cover must also be present within a unit to hold the coveys during the prolonged periods of inclement weather such as occurred during the past winter. A movement of coveys was noted during the past winter from areas with insufficient' cover to sites of better cover. It is entirely possible that a number of scaled quail have perished from the prolonged deep snows and cold weather which prevailed in the southeast region during the past winter period. ~pot checks will have to be made to determine the extent of these lossee. Summary Sufficient data was secured during the last two winter periods to eliminate Winter period roadside counts as a census method. Area winter covey counts and spring call counts will be continued in an attempt to find a reliable census method for determ1ng population levels. �Table _!_. SUMMARY OF REPLICATE ROADSIDE SCALED QUAIL COUNTS -- 1959 Route: Carey Dam - Higbee Date ReE1icates Morning Count Date Even,_ng Count 1 12/9/59 109 12/8/59 84 2 12/15/59 95 12/14/59 0 3 12/16/59 43 12/15/59 67 Sum of X 247 151 I f-' W N 3 3 X 82~33 50.33 547 547 Number birds counted along route during census period (Table ~) Percent'b~rds counted Average percent of birds counted 7.86% - 19.93% 0% ., 15.36% 15.05% 9.20% \0 I it\) .;,:) _,t .•. ..•.. ~-# �~'\') Table 2.... :'.':,\ ~d SCALED QUAIL COVEY SIZES --- CAREY DAM TO HIGBEE ROUTE --- 1959 All Counts Following Open peason . Deoember January No. Estimated 18 9 14 15 16 18 21 23 5 6 Coveys. P_opulation Area Higbee Area Ditch Rider's House 26 F. Griffith Hdq. 3 Zimme~an's E. House Zimmerman's Hdq. Thompson I s Hdq. Clark's Windmill Ridenour's Hdq. 7 J. Autry Hdq. 1 1 1 32 25 15 1 36 46 1 22 50' 43 2 38 1 Totals 32 25 15 36 37 65 38 2~S-- Rocking Chair Ranch Area 1st Windmill N.Bridge Statue Rocks . 4 Hay Feed Area Rocking Chair Hdq. 40 2~ E. Of Hdq. E. Hallis Pasture Patton's Windmill Carey Dam Area S. Gate Old Windmill Small Earth Dam Old Rock Bldgs. ,Old Liebert Hdq. West End Dam West of Mailbox RJ J 1 1 2 20 40 2 62 11 1 20 30 5 - 46 14 6 5 19 3 1 15 1 1 13 ~ o 4 I 35 11 -___£Q 192, 5 15 13 29 29 1 20 1 - 25 1 25 TOTAL --24 20 ·107 Total counted in 24 ooveys ~ 5 7' ~otal lellgth of route 21.3 miles Average - 22.79 quail per oovey Number counted 1958 a 592 Per Oent Deorease = 7.60 % = 547 . �-141- Table ...1_. TRIAL ROADSIDE WINTERING COVEY COUNTS Route No.Counted Date Time 1/8/60 1/9/60 A.M. Campo Sandsage E. Campo Bandsage E. 25 A.M. 1/12/60 1/13/60 A.M. A.M. Kirkwe11-State Kirkwe11-State 9 10 Line Line 8 �~\') ..~'h s) Table .-!L. SCALED QUAIL AREA COUNT COMPARISON -- VOGEL CANYON -- OTERO COUNTY Numbers of quail Oounted Number 11L19 /.5_fj __ t_Q_ 1213158 __Q_Q_~e;y s Area Zimmerman's Oactus Flat Hdq. * Mile W. Hdq. Oottonwood Grove & Rock Foundations Numbers ot quail Counted Number 1_~_8_L59__ 'tQ___lL_QLQ_Q_ __ Q_Q_'r_~s 36 1 36 2 35 1 30 1 20 1 21 1 I I-' .j:7 Lower Govt. Springs & Cactus Flat to North 20 Upper Govt. Springs 0 Reservoir Upper Vogel Canyon 0 - 0 Reservoir Pasture in Ridenour's 28 1 0 139 5 109 TOTALS f\) Average Number-Blr(fs--Per -Co"e,.-27.80 Per Cent Increase or Decrease Approx. Length ot Area 6.0 Miles Approx. Width of Area 1.0 Miles 22 1 - 1 0 - 21.80 14.39% 5 r �Table _2_ SCALED QUAIL AREA COUNT COMPARISON -- CAREY DAM. AND VICINITY -- BENT COUNTY Numbers of quail Oounted Number ll/7_j5fi_to 12j3/58 Coveys. Area Numbers of quail Oounted __1218L59 t_o1/6/60... Number Coveys West of Mailbox RJ 16 1 25 1 West of Dam 14 1 20 1 Old Rock Buildings and Old Liebert Hdq. 10 I 29 1 Old Windmill 33 1 15 1 Small Earth Dam o 13 1 South Gate to Carey Dam o - 5 1 East of Patton's Windmill 15 1 49 2 Patton's Windmill 11 1 11 1 West of Patton's Windmill 19 1 0 - TOTALS 118 7 lb7 9 Average Number Birds Per Oovey Per Cent Increase or Decrease Approx. Length of Area Approx. Width of Area 10-.-Sb- , I-' +- w I . - . -_ TEr.33 + 41.53 % 6.0 Miles 1.0 Miles ~\j !:,·,t~ I:':j �-._, "I (:"1, \,:,1 ' .. ,;:~ :~~~ Table SCALED QUAIL AREA COUNT 6 U.S.F.S. PASTURE SE OF CAMPO -- BACA COUNTY * Numbers ot Quail Counted ** January, 1960 Number 12 26 2.7 ~._ __ C9_'\Teys_ Area Estimated Population Windmill East of Side-oats Patch Old Homested NE of Side-Oats Patch 29 30 30 1 - Windmill & Overflow Pit 1.3 Miles N. Old Tree Planting on Hill 30 1 10 Windmill & Overflow Pit North Edge of Pasture Windmill & Overflow Pit East of Tree-Planting ••• - 10 - - Old Sheds, Windmill, & Overflow Fit West of Pasture Fence TOTALS Average Number Birds Per Covey Approx. length of Area Approx. Width of Area * E.Dye, Glover, and C.B. Bright Lease. 2 20.00 6.0 Miles 1.0 Miles ** Grain put out in area January 9,1960 and January 12, 1960. 40 1 t: I �-l45- Literature Cited Leopold., Aido 1939.< Game Management. Charles Scribner's SODa. New York. p.l44. Prepared by: Donald M. Hortman Approved by: F.O. K1einsohnitz Assistant Coordinator Date: April , 1960 ��<-141JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Project Colorado ---------------------------------Nci._~_W_-..;:;3...:.7_-....;R ....;-1....;:3=__ .. __ ....;.Ga=me_;;..B_ir_d __S....;.urv.;....__e~y _ Work Plan No, _ 6 Job No.4 ----~------~--------------Ti tle of _Job: Scaled Quail Brood Counts ----~--~--~----------------------------------~--------------~~ Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 15, 1960 Abstract: During this report period, progress toward standardization of scaled quail brood counts through the use 'of trend routes and defined methods of counting have been accomplished. Strip map.s,of routes, standard brood count forms, and descriptions of routes have been prepared. A young j~Q_:adu_l_t,_,:r-a,t::L9 __:_Qf__.z.a_4: __:__ ;W_O_cWas_,~§._l_G1J-J~t?_g,_1'9.]:' the 195~ brood count period from July 20 through August 31, 1959 based upon a samp.Leof 2350 birds. In the 100 individual broods -which'were accurately counted there -was an average of 8.92 young per brood. By comparison, in 1958 the young to adult ratio was 245 : 100 based upon a sample of 1320 scaled quail observed from July 1 through September 16, 1958. Sixty broods in 1958 averaged 9.60 young per brood. The sample secured the true mean. in 1959 was again sufficient to estimate within ten pe rcerrt .of Ten brood .count routes were established in the southeast .region of Colorado for the 1959 brood count period. These routes averaged 23.75 miles in length. Two counts were made on each route including an early morning and a late evening count. Of 1536 individual scaled quail observed .in two counts along the ten brood .count routes disregarding repeats, there were 66 broods -which could be counted accurately. An average of 3.23 birds were counted per mile travelled ar:d 2.14 broods which could be accur-atiel.y counted were observed p.er hour. An average speed of 15.40 miles per hour was recorded for all routes. In the .ana'Lysf.s of' comparable data from seven .of the routes , it was found that 17.76 per-cenf more quail were counted during the 'early morning counts than during th~ Labe 'evening .count.s, and 61.11 percent more broods could be accurately counted. The evening 'counts ;are .considered essential, however, in_order to secure _a large enough sample t.o give'a t.rue indication of' the hatch. It v.as found that 7.81 percent of the birds observed in the 'Qriginal count were again observed in the following ·count. It is r-ecommended.t.o continue brood counts as outlined. If possible more routes should be established 'Within the scaled quail range to give better coverag:e. Trial wintering covey count s along e.stablished brood .courrt routes have not proven reliable. �-148- Ob j.ectives : (1) To study methods :for ascertaining annual scaled quail production. (2) To .establish permanent, representative scaled quail brood count routes 'Within the range o:fthe species. (3 ) To instruct other Departmental personnel in the -pro.cedures. (4) To prepare :forms and record books :forthe systematic recording ;o:finformation. (5) To eventually turn scaled quail brood counts over to management. Procedures: (1) Selection o:fbrood count routes. (2) Description o:f methods and times :for making counts. (3) Collection o:f :field data. (4) Analysis o:f :field data. ." ) �-149, - SCALED QUAIL BROOD COUNTS Donald M. Hottman Introduction Brood cou~ts in 1958 were made at random in order to determine best areas tor secur1ng brood counts and to experiment 'With methods. Trial brood count routes established during the 1959 brood count period trom July 20 through August 31, 1959 produced gratitying results. Through the use ot routes, it appears possible that comparable data can be secured trom year to year and the brood counts can be made early enough to turn1.sh game managers with the necessary information tor the management ot the species. New Mexico is determining semi-annual population trends ot quail ('scaled, Gambelle, and bobwh~te) through· the use ot roadside trend routes according to Frary, unpub. They have established torty-one roadSide trend routes wh'.ch are run in the early morning during August and February by the game managers 8.nd7or conservation officers. Frary, unpub. calculated 1.8 birds per mile in the southeast area tor the August surveys and .6 tor the February routes. In the southeast, quail broods averaged 9.8 chicks per hen. He found that the w1nter trend route counts gave little indication of the true quail populations but he felt that the time of day for beginning the runs was very important. Be recommends starting winter routes no earlier than 8:00 A.M. Other states using roadside counts on quail to estimate populations ot desert quail '.nclude Arizona and Texas according to Frary, unpub. Purpose of Study Reliable methods ot determining reproductive succe •• have been lacking in Colorado in the past. ~uail have ranked second in numbers of birds killed each year since 1955 among the resident upls.nd game birds on Which an open season is held each year accordIng to Grieb and Hunter, unpub. Methods of accurately determinIng reproductIve success are needed with the scaled quail in order to intelligently manage the species. �-150- ~cknowledgements . Assistanoe in the oollection of brood count data was reoeived from Wayne W. 8andfort, Jim Miller, and Walt Sohuett. The assistance received· from these individuals was greatly appreciated. Results ot Study A young to adult ratio of 284 : 100 was calculated for the 1959 brood count season from July 20 through August 31, 1959 based upon a sample of 2350 birds. Of these, 892 were young, 314 were adults, and 1144 were unclassified. In the 100 broods which could be accurately counted~ there was an average ot 8.92 young per brood. Only broods of which an accurate count was secured were used in the calculations ot percentages. All other broods observed are included under ~ unclassifiedM• The 1959 brood count period data compares tavorably with the 1958 brood count period in which a total of sixty broods averaged 9.60 young per brood. A young to adult ratiO of 245 : 100 was calculated for the sample of ' 1320 scaled quail. Broods were counted at random during the 1958 brood season during the period July 1 through September 16, 1958. Thus, far more scaled quail were counted in a shorter period of time in 1959 and the young to adult ratio Was higher. Ten brood count routes were established in southeastern Colorado during the 1959 brood count period in order that comparative data may be secured from year to year. Of 2350 scaled quail counted disregarding repeats, 1536 were observed along the trend routes on which one early morning and one late evening count was made, 258 were counted in the area south of the Cimarron River Which yields itself to an area oount rather than a roadside count, and 556 were counted in misoellaneous checks. Table 1 shows a comparison of data on ,counts made in the area-south of the Cimarron River during 1958 and 1959. Table 2 shOWS brood count route comparisons of the ten trial brood count routes established in southeastern Colorado. The average length of the trend ', �-151- route. was 23.75 miles. An average ot 3.23 birds per mile with a range ot .33 to 6.73 was calculated tor the combined early morning and late evening count. on the ten routes disregarding repeat observations. Sixty six broods were tallied along the trend routes disregarding repeat obserYations. In addition, eight were counted in the area count south ot the Cimarron River, and twenty six broods were counted in miscellaneous checks. The early morning counts were-started trom 5:02 A.M. to 5:50 A.M. and the late evening counts were started trom 4:40 P.M. to 5:40 P.M. Table _l_ shows comparisons of data collected by routes. Routes 1,2, and 3 were not run for both A.M. and P.M •. counts during a olose enough interval to compare the value ot early morning and late evening counts. Routes 4 through 10 can be compared since both an early A.M. and a late P.M. count Was made within a matter ot not over two days interval between counts. On these seven routes, the A.M. counts tallied 630 scaled quail oompared with 535 tor the P.M. counts. Thus, the A.M. oounts produced 17.76 per cent more quail counted. In addition, 29 separate broods were counted aocurately during the A.M. counts compared with 18 for the P.M. counts. Thus, 61.11 per cent more broods could be aocurately counted during the early A.M. counts. While both numbers of birds and numbers of broods were considerably les8 during the late P.M. counts, it is believed that the data gathered from the evening counts were vB.luable and necessary in securing e sample large enough to secure the ~ccur.cy requIred. Considering all ten routes, a total ot 120 individual quail were recounted on the count following the original count out ot a total ot 1536 scaled quail tallied. Thus, 7.81 per cent ot the birds observed in the original count were again counted during the following repeat oount. Five broods out ot a total of sixty six broods accurately counted were repeat observations in the dual counts made. This amounts to 7.58 per cent repeat obserTations. Repeat observations were determined through recording of site locations of broods and coveys in most oases and the recording ot mileages from check points in others. �(.;']~0,.~ .'to·::::.· ..fL -152- It appeared that high winds had more adverse et'fect in the successt'ul counting ot' scaled quail during the brood count period than any other single t'actor. Frary, unpub. reoommends not oounting quail on established trend routes when the wind velocity is over B-J as the results will probably be unreliable. Five pheasant broods were observed along the scaied quail trend routes. Four broods ot' 5,5,3, and 7 young were tallied on the Holly P.M. route and one brood of 4 young was observed on the Campo Sandsage East route. One bobwhite quail brood ot'2 adults and 4 chicks was counted on the Campo Sandsage West P.M. route. A group of five lesser prairie chickens thought to be a brood was observed a short distance from the Campo Sandaags East A.M. route on August 12, 1959 at ~:SS A.M. shortly at'ter completing the scaled quail route. Other miscellaneous game tallied along the routes included numerous mourning doves, cottontail rabbits, ducks, and nineteen antelope. �Table ...L Area Oount Oomparison * Total Date Scaled Quail No. Oounted Oounted Broods Year Area 1958 S. ot Oimarron River. 9-16-58 282 1959 s. ot Oimarron River 8-11••59 258 Total Tille Birds per hour :3 5 brs 56.4 8 5 hra 51.6 1 f-' , xn Ul * Oounts made both years by Walt Schuett and Donald M. Hottman if\d ~:\) ;r~ �~"\~ .','J , '.,",j -154Table .L Brood Route Count Comparisons De.tesRun Route A.M. P.M. 8-18 1-21 1 1-22 8-11 2 8-29 1••25 3 8-21 8-26 4 8-12 8-10 5 8-19 8-18 6 8-19 8-19 1 8-19 8-19 8 8•.• 22 8•.• 21 9 8-25 8-24 10 TOTALS Name & Oounty{ies) Total Birds Counted • Smith Canyon 64 Otero-Las Animas Carey Dam-Higbee 239 Bent •.•Otero Apishipa Sandsage . 188 Otero Le Sage Ranch 19 Las Animas Campo Sandsage E. 106 Baca Campo ~andsage w. 253 Baoa Carrizo Mtn. 219 Baca•.• L8.s Animas Kirkwell to State llne296 Baca Bessemer Ditch 47 Fremont-Pueblo Holly 105 Prowers, 1536 No. Total 'J:ime Total Miles Broods*· (2 counts) (2 oounts) ·Hrs. Min. Birds/ hour Birds/ mile 3 1 15 21.0 51.20 2.37 9 2 58 42.6 80.41 5.61 12 2 51 40.6 65.96 4.63 1 3 30 56.8 5.43 .33 6 2 55 66.6 36.30 1.59 11 3 35 45.5 10.67 5.56 11 3 33 39.2 61.69 5.59 5 3 1 44.0 94.81 6.73 3 4 30 63.2 10.44 .74 5 2 36 49.4 40.38 2.13 66 30 hrs50 min 474.9 (a) Average : 49.82 birds per hour. (b) Average: 2.14 broods per hour. (c) Average: 3.2, birds per mile. (d~ Average: .1 broods per mile. (e .Average length of route -- 23.75 miles. (t) Average miles per hour for all routes -- 15.40 mph • Repeat observations disregarded. ** Includes only broods clearly defined and accurately counted. �Table ..L Comparison ot A.M. and P.M. Routes No. Brood. 50 2 7-21-59 14 1 64 7-22-59 66 2 8-17-59 173 7 239 8-29-59 103 6 7••25-59 85 6 188 219 10 272 14 491 1 0 18 1 19 1. Smi th Oanyon 8-18-59 2. Oarey Dam - Higbee 3. Ap1sh1pa Sandsage SUB - TOTAL -- ·5. Total Oounted P.M. Date Le Sage Ranch No. Observed Date Name 4. No. Observed A.M. No. Broods No. ot Route 8-27-59 8-26-59 r I--' Oampo Sandsage E. 8-12-59 86 5 8-10-59 20 1 106 6. l,iampoSandsage W. 8-19-59 145 5 8-1f3..59 168 6 313 7. Oarrizo Mtn. 8';'19-59 96 9 8-19-59 174 . 6 270 8. 8-19-.59· 223 4 8-19-59 73 1 296 9. Kirkwe11 - State line. B••seaer Ditoh 8-22-59 14 1 8-21-59 33 2 47 10. Holly 8-25-59 65 5 8-24-59 49 1 114 SUB - TOTAL 630 29 535 18 1165 TOTAL 849 j9 807 )2 1656 - Repeats not disregarded. -- Data tromroute8 1,2, & 3 not directly comparable beoau8e ot divergence A.M. and P.M. count. were made. \J1 \J1 f ot date. in whloh (\) ";\J ;.~>.l �-1564 Table Analysis of Data Brood Sizes Observed , Number 11 C1aas 1 2 Total 2 0 4 5 6 7 10 10 1111 11111 111111 1111111 11J.1111111 1111111111 11111111 1111111111111 111111111111 1111111 111111 1111111111 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i4 8 13 12 7 6 10 100 a. Sum of X 892 b. N 100 o. Mean (X ) 8.92 2 d. Sum ( X - X ) 1075.72 e. Standard deviation (a) s - V 1075.72 100 -- f. Standard error of mea.n B -x =. ,.28 V 100 - V ( a _ 10.76 - 3.28 ) x 3.28 10 g. Confidence Limits ( .05 level) X .j.. t.05 B -x = 8.92 ± 1.982 x .33 = 8.92 + .65 �-157h. Minimum .number ot aample. needed 2 .10 level .Os level H: H= ( t.OS) 2 (a) 2 =~ -- 42.29 .79 (.10 • X ) 2 2 ( 8) ((t .05) 2 • (.Os I ) - -••• 42•~90 = 211 892 .:314 or 1. Young to adult ratio .::. 284 •• 100 �Fci;FM----- --- ---- --=r.• o;m---",,,,,,,,,,,SI'\~ I i I ,ri '!- '">n.' :.~""~ I 'liW. _- 1-"- ) ,g"J..- __, I ~''''''''--T'''.. . ,..-,: tr: • ~~" I , :.OJ.1o, ----lI I I i, '''i>'.,...•A. """,", ·1.... ! __ _~ • ~ t' J ~~ ~~I oP~~. itHJ.i.".O· . L' '--"--.!.~"-----------o;;'__'lwr;------1 ~..,,~ 'i I -~-.... .-, -------Mi ------, _. 04r~N" ,_ j "' i ---iLOGAN """'. .~ """"~l I -- .-.... "-_ I .' ._ ' I ! I I r 1 FIGURE I Location ot Scaled Quail Trend Routes and Trend Area in Southeastern Colorado I , ~ _3 "'ltd .a../~ .v:::::~TfIN Route and Number 1m Trend Area Used for Area Count /11, ~~OIO:AOO 1 "'+ ' ',.. :--fP"VEBlO Ifr : C · .,_ -"""",,,,---, '~- -----.---.-----/ ' ~! .- ' .UI,...._ '0 """ oThlU....,~I. ----- '~J,_o(U;: ~.-.,-",-, oC / 'v' ra .~ IfICO'-;· I ·..".. Nl~" ,.:It., .••.,- Ju"H i --WYl- --- 2dA<.I'_ I I.":" jf r -.l../0'--" I ,/ I _______ II 'W"''''''"-S_,rw°c. 9'«W!! U L) r . ' J ) -:11AW-rr---l ----- I Mel • I ,> 'OlAKrC'ITY •. ~". Htl7UO - --.- ). " """"",,,,,,,,,,,.. "\\ - •• _]._ • ~ I -»: ~. '- .,.~ "~ r _._.\ -- L.-._.~T.'~' <r '''''' -~'"'' I ' ., ••••• '''0 ".H= •.- .•! "MO'. - 'II 'AMOSA _/ '""'-,-\' ) • L "'1 '\ "~ .~, / _'-:I-- i.~ 6~ Oelv'M. \ I' _ _ 'ONr. ,_,,,,;/0, - - - -) " ' oJ""PP611J ~'!':. ::-- .~ , ~ I .....,..~ \.~ _ .. ,~_ I .L $""""" I , r I '~ 1_ ,I __ .__ '--.=,~._ . . _._ i . 'o.c' .~_ \ ,L _ """'''SAm'' ._. •• ~ =c: _/ w , ..._._.. 7I::''r'. ~_. ~.(' .",,1, , ( . /' J 4? ,I lA "0 .I I . ! 1_.,' , , _ ...,,-1 1" eo-"'~ ~ , _.~.I ..._.~• s .,,__ ~I ,' .Cod",_ .~_ ON~rf""". .~ •••••••••• ' ""M,.. :;f _. "",,-. 'N "'-----1r "'";:;"1"'" I''1 "'''1''''· • ~. ("""l . __ f • ~.~ , /...... ...~) \ ,_....__ "_'7"" . _. H."... .,'t 011 ••••• 0/,,_ oA",,~/Dn i ._ , , ! I._. ~::-.;;;, ruHr 'I _ ).6;; rt.",,( /' , HfJ"'" ,Y "" '~-'-'-L_,~ "/, .,.J. ,~) 'A60JA __ i ,- -- OSIL"RCII(F, " CroWLEY ""'MD \CUSrER .r/;', 0 w, ~----- ~- ~'_.--G.~~_ " --~r .,/'""'.~. I, './ d r--,,·L ~..J ).),,,"'' 'ir-' ,. I..... - I. I• • »< ,,_. -C.~'-. \ "" ~-'.. .,/ C..., ~'H£R~ J I --~. ~__ ~ '--> "1 J -_"" ' ._ ~~ 1 '. SAN~6UEl , 10. ' I' Dorn~ 0'"9-_,' J \'Oum- ,-i•••_ oAr"';" '-..,_._.~ ~,SA'U;;'H'-~ 0:: r-!_ -+" --- ---,--__ ~ 1 6_. ~w . L· SPA/NilS 1 ~_I' •__ ., 0.....,.--rr .._ ,-r.!hL o-';;i .• ,~.~ , -1 ,_. flTlIlNIOAO ._~ .-"7 OSI,,.Itvr~/# _, 0 \ "".H~H • I ~~~.... .)oJ" ••.• I~~~ e Trtnch.,.. , i"'8 ; ._... _ o",,_,.. _ -.1..____ iiCiiii-iiiiiii:~iCiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:iiii~iiiiiiiiiiZiii~iiiiiiii ,....,;,3"" _'_ _0. ~ �-159lIGURJI: -2 • SCALED QUAILBROOD COUNT FORt"1 Observer( s) ------- Date Weather Data at Start of Count: Peri-o-'d-o-f~D~a-y-r(TA"".MOT.-o-r~P~.M;r-. )0\-------Temp: ; % CltlUd Cover-=_ Nameof Route Wind (l1.P.H.) ; Direction _ County(ies) "leather Data at End of Count: Time Started Temp: ; % Cloud Cover Time Finished Total Time 1..J'ind(M.P.H.) ; Direct ..•. i-on--Beginning Mileage Precipitation dur1ng Count: _ Ending Mileage Total Miles Cover Condition: Wet Damp Dry Was Dog used during COiiiit? Yes N·-o--- --- Time of Observation Speedometer: Reading Birds Observed Young: Adults: Unclass: Cover Type : \-las Count Accurate? Sub Totals Total Counted Other GameObserved ----------------------------------------------- Niscellaneous Comments: (Broods Observed off main route, conditions, etc. general counting Instructions: 1. Enter all information requested at head of fonn. 2. Drive average speed of 20 M.P.H while on route. 3. Count all birds observed (including adults with no young) 4. Flush all birds when there is any possibility some may be concealed. 5. Record each bird or group of birds on separate lines. 6. Check in appropriate colmnn if absolute count was obtained (ao.~urate count). 7~ Start morning counts at 5:15 A.N. and evening counts at $:00 P~M. �-160- Recommendations Continuation of brood counts along established trend routes is recommended in order that comparative data can be gathered each year. The establishment ot additional trend routes in representative scaled quail areas to give more complete coverage should be conslderedo It is possible that the P.M. counts can be eliminated when enough routes are established to give the degree of accuracy of data requlredo Summary A total of 2350 scaled quail were oounted during the 1959 brood count period from July 20 through August 31, 1959. Ot these, 1536 were oounted along established brood oount routes. A young to adult ratio ot 284 : 100 was determined from the sample data. In addition,it was found .that 100 broods averaged 8.92 young per broodo Along the trend routes, 3.23 scaled quail were counted per mile travelled disregarding repeat observations and 2.14 broods which could be aocurately counted were observed per hour.. An average speed of 15.40 miles per hour Was recorded for all routes. The ten routes averaged 23075 miles in length. Early morning oounts were more productive than late evening counts in regard to number ot quail observed and number of broods whioh could be accurately counted. The brood count sample secured in 1959 was sufficient in size to estimate within ten per cent of the true mean but not sufficient for five per cent ac'cur-aey , It was calculated that 7.81 per cent of the birds observed on the previous count were recounted on the following cc~~t along the trend routes. Repeat observations were determined by recording site locations in most instances and recording ot accurate mileages trom check points in others. High winds appeared to have more of an adverse etfect en the counting ot broods than any other single tactor encountered. �-161- Literature Cited Frary, Ladd G. Unpub. Game surveys - quail population estimates. Job Completion Report Federal Aid ProJect W-93-R-l. New Mexico Department ot Gs.me and Fish, Sante Fe, New Mexico. May 20, 1959. 15 pp. mimeo. Grieb, Jack R. and Gilbert N. Hunter Unpub. Colorado small game hunter harvest survey 1958. Federal Aid Project W-88-R-4. Colorado Game and Fish Department, Denver, Colorado. 28 pp. mimeo. Prepared by: Donald M. Hotfman Approved by: F.C. Kleinechnitz Assistant Coordinator Date: April, 1960 � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/6f3c86291ffed07f165ca88b4ea764b8.pdf ca083f80925b3e1ac995ac68cb257ecb PDF Text Text July, 1960 -1- JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of ~C~o~l~o~r~a~d~o _ Project No. W_-~9~6_-_D_-_4 _ Wild Turkey Development _ Job No.1 Work Plan NO. l=- Title of Job: Population Period Covered: July 1, 1959 to June 30, 1960. Status Summary: A total of 1,796 turkeys were observed in the annual census check of turkey populations. Of these, 241 were observed by the field biologist and 1,555 were reported by other individuals. There were 31 observers who made a total of 48 observations. The average number of turkeys per flock was 37.43. These large counts are a result of an abundance of food since the flocks often break up into smaller groups which wander widely when food is scarce. Objectives: 1. To check progress of recent transplants of turkeys. 2. To assist W.C.Os in becoming familiar and proficient in gathering pertinent data on the numbers and sizes of turkey flocks in their respective districts. 3. To prepare maps showing the location of plants in historical and nonhistorical ranges. Then, prepare a comparative report on the two type ranges. Procedure: 1. To make regular survey trips into recent to hunting). A. As often as possible to take W.C.Os them in methods of gathering needed B. Recording specific flock data a. Flock location b. Flock shift- and reasons where c. Wintering flock counts planted areas (those not yet opened on these trips. data. This will assist possible 2. Prepare maps of transplant areas - western slope. There are few experimental plant areas on the eastern slope. A. In historical range B. In non-historical range a. Gather data on development b. Show present status c. Find reasons for present status if possible C. Prepare reports for comparative studies. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Date: July, 1960 Approved by! __--:::-G.;:.i;::.lb-:=-e.::..;r:,.t::~H~u::;;n.::..;t:.:e:.;:r _ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �Figure 1. Prime young pinon pine in the fall of 1959· Heavy seeding of pinon pine was general over the entire western slope in the fall of 1959. This made an excellent food buffer for the entire area for the rough winter that followed. Photo by M. L. Burget. �Figure 2. Prime acorns in the fall of 1959. There was not as good a crop as in the fall of 1958 but it was good and helped the turkeys over the rough winter of 1959-1960. Photo by Martin L. Burget. �-3Wild Turkey Population St.atus Martin L. Burget The major portion of the turkey population counts was done by Wildlife Conservation Officers this past season. The resultant information was furnished first to the Regional Game Managers and it is possible that the compiled data are not complete. A severe winter followed a heavy crop of mast. Pinon nuts were in unusual abundance. These rich nutlets were available to the turkeys even through heavy snows. Naturally many more turkeys survived because of this unusual benefit, than would have under less favorable conditions such as in the winter of 1951. At De Lt.a, the Burkey Brothers Lumber Company was asked if they would doze a trail to reach. some turkeys wintering in the Love Mesa .area. (They were opening a road for logging operations in the area). When they dozed int.othe area they noticed large dark patches in the pinons and oaks where the snow had melted away. Using glasses they found the turkeys had raked the needles .and leaves back onto the snow causing ittb melt out and leave open feeding areas for the birds. They supplied ear corn for the turkeys and the birds soon found this and used it freely. As usual during the Big Game Season, reports on large numbers of turkeys were brought in from much of the turkey range in southern and western Colorado. MO,st of these reports -vereof birds beyond the reach of feeders in the winter months. Some feed was distributed by private planes. Whether this was found and utilized by the turkeys is not known. Even places where regular feeding areas have been maintained and used regularly by the turkeys in other years, were neglected by the birds this season. Where birds came in they fed lightly and irregularly. One Government trapper - William Terrell - found turkeys at the top of south facing rims along the Colorado River Canyon not far from New Castle. They were feeding on pinon mast and .acornswhere they could find them. One point of interest was that the turkeys vere banded into large flocks. As many as 15 flocks containing over 100 turkeys were reported. These were scattered throughout western and southwestern turkey ranges. The largest was east .of the Devil Creek ranch in Archuleta County where the count was over 140 birds. This flock count was verified at more than one hundred by W.C.O, Vavak, with the use of binoculars. Other flocks ranging in size from thirty .•• five to seventy ... fivewere quite common. One revelation of this large flock activity is that food is abundant. When foods are scarce the flocks break up int.o smaller groups and scatter more. In at least one case the hunting season did some real good. At the Bershenyi place on Fourmile Creek south of Glenwood Springs more than 100 turkeys came in to work on an oat patch in mid-September. During the hunting season, it was known that some twenty turkeys -were killed from this flock. After the season not more than twenty turkeys ever cane into the ranch at one time, and these only stayed for part of a day. Up until February not a single turkey fed on his silage pit. Evidently the shooting left a lasting impression on these turkeys. The following statistical data are arranged according to date. In many cases the figures have been reduced to compensate for possible over-estimation by untrained observers. �-4Statistical Data: YEAR 1959 cmJ""'NTY DRAINAGE LOCATION OBSERVED REPORTED Archuleta Beaver Cr. Baldy Mtn 60 II Navajo R. King R. 48 Devil Cr. Chris Mtn 62 "n Little Nav. C.onfer Hill 41 It Blanco R. Red Ryder R. 29 n Navajo R. 8~ mile 37 Coyote Cr. Bisbee R. " 3 T n Stalstimer Cr. Cavasone Cr. 9-29 48 Devil Cr. 9-29 E. Chirrmey R. 10 " Beaver Cr. 9 -30 Monger R. 18 " 10-23 Garfield Fourmile Bershenyi 61 10-26 Archuleta Beaver Bally Mtn 10-27 Beaver Cr. "" 40 " 10-;]2 Garfield Fourmile Cr. Diamond M. 38 11... 13 " Bershenyi R. " 27 11-13 " Rifle Cr. Hatchery 50 11-13 Rifle Cr. " 16 " 11-13 Delta t:ncompahgre Love Mesa 31 11-13 Mesa " Pinon Me.sa 15 ll~17 Montrose Log Hill " 73 DATE 9 -14 9 ~20 9 -24 9 -28 9 -28 9 -28 9-28 10-26 10-26 10-26 10-28 1960 Archuleta " " " Beaver Cr. " " Stalstimer Bally Mtn. Turkey Sp. Bally Pko Archuleta C. 7 39 17 9 10-19 Devils Cr. Willow Spring " 15 10-20 " " " 35 " 10~20 " Ranch fields 15 " t' 10-24 Stalstimer Notch 11 10~27 Navajo R. Gardner R. 47 " 10-27 " " Confer H. 9 11-10 " King R. 46 " 11-11 Devils Cr. Lee R. " 87 ll~ll " " Chris Mtn. 46 ll=14 Montrose Horsefly Cr. ute Area 77 11·~18 " Cottonwood Hill R. 36 ll-19 " Res. Area 16 " 11-21 " Tahaguache l~per Basin 39 1 -10 Delta Love Mesa 84 2 -15 Escalante C. Picket Cor. " 75 2 -15 Ouray Burro Cr. Gunn R. 46 2 ~16 " Billy Cr. Refuge 16 2 ~17 Garfield Fourmile Bershenyi (Oct 15)115 2 ~18 Baldy Cr. Porter R. " 75 2 -18 Divide Cr. Arthur R. " 34 Totals 241 1555 241 Total ·1796 Total observations 48 Average flock 37.43 plus Total Number of observers 31 REPORTED BY Range Rider Mr. King C. Vavak Highway Mt. School Bus Burget Burget Ford &Mitchel Mrs. Monger Bershenyi-Jackson Burget Ranger Reser Jackson G. steele Hatchery Helper Log Cutter B. Hoover Hunter-T.Morgan Burget Burget Burget 2 Hunters Hunter Hunter Hunter Hunter Burget Burget Burget •.• Mr,King C. Vavak C. Vavak Mill Workers J. Howlett L Rutledg~ Hc;nter Mill Worker Co White C. White C. Morgan B. Jackson B. Jackson Jackson-Ford .e- �July, 1960 -5JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of Colorado --------------------------------- Project No. W-96-D-4 --------~-------------------- Work Plan No. 1 ---------------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Wild Turkey Development Job No.2 Brood Counts July 1, 1959 to June 30, 1960 Abstract: Data gathered on western Colorado turkey range for the season of 1959-1960 showed excellent brood development. While the scope of activity was narrowed considerably by assigning the collection of these data to district W.C.Os, it is gratifying that so many reports came through to the author. A total of 62 broods with 449 poults indicated an upward trend or increase, with 6.93 poults per brood against 6.7 in the 1958-59 season. Weather contributed to this difference. Objectives: 1. To establish permanent, representative brood count areas in all turkey habitat. 2. To gather information on poult rep~oduction and survival as an index to reproductive success. 3. To assist W.C.Os in gathering comparative data on established trend areas, as game management tools. 4. To test and compare express periods (dates and hours) for gathering brood information. Procedures: 1. Location of brood checking areas on newly planted sites. 2. W.C.Os were taken on trips to assist them in learning about methods of checking in their own districts. ��-7Wild Turkey Brood Counts Martin L. Burget Areas where hunting 'seasons have not been opened on the western slope include the following districts: Cow Creek and Billy Creek in Ouray County:; Cedaridge Green Mountain - South Grand Mesa area in Delta and Mesa Counties; Dominguez area in Mesa County; Pinon Mesa area in Mesa County; Stove Canyon, Douglas Pass, Salt Wash area in Garfield County; Glenwood Springs - Rifle area including Elk Creek and Canyon Creek; Derby Creek - Red Creek in Eagle County; Basalt state property area in Eagle County and the Little Hills area in Rio Blanco County. As many trips as possible were arranged with W.C.Os of these districts. Contacts were made with Forest Service personnel, range riders, oil workers, etc. Everyone seemed interested .and a better over-all understanding of wild turkey development within these areas was obtained. The turkey record books were turned over to the District W.C.Os early in the spring of 1959. The simplified form appealed to the men. The summer of 1959 was rather dry. This contributed to good nesting and brood raising conditions. While the records carried in this report are not too extensive, they do show a trend toward good and widespread development. Although the weather was dry there was evidence of a good moisture reserve in the ground. Native grasses matured early which gave the young turkeys a boost. There was a heavy infestation of grasshoppers which also gave the turkeys a lift. Pinon cones made the best crop in years and other foods were equally plentiful. The turkeys nested high and many of them stayed high into the fall and winter months. Best hours to check broods: Generally turkey observations are made by trained searching or by sheer accident. If they see you or hear you approaching you just will not observe them. Observations over a period of some eighteen years reveal the fact that wild hens are much better mothers than tame ones. If there is heavy--,rgrowth and the dew clings to this the hens will brood their poults until late in the morning giving the moisture time to dissipate. Hens have been seen hovering their young poults as late as nine or ten o'clock in the morning. A rain will cause the same type of action. The presence of poults is often revealed by a hen moving through deep grass or weeds almost aimlessly. In such cases the poults are feeding about her in the weeds and grass while she is looking out for their safety. The observer may come on these hens almost any tirre of day, but is most likely to see them between seven and ten o'clock in the morning. Then, again between four and seven o'clock in the evening. The time between these periods is usually spent in some small glade where sun and shadows furnish a natural color portection for the birds. Here the foods tak.en earlier are allowed to digest. Basic management depends on natural reproduction. The controlling circumstances in turkey repr-oduction are pretty much as follows: l·-rnumber of eggs; 2 - hatchability of these @ggs; 3 percentage of a brood raised to maturity; 4 - predator reaction; 5- parasitic reaction; and 6 - disease factors. A brief report on these factors that have resulted from field studies should be covered under brood count findings. >- �-81. Normal clutches of eggs average from eight to fifteen or sixteen. This depends on the age of the hen. The mQst common average comes in the range between 11 and 13 eggs. 2. Hatchability is almost 100%. Several nests have been f'O.undafter hatching with one or two eggs remallllllgunhatched. In all cases where these shells have been opened they were found to contain nearly mature embryo in them. In such cases the hen started setting before completing her clutch of eggs because of cold weather and the hatched birds needed to go to water before the hatch was completed, or the hen was disturbed and left earlier than she should. Wild turkeys are unlike passerine birds that remain in the nest until their feathers have developed to a point that they can fly before moving. These receive their water from insects upon which they feed. Turkeys must have water within thirty-six hours of hatching. Evidently the hens realize this and move before the eggs are completely hatched in a nest. 3. The percentage of poults raised to maturity averages close to half of the eggs hatched. There are known instances where percentages of the maturingp.oults run much higher and other inst.ances where they are less. One of the high observations this year was of 33 poults with three hens observed on August 3, 1959. Thesewere more than half grown. 4. The larger predators such as bobcats and coyotes are pretty well controlled. It is the nest-preying predators, skunks and magpies, that are the present greatest threat. 5· Parasites. Turkeys are subject to body parasites like all animals. Where birds are well fed and healthy, body parasites are not important. The turkeys rid themselves regularly of body vermin by dusting and preening their feathers. In weak or sick turkeys it 'sa different story. In such cases the parasites become a major problem. 6. Disease factors. Wild turkeys are subject to the common diseases of poultry. Usually close contact with domestic poultry is the source of infection. Three major outbreaks of disease are known where heavy losses occurred. Onewasan outbreak of poultry cholera at the Sporleder ranch on Trujillo Greek, Las Animas County in 1947. Another was a blackhead infection which killed about 38 birds out of 50 near the Halverson ranch on Bally Mountain, Yellow Jacket Divide in Archuleta County in 1950. The third was at Thompson Park in western LaPlata County in which the causative organism was never known. �Figure 1. These are areas that have been planted and in which ideal brood count areas can be located. These will be mapped in the future in larger scale. �-9- l ; STATISTICAL DATA BROOD COUNTS Date ~y 25 28 June 1 July 2 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 17 :1.1 29 29 30 Aug. 1 3 27 27 27 Sept. 4 9 9 19 23 24 24 24 28 County Drainage Location Obsd. H P Garfield Fourmile " Shallbarger Kellogg R. lb fI " Crystal Sp. " Fourmile Tabaguache Horse Fly Log Hill Crystal Sp. Montrose tr fI Garfield " It fI fI Mesa Archuleta II Garfield " II La Plata If " " " " " " " II It Garfield Mesa La Plata If fI Archuleta Mesa Re-Cap Martin R. Pine R. Bear Cr. Beaver Cr. Dose R. Dose R. East Valley Bear Cr. Monger R. Cherry Cr. Starvation Cr. Fruita Res. So. Res. Stove Canyon Stove Canyon Res. Devils Cr. W. Turkey R. fI fI Chimney Rock 1 9 Beaver Cr. Kelly R. 1 7 fI II Kelly R. 2 13 Navajo R. King R. 4 35 Dominguez Canyon Totals 10 82 Observed Reported Totals 10 Hens It 52 It 62 82 Foults " 367 It 429 Observers - 19 Average Brood 6.93 plus per hen. Reported by B. Jackson B. Jackson 10 I{~llogg R. Upper Area Mesa Log Hill Martin R. Martin R. " " W. Elk Cr. Hawkins R. M. Elk Cr. Sramex R. Divide Cr. Record R. Fruita Res. Fruita Res. Snowball Cr. Macht R. fI Wright R. Fourmile Cr. Kellogg R. " fI 1 Reptd. H P 2 13 B. Jackson-J. Sharp 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 5 7 15 13 11 10 13 10 13 12 15 19 10 22 B. Jackson J. Howlett Survey-ors D. McClure R. Hoover Mr. Martin F. Dunham Mr. Sramex Mr. Record D. Jerome Mrs. Macht Mr. Wright B. Jackson 1 3 3 2 1 14 33 17 13 6 B. Jackson B. Jackson Summer Res. Ed. Womer Mr. Monger 1 7 4 1 9 45 31 9 Mr. Frame D. Jerome D. Jerome Mill Worker M. Burget··· M. Burget M. Burget M. Burget Tourist 1 7 52 367 �-10- Listing of specific Brood Count .areas time of check period. 1. Cow Creek ••Billy - These areas were not .open to hunting Creek Area in Ouray County ••.W.C.0. Harvey Cox. 2. Cedar Ldge .» Green Mountain •..South Grand Mesa Area - Ouray and Delta Holmes Fullenwider and Gail Boyd. 3· The Dominguez Area- Counties - MeSa'County .•..W.C.0. William Mink. 4. The Pinon Mesa AreaLittle .at Dolore:sArea Mesa County..also. W.C. 0 Dudley Jerome. 5· stove Canyon ..•.Douglas Pass - Salt Wash Area'- Garf'ield This include.s the County •..W.C.Os Dudley Jerome and Hugh Jones. 6. Glenwood- Rifle Area in Garfield C:ounty - includes Rifle Creek, Divide Creek, Canyon Creek, Garfield Greek, South Canyon Creek, Fourmile Creek and Crystal River Areas. This area vas opened to hunting .last f'all. These .areaswill not be included in the counts in the 1960-61 check period. W.C.Os Dunham, Lowery, Reser and Hood. 7· Derby Creek •..Red Creek Area in Eagle and Routt Counties - W.C.Os R. Rosette and M. Graham. 8. Basaltst.ate property 9 . Little Experimental p.ersonnel. Hills Li ttleHills Submitted Date: by: Martjp ••Eagle County .•.W.C.O.:..R. Terrell. Station L. Burget ••.Rio Blanco County- Approvedbyf __ W.C.'0. W. Gooseman and .:G;;::i;:;;lb.;-.e.;;.;r;:..t::-;N:.:..;... ~H~un:;;;;..t:..:e:;;r~ _ State GameManager July , 1960 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordina.tor �July, 1960 -11- JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of Colorado --------~----~~------------------ Project No. Work Plan No. ~W_-~9~6_-~D-_4 _ 2 ------------------------------- Wild Turkey Development Job No.1 Title of Job: Trapping and Transplanting Period Covered: October 1, 1959 to March 15, 1959. Abstract: Weather and food conditions which are controlling factors in wild turkey trapping were both good and bad during 1959-1960. Weather in portions of the range was good while in others it was unfavorable. Food conditions generally were very good. Hunting seasons - two on western slope ranges, both of which were longer than usual - moved the turkeys into back ranges and they stayed there. The Burkey Lumber Company opening a road into Twenty-five Mesa country in February found turkeys in considerable numbers where snow was 3~ feet on the level. Turkeys never came down to normal wintering ranges in any numbers anywhere. It was known that the turkeys were in or near the areas but they refused to come in to feeding areas or to stay in for any length of time. Numerous feed grounds were set up but they failed to lure birds. Where they stayed would have required special equipment to work with them. Again only two catches of turkeys were made. One at the Devil Creek turkey management area and the second on the eastern slope at the ranch of John Sakariason. The first catch included eight gobblers and four hens. The second catch was taken to the Big Salt Wash area north of Lorna in Garfield County. A note on the use of the cannon net trap indicates it is successful where only one trapping try is to be made in an area. Usually the turkeys leave the area and do not come back again. Objectives: 1. To restore Merriam's wild turkey to as many suitable locations within the known former range and other unoccupied sites as feasible. ��-13Turkey Trapping and Transplanting Martin L. Burget Introduction: The summer of 1959 had been extremely dry. However, two conditions to encourage the production of desirable food crops were present. One, the pinon pines were loaded with baby cones in the fall of 1958. If these were not affected by the dry weather they would make a mass of feed for the turkeys during the winter. Second, the bad late frosts that destroy the oak blossoms in late spring did not come. The crops of oak mast ,and many of the other shrubs was not as heavy as in 1958 but itwas still well above average. Just before the turkey season opened October 3-12 the first heavy rains came on the western slope. Back roads were rendered impassable with water running everywhere. During the hunting season the turkeys that had worked down within trapping range were dbserved closely. There was no use feeding as this would have put the turkeys in a more vulnerable position. Flocks were numerous and of good ,size. Indications were that there had been an excellent increase during the season and that poults had matured early. Even public relations relaxed and ranchers that never- before allowed hunting on their property opened and these same ranchers gave excellent help in locating the birds. Then, one rancher begged us to trap on his land this fall as the birds were increasing too ,rapidly. Effect of hunting on turkey activities: The season which lasted t.en days kept the turkeys stirred up. By the close of the regular season many f'Locks had been separated. The flocks of turkeys observed could be found in smaller groups, three or four to around thirty, depending on how much they had been disturbed. Vocal protest at sight of humans was given forth in no uncertain. way. They spooked at every unusual sound or movement which indicated that they were afraid. 'Pherexamt.natd on of birds killed in late afternoon often showed the cropa completely empty. This indicated that the turkeys were even afraid to eat regularly. Five days after turkey season closed the big game season opened. The author was out checking hunters at the Devil Creek ranch.. This was before 5:00 a.m. The first shots were heard around 6:15 a.m. The gobblers began protesting at once. Hunters reported seeing turkeys sitting around in trees in the middle of the day. This is unusual behavior. Normally turkeys loaf or rest in low trees or shrubs in the middle of the day, and it is not unusual for numbers of them to sit under low pines and preen or sleep for short periods while scouts pick about close by to give an alarm at the approach of dangers. So, the )luntingseasons do have an effect ,on the turkey's activities and 'peace of mind. As the big game season advanced turkey reports began coming in thick and fast. One genJeral report of large flocks banding together over much of the range indicated that food was plentiful. The pinon pine seed crop was the heaviest in many years. Indian groups came in to gather the nuts commercially. It was not unusual to see dozens of cars out along the highways with families gathering this sweet ••. meated mast. One hunter report.ed killing a large buck with more than a gallon of pinon nuts in his stomach. So, the deer as well as humans gave the turkeys some competition. �-14Fellewing the big game season en the western slepe a secend wild turkey seasen ran frem Nevember 14 thru 22. Evidently this later seasen upset the trapping I>:r'egram. Mest of the turkeys moved into. back ceuntry and just ,didnIt return. Then, there was a difficult winter in the seuthwestpartef the state. Hewever, east and nerth ef the Devil Creek ranch, ene flock ef mere than 100 turkeys was reported by several hunters. Anether fleck farther nerth hadfrem 75 to. 100. The first fleck was courrbed .as they moved acressa small park by a hunter using binoculars Lookf.ng fer game when he spetted the turkeys. His count was 143. W.C .0. Vavak of Pagosa Springs reperted two. similar flocks a little farther east, ene in Riley Park, the ether on the feet .of'Chris Mountainebserved en the same af't.ernoon . He t.oo, had been using glasses, but he 'was sureseme ef the turkeys had meved through befere he st.arted counting . Neither of these flecks came to.the Devil Creek ranch. Mr. William Jacksenwas again requested to. leek after pessible trapable flecks near Glenweed Springs. He has d.ene a geed jeb but the turkeys just did net comedovn , W.C.Os Dunham and Lowery were alerted at Rifle fer pessible trapping areas in the Elk Creek er the Divide Creek areas. One feed ground was set up in Divide Creek at the Leren Arthur ranch. The turkeys came in irregularly. Mr. Arthur fed but the birds wereenly mildly interested. The pessible reasen is that the entire hillside eastef the Arthur preperty is covered with pinen trees. Lewery and Clark Ferd teek a sherttrip up the hill and feund the greund had been werked as theugh a bunch ef hegs had been reeting there. Needles were windrewed, the duff had been werkedup to. a d:epth ef several inches. Up until mid-February there was net mere than six to.ten inches of snow in this Divide Creek area. Then several heavy snows built it up to.twenty inches but trrapp Lng cond.Ltiensd;Ud net impreve. Mating season wasceming en and quarreling and fUSSing was theerderef the day so. that this sllethad to.be abandened. On Alkali Creek, seuth ef New Castle, en the Frank Porter ranch there were a t.etal or thirty~ight turkeys last year. It was known that there was anether large concentzratifon.of'turkeys justseuth of there en Bally Creek. A drillingeutfit that had been working up en Bally Creek was to. ellen the read in that .area but the heavy snewfarther up the cr-eek.pr-event.edthis. The last report of turkeys where men withsnowshees had gene up to.the eil rigs was that there were mere than ene hundred turkeys in the fleck en Bally Creek. Inducement feeding was dene near the Perter ranch but ,enly 22 birds were attracted. At the Devil Creek ranch a similar preblem develeped. First there were eight turkeys, then twelve, then eighteen and then twenty. Snew piled up to. three feet en the level but seuth slepes kept .epening up between storms. Clark Ferd rode en herseback, used the jeellwhere he ceuld, then checked en snewshees witheut lecating the turkeys. It was quite evident that the leggingeperatiens nerth ef the ranch reacted as we expected itweuld. It is net so.much the taking ef the timber but the denudingef the greund cever that disturbs the turkeys so.much. The birds which did shew up at the ranch were mainly gebblers. Again at Cenfer Hill seuth ef Pagesa Springs, trapping cenditiens did net develep satisfacterily. Turkeys came to. feed irregularly, never develeping a censistent feed pattern. At the Gardiner place near Chreme where they had begged us to.trap the turkeys it was feund that the birds had net been seen since the late turkey seasen. The turkeys never came back in any numbers at the King Ranch en the Navajo. River either. �-15El:3.stern Slope. In Sarcillo Canyon John Sakariason consented for us t,Omake a catch of turkeys. He had been feeding since the first .of December. They had cleaned the food plot early and the turkeys became restless duet.o the severe storms starting in lat.eNQYember. The main bunch of turkeys left his area in late December. There were still between thirty and forty turkeys left so he continued to feed. In February, they began building up. By March 1st, there were nearly one hundred again . At this time stormy weather made travel almost impossible but Clark Ford was able to make a catch of fifteen, on Wednesd13,y,March 9th. Since he had only six crates he banded and loaded the twelve turkeys after banding and releasing the others. W.C.O. Hugh Jones and a local resident assisted with the release near Loma at the old Coal Mine on the old Baster Pass road directly west .of the Stove Canyon release. Statistical Data: Catch No.1 Sex Tom Hen Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen at De~il Creek Turkey Ranch Thursday January 21, 1960 at 3:30 p.m. Delivered to Upper Sarcillo Canyon at lHOO a.m., January 22, 1960 Band 4I4 415 416* 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 Age Mature 2 years Remarks Wing bands only on these *Band lost 2 years Mature 2 years 2 years 2 years 2 years 2 years 2 years mature 1 year Catch No. 2 at Sakariason Ranch north of Weston at 6:00 a.m. Wednesday, March 9 These turkeys were taken to the Coal mine area on the Big Salt Wash north of Loma, Colorado. Released at 10:30 a.m. on March 10, 1960. Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen 476 477 478 479* 480 481 482 483* 484 485 487 488 489 491 mature mature mature Died *Lost Band mature mature mature *Lost Band mature mature mature 2 years mature juvenile These birds banded and released at trap. 2 years Hen 490 mature Hen 492 mature Hen 493 �-16- React.ions of turkeys to the Cannon Net Trap. up to the present, March 15, 1960 the cannon net type turkey trap has been put in use six times. It was first used on November 11, 1954 when 14 turkeys were caught. Other attempts were made with varying success in January, 1955, January, February, November and December, 1956. The most startling result of the use of the net trap was that further feed baiting in those same areas was a waste of time because in no instance were the birds ever lured back to feed again. With the use of the slattype trap, it is often possible to make mQre than one catch in the same winter. Submitted Date : by: Martin L. Burget Approved by: _-;::.G,J..~· ;::;lb;,:..e.:.;r:..t~N:.:.-. ~H~un:.:;;:.;t...,;e...:r _ State Game Manager -..::.J.::u~ly~,i:.._.:l:;.::9:..:6..:.0 _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �-17Supplemental Trapping Report A complete compilation of trapping and transplanting records was deemed a worth-while activity in order to review all records and to have a single master list for future reference. At the same time, the project leader wished to make a comparison of the release areas in both historical and non-historical range as a means of analyzing any differences. This is the information included in this special report. A total of 1,136 turkeys have been trapped in 19 trapping seasons. The number of birds killed by accidental injury was 27 with a total live delivery of 1,109. These were composed of 343 gobblers and 766 hens. The average catch per' season was 58.42. The largest total in one year was 122; the smallest 12. One of the most unusual surprises is the fact that 553 turkeys were trapped at the Devil Creek Turkey Management Area. This is an average of 32.53 birds par trapping year, not counting two years when no trapping was done there. This sizeable removal could indicate that turkeys have a greater tolerance to removal or harvest than has been exerted on anyone area so far by hunting. From transplant areas, 197 turkeys were caught making a total catch of 750 on the western slope. There were 122 turkeys moved to the east.ern slope to such areas as Monument Lake, Trinidad (ten miles northeast), Purgatoire Canyon, Higby area, Tallahassee Creek near Canon City and two areas near Salida. The catch on the eastern slope was 359 birds not counting losses. The smaller number for the eastern slppe is due to the fact that consistent trapping did !?-gtgegin until 1949. Before that time, two catches were made in February, ~. ..) 1942dJnear La Veta and another catch in 1945· Y Original records still on file indicate that four hens were caught in a pole trap and two hens in a wire-mesh (maze-type) trap on February 10, 1942 on Indian Creek (west .of Spanish Peaks). Two of the hens were released immediately to prevent injury in the wire trap. The other four hens could not be banded (lack of hands) so they were weighed and released at the site because the flock wintering in Indian Creek was too small to allow reduction.:-.: Six more hens were caught in a portable wire trap on Echo Creek near La Veta between February 22 and 27 (band31-6) and released at the Ralph Callin Ranch on Red Greek west .of Pueblo on or about February 28. This release is not noted in the above figures, therefore, the total live birds should be 1,115· �-18Complete Trapping and Transplanting Record Year - 1941-42 Source Hen Mar. 6...142 Turkey Ranch 9 This was the total caught that year. Tom 3 Total 12 Year - 1942-43 Dec. 9-'42 Feb .•4-'43 Feb. 9-'43 Mar. 14•.'43 Mar.18-'43 Not Dated Tom Total Source Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Hen 7 3 12 7 2 Ranch Ranch Ranch Ranch Ranch Ranch 3 3 2 Total 31 Total 11 7 7 12 2 39 8 39 Tom Total Disposition: Beaver Creek Salters Canyon Lost Canyon Chicken Creek Callin Ranch Year - 1943-44 Nov. 25-'43 Nov. 28-'43 Dec. 7.,;;.'43 Dec. 14-'43 Dec. 27-'43 Jan. 14-'43 Mar. 7-'44 Mar. 10•.144 Mar. 16-'44 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch 'Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Hen 7 19 8 4 Total 4 3 45 Total 14 12 11 10 3 10 60 Disposition: Beulah ATea 3R Ranch Big Muddy Mesa Verde Park Purgatoire River Hardscrabble Creek 4 2 1 4 3 1 15 60 �Figure 1. Second release area was at Salters Canyon. Eight birds released here were listed in the Beaver Creek records. T. 39 No) R. 16 W.) Sections 28 & 29 �Figure 2. Chicken Creek Release - T. 36 N., R. 13 W., Sections 13-14. �Figure 3. East Canyon- East Montezuma County. Release area near an old mill site - Oct. 30, 1944 - 12 turkeys. T. 35 N., R. 12 W., Section 13. �Figure 4. Clay Creek Release area northeast of Norwood. Two Releases containing 22 turkeys - one Jan. 8, 1946 and one Nov. 22, 1946. T. 44 N., R. 12 W., Section 7 �-19Year - 1944-45 Nov. 19-'44 Nov. 24-'44 Dec. :.1-'44 Dec. 9-'44 Dec. 15-'44 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Total Hen Tom Total 6 4 1 1 2 4 3 11 44 Total 12 11 33 Disposition: 14 13 3 14 Cherry Creek Florida Mesa East Canyon Sawmill Canyon Year - 1945-46 Oct. 30-'45 Nov. 7-'45 Nov. 11-'45 Nov. 30- '45 Dec. 18-'45 Dec. 31-'45 Jan. 8-'46 Feb. 13-'46 Total 44 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Chicken Creek Tulr"keyRanch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Total Hen Tom 9 3 5 13 6 13 4 6 4 55 5 6 4 3 26 81 Disposition: East Canyon Dead Man Gulch Mancos Mesa Oak Creek Indian Creek (west slope) Clay Creek Webber Canyon Total 1946~7 Year ;;.,. Nov. 22- '46 Dec. 4-'46 Pec. 30- '46 :Jan. 19-'47 Feb. 12- '47 Feb. 14-'47 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Vorhees Ranch Faulk Ranch Turkey Ranch Total 12 16 9 11 Salida 12 9 12 81 Hen Disposition: clay Creek Tabaguache Basin Chicosa Canyon Hudson BrotherS Bre~ders Banded only Hayden Ranch Total Tom 3 9 4 24 1 E.S. 9 6 3 2 10 7 Band 6 E.S. 65 19 12 28 10 9 6 E.S. 7 12 84 Total 84 �-20Year- 1947-48 Nov. 13- '47 Nov. 29-'47 Dec. 12- '47 Dec. 16-'47 Feb. 14-'48 Source Lone Dome Feed Area Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch West Carlin Ranch Total Dd.sposition~ Disappointment Canyon Cottonwood Creek Talahassee Creek Talahassee Creek Salida Cottonwood Area Banded Markers Total Year- 1948.•49 Hen Tom 11 6 10 6 5 38 2 5 E.S. Total E.S. 3 E.S. 5 E.S. 15 53 13 11 10 9 6 4 53 Source Turkey Ranch Lone Dome Turkey Ranch Martinez Canyon Mancos Vorhees Ranch Faulk Ranch Turkey Ranch Total Hen Tom Total 12 4 13 3 3 6 10 7 58 4 16 4 17 4 5 9 12 13 80 Gardner - Williams Creek Hudson Brothers Ranch Hayden Creek - Salida Cow Creek .•. Ridgeway Log Hill Mesa - Ridgeway Faulk Ranch Vorhees Ranch Released as markers Total 16 18 14 9 12 2 2 7* 80 Nov. 13-'48 Dec. 8-'48 Dec. 30-'48 Jan. 8-149 Jan. 13- '49 Jan. 19- '49 Feb. 4-'49 Feb. 14-'49 4 1 2 3 2 6 22 Disposition: * Banded and released because flocks of sufficient .size for trapping were not found in a trapping area or because a sufficient number of birds had already been taken from that particular flock. �Figure 5. Log Hill Mesa Release. This area is on the Uncompahgre proper and around five miles northwest of the Community of Ridgeway. On December 30, 1948 twelve turkeys were taken to this area. These were made up of nine hens and three gobblers. T. 46 N., R. 8 W., Sections 30-31 �Figure 6. Canyon Creek., seven miles west of Glenwood S:prings. This area is about one and one half miles up Canyon Creek. On January 16, 1951, fourteen turkeys were released in this area. There were five gobblers and nine hens in this flock. r. 5 S. JR. 89 TN., Section 25. �Figure 7. Mancos Hill north of Highway 160 - looking across East Mancos Canyon. Release on December 18, 1945. T. 36 N., R. 12 W., Section 22. Nine turkeys including three gobblers. �-21Year - 1949-50 Dec. 22-'49 Jan. .9- '50 Feb. 8-'50 Jan. 11-'50 Jan. 26-'50 Feb. 9-'50 Feb. 23-' 50 Feb. 24- '50 Feb. 28-'50 Mar. 14-'50 Mar. 17-'50 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Cousin Springs Sporleder Ranch Cousin Springs Turkey Ranch Purvis Ranch McDonald Ranch Purvis Ranch Caple Ranch Caple Ranch Total 36 Deer Creek - Salida Gardiner Area Current Creek - Canon City South Dakota Williams Creek - Gardner Turkey Ranch Total 11 11 11 16 6 1 56 Hen 9 8 1 9 7 2 1 Tom 2 1 2 2 5 1 4 1 1 20 Total 11 9 1 9 ~2 9 5 3 4 2 1 56 Disposition: Year - 1950-51 Jan. 16- '51 Feb. 3- '51 Feb. 20-'5.;L Mar. 5-'51 Source Hen Turkey Ranch 9 Table Mountain 2 Table Mountain 2 Cottonwood Creek-Tab. 6 Total 19 Tom 5 1 6 Total 14 3 2 6 25 Disposition: Canyon Creek - Glenwood Elk Creek- New Castle Total Year - 1951-52 Dec. 27-'51 Jan. 14-'52 Jan. 20-'52 Source Walton Ranch - Sug. Walton Ranch Middlemist Ranch Total 14 11 25 Hen 7 Tom 3 10 17 1 4 Disposition: Bob Dodge Ranch Middlemist Ranch 10 11 Banded only --t,.........,1,----"""2':""1 To a Total 7 3 11* 21 �-22Year- 1952-53' Oct. 14-'52 Dec. 10-'52 Jan. 5-'53 Jan. 13- '53 Feb. 5-'53 Feb. 12-'53 Feb. 14-'53 Source Hen Jake Light Can. 10 Ben Lane Ranch 7 Ben Lane Ranch 4 Andreoli Ranch 3 Turkey Ranch 4 Turkey Ranch 6 Stevens Ranch-Cucha. 6 40 Total Tom Total 6 3 5 2 3 4 2 25 16 10 9 5 7 10 8 65 Disposition: New Castle-Elk Creek Macht Ranch,Pagosa Spgs. Moab, Ut.ah Poi terey Canyon Jake Light Canyon Turkey Ranch Ben Lane Ranch Andrioli Ranch Stevens Ranch Total Year - 1953-54 Jan. 4-'54 Jan. 10- '54 Jan. 28-'54 Feb. 4-'54 Feb. 8-'54 Mar. 1-'54 Mar. 7-'54 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Four Mile Coliifer... 1Ull Conifer Hill Santa Clara Creek Mesa De Maya Total 5 7* Banded only 15 10 1* 5* 5* 9* 8* 65 Hen Tom 21 9 3 4 6 8 3 2 3 51 1 9 Disposition: 16 Cedaredge Rifle Creek Hatchery Perry Park Ranch Turkey Ranch Fourmile Conifer Hill 6 Total 11 15* 6* 6* 60 Banded only Total 21 12 5 7 6 8 1 60 �-23- Year - 1954-'"55 Nov. 11-'54 Dec. 16-'54 Jan. 13-'55 Jan. 25-'55 F'eb. 3-'55 Feb. 8- '55 Feb. 17-'55 Feb. 21-' 55 Source Beaver Creek Turkey Ranch Conifer Hill Elk Creek Mud Creek Mesa De Maya Mesa De Maya Turkey Ranch Hen Tom Total 8 7 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 15 7 10 10 20 10 5 6 9 17 6 Total 6 57 24 2 7 81 Disposition: 7* Banded only 3 2* 14 17 10 11 Mesa De Maya Santa Clara Creek Mesa De Maya Montana Divide Creek Rifle Cedaredge Mud Creek Turkey Ranch 8 Total Year - 1955-56 Noy. 14-'55 Nov. 24-'55 Dec. 6-'55 Dec. 16-'55 Dec. 9-'55 Dec. 29-'55 Jan. 27-'56 Jan. 27-'56 Jan. 31-'56 Feb. 11-'56 Feb. 17-'56 Feb. 29-'56 Source Cottonwood Creek SE Cottonwood Creek Cottonwood Creek Cottonwood Creek Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Sarcill0 Canyon Turkey Ranch Mud Creek Sarcill0 Canyon Sarcill0 Canyon Norwood Total II If If 9* 81 Hen Tom Totals 3 2 2 4 11 6 7 2 6 1 5 3 1 2 4 7 10 4 11 9 4 4 56 Disposition: Butte Creek Plum Canyon, Perry Park State Turkey Ranch Apishapa property Basalt property Billy Creek property Derby Mesa Little Hills Elk Creek Turkey Ranch Total 14 13 4 7 12 9 16 11 1* 7* 94 38 8 5 16 9 1 13 13 7 4 4 94 �-24Year - 1956-57 Oct. 19-156 Nov. 5-156 Nov. 30-156 Dec. 10-156 Dec. 12-156 Dec. 22-156 Dec. 29-156 Jan. 5-157 Jan. 24-157 Feb. 23- 157 Mar. 16-157 Mar. 19-157 Source Cottonwood Cr. E.S. Sarcillo Can. East Canyon Cr. Sarcillo Canyon" " Turkey Ranch Sarcillo Canyon" " Canyon Creek San Miguel Can. " " Mud Creek-Mancos Fourmile Can. Lightner Creek Turkey Ranch Total 10 7 14 7 3 4 78 Soldiers Canyon, Pritchet Mount Evans Management Area Paul Wolf Ranch Frisco Canyon Muddy Creek Buckhorn Creek - Larimer Co. San Miguel Canyon State Turkey Ranch Stove Canyon Red Dirt Creek Monticello, Utah Mesa Verde Park Fourmile Creek Lightner Creek Turkey Ranch Total 14 11 9 2 2 15 4* 5* 12 12 15 10 2* 4 5 122 "" Hen 10 6 8 9 Tom 4 4 5 3 6 12 4 5 1 44 Total 14 10 5 8 12 6 10 19 18 12 4 4 122 .Disposition: Year - 1957-58 Nov. 20-157 Nov. 27-157 Dec. 29-157 Jan. 1-158 Jan. 15-'58 Jan. 22-158 Jan. 27-158 Feb. 18-158 Mar. 6-158 Source Sarcill0 Canyon Sarcillo Canyon Sarcillo Canyon Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Sarcil10 Canyon Okanela Lodge Cottonwood Creek Turkey Ranch Total Hen 2 5 6 11 5 6 9 3 1 48 Disposition: ::13obShumaker Ranch, Milsap Cr(~;10 Nate Patton Ranch, Rice Mt. 14 Utah St.ate 15 Box Ranch - Las Animas Co. 5 Oak Ridge - Pinon Mesa 13 Big Dominguez Canyon 10 Little Dolores - Pinon Mesa 11 Turkey Ranch 4* Total 82 Banded only Tom 2 2 8 2 2 9 2 5 2 34 Total 4 7 14 13 7 15 11 8 3 82 �-25Year- 1958-59 14-'59 19-'59 Feb; Feb. Source Fourmile Creek Sarcillo Canyon Total Hen 6 8 14 Tom Total 7 10 15 25 4 11 Disposition: Utah State Crystal Spring Bershenyi Ranch - Glenwood Elk Creek - NewCastle Sarcillo Canyon Tot.al Year - 1959-60 Jan. 31-'60 Mar. 9-'60 Sonrce Turkey Ranch Sarcillo Canyon Total 10 2 4 3 6* 25 Hen Tom 5 7 3 10 15 10 Total 12 13 25 Disposition: Sarcillo Canyon Sarcillo Canyon Big Saltwash - Lorna 12 2 11 Total Note - No birds that these totals. Summary. .d.Led .ab traps 25 or in transit However,you will note that .or at releases are included in these are accounted for in the ��-27A Comparative Study in Wild Turkey Development in Historical and Non-Historical Range At the beginning of the wild turkey development program in Colorado the placement of birds was based on the premise that ranges that had supported numerous flocks of turkeys historically, should, under well planned and carefully supervised stocking practices support turkeys today if the habitat was relatively unchanged and if some form of control could be exercised over sizeable acreages. The changes in range and land use and the abusive practices through settlement and development under sharply rising population trends is well known. This expansive pressure is growing year by year. The purpose of this paper is to record the response of transplanted birds in both historical and non-historical range and their success in spite of changing land status. The struggle for a balanced land use program between the lumber industry, the stock raiser, the farmer and the hunting and fishing sportsmen is just in its infancy. The lumberman wanted the last stick of timber that could be cut profitably. The stockman (cattle and sheep) wanted the last spear of grass to top out his herds or flocks so they could be placed ona high priced market. The hunter and fisherman wanted some place in this picture where he could relax and be reasonably successful in his hunting and fishing pursuits. The struggle still goes on. Into this overall picture nature has also taken a rather silent but devastating part. Watersheds are washed out by spring floods that spread rich topsoil to parts unknown. Valuable shrubs are dying by the thousands each year from overgrazing and browsing. Small streams dry up for a period of from three to eight or ten months each year. Many of these were thriving trout streams wi thin the memory of many older settlers. Then, in the spring these streams become raging torrents, washing everything within reach into great piles of debris. It is only recently that land use agencies have been awakened to the serious~ ness of these problems. Efforts at re-foresta.tion, re-seeding of range and cutbacks in grazing have only been initiated in recent years. What our director, Mr. Thomas L. Kimball,said in a recent t~aining school is vital as far as game rehabilitation is concerned. "You can grow a hundred deer while you are growing one shrub to support it." In all too many cases the top soil has been washed a'Way and there is no top soil to grow the shrub in. Again, the vital food and life-giving water are no longer present to grow that shrub. As an example, in Coyote Park, southwest of Pagosa Springs, a large area of National Forest was fenced and closed to grazing by cattle and sheep for a period of seven years. Reseeding was done where it seemed feasible. In the seven years there was no marked upswing of growth. The area is cut by gullies washed during spring runoffs. The problem of l"eyegetation requires time and that time will not be completed in the lifetime of many of the technicians 'Who are struggling with the problem today. Another element that should be understood is competition. The turkeys' principal competitors are deer, cattle and sheep in that order. Since these are all ruminants, their habi tsare similar. Normal browsing may run from 30% to 50% of the current years growth. It is on the current year's growth that the fruits, berries and mast are produced. When the going gets rough, deer and cattle will exceed this normal browsing. It has been shown and observed that in drowth periods �-28- or severe winters, deer and cattle will take as much as two or three years growth in a single winter. The wild turkey is not a bud-eater like the grouse. While his choice of foods is highly varied he must depend on a somewhat limited choice in .••.. winter when foods are hard to get. A normal winter choice of foods may be composed of acorns, pine and pinon nuts, fruits of rose haws, thornapples, serviceberries (dried on the brush like raisins) skunk berries, kinnikinnick berries, all types of grass and weed seeds and elk sedge and succulent grasses growing along spring streams. There are many more things that the turkey would use if they were available. When heavy browsing occurs, plants will not produce mast and fruits so the turkeys must take a less desirable choice of foods. Pine and pinon are not so susceptible to browsing setbacksj however, their cyclic habits in producing seed often make barren years and the pine seed crop is rather uncertain. The pine seed and pinon nut are high in natural oils and when available are excellent and desirable turkey food items . • 1 Lower Dolores River: This area, some fifteen miles down river from the town of Dolores was known as prime turkey range historically. Robert Dunham, members ~of:;theAkin family and other living pioneers who homesteaded in this region in the 1880's attested to the abundance of turkeys from 1874 to 1900. With this encouraging historical background, it was only natural that this should bea starting point for the rehabilitation program. Further encouragement for this choice was the fact that a careful physical examination of the area corresponded closely to presently occupied range in the area extending from Pine River east through Chimney Rock, Pagosa Springs and southeast to the Navajo River Basin. The first year increase of 46 poults from 9 hens and 3 gobblers, by actual count, gave further justification to this choice. By the end of the 1942-1943 trapping season, a total of 25 hens and 6 mature gobblers had been released in the general area around the mouth of Beaver Creek and Salters Canyon. Five hens and two gobblers were released on February 9, 1943 bringing the total to 32. It should be noted that only live releases were counted in these totals. Development Following the release of additional birds during the 1942-43 trapping season, the development in this area began to show real progress. Various agencies including the Forest Service, the stockmen and the general public were all interested in this turkey restoration. For this reason, reports began coming in from many sources. These had to be adjusted tocweed out .duplication. Birds were reported in 1943 in Ferris Canyon, Cabin Canyon and Dry Creek or Dry Canyon (this is the stock drive through this area). Stock riders in this area began reporting br-oods.on the tableland between Dolores and Disappointment Valley - this is known as the "Glade" (not Glade Park). During the spring the first nests were observed near Hoppe Point (a point of tableland or mesa jutting out to the Dolores River rims between Beaver Creek and Ferris Canyon). Two were observed in a single afternoon's checking. TheY- were not far apart and not far from a stock watering pond in the area. Only a few days later, a Forest Ranger, Mr. Knoblock was mending a stock drift fence in the same general area and located two more. In the first two nests there were eleven and fourteen eggs, in the second pair there were eleven and thirteen eggs. �TURKEY TRANSPLANTS HISTORICAL RANGE IN �-29By the fall af 1943 fram reparts and persanal abservatians it was believed that the papulatian had risen to'clase to'twO'hundred turkeys in this area. The prablem af distributian ance the birds begin to'became established in an area is eased by the natural drift to'ather desirable areas. Turkeys have a tendency to'vander a lat which may serve tva purposes in the pattern af their activities. First, it acquaints them with the areas surraundingtheir range, reveals desirable raasts and hiding areas far pratectingthemselves fram predator activities and, secand, it reveals areas where faads are abundant and readily available. Fram 1944 an, the develapment was gaad and distributian general. Turkeys shawed up in Hause Creek, Big and Little Bean Canyans. There were turkeys an the Turkey Creek Flat area near McF~e Park (a natural stand af panderasa pines left as a memarial af the fine timber that was harvested in the area). Numeraus stack watering pands an the "Glade" and Granath Mesa area shawed turkey sign in the spring and summer manths. Turkeys maved intO'the Nar.raguinnep Canyan area and distributian in general was highly satisfactory. Chd:cken Creek: Chicken Creek which is narth and just a little east af the cammunity af MancO's at the east end af Mantezuma Caunty was the site af the second release area. There is a definite tie-in between this plant and thase made an the Dalares River. Bath are west af the La Plata Mauntains, a spur range af the San Juan Mauntains. The MancO's River and the Dalares River drain aut af twin basins at the faat af these twO' ranges. The release paintabaut five miles fram MancO's was an the edge af Chicken Creek Canyan. The tva releases af six turkeys each were made an the rim af the canyan which at this paint is ! mile fram the caunty raad. The first releaseaf three gobblers and three hens an February 4, 1943 was fairly simple. There was snaw an the graund but it was fairly well packed. The carry wasabaut ane-faurth mile. On February 9, when the second release was made, the picture had changed camplet.ely. Over thirty inches af fresh snaw had fallen. Snawshaes, a tabaggan, and a team and sleigh were secured to'haul the cratie«. as near the release area as possible . The team campletely played aut befare getting within the quarter mile mark. Therewere faur men in the crew and the authar was the anly ane familiar with snawshoes. It taak faur haurs to'move these birds to't:re canyon rim. A trail had to'be broken and the crates and tabaggan dragged and pushed to'the point af release and back again. A few days later, the turkeys were abserved in a campact flack when a snawshoe trip was taken to'the canyon . Later that winter they move:d·~taa straw stack abaut twO'miles fram the rims and alsO'were feeding under same secand grawth pines and aaks still farther fram the release area. Develapment During the spring af' 1943 as the snaw began to'gO' aut and traveling became easier, the flock drifted to'the northeast and warked up taward Turkey Creek. Later a nestaf 14 eggs was faund in ane af the shart sidecanyans leading intO' Chd:cken Creek. All eggs hatched and a few days later a rancher, Mr. Merle Cax, faund a small turkey that had drawned in an irrigatian ditch. In July that year a hen with thirteen paults was abserved near an irrigatian reservoir. This was �-30up Chicken Creek about one and one-half miles. In the late fall of 1943, Mr. Cox counted a total of fifty-six turkeys running together. Two hens with broods were reported by a Mr. Wallace not far from the Turkey Creek rims in August of 1943. It is quite evident that all these birds got together that fall and wintered near some straw stacks on the Cox Ranch which is less than l~ miles from the release area. He had raised oats and the turkeys worked in his stubble fields until they were snow-covered too deeply for them to scratch out. Then supplemental feed was furnished and they came to this occasionally until spring. They lived mostly in the Chicken Creek Canyon rims during the winter. These flocks showed excellent development over the first few years. The spread was hardly believable. The splitoffs took them into Turkey Creek Canyon, back into the Jersey Jim Look Out area. One flock moved into the Mud Creek Basin. It was not long until the main flock coming back near the original plant site increased to around eighty to one hundred birds. These flocks ranged about one mile down the canyon from the release area so traps were set in and several catches were taken to move into the areas farther west aridnorth. Lost Canyon - Glenco Area Release! The morning of March 14, 1943 word was received that 7 turkeys had been caught at the Turkey Ranch and were to be released in Lost Canyon. The only way to get the birds to the canyon this time of year was via the railroad. Arrangements were made for the section crew to haul the birds the next morning. They were working in the Millwood area so it would not cause any inconvenience. They hauled the turkeys on a trailer for some distance and then were carried about i: mile to the point of release in Cox Canyon. The balance of the day was spent carrying out work on predator traps until the section crew returned that evening. The second historical fact connected with this release was that the turkeys were all hens. This plant was made up of six mature and one young hen. Our best efforts failed to catch gobblers to add to this plant. However, there were six known hatches and a total of thirty-six poults for the season. Evidently these hens had been mated before they were caught and the eggs were fertile when layed in Lost Canyon. Careful checking proved that there were no tame turkeys that could be contacted in this area. During the summer of 1944 the development continued from the mating of young gobblers. As near as could be checked there were more than 120 turkeys in this general area in the fall of 1944. Some of the birds worked up toward Hay Camp Mesa during the summer but came back into the canyon during the winter. A little supplemental feeding was carried on by railway crews in bad weather. These men seemed to enjoy it and were interested in the development of these flocks. Considerable comment was made regarding this fatherless plant of turkeys. In a number of books on the subject including Leopold's report on his Missouri turkey study, there was a general feeling that yearling wild turkey gobblers do not mate. If this were true then this flock of turkeys would not have increased during the summer of 1944. In discussing this problem with Mr. Carhart, the Coor~ dinator, concerning the introduction of gobblers into this flock, it was his opinion that we should let it ride for a year and check the results the following year. If this experiment had come two years later it would have been valueless. By that time birds from Chicken Creek and the Mancos plants drifted into the headwaters of �-31Lost Canyon and Turkey Creek. While the waters of the Mancos River drain into the San Juan River and the water from Lost Canyon drains into the Dolores, the headwaters are not far apart and the land barrier is a flat divide. It was only a short time until the birds were intermingling from the two divides in pa~t of their summer range. Two things were noted in all of these Montezuma County plants. One was the rapid rate of development and, second, the rapid way in which they filled in the spaces between the plants. Mancos Me.sa, East Creek and Webber Canyon: Development in this area in the east .end of Montezuma County was closely tied together. All of the small streams in this area flow directly into the three heads of the Mancos River (East, Middle and West Mancos). These streams all head on the southwest corner of the La Plata Range and the basin is between the "Rampart ff on the north and Madden Peak on the south. The Mancos Divide runs up on the foot of Madden Peak. Within this area there are several mountains that are not named in the county maps. The plants started with a release of 12 turkeys in East Creek, some five miles downstream from Highway 160 on October 30, 1944. Then on December 9, three birds were caught. It was hoped to put these in with the first release but snow had piled up, so the birds were released near the highway with the hope they would join the birds down the canyon. This did not occur; however, in the summer the one hen with two gobblers managed to bring off a brood of nine and raise them. On December 18, 1945 a release of nine turkeys including three gobblers was made on Mancos Mesa about five miles north of Highway 160 and on the rim of east Mancos River Canyon. These birds flew into the canyon at once. This was what had been hoped. There was a lot of good feed up the East Fork of the canyon. Then, there was little danger of the birds being disturbed in this area. The only possible source of disturbance was cattle ranging in the area in the summer months. On December 18 (same date as above) a release of 12 turkeys including five gobblers was made at the mouth of East Canyon in Webber Creek, south of Mancos. It should be noted here that .eighteen of these last birds were from a catch made in Chicken Creek. They were taken from a flock of more than eighty turkeys feeding in lower Chicken Creek. Development The turkeys in this area never seemed quite satisfied with their':hew home. There was a lot of movement, indicating that, for some unknown reason, they were restless. There was heavy stock use in the area. However, there was lots of oak, pinon pine, juniper and the other shrubs associated with these types. In general they looked like our best ranges in the Dolores River area. One thing that may have caused part of this disturbance was the presence of a lot of deer in this range. In any case the drift in the first two of these releases was to the north. Within three years the bulk of the birds from East Canyon and Mancos Hill had '. drifted to the north and had crossed the East Mancos River Canyon and during the summer, were ranging well up into the quaking aspen-spruce belt. This was just below the old Red Arrow Mine. The Elast Mancos birds had drifted across the headwaters of the Mancos River and were mixing with the Chicken Creek and Lost Canyon flocks. �-32- The development wassatisi'actory but the birds were hard to follow. The Di.amond Match Company had put ina mat.chstick factory at Mancos and the workmen reported seeing birds .and finding nests well up toward the Red Arrow mine dur-Lng spring and summer months. This was at elevations close to eleven thousand feet. These timber cutters and haulers were very cooperative and would make a special effort to report birds. Some predatory activity was seen and noted on nesting hens. These were some of the first such activities noted and brought to our attention. The flocks in Webber Canyon went down Webber Creek and stayed near the south end of Mesa Verde Park. They were reported all the way from the foot of East Mountain (near the release area) to Mancos Springs. This last area is on the Ute Reservation. It was only this past summer that several large flocks were reported in this general area. There is a lot of range in this area that is seldom reached by range riders or others and a considerable development .could have built up around the west end of the Mesa Mountains without being observed. There .are no roads in this area eastoi' Mancos Springs. Then there have always been some reports of turkeys on and along Webber or Middle Mountain. This mountain stands out by itself between East Mountain and Mesa Verde Park. It is so rugged it is next to impossible to climb . Some of the bighorn sheep from Mesa Verde Park moved over there about two years after their release at the Park. On a trip around 1950 to this mountain on horseback both sheep and wild turkey sign were found. Thompson Park - Cherry Creek Area: This area lies adjacent to the East Canyon and Mancos Divide release areas. However, since these birds moved east and south we will t~eat the plants here separately. This is at the west end of La Plata County, south and west of the La Plata Mountains. The first release known as "Cherry Creek" was near the ranch home of Mr. Ross Frame. There were portions of three releases in the area: November 19th, 24th and December 1, 1944. The total number of birds was 15 which included four gobblers. The first shift of these birds was to the north near the D. & R. G. Railway tracks onto a small spring creek known as Starvation Creek. Development The Cherry Creek birds drifted north and east. The first year, turkeys and broods were reported north of Cherry Creek Park (a Forest S.ervice installation) and nearly to Mayday, an.".old mining area at the lower end of La Plata River Canyon. In the fall of 1945 the birds drifted back to the release area where they were fed by Mr. Frame. There was enough indication i'rom observation and reports that there had been an excellent increase. In February, 1946 a trip was taken on snowshoes and an actual count of'84 turkeys was made. If there had been no loss of parent stock this would have made an increase of nearly six poults per hen. It shouiLd be noted that .seven of the eleven hens were juveniles when released. A few days after this count a banded hen was noticed with a large group of poults within fifty f'eet from the road. A check with glasses showed the group consisted of one banded hen and sixteen non-banded birds. While there is noway of proving that this one hen raised a brood of sixteen turkeys, it is true that they were with her. Several times nests have been reported as containing sixteen eggs. It is generally conceeded that wild turkey nests seldom contain more than 14 eggs. �-33Later checks on this release indicated a continued good development. However, in the spring of 1949 a Mr. Denny - living east of Cherry Creek Park - reported finding a turkey so sick and weak in the fall of 1948 he was able to catch it by hand. He said it was covered with a form of grey lice. There had been other reports of sick turkeys both domestic and wild in this area during the summer of 1948. A careful check in the area on foot failed to reveal any sick or weak turkeys. The winter of 1948-1949 was rather severe. One check trip was made into the Starvation Creek area. Fox tracks were noted and some fox scats also revealed portions of turkey bones and feather content. Three traps were set in the area and four foxes were caught in just over a week. Feed was put out for the turkeys and no further predation was noted. Dead Man Gulch: The second release of 13 hens and 3 gobblers was in what is known as Dead Man Gulch behind the Sponsel Ranch. It is also behind a large butte and five or more miles south of the Cherry Creek release. Four days later a catch of all hens was made and thirteen hens were released in the same area. Over a period of three years these turkeys split three ways. The first split noted was from reports of turkeys in Hay Gulch and the Fort Lewis College Campus district. This i$.directly east .of the plant and into a coal mining area. The second split was to the south and west down Cherry Creek. Turkeys showed up in both of these districts the first year. Then, during the hard winter of 1948-49 they drifted into the more or less ba;r.:renareaof what is known as Sunny Side. This is a pinon-juniper break area. Birds were reported in this district for three years. Either they drifted farther south into the Mesa Mountains or they may have blended with the birds at Mancos Springs. Aqimas and Florida River Plants~ Here there were three releases as follows: Saw MilillCanyon - December 15, 1944 Eleven hens and three gobblers Indian Creek - December 13, 1944 and February 13, 1955 Eight hens and four gobblers Both plants made south and west of Durango on Animas River Florida Mesa ••. December 9, 1944 Eleven hens and two gobblers Plant north of Falfa on old Durango Highway These three releases were designed as a probable fill-in between occupied and planted range. Under normal development it was expected that these ranges would fill in a solid block of turkey range reaching from Wolf Creek Pass to the Lower Dolores area in San Miguel County. This would tie occupied range into the southern border of counties in southwest Colorado including Piedra, La Plata, Montezuma, Dolores. and part of the San Miguel. �-34A plant of turkeys had been moved from the Devil Creek Turkey Ranch area and the inclusion of some Arkansas birds to the Hermosa Creek area in 1937 or 1938. These birds had not developed. As far as ~ould be determined there were eight or nine of these birds still surviving in 1941. Development When the plants were made in Sawmill Canyon and Indian Creek there seemed to be a lot of dissatisfaction on the part of the turkeys. They stayed along the Animas River during only a part of the first year. Some of them drifted south along the lower Florida Mesa area. Some were reported north in Ridges Basin, which is the first valley to the north of the release area. Then in the spring of 1946, a band No. 358 was picked up in Lightner Creek. This was from one of the hens planted in Sawmill Canyon. There was no indicat.ion that the bird had been killed in losing the leg band. Rancher Stewart reported a number of wild turkeys in his area and was quite happy with the prospect. While the turkeys remained in the Sawmill Canyon area they never built up in numbers. There are some still there. The same is true of Indian Creek. The main development of turkeys showed up in Lightner Creek and Junction Creek and the Hermosa area. There are three bald mountains in this general area .and it is a little awkward to distinguish them. However, there are good turkey developments in all of them. The first is at the head of Lightner Creek and shows some of the best turkey development in this district. The highest turkeys are at the head of Hermosa Creek in the summer. A ranger who was lost in that area in the summer of 1958 reported seeing three large flocks of turkeys, the largest numbering over 100. This was in September of 1958. In the Florida Mesa area a diligent search was made for turkeys in the spring and summer of 1945. Finally the ditch rider, a Mr. Brown, report.ed turkeys in the Horse Gulch area. This was around eight miles north of the plant area. In 1946 the turkeys began showing up on the Florida River. Another flock was reported on Bally Mountain No.2 (this is east of the Animas and between the Animas and Florida River) and north of the Vallecito cut-off road from Durango. Consistent reports of turkeys have been received from sheep herders in this general area ever since. The flocks ranging farthest north were seen near Transfer Park on the upper Florida River. There has been a lot of fluctuation in this general area because of unusually hard winters in 1948-1949, 1951-1952, and 1957-1958. However, the birds have increased favorably within a year or two following such heavy decimations. Disappointment Release Area: Disappointment Valley is the norther.n-most point of known historical range. On November 25, 1947, fourteen turkeys (2 gobblers) were trapped at the Lone Dome feed ground in Dolores Canyon and transported to this area which completed the gap between known historical and non-historical range on the western slope. The area lies more than forty miles northwest of Dolores and around 25 miles southeast of Norwood. The release area was midway between Buckhorn Lodge and Cedar postoffice. �-35Development The birds were fed by a rancher and stayed close to the release area during the first winter. Then the first fall some of the young birds came back up in the canyon but were nearer the Elkhorn Lodge. The flocks split and one flock stayed on some hills west of Elkhorn while the second flock moved north near the summer camps of the Youngs and a Mr. Bourchard. The second year's development showed much wider distribution and a movement up toward the Lone Cone Mountain area. Birds were also reported around Groundhog Reservoir. Another flock also showed up in the Gourley Reservoir area which is north of the release area and nearly halfway to Norwood. Another flock was reported in the Hog-Back area which is the south rim of Disappointment Valley and would indicate that birds were close to the flocks planted in the Beaver Canyon area and ranging in the summer months on the Glade. This area is closer to the area known as Black Snag which is the site of a ranger summer station. Birds are still ranging in these areas but the development is not as outstanding as it has been in some of the places. Summary of Transplanting in Historical Range in Western Colorado: Since conditions throughout the Montezuma and Dolores County areas are quite similar in character, the entire general area will be evaluated together. Development started with the original plants on March 6, 1942. All of the turkeys trapped during the first two years except two young gobblers were released in these two western counties. These included Beaver Creek and Salters Canyon on the Dolores River below the town of Dolores with the release of 32 turkeys; Chicken Creek with the release of 12 turkeys; and Lost Canyon with the release of 7 hens. This made a total of 51 turkeys planted here in the first two years. During the trapping season of 1943-1944 sixty turkeys were trapped. Fifty of these were sent to the eastern slope and ten birds were released in Mesa Verde Park. In the trapping season of 1945, forty-four turkeys were trapped at the Devil Creek Ranch. These were all delivered east of the original area except three that were released in East Canyon, Montezuma County. It should be noted that these plants tie in closely with the original releases. Cherry Creek received a plant of 14 turkeys, Florida Mesa 13, Sawmill Canyon 14, and East Canyon 3. In the trapping season of 1945-1946 the rest of the original area reeeived plants to complete the stocking. East Canyon received 12; Dead-man Gulch (south of Cherry Creek) received 16; Indian Creek (northeast of Sawmill Canyon) received 12 and Webber (south of Mancos) received 12. Mancos Mesa received 9 to fill the area along East Mancos River. This made a year total of sixty-one. In this entire area which embraces parts of three counties, a total of 166 turkeys had been released. Of these, 19 had been trapped from newly planted areas. The balance of 147 had been trapped from the Devil Creek Turkey Management Area. Development Development withIn these areas was wi t.h varyf.ng degrees of success. The development in Beaver Creek for the f'Lr st two years has been shown to be approximately 200. In the plru"t at Chicken Creek the first year's increase was nearly fifty poults. First year in Lost Canyon showed an average of six poults per hen, with second year checks revealing more than one hundred birds. The releases in East Canyon, Mancos Mesa, and Dead-man Gulch were less rewarding and because of �-36the natural spread, more difficult to check. A positive check on the Cherry Creek release showed seventy poults from ten hens in a single yearTs development. In the Sawmill Canyon and Indian Creek releases there was dissatisfaction on the part of the turkeys and a lot of movement in the first few years. However, the development .and spread of the birds continued and showed that they were going to take hold. While it is extremely difficult to get a complete and accurate census on turkeys, the early reports and observations indicated an excellent increase over the first few years. By 1948, even with some setbacks from bad weather conditions and light food crops, an actual count in the Dolores River area, showed approximately 400 turkeys. The other areas too, showed good development and it was felt that an open season would be beneficial in spreading the turkeys. The first ITQiltingseason then was opened in 1949. The first nine years of turkey development had been excellent. Food conditions varied some but these were offset in the earlier years of the program by using supplementary feed. In the first years of development the filocksbanded together. This was good as the flock locations were known and could be reached in most cases. When the going got rough there were always interested citizens and rangers or Game Department employees ready to give a hand in seeing that the turkeys received feed at the time it was needed. Many ranchers volunteered to haul feed and scatter it. Everyone reported turkeys when they saw them. Rangers kept records of observations which were much appreciated. Even lumbermen and loggers gave many good reports in the earlier days of the development. One unusual case was recorded in the Dolores Canyon and Thompson Park areas where the birds seemingly disappeared after the winter of 1957-58. When the downtrend in turkey population became known, investigation disclosed that a rancher in the area had bought pen raised stock from a New Mexico source and turned them loose with the Dolores Canyon turkeys. It is possible that disease such as pu.Ll.orum, coccidiosis or blackhead could have run through this entire area .causing great damage or even destruction of entire flocks. In the case of pullorum disease, which is one of the most common infections in poultry, it is the poults or chicks that are .mostadversely affected. The causitiveorganism Salmonella pullorum may be transmitted to the yoUng by the mother. The organism is in the blood stream and may be transmitted to the egg in the process of development. Disease, of cour-se , is only one of the possible links in a chain of circumst.ances that may have been the underlying cause in a breakdown in wild turkey development. It should be noted that nearly all of the gallinaceous wild birds are subject to diseases of poultrY. Directly or indirectly this is traceable to the encroachment of man into the native range of the wild birds. other population depressants include weather, food, and predation. In .any one of these causes for a breakdown in development there should be evidences left that would show the cause or the result of it. In the case of weather and short foods there should be remains revealing starvation as a cause. In predation there should be feathers and bony scraps left to show cause of death. In case of disease there should be sick birds or emaciated carcasses left to show the underlying causes. However, where the diseases were active on young poults there might not be very much evidence left. Field checks within the problem area did not reveal much sign of any sort. Further, there were no reports or at least, few reports of sick or diseased birds. �-37Even if the introduction of diseased or half tame turkeys could have been one of the basic factors in this breakdovm in numbers, it hardly seems feasible that evidences of the results of this introduction could have covered so large an area or been responsible for the present state of the turkeys in this district without being discovered. It is now quite evident that weather played a specific part in this breakdown. In checks during the summer of 1959 there was a constant reference to t.re fact that the turkeys did not show up in the summer of 1958 like they had in other years. Non-Historical Range: Original historical investigations did not indicate any turkeys farther north on the Western Slope than the Disappointment Valley. In 1943, Mr. Arthur Carhart, former Federal Aid Coordinator proposed : "The most strategic move in the filIl:therance of the hunting possibilities, would be to make a determined effort to establish the birds at some point in the Uncompahgre Valley, westward from Montrose and Delta, to be used as a future source of transplanting stock for that whole region." In some of the early tries at stocking wild turkey in various parts of the state two tests had been made in this area. One at the Porter Ranch about two miles up the San Miguel River from Naturita. The other was on the Sheets Ranch near the old Ute Post Office. The results of these two tries were similar. In both cases the turkeys crossed with t.ame turkeys on these ranches and apparently were lost to predators. During the first examination of this Uncompahgre range, food types 'Were found to be satisfactory, roosting areas plentiful and water was available. This was all to the good. However, because of the great amount of flat country on the Plateau which would make summering range, and the long distances from this range to suitable wintering areas, it was believed to be inadequate or marginal habitat. The Uncompahgre Plateau lies in a northwest by southeast direction and is made up of a .series of mesas and deep gorges. The south drainage is carried by the San Miguel River and thence to the Dolores River. The principal land mass is a high plateau with radiating flowages running from a .central high range. Ma,st of the streams are small except in spring runoffs and a lot of the lower land forming the divisions between the streams have considerable flat land in them. Three main areas were chosen for the first releases. No.1, Tabaguache Basin, which has a lot .of' south facing s.Lope along the West Rims. No.2, The Ute Area, where the ranchers had ceased raising tame turkeys. And, No.3, Clay Creek, along the south end of Sandborn Park. It should be noted that all of these plants were north or east of the San Miguel River. The river rims offered some winter havens for the turkeys in case they were needed. These rims opened either south or 'West and would bare up rather quickly after st.ormperiods. The first release in this area was made at the mouth of Clay Creek on January 8, 1946 and consisted of nine turkeys, three gobblers and six hens. The second release was a supplemental release at the same site the following fallon November 22, 1946 composed of three gobblers and 10 hens. �-38The next release was the largest ever made in one place. A catch of 28 turkeys (four gobblers and 24 hens) was made at the Devil Creek Turkey Area and the plan was to divide them into two flocks in the Tabaguache Basin. The weather and the road conditions were bad on December, 4, 1946 and a big snowdrift at Coyote Spring changed the plan resulting in the release of all birds at one place. On February 5, 1947, thirteen turkeys were caught in the Chicken Creek area and released at the Ute Ranger Station on Ute Creek about one and one-half miles below the Ute postoffice site. The following day, two mature gobblers from the same trapsite were released at this same spot. , - Development - Clay Creek Area The first two years these birds spread considerably over what is commonly called Sandborn Park. The main bunches went into Hanks Valley, while anonhezr. group traveled southeast into an area known as the Craig Point area. This was ideal turkey range. It has heavy stands of prime ponderosa timber dotted with small parks and islands of large oaks. The rims along the San Miguel River are covered with pinon pine and junipers with all the associated shrubs. Other splits have occurred from time to time with the turkeys moving up or down the park area so it was extremely difficult to get accurate checks. However, with checks that could be made and reports from Game Department personnel, Forest Rangers and stockmen the development seemed highly satisfactory. Some of these turkeys moved across the river toward Norwood. Others moved up the San Miguel into the Beaver Creek district while still others moved into the old Sam's postoffice area. Development of Tabaguache Basin and Ute Creek The Tabaguache turkeys split the first season. A small bunch worked across the Cottonwood Creek area and toward the Ute plant. These soon intergraded and the development took off at a good rate. It was only a short time until turkeys were reported around Iron Springs and the Selesca Ranger Station. Wintering range showed up along the San Miguel rims and in the Cottonwood Creek drainage. Frequently these birds were found wintering in the pinon-juniper types on south-facing slopes. The highest reports have been noted in the head of Horsefly Creek which drains into the Uncompahgre River Basin. There now is always a good flock that summers and raises poults in the Johnson Springs area which is well above the release site. The first movement of the Tabaguache Basin birds was that they moved into the lower basin. The next split took part of this flock up on 25 Mesa and into the head of Roubideau Canyon and Escalante Canyon. This winter (1959) it was reported that more than 100 turkeys were wintering in the head of El3calante Canyon at an old homestead known as the Picket Corral. There have been few setbacks of any consequence in any of these areas since the plantings in 1946 and 1947. Cow Creek and Loghill Mesa Development On December 8, 1948, four turkeys were taken from the Lone Dome Trap area to Cow Creek northeast of Ridgeway and east _of Highway 550. Then, on December 30, 17 more turkeys were caught at Turkey Ranch. Four were added to the Cow Creek plant and 12 were taken to Loghill Mesa at the southeast end of the Uncompahgre Plateau. One turkey was dead in the crate at time of planting. In the Cow Creek plant there were two gobblers and in the Log Hill Mesa there were three. �TURKEY TRANSPLANTS NON-HISTORICAL \ IN RANGE �TURKEY TRANSPLANTS IN NON-HISTORICAL RANGE �-39At the time of release on Loghill Mesa~scratching sign was found which showed that birds from some other plants on the Uncompahgre Plateau had already moved into this area. This was all to the good. Observations and reports from this area since have shown a consistent development. In Cow Creek, the first year checks indicated better than thirty poults. The second year there was an even better development. In 1949 - December 22, a second strengthening plant was put into Burro and Deer Creeks. This was another stream flowing into the Cow Creek area. After the State purchased the Billy Creek property (1955) it was decided to try another plant in this general area and three gobblers and six hens were released to give this area another boost. It was felt that since there would he a full-time custodian in the area, these flocks might be built up to trapping strength in a short time to supply stock for other nearby areas. At present this area is showing excellent progress and turkeys are showing in much of the adjacent habitat. Another thought expressed by some of the W.C.Os is that some of these birds are crossing the Highway into the Loghill Area. The Uncompahgre area was opened to hunting in 1954 or 1955 but there has never been much pressure thereuntil the past two years. Last fall (1959) more turkeys were taken and the interest is picking up. The Cow Creek district is not yet open for hunting but should be in the next couple of years. This indicates that turkeys can and will fill into non-historical range if food and range conditions are satisfactory. Derby Mesa - Red Creek Area: When the Glenwood Springs area showed promise there was considerable pressure to try some plants farther up the Colorado River. On January 27, 1956 twelve turkeys were trapped in Main Elk Creek and taken to Derby Creek .about five miles up from Burns postoffice. On February 29, 1956 four hens were trapped in tre Norwood area and added to this plant. Then on December 12, 1956 twelve turkeys were taken to Red Dirt Creek and released at the mouth of the canyon. Development It is too early to evaluate this planting area. In 1958 more than forty turkeys were reported in the W Mountain Area .-.near the head of Derby and Red Dirt Creeks. A second flock was known to be ranging on the west edge of Red Dirt Creek on Derby Mesa proper. Another flock went up Sunny side Creek while still another flock showed up about five miles south of McCoy. If these turkeys survived the hard winter of 1957-1958 they should make it. There is still a small bunch near the mouth of Red Creek also. Stove Canyon and Pinon Mesa: As early as 1953, turkeys had been reported in the Douglas Pass .ar'ea . There were never any confirming sight records picked up on these reports. There had been some pressure by Department personnel and requests by Grand Junction sportsmen to make plants of turkeys both in the Douglas Pass and Pinon Mesa areas . Preliminary examination of the Douglas 'Pass area in 1956- which was a dry season - were not very assuring. The average rainfall for.the area in recent years had been quite low. Food species lacked fruits or the fruits were dried until they were valueless as food. However, better conditions were found ata higher altitude in �-40Stove Canyon. Rose haws were plentiful and the thornapple thickets were loaded with mature fruits. There were also good roosts in the canyon. Pinon Mesa which is south of Glade Park and also southwest of the Colorado National Monument indicated general conditions much like those on the Uncompahgre Plateau. It is lower in elevation and good pinon crops are a rule rather than an exception. The first plant in the area was in Stove Canyon. This was of ten turkeys (one gobbler) trapped at Okanella Lodge in Canyon Creek. These turkeys were trapped and delivered the same day, December 29, 1956. 'Then two mature gobblers were trapped and released at the same site on March 16, 1957. These were taken from a catch made in Lightner Creek. Two releases were made in the Pinon Mesa .area in 1958. The first plant was made from a catch at Devil Creek Ranch on January 1, 1958. The second catch was made atOkanella Lodge on January 27, 1958 and delivered on the Little Dolores. Development It is too early to evaluate either of these plants. There were more than sixty turkeys in the Stove Canyon the first year. Then around 150 were in the same area in 1958 with an unknown quantity in 1959. The spread has been excellent as turkeys are showing up in canyons east .and west of Stove Canyon and broods were exceptionally good. In P'Lnon Mesa the turkeys are showing up heavily in areas around and to the south of the release area . The Dulk of the birds have moved up onto the mesa. Therevere so many pinon nuts this last fall that the trees were simply loaded and in some areas Indians were imported to pick them to sell to the commercial trade. Two large flocks or nearly 100 turkeys were reported in the area with a number of smaller flocks. Glenwood Springs - Rifle Area: Frequent trips for a period of three years had shown that the mast crops in this area produced more consistently than they did on the historical range farther south. The first release of turkeys was on January 16, 1951, in Canyon Creek about of Glenwood Springs. There were five gobblers and nine hens. On February 3, 1951 three turkeys were trapped on Table Mountain near Rye, Colorado and were taken to the Ranger Station on West Elk Creek northwest of New Castle. There -was one gobbler in this catch. Then on March 5, 1951 six hens from the Hill Ranch on Cottonwood Creek (Uncompahgre area) were trapped and added to this release making nine turkeys in .all. Then on February 5, 1953 five turkeys trapped north of Pagosa Springs were taken to Main Elk and released at the Morrison Ranch. seven miles northwest Development Development in this general area was rapid .and steady. In 1953 sixteen turkeys were seen moving into South Canyon Creek. Then the turkeys in Canyon Creek began spreading. More than forty turkeys were observed in East Elk Creek and more turkeys showed up in Main Elk Creek. There were turkeys in Three Mile and Four Mile Creeks south of Glenwood Springs. Turkeys showed up in the Crystal River Ranch west of Carbondale. Then, in only a short time turkeys showed up in �-41Alkali and Garfield Creeks. To keep the development active seven turkeys were trapped at Turkey Ranch and taken to Divide Creek on December 16, 1954, and 10 more trapped on Conifer Hill south of Pagosa Springs were added to these on January 13, 1955 making a complete plant of 17 turkeys in the Divide Creek area. To continue plants in this general area, a catch of six turkeys on Conifer Hill was taken to the Rifle Hatchery on February 4, 1954. On January 25, 1955 a catch was made using the net trap. One hen and three gObblers (one gobbler died in transit) were released directly north of Rifle. The other five gobblers were taken to Cedaredge. On February 3, 1955, 12 hens were trapped at Mud Creek near Mancos and added to the above release of gobblers. In the 1955-1956 trapping season a catch of 12 turkeys made at the Turkey Ranch containing nine hens and three gobblers and taken to the Basalt Management Area completed the plants in the Glenwood - Rifle area. This made a total release of 67 turkeys in the general region with all but twelve in Garfield County. These twelve were in Eagle County at the Basalt property. Development in the Rifle area worked under a somewhat different pattern. The birds planted directly north of Rifle stayed in the general area two years. However, the birds had split and a flock showed up on West Rifle Creek at the CV Bar Ranch. Another spl:itwent over on the "Government Road" (Highway 13) at the Rees Ranch and developed there about two years. Eventually turkeys showed up in the Parachute Creek north of Grand Valley. South of the Colorado River in the Divide Creek area the development was rapid also. Reports were coming in from the Divide Creek area and turkeys showed up in Main Creek. Then surprising as it may seem a small flock moved into the Colbran area at the foot of Grand Mesa in Mesa County. The spread was so wide and development sufficient that no further stocking was felt to be necessary. Cedaredge Area: The first release in this area (near Milk Creek) was made on January 4, 1954 composed of three gobblers and nine hens. The next release was on January 25, 1955 .consistingof five gobblers taken from East Elk Creek. On February 3, 1955, six hens were added to these. The release was made in Milk Creek about six miles south of Cedaredge. This area had an abundance of feed but the brush was so thick it was almost impenetrable. The amount of coyote and bobcat sign made it necessary for W.C.O. Fullenwider to carryon an intensive trapping program. The turkeys stayed intact for the first winter after release then began spreading out. By 1956 a flock of 75 had moved into La Rue Creek, which is around ten miles south of the release area. There is still a small flock in the release area but others have spread out along the foot of Grand Mesa and Green Mountain. Big Dominguez Development: There was a complaint that the Big Dominguez Canyon and Cottonwood Creek were barren of turkeys even though the author had seen turkeys and found sign after the Uncompahgre releases in both of these areas. The Dominguez lies north and east of Escalante Canyon and Cottonwood Creek lies to the south between Escalante and Roubideau Creeks. It was decided to try to make a plant in both of these canyons but at the time plants could be made it was found impossible to get into Cottonwood Canyon for the release. As a consequence, only one plant was made in the �-42Big Dominguez in 1958. Five hens and two gobblers were released on January 15. Then, three hens were added from the Turkey Ranch on March 6, 1958. Turkey sign and tracks were seen and there were reports from hunters in the two years this plant has been active but it is too early to draw any conclusions in the possible development of these areas. Comparisons in Non-Historical Range: Two of the non-historical ranges have developed to a point where hunting seasons have been openedj the Uncompahgre in 1955 and the Glenwood Springs-Rifle area in 1959. The Uncompahgre area has never been hunted seriously. This is due to the fact that while deer hunters report a lot of turkeys in the area the local hunters are not sufficiently sure of the locations where birds can be found to t.ake much chance. The Glenwood Springs area was new last year and the hunters only sampled it. However, the hunters were quite successful and that should encourage lllOreto take par.t another year. The desired result of scattering certain flocks was successful and that was a valuable help. Development On a straight comparative basis it would seem that the non-historical range has a slight edge on historical ranges. With a few rare exceptions the non-historical range is in a position to have less human interference. Another advantage is that .it is lower in altitude. Weather, which is one of the most important i'actors has for the most part been less severe in non-historical range though the predator pressure is thought to be greater than in historical range. On a numerical basis 166 turkeys have been released in historical range while in non-historical range to date 289 have been released. On a geographical basis this latter area covers about three times as much land area as the former ranges . Analysis and Recommendation: The prime purpose of distribution in trapping and transplanting has been to develop huntable flocks over a larger area. It should be noted under this whole program there has been a good general buildup of turkeys in occupied as well as planted ranges. When the wild turkey program was st.arted in Colorado in 1941 there vere turkeys in only four counties in western Colorado. Today, after eighteen years this has been expanded to a total of fifteen counties. While it is tru.ethat some of these counties have only a few flocks , it is also true that the possible stocking range has been fairly well filled. There is little difference in historical and non-historical range development if the areas are well chosen by qualified technicians. There are basic needs for the si.lpport.ofgame animals and birds. If these are supplied within the range chosen, the animals and birds will thrive if given the proper supervision needed. If these basic needs are not met they will not develop in a;p.y range that might be chosen. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Date! J_u_l.::..y.:...,--..;19;..6_o _ Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �-43- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS State of PROJECTS Colorado -------------------------------- Project No ..-.- W_-~3~8_~~R_-l~3~ _ Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 1 5 ----~--------------------Title of Job: Experimental Trapping and Marking Technique ----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--------------Work Plan No. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Abstract: One deer and four elk were tagged and marked during the past trapping season. At least 16 more elk were trapped but escaped for various reasons. The three main problems that arose this last year have apparently been solved. One new group trap was constructed above the Ellgen property on 2nd Dry Creek which should catch more deer than the trap on East Elk Creek. Objectives: 1. To obtain as much information as is possible from a review of pertinent literature regarding different methods of trapping big game animals. 2. To have a complete review of literature done on techniques and materials used in marking big game for .iJ:ositiveidentification at later dates. 3. To continue work on the experimental deer and elk trap at the Sapinero Game Management Area, with the idea of developing new types of gates that will be ~ermanently set and allow any number of game animals to- enter the tra~ and at the same time effectively seal them in. 4. To continue develo~ment of the net catching and holding device which will make handling of the animals easier and safer for both the animal and the personnel working on it. 5. To mark and tag all animals caught with cattle tags in both ears, brightly colored leather collars for deer, and various dyes for the backs of elk. 6. To follow up on any re~orts of marked animals in order to determine distance traveled, and summer range area compared to winter r~ge area. 7. To run several snowshoe and Sno-Cat counts in the tra~~ing area to observe movements of the marked animals and have both a ~lane and a helico~ter count the area to see if a "Lincoln Index" can be run by use of marked vs. unmarked animals. 8. To use the Cap-Chur gun on both deer and elk in the group trap with the objective of finding the maximum and minimum dosage of the nicotine alkaloid used in the projectile syringe. �-44, .... Procedures! 1. The reviews of literature on trapping methods and techniques and materials for marking the animals will be carried out by a student or students at Colorado State University, College of Forestry and Range Management. 2. Bait deer and elk into the experimental trap with alfalfa hay and salt. Tag and mark all animals caught with ear tags and such plastic materials as are available from various manufacturers. Deer and elk will be induced to jump into the net catching device for easier handling. The complete plans for the trap, net, and experimental gates are to be found in the Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly Reports for October, 1958 and July, 1959. 3· Any reports of marked animals will be checked out to get the following information: a. b. c. d. Distance traveled. Ease of identification (color fastness). Summer range vs. winter range area. Map recoveries and sightings, such information to be used for management purposes. 4. Enlist the help of a veterinarian to help work out the dosages for the Cap-Chur gun to make it more efficient and faster acting. 5. When the experimental gates seem to be working satisfactorily, work out the cost per animal trapped and marked so that economic justification for a continued trapping program can be set up. �-45Experimental Trapping and Marking Technique Raymond J. Boyd and M. C. Coghill The winter of 1959-1960 was the second 'very,light winter in succession in the Sapinero area. The elk did not come down to their normal winter ranges until late in February, 1960. The snow depth did not exceed 30 inches and did not .reach that depth until about March 4, 1960. By March 10 the snow had melted down to 6 inches. Another storm put the depth back to 18 inches on March 18. Trapping was stopped about March 25 because the elk no longer came to the trapping site. In spite of the light winter we caught at least 20 elk in the trap. It was not possible to tag all of these animals for the reasons listed below. However, indications are that we can catch elk in the group trap in a light winter, so it should be possible to catch large numbers in a heavyvinter when feed is hard to get. Three new problems developed this year, each of which have been solved as far as is known at the present time. On February 23, while flying the West Gunnison elk trend, four elk were observed inside the trap. Af3 the plane circled the area the elk simply ran out of the trap. Subsequent investigation showed that .the electi':ictrip had worked perfectly and released the gate, but the crossbar holding the gates open had fallen in such a manner as to prop one of the gates open, which allowed the elk to escape. This condition has been eliminated by fastening one end of the bar, on a swivelJ and hooking the other end to the Solenoid release. This keeps the bar from falling to the ground, and should stop any trouble of this type in the future. On March 7 the electric release was activated and the gates closed behind 12 head of cows and calves. Af3 the trapping crew approached the trap the elk began to mill around and push at the gate. One of the elk, a calf, hit the gate extremely hard and succeeded in jamming one of the hinges. The next time it hit the gate its head went between the bars of the gate and in trying to back out, the gate was forced open and stayed that .way because of the jammed hinge. All 12 animals escaped. In order to eliminate this factor, a "safety" bar was constructed which could be dropped in front of the gates by the trapping crew if animals were in the trap. It is obvious that the animals do not fight the gates when they trap themselves, but do seek a way out when the crew approaches. The release for the safety bar is located about 100 yards from the trap and the animals do not have a chance to fight the gates before the bar is dropped, preventing the gates from being opened until the bar is reset. This arrangement allows the principle of the gates to be fully utilized until the trapping crew approaches the trap sj;te. The bar was used successfu.lly two different times after it was installed. Since it was noticed that the calf had gotten its head between the bars o,fthe gate, several wooden slats four inches wide were wired vertically betw@.en the bars to stop either deer or elk from getting their heads caught. �-46- The third problem that developed was that the net was plenty big enough for deer, but some of the elk nearly jumped over it. A new net frame has been const.ructed that is two feet longer, which should eliminate this problem. The old net will be used on the new group trap that has been constructed on 2nd Dry Creek, which should catch more deer than the trap on East Elk Creek. The animals caught and tagged this year were all ear-tagged with the new shield type ear tag, one silver tag and one red tag, both numbered the same. The one deer tagged was also marked with a 2~ inch wide leather collar covered with "Rocket; Red IT colored plastic material. One elk was marked with a similar collar, while two cow elk were marked with a four inch white plastic collar, trade~ mark "WeblonlT, which is a vinyl-impregnated nylon material. Cine spike bull was caught, but we could not put a collar on him because his head was too large to fit through the collars we had made up. Table 1 - Deer and Elk Tagged During the Winter 1959~60 Sapinero Game Management Area .. ..... Date Tagged , , , ; , , IYrarch5, 1960 March 5, 1960 March 10,1960 March 18,1960 March 18J1960 . Species Sex Age Right Ear Tag Left Ear 'rag Deer Elk Elk Elk Elk Female Female Female Male Female Yearling Mature Mature Y~arling(?) Old S-l..,white S-2-white S... 3-white S-4-white S-5-white S=l-red S~2-red S=3-red S4=red S~'5-red Remarks Red collar Red collar White collar No collar White collar Recommendaltions: The experimental trapping program at the Sapinero Game Management Area has been very successful from the standpoint of learning how to run the trap and how to hand:l.= the animals caught. We have also learned that elk can be induced to enter a trap even in a light Winter, which indicates that we can expect to catch large numbers of animals in the event a heavy winter makes food hard to obtain. All of the problems that have arisen during the past two winters seem to have 'been solved, but it will take a heavy winter before we can say t.hat the trap and net. are entirely satisfactory. Also, enough animals are marked with collars so that at least some time sho'cld be spent in trying to locate some of the marked animals by using a plane and observ= ing elk on the calving areas in the Gunnison National Forest. Pr-epar-ed by: Date t Raymond J. Boyd M. C. Coghill J'u.ly 1960 -------------~~~-------------------J Approved 'by r Gilbert N. Hu.nter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -47JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No. W-38 .• R-13 Work Plan No. 4 Title of Job: Study of Deer Losses on Colorado Highways Period covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 .. Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 3 Abstract: Most of Colorado's deer highway kills appear to be due to lack of alertness by the driver. Most accidents happen when the weather is clear, on known deer crossings, and on straight road. Does more frequently are killed than bucks or fawns. More deer are killed between 4 p.m. and 10 p.m. than any other six hour period. The average damage to a vehicle hitting a deer is $150.64. Objectives: To determine the various factors that affect the loss of deer by cars on Colorado highways. Procedures: A uniform deer-auto accident report form was distributed to all Conservation Officers. These forms were to be filled out and returned to the project leader. R~sults: A small portion of highway kills were reported from some Conservation Officers districts, therefore, the findings listed here must be indicators of general conditions. It is not compulsory that drivers killing deer on Colorado Highways report the incident. Too often very little information could be collected on many of the highway kills. Class of deer killed: Bucks Does Fawns :-:-nknown Information on driver: Based on a sample size of 131. 40·9% 53.5% 3.0% 2.6% Based on a sample size of 131. Driver identified 42% Driver unidentified 58% No driver injuries were reported. Contributing factors: Fat.Lgue Headlights glare Drinking Poor vision (one eye, etc.) �-48- Amount of damage to automobile: Sample size 47. Average $150.64 (Nothing - $481.00) Time of Accidentt Based on a sample size of 83. 4 a.m. - 10 a.m. 10 a.m. ~ 4 p.m. 4 p vm . - 10 l' .m , 10 p.m. 4 a.m. 20.5% 2.4% 61.5% 15.6% - Weather: Based on a sample size of 108. Clear Rain or Snow Fog Cloudy 70.4% 6.5% 0.9% 22.2% Location of Accident: Based on sample of 102. Known crossing Not a known crossing Road surface type: 64.7% 35·3% Based on sample size of 116. Black top Dirt 98.0% 1.8% Other road information: Based on sample size of 122. Accident on curve Accident on straight road Accident on hill crest 22·~10 68.9% 8.2% Conclusions: Study should be continued with a more simplified form. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date: Approved by: July, 1960 ----------~~~~---------------- Gilbert N. Hunter --~~~~--~~------------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -49- State of Project JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Colorado ----------------------------------NO. __ ~W~-~3~8_-~R_-~13~ Work Plan No. _ 4 ----~----------------------- Deer-Elk Job No. Investigations 4"" ", ' """"" " Ti t le 0 f Job: ~Exp:::£::.:::e.:.r.:::i;:.:m:::e::.n:..:::t.:::a:::l~S::.n:::o.=w__:..;M:::e.::::l: _ Period April 1, 1959 through Covered: March 31, 1960 Abstract: Last year's experiments indicated that dusting snow with the proper amount of carbon black could be used to hasten snow melting. This year an attempt was made with fair success to mechanize the blower device. Objective: To determine if it is practical to use carbon black products to hasten snow melting and to devise an efficient method of dispensing such products. Procedure: The same square carbon hopper was used this yearj however, in place of using a hand driven forge to produce the blast of air going into the hopper, a gasoline motor driven device was used. This cons~sted of a surplus army blower of the type that was used to force warm air onto aeroplane motors. The heating device was removed as it was of no value. The air was forced into the hopper with the aid of a 3 inch flexible tube and out the other end of the hopper. The carbon dispersion was only fair, probably because of the weak blast of air put out by this device was not sufficient and there was a tendency for the carbon material to pack in the hopper. An agitator of some sort could be devised to correct this. Recommendations: should be used. Prepared by: If any further tests along this line are made, a bigger blower Paul F. Gilbert Approved by: ----~--~~~~~------Date: July, 1960 ----------~~~~~------------ G~il~b~e~r~t~N~.~H~un~t~e~r~ _ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �Fig. 1. Mechanized charcoal blower. Motor blows air through square hopper and back underneath trailer through the three inch hose. �Fig. 2. Melting begins shortly after charcoal dust is applied. �July, 1960 -51JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~~~~--------------- Project NO. ~W~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~3 _ Deer-Elk Investigations _ Job No. Work Plan No. ~5~ Title of Job: ~D~e~n~t~i~t~i~o~n~an~d~Ag~e~-~W~e~i~g~h~t~C~o~r~r~e~l~a~t~i~o~n~ Period Covered: October 15, 1959 to April 15, 1960 1 _ Abstract: A total of 75 deer were weighed at the Little Hills Experimental Station during the winter of 1959-60. Mature bucks were heavier than usual but mature does were lighter. Yearling bucks were lighter but yearling does were heavier. All fawns were considerably heavier. Objectives: To determine weight groups for the Piceance Creek area. Techniques Used: Trapped deer were tagged, aged, and weighed on platform scales. ��-53Dentition and Age-Weight Correlation Don G. Smith Trapping operations during the winter of 1959-60 were confined to the Little Hills area near Meeker,. Colorado. Incidental trapping was done near Gunnison. Weights are from deer wintering in the Piceance Creek area. A total of 75 deer were aged and weighed. Size, weight, and dentition were used to classify age groups. A new age group was used this year -- old deer-which will continue to be recorded. The condition of the animal is also noted. New trapping record books were used to facilitate records. Results are presented in Table 1. Table 1. Age Average Weights by Age Class Average Weight Number in Pounds Trapped Sex Weight Range Comparison with . 6-year Average old old bucks does 0 3 139·3 133"'0144 mature mature bucks does 7 10 167·7 135· 5 132..,215 117-154 heavier lighter yearling yearling bucks does 12 2 122.4 123·5 104... 136 120-127 lighter heavier fa:wn fawn bucks does 24 17 74.8 71.8 49=91 58-87 heavier heavier No old bucks were weighed due to the selectivity of the trap although some were caught in wing and group traps. Mature bucks were heavier than usual as one buck weighed 215 pounds. Mature does were in good condition although they averaged six pounds lighter than usual. One only weighed 117 pounds. Yearling bucks were down as one buck weighed only 104 pounds, but they were heavier than those trapped last year. Yearling does were up slightly over the six year average and considerably up over last yearj however, only two yearling does were weighed. Both sexes of fawns were heavier than the six year average although buck fawns·weighed slightly less than last year. The condition of most of the deer appeared good, especially the fawns. Feed was no problem as the spring of 1960 arrived earlier than for many years. A total of 227 deer were trapped, of which 135 were tagged. Details of the trapping operations are reported under a separate report, the Little Hills Grazing Study, Project 101~R, Work Plan 2, Job Number 1. A new group type trap was used to stock the experimental pastures with good results. �-54. . . . . . .. Deer Tag Returns: A total of 14 deer tags were returned this year compared to 10 last year. Most of them were from the Piceance Creek and Douglas Creek areas. The distance from trap site to kill varied from 1 mile to 75 miles. Outstanding distances included a buck from Picenace traveling 75 miles east to Hammond Creek; a buck from Radium traveling 50 miles to Dillon, and:a buck from Dry Creek near Sapinero traveling 60 miles to Middle Cottonwood Creek near Buena Vista. Results are presented in Table 3. Table 3. :ragging Date 1959 Report on Deer Tag Returns ... Tagging Round Cow Age & Sex Tag Tag 11/25/58 fawn buck mature doe 3/5/58 mature buck 12/9/58 2/18/56 yearling buck 12/15/53 yearling buck 2/14/57 mature doe 2/6/57 mature buck 1/31/54 mature doe 12/12/54 fawn doe 12/13/56 mature buck 1/12/56 mature doe 2/15/56 fawn buck 12/22/56 mature buck buck 12/30/53 fawn 1646 A 1757 1683 2322 1072 2931 2922 269 291 A 1302 A 1623 Trapping Site Date. of Kill of Kill Distance 1647 A 1758 1684 LLttle Jlills Nov. '59 Cathedral Blfs. 25 mi. Little Hills Nov. '59 Dry Fork 1 mi. Little Hills Oct. '59 Dry Fork 2 mi. Little Hills Oct. '59 Dry Fork 1 mi. Little Hills Oct. '59 Hammond Cr. 75 mi. 1792 Lit,tle Hills Oct. '59 L-0-7 Mtn. 15 mi. 1783 Little Hills Oct·.'59 Piceance Cr. 4 mi. 1130 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 East Douglas 10 mi. 1135 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 Cathedral Blfs. 5 mi. 1604 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 East Douglas 10 mi. 1181 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 East Douglas 10 mi. A 1303 Radium Oct. '59 Near Kremmling 15 mi. A 1624 Radium Nov. '59 Near Dillon 50 mi. A 817 DrY'Cr- Gunn. Sept '59 Mdle. Cottonwood 60 mi. (20 mi. west Buena Vista) There were 30 deer caught which had been tagged during previous years. Most of the recatches were from recent years although several were from 1950, 1951, and 1954. However, the two does tagged in 1951 and 1954 died in March, 1960. The report is presented in Table 4. �-55~ Table 4. Date " , , , , , ... .... Trapping Record of Recatches 1959-60. Sex . , ; , , . , , ,Af!,e , Left Ear . , . , , , 3/4/60 12/30/60 1/21/60 12/5/59 12/30/59 1/20/60 2/38/60 1/6/60 1/28/60 2/23/60 2/1/60 1/24/60 1/24/60 1/6/60 2/27/60 1/21/60 12/31/59 2/20/60 1/6/60 3/1/60 2/8/60 buck mature ,"A3000 doe mature doe mature 98 doe old 198 doe 'mature doe old 191 doe mature A 1415 doe mature A 1420 buck mature A 1426 doe mature A 1428 buck mature A 1432 doe mature A 1449 doe matur~ A 1457 buck mature A 1484 doe mature doe mature 1639 doe mature 1662 doe yearling 16'79 doe mature 1681 doe mature A 1792 doe mature 1798 1/24/60 12/29/59 12/18/59 2/17/60 3/4/60 1/16/60 2/20/60 2/28/60 2/23/60 doe mature doe mature doe mature doe old buck mature buck yearling buck year ling doe yearling doe mature 2944 A 1906 A 1939 A 1945 A 1965 , ..Right .. Weignt' Oondition , ., . . Remarks . . . . . . . Ear A 14 A 22 A 319 A 395 A 1416 A 1419 A 1425 A 1427 A 1431 A 1450 A 1458 1512 1638 1663 1680 1682 A 1793 1802 1803 1863 A 1905 A 1936 A 1938 A 1944 A 1964 1970 137 148 128 143 143 143 186 130 135 130 143 138 133 147 152 129 120 good good good poor good good good good fair good good good good good good good good good good good fair good good good good good good good good good Tagged 12/19/56 Tagged 12/30/56(N'ew tags ~~~~ Tagged 2/12/50 Tagged 316/51 Died 3/29/60 Tagged 11/26/54 Died 3/29/60 Tagged 1/28/50 Tagged 1/26/59 Tagged 1/28/59 Tagged 2/4/59 Tagged 2/4/59 Tagged 2/9/59 Tagged 2/18/59 Tagged 1/6/59 Tagged 1/12/59 Tagged 1/26/57 Tagged 11/21/58 Tagged 12/3/58 Tagged 12/7/58 Tagged 12/8/58 Tagged 12/31/58 Tagged 2/17/57 Leg broken Killed 3/29/60 - Weak Tagged 2/27/57 Tagged 2/27/57 Tagged 2/14/56 Tagged 2/23/59 Tagged 3/8/59 Tagged 3/8/59 Tagged 3/10/59 Tagged 3/7/59 Tagged 11/22/56 �-56TRAPPING REPORT LITTLE HILLS EXPERIMENTAL . Table 2. Deer tagged during the winter of 1959-60 Date.. , Sex . Age buck Right Ear A 322 Weight 11/17/59 Left Ear A 321 12./3/59 12/9/59 12/11/59 12/12/59 12/13/59 12/13/59 12/15/59 12/17/59 12/17/59 12/21/59 12/24/59 buck fawn A 325 buck fawn A 1974 buck fawn A 1981 buck fawn A 1983 doe mature A 1986 buck fawn A 1987 buck yearlingA'J.989 doe yearling A 1992 buck y~arlingA 1994 buck fawn A 1995 doe old A 1998 A 326 A 1976 A 1982 A 1984 A 1985 A 1988 A 1990 A 1991 A 1993 A 1996 A 1997 80 75 65 57 137 65 126 127 130 78 133 fair fair fair good fair good good good good good good 12/29/59 2/25/60 2/25/60 2/26/60 2/26/60 2/26/60 2/27/60 2/27/60 2/27/60 2/27/60 2/28/60 2/28/60 2/29/60 2/27/60 2/29/60 3/1/60 3/2/60 3/2/60 3/3/60 ~3/3/60 3/5/60 3/5/60 3/5/60 3/6/60 12/31/59 12/30/59 1/1/60 1/1/60 1/2/60 1-/3/60 buck fawn A 2000 buck yearlingA 2501 doe fawn A 2504 buck yearlingA 2505 ,doe mature A 2508 buck fawn A 2509 doe mature At25IL doe fawn A 2514 buck mature A 2515 buck yearlingA 2518 doe mature A 2519 doe fawn A 2521 doe mature A 2526 buck fawn A 2524 buck fawn A 2527 doe fawn A 2529 doe old A 2531 doe fawn A 2533 doe yearling A 2536 buck mat.ure A 2537 buck yearlingA 2540 doe old A 2542 doe mature A 2544 doe yearling A 2546 'buck fawn A 2801 doe fawn A 2804 doe fawn A 2806 buck mature A 2808 buck yearlingA 2810 buck fawn A 2811 A 1999 A 2502 A 2503 A 2506 A 2507 A 2510 A 2512 A 2513 A 2516 A 2517 A 2520 A 2522 A 2523 A 2525 A 2528 A 2530 A 2532 A 2534 A 2535 A 2538 A 2539 A 2541 A 2543 A 2545 A 2802 A 2803 A 2805 A 2807 A 2809 A 2812 87 good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good fair good fair good good good good good good good good good good good good , , , , , .. STATTON , , , . mature Condition fair 91 72 78 140 84 , , . , . Remarks 2 pt. shot with Cap-Chur gun Had broken leg Open sore on back •.•doctored Shot #5 April 25, 1960 2 pt. 2 pt. Incisor teeth missing Died Mar. 1, 1960 3 pt. 3 - 2 pt. Antlers shed Shot #4 April 26, 1960 3 pt. 2 pt. pus in eye Shot #4 May 13, 1960 �-57'rable 2 (Continued) Date 1/3/60 1/4/60 1/4/60 1/5/60 1/6/60 1/6/60 1/7/60 1/7/60 1/7/60 1/'T/60 1/8/60 1/8/60 1/10/60 1/12/60 1/13/60 1/14/60 1/14/60 1/14/60 1/18/60 1/19/60 1/20/60 1/21/60 1/21/60 1/21/60 1/21/60 1/22/60 1/23/60 1/23/60 1/23/60 1/2'5/60 1/25/60 1/2'1/60 1/)8/6" I v ! _ 1/28/60 1/29/60 1/30/60 1."/ 130 /6 o 1/3-:,..160 2/1/60 2/2/60 2/4/60 2/5/60 2/5/60 2/6/60 2/6/60 I .. " 2/7/60 2/7/60 2/8/60 2/9/60 Sex Ag§ Left Ear doe fawn A 2813 buck fawn A 2815 buck fawn A 2817 aloe mature A 2819 buck fawn A 2821 buck yearling A 2823 buck fawn A 2825 doe fawn A 2827 bllck fawn A 2829 buck mature A 2831 doe fawn A 2834 doe mature A 3835 doe yearling A 2838 buck fawn A 2840 doe fawn A 8841 buck faw.n A 2843 doe mature A 2845 buck fawn A 2847 buck faw.n A 2849 doe fawn A 2852 buck fawn A 2854 baek fawn A 2856 bu.ck yearling A 2858 doe fawn A 2859 doe fawn A 2861 buck yearling A 2864 doe mature A 2865 b~ck fawn A 2868 doe matare A 2870 fs;w.;.'1. doe A 2872 doe fawa A 28'74 buck yearling A 2876 doe mature A 2877 doe fawn A 2880 doe mature A 2882 doe fawn A 2884 d.oe matu.re A 2885 buck fawn A 288'7 buck mature A 2889 ·buck fawr.:. A 2891 ·01:i.ck yearling A 2894 -b~ICk fawn A 2896 ~t·c.:.:re buck A 2897 buck yearling A 2899 d.oe fa;TNYl A 2902 doe yearling A 2904 doe ma+ure A 2905 doe old A 290'7 buck fawn A 2910 Right Weight Ear A 2814 79 A 2816 A 2818 85 A 2820 A 2822 89 A 2824 136 A 2826 76 A 2828 87 82 A 2830 180 A 2832 A 2833 58 A 2836 133 120 A 3837 68 A 2839 A 2842 72 A 2844 85 A 2846 117 A 2848 74 A 2850 A 2851 74 A 2853 76 A 2855 49 A 285'7 104 A 2860 74 A 2862 77 A 2863 126 A 2866 124 A 8867 78 A 2869 139 82 A 2871 A 2873 73 120 A 2875 A 2878 144 A 2879 74 A 2881 137 A 2883 70 A 2886 145 A 2888 47 A 2890 192 A 2892 77 128 A 2893 82 A 2895 A 2898 154 A 2900 115 62 A 2901 A 2903 115 A 2906 132 A 2908 144 A 2909 73 Condition good good good good good good good good good good fair good fair good good good good good good good good good good good good. good good good good good good good good good fair good good good. good good fair good good good good, Remarks Shot #4 :May 6, 1960 Died in #4 Mar. 1960 2 pt. 4 pt. sawed horns Found dead 2/15/60 Died in #4 2/20/1960 2 pt. 2 pt. Old Tag A=22 replaced Shot #5 April 22y 1960 4 pt. Died :MarchJ 1960 2 pt. 3 pt. 2 pt. Shot l\1ay11, 1960 �-58Table 2 (Continued) Age Date Sex 2711/60 2/11/60 2/11/60 2/11/60 2/12/60 2/12/60 2/12/60 2/13/60 2/13/60 2/13/60 2/13/60 2/16/60 2/16/60 2/16/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/18/60 2/18/60 2/18/60 2/18/60 2/19/60 2/19/60 2/19/60 2/19/60 2/15/60 2/20/60 2/20/60 2/21/60 2/21/60 2/21/(Jo 2/21/60 2/23/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 buck yearling A 2912 A 2911 buck yearling A 2914 A 2913 doe fawn A 2915 A 2916 doe fawn A 2918 A 2917 doe fawn A 2920 A 2919 doe mature A 2922 A 2921 buck fawn A 2924 A 2923 buck mature A 2926 A 2925 doe old A 2928 A 2927 buck mature A 2930 A 2929 doe mature A 2932 A 2931 buck mature A 2934 A 2933 fawn doe A 2936 A 2935 buck fawn A 2938 A 2937 doe fawn A 2939 A 2940 buck mature A 2941 A 2942 buck mature A 2944 A 2943 doe old A 2945 A 2946 buck fawn A 2948 A 2947 buck yearl~ A 2949 A 2950 buck mature A 295l A 2952 doe fawn A 2954 A 2953 buck fawn A 2955 A 2956 buck mature A 2958 A 2957 buck mature A 2960 A 2959 bu.ck fawn A 2961 A 2962 buck fawn A 2964 A 2963 bu.ck yearling A 2966 A 2965 buck mature A 2967 A 2968 buck fawn A 2969 A 2970 buck matiure A 2972 A 2971 buck yearling A 2974 A 2973 buck fawn A 2976 A 2975 doe old A 2978 A 2977 doe, mature A 2980 A 2979 bu.ck yearling A 2982 A 2981 buck yearling A 2984 A 2983 ma+ure A 2985 A 2986 doe ma+are A 2988 A 2987 buck buck fawn A 2989 A 2990 mature h- 2083 A 2991 doe (button) doe mature A 2992 A 2993 buck yearling A 2994 A 2995 doe fawn A 2996 A 2997 buck mature A 2999 A 2998 'buck mature A 3000 A 14 2/21/60 2/25/60 2/25/60 2/25/60 3/4/60 Left Ear Submitted by: Don G. Smith Date! July, 1960 Right Ear Weight Condition 119 123 58 72 58 125 71 161 141 215 154 good good good good good good good good good good good good good good fair good good good good good .' good fair good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good - :L2'7 good good good good good Approved by: Remarks 2 pt. 2 pt. Antlers shed Antlers shed 4 pt. Antlers shed 4 pt. Broken back - shot 3 pt. Antlers shed Antlers shed 4 pt. 3 pt. 3 - 4 pt. Antlers shed 2 pt. 2 pt. Antlers shed - wore hair off body 2 pt. Antlers ahed Recatch 12/19/56 Retagged with A 3000 Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -59JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~--~~~----------------- Project No. Work Plan No. ·_W~-~3~·8~-R~-~1~3~ 6 _ Deer-Elk ..... ----~--------------------- Job No. Investigations , . , , , 1 Tit le of Job: M::.::::.et.::;h:::.o:::d::::s:::.....:o:.:f::......::Ev::..:.;a::l:.::ua::::..::t Period April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Covered: Objectives: (a) To determine if any actual loss in production of alfalfa occurs from spring grazing by deer or elk, and if such a loss occurs, how much. (b) To correlate the actual amount of use by game animals on the test plots, as to number of animals and length of time, with changes in production so that estimates of game numbers may be converted to change in pounds of hay produced. Procedure: METHODS AND MATERIALS The procedures and equipment used in this segment differed slightly from those used in the previous two segments, so each will be discussed under the appropriate heading. Alfalfa Plots The plots were 200 feet x 200 feet (40,000 square feet) in size. The plots that were randomly selected to be fenced were enclosed with two strands of 39-inch woven wire hung on 10-foot steel posts. The posts were already in place, being ham~ mered into the ground during the fall of 1958. The wire, however, was not put into position until just before growth started in the spring. This allowed every plot to receive fall, winter, and early spring use by the deer. The wire was not taken down until harvest of the hay was started. After holding several meetings with Dr. Elmer Re mmeng a , Department of Mathematics, Colorado State ~niversity, Fort Collins, Colorado, going over the statistical analysis of the previous years work, it was mentioned that eventually the q~estion would be raised as to the accuracy of the Analysis of Covariance test on the hay weight data. In other words, how large a difference must there be between the amounts of hay produced from the grazed vs. the ungrazed plots before it could be detected? The appropriate statistical test of this question is known as the "Power of the Analysis-of-Variance Tests" or more simply the Phi Square (~2) Test (Dixon and Massey, 1957). �-60When the hay weight data from the 1958 study year (Boyd, 1958) was subjected to the Phi Square Test, the accuracy was such that we could detect a difference as small as 1,000 pounds per acre 95% of the time. ThiS, of course, is not nearly accurate enough to be used in an arbitration or court case. It was necessary, therefore, to predetermine a difference in production that would be acceptable, insert this figure into the formula, and based upon the known variation between the plots of each treatment, determine the sample size necessary to meet the chosen difference in production. After a discussion with the State Game Manager, Mr. Hunter, we decided that we must be able to detect a difference as small as 300 pounds per acre before the data would stand up in court. When the 300-pound figure was inserted into the formula and solved for the required sample size, we found that 70 plots would be needed to satisfy the requirement. Because the treatments were divided into five replications each, we would need a total of 14 sub-samples from each plot. In order to make the harvest and analysis Simpler, we divided each plot into 20 sub-plots in the following manner: Each plot was divided into four strips, each 50 feet wide and 200 feet long. Each strip was then subdivided into 16 sub-plots, 12 feet wide and 50 feet long, giving a total of 64 sub-plots in each plot. From these 64 sub-plots 20 plots were randomly chosen that were to be harvested and have the hay weighed (Figure 1). While the sub-sample included 100 plots instead of the original 70, iGtwas felt that not enough additional work would be entailed to harvest the additional 30 plots and also that the accuracy might be increased beyond the 300 pound req::..irement. Since the mower that was to be used on the harvest of the damage study plots had a six-foot Sickle, it was very simple to determine what hay was to be included inside a sub-plot, and which hay was to be left out. After the hay had been mowed down and allowed to cure, it was raked with a side delivery rake into windrows that only included hay from an area 12 feet wide, this being shown by two mower swaths. Each windrow was then divided into 50-foot sections and the appropriate ones marked for weighing. After the hay had cured in the windrow, a John Deere baler was pulled along the piled hay and all the hay from a 50-foot section was put into one bale. These bales were weighed as they came out of the end of the bale case (Figure 2). The scale that was used to weigh the bales was a Chatillon beam balance, accurate to the nearest 1/4 pound. Deer Counts The number of deer 'asing the alfalfa field were determined by counting them from the observation tower that is located on the north edge of the field. The tower floor is 18 feet from the ground, which placed the observer and his binoculars about 23 feet above ground level. From this vantage point it is possible to see 'he entire field, and in no case can a deer be on the field without being observed. �-61During the daylight hours the deer were counted everyone-half hour with only the assistance of binoculars. After dark it was necessary to use the 1,250watt spotlight mounted on the roof of the tower. With this light and a pair of good binoculars it was very simple to get an excellent count of the deer on the field. When the light was used the deer did not seem to be bothered to any great extent because it was rarely on for more than one minute, this being about the length of time it toaR to count the field. The deer were counted every hour after dark until midnight. Thereafter the count-s were made every other hour. The follOWing night the deer were counted on the hours that were skipped the previous night, and so forth. Weather Obseruations Direct readings were taken on two different weather phenomena during the 1959 study period. The air temperature was recorded on a J. P. Friez Thermograph, ML-77. This machine recorded the tenrp.eratureon a gral':ti· ... for a seven-day period. The instrumentwas checked with a registered weather observer thermometer at the Montrose County Airport. The line on the chart or graph can be read to the nearest 15 mdrnrbesJ if such accuracy is needed. The wind velocity was measured by an anemometer that was mounted on the northeast corner of the roof of the tower. The dial on this p:articular in:str"tlment showed only total miles .of wind, and could not be read at any time to get the velocity at that particular moment. The dial was rea,deach evening just before counting began and was again read when counting ceased. This gave a figure which was the total miles of wind that had blown between the two readings. This figure, when divided by the number of hours in the period, gave an answer that was the average speed in miles per hour for that particular period. The instrument used was manufactured by the J. P. Friezand Sons Company of Baltimore, Maryland, and is their Model ML~80. �FIGURE 1SAMPLE DESIGN FOR ONE- ACRE ALFALFA PLOTS r+: X 17 16 X X 15 14 13 12 II X X X X 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 X 3 2 X X I STRIP I STRIP 2 200 • X X X X X X X " , L-- 200' X X STRIP 3 X STRIP 4 �Fig. 2. Weighing Hay from Sample Plots at Billy Creek, 1959. �-63Methods of Evaluating Deer and Elk Damage to Alfalfa Raymond Boyd The various types of analysis that were applied to the data gathered at the Billy Creek Game Management Area did much toward answe-ring many of the questions that arose after the 1958 study year. Each of tne items of information gathered in the course of the 1959 study year will be discussed separately under the appropriate headings. Alfalfa Production Plots Mowing of th,e alfalfa field and the plots contained in it was sta.rtedon June 24, 1959 when the hay -was about one-fourth in bloom. After the hay was baled, it was weighed sub-plot by sub-p.lot; as explained in the previous section on methods. The weights of the hay produced from each plot, the total amount being shown instead of the 20 individual weights from each plot ,are tabulat.ed in Table 1. Table 1. Number of Pounds of Alfalfa Produced from 200 Sub-plots in 1959 at the Billy Creek Game Management Area. Treatment Replrucation Fenced Unfenced 1 - 2 3 - 4 5 - 6 7 - 8 9 - 10 651.25 Ibs. tI 879·75 745.00 tI 497·50 tI 608.00 tI 839·00 Ibs. 472.50 tI 1,056.75 tI 770.25 tI 380.00 tI Total 3,381. 50 Ibs. 3,518.501bs. In determining if there is any significant difference between the total amount of hay produced from each series of sub-p.l.ot s , the data may be subjected to a simple tlTtItest (Snedecor, 1956). The calculated tlTtIvalue for 198 degrees of freedom is 0.6008. The values t .05 = 1.97 and t .01 = 2.601 being taken from the table tlValues of tit (Snedecor, 1956). Since the primary reason we ran the damage study for an additional year was to increase the accu.racy of our analysis, it is necessary to subject the hay weight data to a Phi Square Test (Dixon and Massey, 1957). �-64The data was substituted into the foliLowing formula, where "d' is the quantity we need to solve for. All other items in the formula are taken directly from the "T" test calculations. n = t 1.97 s = 12.9 n = (.05) t2 s2 d2 and 2.60 (.Ol)(Snedecor, 1956) 100 Solving for d; d = 2.53 for each sub-plot This means that we can detect a difference as small as 2.53 Lbs . per sub-plot This figure is meaningless unless we expand it to a figure comparable to the difference in pounds per acre. We can easily do this by Irru.ltiplying the d = 2.53 by 72.6, which equals 183.56 pounds per acre 95% of the time. If we further -want to refine our accuracy to the 95% level we merely substitute the figure 2.60 for t .and solve again for d. This answer (3.35) times 72.6 tells us that we may.detect a difference as small as 243 .5 pounds per acre 99% of the time. 95% of the time. c. Deer Count Data was begun the evening of' April 20, May 19, 1959, at which time counting was suspended because of the lack of' deer coming onto and using the field. The counting of deer using the alfalfa field 1959 and continued on a more or less regular basis until During this period of time a total of 5,990 deer were counted on the field. Thi£ figure is an absolute minimumbecause of the f'act that the deer were not counted all night every night of the counting period. On the basis using the field. the field. of' 21 counting nights, we found an average of 285 .deer :per night This breaks down into an average of' nearly 24 deer :per hour using Weather Observations During the course of the damage study two different types of information were gathered concerning the weather conditions at Billy Creek during the spring grazing season. A. Air Temperature - As was mentioned before, recorded by use of' a thermograph. the air temperature By reading the graphs from the instrument it was possible temperature at the same time that the deer were -courrbed , was to obtain the air In order to determine if there was any relationship between the air temperature and the number of de.er counted, it is necessary to subject the data gathered to a "Coefficient of Correlation Test" (Snedecor, 1956,). Table 2 shows the calculations of the Coefficient for the air temperature vs. deer count data. �~8:b,le,2,- Coe,fficient 1959 of ,Correlation . SumF Doc Dy = = 171 N on Temper,ature-Deer Count Dat.aj Billy Greek, , ~~~:,J:L8 ," Sum Fx . Dx = 33 SumFx ... D;x2 = 49,592 SumFy . Dy = 223 SumFy ; . ,"\ . 0/ r = 0.14 = 25,455 ,!",'! B. Wind Velocity - The wind velocity could only be approximated because of the limitations of the instrument used in the study. There was a total of 541.4 miles of wind during the period April 20, 1959 through May 16,1959, inclusive. This figure shows onf.y wind that blew.during the counting periods. Thisaverage:s out to 4.75 miles :of wind per hour. There is no way that .a correlation analysis can be run on the -wind velocity vs. deer numbers data., nor can a regression equation be set up. DISCUSSION The purpose of this section is to discuss the results brought out in the analysis of data section and to interpret them with the idea of answering the questions posed in the objec't fves j namely, (1) to determine if any actual loss in production occurs from spring grazing by deer or elk, and if a loss occurs, how mucrr; and (2) to correlate the actual amount of use by game animals on the test plots, as to number-sof animals and length of time, with changes in production so t4at estimates of game use may be converted to change in pounds of hay produced. Alfulfa Plots Since the main reason we ran the experiment for -anaddi tional year -wasto increase the sample size in order to bring about greaterac-curacy, -weneed only to examine the results of the "T" test to see if there are significantd1fferences hetween the means of the replications of the two treatments, and if significance is not .shovn, then the calculated lid" from the Phi Square Test would indicate just what .accuracy we had in our experiment. The "T" value of 0.6008 obViously does not exceed the 95%level of 1.97 or the 99%level of 2.601, thus we can state that there is no statisticallysignificant difference between the amount of hay produced from the unfenced and fenced plots. With a calculated difference of 2Y,3.5pounds per acre with 99%confidence, we can be assured that our experiment was extremely accurate because an amount of hay this small on an acre could be mis-sed by a sloppy job of mowing, ,a dull Sickle, or a poor job of raking. �-66"" Deer Counts The methods used in this study to determine the numbers o.f deer using the field were, in the opinion of this writer, the best available and gave very accurate .data as to numbers and time of feeding. In Figure 3, the hourly fluctuations in deer numbers is .shown, The graph indicates that the hour between 7:00P.M. and 8:00 P.M. is the time of'night that the greatest number of deer can be counted. This compares to the 1958 results which indicated that the hour between 6:30P.M. and q'::30P.M. was the be:st time to count. These two series of times.compare very .favorably with each other, and tend to giveeach other support . ., Weather Observations When the deer counts -were correlated with air temperature at the time of each count, very little if any relationship -was indicated by the calculated "r o.f 0.14. ll As was mentioned in the 1958 report (Boyd, 1958) the -wind velocity data was not the he.st type to work with because the actual speed o.fthe wind at any given time could not be determined. The wind did affect deer numbers on the field in that they seemed more nervous and tended to move around quite a lot whenever strong winds began to blow. It is intereBting to no~that the average wind velocity in 1959 was 4.75 miles per hour, while the average velocity in 1958 was 4.14 miles per hour. This striking similarity between two different years' wind data would tend to cancel out any effect wind would have had .on deer numbers from one year to the next. Conclusion Since this experiment was designed to allow all factors such as weather, disease, insects, etc. to be constant on all of the plots, the only factors that might affect the amount of hay produced are soil differences and animals grazing on the alfalfa before it is mowed, in this case deer. By using the "Analysis of Covar-Lancee'on the 1957 and 1958 data we determined that spring grazing by deer had no reducing effect upon the production of alfalfa. When the study was slightly redesigned in 1959 we were able to run both a trTIrtest and an "Ana.LysLs of Variance" upon the data, which again showed no statistically significantdifferenceB in production between the grazed and ungrazed plots. Further, our accuracy, as determri.nedby the "Power of Analysis of Variance." test, was so good tha.t.any #.f'ferences in production could be :attributed to harvest practices and not to grazing by deer. The same statement made at the conclusion of'the 1958 study bears repeating here, at the end of the 1959 study~ IISincewe have already determined that there is no significant difference between the yields of' the plots, spring grazing by deer had no harmful effect upon the amount of hay produced from the field. II �-67SUMMARY 1. The actual amount of' hay produced f'rom 200 sub-p.Lotis -was determined by weighing all of the hay from each plot right after it wa.s baled. One •.. half of' the plots were fenced ,agl3.instdeer grazing, the other 100 were left open to free deer use. 2. Totl3.lproduction from the 100 ungrl3.zed:plots was 3,381.5 pounds while 3,518.5 pounds were produced f'rom the grazed plots. These two f'iguresare not statistically different from each other. 3· Deer USing the alfalfa field during the early spring, mid-April through mid •.. May, were counted from an observation tower, with the assistance of a 1,250-watt sel3.rchlight, every hour all night. A total of 5,990 deer were counted using the field during the 1959 study year. 4. An13.1ysis of the times deer were counted indicated that betwe,en 7:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M. is the best time to count deer, as this was when maximum numbers used the field. 5. Correlation of' air temperature ,and numbers of deer did not show any relationship. An fir" of' 0.14 was calculated f'rom this data. This figure conf'irms the calculated "r " for 1958, which was :•.•0.3. 6. Wind velocity did not apprecil3.bly aff'ect deer numbers. It was interesting to note, however, that the average wind velocity for 1959 was 4.75 miles per hour, while the average velocity in 1958 was 4.14 miles per hour. Recommendations for Further Study It is apparent that further study into the actual damage phase of this study would be merely repetitious and any additional work on this phase should wait until a court test of these results can be made. At the time of this writing an arbitration hearing is pending that will use these study results to deny any damages to the complaining pa.rty. Submitted Date: by: _--=.:R;::a:::..ym.:::::o;:::n;::d:....;.:,Y..:,.-=.B.=0JLy.;::,d:.--_____ Approved by! _-::G;:::i.;:1...:.b..:.e;:..r...;.t.. .....;;:::H;::un:;;::' ;,:t..:e..;:.r _ State Game Manager July 1960 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst, Coordinator ----------~~~~~-------------- �FIGURE 3 - AVERAGENUMBEROF DEER' USING THE ALFALFA FIELD AT BILLY CREE~( APRIL 20, 1959- MAY 16,1959 50 I 0\ ex> I 0 ..., L&J Z ::;:) 0 o 0:: 20 L&J CD i ~ 0:: L&J 10 ~ o~ ~ ·6:00 7:00 6:30 8:00 7:30 P.M. 9:00 8:30 10:00 11=00 1:00 12:00 2:00 HOUR COUNT WAS TAKEN 3:00 A.M. 5:00 4:00 _ �July, 1960 -69JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ----------------------------------- Project No .W":3'8-R-13 --------~----~--------------- Work Plan No. 6 ----------------------------- Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 5 Title of Job: Methods of Preventing Deer and Elk Grazing on Alfalfa Beriod Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Objectives: To determine methods of lessening or preventing deer and elk grazing on alfalfa in the spring. Results: The press of other duties concerned mostly with Work Plan 6, Job 1, did not allow very much time to be spent upon actual field work on this job. However, several meetings were attended with Fish and Wildlife Service personnel the past year which shed a new light on this particular research job. It seems that the Food and Drug Administration has not yet set allowable limits on the amount of chemical residue that is acceptable, should the various types of repellents we intended to test be used, on crops that are to be eonsumed by humans or consumed by animals that are to be killed for human consumption. For these reasons the Denver Wildlife Lab did not want to do any spraying of alfalfa fields until these questions have been answered. They are, at the present time, working on the problem and hope to have some definite answers in the near future. It was not possible to do any actual field spraying as set up in the P.S.&E. for this job, so a negative report is necessary for segment 13 of this job. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be placed on the inactive list until such time as it becomes feasible to do field spraying of alfalfa with animal repellents. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter ----~----------~-------------~~--~--~~-----------State Game Manager Date: July, 1960 --------~~~~~-------------F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -71JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------~~~~~--------------- Project NO. ~W~·-~3_8~-R~-~1~3~ Work Plan No.6 _ --~~-------------------- Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 6 Title of Job: A Study of'.the Monetary Value of Fruit Trees Period Covered: Apr-LL ,1" 1959, thru March 31, 1960. Objective: To find the total value of fruit trees as to the various species, age classes and varieties. Procedure: The greater part of the data presented in this report was gathered by personal interviews of fruit growers in the Paonia area. Prices quoted on young trees were taken from nursery catalogs that are available f'rom the various sales houses that handle this type of stock. . . Results: 1. Initial cost of nursery stock. Most fruit growers in this area, or most others as a matter of f.act, buy root grafted nursery stock direct from commercial nurseries. The cost of'apple trees, 2 to 3 feet high, is about 65¢ a piece, while young trees 4 to 6 feet high go from 85¢ to $1.00 a piece. Cherry trees cost on the average of $1.00 a piece, while peach trees are 80¢ to 9O¢ a piece. These figures are subject to change almost yearly, and were taken from 1960 fruit grower catalogs. 2. Planting cost. There are several items to be considered when figuring the cost of planting young fruit trees. First, the exact location of each tree haa to be stakedj this usually being accomplished with the aid of surveying equipment. The holes for the trees are usually about 18 inches deep and 18 inches across. Depending upon the operation, they are dug either with a mechanical digger or by hand. By working steadily, it is possible for a man to dig 10 to 12 holes per hour by hand. After the holes are dug, it takes an average of 15 minutes to put a tree into the hole and properly tamp and pile the dirt around the roots. �-72- 3· Maintenance Cost. A general rule-of-thumb used by most growers in this area is $1.00 per tree per year for pruning, spraying, disking and irrigation. Actually, there is very little pruning of fruit trees until they are 7 to 8 years old, after which pruning every y~ar is the rule. Fertilizer is an extta CO$t which is not considered in the above figure of $1.00 per tree per year. A good grade of trace element commercial fertilizer, 10-10-10 type, costs from $70 to $100 per ton, with a normal application rate of 100 to 200 pounds of the material per acre. 4. Harvest Cost. The picking of the fruit is done generally by transient workers and high school students. Picking is done on a piece type of work, in that the pickers get 12¢ to 15¢ per box for picking apples or peaches. It costs another 3¢ per box to haul the fruit to the packing house. If the grower does not have his own boxes, he must rent them from the packing sheds. 5. Taxes. According to the assessor's office in Montrose County, Colorado, the tax assessment on orchards is not different from the assessment on other types of irrigated farm lands in this area. The:refore, in order to determine what the taxes would be in any area where trees were being damaged, it would be necessary to contact the local tax assessor to determine values of the trees. 6. Expected Productive Life of Various Fruit Trees. Peach trees have a rather short productive life compared to apples. They will average about four years of age before they begin to produce fruit in comme~ial lots, and ~ive to six years before they get into peak production. Thereafter, they produce quantity crops until 15 to 18 years have passed, after which their production begins to go down hill. Apple trees, on the other hand, are six to ten years old before they begin to produce large amounts of fruit, and do not reach maximum production until 13 to 15 y~ars have passed. After 40 to 45 years have gone by, the trees begin to produce less and less fruit. Discussion: It is possible to generalize a formula to determine the total cost of a young fruit tree if it has been 100% damaged by game animals. There are several factors that cannot be exactly tied down to a specific cost, and for this reason~ it would seem best to use prices and costs in the local area to complete the formula. �-73Labor costs in the planting costs section are difficult to determine, should be ~igured according to local conditions. and AB was mentioned above, the taxes on ~rui ttrees are very nearly the same as those for other types of irrigated land, so the cost of a tree chargable to taxes should be figured locally on the going assessment for that type o~ land. On the basis o~ the ~oregoing information, it is possible to set up a ~ormula which will enable too Game Damage Officer to move exactly determine the actual cost of a ~ruittree i~ it has been damaged by deer or elk. Therefore, the following formula is proposed: I + P + Mey) + H(y) + T :: Total Cost ofa Tree, where I = Initial cost of seedling replacements. P = Planting costs (must be costs at time o~ replanting). M ::Maintenance cost. H = Harvest cost (may not apply as young trees do not produce much fruit). Y Number' of years damaged tree has been in ground. T ~ Taxes on the tree, prorated as to cost per tree. It must be remembered, however, that some costs cannot be figured because of their intangible nature. For instance, if an orchard was 100% damaged after it had been in for two or three years, what value could be assigned the trees beyond that determined by the formula. In other words, if the field had been in grain or hay, what amount of money could the farmer have realized from that crop, instead of the money he realized from a reduced fruit crop. , , Recommendations! It is recommended, therefore, that this formula be proposed to the Game Damage men for their consideration and comments. If it seems to fit practical field application after the damage men examine it, it should be put into use during orchard damage periods. Prepared by: __ R..... aym~o_n_d...;.....:J;;.,..., ....;;B::.,:,o::.::y~d~ Approved by! __ Date! ~J ..... u~1~y~,~19~6~o~ -=G;,-i_lb.,..e ..... rt-",._N_. -,:H~un_t_e_r_ .•...... _ State Game Manager _ F. C. IG.einschnitz ABst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -75JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~------------------------- Project No •__ Work Plan No. ---.:..W:•.. ~3_8-...;:R;.;..-...;;:1:;;:::3 : Deer-Elk Investigations "6 ' ----~--------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Job No. 9 Experimental Night Census of Deer April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Objectives: To find methods of counting deer and elk more accurately while they are grazing on agricultural fields in the spring. Procedure: The main criterion the Game Damage Officer or local WCO has for determining the amount of use on alfalfa or other crops in the spring from grazing deer or elk is the nightly counts done by the local conservation officer. Since the greater portion of the actual counting is done at night from a pick-up with the assistance of a spotlight, there are certain areas in fields that cannot be seen from a road. The counts can be mare accurately made if these "b'llnd ' areas could be counted along with the rest of the field. An Army surplus "Sniper-Scope" has been obtained and will be used to see if these "blind" areas can be counted on foot by the use of the in~ra-red beam thrown by the scope. Results: Since all of the work on this job had to be done at night, no work was accomplished because of the press of duties under Work Plan 6, Job 1. All of the nights that might have been used to test the Scope were spent in the observation tower at Billy Creek. However, several factors have been brought to light during the course of three years intensive study of deer numbers as part of Work Plan 6, Job 1. An analysis of the all~night counts for three years at Billy Creek indicate that the hour between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. is the best time to count deer on alfalfa fields in the spring, as this was when maximum numbers of deer were ~sing the fields. Since the spring damage period lasts approximately six weeks during April and May of each year, there is still quite a lot of daylight during the best counting period. The design of the "Sniper-Scope is such that complete and absolute darkness is needed in order for the scope to operate at all effectively. Therefore, it would seem that the S~Qpe has very little practical application in areas where use occurs only during the spring. ll �-76It may be that further counts of deer in areas where use occurs all summer long will show that counts after dark are more effective in obtaining estimates of game numbers. Should this be the case, the use of the Scope should be a very great help in obtaining these counts. Recommendations! An area of summer~long use by deer on crops has been chosen for a similar "damage" study starting probably in 1961. The rfSniper-Scope" should be tested in this area to see how effective it is, if only to have such information as: 1. 2. 3. Effective distance Clarity. Ease of handling. of light beam. Any uses that the Law Enforcement Division might have for this Scope should be tried in order to see if it has application in their type of work. Prepared Date~ by! _..;:.;R.::aym~o.:.;n::.d::......;J::..:... •...;:B:.:0::.J:y~d:...._ Approved by: July, 1960 ----------~~~~~---------------- Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -77JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS .. .. , State of , .... Colorado Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. 6 ----------------------------- .... . , Job No. 10 Title of Job: Methods of Evaluating Elk Use on Native and Seeded Pastures Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Objectives: 1. To determine the amount and kind of pasture grasses eaten by elk. 2. To determine methods of easily arriving at these f~es. Procedure: (a) Conduct a complete review of literature relative to the food habits of elk during the period of the year that use occurs, and also their preference of plants that are available in the areas where these claims of damage are coming from. (b) Contact the fOUT Regional Game Managers to determine the extent of pasture use by elk that may be included in future damage claims to the Department. (c) Set up a problem analysis and study plan to be followed in future years in order to answer the 'questions posed by the objectives. Results: (a) The review of literature has been assigned to a junior Game Management student at Colorado State UniverSity, Mr. Jim Ells. The review is rather large in scope and he has not completed it either to his or his professor's satisfaction. However, it is in process and should be in our hands for use if this job is reinstated in the future. (b) A Questionnaire was sent to the four Regional Game Managers to ascertain the extent of pasture use by elk that might conceivably be reported as damage in the future. The replies to the Questionnaire are summarized below: ?outhwest Region - Don Bogart, Game Manager One area near Pagosa Springs has enough use on 200 acres to make control necessary, but no claims have been filed to this date. This use takes place in the spring. �-78Northwest Region - Dick Denney, Game Manager Four different areas have enough elk use of pasture to varrant some ~omplaints. Damage claims have been filed in two cases, but not paid. The use is during the spring, and a little summer- use in one case on Cold Springs Mountain. An undetermined number of acres are affected in these four cases. Northeast Region - Hal Swope, Game Manager One general area, west of Fort Collins, near the boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park, is haVing rather heavy use by the elk on grass meadows. There have been many complaints, but only one claim filed to this date. Payment of this claim is pending Commission action. About 1,000 acres are affected in this area. The use period is April to June, during which time some control measures are being utilized. Southeast Region - Stan Ogilvie, Game Manager One ranch is having enough elk use to make them put in damage claims for the past two years, one of which has been paid and the second one will be paid, according to the Game Manager. The use takes place during the winter and spring and is heavy enough (about 135 elk) to warrant control methods. Approximately 4,800 acres are affected. (~) This research job has been dropped from Segment 14 of Project W-38-R. The administrative staff of the Department decided that the problem is not widespread enough to warrant an extensive study on the situation. Therefore, this job will become inactive until such time as it is determined to renew the study. Prepared Date: by: __ R.:....aym::..-.o.:..n.::.d~J.:...•...;;B:...o:..::y:...:d~ Approved by: __ .July 1960 ----------~~~~---------------- -=G.:::.i;::lb~e.:.:r:..t.;,.....:N:.:...:. ~H~un~t:..:e:;:r:.-. _ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -79JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------------------------------ Project No.__ ~W~-~3_8~-R~-~1~3~ Work Plan No. : 9 --~------------------------ Deer-Elk Investigations Job No.2 Title of Job: Comparison of Air and Ground Deer and Elk Counts Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: A total of six counts, three each by the airplane and helicopter, were made on Cedar Ridge preceding the ground drive. The plane recorded from 38% to 56% with an average of 47% and the copter recorded from 74% to 78% with an average of 76% of the actual number of deer on the area. The 56% recorded by the airplane, and all the percentages recorded by the copter, were the highest yet recorded for these ~espective types of aircraft on this area. Forty-seven drivers and six observers saw a total of 291 deer on Cedar Ridge the smallest number ever counted on this area. This low number was due, however, to the light winter in Middle Park this year rather than a faulty ground drive. Count variability due to snow, light and flying conditions appeared to be significant -- up to 18%. Objectives: (1) To determine whether air counts will consistently tally the same percentage of elk as are present on the ground from time to time and from area to area. (2) To determine whether air-to-ground deer ratios will remain the same from one vegetative or terrain type to another, and (3) To determine factors required to correct air counts for different snow conditions and to work out an easily recognized set of standards to permit an accurate selection of the proper correction factors by the aerial observer. Procedure: Select deer and elk areas respresentative of aerial population-trend areas on which these animals are counted annually. Such sites must possess features of terrain which make it possible to obtain a potentially total ground count of the deer and elk present. Air crews count each study area as many times as pOSSible, under different conditions, immediately prior to each ground drive. Information thus obtained is analyzed to determine the consistency of ratios. Also, data on ground conditions (snow cover), flight conditions and visibility were tabulated to determine the effect of various combinations of these three factors on the counts made. Departmental pilots and observers use an easily recognizable set of standards for classifying such factors -- snow, light and air conditions. In addition, special effort is being made to obtain similar information using a helicopter. ��~81- Comparison of Air and Ground Deer and Elk Counts John T. Harris Introduction: Air-ground counts on Cedar Ridge since 1952 have shown that .aerial crews count an average of 42 percent .of the deer population on this area . Intensive work on this area in 1955 indicated that snow conditions (background) could cause aerial counts to vary as high as 15 percent. Since these counting conditions affect the number of animals counted from the air, they would influence trend counts .as well as total p.opulation counts, elk counts as well as deer. Present research is designed to de:t.erminecorrection factors for the standardization of aerial population surveys. The annual population data gathered in Colorado is of a trend nature; therefore, the emphasis has been placed on determining variability due to counting conditions rather than percent of animals counted. R~sults: Three airplane (Cessna-175) and three copter (Hiller 12-E) counts were obtained on Cedar Ridge this year preceding the ground drive. Air courrts were made on February 11, 12 and 13 and the ground drive followed the last flight on the 13th. The counts are summarized as follows: AIRPLANE COUNTS: Date 2/ll 12 13 Observer Ow:ens !I !I Counting Conditions Snow Cover Light Air I I I III II I III I I Counting Time Start End Total 9:30AMl'O:00 30Min. 7:50AM 8:20 30Min. 7:25AM 8:00 35Min. No. Deer Counted 164 143 III HELICOPTER COUNTS: Owens 11 III III II 4:40PM 5:05 25Min. 217 12 III I I 8:45AM 226 9:15 30Min. Evans 13 III II I 8:20AM 9!00 40Min. 214 *Percentage of the actual number of deer on the area as determined by the gr-ound drive. !I % Deer Counted* 56 49 38 75 78 74 A tot.al of 47 drivers .and 6 .observers partidi.pated in the ground courrt. Drive~s c.ounted 172 deer which cut back thr.ough thedirve line and observers c.ounted 119 deer which left the area for a total count of 291 deer. An excellent drive line Vlas maintained and it was the opinion of thosewh()Supervised the drive that .an accurate count was obtained of the deer using Cedar Ridge. This is the smallest number .of deer yet recorded on a ground drive. The three plane counts averaged 139 deer or 47% of the actual numiberof deer on the area . The copter counts .averaged 219 or 76% of the deer on the area. Both plane and copter counted exceptionally high pmentages as compared to past counts. Plane CO"Qlltssince 1952 have averaged about 42%; copters usually recorded between 50% and 60%. The February 11th plane count of 164 which represents 57% of the deer is the highest ever obtained by a fixed-wing aircraft on this area. All the copter counts were the highest percentages yet reco[lded. �-82- The highest plane count was obtained under excellent snow, light and flying conditions, the other two being made under poor snow-cover. All three copter counts were made under poor snow (background) conditions with three variations in light and air conditions. Past studies have shown that snow-cover (background) is the most important single factor contributing to variability in aerial counts. Conclusions: The low wintering 'popu'Lat t.on of deer on Cedar Ridge was probably due to the relatively light wdnter in Middle Park in 1960. This area isa critical or key 1'0rtion of the Middle Park deer range and is heavily used in hard winters. The high percentage of the deer counted by l'lane and copter this year could be because the pilots and particularly the observers are becoming experienced at flying the Cedar Ridge area. Another explanation, and one which has not been indicated until this year, is that the high counts (percentage-wise) could be associated with the low number of deer on the area. Thus, as numbers decrease per unit oi' area they may tend to concentrate more, or not form so many small scattered groups, resulting in a less complicated sequence and distribution pattern from the standpoint of the observer. Such a pattern might develop only after a certain low 1'0intin the population is reached. Intensi ve work on this area in 1955 showed that snow conditions or background could cause aerial counts to vary as high. as 15%. Maximum and minimum counts by the airplane this year (38% to 56%) indicate that the variability in aerial counts could vary up to 18% due to snow, visibility and flying conditions alone. The copter counts, which showed little variability, were all made under the same snow conditions tending to su.pport the above theory. The low count by the airplane (111) on the 13th is unexplainable. It was made under similar snow and air conditions as the plane count on the 12th (143), and under better light conditions. There is a possibility that some oi' the deer may h;ave left the area between these two counts; however, results of past experience and consistency of the copter counts would appear to rule out this possibility. The high l'ercentageof the deer counted and the consistency of the counts by the helicopter emphasize the value of this aircraft for big game work. The increased amount oi' information which can be derived from their use (both in quantity and qv.ality) should eventually justify their added expense. They are especially valuable in obtaining sex- and age-ratios. Even though the ratio of air to ground counts may remain fairly consistent, the variability due to .snow, light .andair conditions appears to be significant (up to 18%). Since the.se countingcondi tions affect the number of animals. counted from the air they would be applicable to trend counts as well as total population counts; elk as well as deer. Thus, we could falsely interpret a 15% increase or decrease in popu.lation since such increase or decrease could have been due to counting conditions alone. Trend-count data can be standardized by either makiugthe counts under similar conditions each year or evolving correction factors for the conditions normally encountered which affect such counts. Since there are years when it is not possible to count under comparable conditions, the latter alternative would appear to be the most practical, and would result in comparable counts annually regardless of con~ ditions. �ESTIMATED (Actual) TREND 600 POPULATION- COUNTS----- MEAN TREND COUNT.· • .-.. . 550 500 450 400 0::: w w. 0 IJ.. 0 a: w (D 350 300 250 200 ~ => z 150 100 ,." \ ,,\ \ , ~ \ I '"\ 50 , ,,...." •••••• ~ •••• '•• " •••• \ •• " 1"( \ /, NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY WINTERING ,,...- ---- ••••••••• MARCH APRIL MAY PERIOD Figure 1.-COMPARISON OF TREND COUNTS WITH TOTAL POPULATION ESTIMATES;' CEDAR RIDGE STUDY AREA, PARSHALL, COLORADO, 1958-59. �-83Ground drives are presently the best means of obtaining a total count. Since they require considerable outlay of manpower and materials, they are the limiting factor in the amount of information obtained annually. This research has been stepped-up considerably, however, by increasing the number of aerial counts (under varying conditions) made prior to the ground drives. Management Value: The management value of standardizing aerial counts, both f)Tom area to .area and from year to year, is obviousj especially since aerial trends are going to be a primary consideration relating to population factors under the proposed score-card system ·of herd-unit analysis in Colorado. Recommendations: 1. Continue emphasis on making as many counts as possible with both plane and copter prior to the ground drives. 2. Design experiments to adequately evaluate the influence of the counting conditions. 3. Compile all previous air-ground correlation counts and make a correlation analysis of the total numbers of deer and the percentages .counted. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: July, 1960 Approved by: _---;,G,.,.i_l..,.b_e_r_t_N ..... -"..H_un_t_e_r State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator _ ��July, 1960 -85JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ---------------------------------- Project No. Work Plan No. W_-~3_8_-R_-_l~3~ _ 9 --~---------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 3 The Pellet-Group Count Technique April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: The pellet group census technique was again tested on Cedar Ridge in 1960. Both 0.01 acre and 100 square foot plotisizes were tested. These data were compared with aerial and ground counts to determine the accuracy of this technique with regard to trend and total population estimates. Sampling accuracy was found to be within 20 percent with 95 percent confidencej however, the pellet counts did not detect the decrease in the 1960 population from that of 1959. Total population estimates from pellet counts were higher than the known wintering population this year. Objectives: (1) To field test this technique on Cedar Ridge in Middle Park to determine its applicability as a method of obtaining trends and/or total population estimates of deer using winter concentration areas. (2) Depending upon the success and feasibility of this trial, the mechanics of such a method can be set up for trial in other applicable areas. Procedure: Eighteen randomly located transects, each consisting of 25 mechanically spaced plots, were established on Cedar Ridge in the fall of 1957. Sampling intensity and design were predetermined by ~mall-scale measurements to properly sample the area. The 18 transects traverse the area from north to southj they vary in length from about one-quarter to slightly over two miles, and in width (distance apart) from 100 to 900 yards. Pellet groups were stamped out or removed when the plots were first established to eliminate error in the spring counts. Pellet groups were counted in May, 1960 and analyzed to determine sampling accuracy, trend value, the most efficient plot size (.Ol:'acre or 100 square foot) and the total wintering population of deer on Cedar Ridge. Arrival and depart~e of the deer herd was determined by close observation during the fall and spring migration periods. Plots were counted by two men -- one counting the smaller 100 square foot plot and the other counting the .01 acre plot. Strewn-out groups were recorded in fractions. Seven aerial and one ground count were made on the study area in 1960. Results of these counts, especially the ground counts, were accepted as the best estimate possible of the total number of deer present on Cedar Ridge. ��-87- Pellet Group Count Technique John T. Harris .. , . Introduction: This intensive su~dy of the pellet-group census tehcnique, initiated in 1957, was conducted on a portion of the Middle Park mule deer winter range in northwestern Colorado. The Cedar Ridge study area is a critical segment of the Middle Park deer winter range. Annual counts from 1955 until 1959 have indicated that this area winters an average of 626 deer, with 396 being the lowest, and 801 the highest number yet recorded during the period. Aerial and ground counts in 1960 showed an al'proximate 291 deer on Cedar Ridge this year -- the lowest yet recorded. Results of this study to date have indicated that the sample (established in 1957) is detecting the number of pellet groups deposited annually to within 20 percent accuracy (95 percent confidence), and the 1959 pellet counts correctly detected an increase in the wintering p:opu1ationon Cedar Ridge over that of 1958. Sample size projections have indicated that 100 square foot plots are the most efficient from the standpoint of total sample size. Total population estimates from pellet counts have been canservative with the 1958 estimate being 23 percent, and the 1959 estimate being 33 percent below the known wintering populations for the same years as determined by aerial and ground countis. Results: The 1960 pellet .count data were analyzed relative to the following questionst (1) How many pellet groups were deposited on Cedar Ridge during the winter period? (2) How did the total population estimate, derived from the pelletgroup data compare with the actual number of deer wintering on the area? (3) Did the number of pellet groups reflect the population trend? and (4) What is the most efficient plot size? Statistical analysis of these data was required to ascertain: the sampling accuracy achieved, plot-size efficiency and to derive confidence limits both for the pellet counts and total population estimate. Results of the 1958 and 1959 pellet counts are given for comparison where applicable. Analysis of similar data in past years has shown that individual plot totals give a more satisfactory analysis than transect totals; thus, this year's data was anallfzed by plot only. A total of 662 pellet groups were courrted on the 0.01 acre plots this year. This compares with 611 in 1958 and 717 in 1959. In addition, 214 groups were counted on the 100 square foot plots .as compared to 172 in 1958. The 100 sqllare foot plots were not counted in 1959. Table 1 gives a comparative analysis for the two plot sizes. �-88Table 1 -- Cedar Ridge Pellet-Count Analysis, 1960 - 100 square footan,d .0..01 .8:e~e plots, 18 transects, 446 plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison 100 sq.ft.plots 0.01 acre plots Size of plot (radius) Sample size/ttansect Total sizeo:f ':sample Percent of area sampled Total pellet groups counted Average groups/acre Averag.e deer days-of-use/acre Average No. groups /plot Range Standard deviation Standard error of mean Coefficient of variation Confidence interval t.10, 445df t.20, 445df Sample size t.05, 445df .10 acc. .20 acc. ·30 acc . 5 ft.,7·7 in.(.0023 ac.) .0575 acre 1.03 acres 0.02 213·9 208 16.4 11 ft., 9 .3 in. .25 acre 4.46 acres 0.10 661.8 148 11.7 0·99 .046 206% 1.48 o - 19 2·35 .11 158% .48 + .07 .48 +" .06 1.48 + .18 1.48 +" .14 0.48 o - 5 1,500 375 172 859 239 48 Total Populat.ion Estimate: An aerial photograph of Cedar Ridge wasplanimeteredto determine the total acreage of the area sampled, found to be 4,544 acres. Close observation in the 1959-60 winter showed that the deer began to move onto the study area about November 15, and almost .all were on winter range by December 10. The migration from the area the following spring was from April 15 until May 20. Generally, the winter of 1959-60 was a relatively light .one for the Middle Park area, including the study area. The above information was graphed and the total herd days on the area were derived by equally dividingthe intervals which deer moved onto and off the area. Thus, a total of 160 herd days was computed for 1960. This compares with 150 herd days in 1959 and 160 in 1958. The formula used in estimating total population was as follows: Number of Deer ~ (pe'$let groups acre) defecation rate acres) days For Cedar Ridge these values were computed as follows: Size of area censused Estimated herd days Defecation rate Average 'pellet group?!acre 100 sq.ft.plots 0.01 acre plots 4,544 160 12·7 208 4,544 160 12·7 148 �-89The 1960 total population estimates were derived as follows: o .01 acre plots: 100 sq.ft .plots No. Deer = (208) . (4 544) (12.7) . (1 0) 6 = (~48) . (4,544) (12 .7) . (160 ) = 652,512 2,032 = 321 = 2,032 = 465 Confidence interval t.05, 445 df ::: 465 ~ 157 deer 321 ~ 59 deer It should be noted here that the confidence limits placed on the population estimates express only the variability due to samP:ling.; One ground count was made on Cedar Ridge on February 13, 1960. 291 deer were counted on the study area at this time. A total of A supplementary aerial count was made on March 23 to see if the wintering population of Cedar Ridge was remaining relatively stable. A total of 216 deer were counted at this time. This aerial count, when adjusted by correction factors derived from long-time studies on the ar-ea , indicated that the wintering population numbered at least .as many as before, or may have increased slightly. The ground-count-total of 291 was accepted as the sustained wintering population for 1960. The estimated population of 321 for the 0.01 acre plots was 10 percent and the estimate of 465 for 100 square foot plots was 60 percent greater than the known wintering population of 291. Estimates in 1958 and 1959 were both conservative being 77 percent and 67 percent respectively for 0.01 acre plots. The 1958 population estimat.e, using 100 square foot plot data, was only 63 percent below the actual population. These figures are tabulated as follows: Table 2 Year 1958 1959 1~60 Comparison of total population estimates from pellet counts with actual population, Cedar Ridge Study Area, Parshall, Colorado, 1958-60. Pellet-Count Estimates Actual Population 0.01 acre plots 100 sq.ft.plots (Ground Count) 305 + 70 381 +" 74 321 "+ 59 371 ~ 94 465 + 157 396 566 291 �-90~ The 1960gra1.IDd-drive .figure was within the can.fidence limits of the 1960 p:ellet-group estimate using 0.01 acre plat .datia. This was also. the case in 1958 'With the 100 square foot plot estimate. Annual winter-martality studies an this area showedthe 1959-60 winter lo.ss to. be negligible, thus, it wauld have no. ma.,'berialeffectupan the pellet-caunt ,data. Trend Value: Accardingta thegraund-caunt figures, there wasa49 percent decrease in the actual wintering papulatian, from 566 in 1959 to. 291 in 1960. Pelletcaunts, however, shawed anly an 8 percent decrease, and the estimated papulatian shaweda 16 percent .decr'ease fram the 1959 estima.t.e. This year I sestimate, based an the 100 square fo.at plat .data showed an 18 percent increase as .camparedto. the 1959 0.01 acre plat estimate (100 square faot plats 'were natcaunted in 1959). A t-testwas nat madebetween the 1959 and 19600.01 acre plat data since the can.fidence limits at the .10 level show an averlap-indicating that the 1960.change (downwardtrend) was nat detected. Discus sian: The primary aim or this investiga.tian was tacampare papulatian and trendestirnates fram pellet groups with the best po.ssible est.imat'es of knownpopulatians . Standard SBmplingprocedures and techniques -wereused. Sampling .intensi ty was samewhatgreat.er since it was desirable tao.btain the best passible 'estimate of' the numberaf pelletsdeposi ted an the study area. A fairly canclusive repart ~ written-up fo.r this study in 1959. It ~ cancludedat that time that the abjectives af this job had, for the most part, been fulfilled. Pellet .caunts were made one mo.reyear, however, to. abtain addi tio.nal infarmatio.n relative to. the mast efficient plat size. Theall-time law -wintering populatio.n an the study area this year, supplied some addf,tianal info.rmatian relati veta sampling accuracy . hawever7 Since the impo.rtant .findings to. datel:!:ave been mentianed in the intraductary remarks, anly the results of the 1960caunrt;Swill be mentianed here. Sample size proj.ectians still indicate that this sample (established in 1957) is detecting the number of pellet groups depasi tedannually to. within 20 percent .aceuracy (95 percent confidence ) . The 1960 pelletcauntsdid fram that af 19159. not; detect the decrease in the -wintering populatian Sample size pro.j;ectiansfrom the 1960dat.a subst.antiate the findings of past years •.. - that 100 square foot plats are the most efficient , particularly from the stiandpo.lrrt.of tat.al sample size. This was evident again this year even cansidering t.he lowerw1ntering papulatianand resultant great~r variability in pellet countis, The tatal papulatianestimates far bath plat Sizes, which have been canser •.• vative in the past, exceeded the knawnwintering papulatian this year. This is prabably due to. the greater variability in the number af pellets caunted per plat which is assaciated with a cansiderably lawer wintering papulatian than that af 1959, and the resultantdrap in pellet group density. �-91Conclusions: The pellet group census technique boils down to a sampling problem. Generally, the s.amplingaccuracy, design, etc. aee dependent upon the density of pellet groups. The pellet-count technique is probably of greatest value, from a management standpoint, in determining population trends, concentration areas, and for comparison with ram.ge-use information. Total population estimates from pellet-count data requires factual information of a nature that would make it impractical to use this technique under the presentday management program in Colorado. Such estimates, however, may be practical and desirable for an intensive type of study. The data lend themselves well to statistical analysis making it possible to place confidence on the populat.ion estimates . . , , . Recommendat.ions: No f'urther field work is planned for the pellet-group study since other proposed jobs and work schedules will result in inadequate manpower and time to carryon such a study. However, if and when it can be resumed, application of the pellet-group technique for determining population trend on a herd-unit basis should be considered. Such application should be based, at least in part, on the results of this investigation. Prepared by: Date: John T. Harris Approved by :_~G~i;::lb~er;:.t-:::--;N:.:...-:H:.::;un:.;;:;:.,.t;... _ State Game Manager July, 1960 ----------~~~~~----------------- F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -93- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------~~~~~--------------------- Project No. W-38-R-13 Work Plan No. ----~----------------------- 9 : Deer-Elk Investigations Job No.4 Title of Job: Population Estimates Based on Age and Sex-Ratios Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: Two pre- and two post-season sex- and age-ratio counts were made of the White River elk herd. These data were correlated with the 1959 card survey and check station kill figures, and projected to indicate a post-season population of 7,102 elk in this herd. Objective: To determine the applicability and accuracy of age and sex ratios in population counts. Procedure: Four sex- and age-ratio estimates were made of the White River elk-herd as follows: (1) July, 1959 pre-season cov-ca1f ratio count. (2) September, 1959 pre-season sex-ratio count. (3) November, 1959 post-season sex-ratio count. (4) March, 1960 supplementary post-season sex-ratio count. The July counts were made with a Bell H-13 helicopter and the rest were made with a Hiller 12-E copter. All classification was done by Dwight Owens, a qualified aerial observer of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. The original counts were recorded on a small tape-recorder for later analysis. This facilitated counting and made possible a larger sample. Aerial photographs were taken of the larger groups of elk for later classification, and to check observer accuracy. The counting was confined to Areas E and X as found in the 1959 big game map. This included game management units 23, 24, 25, 33 and 34 which covered the area conttibuting to the main White River Herd. Special effort was made to count the complete area and to treat each of the five units equally. Thus the total area involved was flown for each sample not just concentration areas. Additiilina1effort was made this year to classify at least 500 animals for each of the four counts . .A!£, elk were encountered, they were sexed. Since the samples taken were of a binomial nature, the random distribution of the animals, as they occurred, was considered sufficient. Only total groups were ciassified. �-94Age samples of the White River elk were obtained at big game check stations during the 1959 hunting season. The ageing technique used was developed by Dr. Don C. Quimby, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana. It is based on replacement of the incisors and premolars (up to 3 years) and progressive wear of the molars and premolars (after 3 years). Only the lower jaw (mandible) is used for ageing by dentition. Some other characteristics noted which help to supplement the age classification are size, coloration and antler development. Elk-jaw boards, using assigned-age jaws, were prepared to aid in the standardization of the ageing technique. The jaws used were from varibus Colorado elk herds. The writer and Dr. Quimby} using a large collection of known-age ja~s, assigned and verified the ages of the study j,aws. The total kill for this herd is ext~acted annually from the game management card return (projected) kill for the respective units involved. It is then compared with the check-station kill figures to determine hunter bias in reporting kill by sex and age. �-95- Population Estimates Based on Age and Sex Ratios John T. Harris Introduction: Sex- and age-ratios have been"".usedannually in determination of'the number of elk in the White River herd since 1957. Generally the technique involves the correlation of a known herd quantity with the kill i'iguresand, by use 'of ratios or proportions, proj ectingfortotal population. The main White River elk herd was chosen for this study because the winter and summer range boundaries of this herd, which uses the White River Piateau, could be fairly well defined -- having been determined by various other studies. In addition, the game management unit boundaries and herd unit boundaries coincide very closely which makes it possible to use the annual elk-kill figures for the units involved. The Rifle and Idaho Springs hunter check stations annually check 50 to 60 percent of the elk from the five main White River Units. Correlation of card survey and check station kill data since 1957 has shown that there is very little bias by hunters in reporting elk kill by sex. Thus, it was concluded that the bull-cow-calf kill ratios used in the formula projections were suf'ficiently accurate. Past year!s sex- and age-ratio counts and herd estimates are given for comparison where applicable. Results! Pre-Season Counts -- The 1959 pre-season cow-calf and sex-ratio counts weremaCLe frOm Sweetwater Lake,a resort area on the eastern side of the study area. The cow-calf counts were conducted from July 23 through the 25th and the bull-cow counts were made from September 21 through the 23rd. Results were as follows: July -- 40 bulls, 30 spikes, 362 cows, 242 calves; total 674 September ~- 66 bulls, 63 spikes, 256 cows, 161 calves; total 546. In July, the cows and calves were in both small and large herds, and the calves were easily distinguished. The largest herd observed was slightly over 200, mostly cows and calves. Several herds of 75 to 150 were seen. The bu.lls were more solitary and difficult to find, and they were seldom seen in groups with the cows and calves. Spikes were difficult to distinguish because of short antlers (still in velvet) and coloration similar to the cows. It was found that the morning counts were the most productive. Most flights were started at 4:45 a.m. and were completed by 7:30 a.m. Evening flights were attempted but discontinued because of poor light and failure of the elk to move out into the open parks until too late. Of the 674 elk classified in July, 489 or 72 percent were on the Flat ..•. Tops Wilderness Area. Game management unit 24 contained 62 percent, 23 percent 'Were in unit 34 and 15 percent in unit 25. No elk were observed in units 23 and 33. In September, the elk were more scattered, the older bulls having collected their harems for the rut .and the single and young bulls moving steadily in search of cows. Almost all the elk had moved into the heavy timber at the heads of the various creeks and rivers which drain the White River Plateau. The largest groups �-96- were observed on the headwaters of Doe, South Fork, Park, and Lost Solar Creeks in unit 24; Sweetwater and No-NameCreeks in unit 34; and Grizzly C:r-eekin unit 25. Nineteen elk were observed in the Cline-top Mesa area in unit 33. No elk were seen in unit 23. Post Season Counts-- The post.-season counts were conducted from Glenwood Springs on the ~outhern boundary of the study area. The November;flights were made from the 18th. through the 20th and the March flights the 16th through the 19th. Results of these flights were as follows: Novemher 28 bulls, 53 spikes, 238 cows, 222 calves; total 541 March -- 59 bulls, 52 spikes, 324 cows, 516 calves; total 951. The Novembercounts found the elk in the same genet-al areas, and at the same elevations in most cases, as the September count. A slight downwardmigration was noticeable on the South Fork of the White River. The greater ~ortionof the elk were counted on Elk Creek in unit 23; Park.and Lost Solar Creeks and the headwaters of the South Fork in unit 24; and nor-bhxrf Storm King Mountain in unit 34. No elk were seen in units 23 and 25. Mature bulls and spikes were running with the cows and calves at this time and very few lone or small groups of bulls were found. Morning nights ~ainwere found to be better for counts than evening flights. The March post-season courrt was made to supplement.and .conf'irm the November count, especially with regard to the bull-cow ratio. The majority of the elk (69 percent) were courrbed ion the north-side units 23 and 24 on the South Fork and Yellow Jacket .areas, and on Heaver, Lost, Elk and Miller Creeks . The other 3l percent were found on the south-side units 33, 34 and 25;()n Canyon, Elk, Deep, Sweetwater and Red Dirt Creeks. In November, the elk were 'on their winter range -with the largest .concentration being on the South Fork of the White River between Buf'ordand the CampGrOlmd. These counts were taken throughout the day, weather and air conditions ~lr'mitting. Since the elk were concentrated on winter range, the early and late flights were not necessary to see a suf'ficientnumber of' animals. Kill - .•.The 1959 elk-kill from the hunter card surveyvre.s compiled for the five units involved. In addit!Lon, the check station kill figures for these units were compiled to check and adjust the total percentage kill by sex and age. These figures· are tabulated as follows: �-97- T,8:.b,le 1 -- Kill figures, by unit, from the 1959 card return* and check staticn . tctal kill, White River Units, Areas Eand X. . . .... .. . . . . . . . . ~. . . . . Unit N.c. Bulls Percent Tctal Ccws Calves 23 116 38.9 230 29 375 24 274 72 13 37·2 359 25 4 44 4·7 33 7 11.2 61 8 108 33 39 8.0 41 34 32 78 5 Total 100.0 266 964 639 59 Percent 6.1 100.0 66.3 27·6 Check-Station Kill: Total 20 600 321 219 Percent 60.2 100.0 36·5 3·3 * Game Management projected kill from late card returns. . . , , , , , , , , . The total elk kill for this area in 1957 was 984 and 999 in 1958. Tberewere 1,000 validations issued fcr these units in 1957, 600 in 1958 and 500 in 1959. A total of 62.2 percent of the White River elk were checked through the Rifle and Idaho Springs Check Stations this year. Comparati ve figures for past years were 55.9 percent in 1957a.nd 52.• 2 percent in 1958. The total White River elk checked by the Rifle .and Idaho Springs Stations for the past three years were: Check Station Idaho Springs Year Rifle 201 (36%) 350 (64%) 1957 1958 248 (48%) 273 (52%) 201 (34%) 1959 399 (66%) The percentage kill by sex and age from the check stations is considered the most accurate since the animals are sexed and aged by department personnel. Table 2 •.. - Comparison of percentage kill (by sex) of check staticn and card returns, White River Units, 1957-59· 1957 1958 1959 Sex Check Sta. Card Ret. Check Sta. Card Ret. Check Sta. Card Ret. Bulls 59::-3 60.2 65.0 66.3 63·4 57·9 Cows 31.7 36.0 30.6 27·6 36·7 ·36·5 Calves 6.1 6.0 5·4 5·7 3·3 3·3 There is a greater discrepancy between check station and card return sex-ratio percentages in 1959 than the two preceeding years. lJsually these comparisons indicate a slight tendency for hunters to report calves as bulls or adults -~ the 1959 data indicates the opposite. Percentage of calves killed, as indicated by card-return projections almost doubles that of check stations even though 62 percent of the total animals killed were sexed at check stations. Herd Estimate -- The 1959 pre- and post-season counts were converted to ratios and compared with the total kill from card returns. The following calculations were made to determine the size of the elk population before and after the 1959 hunting season. �-98- Pre-season ratio Kill... Post-season ratio " Bulls Cows Calves 46 639 34 100 266 100 64 5,9 93 X ::::number of females in the fall .46 X :::: number of males in the fall X - 266 :::: number of females ;after .46x - 639 :::: number of' males after .34(x-266) also before hunting season . before hunting season. the hunting season . the hunting season •. ••number of' males after the hunting season . .46x - 639 = .34(x-266) :::: .34x- 90.44 .46x - .34 = 639- 90.44 Thus: .12X = 548.56 X :::: 4,571 fe~J:es and in the fall before the hunting season . .46x 2,103 males in the fall .64x 2,925 calves in the fall before the hunting season. 9,599 Total fall population. 964 = Total kill. 8,635 Total post-season population composed of: 1122 (13%) bulls, 3798 (44%) cows and 3711 (43%) calves. Year Similar proj:ections Total Herd Estimate 1957 1958 2,952 3,165 before the hunting season. for the two preceeding years are: Composedof: Bulls Cows Calves 1,627 1,465 293 383 1,032 1,317 It was the opinion of all concerned that the 1959 pre- and post-season sexand age-ratio samples were the most accurate yet obtiaf.ned . In addition, two preand two post-season counts were made. The 1959 herd estimate (8,635), however, more than doubled that of the two preceeding years . Thus, as a supplementary check on the accuracy of the estimates, all ratios available from the three year's sample data were formulat.ed With the respective kill figures. Results of these proj.ections are tabulated as follows: Table 3 -- Comparison of' sex- and age-ratio River E.lk Herd 1957-59. post-season herd projections, White Year Rat.io BUll/COW Bull/Unantlered Bull/Calf Cow/Calf 1957 2,952 2,551 2,363 355 1958 3,161 3,624 3,460 2,034 1959 8,635 33,105 80,026 811 The 1959 kill classifications from card r~t:urns were adjusted from the check station kill percentages by sex and age (Table 1). This was deemed justifiable in view of the large sample checked th;r'ough check stations (62 percent), and he cause animals at check stations were classified by experienced personnel. �-99- Card-Return Kill Adjusted Kill -- Bulls 639 581 Cows ""2bb 352 Calves 59 31 Total 964 964 The adjusted kill was formulated with the pre- and post-season sex;... and ageratios resulting in a projected herd estimate of 7,102 composed of 1,065 bulls, 3,125 cows, and 2,912 calves. These figures were accepted as the best possible estimate from the data obtained this year. ~ing Studies -- The aging technique was tested at the six big-game check stations during the 1959 hunting season. A total of 219 jaws were collected at this time. Eighty-one jaws from the White River Herd were included in this collection. They were aged as follows: 12 calves, 14 yearlings, 15 two, 11 three, 4 four, 9 five, 6 six, 4 seven, 2 eight, 2 nine, lover-ten and 1 over-15 years old. These jaws were collected mainly for the purpose of supplementing the Lnformation regarding the development and wear of elk teeth in Colorado, and to improve accuracy of the aging technique. Effort -was made to collect older-age and abnormally developed jaws. Therefore, this samp.Lewas considered unrepresentative of the age composition of this herd, and was not used for a herd estimate. Discussion: This study has resulted in several facts for consideration: The 1959 sex- and age-ratios were believed to be the most accurate yet obtained. There was no difference in the July and September cow/calf ratios. There was a considerable discrepancy in the number of calves per cow observed during the November and March post-season counts, but the bull-cow ratio remained the same. The 1959 total herd estimate more than doubled that of the two previous years. Check station kill figures indicate that there may be too much bias or too large an error in the sex- and age-classifications from card returns. A much greater percentage of animals are found on the north part of the stmdy area as compared to the south. More .emphasis will be placeg.,next year, on securing adequate pre- and postseason ratios. Double checks will be made of each ratio again to determine how large a sample is needed and when to take it. In addition, more emphasis will be placed on securing equal classification counts on the north and south portions of the study area. The similarity in July an<f.September cow-calf ratios indicated little to no calf mortality during this period. Further, the September cow-caIf ratio will probably be sufficiently accurate. The Much greater number of calves (66 percent) recorded in March, than in November, indicates several possibilities as follows: (1) Observer error in recognizing the older calves (four months Older), (2) Calves whose mothers were killed in hunting season (October) may have had time to join the groups as winter progressed -- they may have been single and scattered in November, �-100(3) An extra heavy cow kill, (4) Mistaking yearling cows for calves so late in the year -- adult cows appeared fairly easy to distinguish. It should be noted that the bull-cow ratio remained exactly the same for the March counts as the November counts, with almost ,double the number of animals being counted. This helps to corroborate the theory that error exists B"omewhere with regard to the calf counts. Since a sufficient sample of the kill is secured annually at the check stat1.ons, these data will be used to adjust the total projected kill from card returns. Coruf:idencelimits were not placed on the total herd estimate this year since there is obviously more work necessary relative to the basic mechanics of this technique. The accuracy of the final estimate depends upon the accuracy of the data oQrbained, and since three samples are involved (pre- and post-season ratios, and kill) there is a much greater chance for variation than where a single sample is necessary. The kill data is considered sufficiently accurate plus the fact that, from the standpoint of' the formula, it is .a mrLnor source of error. The accuracy of the pre •.•and post-season ratios is much more important with regard to the magnitude that they affect the final population estimate. Future emphasis will be placed on the proper technique mechanics for obtaining these ratios, and a proper analysis technique for evaluating their accuracy. Recommendations: season ratios. (1) Try to calssify 1,000 animals for both the pre- and post- (2) Obtain July and September pre- and November and March post-season again to double check these ratios. (3) Attempt to obtain comparable counts counts on the north and soirth rpor-t Lons of the area. ( 4) Adjust the total. projected check station data. kill classification from card returns using Prepared by :_.-:.J..:.o,::hn~;:;.T_ .....;::H;.:;;arr;.:;;;:;.;:;.i;,;:s _ Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Date1 J_U~ly~,~1~9_6_0 _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -101•.. JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ---------~--~~~----------------- Project NO. ~W~-~3~8~-R~-~1~3~ _ Work Plan No. -------~---------------------- 9 Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 5 Title of Job: ~In~v~e~s~t~i~g~a~t~i~o~n~o~f~O~t~h~e~r~C~en~su=s~T~e~c~hn~i~q~u~e~s~ _ Period Covered: May 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: Deer trend counts were employed in Poudre Canyon and Middle Park to evaluate this technique. Work to date has shown that the number of counts necessary to detect annual trends depends upon the accuracy desired. An average of a number of trend counts appears to be more desirable than a single count. Comparison of browse utilization, pellet-group counts and aerial counts on elk winter range were made from 1957-60. The fluctuation in these factors from 1957-58 and 1958-59 were inconsistant both in percentage change and direction of change (increase or decrease). In the 1958-59 winter the amount of utilization decreased while elk days•.. of-use/acre and aerial trend counts increased. Objective: To run small-scale tests of census techniques which appear to have the greatest possibilities for attaining the objective of this work~lan--to determine a census method or methods suitable for use in the management of big game in Colorado. Procedure: Two types of census techniques were investigated to determine their applicability, accuracy and feasibility for use on Colorado deer and elk ranges. These techniques were tested relative to selection of a method whereby Wildlife Conservation Officers could obtain adequate appraisal of big-game herd trends in their respective districts. �-102- Three experimental areas were selected in Poudre Canyon for the collection of basic data on walking-cruise techniques. Altitude and seasonal distribution were considered in selection of these trend-study areas. They were about five miles apart at elevations of 6,500, 7,000 and 7,500 feet covering an upper-] middle and lower segment of the main Poudre Canyon mule deer winter range. Each census strip was approximately two miles long. Intermittant counts were made on these three areas throughout the 1958~B9 wintering period. General statements concerning weather, snow depth, temperature, and animal condition were recorded relative to each walking count. visibility In addition, a two-mile walking--cruise census strip was selected on the Cedar Ridge area in Middle Park, Colorado. This strip was checked at intervals throughout the winters of 1959 and 1960, and the data were compared with information derived by aerial, ground and pellet-group counts being employed on this area. In USing the walking onuise techniques, the observer walked along a predetermined strip and recorded the total number of animals seen. The trend-count data were analyzed to determine the relationship of such counts to actual population, and the number of counts necessary to obtain reliable management information. Elk pellet-group counts were made on 15 range-production and -utilization transects on the South Fork of the White River from 1957 until the present. This information was compared with the degree of utilization on key-browse plants, and aerial trend counts for the same area. �-103- Investigation of Other Census Techniques John T. Harris Introduction: New census methods are constantly being developed and reported in the literature. Some of these may have immediate application, or it may be desirable to compare them with census techniques presently being studied. In addition, it may be desirable to make certain modifications of the methods presently being tested, or to employ some special census technique adaptable to certain situations, such as the meadow counts or track counts presently used for the White River deer herd. Such information could be valuable for comparison with results of other census techniques. This j)J:tase of the investigation was designed to allow a certain measure of flexibility in the job for making tests and comparisons where they are considered desirable. The 1959 data is also included in this writing since field work for that year was completed too late to report this job in that segment. Cruise counts were made on the three Poudre Can¥on study areas between November 18, 1958 and April 30, 1959. Walking time on these counts varied from 45 minutes to l~ hours with the average being 1 hour. The amount of snow on the ground was the main factor contributing to an increase in walking time. A total of 11 walking-trend counts were made on the lower trend-count strip, and 7 each on the middle and upper strips. Counts were begun on November 18 and continued intermittently until April 30. Snow depth varied from 0 to 20 inches during the study period. Generally, the deeper snow depths were encountered on north slopes and drainages. Visibility was generally good to excellent. The Poudre trend-count data were analyzed to determine the number of counts necessary to obtain a reliable average of the number of animals seen. A summary of this analysis is tabulated as follows: Table 1. Poudre Canyon Walking Cruise Counts, 1958-59. Trend-Count Area Narrows Camp Gr. Kelley Flats Washout Gulch ,500 7,000 7,500 ',' 7 Total No. Trend Counts 11 7 Total Deer Counted 208 199 83 Average 11.86 18.09 29·71 o ... 49 Range o - 19 9 - 53 Standard Deviation 16.8 5·4 15·7 Standard Error 5.06 2.07 5·93 Coefficient of Variation 92.8% 46.2% 52.8% Confidence Interval t.10 18.09 19.17 ~'.11.82-.;>4Q02 29. 71 .~ 11. 5 n "t.20 11.86 L. 2.98 18.09 l6.94 29.71 8·54 Proj. Sample Size .10 ace. 6 191 51 It It It .20 acc. 48 13 17 n n It .30 acc. 21 8 6 �-104The Cedar R;idgewalking-trend counts were analyzed both with regard to minimum number of counts necessary and how the counts compared with the actual wintering population of deer on this area for both years. The variability analysis and projected sample sizes from these data are given as follows: 1959 "1960 Total No. Trend Counts 13 Total D~er Counted 468 363 Average 31.2 28.0 Range o - 71 6 - 59 Standard Deviation 20.7 16.5 Standard E;r-ror 5.34 4.6 Coefficient o:fVariation 66.3% 59.0% Confidence Interval t.10 20·7i 9·4 2.8i8 " "~,20 20·7 17.2 2816 Proj. Sample Size .10 ace. 94 166 " If ".20 acc . 24 41 " If ".30 acc. 10 18 -rr A close approximation of the time which deer began moving on, and off, the Cedar Ridge area was obtained relative to pellet group census work being conducted on this area during the same year. In addition, a good estimate of the actual wintering population of deer on this area was obtained through ground drives, aerial counts and pellet-group counts. This information was compared with the trend-count figures to determine if such counts were indicative of herd numbers. Figure 1 graphs this relationship using the 1958-59 data. It is evident that a single trend count could have varied considerably depending upon when it was taken. The counts varied from 0 to 71 deer while sampling a relatively stable population of over 550 animals in 1959. There appeared to be little correlation between snow, temperature, visibility and the npmber of deer seen. Visibility, however was good to excellent on 13 of the 15 counts, and was classified as fair on the remaining two. The 1960 data averaged 28 deer as compared to 31 in 1959 resulting in a 9.7 percent decrease. Ground-count figures were 564 in 1959 and 291 in 1960 -- a decrease of 48 percent in the actual wintering population. The browse-transect data and annual game management. elk-trend figures were tabulated to determine if there was any consistency between the degree of utilization of key-browse species, pellet counts and aerial trend counts on the South Fork of the White River. The aerial trend figures were extracted from the annual game management elk-trend counts for the South Fork area. Figures for 1957 were not available since trends were not flown.on the South Fork that year due to inclement weather. Browse production figures were also included since percentage utilization is directly related to the amount of'annual growth produced. �-105A summary of the comparisons made is presented in the following tables! Table 2 .. .Ae.onrparison.ofpellet C.ounts*.,. aerial-trend counts .and b.rows.e. utilization*, South Fork, Whi+e River, 1951"':60. . Winter Comparison 1958 1959 1957 Production...Total inches 1,612 1,812 2,277 2,956 1.56 1.73 Growth Index (inches) 2.15 2.24 Utilization - Total inches - Percent 928 54.4 866 40.4 956 33·7 658 40.0 Pellet Count - Total groups Elk days-of-use/acre 302 15·9 185 9·5 282 14.5 310 16.0 371 406 , ... Aerial trend count *From 15 key-browse production-utilization Table 3. transects. A comparison .of the percentage increase (I.) or decrease (-) in browse production, utilization and pellet counts from 1957-60; and aerial trend c.ounts from 1958-60; South Fork, White River. Percentage Change 1957 - 58 f 25·7 I- 24.3 1958 - 59 . f 29.8 I- 4.2 1959 .•.60 - 14.0 - 6·3 I- 18·7 Elk days-of-use/acre - 38.8 I- 52.6 .;.. 52.6 Aerial trend counts --- f f 60·9 Comparison Production - Total inches Growth Index Utilization (percent) 9·4 Discussion: The Game Manager is interested in the minimum number of counts necessary to detect herd trends with reasonable accuracy. This analysis showed that the number of C01IDts necessary is dependent upon the number of deer seen. 'I'hns., if a high number of deer are consist~tly counted, fewer counts would be necessary. The number of counts necessary could be minimized by making the counts during the period of greatest concentration each year--the cirtical period. However,since winters vary both in severity and occurance .of the critical periods, it w.ould be difficult to determine the proper time for comparable annual counts. The Cedar Ridge data, when compared with actual population figures, shows that considerable variation can occur in trend counts when counting a relatively stable population. �-106- Dice (1938) said frNosingle statistical sample, unless it is very large, can give more than a rough approximation of the size of the population from which it was taken. If possible, therefore, several sample plots should always be counted and the mean of these samples used as the basis of calculation. '.'. . It is obvious that the greater the number of samples and also the greater the size of the individual samples the more accurate the calculations of the populations will he." The average of all trend counts on a given area may reflect the population trend; however, more than two year's data would be necessary to determine this. Rasmussen and Doman (1943) reported a method of winter spot counts in which small census areas were selected on the upper, intermediate and lower limits of deer winter range in each management unit. "These 'spots' usually consist of a small drainage or other unit of from 1 to 3 square miles having well defined houndaries. One man is used in counting each area and routes of travel are carefully described and recorded and no estimates are made .... Total numbers seen from year to year will indicate population trends." The authors considered the method the most practical technique for determining trends of mule deer on western ranges. Such studies reported in the literature, however, were not designed to evaluate trend counts in terms of accuracy, sampling adequacy, and their relationship to actual population. The comparison of browse utilization, pellet group counts and aerial trend counts on the South Fork eLk winter range does not show much consistency. However, since only four year's data are available and consequently, only three periods of measured change (increase or decrease) in the factors investigated, definite conclusions regarding their relationship G)v:,:trend value cannot; be made. More annual data of this type are needed to make such determinations. Such inconsistencies as the increase in pellet groups and aerial trend-count figures (1958-59) and a corresponding decrease in utilizatipn could have been due to the amount and availability of the browse (more produced), inefficiency of the sample, etc. Utilization, pellet counts, and aerial trends were consistent in showing an increase in 1960 although not of the same magnitude. Pellet counts have been systematically used 80S an indicator of deer presence since the 1930's. Most authors who have used this technique agree that the amount of sampling necessary to analyze a given area depends upon annual pellet group dens i ty and desired accuracy (Robinette, et .al., 1958). Pe Ll.et -courrt trends on the South Fork apply only to the key range-areas. Sample inadequacy is inherent in trying to obtain quantitative data on large, often highly variable and not readily accessible big-game winter ranges such as the South Fork. Thus, the only alternative left to the game manager is to obtain as representative a sample as possible, or to confine his population-and range ... trend measurements to the key orc":titical areas. Proper application of such a sample and the information obtained, therefore, depends lipon the judgement and experience of tihe game manager. �-107McCain and Taylor (1956), in reference to estima-bes oi'big game numbers based on consumption of key i'orage species st.ated, "As additional data i'rom subsequent years became available, this trial-and-error method of computing the herd size would become more and more dependable. A principal objective of management is to balance use by game against i'orage production and see that the surplus i'orage is harvested but not overused. This method permit.s a start in that direction without the necessity of knowing the exact size oi'the deer herd. II Young (1938) stated that numbers of animals should be correlated with range trend to add meaning to range condition. Recommendations: Continue the South Fork pellet-group counts and range utilization measurements for annual comparison with the aerial trend counts. Make special effort to obtain comparable aerial-trend counts for the South Fork each year. Such counts should be made exactly as they are made each year i'or management purposes. Literature Cited Dice, Lee R. 1938. Some census methods i'ormammals. Jour. Wildl. Mgt., 2(3)j 119-130. McCain, Randal and Walter P. Taylor. 1956. Methods oi' estimating numbers of mule deer. In The Deer of North America. Stackpole Co ., Harrisbury, Pa OJ and Wildl. Mgt. Inst., Washington, D.C. 668pp. (pp.431-438). Rasmussen, D. I. and E. R. Doman. 1943. Census Methods and their Applications in the Management of Mule Deer. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf ,, 8:369-379. Robinette, W. LeSlie, Robert B. Ferguson and Jay S. Gashwiler. 1958. Problems involved in the use of deer pellet group counts. 18pp mimeo (to be published in Transactions of the 23rd North American Wildlife Conference). Young, Vernon A. 1938. The carrying capacity of big game range. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 2(3) j 131-134. Prepared by: John T. Harris Approved by: ----------------------------Date: July, 1960 ----------~~~~~----.----------- Gilbert N. Hunter --~~~~----~~-----------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -109- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ----~~~~~----------------- Project No. W-38-R-13 Work Plan No.__~9~ Deer-Elk Investigations _ Job No.6 Title of Job: Application of Selected Census Techniques Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: Application of the aerial-strip census techmique in the Middle Park Area resulted in a total projected estimate of 12,610 deer in this herd. The sample, although relatively small, yielded considerable information relative to technique mechanics and sample variability. Introduction: This phase of the census-study work plan was initiated,"last year for the purpose of conducting large-scale or herd-unit application of the census techniques being tested. This was considered necessary to ascertain the efficiency, practicality, and proper application of the census techniques as they would be used on a management basis. Objectives: To test the management application of census techniques being studied. Procedure: The aerial-strip census technique was employed in Middle Park on March 11, 1960. This effort was an experimental attempt to use this method to make a total census of the wintering deer herd in this area. A total of five north-south strips were flown at an alti~ude of 200 feet while c~xnting a strip 200 feet wide. Flying was done with a Cessna 175 with a pilot and observer. All flights were made under the same flying conditions: light-l, air-l and snow (background) -3. The pilot guided on prominent terrain features which were pre-determined and roughly mapped-out before the flights. An air speed of 75 miles per hour was maintained while counting the strips. All observing was done from the right side of the plane, and only those deer seen within the 200 foot (estimated) sample strip were counted. The observer trained his eye in estimating this strip width by some pre-flight trials over a measured course. area. A total of 207 deer were counted over 69 miles (total sample) of the sampled These courrt s are as follows: �-110Table 1 -- Aerial-strip census counts, Middle Park mule deer winter range, March 11, 1960. Flight Time Total Total Deer Deer Seen! Length of . .. .• Strip Direction Start Finish Minutes Minute Counted Stri;2 (mi. ~ , 1 2 3 4 5 South-North South-North North-South South-North North-South 10:30 10: 57 11%20 11:36 11:54 10:48 11:13 11:30 11:45 11:56 18 16 10 9 2 6·9 1.0 ·3 5·9 5·5 23 20 12 11 3 ,., 124 16 3 53 11 The number of deer seen per strip was found to vary greatly (3 to 124); however, this was due, in part, to the difference in strip length. Thus, these data ~re put on a deer seen per minute basis for standardization. This too resulted in a high variation between strips (.3 to 6.9). The total size of the area sampled was calculated to 485 square miles, and the total size of the sample was 7.84 square miles. This resulted in an average of 26 deer seen per square mile on the area counted, and a projected total of 26,610 deer on the Middle Park winter r~ge are~. Due to the small number of strips counted, and the wide variance in the number of deer seen per strip, no statistical analysis was made of these data. Discussion: This year!s experimental aerial-strip census was emplpyed on a herdunit basis in the Middle Park area to determine if the technique would be usable under such conditions. No measure of confidence was placed on th~ herd estimate since the data were not subjected to statistical analysis. The study did, however, give some valuable information regarding proper technique mechanics, and the degree of sampling variability which might be incurred. This information will be used as a guide in employing this census technique in subsequent years. It is evident that a larger sampie is necessary, the sample should be stratified and the count variability should be analyzed on a deer seen/minute or deer seen/mile basis. In addition, the beginning and ending of the sample strips should be fairly well defined to facilitate determination of the size of the area sampled. This area will vary from year to year as dictated by the extent of winter range being occupied. Recommendations: (1) Obtain a larger sample in future trials at least 20 or more strips. (2) Consider roughly stratifying the sample area with regard to deer density. (3) Pre-determine and define the beginning and ending of each sample strip. (4) Analyze on the basis of deer seen/minute or deer seen/mile. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: J_u_l~y~,~1~9_6_0 Approved by: _ ~G~il~b~e~r~t~N~.~H~un~t~e~r~--------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/9d695f0ab4c5c4fd6407bac053b7d79a.pdf d7cf21276128c66f2f4be0f23974381c PDF Text Text October, 1960 -1- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------------------------------- Project No. W-10l-R-2 Game Range Investigations 1 Job No.1 ------------------------------- Work Plan No. ----------------------------- Title of Job: Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study Period Covered: July 15, 1959 to March 31, 1960 OBJECTIVES For sound winter game range management it is necessary to know the percentage of annual growth game may be permitted to remove yearly from key browse plants without injury to the plants. Also, it is important to know the effect of different intensities of use on the amount of forage produced. The Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study is a long-term clipping experiment simulating different intensities of game use on five key species of browse plants: big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, serviceberry, and oakbrush. The purpose of the study is to attempt to learn how the yearly removal of certain percentages of the annual growth stems and of old stems affects the plants and their forage production. PROCEDURE 1. Twenty-four 10-foot square plots have been established for each plant species, and these have been fenced from game. 2. Plots were randomly selected to receive specific treatments. 3. Three replications are provided for each treatment. 4. Plants in the three plots of a re~lication have been subjected to the following treatments: (a) Yearly, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 percent of the annual growth stems have been removed in random fash~on. (b) Three plots for each plant species serve as controls, receiving no treatment. (c) Two years' stem growth was removed from each plant one yearj yearly thereafter, all stems falling within a maximum diameter were removed to simulate destructive use. 5· The following records are collected yearly: (a) Total number of annual stems removed from each plot. (b) The lengths of 100 annual stems removed from each plot. (c) The green and air-dry weight of stems and leaves removed from each plot. (d) The number of annual stems produced and the lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. (~) The number of live and dead plants in each plot. (f) Photographs of the plots are taken from established photo hubs. (g) Observations are made on general plant vigor, disease, seed production, etc. �-2- FINDINGS Field Work.--Field work on the study began July 15, 1959 with a crew of 4 men. The first few days were spent weighing and tagging sacks, repairing plot fences, and practicing clipping outside the plots. The actual clipping work was completed for the year on August 27. Data Collected.--The following data were collected for each of the 5 species: 1. Total number of annual stems removed from each clip plot. 2. The lengths of 100 annual stems in each plot. 3· The green and air-dry weights of stems and leaves removed from each clip plot. 4. The number of annual stems produced and the lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. 5· The number of live and dead plants in each plot. 6. A photograph was made of each plot prior to clipping. 7· Observations were made for each plot of the general plant vigor, disease, seed production, and effect of clipping. Preliminary Report.--A report was written and presented to The Research COmmittee, February 3. It is a preliminary outline report of the results of study through 1958. Data Analysis.--Analysis of the 1959 data has been about completed by Statistician, Jack R. Grieb, and the mathematics department of Colorado State University. Ten-year Summary Report .•-A ten-year summary report is being prepared for publication. It will include detailed results of study for the years 1949 through 1959· Prepared bY:__~H~a~r~o~ld~R~.~S~h_e~p~h~e~r~d~ Approved by:__~G~i~lb~e~r~t~N~.~H~u~n~t~e~r_ State Game Manager Date: ~0~c~t~o~b~e~r~,~1~9~6~0 _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �October, 1960 -3JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ----~--~~~---------------- Project No. W-10l ... R-2 ------------------------------- Work Plan No. 2 ------------------------------ Title of Job: Little Hills Grazing Study Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to April 1, 1960 Game Range Investigations Job No. 1 Abstract: Livestock pastures were stocked without major difficulties. A table of animal unit e~uivalents was adopted by means of which past and future stocking can be e~uated to one standard. Using this table fawn deer are considered as one-half a deer. A total of 222 deer were captured of which 137 were placed in the pastures and 85 tagged and released. Deer removal took two months time; it involved over Sixty individual drives by crews of three to six men. In spite of a record high number of deer stocked only seven dead ones were found, presumably because the deep snows did not accumulate until late in February. Accidents to fences resulted in a net understocking of pasture four by 787 deer days and an overstocking of pastures three and five by 96 and 638 deer days respectively. A three-year comparison of preferences of livestock and deer for mountain mahogany and serviceberry by the stem length method shows mahogany to be much preferred by all animals. Both browse plants were consumed in decreasing rank as follows by the animals: deer~-cows--sheep. The regular after-grazing utilization estimates were accomplished promptly after livestock and deer were removed. They are tabulated in four tables by season, pasture, and class of stock. Over sixty photographs of line transects were taken and a project filing system developed. Utilization of serviceberry beyond the current year's growth (1958) was: 13.1% in pasture four, 0.0% in pasture two, 2.8% in pasture one, and 13.5% in pasture ten (control). Aerial photos in stereo pairs, enlargements, and photo maps of each pasture were obtained for use in stratifying the pastures in various ways for future vegetative studies. Except for obtaining the pasture photographs, the proposed forage production study was not started for a number of reasons discussed. �-4Objectives: Long Time: To determine the amount and kinds of forage used by deer, cattle, and sheep in enclosures and under various intensities of grazing, and to measure and record the plant succession occurring under these treatments. Immediate: 1. To maintain and improve the existing system of p~sture stocking. 2. To determine the differences in utilization by cows, sheep, and deer of serviceberry and bitterbrush, as may be indicated through stem-length measurements before and after grazing (under heavy grazing intensities only). 3· To determine differences in forage production before and after grazing in at least the heavy-use pastures for certain selected, abundant species, by exparimental use of the weight estimate method of Pickford and Reid. 4. To maintain the existing system of roughly estimating utilization of all species in all pastures after g.raz Lng., 5· To establish a permanent vegetative photographic system which will incorporate work previously done with new work, including a filing system. 6. To replace existing wooden point area markers and line transect stakes in all pastures with permanent steel stakes, and to add others needed, especially in the newer pastures. 7· To initiate observations on the extent to which deer, cattle, and sheep utilize twig growth older than one year. Also, to record other details concerning the grazing pattern of these animals. 8. To do exploratory work on new problems which will require more detailed work plans at a later date: (a) a study of the relationship between shrub production (weight) and stem length; (b) a study of the relationship between plant production (principally browse) and climatic factors; (c) a study and long-time plan for obtaining quantitative data on various site factors as they will be influenced by various grazing intensities. �-5LITTLE HILLS GRAZING STUDY William T. McKean Pasture Stocking - Livestock A pasture rotation plan has been worked out this year to permanently set up the stocking procedure developed in ;1.958. The schedule for the next five years is as follows: Table 1- Five Year Livestock Pasture Rotation Plan Beginning in Spring 1959. Sheep Cattle ... Year Season Pasture Number Year Season Pasture Number 1959 Spring 5 9 1 1 5 9 1959 Spring 3 2 8 8 3 2 9 1 1960 Fall 1960 Spring Fall Spring 5 Fall . . . . . . 1961 Fall 1 5 9 9 1 5 1961 Spring 5 9 1 1962 Fall 1 Spring Fall 1962 5 9 1 Spring Fall Spring Fall 5 9 1963 Spring Fall 9 1 5 5 9 1 1963 Spring Fall 2 8 3 3 2 8 8 3 2 2 8 3 3 2 8 8 3 2 2 8 3 3 2 8 �-6Following the new stocking plan adopted in 1959, thirty-five adult _es and twelve two-year old heifers were used in the pastures according to the schedule presented in table 2. Ho major difficulties were encountered and the desired stocking rates were realized. These are shownin table 3. Table 2. Sumary or stocking records for livestock deer grazing year 1959-60. grazing year 1959, and �-7Table 3. Summary of stocking of livestock for year 1959 and for deer for year 1959-60. Pasture Acres Class 01' Season A1.'liTM] of Use No. of Tota1* Anjma.ls Days Spring Fall Season 35 34 Spring Fall Season 12 12 12 12 120 120 Deer Spring Fall Season Winter 16 4 144.64 Deer Winter ~ 86.42 Sheep 1 Ani ma:J * Unit Months Acres Per An:lmU Unit Month 24.25 27.10 51.35 1.50 8.80 8.00 16.80 9.96 21538 4.00 4.00 8.00 84.40 22.50 1.93 72 4.1998 166.60 .87 35 34 444 374 Deer Spring Fall Season Winter 19 1,2934 14.75 12.50 26.25 64.46 3.27· 1.34 6 99.93 Deer Winter 23 1,2499 49.96 1.99 7 90.67 Deer Winter 9 907 30.23 3.00 8 206.43 CattJ.e Spring Fall Season 12 12 144 156 4.80 5.20 10.00 20.64 Spring Fall Season 35 12 25.94 25.20 51.14 3.06 2 3 9 77.37 Sheep 167.25 CattJ.e 162.B1. Cattle 156.55 Sheep * Fawn deer counted as 1/2 a deer. 729 816 264 240 776 756 �Pasture Stocking - Deer Entries A table of animal unit equivalents has been adopted by means of which it 1s hoped that all the pasture stocking records of the past and of the future years can be calibrated to one standard. This table was derived from correspondence with a number of animal husbandry and wildlife specialists in the western colleges. (k).emajor change is that fawn deer are considered as 1/2 a deer (or lIe ot one cow) instead ot a full deer. Atter considerable disCUSSion, it was decided to stock the deer pastures this winter on this basis. Accordingly a muchheavier stocking than previous was carried out. Cattle Cow& one month c&l.f•••• l Dry co. ••.......••..••.. 1 Cow& 6 to 7 month calf.l 1/4 Heifer, one year........ 2/3 Heifer, two year •••••••• l Steer, short yearling... 2/3 Steer, long yearling.... 3/4 ~ Sheep Ewe & young lamb•••• 1/5 Ewe & older lamb•••• 1/4 Ewe, yearling ••••••• l/6 Old ewe••••••••••••• l/5 Buck •.••••••••.•••••l/4 Deer Doe, mature••••••• l/4 Doe, yearling ••••• l/S Fawn•••••••••••••• l/e Buck•••••••••••••• l/4 ...•.....••..•.....•1 This year, deer trapping started late in October. As usual the closed area around the pastures and heavy hunting on the outside forced many deer downon to Dry Fork. By' November5, thirty-six deer had been caught and pastures number three and seven were full to the desired stocking rate. This early initial success was due in large part to an idea of Ed. Wiseman, new ranch foreman, who suggested that short deer-proof fences be constructed across Corral and Reigan Gulches which run between pastures seven and eight and pastures two and three respectively. Gates were installed in the fences and by simply opening the upper gates at night and closing lower ones, deer drifted down into the impoundments. About midnight the upper gates were approached from the rear and closed. The deer captured were counted into paa;tures seven and three the next morning. Existing wing traps were also effective at this time. Following the close of hunting season the deer movedback up on the ridges and very few were caught along Dry Fork until early in December. By this time sufficient snow had accumulated to make box trapping effective. The twenty-three box traps, which had been re-built during the swmner, were baited about December1. They proved increasingly effective up until a warm period came about March 1. All trapping stopped on March twelfth. The pastures were full by Februar.y thirteenth. A great many of the deer caught in box traps were caught well up in the gulches or even up on top of the ridges. In spite of snowvarying in depth from twelve to twenty inches there, all through January and February, they did not comeback downon to the Dry Fork bottoms as they often have in the past. Late in Novembera panel-type group trap was transported from the Hot Sulphur Springs managementarea (W-38-R) and set up at the mouth of Reigan �-9Gulch where deer had been traTe1ing. It was ineffective because just at that time the deer stopped coming down to water when the snows came. Another year it should be very ef'fective there in October and November. A total of 222 deer were captured of which 137 were placed in the pastures and eighty-five were tagged and released. Broken downby t,ype of trap, this catch was: Corral traps - 27J Wingtraps - 2lJ Group trap - 4; Box traps - 170. Two deer jumped into the pastures from the outside making an actual total of 224. Whentabulated by sex and age classes (table 4) it will be seen that the percentage of fawns caught was thirty-five (35.1 percent). This has averaged about 42 percent aver the' years. The drop is attributable to the fifty-two deer caught in corral and wing type traps. These traps seemed to catch yearling and adult bucks quite as readily as others (613 for 30.6 percent). Of sixteen deer placed in pasture three, ten were bucks. Table 4. 1959-60. Sex and age groups of deer trapped at LitUe Hills, Bucks Does II) IQ .Y ~ II) Ii 1%4, Untagged deer put in pastures Tagged deer put in pastures Tagged deer released Total ~, ~ CII s ! 0 E-t ;i ~ ~ Total , i , i ,s 10 II) t1IJ t1IJ II) Unknown 10 ~ ~ <: 0 E-t .~ .~ II) i ~ ~ ~ <: 1%4. ] CD 0 E-t 1%4 ~ ~ ~ 0 E-t , 14 22 47 0 12 7 19 0 2 14 16 II 0 1 12 25 12 6 43 15 3 29 47 0 0 0 0 40 15 35 90 12 13 ,.18 43 15 3 24 42 0 0 0 0 27 16 42 65 37 37 31 105 30 a 67 105 II 1 12 7/3 45 99 222 0 II Total bucks (yearling and adult) ••••• 68 --30.6 % Total does (fearling and aQult) •••••• 75- 33.9 % Total fawns•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 78 --35.1 % Unknown S6X •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 -- 0.4 % or the eighty-five deer tagged and released twenty-three repeated (11. fawns, These repeats ranged from once to thirteen times for the same deer this winter. There were twenty-nine recatches of deer from previous years (22 does and 7 bucks). 5 does, and 7 bucks). �-10 •• "Table 5. Trap record of deer re-caught during winter 1959-60. Age ~en First Tag Numbers ~ex :Button 198 Doe,-"lrature 1lar. 1950. Dec. 1957. Feb. 1959~ Dec. 1959 4 Doe Feb. 1956. Deo. 1957. Feb. 1959~ Dec. 1959 4 1863 Cow 1803 Cow CowA319 Pae .oal.la''- t ~ture Fawn Feb. 1957. Dec. 1956. Dec. 1959 19 yr. 13 1954~ Dec. 1959 2 Doe Mature Dec. 1956~ Dec. 1959 Buck ear1i.nsl Jan. 95~. Jan. 1.900 Caw·AL.J.9-20 Doe llature Jan. 959~ Jan. 1~00 2 ~e ~ture Years Caught Nov. Cow A1662 ~Ck Button2062 lQl Cnw .A. ~Qt; poe Caw 163 16,39 Doe Button 98 Pee ~-m50 poe :eu,,~ 2S441802 Pae A22-replaced b; A2881-A28a2 Pae Nature Jan. 1950, nee. 1.955 Nov. 1957 .• Jan. 1959. Jan. 1900 1958. Jan. 1960 IIO mo. 5 110s»•• 11 yr. 11 mo. 11. yr. 12 III mo. ~ture Kature Feb. 1957. Jan. 1960 Feb.~. Jan. 1.900 2 ~ture Jlature Dec. 1956. Jan. 1960 Feb. 1.959~ Feb. 1.900 CowAl905-06 Ooe ~ture CowA1679-80 Pae lFawn Doe l2 2 Feb. 1950~ Jan. 1959~ Jan. 1960 Jan. 1.959~ Jan. 1.960 F~b. 1959. Jan. J.960 Feb. 1957~ Feb. 1960 1512 12 1 mo. IIyr. 28 days II yr. 11 yr. ~ture ~ture Nature fawn Doe 9 mo. 15 yr. Nov. Doe Doe 9 110. 12 yr. Mature Cow 1798 1970 9 mo. [3 yr. ~ture 3 12 12 2 2 mo. r~yr. 12 yr. 11 mo. III 110. 13 yr. 2 110. 12 IIn. 12 yr. 2 11 mo. Feb. 1959, Feb. 1960 2 Dec. 1958. Feb. 1960 Mar. I9~9. Feb. 1.900 1 yr. iI yr. 2 2 lID. 12 III mo. Nov. 1956. Feb. 1960 IMature Mar. 1959. Feb. 1960 iMature 2 Jan. 1957~ Feb. 1959. Feb. 1960 IJ yr. 2 2 ,3 4 110. rr yr. 1 mo. 13 yr. 1110. i1 yr. AlUL5-16 IDee iJlature Jan. 1959. Feb. 1960 2 Al.964-65 Doe lFawn Jan. 1959, Fo. 1960 2 1 Il10. 1yr. 1 JIO. JJ.792-93 Doe IMature Dec. 1958, 1Ia:r. 1960 2 rr "Fr. 13 mo. 12 ~ & J.3000 inuck IJIature Dec. 1956, liar. J.960 11 yr. �•.. ll •.. Eighty-four deer were eighed this winter. follows: Bucks Fmms Yearlings (il) 77e5 1bse 1221bs (21) These weights were as Does Yature (6) 163 1bs Yearlings Fawns (J.1) (2) 1211bs 72.6 Ibs Mature (21) 131 Ibs. The saDple or mature does very probably includes several yearlings improperly agedo Pasture Stocking ~ Deer Removals Earlier stocking permitted earlier remOvals. The pastures were empty bT April fifteenth except for small numbers of deer. twelve deer were baited out ot pastures seven and four. The period of deer driving extended from February22nd thru April 15th and envolvad over sixty individual. drives. The Station personne1.ere assisted by three laborers, hired on an hourly basis (12 hours) during the period March 29 thru April 6. In addition, a special. drive b7 students of C.S.U. and others helped empty pasture three on April 15th. Deer in singles and pairs remained a very time-consuming chore in every pasture. They were all removedlate in May. Seven deer are mown to have died or naturaJ. causes within the pastures. Of the dead deer five were in pasture four. This mortality rate of five percent is reasonable., Deep snows did not accunmlate until early February. :Bright coJ.orad cloth and plastic streamers, tied to the ears or the deer thru their ear tags, were of somehelp in identifying individuaJ. deer as the;y left the pastures. This was particularly true in light and moderately stocked pastures. Twounfortunate accidents occurred during the winter. A gate between pastures four and five was left open, and ten deer went from pasture four into pasture five (unstocked) before they were discovered on December11th. Actual1y only five were counted in a drive of pasture five on December12th, but spring drives revealed. .five more. ConsequentJ.ypasture five was overstocked (see table below). fiso during a drive of pasture four on March 29th five deer forced a hole through a gate and got into pasture three. Of 71 head stocked in pasture four there were five which either died and were not found., or they soaped unnoted•• These events resul.ted in a net apparent understocking or pasture tour of 787 deer day • (tabl® 6) ActuaJ.l.ythis pasture wu stocked heavier thaD. it has been for ~ years.. Utilisation estilllates bear this out. �-12Table 6. Deer c:ia.T d6'liation in pasture calCUlated Deertt Dazs Desired Pasture stocking, 1960-61. ApprOiiliiate Deer Days Achieved 3 2,442 5,785 5 1,296 6 1,499 7 907 *Fawns considered 1/2 a deer. 4 DevI&tion Under OVer 96 2,538 4,998 1,934 1,499 974 767 638 o o 67 Measurements (by stem-length) Utilisation With the completion of after-grazing measurements on serviceberry in April, 1959 three years or lISasurements of this species have been attained in the heavy use pastures. It is now possible to compare preferences between sheep, cows, and deer for these two ke.y species of deer food namely serviceberr.y and mahog~ as reveal.ed by the stem length method. . In table 7 and figure one it is evident that mahogaDiY is a far more palatable plant than serviceberry to al.l three an; mala, Deer consumed far more of each plant than did cows and ate almost twice as much mahog&l\V' as sheep did, but only a small. amount (2.3%) more serviceberry than sheep. The control pasture showed the heaviest deer use of all. Very few cattle are using it. Table 7. Pasture Comparison between mountain mahOg8.D3' and serviceberry as food for cattle, sheep, and deer under heavy stocking based on stem length differences during three years.* Dliference and atter 1 Sheep 2Cowa 4 Deer 10 Control between before measurements 28.22 64.17 336.47 292.71 LSD •• 18.5~ -.1 6.5 138.8 221.7 LSD15.5- 4 3 1 2 3 3 2 1 * JIOUiiw:n U8li8i~-1954-55, 1955-56, 195&:57coDlbiiiBd Serviceberry- 1954-55, 1957-58, 1958-59 combined 17.51 30.31 . 78.87 75.52 0.0 2.3 39.4 45.6 �•.13Birch-leaf Mountain Mahogany Service beITY 1954-55; 1955-56; 1956-57 rza Utilization 1954-55; 1957-5B; 1958-59 Percentage 0 Stocking Rate :S ~ ~ 80 ~ C) F-t 75 ~ 11.1 70 CD LI\ • V\ r- s::: • F-t pj CD Po CD III ~ CD F-t co as 0 ~ ~ C) • III +> ~ ·ri e- ~ ~ m ~ 60 co co• r- » C) F-t 65 ~ C) <II M C\J • C\J r-I t:I asF-t M I F-t CD 0 tH 55 CD .0 11.1 -e -d ~50 -8 !::1 CD CD 'Ii ~ ~ +t s= 40 Po e CD 11 ,£ 35 CQ CD ~ ~ ;30 III CD F-t ~ 0 ~~ \1\ ...:::t • rr- • r-Ir-i • ~ C) :.9'8 C) ~45 :::;, 25 ~ as ~ • 0\ ~ :""\ III 8F-t ~ :f m:s ~ s:: 7~F-t :f S ~ e 6~ Pc $ .~ as F-t 5.~ I F-t 43CJ) .~i t:I ~8. ~ III .$ CD :t~ '-' ~~ •• 0"" Sheep 9) ~P'\ • C\J 4 Deer Sheep Cow Deer Control Fig. 1. Comparative preferences of sheep, cows and deer!or moUntain mahoganyand serviceberry over three year periociB under heavy stocking rates, based on before and after grazing stem length measurements of tagged stems. �-14It bas been decided to discont.inue stem-length measurementstor three principal reasons. These are: 1. Stem length measurements,.sthey have been employedjdonot measure use of browse by livestOck in the spring, hence Only half of the livestock grazing year is used to comparewith the winter browsing by deer. 2. The measurementswere not sensitive enough to showsignificant differences between the light and moderately grazed pastures tor azv browse species tried. This 8i tuation makes it necessary to invent someother measurementmethod not yet accomplished. 3. The results obtained while good as far as they go,do not justify the time and expense' involved. Utilization Estimates: During 1959 it was again possibLe to makeestimates of use in all pastures a few days after livestock and deer were removed. This was true for all grazing seasons. Weather-wise, this year was like 1958 in which only normal or sub normal.precipitation occurred during the growing season. Consequently manypLants were somewhatshort in growth, particularly browse plants. Utilization percents have been averaged by plant groups as was done in the 1958 data. The figures shownin table eight following clos4y resemble those taken for 1958. See table six, page 207 of the report for July 1959 (part two). It should be noted that the winter figures are for the preceding year (1958-59) and cannot be added directly in pastures three and five to get a total annual figure for those pastures. This lag in reporting is due to the fact that deer removals each spring have not been accomplished untU after this report is due. �Table 8. Comparative, aver=r grasing year 1959 utilisation , for livestock estimates of plant groups by seuon, and 1958-59, for deer. Spring Grass Fall Wfiiter Spring Forbs Fall PASTURE and by pasture !Winter SpJoing !row8e Fall tor Winter - 1. Sheep H 33.1 34.6 - 23.5 ll.O 24.5 26.0 2. Cow H 43.4 53.0 - - 7.5 7.3 - 12.0 18.0 3. Cow )I 15.5 12.4 - 4.1 2.3 - 32.6 4.7 - - 0-5 ~ ~ 0-5 - 0-5 - - 41.0 l4.2 8.3 -- - - 14.1 - 22.3 Deer )I H - - Sheep )I 11.0 12.1 Deer - - 4. Deer 5. M 6. Deer )( 7. Deer 8. Cows II L - 0-5 - 0-5 - - 0-5 14.0 12-----L - 9. .She~p It__ _2.0 __ H-He&T1, -- ~derate, 14.2 L-Light. - -- 0-5 7.7 5.4 - - - - - 0-5 0-5 - - - 0-5 - 2.6 2.7 - - 3.0 9.2 11.2 9.0 12.5 9.7 - 27.6 ~ VI I 15.9 - I �-16Table 9. Average percent utilization and rrequene,r or occurrence qy pasture during sprlng grazing season by livestock, 1959. y FOBAGE SPECIES Cattle Sheep P.1 -sheep P.2-Cattle P.3-Deer P. 5-Deer P.8-Cattle P. 9-Sheep FreqY AT/,Freq. AT/, Freq. AT/, Freq. AT/, Freq. AT/, Freq. Av% Occur Util Occur util. Occur Util Occur Util Occur Utll Occur Ut.'U Grass and Grathtfe Agropyron SDii . Agropyron illerme Ory.,pais hymenoides Koeleria cristata Poa spp, ()rywopsis micrantba Cars spp. Sitanion bystr±x Elymus condensatus Stipa comata 13rODlllS tectorum Bromusinermis &rdeum jubatum Juneus bu!onius Average :Browse liiel&nchier utahensis Pinus edulis JUDiperus utahensis Chr,ysotbamnusviscidinorus Chrysotbamnusnauseosus Te~ canescens Artemisia tridentata SJmphoricarpos tetonensis Quercus gambelii Ribes spp. lIahoma repens Cercocarpus montanus Purshia tridentata Iurotia laData Ephedra ap. Pacb1stima Jll3rsinites ChryIotllamunsdepressus .lTerage 4 5 3 1 11 43 33 15 2 1 63 0 1 40 5 4 5 3 1 4 2 21 15 56 62 50 56 15 2 3 40 21 2 15 2 5 6 6 4 2 5 1 20 13 33 26 26 5 ~3 0 :5 4 6 3 3 16 2.3 13 4 5 1 Q 1 6 5 4 4 30 15 15 4 24 2 6 6 6 1 5 21 2.3 16 3 1 5 15 5 1 1 25 10 4 1 2 5 1 0 it. 0 18 0 1 43.4 33.1 4 6 1 0 5 3 0 6 6 6 36 5 30 .38 13 1 1 2 3 6 1 4 1 2 - 0 56 eo 15 24.5 22 47 0 26 5 5 5 6 3 3 5 6 42 1 0 5 2 3 5 6 83 10 24 .3 1 0 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 38 30 30 54 53 85 0 a 1 0 2 40 30 .3 1 1 0 0 12.0 11.0 15.5 0 0 32 32.6 9.0 6 6 4 4 29 0 0 30 6 4 4 5 3 0 0 1 6 7 6 7 .3 3 62 0 18 3 1 3 3 5 15 4 2 3 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 12 4 2 1 4 3 36 1 5 24 17.2 0 14.0 1 2 7 0 0 41 16 0 1 2 II 3 2 1 5 0 20 0 ~ 2 11 1 0 ~. 70- 0 3.0 12.5 made1Ii.i is: June 26, i959 by tmiii T. llCltean l'rom siX S1'£es Ii Y OCUlares'E!ii&te. ch pasture, each site constituting a circle or approximately SOfoot radius. y IwIber at p10ta out or a total. of six or seven in which each species occurred. �•.17fable 9. (Continued) lORAGESPECIES Sheep Cattle P. 5-Deer P. 6-Cattle P. 9-8heep P.l -Sheep P.2-Cattle P.3-Deer Av% Freq. Avf, Fraq. Av% Fraq. AT% Freq. Av% Fraq. AY% ¥req. Occur Util Occur Util. Occur Uti! Occur utU Occur Util Occur Uti! Forbs lriogonwa U;JDbella tum 1 CryptaDtba spp. 3 J.ntermaria. dimorpha 3 Fblox caespitosa 4 Sideranthus sp. 3 Opuntia ap. 1 Eriogonua tristichom Heuchera parvatolla 1 Lupirms greenii 3 Erigeron spp. GaJ.ilUll boreal-e 2 Artemisia frig4,cSa 2 au tierra.ia sarotbrae 4 Artemisia wrightil 2 Haplopappu.s acaulia PBDtstemon caespitosu8 1 Astragalua chamaeluce 2 Achillea lanulosa 1 Senecio 111tabUls Lesquerella sp, 3 Artemisia dracuncul.oldes Siaymbriua al tissima Corydalis aurea Lepidiwa JlK)ntanum 1 Oenothera sp, 2 .3 Spbaeralcae coccinia Cbr,ysopsi& villosa Weeds unid. Linum lewisii 2 btraglu& diversUolius 2 !alsamorrhisa sagittata Agoseria glauca Asclepiua app. 2 QUia aggregata 2 Castilleja ChrOMO sa Astragalus lambertii 2 PenstellOn fremontii .Aster ap. Uuatard UJrl.d. TaraxaCUll officinale L1tbosperDIlD.ruderale Senecio sp. Ole_tis sp. Tragopogon ap, Ba.phorbia robusta 0 0 0 3 6 3 22 23 0 4 0 67 2 .3 3 1 5 13 5 ell 13 0 0 CJ 4 1 35 0 4 14 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 6 2 ~'7 0 4 0; 3 0 50 15 48 15 45 70 90 30 0 2 Q. 2 1 2 j 1 3 2 2 1 o· 5 5 0 0 0 G 3 25 4 Q 2 0 3 1 5 15 7 3 2S 4 0 0 1 0 16 Q 4 II 0 0 0 2 Q 3 0 3 1 Q 0 0 4 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 75 1 2 0 0 .3 8 1 2 10 0 e 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 50 Q 1 2 0 0 2 2 25 4 0 0 33 3 0 4 0 0 17 0 15 3 2 3 2 2 0 40 16 0 0 6 0 1 1 2 2 0 1 75 33 3 0 1 33 3 .3 1 0 Q 36 0 2 4 1 2 3 2 1 ). 13 1 ~ 4 2 5 3 5 2 2 1 0 0 3 3 0 1 3 1 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 23 2 3 1 2 3 4 2 0 •• 3 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 13 0 4 .3 1 0 1 2 2 20 ~ 0 .l 2 ~ 1 2 1 50 0 3 1 1 2 4 50 25 -0 0 1 0 23.5 7.5 .3 0 3 Phlox loDgifolla Average 6 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 56 1 4.1 7.7 2.6 1 11e2 �... 18Table 10. Average percent utilization ~ grazing by livestock, FORAGE SPECIES Grass ~ Grasslike liropyron inerme Or,yzopsis bJmenoides Koeleria crista ta Fbaspp Oryzop8ia micrantha Care spp. 51tanion b;ystrix Elymus condensa tus Stipa comata BroDll1einermis ESrOD1S tectorum Average Browse Aiie1anchier utahensis Pinus edulis Juniperus utahenaae Chrysothamnus Ti.cidofiorus Cbrysothamnus nauseosus Tetr~ canescens Artemisia triden ta ta Sympboricarpos tetonens is Quercus gambelii Ribes sp. 1IaJ::Jonia repens Cercocarpus montanus Purshia tridentata Eurotia 1anata Ephedra sp, Pachist1ma JlJ3rsini tea Barcobatus vermiculatus heudotsuga taxi.to1ia Cln7eo~ .deprear:sus Average and frequency of' occurrence by pasture 1959. y during caIDe Sheep P.1 -Sheep P.2-Gatt1e P.3-Deer P. 5-Deer P.8-Cattle P. 9-Sheep Freqy Av%Freq. Av% Freq. Av% Freq. Av% Freq. Av% rreq. Av% Occur UtilOccur Util Occur Util Occur Util Occur Util Occur Util 6 6 5 5 2 0 1 2 38 6 43 6 58 60 30 0 0 48 4.3 33 0 1 0 7 0 1 90 3 26 2 25 53.0 1 1 2 12.4- 5 12.1 1 4 6 0 0 89 6 6 6 4- 1 0 0 24 5 0 0 39 5 5 5 3 0 0 0 23 6 7 7 30 23 0 2 3 3 5 6 3 0 0 0 4 4 5 20 2 0 6 5 0 0 0 3 3 7 7 0 3 0 5 0 0 2 45 0 0 0 1 0 4 4 3 4 2 2 0 0 75 1 50 20 6 6 6 5 5 1 42 5 6 1 10 1 4 4 6 •• 34.6 6 6 6 4 1 2 4 2 3 59 80 6 6 6 5 4 5 1 50 71 83 84 1 42 0 39 64 1 1 0 0 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 14 13 30 zi 6 3 3 1 3 1 14 8 22 35 0 9 0 1 3 2 20 15 28 24 0 10 0 4 16 4 21 10 14.2 6 6 6 42 3 4 1 4 4 •• 0 14 14 6 4 6 4 4 3 1 1 1 1 0 10 90 0 0 1 0 7 7 7 6 1 3 1 1 5 1 12.7 6 3 3 1 5 2 1 1 28 18 4.7 8.3 9.2 10 7 18 33 10 15 10 0 24 0 0 0 0 38 10 8 0 a 0 0 0 2 49 17 50 9.7 estilllates made Oct. 30 - Nov. 30, 1959 by William T. McKeanfrom six sites in Y Ocular each pasture, each site constituting a circle of approximately 50 root radiu8 y NUlIIberof plots out of' a total. of six in which each species occurred. �-19Table 10. (Continued) FORAGE 8PECIES CattJ..e Sheep P. 5-Deer P.8-Cattle P. 9-5heep P.1 -&beep P.2-CattJ..e P.3-Deer Fraq Av% Freq Av% Freq Av% FreqAv% Freq Av% Freq A"f% Occur Util Occur Util Occur Util Occur Util Occur Utll Occur Ut.U Forb a Irlogonum UlIbellatum 1 Cr,yptantba spp. 4· AnteImaria dimorpha 3 Phlox cusp1 to sa 5 51deran1ihna sp. 2 Opantia sp, 1 Eriogonum tr1st1cham 1 Heucbera parvatolia 1 Lup1mus green11 3 BrigGl"ODspp. 1 GaJ.illll boreale 2 Artemisia !rigiQa 2 Qu. tierrasia sarotbrae 2 Arte1Kisia wrightll 2 Hap10pappus acaul1s 1 ~tstemon caespitosus 2 Astragalus cbamaeluce 1 Achillea lanulosa 2 Lesquerella ap. 2 1 Senecio l1II1tabilis Artemisia dracunculoides 81symbrium al tis sima Corydalis aurea Lepidium mntamua O'el'lOtbera sp, Sphaeralcae cocc1n1a Chry-sops1a v1llosa Weeds unid. Linnm lewisii Cirsium ap. Composite unid. Astragalus diversilol1ua Balsamorrbisa sagittata Agoaeris glauca Asclepius app. Average 10 0 0 35 70 0 Q 0 0, 0 26 415 0 15 Q, 0 Q 0 0 Q'. 4 21 1 6 4 0 0 0 6 5 2 3 1 2 5 3 2 2 5 3 1 5 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 (ill 0 75 0 10 0 4 4 3 1 a 3 4 2 8 ,:0 0 6 8 2 1 1 43 0 12 2 3 0 17 e e 3 4 1 2 2 1 4 0 Q 2 0 0 2 1 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 01 0 4 0, OJ 2 3 3 50 1 2 1 2 5 o 0 0 0 0 0 13 - - 11.0 4 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 7.3 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1.3 0 40 Q; 1 4 4 3 8 1 3 3 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 6 40 0 0 0 3 0 4 3 3 1 a ~ 25 0 0 0 6 6 2 3 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 (It ... 4 2 2 0 15 2 0 - 0 1 0 0 1 2 5 0 1 1 0 0 Q 2 2 1 2 8 5.4 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 50 0 a 5 0 13 0 0 2 1 - 0 13 0 2.) 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 16 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 (j); 0 0 0 0 25 2.7 :3 9.0 �Table 11. Average percent utilisation and frequency of occurrence bY'pasture during browsing bY' deer, winter 195~59. Y FORAGE SPECIES Y Amel.ancbier utahensis Cereocarpos montarms Pnrshia tridentata ChrysotJvmnus viscid,iflorus Clrr)rsotbammJ.snaaseosue Artemisia tridentata Quercus gambe1ii Pinus edulis Juniperus utahensis Symphoricarpos tetonensis Tetradymia canescens lIahonia repfi:lnB Eurotia lana ta. Ribea spp. Epbedra ap. Rhua trilobata Average P.3:uoaerate P.4-Heav.y P.S-UOderate P.&:MOa&rate p.7-Liiht Freq. Occur Av% Freq. Av%Freq. Util Occurut.il. Occur La. 43 7 2 5 57 55 28 78 3 85 2 13 3 5 2 5 5 68 21 20 1 0 5 4 6 5 3 6 4 6 3 1 1 1 1 0 30 80 30 1 69 10 28 25 0 2 }8 1 40 1J.00 Av% Freq. Util Occur Av% Freq. Av% utll Occur uta 6 4 2 4 25 38 40 5 5 2 2 4 22 38 30 34 6 4 5 3 16 32 52 9 3 4 1 6 5 37 19 1 1 0 2 4 1 2 5 2 2 4 70 .3~ 1 3 0 0 17 30 1 1 1 2 1 18 1 5 1 0 a 6 6 5 4 0 2 1 1 30 - 2 27.8 41.0 14.1 22.3 0 15.9 Ocular estimates made during the period April 27 - lIa.Y'; 7, 1959 by" William'!'. Y McKeanfrom six sites in each pasture. Estimates were made of use of grasses and forbs but the amounts were found to '# be so small that they are not included. See similar 1955, also. tables for ,.ears 1950- �-21- Fbotographs: During September CJVer. sixty photographs were taken of all line transects that were not previously photographed by Jlustard (1958). A fflll of the 192 transects set out are not photographab1e because of dense vegetation. Procedures set up by Mustard were followed. Shadowscast across the three foot plot by dense shrubs frequentJ.y made it necessary to return to transects at more advantageous times at day. A large sheet of heavy alumimJmfoil helped reflect light on to the plots in some cases. (See figure two) Small. iron stakes mark corners oi: most of the photo plots. In September the ten meter square quadrats in pasture two were visited with the 1954 photos of eaoh in hand. Pasture two has been the most heavi.ly grased of all pastures, yet it was evident that vegetation within only five 0;[ these quadrats had changed enough to shalf up in new pictures if they had been taken (5 years later). By some coincidence the majority of these quadrats had ;[allen on rather bare sterile sites in the -beginning. Time permitting, more 0;[ the quadrats will be examined in 1960-61. Appropriate file boxes have been purchased for keeping all these pictures and a filing system devised. There is a need for more colored slides and black and white 2x2 slides of the vegetation in the pastures because they can be used in public addresses to greater advantage than can black and white prints. utilization In Excess of Current Year's Growth: Incidental to measuring 14,560 serY'icebeITYstems in the spring of 1959, the crew kept a taJ.ly of stems eaten beyond the current year's growth. 'The results are self explanatory as shownin table 12 below. Table 12. Amount0;[ utilisation on 1.4,560 serY'iceberry stems beyond current year's growth, by pasture-1958-1959. Acres per PASTURE A..B.K. 1. Sheep H 2. Cows H 4. Deer H 10. Control H Total 1.46 1l.16 0.79 ? H equals heavy use. No. stemS Utilized 69 14 1124 926 2133 No stems mil. BeyondCurrent Year I s Growth .Percent 2 0 148 124 2.8 0 13.l. 13.5 274 �-22Forage Production: Segment number three of the P.S.&E. for Work Plan Two"Job One outlined to determine differences between pastures in forage production. The first bree steps pertained to procuriDg aerial. pictures ot the pastures. This has been accompliShed. Wenowhave z 2 sets of staNo pairs ot each pasture (1" to 400 teet) 1 let ot enlargements (1" to 200 teet) 1 set ot "photomapsH(l".to 200 teet) The last item listed is.a set ot photographs produced photogrammetrica.l.q from the ste~ pairs and a topographic map. The process is somewhats1m1lar to that by" which planimetric maps are made. It was decided to purchase these photos rather than the planimetric maps because there is so little change in elevation wi thin one pasture that a planimetric mapwould not show much. All five chain corners in the irid ot each pasture were pin-pointed on each II&p and identified on the back. They are covered by a clear plastic material to help preserve 1ihem • a work procedure designed to att~t. .At1ierthese pic1iures had been s1iudied" it was evident tbat the pasture. could not be type-mapped in the usual sense of the term tor they are au piMDjuniper type. Three distinct sub-types were evident:' sagebrush" bare rock" and pinon- juniper. The impor1ian1iunderstory chaparral was not surrieiently' distinguishable as to species for the stud;r as planned. There are measureable difterences in density (hence production) evident; they are mostly related to exposure and slope or site. Concurrent to this photo study considerable thought and discussion developed amongproject personnel as to the over all pasture project objectives. ,Were they realistic and attainabJ.e in &IIi1 reasonable length of time? Were tne facts thus far obtained useful to management? I1' not, how :mal\rmre years would 'he needed to make them so? The pasture stocking prodedure could and should be improved" and its costs reduced, by some fencing developments and by changing some of the vegetation studies so as to allow more time to stocking work particularly deer. This seemed more urgent than starting a new field studT this yea:r. In so far as the forage production sub-job was concerned, doubts developed. to this effect: There was no assurance that a clearly detined stratification ot rorage production data by vegetative types was a1itainabl.e by the method outlined. Even if it were obtainabl.e would the sampJ.esize be mater1a.1.~ reduced? Because ot 1ihis situation Which developed in July, it was decided not to make a start on the forage production work. In addition" work on sUbjob six (replacing stakes) and re-building deer traps had used up al.lIost all the manpoweravailable for the summer. �Fig. 2 Typical 3x3 foot photo plot astride the tape of a line transect as photographed 3.5 feet from the permanent point of origin stake. Fig. 3. View along part of a transect to 'show the problem o~ threading tape through brush in such a way as to be repeated several years later. Thus far only the intercept of brouse plants along these transects has been measured. �-23............. Recommendations: l. Methods of getting deer into and out of their respective nearly on schedule and at less expense still need improvement. pastures more 2. A person, sympathetic to the project and physically and mentally capable, needs to be hired full time to work on pasture maintenance and keeping records of pasture stocking work. This would free the biologist to plan and execute the vegetation studies and to analyse the data properly. Or, two biologists are needed; they would divide the office work and "Legwo'rk" between themselves as required. 3. and trend A greater amount of time needs to be spent on a study of range condition in each pasture and less time on detailed :study of a few species. Prepared by: Date: William T. McKean Approved by: October, 1960 --------~~~~~~~--------------- Gilbert N. Hunter State GameManager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��October, 1960 -25- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~~~-------------Project No. ~W~-~1~0~1~-R~-~2~ _ Game Range Investigations Work Plan No.__ ~2~ _ Job No. 3 Title of Job: Rodent Effects on Deer Winter Range Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to January 1, 1960 ABSTRACT •• i' -,: A study is being made in southwestern Colorado by the Colorado Game and Fish Department to learn how rodents affect deer winter range in a pinon-juniper type. The study, located in Mesa Verde National Park, is in its fourth year. ThiS, the fourth Job Completion Report for the study, presents the data collected and the results observed to date. Two three-acre plots have been establishedj one is a rodent-proof exclosure, and the other is an unfenced control. Deer have free access to both. Trapping has virtually exterminated small rodents within the exclosure. A rodent census patterned after the North American Census of Small Mammals has been taken annually to determine the rodent population responsible for any observed changes in vegetation resulting from rodent controls. The 1959 catch was comprised of 4 species of small rodents, mostly white-footed mice. Two years of rodent control have had no visible effect on the vegetation. Drowth conditions in 1959 resulted in fewer species and decreased plant density. The reason for other observed changes have yet to be determined. Dead and live browse plants were examined for evidence of rodent, fungus, and termite damage. A deer-pellet weathering study has been started to assist in the aging of pellets. ��-27RODENT EFFECTS ON DEER WINTER RANGE Harold R. Shepherd INTRODUCTION Many winter deer ranges in Colorado are deteriorating. They are often marked by the die-off of woody shrubs and by a scarcity of seedling shrubs. Game biologists have become accustomed to blaming over-use by big game and livestock. However, there is reason to suspect lOodents may be partially resIlonsible. In Mesa Verde National Park, in southwestern C.olorado, it is rellorted that bitterbrush Illants have been found girdled by rodents. Rodent damaged browse Illants have also been found elsewhere in Colorado. It is susIlected that in some areas rodents may be largely responsible for the scarcity of bitterbrush and mountain mahogany seedlings. In any sound Ilrogram o:fgame-range management ,all of the factors contributing to range use and deterioration should be taken into consideration, including the effects of rodents. A study is needed to learn how rodents affect deer winter range. Such a study was begun in August of 1956 in Mes.a Verde National Park. It is expected that several years will be required to complete the study and accomplish its stated objectives. This is the fourth Job C.ompletion Rellort .on the continuing study. It rellorts the Ilrogress made during the Ileriod Allril, 1959 to January, 1960 toward .accorn.:plishment .of the long-term .objectives of the study. Previous reports were published in the July issues of the Quarterly 1'rogress Report of the Federal Aid Division of the C.olorado Game and Fish Dellartment for the years 1957, 1958, and 1959· OBJECTIVES The long-term, over-all objective is to study how rodents affect the composition, ground cover,e:nd repT9ducti:on of'vegetation in a pinon-juniper type deer range, with particular ern.:phasis on browse Illants. The objectives for the period covered by this report are as follows: 1. Collect Illant composition and density data from established line transects. 2. Make photographic records of vegetat.lon from permanent photo stations. 3. Collect deer pellet-groull data from established Ilellet-groullplots. 4. Continue rodent control inside the rodent exclosure. 5. Make a rodent census, using established census traIl lines. 6. In areas surrounding the plots determine the percentage of browse plants killed from girdling by rodents. 7. Make a collection of plants from the vicinity of the study, and press, identify, and mount them to provide an herbarium for pos LbLve identification of plants within the study area. �-28PROCEDURE Line Transects l Plant composition and density data were collected frdm70 permanent line transects, using the Parker-Savage method described in the JViy, 1958 report. ( Pellet-group Data (' Deer pellet-group data -were collected from 70 permanent 1/100 acre plots as in previous year.... In addition, a total count was made of the pellet-groups within the rodent exclosure and the control area. All pellet-groups were marked -with paint for future identification. Rodent Control In order that any rodents might be caught that had gained entrance to the exclosure during the previous fall, winter, and spring, trapping was begun July 1 and continued through July 14. Snap traps were spaced approximately 15 feet apart over the entire 3-acre exclosure. Trapping was done again during the period September 7-19. Bait used--The bait used was a mixture of equal parts of suet, raisins, peanut butter, and paraffin with some DDT to combat bait stealing by insects. Small Mammal Census A small mammal census was conducted within the permanent census area described in the 1959 report. The standard procedures of the Advisory Committee of the North American Census of Small Mammals was followed. Census data wer-e reported to the Committee. Photographic Records Photographs were taken of photo plots as described in previous reports. Plant Collecting Additional plants from Mesa Verde and vicinity were collected and prepared for the study herbarium. Dead Browse Plants Examined In 1958 it was learned that many dead and live browse plants contained a fungus and wit:Ches'-broom. In 1959 additional plants were examined to obtain better infar1Ilationon the inc.idence of fungus and witches '-broom and rodent girdling. The plants examined included 477 bitterbrush, 149 sagebrush, and 19 serviceberry plants. Deer-pellet Weathering Experiment In making a total pellet count of the Control and Exclosure, it was difficult to estimate the age of deer pellets. To aid in the future aging of pellets, a simple study was begun to learn how different site factors affect the weathering of pellets. Very fresh pellet-groups were collected, and these were placed in several different situ.ations. The situations were bare ground in sun, bare ground in shade, on litter in sun, on litter in shade, under litter in sun, under litter in shade, in wash in sun, in wash in shade, on grass in sun, on grass in shade. Three replications for each situation were provided and marked -with a permanent numbered plot stake. Table 4 and Fig. 1 show the location and treatment of the pE111et-groups. Color photographs 'Will be taken to show the effect of age and different site factors on pellet -weathering. �-29RESULTS, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS Line Transect Data Number of Species.--The summary of line transect data for 1959 is shown in Tables 2 and 3. Within the Control Area were recorded 6 species of browse, 5 species of grass, and 12 species of forbs. Within the Exclosure were recorded 6 species of browse, 5 species of grass, and 13 species of forbs. Several species of grasses and forbs recorded in 1957 were not encountered in 1959, presumably because of the drouth. These were Stipa comata, Eriogonum subalpinum, Lomatium simplex, Penstemon comarrhenus, Tragopogon spp., Balsamorhiza sagittata, eirsium plattense, Comandra umbellata, Helianthus nuttalii, Lactuca spp., Malvastrum coccineum, Phacelia heterophyla, and Poa pratense. None of the species absent in 1959 comprised more than 1 p.ercent density in 1957· Percent Density and Composition.--In general, plant density was less for both the Control Area and the Rodent Exclosure in 1959 than in 1957. This, likely, results from the drouth in 1959. Changes in composition and density figures as between the Control and Exclosure have occurred for many plants since the beginning of the study. However, until the study has been conducted for a longer time and the data have been statistically analysed it will be impossible to say if these differences represent real or only apparent differences in the vegetation. Effect of Rodent Control.--AB might be expected, there are no visible changes in the vegetation resulting from two years of rodent control. Deer-use of Control and Exclosure Compared Pellet-group Plots.--Within the Control there was a mean of 6.5 deer pelletgroups per plot with confidence limits of 6.5+1.5 at the .05 level. Within the Exclosure there was a mean of 5.0 deer pellet=groups per plot with confidence limits of 5.0+1.5. From these data it can not be determined if there is a real difference in-the deer-use of the two areas. Total Pellet-group Count.--Because pellet-group plot data indicated that there might be more deer-use of the Control Area than of the Exclosure Area, a total count was made within each. The results of the count are shown in Table 1. These data also indicate slightly greater deer-use within the Control Area. It is suspected that the rodent fence around the Exclosure is lessening the deer-use of that area. Rodent Control Effective Rodents have been virtually eliminated from the Exclosure, and the rodent fence is effective in preventing the entrance of others. This is proven by the fact that during 27 days of trapping with traps spaced 15 feet apart only 7 rodents were caught, whereas 112 were caught outside the exclosure in 3 days with approximately the same number of traps. The rodents caught within the Exclosure were 3 Hopi chipmunks Eutamias quadrivittatus, 3 white-footed mice Peromyscus maniculatus, and 1 True white-footed mouse Peromyscus truei. �-30Small Mammal Census The census was taken on September 3, 4, and 5. The results of the census are shown in Table 5. The kinds and numbers of rodents taken were as follows: whitefooted mouse Peromyscus maniculatus 95, True white-·footed mouse Peromyscus ,truei 13, meadow mouse Microtus mexicanus 1, Hopi chipmund Eutamias quadrivittatus hopiensis 3. In all, 112 small rodents were taken: 77 the first day, 19 the second day, and 16 the third day. The tbtal:'_rodentcatch in 1959 exceeded that of' 1958 by 26 percent. This increase was due to an increase of'Peromyscus maniculatus, three times as many having been taken in 1959 as in the previous year. The number of harvest mice Reithrodontomys megalotis aztecus 'taken declined from 29 in 1958 to none in 1959. Evidence of Rodent, Fungus, and Termite Damage Tables 6, 7, and 8 show the incidence of rodent, fungus, and termite damage to browse plants. No evidence of'rodent girdling was found. Rodent damage to browse plants by girdling does not appear to be an important cause of plant die-off in the study area. As in 1948, many of the plants examined contained fungus mycellia and witches'broom. It remains to be established if the broom is caused by the ~ungus and whether the fungus causes plant die-off. One plant pathologist shown infected plants said he doubted that the fungus was an important cause of plant die-off. Termites or their tunnels were found in the dead wood of many of the plants examined. However, they are not suspected of doing damage to the live plants. RECOMMENDATIONS Build a dummy fence around the Control so tha.t deer will be subjected to the same conditions as in the Exclosure. Subject transect data to statistical analysis to learn if real differences exist in the vegetation within the Control and Exclosure. Collect home-range data for rodents so trap line data can be converted to animals per unit area. Make food habit study of rodents. Have fungus affecting plants examined by experts to learn its name and possible effect on plants. SUMMARY During the summer of' 1959, additional data were collected for a long-term study to learn how rodents affect a pinon-juniper deer range area in Mesa Verde National Park. Two three-acre plots have been established. One is fenced against rodents but not deer. The other is an unfenced control plot. Deer pellet-group counts have determined the comparative use between plots. �-31Intensive trapping has virtually exterminated rodents within the fenced plot. Near the fenced plot, a rodent census patterned after the standard procedures of the North American Census of Small Mammals was run on 3 consecutive days in September. Using 480 kill traps, 112 small rodents were caught. These were comprised of 108 white-footed mice of 2 species, 1 meadow mouse, and 3 chipmunks. The total catch in 1959 exceeded the 1958 catch by 26 percent. Perornyscus maniculatus accounted for the increase, 3 times as many having been taken in 1959 as in the previous year. The number of harvest mice in the catch dec.lined from 29 in 1958 to none in 1959· Presumably because of drouth conditions in 1959, fewer forb and grass species were recorded in 1959 than in 1957, and plant density decreased. Causes for changes in composition and density figures as between the Control and Exclosure which have occurred for many plants since the beginning of the study have not been determined. Two years of rodent control have had no visible effect on the vegetation. Deer-use appears to be heavier in the Control than in the Exclosure. fence will be built to correct the situation. A dummy Dead and live browse plants were examined for evidence of rodent, fungus, and termite damage. No evidence of rodent girdling was found. Many of the plants contained fungus and witches I-broom; however, it is not known if fungus and witches broom contributes to plant die-off. 1- Termites or their tunnels were found in the dead wood of many plants. A deer-pellet weathering pellets. Prepared by: __ Date: study has been started to assist in the aging of .;;:H;.:.a;.:.r..;;o.;:l;.:.d;.....;:..R;... .....;;;S.;;:h;.:e.=:p.;;:h;.:e.;:r..;;d~ Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager October, 1960 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator -------------------~~------------- ��October, 1960 -33JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ---------------------------------- Project No. Work Plan No. W-10l-R-2 3 ----~----------------------- Game Range Investigations Job No.2 Title of Job: The Value of Internode Counts in Determining Browse Utilization Period Covered: October 1, 1959 to March 15, 1960 Objectives: Explore the possibility of determining an index-of-utilization for browse annual stem growth by a comparison of the number of internodes left uneaten with a number typical for the species. Procedure: A search of the literature was continued to learn what has been done of a similar nature, and the proper techniques of staining, embedding, and sectioning were studied. Findings: A sufficient number of stems and buds have been collected over the past few years from different sites and plants for the laboratory part of the study. Laboratory examinations must yet be made of the assembled materials before any results can be stated or conclusions drawn with respect to the objectives of the study. Prepared by: Harold R. Shepherd Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter ----------------~--------State Game Manager October, 1960 Date: ------------------~~------------F. C. K1einschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��October, 1960 -35JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ----------------------------------- Project No. Work Plan No. W~-1~0~1~-~·R~-~2~ 3 _ ----~------------------------- Game Range Investigations Job No.3 Title of Job: Browse Transect Analysis and Application Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Objectivesl To instruct Departmental field employees (Wildlife Conservation Officers, Trappers, and Wardens) in the proper use of available range analysis methods and techniquesj to assist field personnel in the determination of herd size, range carrying capacity, annual forage production, and utilization. The net result is to provide methods whereby big-game season recommendations can be made accurately and reliably by district field personnel. Procedure: Range investigation personnel met with district field personnel and reviewed maps of their respective big-game range areas. Key areas, representative of large tracts of critical game range, were selected within each district. A browse transect (10 plant sample of a key species) was established and permanently marked within the key areas. Annual forage production and subsequent utilization was measured and recorded from each tagged branch. These measurements served as a guide in the determination of production and utilization over a wide area surrounding the browse transect site. Pellet group counts, to determine deer-days use, accompanied each of the established browse transects. Results: Range research personnel met with Regional and District management men during the project year to carry out the objectives outlined in the P.S.&E. Browse production and utilization transects, extensive surveys, and pellet-group counts were made in the following designated areas: Northwest Region: - Transect Area 1. Brown's Park - Cold Spring Mt. 2. White River - Buford Area 3. Douglas Creek Area 4. Little Hills - Dry Fork Area 5· Glade Park Area 6. Colbran Area 7· Aspen - Roaring Fork Area 8. Eagle - Gypsum Area 9· State Bridge - Wolcott Divide Area 10. Kremmling - Middle Park Area No. of Transects 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 4 2 2 �-36Southwest Region: - Transect Area l. Dry Basin Area 2. Rio Grande - Unit No. 68 3· Rio Grande - Unit No. 79 4. Rio Grande - Unit No. 82 No. of Transects 3 2 1 1 The data gathered on these surveys was analyzed by management and research personnel, and formed the basis for the intensive management of spec.Lf'Lc herd and area units. Recommendations: It is recommended that project personnel continue the browse transect analysis, working directly with the Regional and District management men, to further evaluate the potential of this range survey technique. Prepared Date: by: H. M. Boeker and B. D. Baker October, 1960 ------------~--~-------------- Approved by: _---;G.=i.=lb.=..::,er:.t.=.....;N:.:....:.. .....,:H::,;u:::n::..t:.:e:,:r=--_ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �October, 1960 -37JOB Cm,1PLETION REPORI' INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of ~C~o~l~o~r~a~Q~'o~ _ Project No.__ ~I~{-~7~9_-~~_-7~ Job No. ~l~ Period Covered: _ Vlildlife Habitat Improvement Studies T~i~t~le~Study of New and Rare ~'1oodySpecies C~lendar Year 1959 Abstract: Thirty-three different species of trees and shrubs were planted in the seed-germination tests. Over 9,000 seedlings were transplanted on 23 testplots, including Department properties. Potted plants were transplanted as late as September 22, in a test to determine how much the planting season can be extended by this means. To devise propagation methods and study the adaptability to eastern Colorado grovtng conditions, of tree and shrub spec ies offering possibilities of improving y,ildlife habitat. ob.iect.tves : Progress of Horle Germination Studies - Small lots of seed of 18 species and larger lots of 15 others were used in the germination tests this year. Four beds of Juniper scopulorum and several broadleaf species were carried over to test for secondyear germination. Tyro of the 33 spec Les were put in frames under city water, rather than under the nursery irrigation system where the alkaline water had proved to be very detrimental to good germination. These two species-Mahonia fremonti and Ribes leptanthum, Colorado natives--did not get large enough and were held over for next year's potting program. As usual the Caragana and Prunus species showed good results, except for some of the Prunus which were from an eastern seed source and apparently dried too much in storage. The big-seeded Russian olive did very well and will be dug and part of it potted next spring. The same may be said for the roses, grapes and one of the cotoneasters, C. integerrima. �-38___________ Amount Species .;:.:SP:.;:E:.:CIES PLANTED IN 1958 Stratified Planted 6 oz. Halus Columbia 1 oz. Ma'Ius sargentii 1 oz. " sieboldi 3/4 oz. " Zumi yes spring " " 1 oz. Sambuccus neomexicana •• ! lb. Caragana microphylla brevispina " " pekinensis spp . (unknovn ) no 3 oz. 3 oz. 4 oz. •• fair germination poor none-poor seed fair " Exc.-nursery seed " very godd " " " " " " " 2 lb. Prunus armeniaca ansu " melanocarpa vir. (Cheyenne) P. subhirtella ascendens 3/4 oz. pseudocerosus 1 oz~ maximowiczi " 1 lb. 1 oz. II It 11 II " It 11 Remarks " " " " " II " " " " " " fair •• none--poor seed II 11 11 11 II " 11 " 2 oz. Hahonia fremonti " " & fall 11 oz. Cercocarpus ledifolius " " fair 2 yr. seed 8 oz. 8 oz. Rosa altaica Rosa laxa " " " II good very good 1 lb. Rhus cismontana II 11 trace 4 lb. Corylus californica " II none '" very good 9·5 lb. Elaeagnus angustifolia (big seed) 3 oz. " umbellata " " fall 1 oz. Cotoneaster 1 oz. " 2 lb. 12 oz. " 1 lb. " " spring racemiflora soongorica faveolata integerrima multiflora 1 oz. Genista spp. 2 oz. 1 oz. Ribes diacanthus " lepthanthum 1 lb. Aesculus glabra It lb. Vitis beta 2 lb. Juniper utahensis fair trace--eastern " fair none If 11 II II n II 11 11 none 11 " 11 II fair good " II II II " " II & fall none goad none 3yr. old seed �Fig. 1. The autumn olive, Elaeagnus umbellata, as it reaches maturity at the Nursery, attracts more attention. It is about eight feet high, quite dense with branches, spreads low to make a good ground cover, and has bright orange berries quite attractive to wildlife. It fits nicely into the second-from-the-windward side of plantings, replacing its often-used relative, the common Russian olive. Fig. 2. Dwarf peashrub , Caragana pygmea, (right) is doing very well in the San Luis Valley in spite of little or no cultivation, along with common honeysuckle, Lonicera tatarica. The peashrubs had dropped their seed but the honeysuckles were loaded with juicy red berries when this picture was taken in August. �Fig. 3. Russian olives had come back (center) after dying to the ground in a San Luis Valley planting. They are bordered by common peashrub, Caragana arborescens, with slow~growing Western Yellow pines at the left. Fig. 4. Boy Scouts, under the supervision of W.C.O., Sig Palm, planted over 200 potted evergreens and broadleaves at Poudre Ponds in early August. Superintendent Gresh "irrigated them in" and they continued growing even better than in the shadehouse. �The four beds of Juniper scopulorum planted last fall, mu.Lched with sawdust and covered with snowfence-for the wi~ter, began germinating in April. Part of the mulch was removed and the shade replaceJ. Germination was spotty but fair. Damping-off took a few spots where the seedlings were the thickest. The sawdust seemed to inhibit plant growth somewhat. More information should be avad Lab Le on this point next year. Work on the hybrid-rose phase of this project was discontinued except for the collection and use of open-pollinated seed for production of plants for hedgerows and clump plantings where farmers wish them. Sterility was apparent in all plants selected for selfing. ,; I Testplot~ - The nursery-grown seedlings were dug, graded ana stored in March a~d early April. Distribution started immediately afterwards, with over 9,000 plants going to 23 plots, including 8 farms and 10 Department properties. The bed of large pine (2 to 3 feet) transplants was finally put to good use after it was fOlli.d last year that they could be transplanted quite successfully after being heavily pruned. Twenty-seven species---6,083 in tarpaper pots and 3,089 bare-root--were included in this year's distribution. Some of them had been established in pots for two years. One of the more interesting plots started this year was a demonstration planting northeast of Colorado ,Springs in cooperation with the Isaac Walton League of that city. Hhile the area is decidedly marginal, it is believed that an excellent test can be had there of the adaptability of all species used if they can once becoQe established. Very dry weather reduced survival materially this first year but the club is very much interested in the project 80 that ultimately it should prove successful. More plants will be tried as they become available. �-42SPECIES DISTRIBUTED DURING 1959 ____ ~S~p~eci~-_s~ C.~o_mm~o_n __n_am~e B_a_r_·e __-r_o_o_t Amelanchier alnifolia Atriplex canescens Car-agana pygm,::~. Caragana microp~ylla Caryopteris mor.ghoLi.ca Colutea arborescens Cr'at.aegusarnoldiana Crataegus 3ucculenta Elaeagalls commutata Juniperus scopulor'U!!J Malus species Pinus edu.lLs Pinus nigra Pinus ponderosa Prunus hortulana Prunus tomentos? Populus sargentii Rhus canadensis Salix vitellina Shepherdia·arger.tea Sh~pherdia canadensif Symphorica.rpos alb:ls Syringa vu.tgar Ls Syringa villosa Tamarix sp:p Vi tis (beta) Serviceberry Saltbush, rourvtng Dwar-f peashruh Littleleaf p~ashrub Bluebeard Common bladder senna Arnold's hawthorn Fleshy hawthron Silverberry R.U. Redcedar 21 10 212~ 503 100 100 Cr'abapp.Les 235 31 37 85 485 Pinon pine Austrian pine Western Yellow pine 1150 Hortulan plum Hanking cherry Cottonless cottonwood Canadian squawbush 526 San Luis golden willow 112 Silver buffa10berry Russet buffaloberry Cornmon snowberry Common lilac Late lilac Tamarisk 1025 Beta grape (vine) 95 TOTALS . GRAND TOTAL P~o_t_t_e_d _ 76 (B&B) 15 361 258 274 266 128 309 55 291 G083 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9172 �PLOirs RECEIVING TEST SPECIES StateProperties 1959 (10) Sweitzer Lake Poudre Ponds Wray Hat.chery Mount Shavano University Deer Pens Carey Dam Game Farm Bonny Dam Las Animas Hatchery Burcbi'ie1d Lake Forest Service --- cooperative projects Trout Creek Salida District Springfield Plantings Private Farms and Rancbes (8) Deines Siverly Shuler Teets Grimes Harms Kimball Goodwin Sportsmen's Clubs (2) IWL -- Colorado Springs Loveland Sportsmen IS Cltib (3) �-44Numerous comments might be made on m~ species in the test but many of them have already been covered in previous reports. New findings will be withheld for later reports. Special mention should be made of four or five plantings in the southern part of the'San Luis Valley. On one place-------Anderson's near Jarosa-- the "first pheasants in years" were seen this year and interest is increasing for more cover. The dwarf caragana and honeysuckles have done very well, some crabapples winter-killed but have "sprouted from the roots," and most of the Russion olives have made good growth in spite of an extended drouth. Since the trees have gained a reasonable height the farmers in that region report quite a number of doves, and an apparent increase from year to year. Prep~red bY: Date: G~le~nn~~Ki~'n~g~h~o~r~'n~ Approved by: October, 1960 -----------~~~~~~~---------- Gilbert N. Hunter State Game ManagerF. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �October, 1960 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVE'STlGATEHS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------------------------------- Project No. W-79-R-7 Wildlife Habitat Improvement Studies ----~~~~------------- Job No. ~2~ Period Covered: Title Study Various Herbaceous Species Calendar Year 1959 Abstract: Seven hundred twenty clones (720) of grasses and fifty pounds of legume seed wer-e distributed to 16 plots. Two grass increase plots were started. Objectives: Study propagation methods and adaptability of prom~s~ng species for Colorado, especially their values for wildlife, as food, nesting and escape cover. Progress of vlork: Calls have increased for several of the grasses being tested at the nursery so increase plots were started for pampas and elephant grasses which were described quite fully in the 1958 report. The strain of pampas grass at the nursery does not produce seed so must be started from cloneG. The elephant grass seed, however, comes quite readily when fall-planted and kept on the moist side during germination. It is such a vigorous grower that it should not be allowed to get a start where not wanted. By planting clones the farmers are far more certain of getting established plantings and seem to prefer that method. The bybrid crested wheat plot attracts quite a bit of attention since it is located just vest of the nursery building. More and more calls are had for "starts"but most are for clumps rather than seed. Only 20 lb. of Astragalus cicer seed were distributed, two 10-lb. lots, to Department properties, while 600 lb. were harvested from the nursery seedplot. The combine method was used again with very good results. Distribution of grasses and legumes during 1959 Has as follows: Plots Elephant grass .Volga rye " Pampas grass Hybrid Crestedwheat Periisetum purpureum Elymus giganteus Cortaderia sellona Agropyron cristatum Milkvetch Sweetclover Plots -2Astragalus cicer ~elilotus officinalis 1 Prepared by: Date: Glenn Kinghorn 1 3 5 4 Approved by: October, 1960 --------~~~~~~----------- Clones 50 100 320 250 Seed (n..) 20 30 Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��October, l.96O JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of ~C~o~l~o~r~a~d~o Project No. U-79-R-7 Job No. 5 Period Covered: _ : Wildlife Habitat Improvement Studies Test Various Methods of Establishing Evergreens and Broadleaf Species for Year-round Transplanting. Calendar Year 1959 Abstract: Losses in potting evergreens ran to almost 50% but were almost nil with broadleaves. Plantings were made all summer long with apparent success. Modifications wer-e started on potting equipment after observing results of others. Ob.iec t.Lve s : To simplify handling and guarantee better survival of those plants which have proved difficult to establish in field plantings. Progress of Hork: Excellent results were had with potting broadleaf species in the spring of 1959 but the two evergreens did not respond. Losses were almost 50% with both the Pinus edulis (shipped in from the midwest) and with the Juniperus scopulorum (purchased from the State Forester and produced at the Halsey Nursery of the Forest Service). Such losses might be attributed to any of several causes, but it is believed that fall digging plus winter storage and other handling methods prior to their delivery to the Department nursery and handling methods after arriving at the nursery might also be included would account for most of the failure to survive. In contrast with that experience is the fact that the few nursery-grown plants vht ch were hand-dug and potted within an hour or two showed practically 100% survival. The use of about 20% old aawdus t in the potting mixture in place of more peatmoss seemed to give just as good results. The mixture used was 2 parts each of soil (somewhat sterile since it is excavation soil from the nursery building site) and peatmoss and 1 part old sawdust. The sawdust was hauled during the sunwer from an old sawmill site on the State Forest west of Fort Collins. In addition to its use in the mixture, it is also used as a mulch on seedbeds, around pots in the winter and otherwise to replace the more expensive shingletoe. Three moderate applications of liquid fertilizer seemed to keep the plants in better condition throughout the summer months than two heavier treatments. Combinations of 20-30-10 in two different brands were almost identical in results---at least to the naked eye---and were much easier and cheaper to apply than the old method of mixing the different chemicals separately for spraying. No foliage burning was in evidence at any time. One corner of one frame did suffer a slight loss from a draft of spray of amine triazole used to control perennial weeds outside the frame. The broadleaf species---5,122 of 10 kinds---were potted in late March and the evergreens---5,626 of 2 kinds---were potted in May. All were placed in frames in the shadehouse immediately and spray-irrigated within a few days. �-48- . i~terials Potted in 1959 Pinus edulis Pinon pine 498 Juniperus scopulorum R.M. Red cedar 5170 Prunus besseyi Sandcherry 1017 Rhus canadensis Canadian Squawbush 1104 Prunus fruiticosa Ground cherry 219 Syrinl1a villosa Late lilac 203 Shepherdia canadensis Russet buffaloberry 526 Crataegus succulenta Succulent hawthorn 521 Vitis beta Beta grape (RC) 141 Caragana microphylla Littleleaf peashrub 847 Caragana pygmea Dwarf peashrub 420 Atriplex canescens Fourwing saltbush 124 5,122 Total 10,790 5,668 Some of the potted plants were distributed during the late summer and early autumn, as shown in Job 1. As mentioned in that report, a planting was made as late as September 22 at an elevation of approximately 7,000 feet, and several others in August at Lover elevations. Without any publicity at all, interest seems to be growing in summer and fall planting since the potted materials are available. To lengthen the planting season, with broadleaves or evergreens, or both, is enabling farmers to "fill in" or start new plantings when they are the least busy with regular farm work. Having growing plants with which to work adds an extra incentive, even to many house~nves, to give them better care. Later plantings are also made when the early spring weeds have been destroyed and care is much easier .. The important factor, however, is the improvement in survival. Almost all planters report practically 100% saved. Especially is this true with the evergreens, as compared with 50 to 90% losses common with bare-root plantings. The slight extra cost for potting and establishing under shade for a few months is proving to be a great saving "for the long pull." As for costs, no definite figures were kept of this spring's work but they undoubtedly were about the same as in previous years when the hand machines were used---about 8¢ per pot, including everything except use of equipment and plants. This cost, of course, varies greatly with species used, but the fact that smaller plants can and should be used for potting results in a considerable �-49saving over costs of larger bare-root stock . . . . . . and the growing plants take off easier since they have their full root systems intact when they are transplanted to the field. Modifications of potting equipment by Al Foster of Kroh Bros. Nursery in Loveland, and John Ellis, nurseryman for the State Forest Nursery, were watched with great interest. Both have made quite radical changes from the hand-operated machines and in quite different directions. Foster developed a continuous-belt design with which he potted over 200,000 rooted cuttings for the Air Force Academy. He still does much of the packing of soil around the roots by hand. His machine is over 8 feet long, requiring 9 and 10 operators. The Ellis machine uses compressed air for packing (3 pots at a .time) and a system of conveyor belts for moving (by hand) trays containing 3 pots around the assembly line. The project leader and nursery foreman have studied both methods and done considerable planning (on paper) with the goal of combining the best of both methods, with some new ideas of their own gleaned from experiences at the nursery. They are in the process of developing a shorter (about 6 feet) machine, consisting of a motor-driven pair of continuous chains carrying the pot-forming clamps with the continuous belt passing under a spring-activated plunger to pack the soil and close the pot at the same time. Side-clinching hand staplers will be used to bind the pots. It is anticipated that six workers will operate the machine, with a soil tender and one person to keep staplers filled, take away pots and otherwise act as handyman. Special boxes will be secured to hold about 25 pots each to facilitate handling and transportation to the shadehouse frames. Complete details and a reporc of the first-year's operation with the new "machine" will be given in next year's report. Foster estimates his costs were about 4.6¢ per pot and Ellis says "under a nickle." If a more compact piece of equipment can be built which will require less workers and eliminate more of the hand work, especially the packing, it is believed the overall cost of potted plants for field planting can be reduced to a figure justifying their use for a larger part of all habitat development. Miscellaneous: "Extra curricular" activities of the project leader and foreman during the year included considerable nursery and building maintenance and repair, gravelling several of the roads at the nursery, overhauling the equipment during the winter months, installing a misting system in the refrigerated storage, planning and preparing materials for a large gamemanagement exhibit in the conservation section of the Boy Scouts Jamboree at Colorado Springs (for which they were transferred to another salary budget for several weeks), attending the Training School at Lowery Field, and the Safety School in Fort Collins. Prepared by: Glenn Kinghorn Date: ~O~c~t~o~b~e~r~,~19~6~o~ Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager _ F. C. Kleinscbnitz Asst. Coordinator ��Oatober, 1960 JOB COMPLET ION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of Colorado ----------------------------- Project No. vlork Plan No. H-96-D-5 1 ------------------------ Wild Turkey Development Job No.3 Title of Job: Location of Transplanting Sites Period Covered: July 1, 1960 to September 30, 1960 Introduction: The following are specific data reports on the location of transplanting areas for the year 1960-61. Examination of these various areas started in July by making a trip with ~l.C .0. Dudley Jerome. At this time we covered the entire Pinon Mesa area. On this trip we covered Pinon Mesa, the Fruita Reservoir area, coming down by Beezer Creek, 2-V Creek, and the Little Dolores area. It had been hoped that further transplants of turkeys might be made on Beezer and 2-V Creek. However, reports from sheepherders within the area showed that large flocks of turkeys had concentrated within part of the Beezer and 2-V creek areas and wintered there. This was evidenced by the fact that in several large groups of tall pinons and cedars turkeys had left evidence of haVing wintered within the area in the form of copious amounts of droppings under these trees. At times these measured as much as 15 inches in depth. It is the opinion of Mr. Jerome that we did not need a further stocking of birds within this area. In fact, he was about ready to open a season which could not be opened for two more years under the Federal Aid Program. Foods were so very apparent a year ago that evidently the turkeys concentrated within the pinon area. This present year has been beset by drought which mw{es a winter feeding problem that we did not have a year ago. In fact, an examination of the Hest Salt Wash area did not give too much information. The technical report for the "'est Salt Wash area will be found in Federal Aid Quarterly for October, 1956. However, there have been turkey tracks noted in the general area where the release was made last year. During this particular summer both the man who had this area for range and his son passed away. Just what effect this vill have on further turkey development is still open to some question. However, most of the ranchers within these given areas have been very cooperative. Mr. Jerome still feels that a strer#hening plant within the area would be valuable. The area is suffiCiently large that it would support from 200 to 500 turkeys under normal conditions and, of course, the strengthening plant would assist in filling the area that much faster. He believe that a plant should be made in this area if at all possible this year. �-52Areas examined that had been recommended for wild turkey plants: Area 1 - Paonia District (Landis Peak area) This area lying approximately 6 miles south81d west of the town of Paonia, was recommended for .Tild turkey plants by U.C .0. Gayle Boyd. This was recommended on what is known as Minnesota Creek. However, in checking the maps the creek draining this immediate area is Reynolds Creek. It is at the extreme foot of Lamborn Mountain. This land lying within the bounds of R. 6 W., T. 14 S., Sec. 27, 34, and 35. The original survey of this area came in late July. The bulk of thls land was privately owned and while the owner would be perfectly wil.ling to cooperate in the wild turkey program this examination showed that this area was completely unsuited to any turkey development. Water was plentiful but this year they had sprayed all the shrubs within the given area for the purpose of killing them back, and,of course, this destroyed any possibility of reproduction of food for turkey development. The areas covered in the lower area has 60~ sage, Artemisia tridentata, 25% cedar, mostly Juniperus mono sperma Spa While areas are covered with 40~ serviceberry, Amelanchier spp., and oak, Quercus spp., balance is mixed sage, forbes, etc. There are practically no roosting sites in this area and for too much open country for good turkey development. Area 2 - Paonia Town Springs The same day a further area was examined within this same general area. This is known as the Land's End Peak area. It lies on Bell Creek and is just a little south and west of the town of Paonia. It is not more than l~ miles from Area 1 on Lamborn Peak, R. 6 W., T. 15 S., Sec. 4 and 9. Art Rogers and others stated that the area had supported some 21 turkeys that stayed near the large springs that were used for Paonia city water from 1949-51. It was felt that during the winter of 1951-52, which had been extremely severe and a heavy .drought in the summer of 1951, had prevented development of the proper food and was the cause of these birds leaving but it is still felt that the area could support a fair number of turkeys if properly cared for. This special care was assured from numbers of citizens within the community. Requirements of location of transplanting sites: A. Food factors: 1. Types Available. In the physical examination of this particular area the following facts are noted concerning foods available. Hillside brush types: - Oak - Quercus SPa - 6o~ - Cedar - Juniperus sp. - 15% - Serviceberry - Amelanchier Spa - 15% Draws: - Rose - Rosa ~. - Quakie - Populus tremulodes Spa - Hawthorne - Craetaegus Spa - Snovber-ry - SymphoricarPOs sp. �PROIYI R R R.£ R R- t,.'v/. I I 1 \\ 1 1\ ~------------Is~\~------~I------~--------------~--------------~~='~--------~~------------~~.14. \\ \ r I , I I ' II ~Isl \ II ,JO"ORSS < I l �-54Herbaceous species: 2. - Native bluegrass ~ Poa ~. - Crested wheat - introduced - Forbes - Heeds and other general understory types Amount of Food Available Under normal conditions there would be plenty of food to support a good development of turkeys within this given area. However, during this present year foods are extremely short and feeding by hand.would be necessary for the first year, and, of course, this would need to be planned ahead before plants are made. It should be noted that under normal conditions areas close by have done extremely well when planted within these general ranges. B. Extent or size of proposed area: This area is of sufficient extent to support a fairly large development of turkeys. C. Water factors within area: This area is supported by Bell Creek and the Paonia Springs area which means that water in the form of springs is available for birds at all times during the year. D. Predator factors: A heavy trapping program by government trappers within this area have reduced the threat of any available predators, which, of course, leaves this area open and desirable for the development of wild turkeys. E. Land ownership: The land ownership within the area is approximately 60% private land, the balance is city property which is constantly cared for by city water commissioner and would be protected against encroachment. F. Elevation of area - Approximately 7000 ft.: Amount of south facing slope - most of this area has south and east slope but is open for most of the winter clear to the foot of these peaks. G. Roosting sites: There are considerable amounts of large pinons, spruces, cottonwoods, and other roosting trees to support the birds within this area for any development. H. Nestine cover: Nesting cover is plentiful with much Small brush and many areas that are well protected for the birds to nest in. I. Escape cover: Escape cover is available over most of the area in the form of rather large oaks, cedars and pinons. J. Water factor other than moisture factor: In normal years there is a lot of available moisture both in the form of rain and snow during winter and, of course, the large amount of moisture supplied by the town springs which have an overflow in the Bell Creek provide year around water for wild turkey development. �-55... Recommendations: It is recommended that this area receive a good plant of turkeys this year if the birds are available. Because of the present short food factor, some foods would need to be provided for first year's wintering needs. Most years this would not prove to be true. Evidences shown in the physical examination of this area indicate that there are large crops of berries, grasses, etc. which would be sufficient for a fairly good development of turkeys. Area 3 This area known as the Hallace Creelc Area lies south and west of Grand Valley 6 miles. The geographical location is-R. 95 w., T. 8 & 9 S., Sec. 27,28, 33, and 34, lying south of the Colorado River and nearly directly south of Grand Valley and on the foot of Battlement Mesa. General types in the area,south facing slopes are principally Mono sperma juniper with a small sprinkling of pinon and general underbrush type. North slopes are heavy brush with mountain brush types. (See range evaluation on another page). The draws are filled with cottonwoods, some alder, heavy rose, snowberry, and serviceberry thickets. Oak and serviceberry are the predominating cover type and there are some quakie aspen in the upper draws. General Food and Type Evaluations A. Food factors: 1. General type - Oak and Serviceberry Top slopes - Juniper - Juniperus monosperma Pinon - Pinlls edulis sp. 2. Top north mountain slope range type Oak - Quercus gambeli sp. Mountain mahogany - Cercocarpus Serviceberry - Amelcnchier sp. Chokecherry - Prunus sp. Rose - Rosa sp. Snowberry - Symphoricarpos sp. Thornapple - Crataegus sp. sp. mentanus sp. 3. Bottom Cover Cottonwood - Populus sp. Chokecherry - Prunus sp. Rose - Rosa sp. Snowberry - Symphoricarpos sp. Thornapple - Crataegus sp. 4. Ground Cover Native grasses generally Native bluegrass - Poa sp. Needle grass - Stipa sp. Introduced grasses-: Crested wheat and bluegrass species Forbes and native weeds that grow with this type cover �WRL LAC£. c REEK R·Q5 vJ· 13 2+ 25 ;' 5 r -2.--I I I I / 1/ �-57Amount of food available - Foods generally within this area are abundant in normal years. The present year drought has caused foods to be short. Normally the amount of food available would be sufficient for a considerable development of wild turkeys within this area. B. Extent or size of proposed area This area lying adjacent to presently occupied area seemed to indicate that the extent of the area is sufficient to carry a flock of from 200 to 400 or 500 birds. C. Water factors At the point of release there are 3 or 4 ponds on Wallace Creek that would supply the turkey's needs any time of the year. Further back on Sugar Loaf Mountain on Battlement Mesa there are large springs' that have been dug out for stock and would supply the turkeys' needs during summer range. This makes two types of water available, springs and stream water. D. Predator factors A heavy trapping program carried on by stock men within this area in recent years has nearly eliminated the principal predators that would cause us any trouble. For this reason predator factors are not important. E. Land ownership This area is about 50% under private ownership who are favorable to the development of wild turkeys within the area. Balance of the land is owned part by Forest Service and partly by B.L.M., both of which, of course, are favorable to the development of wild turkeys. F. Elevation The elevation of this area is between' 6500 ft. and 7000 ft. Approximately 1/3 of the area is south faCing slopes which are conducive to good turkey development. G. Roosting sites Many of the important roosting sites are in the draws and in the form of cottonwoods; However, in pockets on the south. facing slopes there are some large junipers and pinon trees which would be valuable and sufficient to cover our needs. H. Nesting cover Because of the lay of the land nesting cover types are abundant. There are a number of excellent places for nesting and because of the fact that most of the land is used only for cattle pasture there would be very little disturbance in any nesting activities during the early spring. 1. Escape cover factors Escape cover in the form of oaka, quakies, cottonwoods, etc. are abundant Some of the orues are as much as 30 ft. high in this area everywhere. which would make excellent escape cover for ground predators. �-58J. l-1eatherand Moisture factors In normal years this area would supply an abundant amount of moisture. There is always heavy snow cover in the upper ranges of this area in winter and because the top slopes are faCing north this holds a considerable amount of moisture and the small streams run all year through. For this reason it makes an excellent pasture land and is ideally suited to the development of wild turkeys. It is recommended that at least one plant of turkeys be made in this area this year if possible. This would tie up much of the area from the Mam Creek and Divide Creek areas and fill in the balance of the range that is suitable within this given area. Area 4 Some turkey feathers were found by W.C.O. Marion Lowry on an area known as Horsethief flat, the area almost directly south of De Beque. Because of this I thought that perhaps it might be a development area that could be used for wild turkeys. Going over this area in late July or early August, it was found that there were actually thousands of acres of sagebrush land bordered on the east by narrow strips of Monosperma junipers. The area is extremely dry and on the hillsides leading down to the water supply the only available food would have been in the form of Atriplex type in the form of Four-wing saltbrush and shadescale. In this examination check of the area it was found to be completely unsuited for the development of turkeys and for this reason is not recommended in this checkup. Area 5 West MaID Creek area lying directly south of the town of Rifle approximately 10 miles. This area lies within R. 93 W., T. 7 S., Sec. 20, 21, 28, and 29, and includes considerable range surrounding these sections. This area, composed primarily of the West Mam Creek baSin, contains desirable slopes in respect to exposure during winter time. Since the West Mam Creek runs generally west in the proposed release area, considerable south-facing slopes are found along the north side of this drainage. Vegetation on the southfacing slopes consists primarily of serviceberry and oak, with scattered juniper and an occasional pinon in the lower areas. North-facing and eastfaCing slopes of the basin are composed again of serviceberry and oak, primarily, giving way to aspen and spruce higher up. Snowberry is abundant in the baSin, along with numerous native forbs and grasses. The main creek bottom contains numerous cottonwoods, roses, snowberry, buffalober~J, and serviceberry thickets. Although the general cover within the basin is oak and serviceberry, open areas throughout these covers would seem to create ideal cover for wild turkey. �I. '.,•.. 2 4 I •..•.. - •.•. ~-----.. 18 8 - .. ---- ..--. , , \ \ {& I 7 I 6- ,, 1, \ \ /3 , r. 7.-s. ,--~-I I I I J -, \, \ '1 eo \ 81 34 FOREST 25 ~I 32 �-60General Food and Type Evaluations A. Food factors: 1. General type - Oak and Serviceberry with considerable 2. snowber-ry Specific types on slopes Oak - Quercus gambelii sp. - no food during winter of 1960-61 Mountain mahogany - Cercocarpus sp. Serviceberry - Amelanchier sp. - no foed during winter of 1960-61 Chokecherry (limited) - Prunus sp. Rose - Rosa sp. - good food crop during winter of 1960-61 Snowberry-{common to abundant) - Symphoricarpos sp. - some berries during inspection trip 10-21-60 Thornapple - Crataegus sp. - limited Buffaloberry - Sheperdia sp. - limited 3. Bottom cover Cottonwood - Populus sp. - sufficient age to provide desirable roosting sites Chokecherry - Prunus sp. - scme Rose - Rosa sp. - plentiful Snowberry - Symphoricarpos sp. - plentiful Thornapple - CrataeGus sp. -limit' 4. Ground cover Native grasses and forbs Native bluegrass - Poa sp. Bromes - Bromus sp.--Wheatgrasses - Agropyron sp. Unidentified forbs Amount of food available - Food generally short during the fall and winter of 1960-61. Some snowberry and considerable rose hips. No acorns or snowQerry. Other berries generally lacking. B. Extent or size of proposed area This area lying adjacent to presently occupied range in the Divide Creek drainage. Range could cover perhaps two townships or more and support several hundred wild turkeys. C. Water factors At the point of release there is running water in West Mam Creek, as well as water in several ponds used to hold domestic water supply for the Vaughn Cameron dairy farm. Springs and tributaries to West Mam Creek insure ample water for wild turkeys, even during the driest years. D. Predator factors Although common predators such as bobcats, some skunks, and perhaps coyotes and foxes occur in the West Mam Creek basin, predator populations are such that they should not be detrimental to wild turkey development. �-61E. Land Ownership This area is within the National Forest primarily. Private land below the forest boundary and interspersed within forest lands is owned by individuals who are favorable to a release of wild turkeys. B.L.M. lands below the forest boundaries are favorable for wild turkey development. F. Elevation Between 6,000 and 7,500 feet. Approximately 1/3 of the area (north side of the basin) is south-facing slopes which should be open and suitable for turkeys during normal winters. G. Roosting sites Mature cottonwoods along the main creek comprise the major sources of roosting sites. Scattered junipers and spruce trees at lower elevations should provide turkeys with additional roosting areas. H. Nesting cover Numerous, good nesting sites. Area primarily cattle range. I. Escape cover abundant escape cover of high quality. Oak and serviceberry thickets would provide suitable escape cover throughout the area. J. Weather and Moisture factors Sufficient moisture during normal years should provide an abundance and variety of berries and acorns, which would support sizeable flocks of turkeys. It is recommended that one group of wild turkeys be released within the area described above during the fall or winter of 1960-61. Development within this area would extend the Divide Creek turkey range to the west and perhaps would tie in with wild turkeys which are to be released within the Wallace Creek area. Other proposed transplant sites are Hest Salt Wash, Garfield County - reports dated October, 1957 an~ January, 1959j Pinon Mesa - Beezer Creek near Glade Park, Mesa County - reports dated October, 1957 and January, 1959; Pinon Mesa 2V Creek near Little Dolores River, Mesa County - report dated January, 1959. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Date: October, 1960 Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��October, 1960 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS , , State of COLORADO ------~~~~~--------------An Ecological Investigation of the Project No. W-105-R-l --------~--------------------~ Cache la Poudre Deer Herd, Colorado Work Plan No.__ l~ __ : Job No.2 Title of Jobz History of the Cache la Poudre Deer Herd Period Covered: July 15, 1959 to June 30, 1960 Objective~ To assemble available historical information on the Cache la Poudre deer herd. Procedures: Information from1 1. 2. 3. 4. Library research. Game and Fish Department records and files. U. S. Forest Service and other governmental agency recordS and files. Interviews with federal and state agency personnel. Prepared by:__~D~e~an~_E_.~M~e~d~i~n~ Date: Approved by: October, 1960 ----------~~~~~~~----------- G. N. Hun.t~~e~r~ State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator _ ��-65THE CACHE LA POlJ"DREDEER HERD A Historical Review Dean E. Medin INTRODUCTION In the early 1940's Colorado deer ranges were subdivided into management units. Boundaries were defined, insofar as possible, by individual deer herds. This report is a historical review of the Poudre River deer herd, marked on Colorado's big game regulations as Game Management Unit 19. The herd occupies a range of approximately 576 square miles on the east slope of the Rocky Mountains in Larimer County, Colorado. The herd name is derived from the Cache la Poudre River which drains from the rugged alpine of the Front Range to the west down through the forest zones and browse-covered foothills to the shortgrass prairie some 60 miles to the east. Lying for the most part within the Roosevelt National Forest, the herd range is defined by the Front Range divide to the west, the break between mountain and prairie to the east, the Poudre-Big Thomson drainage divide to the south, and the Redfeather road to the north. The deer, which are classified as Rocky Mountain mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus hemionus), summer in the forested zones at the higher elevations and move down to the valleys and open south slopes of the foothills in winter. In compiling this review reliance has been placed entirely on records, reports, published works, and other printed material. As with most written history, information is incomplete and contradictions frequently occur. Although primarily a review of deer history in the Poudre River drainage, reference to pertinent records from other locations in and about Larimer County are included. INDIANS Previous to the occupation of ColoradQ by the whites, the Arapahoe and Cheyenne Indians held almost complete dominion over the foothill and plains country to the east of the mountains. The Utes claimed the whole mountain area and the western slope (Watrous, 1911). The Arapahoes are supposed, at a remote period, to have lived near the Great Lakes and to have engaged in agriculture before adopting the nomadic existence of the plains. The Cheyennes were living in settled towns and growing crops on the Cheyenne River of South Dakota long after the first Spaniards entered Colorado. Before 1800 the Cheyennes moved southwestward and united with the Arapahoes. Both nations were bitter enemies of the mountain dwelling Utes to the west (Hafen, 1933). The Cache la Poudre Valley seems to have been the favorite hunting grounds of the Arapahoes and Cheyennes. They spent a good part of the hunting season along the river and their tepees were familiar sights to the early explorers and emigrants. Camping grounds were on both sides of the river near the mouth of Boxelder Creek and at or near Laporte (Watrous, 1911). �-66Meat was the chief food of the Arapahoe. The vast buffalo herds provided the principal supply, but antelope, deer, elk, rabbits, and other game were hunted also. These secondary game animals were used more by the Utes than by the plains Indians (Hafen and Hafen, 1944). According to Steinel (1926) rrThereis no record of universal famine among the Plains Indians . . . Everything favors the conclusion that the physical vigor of these tribes was due mainly to a diet of meat, which did not fail them until the white man invaded their haunts.rr Deer were killed primarily with the bow and arrow using stalking and still hunting techniques. Drives, rrVrr-traps,and other devices were sometimes used (Hafen, 1933). Hilger (1952) records that deer afforded clothing, ornaments, and implements for the Arapahoe. Spencer (1930) doubts that the combined number of Cheyennes and Arapahoes at anyone time exceeded two thousand. With buffalo as the chief sustenance, this sparse population, roving over the plains and foothills from the Arkansas to the Poudre, probably had little or no direct effect on deer numbers. EXPLORATION AND FUR TRAPPING Probably the first white men to visit Larimer County were Spanish explorers arriving in the early 18th century (Watrous, 1911). These expeditions were in search of gold and, unfortunately, little reference is made to the natural history of the region. The earliest written records containing inf0rmation on game abundance in the Poudre River area are supplied by American explorers and fur trappers. During the winter of 1825, the Ashley-Smith expedition progressed from the Plains up the Poudre Valley. Beginning the 26th of February Ashley reported in his diary: "Al.bhough the last ten days had been pleasant weather partly accompanied with warm suns, the scene around us was pretty much the same as when we arrived, everything being enveloped in one mass of snow and ice, but, as my business required a violent effort to accomplish its object, notwithstanding the mountains seemed to bid defiance to my further progress, things were made ready, and on the 26th we commenced the doubtful undertaking.232/ Our passage across the first range of mountains, which was exceedingly difficult and dangerous, employed us three days, after which the country presented a different aspect. Instead of finding the mountains more rugged as I advanced towards their summit and everything in their bosom frozen and torpid, affording nothing on which an animal could possibly subSist, they assumed quite an altered character. The ascent of the hills (for they do not deserve the name of mountains) was so gradual as to cause but little fatigue in traveling over them. The valleys and south sides of the hills were but partially covered with snow, and the latter presented already in a slight degree the verdure of spring, while the former were filled with numerous herds of buffaloes, deer, and antelope." (Dale, 1941). On the 20th of September, 1839, E. Willard Smith enters in his diary ", .. Messrs. Thompson and Craig went l1efore us and killed three buffaloes. Before this we had plenty of fat venison. In the afternoon they killed two deer. At night it was quite cold and frosty. Apparently the expedition was follOwing the route of U. S. Highway 287, northwest of Fort Collins (Hafen and Hafen, 1955). II Ashley is the first white man, so far as is known, to undertake the crOSSing of the Front Range near this latitude. �Independent trappers operated on the Poudre during the early years of the 19th century as beaver abounded and buffalo, bear, deer, and antelope were plentiful on the adjacent plains. These trappers had practically disappeared when Fremont passed through the county on his second expedition in 1843 (Watrous, 1911). While exploring Poudre Canyon, Fremont records for the 29th of July fr•..the stream was wooded with cottonwood, box elder, and cherry, with currant and serviceberry bushes. .• and at night the hunters came in with a fine deer. If Elevation of this camp was 5,540 feet (Fremont, 1845). Rufus Sage in his frScenes in the Rocky Mountainslf gives us several clues to the early abundance of deer. OnSeptember 30th, 1843 he wrote: fr...I raised camp and proceeded for ten or twelve miles, through a broad opening between two mountain ridges, bearing a northwesterly direction, to a large valley skirting a tributary of ThompsonJs Creek, where, finding an abundance of deer, I passed the interval till my return to the Fort. 2771 MY hunting was confined principally to black-tailed deer. These animals are much larger than others of the genus cervi, and their flesh is of a superior flavor. Their habits are similar to those of the wild sheep, leading them constantly to seek the regions of spring; in the winter, descending to the valleys, and in the summer, keeping pace with the melt ..• ing snows upon the mountain-sides." (Hafen and Hafen, 1956). In January, 1844, camped near Golden on Clear Creek, Sage mentions "enjoying full scope for my trusty rifle among the vast quantities of deer which showed themselves in every direction ..." (Hafen and Hafen, 1956). Sage's record gives us our first indication of the migratory habits of the deer. Further documentation of seasonal movement is supplied by Drannon (1900) who spent the winter of 1849-1850 trapping on the Poudre with Kit Carson. According to Drannon they had "..~good success trapping this winter, until about the first of January, when we had an unusual heavy fall of snow in the mountains which droVe all the game to the lowlands, nothing being left that was fit for meat except a few mountain sheep ..•" A trip up the Poudre River in 1852 by J. R. Todd and other travelers while crossing the continent offers further evidence as to early game abundance. He relates that frtothe travelers the Poudre Valley appeared to be the hunters para';;' d.Lse ... game was plentiful, herds of buffalo were seen upon the plains, as well as deer, elk and antelope." (Watrous, 1911). These early records would seem to establish: (1) that deer were abundant, both in the mountains and on the plains (at least the plains proximate to the mountains), (2) that the deer were subject to seasonal elevational movements, (3) that during the mountain Winters, deer concentrated in the valleys and open slopes, and (4) all of the deer did not move to high elevations during the summer period. With the exception of the apparent abundance of deer on the plains, the same things could be relat.ed of the deer inhabiting the region today. He was in the region of Estes Park, favorite summer resort of today. �-68SETTLEMENT First settlement in the region, about 1858, began a period of impact on game populations and drastic changes in the country. The settler turned to the forest and prairie for what economic values he could find. Timber and grazing resources "Qegan a period of exploitation. Wild animals, including deer, provided the chief source of food in the early years and were of primary importance to the economy of the era. Settlement leaves a record of early game abundance and the beginning of the decline. Game Abundance.--An entry by Watrous (1911) suggests the abundance of deer during early settlement: "Baker , Strauss, Bob Lawrence and a man named Brown hunted during the winter of 1860-61 in the mountains north of Livermore, their camp being on what is now known as the Halligan Ranch on the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River. They also camped for a time where the late Harry Gilpin-Brown's residence now stands on the Lone Pine. Deer and mountain sheep were plentiful in those days, each o~ the hunters killing two wagon loads of game which they marketed in Denver." Numerous authors have recorded the period of plenty and quotes such as the following by Davis (1918) are common: "Some of the boys went hunting and brought in three deer ... found game very plentiful." {Near headwaters of Cherry Creek in 18501. Duncan (n.d.) reminds us of the abundance of deer, elk, and antelope in the Poudre Valley in 1860. In the late fall of 1866 J. S. Hoy enters an interesting note giving some insight to the habits of the deer and the part they played in the local economy: "During our first day's travel Lnear Virginia Dale Creey' we crossed numerous trails made by elk and deer, all going in one direction, east, and southeast, toward the lower country. Jim came back to camp late in the afternoon, tired, hungry, without seeing anything, all game apparently left the country for somewhere. He ought to have known that there was no game in the country at a time when snow usually covered the ground several feet deep; that elk and deer in particular, always started to the lower country during or after the first snowfall, leaving only a belated straggler here and there." Upon reaching a hunting camp near Virginia Dale: "They had one deer hung up, one of the largest of his kind, with great antlers. He was estimated to weigh 200 pounds ... The hunters and owners were very much in need of fresh meat, but this deer and any others they could get were destined for the Denver market, to be sold for things of prime necessity, things they must have to enable them to continue in business." (Hoy, 1952). In l859, Joel Estes, with his son Milton, traveled to the head of Little Thompson Creek on a hunting and exploring trip. While on this expedition they discovered what is now known as Estes Park. The following year the Estes family settled in the park and began a ranching operation that lasted until 1866. Milton Estes, in his "Memoirs of Estes Park", published in 1939, refers frequently to the abundance of wild game. -- �"We never killed any of the stock for food, for there was plenty of wild game. Winter drove all the game down to the foothills, except the elk, they would remain in the Park until summer, then they went up over the range of mountains ... One fall and winter the writer killed one hundred head of elk, besides other game, such as mountain sheep, deer and antelope ... Game was so plentiful that we could not suffer for anything to eat or wear ... There was no end to the game, for great bands of elk, big flocks of mountain sheep and deer were everywhere ... The park was a paradise for the hunter." Lamb (1923) interviewed an early resident of the middle 1870's who related that Deer were plentiful, blick tailed most thick in dense timber in summer, in winter they were low, except in open winter ... White tailed deer were formerly found in foothills and plains in 77 (1877) near Lyons ... a few wolves but mainly coyotes. Mountain lion were never plentiful nor were bears." On March 11, 1874 the Fort Collins Standard ran a small item: "The North Fork of the Cache la Poudre abounds in mountain trout and deer, elk, antelope, etc. are plenty in the mountains." Nelson (1928) recorded an interview with J. S. Sloan of Livermore: "Mr. Calloway and a man by the name of Nidson were great game hunters and killed thousands of deer and antelope which were hauled to Denver by Mr. Alford ... the deer were very numerous .-butthe antelope, bear and mountain lion were rather scarce in propositionLsi.i!." LApparently the period referred to is the late 1870'~o Although Mr. Sloan mentions the deer as being nurrieroushis reference to the scarcity of antelope gives us a first indication of decline in those species of game with us today. Most of the buffalo were gone from the prairies by the late 1870's (Steinel, 1926). If LsiiJ Grazing.--Livestock were moved into the Poudre Valley with the advent of settlers. Duncan (n.d.) recalls Ranger Jones who settled in the valley in 1860 and brought with him from Kansas "...a large herd of cattle and quite a number of horses and mUles." Hilton (1915) dates the beginning of cattle grazing in the vicinity at 1862 and sheep grazing at 1871. "A man from Vermont brought in a band of sheep which were grazed entirely in the valley country. Later a few were grazed about Livermore and in the mountain region. More and more cattle were brought in from the outSide, mainly from Texas." In 1863 cavalry was stationed at LaPorte to guard the Overland Trail and protect cattle in the area against stock thieves (Watrous, 1911) . The following quotation from Watrous (1911) gives a lucid picture of early stock raising in Larimer County: "Stock growing early became an important industry in Larimer Cmmtyand in the late 60's and early 70's, thousands of head of cattle, great bands of horses and flocks of sheep grazed upon the rich pasture lands of the plains and the valleys of the mountains. The mildness of the cllmate, the vast grazing ground on the plains, the ranges in the mountain parks and valleys all tended to make stock growing profitable as well as pleasant. Large fortunes were acquired in this industry and many of the new comers engaged in it. At one time Larimer County ranked second in the state in the number of head of livestock owned and run upon its ranges. Nearly 50,000 head of cattle and 75,000 sheep were assessed for taxation in 1878, but as settlers came in and took up farms the range became restricted so that many of the cattlemen moved their herds to Wyoming where there was a wi.der scope of unoccupied country for stock to range over and feed upon. 'I'houghthere are still many thousands of domestic animals in the county jJ..9l"Y, the herds are not as large as they were in the early days." �By 1870 every section had its cattle kings. The cattle business probably reached its height in the 80's. Most of the available grazing lands were occupied by vast herds (Chapman, 1924). For a time the unexploited grasslands and meadows supported the stock adequately, but as ranges became overgrazed, carrying capacity decreased rapidly. Hilton (1915) wrote: "The country was overgrazed to such an extent that later the number of stock raised was materially reduced ..." A notation by Willey (1924) exemplifies the intensity of grazing exploitation during the period. "In 1886 Mr. Wm. Gard's father and others took some grass out of Pingree Park that was 4 ft. high ...they took this out to send to the centenial [SiiJ for exhibit. In 1888 C. G. Buckingham took cattle into Pingree Park." Logging.--The first sawmill in the county was operated in 1862 on the Poudre River near LaPorte. Another was in operation at Rist Canyon about the same time. Lumber was sawed for building materials and floated down the Poudre to Greeley. Later the logs themselves were floated to Greeley (Hilton, 1915). Previous to the operation of sawmills, poles and posts were cut for building fences. An early peak in timber operations was reached about 1867 when ties were cut in great numbers and floated down the Poudreand its tributaries for use on the Denver and Pacific Railroad, the first railroad in the region. From 1870 to 1880 millions of ties were cut from the upper sources of the Poudre to be used in the construction of the Union Pacific Railroad. All cutting was done on the public domain. Much of the timber was cut from the lower foothills where now no timber remains (Hilton, 1915). Horgen (n.d.) wrote of the "immense log drives down the Poudre in 1873 and the attendant damage to irrigation ditch dams and headgates. As a result ..."the timber floating business was discontinued but the floating of ties was not stopped until 1882. .. and the sawmills were moved back into the mountains. II II A paragraph from Watrous (1911) reveals an early result of the forest exploitation: The relations between forestry and irrigation are very intimate. Several years ago, the streams were at flood during most of the irrigation months. Now they are low in July at least. The mountain forests which protected the snow banks have been depleted; these snow banks which formerly melted gradually and did not disappear until August are now gone by the first of July. Hence the more sudden floods in the spring time and the lower states of water in July, August and the autumn months. It is not the irrigation ditches of Colorado that cause the Platte to run dry in Nebraska ...it is rather the destruction of the forests which deprive the sources of supply their natural protection and thus permanently change the character of our mountain streams." If ••• Fry (1954) recalls that lithe 'tie boys' had cabins and camps up every gulch on the Poudre {during the 1870 and their numbers must have run in the hundreds ... 'me last drive down the Poudre, must have been in the very early '80s when the 'buf.k of the tie timber--8 inch trees,..~hadbeen cut. The men got about 10¢ a tie, and could generally cut around 40a day, so the wages were good. 'il, II �The demand for l"Qmber increased rapidly during the twenty years following 1880 and several portable mills were set up at different points in the mountains wherever there was timber suitable for sawing, and millions of feet of native lumber were cut and marketed in the valley towns during that period. When the timber in thevicinity of a mill became exhausted the mills would be moved to a new site where timber was plentiful and more accessible (Watrous, 1911). Fires.--Apparently fires were commonplace during the pre-settlement period. Horace Greeley, in traversing the foothills from Denver to Fort Laramie in 1859, relates: "Cache la Poud.re has quite a fair belt of cottonwood, thenceforth there is scarcely a cord of wood to a township for the next fifty or sixty miles, and the pine is no longer visible on the hills near us, because they expose little but rock, and hence are swept by the annual fires.fI (Watrous, 1911). It is not until the period of forest depletion that fire history enters in detail. Hilton (1915) reports: ffAvery considerable loss of immature timber has resulted ...on the cut over areas on account of fire carelessness. In almost all parts of the country where milling operations have been carried on there have been serious fires, resulting in the total destruction of very large areas of all the young growth remaining after cutting. In many places ...where this has occurred the lodgepole pine type prevailed and the young growth has come on. However, there are some places in the yellow pine and Douglas fir types where the burning has occurred, especially on the steep mountain sides, and very little reproduction is coming on, although the fires burned a great many years ago." A vivid description of an early fire on the Poudre is given us by Fry (1954): If During June of 1893, one of our dryest summers, a fire got started in the Upper Country between Bennett Creek and the Little South Poudre. And as, in those days, there was no organized way of fighting fires, it just burned away. For days and weeks, all that was visible of the sun was the appearance of a big red ball through the smoke. The fire burned everything to timberline the length of Bennett Creek, then dropped over into Mineral Springs Gulch (Rustic Gulch) and came down within a mile or two of the River ... The south slopes of Bennett Creek were hardest hit, as everything from Big Tree Gulch to the head of Crown Point Gulch, was a blackened waste with nothing but the trunks of the Pine and Spruce standing to show where once had been a magnificent rforest." In this same description Fry indicates the successional stages following a fire. ffNature,however, is a wonderful re-builder. The heat from the fire fertilized the imprisoned seed, and in a few years, the new growth commenced to be seen. As always, the first growth to be noticed were the raspberries, which started the year after the fire." Gard (1927) sheds additional light on the ecology of fire in the region% "For several years raspberries and blueberries were very plentiful and we used to gather them by the pailfuls. It seems to be natural for raspberries and blueberries to spring after the timber has been swept by fire. The fire that swept that region tributary to Box Prairie occurred the fall of 1884. The fallen timber and the following growth of young pine and aspen timber has depreciated the range to a great extent. When the range was at its best �-72we summered around eight hundred head of cattle there... Parks that then were open grass parks are now practically aspen thickets.1f A fire in the Pingree Park area in 1890 burned all summer until the snows in late October put it out (Willey, 1924). GAME DEPLETION The history of game depletion in the Cache la Poudre drainage began with the advent of white settlement. Although records indicate an abundance of game during the early settlement period, the pressure exerted by market hunters, ranchers, homesteaders, miners, and timber crews began to take its toll. Hilton, in his 1915 resum~ of the early history of the Colorado National Forest (now the Roosevelt)" includes a section entitled "Hf.s toz-y of Game Distribution!!. In regard to this heading Hilton remarks: If I believe this title should have been IHistory of Game 'De's'trU:c't'fon! . This was the original designation. A history of the game since-the white man came in would be a history of the destruction of the game if not actual eradication. If Probably the greatest direct effect on the game was hunting to supply meat .and skins for the market. A number of authors have recorded the slaughter. Hoy (1952) encountered market hunting camps on the Poudre and its tributaries in 1866. At one camp he was informed that although the camp was sorely in need of fresh meat that any deer they could get ... were destined for the Denver market, to be sold for things ... they must have to continue in business Lffiarkethuntin~.11 Estes (1939) refers to the game market in Denver. IIBythis time we had a trail to Denver, where we sold many dressed skins and many hind-quarters of deer, elk, and sheep." Hilton (1915) wrote of the decrease in game numbers by the hordes of rrQllterswho came out to hunt for the marketing of meat or hides. In the Livermore area during the late 70's game hunters killed thousands of deer which were hauled to Denver (Nelson, 1928). ll These, and many similar references, point out the tremendous pressures leveled against the game popUlations. Under the force of such hunting deer numbers began to decline. A first record of the scarcity of game is supplied by Horgen (n.d.) who in relating his personal experiences tells of the entrance into Cherokee Park of an acquaintance. liThegame was very scarce when Mr. Campton first went to Cherokee 'La-bout18fYi!. He states there is more now than there was when he first went there." Details of the decline during the last decade of the 19th century are lacking. It was not long after the turn of the century, however, when several eminents were forecasting the extinction of the mule deer. In February, 1903, A. G. Wallihan, a famous wildlife photographer, made the following prediction regarding the mule deer in Colorado: "Unless we have a closed season on deer, five years will see the finish of these animals. Five years would give them a good start again.1I (Hornaday, 1914). In 1904) Hornaday laments: nUnfortunately, on account of its preference for open country, its {the mule deeil ultimate extinction in the United States is only a question of about ten years; for everywhere, save in Yellowstone Park, it is being destroyed very much faster than it breeds." �-73other naturalists expressed concern and then alarm. mammalogist, wrote in 1908: E. R. Warren, a Colorado ffThedeer have probably been increasing in some localities, and merely holding their own, or even losing ground in others. Thanks to the idiotic action of our last legislature in permitting does to be killed as well as bucks there will undoubtedly be a great decrease in the numbers of our deer in the next two years, before the mischief can be stopped by the repeal of the act. Many deer were killed this year during the open season, and numbers of does and fawns were included among them. It is too soon after the close of the hunting season for complete statistics to be available, but there is enough to show that great harm has been done. The state Game Commissioner's office kept an account of the deer brought into Denver by rail this last open season. About 400 deer were brought in; of these approximately two-thirds were bu.cks, of the balance about ten percent were fawns, and the rest does. If In 1911 Merritt Cary reports in II!:::. Biological Survey of Coloradon: ffEastof the main ranges a few /mule deer7 are left in the rough juniper country •..Mr. Edward ~reble reported a few mule deer in the foothills of Boulder and Larimer Counties in 1906. Apparently none remain on the plains east of the mountains, where they were common in early times ... ffTheColorado game law in force during 1907 and 1908 allowed the killing of one deer 'with or without horns by any person during the open season. This inclusion of deer without horns worked an incalculable injury to the deer of Colorado during the two years it was operative, as a great many does and fawns were killed by unscrupulous hunters and particularly by novices. The pernicious results were not fully manifest in 1908, when it was estimated a total of about 2,500 deer were killed during the open season, but reports show that a great scarcity of deer throughout the mountains marked the season of 1909." I The period of 1909-1912 was probably the point of low deer population in the ~oudre River drainage. Fortunately, an era of conservation awareness had entered and was beginning to gather momentum. LEGAL PROTECTION The idea of conserving game in Colorado had its roots during the early 1860's. The Territorial Assembly of 1867 attempted to protect big game, on paper at least, by prohibiting the taking of deer, elk, antelope, and mountain sheep from January 15 to August 15 (Palmer, 1912). This was the first Colorado governmental action concerning deer. No provision was made for enforcement, however, and indiscrimi~ nate killing continued. The First General Assembly of 1877 closed the season 0 n big game from January 1 to September 1. It was unlawful to kill game for uses other than food and then only for immediate use. In 1885 the open season on deer was limited to 11 weeks. A law prohibiting the waste of wild meat was enacted the same year. A buck law was put into effect in 1887, giving legal protection from hunting to does and fawns. In 1889 the first law in Colorado governing the interstate commerce in the skins and horns of game animals came into existence. Game could not be hunted and killed for the purpose of getting skins or horns. �-74Active game protection existed in name only until 1891 when the legislature created the first conservation law enforcement by requiring the Fish Commissioner to act as "Came and Fish Warden rr with the authority to appoint four district wardens. This action came 24 years after the first law regulating the taking of game. Four years later the business of professional hunting had practically been stopped. In 1895 the game and fish payroll consisted of nine men--a Fish Commissioner and Game Warden, a Superintendent of Hatcheries, three deputy wardens, and three Assistant Superintendents of Hatcheries (Hart, 1954). In 1893 a bag limit was placed on deer, restricting the kill to five bucks per hunter, to be taken during an open season from August 15 to October 31. By 1897 the bag limit had been reduced to one antlered deer and the open season limited to six weeks. The Colorado Department of Game and Fish was created in 1900 with the head of the department known as the "Forest, Game and Fish Commissioner". Colorado law setting up legal machinery for civil actions was pioneered. In 1903 hunting licenses were required with 15,184 being issued at one dollar for resident hunters and 25 dollars for non-residents. By Act of Congress in 1904, the Forest Supervisor and Rangers were given authority to assist in game and fish law enforcement. For the first time it was possible to operate effectively against game law violators (liart,1954). Legislative limitations on hunting continued to be enacted. The open season on deer was closed from 1913 until 1918. State Game Re;fuges were created in 1919. Hunting regulations chronology applying specifically to the Poudre deer herd is summarized in Table 1. These progressively rigid restrictions, paralleled by increasingly effective enforcement, were probably a significant step in halting the decline and turning the curve of game abundance in an upward direction. FOREST AND RANGE MANAGEMENT In 1897 President Theodore Roosevelt proclaimed the Medicine Bow National Forest Reserve in Wyoming and Colorado. The United states Forest Service was created in 1905 at which time the administration was transferred from the Department of Interior to the Department of Agriculture and the National Forest system organized. That part of the Medicine Bow in Colorado was later called the Colorado National Forest and still later the name was changed to the present Roosevelt National Forest. Various parts of the Front Range were added to the Forest in succeeding years. Most of the foothill areas were acquired in 1917 (Horgen, n.d.). The National Forest system was to play a significant part in the future of deer and other game species. Forest personnel aided greatly in game law enforcement. Of perhaps greater importance was that the Forest Service, upon acquiring the lands, recognized the generally poor conditions and initiated programs to regulate grazing, timber cutting, and other forest uses. Most of the forest areas had been badly overgrazed and the mountains were overstocked with cattle and sheep. Trespass cutting and other timber abus~s were prevalent (Hilton, 1915). �Under Forest Service administration, numbers of livestock have been reduced to a more realistic figure. Table 2 summarizes the long struggle to reduce stocking rates on the Roosevelt. In 1917, 27,570 cattle (and horses) were allowed grazing on the Forest. The following year saw 23,325 cattle and 9,185 sheep (and goats) permitted. Cattle numbers show a steady decline with the 1955 figure of 8,626 amounting to 31 percent of the number permitted in 1917, the peak year. Sheep grazing reached a high in 1927-1930 after which a downward trend began with 7,700 permitted in 1955. The 1944-1948 period marked a growing realization of the needs of watershed management as it concerns grazing. The first real attempt was made on the Forest to put grazing in its proper position with watershed protection and recreation (Weaver, 1950). In 1949 the Roosevelt Forest. officers began a vigorous reduct.ion program aimed at cutting grazing obligations. The storm of protest from permittees caused an investigation by the National Forest Board of Review. The following is quoted from the summary report of this Board in 1950: liThefundamental problem in the present grazing situation in the Roosevelt National Forest is directly related to the other several resources for which public economy and sustained use demand consideration. The problem requires an effort to determine the relative values of these resources, or uses, under the m.a;nagementand administration of the Forest, in order to best serve the immediate locality, the state, and the public in general. In attempting to make such an evaluation it is necessary to take into consider ••. ation first the water and soil factors upon which the other resources and uses depend. It involves also an appraisal of the relative importance of timber production, grazing, wildlife production, recreation, irrigation and domestic water use ... IIAnunfortunate situation exists between the Forest SerVice and the grazing interests in the Roosevelt National Forest area. In the interest of all con= cerned this situation should be improved or corrected ... The range lands or important watersheds which were visited showed excessive deterioration ... An evaluation of the various uses on the Roosevelt National Forest indicates that these should be considered on the following priorit.y basis~ watershed values, first; recreation, including camping, picnicking, tourist travel, hunting and fishing, second; grazing, third; and timber uses, fourth ... "Closure of limited areas to grazing on vital watersheds seems to be justified where steep topography, erosive soil, and lack of vegetative cover makes such action imperative in safeguarding the water and soil resources ..." Moderation in grazing practices, plus the restricted logging activity and curtailment of destructive wildfires, have not been without effect on the deer and their habitat . Although some areas are still overgrazed, a degree of range re~, covery is in sight. The direct competition for forage between livestock and deer has been lessened. Fire prevention and controlled logging operations have contributed toward a stability previously "unknown. �-76RECENT Shortly after the turn of the century the Poudre River deer herd, like many others in the state, had been reduced to a fraction of former numbers. In 1914 Forest officers estimated only 975 deer on the entire Roosevelt National Forest. Responsible persons were alarmed and drastic remedial action was taken. A statewide closed season was enforced from 1913-1917 inclusive. This period, apparently, was the beginning of recovery. The increase in numbers was slow through the late teens and early 20's, but by 1925 there was sufficient recovery to assure a breeding base (Carhart and Coutts, 1941) . By 1930 spectacular increases were noted. In the late 1930' s many herds in the state were out of control (Hunter, n.d.). Statewide deer kill figures through the 40' s shot up at .an astounding rate. On the Poudre drainage the first either sex season since the first decade of the century was held in 1949. The remarkable deer increase was the result of a combination of factors. Protective legislation was instrumental. Until the middle 3G's legal protection had been the core of the deer management program. Antlered only and closed seasons were held during the early years (Hunter, n.d.). Law enforcement became more vigorous each year. Game refuges were created in the early 20's. The Colorado State Game Refuge, encompassing several townships on the Poudre, was established in 1920. Organized control programs restricted the number of deer predators. Forest and range management programs were progressing rapidly. A grazing permit system was begun shortly after the creation of the Forest Reserve. By 1930 direct deer-livestock competition on the Poudre had been substantially reduced. Unauthorized grazing had been curtailed. Destructive wildfires and unregulated logging were brought under rigid control. Watershed and wildlife values became increasingly recognized. These~ and other forces, contributed to a phenomenal increase in the deer population. With the ranges fully stocked (and overstocked) with deer, management problems underwent a radical change. Where formerly there were too few the problem had become one of too many. There were reports of over-utilization and downward trends in range condition. In the late 1940's Game and Fish Department personnel recommended a reduction in the Poudre deer herd (Till, 1960). Either sex hunting seasons were held in 1949 and 1950. In 1953 the present boundaries of the Poudre deer herd were established and designated Game Management Unit 19. The known hunting record of the herd from 1953 to date is shown in Table 3. SUMMARY Indians 1. Historical accounts indicate that deer were numerous in the region drained by the Cache la Poudre River during the period of Indian inhabitation. The vast buffalo herds of the plains provided the principal food supply but deer were hunted as well and were an important part of the Indian culture. 2. It is doubtful that the combined number of Arapahoes and Cheyennes, the prominent trIbes of the region, exceeded 2,000 at anyone time. With buffalo as the chief sustenance, this sparse population~ roving over the plains from the Arkansas to the Poudre, probably had little or no direct effect on deer rr amber-s • �-77Exploration and ~ur trapping 3· Records of explorers and fur trappers during the first half of the 19th century establish the abundance of deer in the Poudre River area. Deer were encountered both in the mountains and on the plains adjacent to the foothills. 4. That the deer were subject to seasonal elevational movements, up in summer and down in winter, is well documented. There is some evidence that .at least .a few deer summered at the lower elevations. A few of the accounts indicate that during ·the mountain winters, deer concentrated in the valleys and on open slopes. Settlement 5· First settlement in the region, about 1858, began a period of impact on game populations and drastic changes in the country. The period leaves a record of early game abundance and the beginning of the decline. 6. Wild animals, including deer, p:r'ovidedthe chief source of food in the early years and were of primary economic importance. Market hunting became a profit •.. able profession. 7· Livestock were moved into the Poudre Valley with the advent of settlers. Stock raising became an important industry in the late 60 I S and early 70 IS, probably reaching its height about 1880. 8. Sawmills were in operation on the Poudre as early as 1862. From 1870 to 1880 millions of railroad ties were cut and floated down the Poudre and its tributaries. Flooding and irregular flows of water resulted from the early timber exploitation. 9· Fires were apparently commonplace during the settlement period. Timber fires, setting back plant successions to sub-climax levels, were probably beneficial to deer. Wildfires on the browse-covered slopes of the winter range were probably detrimental. Present day evidence suggests that brush fires destroy many valuable deer food plants on the winter range. Game depletion 10. Deer were reduced to a fraction of former numbers by the tremendous influx of immigrants who killed for their own use and for the market. Probably the greatest direct effect on the game was widespread commercial hunting. ll. By the turn of the century responsible persons were expressing concern and alarm about declining deer numbers. Several were forecasting the extinction of the mule deer in Colorado. Legal protection 12. Legislative protection for Colorado game animals began with the Territorial Assembly of 1867. Prohibitive laws continued to be enacted at almost every session of the legislature. Active game protection, however, existed in name only until about 1905 when effective law enforcement mechanisms were created. �-7813· Gradual restriction of deer rrunting privileges, combined with more effective law enforcement, served to halt the decline and contributed to the upswing in deer numbers. Forest and range management 14. The National Forest system played a significant part in the history of deer and other game species. Roosevelt National Forest officers aided in enforcing game laws. Of perhaps greater importance was that the Forest Service, upon acquiring the lands, recognized the generally poor conditions and initiated programs to regulate grazing, timber cutting, and other forest uses. 15· Under Forest Service administration,: numbers of livestock were reduced to a more realistic figure. On the Roosevelt cattle grazing shows a steady decline with the 1955 totals amounting to 31 percent of the number permitted in 1917. Sheep numbers have been similarly reduced. Recent 16. Deer populations began to recover during the statewide closed season enforced from 1913-1917. The increase in numbers was slow through the late teens and early 20's, but by 1925 there was sufficient recovery to assure .abreeding base. By 1930 spectacular increases were noted. In the late 1930's many herds were out of' control. 17· The phenomenal increases were the result of a combination of factors. Protective legislation, effective law enforcement, refuges, predator control programs, reduction in direct livestock-deer competition, and control of' destructive wildfires all contributed. Watershed and wildlife values had, become increasingly recognized. 18. Deer management problems underwent a radical change. Where formerly there were too few the problem became one of too many. Either sex hunting seasons were held on the Poudre in 1949 and 1950. 19· In 1953 the present boundaries of the Poudre deer herd ware established and designated Game Management Unit 19. The hunting record since that date has been one of alternating antlered-only and either sex seasons. �-79LITERATTJRE CITED Carhart, A. H. and J. M. Coutts. 1941. Deer food requirements in Colorado. Colorado Game and Fish Comm., Pittman-Robertson Report, Deer-Elk Survey 5: 1-27· Cary, Merritt. 1911. A biological survey of Colorado. U. S. Dept. Agric., Bureau of Biol. Survey, North American Fauna No. 33, 256 pp. Chapman, Arthur. 1924. The story of Colorado--out where the west begins. McNally & Co., Chicago, 270 pp. Rand Dale, H. C. 1941. The Ashley-Smith explorations and the discovery of a central route to the Pacific, 1822-1829. Rev. Ed., The Arthur H. Clark Co., Glendale, Calif., 360 pp. Davis, H. S. 1918. Reminiscences of General William H. Larimer and of his son William H. H. Larimer. Press of the New Era Printing Co., Lancaster, Pa., 266 pp. Drannon, W. F. 1900. Thirty-one years on the plains and in the mountains. W. Jackson Publishing Co., Chicago, 586 pp. Thomas Duncan, C. A. n.d. Memories of early days in the Cache la Poudre Valley. Printing Co., Fort Collins, 57 pp. Colorado Estes, Milton. 1939. The memoirs of Estes Park. Colorado State College Library Bull. No.6, 14 pp. (Reprinted by permission from the Colorado Magazine 16(4): 121-132). Fremont, J. c. 1845· Report of the exploring expedition to the Rocky Mountains in the year 1842. Gales and Seaton, Printers, Wash., 693 pp. Fry, N. w. 1954. Cache la Poudr'e-c-I'The River"--as seen from 1889 to 1954. author, Fort Collins, Colo., 52 pp. The Gard, W. H. 1927. Letter to Forest Supervisor, Colorado National Forest, Fort Collins, Colorado, May 11, 1927. Hafen, L. R. 1933. Colorado--the story of a western commonwealth. Publishing Co., Denver, 328 pp. The Peerless and A. W. Hafen. 1944. Colorado--a story of the state and its ------people. The Old West Publishing Co., Denver, 436 pp. 1955· To the Rockies and Oregon, 1839-1842. Giliendale,Calif., 315 pp. The Art.hur H. Clark Co., 1956. Rufus B. Sage, his letters and papers, 1836-1847. H. Clark Co., Glendale, Calif., 347 pp. The Arthur �-80Hart, John. 1954. Colorado's Department of Game and Fish; yesterday--today. No Pub. ,Gn file, Colorado Dept. of Game and Fish, Denver, 57 pp. (Mimeo.) Hilger, Inez. 1952. Arapahoe child life and its cultural background. Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bull. 148, 253 pp. Smithsonian Hilton, H. E. 1915. History of the Colorado National Forest. No Pub., On file, Roosevelt National Forest, Fort Collins, 50 pp. (Typewritten). Horgen, I. S. n.d. Old history of the CoiLoradoNational Forest. No Pub., On file, Roosevelt National Forest, Fort;Collins, 52 pp. (Typewritten). Hornaday, W. T. 1904. The American natural history. New York, 449 pp. 1914. The American natural history. New York, 4 vol. Charles Scribner's Sons, Charles Scribner's Sons, Hoy, James S. 1952. The J. S. Hoy manuscript, copied from the original manuscript, with some notes and comments by James G. Hodgson. Colorado A & M College, Fort Collins, 269 pp. (Typewritten). Hunter, G. N. n.d. Mule Deer Management in Colorado. No Pub., On file, Colorado Dept. of Game and Fish, Denver, 17 pp. (Mimeo.). Lamb, Carlyle. 1923. Letter to Forest Supervisor, Colorado National Forest, Fort Collins, Colorado, n.d., 1923. National Forest Board of Review. 1950. Report on the grazing situation on the Roosevelt National Forest in Colorado. No Pub., On file, Roosevelt National Forest, Fort Collins, 20 pp. (Mimeo.). Nelson, A. L. 1928. Roosevelt National Forest memorandum. On file, Roosevelt National Forest, Fort Collins, Colorado, Aug. 9, 1928. Palmer, T. S. 1912. Chronology and index of American game protection, 1776-1911. U. S. Dept. Agric., Bureau of Biol. Survey, Bull. No. 41, 62 pp. Spencer, F. C. 1930. Colorado's story. The World Press, Denver, 249 pp. Steinel, A. T. 1926. History of agriculture in Colorado. College, Fort Collins, 659 pp. Stone, w. F. 1918. 4 vol. History of Colorado. State Agricultural S. J. Clarke Publishing Co., Chicago, Till, C. E. n.d. Mule deer management, Unit 19, Poudre River, Colorado. No Pub., On file, Northeast Regional Office, Colorado Department of Game and Fish, Fort Collins, 7 pp. (Mimeo.). �-81Warren, E. R. 1908. Further notes on the mammals of Colorado. Colorado College Publication, Gen. Series No. 33, Engineering Series 1(4): 64-89. Watrous, Ansel. 1911. History of Larimer County. The Courier Printing and Publishing Co., Fort Collins, Colo., 513 pp. Weaver, C. N. 1950. A brief history of grazing on the Roosevelt National Forest. No Pub., On file, Roosevelt National Forest, Fort Collins, 7 pp. (Mimeo.). Willey, R. R. 1924. Letter to Forest Supervisor, Colorado National Forest, Fort Collins, Colo., March 31, 1924. �-82Table L.-:-C.HRO.No,LOG-Y: .OF IlUNT.~G .REGULAT10W:S,l'0UD.REHIV.ER DEER .HERD,.COLORADO General .. . .. Season , Year , , ..Type .of .. Season Bag Limit 1867-1876 License Cost Res. Non-Res. None required 1877 •.. 1882 Sept. 1Dec. 31 " " 1883-1884 Sept. 15Dec. 31 fI fI 1885-1886 Oct. 16Dec. 31 " " 1887-1890 Sept. 1Nov. 30 " " 1891-1892 Aug. 1Oct. 31 " " " " 1893-1896 Aug. 15Oct. 31 " " Five " " 1897-1898 Sept. 1Oct. 15 " " One " " 1899-1900 Aug. 15Nov. 15 " " " " " 1901-1902 Aug. 15Nov. 15 " " Two " " 1903-1904 Sept. 15Sept. 30 " " One $1 $25 1905-1906 Sept. 25Oct. 10 " " " " " 1907-1908 Oct. 1Oct. 20 E.ither sex II " " 1909-1910 Oct. 1Oct. 10 Antlered only " " " 1911-1912 Oct. 1Oct. 6 " " " Antlered only " " Remarks Deer protected Jan. 15-Aug.15 No deer may be killed for skins or horns only. Night hunting & running deer with dogs prohibited. Lacy Act preventing interstate shipment of game birds & mammals. �-83Table 1.--Continued . . Year General Season Type of Season Bag Limit License Cost Res. Non-Res. 1913-1917 Closed Closed Closed Closed 1918-1933 Gct. 12Oc t . 15 Antlered only Gne $2(1918-1920.) $25 $5(1921-1933) 1934-1937 Gct. 12Oc t . 18 I! If If $5 1938 Oc t . 9Oc t , 18 I! I! I! If If 1939 Gct. IlGct. 20. l! I! If If If 1940. Oc t . 4- I! I! If I! If Remarks Two or more points on each antler to be legal. $25 Gct. 20. 1941 Gct. 3Oc t . 12 If I! I! If " 1942 Gct. 3Oc t . 18 I! I! It If If 20.0. antlerless validations for Larimer County. 1943 Oc t . 9- " If " " " 10.0. antler less validations for Larimer County. If " " If If 350. antlerless validations for Larimer County. Nov. 7 1944 Oc t . 7- Nov. 5 1945 Gct. 6Gct. 21 If " If " " 1946 Oc t . 12- " If " " If If " If " If If " If If If If " " " Nov. 24 1947 Oc t . 11- Gct. 31 1948 Oc t . 15- Gct. 31 1949 Oct. 15Gct. 30. 1950. Oc t . 20."- Gct. 31 Either sex If " $7·50. $40. Five day delay on Eastern Slope opening date first established �-84Table l.--Continued . , , , , . . . . , . , , .. . . . . . . General Season Type of Season Limit License Cost Res. Non-Res. 1951 Oct. 20Oct. 31 Antlered only One $7.50 $40 1952 Oct. 20Oct. 31 11 II II 75 antlerless validations for Unit 19· 1953 Oct. 24Oct. 31 Either sex 11 11 11 Present Unit 19 boundaries established. 1954 Oct. 20Oct. 31 Antlered only " II " 1955 Oct. 20Oct. 31 Either Sex " II II 1956 Oct. 20Oct. 31 Antlered only 11 II II 1957 Oct. 20()Oct. 31 Either sex II II II 1958 Oct. 20Nov. 2 Antlered only " " II 1959 Oct. 22Nov. 3 Either sex II II II Year " 11 Bag .... . . Remarks �Table 2. --SD1'4M.ARY OF GRAZING HISTORY, ROOSEVELT NATIONAL FOREST, COLORADO (From .. Weaver, 1950 .andU~.B.F.S. .Annual Repor-bs}. . :Numbers permitted: Total (A.U.M.) : Year .:..Catt.le : Sheep . :Actual: Capacity: ~&Horses: & Goats Permitted: Use (A.U.M.) Remarks . . . . .. - 1907 First records of grazing Qegin. 1909 Thousands of cattle died of starvation winter of 1908-09. 1910 7,400 1913 7,071 1914 7,222 1915 7,047 1916 8,282 --- 1917 27,570 111,701 121,679 Foothill areas added to Forest making about same area as present. Foothills seriously overgrazed. Push began for dual use by sheep & cattle because of wartime demand. 3,500 No sheep grazed, 1911-1917. 1918 23,325 7,156 96,239 106,305 1919 19,787 9,185 82,459 93,900 1920 20,578 7,863 85,252 84,523 1921 18,957 9,384 78,982 96,894 1922 20,706 13,110 88,216 88,788 1923 17,887 14,634 76,796 96,566 1924 17,637 16,825 85,416 96,566 1925 18,590 15,640 88,735 97,412 97,320 1926 16,006 13,325 73,854 83,592 Colo. State Game Refuge established. Demand for range dropped off with permittees having financial difficulties. �-86Table 2.--Continued :Numbers permitted: Total ~A.U.M·d :Actual! Capacity :(ear,.! Cattle: Sheep :& Horses:& Goats Permitted: Use : (A.U.M.) . . Remarks 1927 17,002 17,507 85,933 77,745 1928 16,201 19,349 92,062 79,693 99,365 1929 15,748 17,920 89,666 78,991 96,835 1930 14,760 18,908 82,047 80,758 93,021 1931 14,589 16,497 79,380 70,302 93,021 1932 15,467 15,084 82,169 74,888 86,695 1933 15,043 15,026 78,386 71,613 89,4,4b 1934 14,354 19,587 76,414 74,333 89,440 1935 14,323 14,850 77,106 70,090 76,311 1936 13,824 15,650 73,176 68,086 76,311 1937 13,788 15,780 72,156 69,120 72,486 1938 13,376 14,200 69,223 64,800 72,486 1939 13,786 13,600 67,911 65,362 72,486 Gradual reductions accom= plished 1933-1941 1940 13,911 13,795 63,285 61,540 58,311 Estimated capacity took big drop. 1941 11,476 10,950 58,287 55,099 57,034 1942 12,451 10,142 61,333 54,329 57,034 1943 12,571 12,518 58,952 52,590 43,792 Concerted drive to bring capacities into line. 1944 12,161 12,150 56,055 49,144 43,230 Growing realization of need for vatershed 1945 12,198 9,450 53,287 46,125 43,235 1946 11,908 9,760 52,262 47,179 43,235 1947 11,548 7,935 49,239 45,644 39,960 1948 11,224 9,500 47,640 44,697 39,960 �-87Table 2.--Continued Year :Numbers permitted: Tdtal-'~A.U .M. L: : Cattle : Sheep :Actual: :& Horses:& Goats Permitted: Use Capacity (A.U.M.) Remarks 1949 10,489 8,450 42,303 39,370 25,698 Embarked upon vigorous reduction program aimed at 45% cut. Investigation from Washington over storm of protest. 1950 9,433 7,700 38,310 37,187 22,545 National Forest Advisory Council recommended uses of Forest be considered on following basis: (1) Watershed values, (2) recreation, (3) grazing, (:4) timber. 1951 9,306 8,211 38,850 38,845 23,797 1952 9,641 8,430 38,107 36,138 23,363 1953 9,376 6,700 35,966 34,391 23,494 1954 9,079 7,100 34,734 30,737 23,494 1955 8,626 7,700 32,737 31,062 23,494 �Table J'.--liUNTINGHISTORY OF THE, J?OUDRE RIVER DEER HERD, GAME MANAGEMENT UNIT 19, 1953-1959. : Type and .,.. Length . .:Kill by Age Classes t Total Year""""" : of Season !Buck : Doe : Fawn : Kill 1953 860 927 304 2,091 3.63 Antlered only Oct. 20-0ct. 31 766 - - 766 1.33 1,457 53% 2.53 Either sex Oct. 20-0ct. 31 515 472 104 1,091 1.89 2,019 54% 3·51 Antlered only Oct. 20-0ct. 31 689 - - 689 1.20 1,395 49% 2.42 Either sex Oct. 20-0ct. 31 760 652 138 1,550 2.69 2,456 63% 4.26 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 805 - - 805 1.40 1,848 44% 3·21 Either sex Oct. 22-Nov. 3 856 1,162 338 2,356 4.09 3,139 75% 5.45 'D Ii 0 .q t:J .. ~ C1> C1> Cf) Q ct· ~o ~ !2'i :Ai p.. :=i ~.o C1> • Q § ~ c+ C1> to ~Ii g § p.') 0 1-" Ii ct Ot! ~ N C1> Ii Ii .. 0' .. ~ ~ • C1> p.. 0' ~I~ ~ 'D (l.'l C1> p.. 0 I-' 0 C1> Ii 1-" I CP CP Antlered only Oct. 20-Nov. 2 ~ 0 : Success : Hunters per sq. mi. : Ratio : ::Ei'thersex Oct. 24-0ct. 31 1954 (Jl : Kill per ! Hunting : sq. mi. : Pressure 0 o c+ s C1> l? § j::g Ii " I-' \0 0\ 0 * p.. 1-" :=i 1 �October, 1960 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGA'rIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No. W-I05-R-l ------------------------------------ --------~~--------------------- Work Plan No. 2 ------------------------------- An Ecological Investigation of the Cache la Poudre Deer Herd, Colorado Job No.1 ----------------------------------------- Title of'Job: Boundaries, Cache la Poudre Deer Herd Period Covered~ July 15, 1959 to June 30, 1960 Objectives: To establish tentative boundaries of the Cache la Poudre deer herd (total and summer and winter range). NOTE: Herd boundary determination will be treated as a continuing job throughout the cou.rse of the project. Progress reports as required; and completion report on termination of' job. Procedures! (1) Use of natural topographic and vegetative zone boundaries as ind!i:catedfrom U.S. Geological Survey maps, U.S. Forest Service vegetative type maps, and aerial photographs. (2) Field reconnaissance from ground and air. (3) Interviews with federal and state agency personnel. Results! The boundaries (total, summer, winter) of'the Cache la Poudre deer herd are presented in Figure 1. The total herd boundary, indicated by the hachured line, is that of'the present Colorado Game Management Un L t 19. The original conception of this unit, established in 1948 and revised in 1953, was a definition of the Poudre deer herd. It remains a logical and acceptable definition. Tentative summer and winter ranges are indicated with a transition zone between. These are flexible and subject to refi.nement as familiarity with the herd increases. Prepared by =__ Date: D_e_an __ E_._M __ e_d_i_n October, 1960 ------------------~~-------------- Approved by: _--:;G;.,...---.,.N;.,.. ......,;:.H,..:.u_n_t_e-:-r-:-_ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �50' 40' 105" 30' 2.0' 10' T9N ....;j 140 ~T8N I GAME MANAGEMENT DEPT. OF SIXTH 1 t 0 PRINCIPAL 1 Sc~e UNIT 7N 19 GAME AND FISH MERIDIAN 5 Miles 3 4 Unit Boundary '40' 30' LEGEND ~ Management ~~k¥J Approximate Transitional Zone Between Summer And Winter Ranges FIGURE 1. Beundar-Les of the Cache La Poudre deer herd of summer and winter range. (Game Management Unit 19) with a tentative definition IT6N 1 o I �October, 1960 -91JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No. W-I05-R-l ----------------------------------- --------~---------------------- Work Plan No. 2 ----------------------------- Title of Job! Period Covered: An Ecological Investigation of the ~ Cache la Poudre Deer Herd, Colorado Job No. 2 Sub-unit Classification, Cache la Poudre Deer Herd Range July 15, 1959 to June 30, 1960 Objectives: To establish a tentative sull-unit classification of the Cache la Poudredeer herd range. NOTE: Sub-unit classification will be treated as a continuing job throughout the course of the project. Progress reports as requiredj and completion report upon termination of job. Procedures: (1) Use of natural topographic divisions and vegetative types as indicated from U.S. Geological Survey maps, U.S. Forest Service type maps and aerial photographs. (2) Field reconnaissance from ground and air. (3) Location of hunting pressure and deer kill by hunter interview at check station. Results: A tentative sub-unit classification of the Cache la Poudre deer herd range (Game Management Unit 19) is presented in Figure 1. The divisions were arrived at from consideration of vegetative zones, elevational gradients, seasonal disttibution of deer, deer kill, hunting pressure, .pub Ll,c and private land, and access problems. The sub-units will be used in locating and interpreting hunting pressure, deer kill, and related distributional patterns. Prepared by: Dean E. Medin Date: October, 1960 Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �50' 40' 105·30' 2.0' 10' 00 I \0 ro 140· l .....jj..;j 7N 19 DEPT. OF GAME AND FISH SIXTH Lj 0 PRINCIPAL 1 sere MERIDIAN 40· f------" 30' 3 4 pMiles 6N Polyconic projection North American detcm FIGURE 1. Tan~~ive sub-unit olassifioation of the Caohe la Poudre deer herd range (Gam~ManagementUnit 19). �October, 1960 -93JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~--~--------------------- Project No. w-88-R-5 ------------------------------- Work Plan No.1: ------------------------------ Waterfowl Investigations Job Title of Job: Waterfowl Kill Survey Period Covered: October 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 No. 5 Abstract: Results of the 1959 random survey of waterfowl hunters reveals that of the 31,431 Colorado duck stamp buyers, 29,060 hunted ducks bagging an estimated 122,924 and crippling an additional 22,417 for a total hunting loss of 145,341 ducks. The average season duck bag per hunter was 4.2 birds, and mallards again accounted for more than 65 per cent of the harvest. Duck kill estimates by county revealed that the eastern slope again accounted for about 75 per cent of the total state harvest as in the past. High kill counties were Weld, Larimer, and Morgan in that order. This was the poorest duck season experienced in Colorado since the beginning of the surveys in 1954. For geese, an estimated 13,647 hunters bagged an average of 1.61 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 21,972 birds. In addition, another 4,730 birds were reported wounded for a loss of 17.8 per cent, and a total hunting mortality of 26,702 geese. The Southeast Region again accounted for more than 80 per cent of the total harvest with Baca, Kiowa, and Prowers the high counties in that order. Weld County showed a large increase in goose harvest over past years probably as a result of more geese wintering in this area in 1959. This goose season appeared to be the most successful on record, probably as a result of the increased length of hunting season, and increased number of this species present in the State during the hunting season. Complete comparisons of all data including county and regional kill estimates are presented in the text of the report. ��;..:95Waterfowl Kill Survey Jack R. Grieb This random survey of Colorado small game harvest is a cooperative venture between Federal Aid Project w-88-R and the Game Management Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. Techniques were the same as those used in the past, with randomly selected hunters notified immediately preceding the season, and a sample questionnaire included to show the questions that would be asked. After the season, the hunters were contacted a second time and requested to fill out and return the questionnaire. One follow-up letter was sent to all non-reporting hunters after an interval of about two weeks, and the sample was .concluded when the response to this follow-up had dropped off. Questionnaires were sent to 10,000 randomly selected license buyers in 1959, and a total of 6,839 responded for a return of 68.4%. Of the 6,839 returns, 1,464 re:ported that they had not purchased a license, 3,857 re:ported hunting, and 1,518 houghta license but did not hunt. Most of the hunters in this last category were found to have:purchased a combination hunting and fishing license which was used for fishing only. Thus, of the total license sales of 176,031 during 1959, it is estimated that 128,199 hunters, hunted one or more species of small game. To facilitate discussion, the remainder of this report will be divided into component sections of waterfowl and upland game harvest. WATERFOWL HARVEST Colorado duck stamp sales are plotted in Table 1 revealing that the 1959 sales of'31,431 were the lowest in the last six years. This decrease is attributed to an increase in the price of the duck stamp from two to three dollars, and adverse advance publicity which stressed the low sup:ply of ducks and forecasted a poor hunting season. Table l.--Duck Stamp Sales for Colorado Number of stamps sold Year 31,431 1959 41,897 1958 41,794 1957 1956 36,303 1955 39,107 1954 32,450 Per cent change from previous year 24·9 + .02 + 15·1 7·2 + 20·5 �-96Table 2 classifies Duck Stamp buyers by the type of hunting in which they engaged for the past four years. Thus, it appears that the number of duck hunters were down Significantly, and the number of goose hunters were normal compared to previous years. This was caused by the decreased length of the duck season, and the increased length of the goose season during 1959. Average number of days hunted for waterfowl was slightly below 1958 and well below previous years. Again this is attributed to the length of the duck season. ,T,9:b,le, ,2.--Estimated Number of Duck and Goose Hunters, Average Number of Days Hunted and Season Length, by Year, Bag and Average number Season length possession Number of Number of days hunted for (days) limit Year duck hunters goose hunters ducks and geese ducks geese ducks geese 29,060 1959 13,647 4-8 5·70 50 2-2 75 1958 38,773 14,705 5.78 60 4-8 90 2-2 37,166 1957 12,057 6.52 2~2 60 5-10 75 1956 34,793 12,477 60 2-2 5-10 7·37 75 ,195,5, 37,816 17,634 8.87 60 2-2 5-10 75 '1~54' 31,834 12,136 60 60 7·64 2=2 5-10 Duck Harvest Hunting statistics of the 1959 season are tabulated and compared with past years in Table 3. This reveals that the total retrieved kill of 122,924 was the lowest harvest recorded since the beginning of this survey in 1954. In addition, it was estimated that 22,417 birds were crippled for a wounding loss of 15.5 percent permitting an estimated total hunting mortality of 145,341 ducks for 1959 in Colorado. Table 3·--Duck Harvest Statistics, 1954-1959. Year 1.959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 Number of hunters 29,060 38,773 37,166 34,793 37,816 31,834 Average seasonal bag 4.2 6.1 6.8 5·9 6.7 5·6 Total estimated harvest 122,924 236,515 254,587 185,737 253,367 179,856 Wounding loss Percent number 22,417 15·5 12·3 33,088 14.1 41,679 16·3 36,195 38,182 13·1 14.5 30,396 Total estimated hunting mortality 145,341 269,603 296,266 221,932 291,549 210,252 The species composition of the 1959 bag is listed in Table 4 and compared with the average of the five previous years. This table reveals that the total 1959 duck harvest was 45 percent less than the five-year average. This large decrease is attributed to a decrease in the number of waterfowl hunters combined with a decrease in the average seasonal bag. The decrease in the average bag was caused by shorter length of season and later opening hours. Species composition for 1959 was very similar to that of the five year average. This was due to the opening date in late October which emphasized the harvest of mallards and other later migrating species, and missed the peak migration periods of the earlier migrants. The actual numerical harvest of all species decreased drastically in 1959 from the five-year average, �-97A tabulation of duck kill and hunting pressure by 10~day intervals of the season is given in Table 5. This indicates that the harvest was greater during the earlier intervals of the season decreasing toward the end. Also the number of hunters participating in each 10-day interval decreased from beginning to the end of the season, and this appeared to be the main reason that the harvest decreased as the season progressed. Considering all factors, Colorado had a duck season which was considerably below normal in terms of harvest. This occurred despite the fact that migration and winter concentration inventories indicated that a normal duck population occurred in Colorado throughout the hunting season. 'liable4.--Species Composition of the Bag. Species Mallard Pintail Green-winged teal Blue-winged teal Cinnamon teal Baldpate Gadwall Shoveller Canvasback Redhead Scaup Goldeneye Buf'flehead Ruddy duck American merganser Ring-necked duck Wood duck Black duck Hooded merganser Unknown and other kinds Coot 1959 Number Percent killed of total 63.60 78,180 3.41 4,192 11.60 14,259 4,339 3 ·53 959, 1,930 1,525 1,106 811 947 356 283 209 172 .78 1·57 1.24 ·90 .66 ·77 .29 .23 .17 :.14 37 .03 61 .05 5-year average 1954-1958 Number Percent killed of total J{45,935 65.25 7,439 3·33 20 l02 8·99 8,732 3·90 .02 49 1.18 2,645 4,666 2.09 1.32 2,946 2,116 ·95 1.17 2,625 .76 1,695 486 .22 .16 368 1,002 .45 .14 304 .Q1 23 .01 15 10 T j 11.02 13,546 22,431 12 .01 52 Total 122,924 100.00 223,641 ~ Estimates too small for accurate comparison. Percent change 1959 from 5-year average 46.4 - 43.6 - 29·1 ~ 50·3 Y - 63.7 ~ 58.6 ~ 48.2 - 47·7 - 69.1 - 44.1 1/ II II II II 1/ II II 10.03 .02 100.00 - 39.6 Y Table 5.--Ducks Bagged and Hunting Pressure by 10-day Intervals of the Season 1959 Estimated Estimated hunting Birds bagged Pressure Average Number of Percent of NUmber of bag by Percent of Dates ducks total kill hunters total hunters periods Oct 26-Nov 4 34,161 3.6 27·79 9,599 33·03 Nav 5 - 14 24.47 30,079 9,808 3·1 33·75 15 - 24 25,544 8,619 20·78 29·66 3·0 25-Dec 4 18,070 14.70 6,187 21.29 2·9 Dee 5 - 14 12.26 15,070 4,626 15·92 3·3 - �Goose Harvest Hunting statistics of the goose season are presented in Table 6 which reveals that an estimated 13,647 (12,350 resident and 1,297 non-resident) bagged an average of 1.61 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 21,972 birds. In addition, another 4,730 birds were reported wounded but not retrieved for a wounding loss of 17.8 percent. This permits a total hunting mortality for Colorado during 1959 of 26,702 geese. Comparison with past years reveals that 1959 had the highest recorded average seasonal bag per hunter; and despite a small decrease in hunters (mainly nonresident) had the largest harvest of any year since the beginning of this survey in 1954. Comparison with the five-year average reveals an increase in the 1959 harvest of 87 percent. Harvest Statistics, 1954-1959. Table '6.''':..{ioose Year Number of hunters Average seasonal bag 13,647 14,705 12,057 11,541 17,364 12,136 1.61 1.34 1.21 .98 1.02 .67 Total estimated harvest Wounding loss percent number 21,972 17·8 19,704 22·3 14,589 23·5 21.6 11,310 17,711 18·3 8,168 22.8 Five';year 'average goose harvest is 14,296 -- 1954=58. 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 4,730 5,655 4,473 3,116 3,884 2z410 Toltal estimated hunting mortality 26,702 25,359 ,19,062 14,426 21,248 10,578 Species composition of geese killed were very similar between all six years of the survey being 90 percent or above Canada geese. The remaining percentages for the six years were flother and unknownfl species of geese, and were actually probably Canada geese which the hunters were not able to correctly identify. This year for the first time the kill of one snow, and one white-fronted goose were reported. The 1959 goose hunting season was characterized by excellent water and food conditions in the Arkansas Valley during the fall and winter periods. Census figures taken at weekly intervals in the Arkansas Valley indicate a record number of geese were present in Colorado during most of the season. This combination of larger numbers, wide distribution, and longer hunting season made more birds available to more hunters for a longer length of time resulting in a larger than normal harvest. Without question, Colorado had a highly successful goose season in 1959. Waterfowl Harvest by County The reader is cautioned that information presented in this section of the report is subject to a great deal more error in accuracy than estimates in previous sections, since the original sample has been broken down to a county basis} thus decreasing the size of samples on which to base estimates. �-99~ 'Phis is probably even more true of geese than for ducks, since there were many more duck hunters. Consequently, it is realized that in some counties, both duck and goose kill have been over~estimated, and in others, under •. estimated. Hovever-, despite this error, these data represent the most accurate information on this subject possible at the present time. It is hoped to increase the accuracy of county data in the future. Tables 7 and 8 compare the 1959 duck and goose kill respectively with the average of the previous seasons, by county, within each waterfowl region. These regional divisions of the State were located on the basis of waterfowl migration, location, and topography, and permit a closer evaluation of kill, yearly changes in kf.Ll.,and the effect of different types of hunting seasons on various portions of Colorado. Regional recap of the 1959 duck season as summarized at the conclusion of Table 7 shows that the harvest decreased most in the Northeast,West Central, Southwest, and High Country Regions. The decrease in the Northeast was undoubtedly caused by cutting the duck season at December 14. This area is famous for its mallard shooting during late December and early January. The decrease in the High Country was probably caused by opening the season at a later date, and many of the birds were gone by the first part of the season. As for the West Central and Southwest Regions this decrease was caused in part by a growing lack of safe resting places for the birds which pushed many birds out of the area, and made the remainder seek areas inaccessible to hv.nters. The eastern slope again contributed to the bulk of the duck harvest being about 75 percent in 1959 which is similar to previous years. Weld, Larimer, and Morgan were the high three harvest Counties in that order. The 1959 goose harvest compared to the five-year average in Table 8 shows that the Southeast Region again accounted f"<Dr more than 82 percent ot'the total goose bag. Baca, Kiowa, and Prowers were the top harvest Counties in that order. Other Regions showed similar harvest t.opast years with the exception of the Northeast which decreased,and the Central which increased. The reason for the decrease in the Northeast is unknown, but the increase in the Central (mainly Weld County) is believed to be caused by management procedures which almost doubled the number of geese wintering in this area. �-100•.. Table 7.-- Duck Kill b~ Region and Count~ Five-year average 1959 Duck Kill 1954-1958 Waterfowl Number Per cent Number Per cent Region killed of total killed of total and County NORTHEAST .•15 184 .51 Cheyenne 1,119 565 .46 Kit ·Carson 3,113 1.40 148 .12 Lincoln 2,582 1.16 4,708 3.83 Logan 5.20 ' 11,530 4.39 Morgan 5,396 7.17 15,919 111 .09 Phillips 496 .22 1,721 1.40 Sedgwick 3.18 7,057 824 .67 Washington 1.34 2,975 12278 1.04 Yuma 2~24 4,284 14,935 12.15 NORTHEAST 22.42 49,775 TOT~ SOUTHEAST 934 .76 .89 Baca 1,968 2.07 4,586 3,578 2.91 Bent 2.42 5,364 2.05 2,520 Crowley .56 369 1,254 .30 Huerfano 1.46 3,252 860 .70 Kiowa 774 .63 Las Animas .97 2,161 1.19 2,647 627 .51 otero 3.04 Prowers 6,750 4,474 3.64 52379 2.42 2.86 3,516 Pueblo 17,652 14.36 15.02 SOUTHEAST 33,361 TOTAL CENTRAL 4.41 5,421 Adams 5.08 11,272 .83 701 .57 1,835 Arapahoe 5.33 6,552 Boulder 4.96 11 ,018 .98 .04 49 .04 Douglas .28 Elbert 639 .79 529 1,754 .43 E1 PasO .92 1,463 1.19 2,041 Jefferson 7,449 6.06 8.27 Larimer 18,365 37,455 30.47 16.29 36,159 Vleld 59,619 48ft50 CENTRAL TOTAL 83,181 37~46 SAN LUIS VALLEY 1.81 2.57 2,225 5,706 Alamosa 3,614 2.94 1.44 Conejos 3,190 823 .67 .36 790 Costilla 5,237 4.26 2.32 Rio Grande 5,154 3.36 42130 2.71 Saguache 6,021 13.04 16,029 SAN LUIS VALLEY 20,861 9.40 TOTAL NORTHWEST 1.40 1,721 1.07 2,368 Garfield 763 .34 983 .80 j'?offat 627 .51 •51 Rio Blanco 1,140 1.01 -1.,624 1 242 Routt 3.72 4,573 NORTHY!EST 2.65 5,895 TOTAL Estimated 1959 hunting I2ressure Number Per cent hunters of total 108 134 107 1,241 . 1,619 84 541 270 674 4,778 .37 •• 46 .37 4.27 5.57 .29 1.86 .93 2.32 16.44 404 837 541 189 404 215 485 '944 1,000 5,019 1.39 2.88 1.86 .65 1.39 .74 1.67 3.25 3.44 17.27 1,915 567 1,565 26 6.59 1.95 5.39 .•09 244 567 2,321 52236 12,441 .84 1.95 7.99 18.02 42.81 622 459 241 837 808 2,967 2.14 1.58 .83 2.88 2.78 10.21 541 241 81 215 1,078 1.86 .83 .28 .74 3.71 �-101Table 7.-- Duck Kill by Reqion and County. Cont'd. Five-year average 1959 Duck Kill 1954-1958 Waterfowl Region Number Per cent Number Per cent and County killed of total killed of total WEST CENfRAL Delta 3,973 1,046 .85 1.79 1.90 Mesa 7,179 3.23 2,336 Iv'.ontrose 4,561 2.05 2,297 1.87 Ouray 221 412 .18 .19 WEST CENfRAL TOTAL 4.80 5,900 16,125 7.26 SOUfHVIEST Archuleta 317 .14 Dolores 36 .02 Hinsdale 37 .03 30 .01 LaPlata 897 .73 2,517 1.13 Mineral 234 216 .19 .10 1,436 Nonte;'luma .65 578 .47 San Juan. San Miguel 401 .18 98 .08 1.50 SOtITHVIESTTOTAL 42953 2.23 12844 HIGH COUNTRY Chaffee III .09 1,HI .50 Clear Creek 5 T Custer 135 .11 685 .31 Eagle 344 .28 1,487 .67 Fremont 504 .41 1,636 .74 Gilpin ' 467 .Gr and .38 312 .14 Gunnison 37 .03 706 .32 Jackson 421 .19 Lake 332 .27 343 .15 Park 61 .CO 586 .26 Pitkin 320 .26 396 .18 Summit 49 .04 102 .05 Teller 12 .01 .Q~ 2~ 1.93 HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL J-,..8.8:':l 2,372 3.55 NORTHEAST SOtITHEAST CENTRAL SAN LUIS VALLEY NORTHWEST WEST CENfRAL SOUTHFIEST HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL OF REGIONS Estimated 1959 hunting Qressure Per cent Number hunters of total 296 567 485 81 1.02 1.95 1.67 .28 1,429 4.92 26 190 .-_81 81 .09 .65 .28 .28 81 459 .28 1.58 81 .28 55 108 134 .19 .37 .46 163 52 26 108 26 55 26 55 889 .56 .18 .09 .37 .09 .19 .09 .19 3.06 49,775 33,361 83,181 20,861 5,895 16,125 4,953 7,885 Summary by Region 14,935 22.42 15.03 17,652 37.46 59,619 9.40 16,029 4,573 2.65 7.26 5,900 2.23 1,844 3.55 2,372 12.15 14.36 48.50 13.04 3.72 4.80 1.50 1.93 4,778 5,019 12,441 2,967 1,078 1,429 459 889 16.44 17.27 42.81 10.21 3.71 4.92 1.58 3.06 222,036 100.00 100.00 29,060 100.00 122,924 �-102 •. Table 8.-- Goose Kill b~ Reqion and Count~ Five-year average 1954-1958 Waterfowl Region and Count~ NORTHEAST Cheyenne Ki t Carson Lincoln Logan Morgan Phillips Sedgwick Washington Yuma NCRTHEASTTOTAL SOurHEAST Baca Bent Crowley Huerfano Kiowa Las Animas Otero Prowers Pueblo SOUfHEAST Tor AL CENTRAL Adams Arapahoe Boulder Douglas Elbert E1 Paso Jefferson Larimer Estimated 1959 hunting oressure Number Per cent hunters of total Number killed Per cent of total Number killed Per cent of total 26 61 19 .09 57 29 .42 .21 83 616 5 98 35 -155 12088 .18 .43 .08 •• 58 4.31 .03 .69 .24 1.08 7.61 440 180 2.00 .82 639 2.91 198 769 29 29 142 142 12395 1.46 5.64 .21 .21 1.04 1.04 10.23 6,410 1,064 420 95 1,949 48 193 2,000 92 12,271 44.85 7.44 2.94 .66 13.63 .34 1.35 13.99 .64 85.84 8,765 2,222 1,380 281 2,681 101 19 2,641 19 18,109 39.89 10.11 6.28 1.28 12.20 .46 .09 12.02 .09 82.42 3,846 940 770 341 1,339 86 113 1,367 86 8,888 28.18 6.89 5.64 2.50 9.81 .63 .83 10.02 .63 65.13 280 7 14 1.96 .05 .10 19 101 101 .09 .46 .46 429 170 142 3.14 1.25 1.04 18 12 83 40 323 777 .13 .08 .70 .28 2.26 5.44 101 60 2.180 2,562 .46 .27 9.92 11.66 199 342 1,III 2,393 1.46 2.51 8.14 17 .54 101 440 .46 2.00 142 399 285 1.04 2~92 2.09 541 2.46 826 6.05 29 29 .21 .21 11 Vleld CENTRAL Tor AL SAN LUIS VALLEY Alamosa Conejos Costilla Rio Grande Saguache SArI LUIS VALLEY TOTAL NORTH~'IEST Garfield ~.P.offat Rio Blanco Routt NORTH\IESTTOTAL 1959 Goose Kill , /' 7 4 .05 .03 11 .08 4 64 .03 045 68 .48 �•.103Table 8.--Goose Kill b~ Reqion and Count~. Cont'd. Five-year average 1954-1958 1959 Goose Ki 11 VJaterfowl Region Number Per cent Number Per cent and County killed of total killed of total WEST CENTRAL Delta 10 .07 fksa 13 .09 J\f.ontrose ,.27 39 Ouray VIEST CENTRAL TOTAL 62 .43 SOUfHVIEST Archuleta Dolores Hinsdale La Plata 5 .03 Ivlineral Montezuma San Juan San 1I/li gue 1 SOUfHVIEST TOTAL .03 5 HIGH COUNTRY Chaffee Clear Creek Custer 4 .03 Eagle Fremont 5 121 .03 .55 Gilpin Grand Gunnison Jackson Lake Park 5 .03 Pitkin .Summit Teller .55 121 HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 14 .09 Estimated 1959 hunting Qressure Per cent Number hunters of total - 29 .21 29 .21 29 87 .21 .63 29 .21 29 .21 1,395 8,888 2,393 826 29 10.23 65.13 17.54 6.05 .21 87 29 13~ 647 .63 .21 100.00 ..,. - NORTHEAST SOUfHEAST CENTRAL SAN LUIS VALLEY NORTHliiEST \'JESTCENTRAL SOUfHVJEST HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 1,088 12,271 777 11 68 62 5 14 l4~296 Submitted byt Jack R. Grieb Date: Summary by Reqion 2,,91 7.61 . 639 85.84 82.42 18,109 5.44 2,562 11.66 541 2.46 .08 .48 .43 .03 121 .55 .09 100.00 21,972 100.00 Approved by: --~0~c~to~b~e~r~,~1~9-60--------- Gilbert N. Hunter --s!ate Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator - � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/3105fd6da271dc142f33a781b8c0fc44.pdf 7b50a3b501062b3a8fdae7e6c87088d8 PDF Text Text January, 1961 -1- COLORADO DEVELOPMENT COMPLETION REPORT FISH AND HILDLIFE HABITAT IMPROVEI.ffiNT PROJECT FW-6-D-3 December 1, 1959 to November 30, 1960 HORK ACCOMPLISHMENTS Planting Trees, Shrubs or Aquatic Plants: Trees and shrubs planted in 1960 included: Ponderosa Pine (Pinus ponderosa), Rocky Mountain Juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), Russian Olive (Eleagnus angustifolia), squawbush (Rhus trilobeta), Chinese elm (Ulmus pumila), Hackberry (Celtis occidentaIiS), Caragana (Caragana arborescens), plum (Prunus americana), sandcherry (Prunus besseyi), green ash (Fraxinus lanceolata), chokecherry (Prunus melanocarpa), golden \fillow (Salix vitellina), cottonwood (?opulus sargenti), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Blue spruce (Picea pungens). -Soil Conservation Districts planted 211,514 seedlings (Table 1). Personnel on the project planted 15,235 seedlings (Table 2), making a total of 226,749. Potting of 34,000 evergreens was accomplished by a contract \fith the Colorado State Forest Service at a unit cost of fifteen cents per live tree delivered in 1960. Originally, 85,000 were contracted forj but due to severe winter loss, only 34,000 were available for use during the 1960 planting season. Evergreen seedlings held over from the 1959 season accounted for 29,182 potted plants; 1000 Austrian Pine and 700 blue spruce were surplus in 1960 and not used, making a total of 61,482 potted evergreen plants distributed. This total consisted of 36,647 Rocky Mountain Juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), 24,535 Ponderosa Pine (Pinus ponderosa), and 300 Blue spruce (Picea pungens). A total of 5610 Ponderosa Pine, which were seven years old were undercut and distributed to Soil Conservation Districts. These were bare-rooted and were transplant stock held on the nursery. Approximately 100 plantings were inspected in northeastern Colorado to ascertain survival, care and design. Only two percent of these plantings had not followed the original design and while no attempt vras made to get a definite survival figure, over-all inspections showed that 70 percent of the plantings were in good to excellent shape in so far as appearance and care were concerned, 25 percent in fair to poor category and 5 percent could be listed as complete failures. �TABLE 1 SEEDLINGS DISTRIBUTED TO SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS (1960) 'CJ v .p 0 0 t'H Q) '" § ~ !II () '" ::r1 t'H ..c:: t:) H o '" Ul ;::J H Q) >•.-1 H 0 Q) Q) Po () •.-1 ~ e ~ Q) ~ Q) s:: ·rl p., iii g. (/) ..c:: Ei H 1%1 a ,:{ p., o 'CJ § co :>. ..c:: Ul ..c:: s:: ~0 Q) Q) k 0 o Q) ..c:: (.) :.: 0 H H ·rl ~ ~ 0 .p -> ;::J +' 0 0 (.) Q) ~ ~'" 0 Q) ~ H H H 'CJ H H Ul () H 5 cr. Ul s:: bD ;:: •.-1 .p .p c, ;::J H oj .p 0 (.) 8 I Ul Q) •.-1 I f\) I AREA I Eagle Meeker 125 650 775 TOTAL 860 1620 200 250 450 230 300 530 125 240 365 50 100 150 130 80 210 2L~80 12 160 10 240 10 ~32 2400 2100 270 350 900 900 2025 450 700 700 600 550 6975· 4970 1990 500 800 750 1800 925 700 400 5375 2250 2000 600 350 600 200 6000 AREA III La Plata AREA IV Agate - High Plains Big Sandy & Horse Rush Custer County Divide Fountain Valley Kiowa Upper Arkansas TOTAL 200 100 300 900 100 1000 32 400 300 3222 175 600 600 100 600 600 100 175 9715 4070 4200 4982 4200 2150 29317 �'1:1 Q) oj.) 0 0 D:< Q) po, .c: 17) I» ~ ~ Q) .0 ~0 al AREA V --Big Thompson East Adams Platte Valley s. E. Weld West Adams West Greeley 'lorAL AREA al ~ s::! -ro to cU H cU :r:: (.) 50 200 50 1200 Q) I>- ~ t> P. ~ s::! ;:j r-i 0 I-;) ~ ~ ;:j Q) 0 ;:j ~ P. Q) .c: .0 Q) s::! ~ ~ al ;:j 0' El § r-i p.. 0 '1:1 s::! .c:17) <.: s::! Q) Q) ~ p.. CI) i4 260 2350 225 850 350 200 4235 152 1500 348 550 350 560 3460 50 1000 1000 1250 300 350 3950 50 2200 800 650 800 200 4700 400 26 1000 1000 100 200 1000 650 2850 100 6000 125 7225 150 1000 1000 1000 300 1250 1000 1300 1300 500 3950 2050 500 2100 2000 1300 50 950 200 1450 50 900 950 1350 150 150 3550 400 1000 500 1000 2000 50 1)-1-503000 100 6000 100 6700 )-1-00 75 200 1000 672 2347 160 200 2950 1500 1000 2700 495 2215 300 1000 650 I» CI) al CI) 0 500 1000 100 ~ ~ '0 Q) ~ ~ 0 0 0 .-i .-i oj.) oj.) o :B: (.) ~ ..G ~ 0 In I :B: 17) 17) tJ) .... 17) ;:j Q) 0 s::! oj.) oj.) p.. (.) 0 ...:I .... ;:j 300 300 ~ s::! oj.) 300 500 1000 100 0 al 0 0 Q) .c:0 ~ ~ .-i ,-1 300 r-i cU oj.) 0 8 662 11250 3323 5600 1950 1710 2if495 Y.L Branson - Trinchera N. E. Prowers Pueblo Purgatoire West Otero TOTAL 400 826 /j.800 101 750 20000 2397 2e048 100 100 ~·VII Akron Cheyenne Cope Flagler Hale 150 200 550 500 1050 200 2550 500 18P5 1000 300 750 leOO 1500 500 50 200 100 700 300 935 8910 2945 13Q50 8935 7200 I lJJ I �'I;j ..., Q) o I» I» ..c:: ~ II! H s:; Q) as ~O· «I ~ Q() Q) CD P. ;=j .0 CD 0 ~ c;1j ~ ..c:: Q) -0: H C1l H » ..c:: 0 'I;j C1l s:; ~ H Q) ..c:: 0::: Q) ;.: 0 Q) s:; CD ~0 CJ) eJ U ~ 0 r-i rl ~ 'I;j «I 0 0 rQ ~ s:; 0 ..., ..., I 4-3 C1l ~ 0 rl r-i 0 ..-t (/] [1:) •.-f s::: ..-t ..., ...,;;$ p.. U rn r-i a! ~ :> ..-t r-i •.-f ;=j ;=j U 0 I-;) H P. 500 200 530 500 750 1000 600 300 300 170 100 100 100 300 6.500 1600 500 1400 1000 ll50 900 450 300 1800 1100 14410 2000 1000 1800 1600 1900 1000 4000 2200 23500 1000 1100 1500 250 1000 900 1000 755 1500 llOO 2400 2000 1100 1600 2650 1100 2650 2000 600 600 400 3300 /+100 4900 732 2600 1750 300 16422 26600 25250 775 300 1000 950 1450 1450 3000 6500 1600 450 12 6975 3550 6700 14410 530 160 4970 4235 2347 23500 150 365 10 240 3222 5375 3~60 3950 . 26 2850 300 16/+22 26600 210 10 6000 4700 7225 25250 600 600 100 500 1000 100 1250 1000 1300 2550 1600 300 200 100 400 700 100 5135 1475 2480 432 29317 241+95 28048 126742 9200 7825 32097 35742 300 24305 39165 43395 4900 4200 1500 500 500 700 100 5610 1475 211514 as as s:; CJ) Q) s::: o.-f p.. ;=j 0' CJ) ~ r-i !il § rl p.. as Q) ~ ..c:: o.-f ;.: 0 U ::s 0 0 H Q) s:; ..., 0 E-< AREA VII (Cont'd.) Haxtun Morgan N. E. Yuma Padroni Peetz Rock Creek Sedgwick South Platte Yuma TarAL 1290 300 550 300 250 250 100 300 500 600 250 250 200 100 300 2550 1600 200 !,OO 100 700 100 500 1100 200 3050 175 5135 1475 7400 6920 630'5 10550 9150 P700 3670 20200 11907 126742 'l'OTAt3Y AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA I III IV V VI VII GRAND TarAt 175 300 1I �-5TABLE 2 SEEDLINGS DISTRIBUTED TO REG roNAL PERSONNEL SPECIES TOTAL Hackberry 250 Caragana 4,200 Olive 2,700 Juniper 905 P. Pine 230 Sq_uawbush 2,600 Elm 1,900 Plum 700 Sandcherry 450 Green Ash 300 Chokecherry 400 -- Multiflora Rose TOTAL 600 15,235 �-6TABLE 3 SEEDLINGS PURCHASED, ON HAND AND TOTAL USED BY SPECIES SPECIES SURPLUS AND HANDLING LOSS PURCHASED ON HAND PLANTED Juniper (Rocky Mountain) 15,000 21,647 36,647 Ponderosa Pine 17,000 7,535 24,535 Austrian Pine* 1,000 Spruce* 1,000 300 700 Olive 35,000 34,797 203 Squawbush 45,000 41,765 3,235 Elm 45,295 45,295 Hackberry 10,000 9,450 Caragana 12,025 12,025 Plum 5,600 5,600 Sandcherry 5,500 4,650 1,000 5,610 Bare-Rooted Pine 550 850 5,610 Green Ash 2,000 1,800 200 Chokecherry 1,000 900 100 T'lillow 500 500 Cottonwood 1,000 700 100 100 Locust Hillow Cuttings Multiflora Rose 1,475 1,000 198,020 1,475 600 36,267 300 226,749 400 7,538** *Surplus evergreens will be used in 1961. **Surplus and handling loss was 2.5%. Prepared by: Date: Francis Metsger Approved by: January, 1961 --------~~~~~~~-------- G. N. Hunter --~~--~--~----------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �January, 1961 -7- COMPlETION P.EPORT INVESTIGATIONS REPORT State of COLORADO ------------------------------ Project No. W~-_8_8_-R_-~5~ _ Haterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 3 Horl~ Plan No .__~2__--:--,--..,--:--=-~ __~ Investigations of the Yampa Valley and Brown's Park Nesting Title of Job: Goose Flock. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960. ABSTRACT This four year investigation of the Great Basin Canada Goose Flock breeding in Moffat County, Colorado, was conducted mainly by a series of annual float trips down the Green and Yampa Rivers. A review of estimated breeding populations for this area from 1952 through 1959 shows a substantial decrease in numbers particularly in the early 1950's. This decline seemed to be general throughout the range of this sub-species. Annual goose populations of the study area were as follm-ls: 1956, 153; 1957, 129; 1958, 254, and 1959, 189. The decrease in goose numbers in 1959 was attributed to departure of Geese from the study area to molting lakes, prior to the first float trip down the rivers. Production of goslings varied from 29 in 1957 to 121 in 1958 resulting in flock increases of 29 and 88 percent respectively. Brown's Park contained the most breeding birds per river mile of habitat, probably because of the associated lruces and marshes along the Green River ~ich provided more habitat per unit area. Geese usually arrived in early March and began nesting in late March .nth a peak in nests under incubation by rod-April. Most nests hatched in mi d-May ; Non-nesting birds left the study area in early June and apparently moved to certain reservoirs in \-lyomingto molt. Goose families remained scattered along the river until mid~August when large flocks began to form. Percent of nests successful and eggs hatching were high for all years of the study except 1957 when an early flood crest destroyed most nests on the Yampa River. Average clutch (4.9 to 5.8) and brood (4.8 to 5.5) size compared favorably with those reported by other investigators. The most significant cause of nest mortality was flooding. This occurred only in 1957 on the Yampa River section as a result of an early flood crest. It appears that because of the close relationship between peak hatching dates, and normal flood crest dates, any deviations which would cause geese to establish nests later, or a flood crest to occur earlier, would have a significant influence on the success of the hatch. Flooding is not a cause for concern in Brown's Park. Geese appeared to prefer to nest on low sandy islands most susceptable to flooding. For this reason, nesting structures were built, and points of stable islands cleared of brush to lure pairs to these sites. Of the two methods, nesting structures were far more successful, and it is possible that nest loss to flooding may be aIeviated by sufficient numbers and correct placement of structures. In cooperation vith the Central and Pacific Flyway organizations, and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, restrictive huntinG regulations were imposed throughout the specific f'Lyway of this goose flock. This appeared to improve the status of this goose flock. It is recommended that a yearly survey be conducted to determine flock �...8- conditions. Results of this survey will furnish information for hunting regulation recommendations to the Great Basin Canada Goose Committee, and to the Colorado Game and Fish Commission. Further, that a management plan be formulated for a limited harvest type of hunting season in Moffat County if such is justified by f'Lock status. Finally, that nesting structures be constructed in all suitable areas to aIeviate flood losses in those years of early flood crests. �-9- Investigations of the Yampa Valley and Bro\ro's Park NestinG Goose Flock Jack R. Grieb, Hitchell G. Sheldon, and Don J. Neff INI'RODUCTION The Great Basin Canada Goose, Branta canadensis moffitti, commonly breeds on river systems and lakes of most western states and Provinces of Canada. Because of its competition for living space with ranching and agricultural interests, wildlife managers recognize that this sub-species ,must be managed on an intensive basis. Information derived from banding strongly indicates the existence of individual f'Locks of this sub-species, vThich breed in one specific portion of the general range, use one flyway for migration, and .Tinter in one distinct area. Thus, managers must not only be cognizant of the all-over flock status, they must also be aware of the status of individual sub-f'Locks . One such sub-flock is the Utah-Imperial flock which breeds in southcentral and southwest portions of 1-lyomingand the nor thves t portion of Colorado, and winters mainly in the Imperial Valley of California (Ballou, 1956). During the early 1950's, Colorado Waterfowl Project personnel received an increasing number of reports of a severe decline in the breeding numbers of these geese in this state. This decrease was substantiated by results of studies conducted in Wyoming (Ballou, 1956). As a result, it was decided to initiate an investigation designed to determine what could be done to save this flock. This investigation had the follOWing specific objectives: 1. Determine the size and annual production of the Yampa Valley Brown's Park resident goose nesting flock. 2. Determine factors influencing the annual status of this f'Locl; , 3. Make recommendations for the improvement of flock management and status. The study was conducted during the years 1956 through 1959, and the following is a report of its results. STUDY AREA Present breeding range of this goose flock is Moffat County in the northwest corner of Colorado. This area has two main river drainages, the Yampa River and Green River (Brovn s Park), v,hich permitted a logical division of the investigation. A smaller drainage, the Little Snake River, also supported breeding geese; hovever , this portion was not included in the official study because of navigational difficulties and limitations of time and personnel (Figure 1). t Yampa River Section: This section consisted of the riverbottom from Craig, Colorado, downstream to the Dinosaur National Monument at the weat.ern end of Lily Park. The 90 miles of river contained III islands at low flow ranging from low sand bars to a few over nine feet high. �BROWN'S PARK DENVER • STATE COLORADO . GRAYSTONE ,.. .04 At ,0.04 ,,~t: e ,.. (. LILY JUNIPER PARK Figure 1.- YAMPA VALLEY a BROWN'S PARK NESTING GOOSE STUDY AREAS MOFFAT COUNTY t COLORADO OF ��-12- The Yampa River bottom vas classified into three general vegetativegeological types: (1) wide sagebrush valleys, 39 miles; (2) narrow sagebrush canyons, 26.5 miles; and (3) cottonwood bottoms including lakes, sloughs and flooded meadows, 24.5 miles. About 41 miles of the river study area occurred in populated, cultivated regions. The remaining 49 miles was relatively inaccessible, and usually undisturbed by human activity. Brown's Park Section: This section consisted of the Green River and adjacent lakes and marshes in Brown'S Park. Total length of the river was 15 miles, and it contained nine islands ranging in size from eight by 30 feet to 20-25 acres. There were eight separate semi-permanent water areas along the flood plain of the river. These areas were directly dependent upon the Green River for water. In those years of flood crest, lakes and marshes would be filled providing excellent habitat. In years of no flood crest, the areas dried up and were not useable by geese. METHODS Several attempts were made to census breeding geese by air; however, this te.chnique did not prove practical in this area. Therefore, all work was conducted by a series of float trips down the Yampa and Green Rivers in: (1) Early April or early May; (2) late May and; (3) mid-June.· All geese observed were noted upon field maps for future location compariosn and recorded as paired birds, Singles, birds in groups, and goslings. Paired birds were sub-divided into nesting and idle pairs while single geese were considered to be the mate of an incubating bird. Groups of geese and broods were recorded by number and location. Nests were located by searching the area in the vicinity of a pair or single goose observation. In addition, each island was searched regardless of the presence or absence of geese. All located nests were recorded on field maps and individual 3 x 5 cards (Figure 2). Figure 2. Sample Nest Data Card Nest Data Card No. River Initial Date T R Sec. ------------------------------ ---------- ~------- ------_ Dist. from water--=~..".__:__--yds. Elev. above water_:__---Ft. "later type On ground Soil type ~Nest Lining ..".~~ On structure type Elev. above ground ft. Bank Island Vegetation type No. eggs -----------~------Nest destroyed ~~Approx. date Cause~~~--~~~------Nest hatched No. eggs hatched No. failed to hatch Date of hatch Approx. laying date --------Degree of isolation: Boats Cattle Sheep Roads -------Agr. operations __~ __~~~-:-Canyon ~Sagebrush Park --Broad Cottonwood Bottom _ --------- --------- -------~ ~=-~ _ �-13- Residents of the area wer-e contacted for past and current goose information. These included local ranchers, nomadic sheep or cattlemen and recreational float trips. Nesting structures were built and vegetative growth on islands removed in an effort to provide geese with more nesting sites, and to lure pairs to permanent islands. Restrictive hunting regulations were imposed up and down the flyway of this flock for protective purposes. Equipment consisted of a 14-foot aluminum square stern canoe. This was powered by a 5~ x hp Johnson outboard motor during the first part of the study and later by a 7~ hp Johnson outboard. Both motor sizes gave satisfactory performance; hovever , the 7! hp was faster and proved better for upstream travel. RESULTS Population Trends: A review of past and present breeding populations is presented in Table 1. Obviously, there was considerable decline from the early to the late 1950's; however, this decline is not believed to be as drastic as that portrayed in this table, especially for the Yampa section. From 1952 through 1955 the size of the Yampa population was estimated from several randomly selected study areas along the river. It appears that these areas were located in the better goose habitat, thus inflating the total estimate of breeding pairs. Also, a distinction between actual breeding and idle pairs was not made during the early years of work in this area. Again this would tend to over-estimate the true breeding pair population. There is little doubt, however, that a decrease did occur in the population during the early 1950's. Table 1. Breeding Population of Green and Yampa Study Sections, 1952-59. Study Section Year Yampa 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Green (Brmm's Park) g} 11 Projected from sample area. y Actual count. 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 g II y 1/ "2/ u 2/ y No. Pairs Observer 120 130 110 20 22 21 27 18 Boeker Boeker Grieb Grieb Neff Sheldon Sheldon Sheldon 21 12 Tester Tester Grieb Grieb Neff Sheldon Sheldon Sheldon 8 15 5 11 11 7 �-14- Population Estimates and Flock Composition Comparison of the results of this investigation between years shows that the number of nesting birds increased from 32 to 50 during the study interval. At the same time the number of "idle paired birds" (probably novice nesters) increased from 20 to 32 but dropped to zero in 1959. The reason for this drop was believed due to the lateness of the first float trip down the river that year. It appeared that "idle-paired birds" and some of the grouped birds had departed by that time (Table 2). Production of goslings was at low ebb during 1957 when an early flood crest on the Yampa River destroyed most nests. However, production during the t,vo succeeding years was very good with 121 and 87 goslings produced in 1958 and 1959 respectively. Thus, flock increases for these two years were estimated at 88 and 85 percent, in that order, which was considerably above both 1956 (53 percent) and 1957 (29 percent) (Table 2). Table 3 compares nesting pair numbers and number of goslings produced between sections of the study area. From this tabulation it is found that Br-own's Park held the most breeding birds per river mile of habitat, and produced the most goslings per mile. This is believed due to associated lakes and marshes along the flood plain of the Green River which provided more habitat per unit area than on the Yampa River. Breeding Season Chronology First arrivals of geese usually occurred in early March. Migration into the breeding area was over by about mid-April, after which the local population remained fairly stable until early June. Nesting began in late March with a peak of nest incubation in mid-April. Most nests hatched in mid-May tapering off to early June (Figure 3). Groups of geese and non-nesting birds observed during early counts would become scarce during late May and early June. Tester (1953) noted similar actions during his Brown's Park investigation, and concluded many of these brids moved into the inaccessible Yampa and Green River canyon to molt. During the course of this investigation, however, Department float trips and contact with recreational float trips through these areas failed to reveal significant numbers of molting geese. It is more likely that there was an annual movement of birds to large reservoirs in Wyoming to molt since a number of neck-banded birds from the Wyoming banding study were observed in both the Yampa and Brown's Park goose populations. This investigation was usually concluded in late June of each year and information on the geese after that time is lacking. Hovever , Boeker (1953) found in his waterfowl study on the Yampa River that goose broods remain scattered along the River through the summer until mid-August when large f'Locks began to form. �Table 2.--COMPARISON OF FLOCK COMPOSITION AND PRODUCTIVITY, 1956-59 Year No. of No. Idle No. of Total No. of Nesting Birds Pair Birds Grouped Birds Goslings Prod. 1956 1957 1958 1959 32 32 44 50 48 36 62 52 20 32 32 0 100 100 138 102 Total Population 153 129 259 189 53 29 121 87 of 0/0 Flock Increase 53% 2910 88% 85% Table 3.--COMPARISON OF NUMBER OF BREEDING BIRDS AND PRODUCTION BY AREA, 1956-59. Average of Miles Nesting pairs Location YAMPA: Craig to Juniper Canyon 49.0 8.5 Juniper Can. to Cross Mt. 30.2 3.0 Lily Parle 10.5 2·3 8~r --13~8~Total GREEN (Brown's Park) Totals 15.0 104.7 6.5 20.3- Average Nesting Average No. Pairs / Mile Goslings Prod. Average Young Prod. / Mile ~ VI I 0.2 0.1 0.2 O.2 0.4 ~------O.2 26.~ 0.5 6.5 0.2 5.3 0·5 38-:-3~ - ~ ~ -~ - - b. 4 34.3 ---72.6 2.3 0·7 �Figure .3.-Nesting Chronology, Yampa-Brown's Park Canada Geese, 1956-59 40 beginning incubation ,... "tI G) .30 I 11 I I I (') , G) tI c+ .-t 0 £ I "~Nest,. '", \ \ \ , 20 \ \ I 121 \ ,, G) Ol c+ Ol hatching , \ \, ,, , 10 '\~ , ~" , ,, " ,, ,' 1 2. March 4 1 2 .3 April 4 1 2 .3 liar Period 4 1 , " , 2 June I .3 4 �Table 4.--Successof nests under Observation,1956-59. 1956 No. No. SuccessfulNests 13 No. UnsuccessfulNests 3 Total Nests 16 No. Eggs Hatched 58 No. Eggs Lost 13 Total Eggs 71 Average No. Eggs rClutch~--4~--Average No. Goslings/Brood 4.8 f7 1957 No. % 81.3~ --b-~6.2 18.7 7 53.8 100.0 13 100.0 81.7 29 42.0 18.3 40 58.0 100.0 69 100.0 5.7 4.8 10 1958 1959 No. % No. 10 22 100 -15 - - -94.1 0 0 1 5.9 22 100 17 100.. 0 121 94.5 -S7 93·5 7 2/ 5.5 6 6.5 128 100.0 93 100.0 5.8---------5."8 5.5 5.5 !I Includesone nest under observationon the Little Snake River. g; Occasionaleggs which failed to hatch in successfulnests. I ~ I �-18- Nestint:;Information Hatching Success. Percent of successful nests and percent of eggs hatched was very good throughout all of the years except 1957 when an early flood crest destroyed most nests on the Yampa River (Table 4). With the exception of one year, percentage of nests hatched was comparable to the 79.3 percent found by Naylor and Hunt (1954) on the Susan River, California, and was considerably better than the 23.9 percent success reported from the upper Snake River by Craighead and Craighead (1949). Average Clutch and Brood Size. The average clutch and brood size observed during the four years of this investigation compared favorably with those reported by other investigators (Table 4). Craighead and Craighead (1949) found an average clutch size of 4.6 eggs, and an average brood size of 4.5 goslings (21 broods) for the Jackson Hole Canada Goose flock. Williams and Harshall (1938) at Bear Refuge reported an average of 3.9 goslings per brood from counts of 84 broods. Boeker (1953) recorded an average of 3.4 birds for four broods on the Yampa in 1952, and 6.0 birds for nine broods in 1953. Tester (1953), in Brovm's Park, found an average of 6.0 birds for 18 broods in 1952, and 5.7 birds for nine broods in 1953. Tester also reported observations by Game Management Agent Frank Poley in Brown's Park in June 1948, which lists an average of 4.1 birds for 19 broods observed. Nest and Brood Mortality. Consideration of the number of nests lost each year of the study shows that the most significant cause of nest mortality lias flooding (Table 5). Normal flood crests usually occurred in late Mayor early June on the Yampa River (Boeker, 1953), and in late June on the Green River (Tester, 1953). These had negligible effect on nesting geese since a majority of nests had hatched by that time (Figure 3). Comparison of peak hatching dates and dates of normal flood crests reveals, however, that there is little demarcation, and deviations which would cause geese to establish nests later, or a flood crest to occur earlier, would have great influence on the success of the hatch. It appears that weather is the most important single factor influencing the chronology of both nesting, and timing, amount, and duration of runoff. Unfavorable conditions in the form of heavy snowpack and warm weather existed in 1957 when a flood crest was reached on the Yampa River on May 14, immediately prior to the peak nest hatching period. The result was almost complete elimination of goose nests in this area. Goose production in the Brown's Park area seems less affected by flooding, probably because of its distance from watershed areas which supply the Green River. Thus, high waters do not reach Brown's Park in time to affect nesting. Flooding was cited as a major cause of nest destruction by Craighead and Craighead (1949) on the Snake River. Boeker (1953) also pointed to high flood crests on the Yampa in 1952 as the reason for the low goose production that year. Most authorities (Craighead and Craighead, 1949; Williams and Marshall, 1938) agree that mortality in goose broods usually is negligible. No evidence uas found of gosling mortality during the course of this investigation. �Table 5.-:-Causes of canada Geese Nest, Failure, Yampa and Brown's Park, !9$6-59· Cause No. of Nests Lost 1956 1957 1958 1959 Flooding Collapse of Undercut Bank UnlUlown Predator Human Disturbance Unknown Totals 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 3 7 Totals No. 0 1 % 1 1 1 54.5 18.2 9·1 9.1 9.1 11 100.0 2 Choice of Nest Sites. Location of goose nests varied from low sandy islands to sheer canyon cliffs. Numerous reports were received of cliff, haystack, or tree nesting geese, but only one was found on a cliff, and the, rest were located on the ground. Most of the goose nests observed were on islands in the riverj and although there was evidence that nesting did occur along channel banks, no nests were found even though considerable searching was done in these areas. No definite criteria were discovered for judging the value of an island for goose nesting. It seemed that the geese choose the worst islands (from the standpoint of flooding) for nest sites. They apparently preferred low grassy islands because of high visibility in all directions afforded the bird on the nest. Some nests were located on points of islands which were clear of heavy vegetative growth. In this respect it is to the best advantage ~f the geese that a large beaver population be maintained on both the Green and Yampa Rivers since they tend to hold willow and brush gr01nh down on the islands. There uas a tendency for geese to return to the same nesting site year after year. In many instances during this investigation, nests were found in the same location by the same pair of neck banded birds in successive years. Also of interest is the information tbat birds produced the previous year often returned to the nesting site with the parents. These immature birds could be observed loafing in the vicinity of the nest site until driven away by tbe adults with the beginning of nest incubation. Habitat Improvements. At the conclusion of the disastrous nesting year of 1957, it became obvious that if geese could be lured away from low, temporary type islands to more stable islands, it would be possible to reduce losses due to flooding in subsequent years. Two measures were undertaken to accomplish this: (1) WilloW and brush growth was cut from points and other desirable places on permanent islandsj and (2) Twenty-five nesting structures were placed on various types of areas along the Yampa River. The first measure was notc.consi.der-edsuccessful since only one pair of geese utilized these areas. Artificial nesting structures, however, held much promise for combatting nest destruction. Thus, one structure was used the first year (1958), three in 1959 and subsequent observations have shown increasing use of these facilities each year. Although structures were tried in a variety of locations it soon became evident that the geese accepted only �-20- those placed on islands, especially the small temporary islands. Continued acceptance of nesting structures by the geese will serve to reduce nest destruction due to flood waters. Neck Band Observation. Neck-banded geese were frequently seen during the field work of this study. Three colors were observed -- solid red, solid white, and yellow stripe on red band. The first two colors were assigned to the Hyoming Game and Fish Commission and placed on geese banded at Pathfinder Reservoir (red) and Wheatland Reservoir (white) (Ballou, 1956). The third color was assigned to the Colorado Game and Fish Department, and was placed on a goose released in North Park the year prior to observation (Table 6). Birds carrying the red or ",hite neck bands were banded as adults (probably sub-adults) by the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission during July, 1955. It is this evidence that leads to the conclusion that yearlings and other adult Geese tend to move to 't-Tyoming Reservoirs to molt. Hunting Regulations. In 1953, an unusually heavy harvest of Canada Geese was taken in the Imperial Valley of California (Game Management District 22). Band recovery data from Hyoming strongly indicates that this harvest may have had a significant bearing on the decline of geese breeding in both Hyoming and Colorado (Ballou, 1953). Consequently, it was decided through cooperative discussions between personnel of the Pacific and Central Flyways, and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Hildlife, that restrictive hunting measures would be necessary to restore this flock to more suitable numbers. The following is a yearly tabulation of goose hunting regulations in areas affecting this flock. 1955.--Colorado reduced the bag limit to one Canada goose in Routt and Moffat Counties. 1956.--Colorado and Wyoming maintained a two Canada goose bag limit, but specified that the season would not extend beyond December 15. The bag and possession limit was restricted to t,.,oCanada geese in utah and Yuma and Mohave Counties of Arizona. In California Game Management District 22, the bag limit was one Canada goose. In all of these areas the season was closed December 15. 1957.--Colorado closed the goose season in Moffat County, and Uyoming held to a one bird bag and possession limit. Yuma and Mohave Counties of Arizona and Utah reduced the Canada Goose bag and possession limit to one bird. The Canada goose season was closed in California Game Management District 22. 195B.--Colorado again closed the goose season in Moffat County and Wyoming held to a one bird bag and possession limit. Portions of Yuma and Mohave Counties, Arizona and California Game Management District 22 Here open to the taking of one Canada goose, wh LLe other portions of the same area (except Mohave County) were closed. Utah had a bag and possession limit of one Canada Goose. 1959.--Colorado continued the closed season on geese in Moffat County, and Wyoming continued a bag and possession limit of one goose. �Table 6. Observations of Hyoming Neck Bands on Canada Geese on the Yampa and Green Rivers ~ 1. Yampa River Red Band 1 of a pair about 20 mil~s below Craig. Observed 1 May, 1956. 2. Yampa River Red Band 1 goose on nest on island 10 miles above Juniper Springs. Observed 2 May, 1956. Yampa River Red Band 1 of 4. Yampa River Red Band Both birds of a pair 1 mile Hbove Haybell bridse. Observed 12 May, 3· a pair between Maybell and Sunbeam. Observed 6 Hay, 1956. 1956. 5· Yampa River Hhite Band 6. Yampa River Red with Yellow Stripe Band 1 goose on nest 15 miles below Craig. Observed 20 Hay, 1956. 1 of a group of 9 birds 25 miles Craig. Observed May 23, 1958. be.Lovr 7. Little Snake Red Band 1 goose on nest on island about 4 miles below Ray Smith Ranch in VJyoming. Observed 5 May, 1956. 8. Green River Red Band of 7 birds in field on south bank 1 mile wes t of Utah border. Observed May 8, 1956. 9· Green River Red Band 1 of group of 19 birds on river near Ut.ahborder. Observed 15 May, 1956. 1 of group 10. Green River i-Tni te Band 1 pair with brood on river near Hogg Lake in Brown's Park. Observed 15 May, 1956. 11. Green River Red Band 1 of group of 8 birds on lake at old Basset Ranch in Br-ovn's Park. Observed 16 May, 1956. Y The above table lists only the first sishting of the color bands on the study area. �-22- The bag and possession limit in utah, Yuma and Mohave Counties of Arizona, and California Game Hal1agement District 22 was one Canada goose. In all of these areas except utah the season was closed December 13. It is obvious that once the decision was reached to attempt protection through restrictive regulations, a consistent effort was made by all agencies envolved. Considering the increase in numbers of geese returning to the breeding areas, it is believed that these regulations did much to restore this flock to a less critical status. DISCUSSION The flock of Canada geese breeding in Moffat County is an essential part of the wildlife heritage of Colorado. This is the last segment of a once wide-spread breeding goose population in this state. As such, it is worthy of every management effort to insure the retention of its present range, and the extension of this range where practical and possible. Results of this study have shown that the Yampa and Brown's Park areas offer excellent goose breeding habitat. Birds nesting in this area have a high production potential except in years of early flood crest on the Yampa. Clutch and brood sizes are large compared to studies in other areas. Given the opportunity, these breeding geese can reproduce, and thus perpetuate themselves. Of interest is lack of conflict between this flock and agricultural and ranching activities. The only major exception to this is in Brown's Park where two of the most important lake and marsh areas have been partially drained, and largely removed from goose use. The effect of this habitat alteration on the goose f'Lock is not clear, but in total can be nothing but harmful. Residents of this area are anxious to maintain this breeding flock of geese. They are interested in the birds nesting on their lands, and they often go out of their way to protect them. This interest is not because of the hunting benefits which they may derive, but seems to stem rather from the simple enjoyment of watching the birds and their activities ~uring the spring and summer months. The same feeling is not held by all members of the hunting fraternity. Pressures are frequently brought to bear to open the season and permit a harvest of birds. Certainly, consideration of the hunters will be an important part of the total management picture for this goose flock. But let us not lose sight of the fact that this goose flock is not invulnerable. The small numbers ifhich remain can be easily eliminated! Heavy harvest of breeding birds coupled with poor nesting seasons could erase this flock from Colorado. This is why careful surveillance of the numbers of geese returning to Colorado must be maintained each yearj coordinated efforts continued to limit the harvest of these birds throughout the flyway to a sound and sensible numberj and every means taken to aid goose production in the Yampa Valley and Brown's Park. Only in this manner will it be possible to maintain this Colorado wildlife resource for all persons, in all times. �-23- RECOMMENDATIONS 1. A yearly consus of this goose flock must be taken to determine its annual status. This information will be used to: (a) formulate, in cooperation with the Great Basin Canada Goose Committee, management recommendations for hunting seasons in all parts of this species flyway, and (b) determine the type and kind of hunting season, if any, justified for Moffat County. 2. It is doubtful if the future goose population of Moffat County will be able to sustain the liberal hunting seasons of the past. Therefore, it is recommended that management plans be instigated for controlled hunting with a season bag limit instead of a daily bag and possession limit. Consideration should also be given to controlling the goose harvest in this area by issuing a limited number of permits. 3. Nesting birds must be given every opportunity, under every circumstance, to successfully bring off their nest. In an effort to combat the threat of flood waters during some years, nestine structures should be built and maintained on each suitable island along the Yampa River between Craig and the lower end of Lily Park. A complete plan, listing suitable islands and maintenance routine, will be compiled by personnel of this project under the Habitat Improvement Job. LITERATURE CITED Ballou, Robert 11. 1956. Nesting, distribution, and mortality studies of Canada geese. P. R. Project H-50-R-5, vlyoming Game and Fish Commission. January 15, 1956. pp. 47-89. Boeker, H. M. 1953. Waterfowl production in the Yampa River Valley, Colora~o. M. S. thesis, Colorado A and M College. 117pp., illus. Craighead, F. C. and J. J. Craighead. 1949. Nesting Canada geese on the Upper Snake River. J. Hildlife Managemerrt, 13 (1):51-64. Naylor, A. E. and E. G. Hunt. A nesting study and population survey of Canada geese on the Susan River, Lasson County, California. Fish and Game 40 (1):5-16. Tester, John R. 1953. Waterfo",l production in Brown's Park, Colorado. M. S. thesis, Colorado A & M College. 98pp., illus. Hilliams, C. S. and W. H. Marshall. 1938. Survival of Canada goose goslings, Bear River Refuge, utah, 1937. J. vlildlife Management. 2(1):17-19. Submitted by: Date: Jack R. Grieb Approved by: Leader, Waterfowl Project G. N. Hunter State Game Manager Mitchell G. Sheldon Senior Game Biologist F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator January, 1961 ----------------~~~~~~~----------------- ��January, 1961 -25- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~~~~--------------- Project No. W-88-R-5 ----------~---------------- Work Plan No. 2 ----~-------------------- Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 4 Title of Job: L~vestigation of the Arkansas Valley Wintering Goose Flock Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 INTRODUCTION: Background and need for this study is given in the job completion report of 1957. OBJECTIVES: The objectives-remained the same as stated in last year's report and will only be summarized here: 1. To determine the fall movement of geese into the Arkansas Valley and the size of the wintering flock. 2. To determine feeding patterns and habits of geese wintering at Two Buttes Reservoir. 3. To evaluate hunter harrassrr.entof feeding geese. 4. To investigate wounding loss at Two Buttes Reservoir. PROCEDURES: With the exception of the method of checking the number of hunters and their harvest information, methods used remained as stated in the 1957 report. Some phases of the study were discontinued due to a decision by the Colorado Game and Fish Commission which closed the Two Buttes Goose Management "~ea to the hunting of Waterfowl making no check of hunters possible. This action was contested in the Powers County District Court and a temporary injunction was issued opening the management area for hunting as prescribed in the commission regulations of 1958. Action of the Court permitted no time to set up or open the check stations nor to hire personn~l to man them. Information deleted from the study for this year consisted of the weight of harvested birds; direction, size, time and duration of flights leaving from or returning to the reservoir; and the gauge, type of shell and shot size used to wound or kill geese. ��-27- Investigation of the Arkansas Valley Wintering Goose Flock Jack R. Grieb and Mitchell G. Sheldon WATER, FeOD AND WEATHER CONDITIONS: Water conditions for wintering Canada Geese were considered good to excellent in the Arkansas Valley and Two Buttes Reservoir area. Storage levels were dmm in some reservoirs but up in others compared to 1958. Geese wintered on all water areas until freeze-up concentrated the birds on larger, more permanent, impoundments. Food in the form of harvested small grains and green winter wheat was again plentiful throughout the entire wintering area. Food supply and distribution was considered to be equal to the past few years, follwoing the last period of drouth in 1955. Weather conditions were considered fair to good for goose hunting with a number of stormy days. The storms were confined to the latter part of the hunting season. This assisted the hunters by providing flights of geese within shooting range after the birds had become "firing-line-shy". Weather-wise the 1959-60 season was considered to be as good as 1958-59 and goose hunting was better than the several preceding years. Considered in all, water, food and weather conditions were good to excellent for the needs and harvest of the Arkansas Valley wintering goose flock. These factors undoubtedly provided a record year for hunting opportunity, enjoyment and harvest for the hunters' efforts. MIGRATION MOVEMENT AND WINTERING POPULATION: A total of five aerial census flights were made to determine the migration into, interchange between water areas and the population of wintering geese in the Arkansas Valley. Results of these aerial inventories and ground observations revealed that the geese arrived in the Arkansas Valley the interval of November 7-9, swelled to a record peak of 54,300 geese in late November and stabilized at about 37,000 from mid-December through the balance of the winter (Table 1). TABLE L AERIAL CANADA GOOSE COUNTS, ARKANSAS VALLEY, BY DATES, 1959-60 NUMBER OF GEESE RESERVOIR Meredith Henery Dyes Holbrook Horse Creek Blue Cheraw Eads John .Martin Two Buttes Total: October 27 65 November 18 1,435 80 November 24 2,100 250 December 1 2,220 210 .., 710 80 160 305 8,517 5,240 29,700 45,682 650 20 7,300 12,000 32,000 54z32O 1,400 65 9,150 10,910 28,400 52,355 January 6 1,695 600 80 5,333 2,650 26,980 37,349 �•.• 28- The interchange between water areas followed the same pat~ern as past years. Birds sometimes foraged from one water area and continued to another to drinlt and rest before repeating the procedure the next feeding flight. This was evidenced during aerial flights by a specific area having thousands of geese and another having only hundreds. A flight at a later date would usually show the numbers to be redistributed to those areas of previous low populations. This phenomena was observed many times in the Two Buttes Areas when geese fed southeast from the Reservoir and rested at Rutherford's Lake (fifteen miles southeast) before returning. Ground censuses of geese at Two Buttes Reservoir showed a trend similar to past years, (Table 2). Population fluctuations were apparent, as last year, with large numbers of geese observed on Rutherford's L~te at times during the fall and winter. Numbers of geese observed on Rutherford's Lake varied from a few hundred to over 13,000 with frequent estimates of 10,000 during the season. A minimum count of 400 was made several times on days following an estimate of many thousands. TABLE 2. GROUND COUNT OF TWO BUTTES RESERVOIR GEESE, 1959-60 Number of Geese Date Number of Geese Date December 9 November 10 31,210 10,300 11 11 12,250 21,990 27,440 12 15,000 12 20,000 22,830 13 13 28,500 22,750 15 15 16 28,450 26,300 17 18 27,200 30,650 17 20 30,000 29,700 18 Y 28,400 January 29,800 December ly 5 4 26,980 27,250 24,770 29,250 5 9 18,100 6 25,000 7 8 31,000 Aerial Count 6y 17 January Inventory figures we re compared for the Arkansas Valley in Table 3. These show a healthy upward population trend from 1948 through 1960. The present inventory figure (1960) is below the all time high of 1959. It has been surmised that some of the geese normally wintering in the Texas Panhandle remained in the Arkansas Valley during 1959. They probably returned to the more southerly wintering areas this year. TABLE 3. Year 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 JANUARY INVENTORY OF ARKANSAS VALLEY GEESE, 1948-60 Year Goose Count Goose Count 25,110 4,798 1955 12,286 24,212 1956 13,170 24,617 1957 19,320 1958 35,894 44,660 30,463 1959 20,236 1960 37,394 20,280 �FEEDING CHARACTERISTICS AND HABITS: Excellent poten~ial feeding areas existed in all directions from Two Buttes again in 1959 as during the past four years. A plentiful supply of harvested wheat and milo, as well as standing milo and green winter wheat were more than enough to meet the needs of the wintering geese. Winter wheat was well established and had produced good growth before the migrating geese arrived. Feeding flights were observed again this year to determine feeding characteristics and patterns as well as the amount of hunter harassment. Thirteen flights were followed to completion while the balance was terminated due to impassable roads, snow or dust storms and darkness (Table 4). TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF GOOSE FEEDING FLIGHTS, TWO BUTTES RESERVOIR, 1959 Flight Feeding Miles Grain Wheat Resting Flying Total In Flock Killed Flushed br Hunters 1 20 10 11 0 0 190 231 87 2·5 2 40 211 10 261 0 1 2.5 500 0 22 l20 11 l20 4.3 0 3 153 4 20 0 10 120 8 0 158 2·5 93 20.4 0 0 96 54 150 150 5 6 44.0 40 602 8 1 492 500 70 10.4 42 0 1 105 30 27 230 7 8 40 18 80 7.8 10 1 0 70 40 0 0 19·1 25 13 29 69 9 10 17.0 11 l2 0 0 23 34 150 93 16.8 11 26 0 38 1 25 270 92 11.6 12 112 1400 0 2 51 30 19 21 140 74 208 0 0 13 32·9 59 TotalS 191.8 10 380 2304 358 l295 37bO 179 5 Averages 14.8 39.8 22·3 289 .38 177.2 117·7 29·2 ·77 The average feeding foray lasted 177 minutes (two hours and 57 minutes) and geese traveled 14.8 miles to and from the feeding areas. They fed in harvested small grains an average of 40 minutes, on green winter wheat an average of 22 minutes, spent an average of 118 minutes watching or resting, and an average of 30 minutes flying to, from or between feeding fields. The average feeding flight contained 289 geese and had 0.77 goose killed from each flight. In the fields, the geese were flushed by hunters an average of 0.38 times each flight. No other form of harassment was observed. The distance traveled has shortened each year indicating more available or attractive feeding areas closer to the reservoir. Watching and resting again made up the bulk of the time away from the water area. No data were gathered on direction, time or duration of flights leaving the reservoir. Gross observations indicated good flights occurred throughout the season except during the full moon phase when the geese fed almost exclusively at night. The only deviation from the daily flight pattern was during the frequent inclement weather when they flew all day. HUNTER HARVEST: In 1959, the Colorado Game and Fish Commission closed the ~TO Buttes Goose Management Area to the hunting of waterfowl. However, the balance of Baca and Prawers Counties were open to duck and goose hunting. The geese, after arrival, fed in department-owned fields immediately adjacent to the firing line. This established a pattern of comp Iete confidence ..,i thout any shooting during their feeding flights. �-30- Three local sportsmen challenged the Commission action as arbitrary and capricious in the District Court at Lamar. A temporary restraining order was invoked by the court November 13, 1959, declaring the area open to hunting at 6 a.m. the following morning. The harvest that followed on the unsuspecting geese could be best described by one word -- slaughter. This continued for several days until the geese reverted to the old pattern of crossing the firing line high and flying far-a-field to feed. The five check stations were not operated in 1959 and no pits were assigned. Thus hunters could shoot from any point between the front and back firing lines. This lack of control led to mass confusion along the "line", for as the geese passed over a segment of the firing line and shooting ensued, the hunters on both sides wou.Ld move under the geese for a shot. Hunter movement and the increased barrage would shift the flight to another segment of the firing line and the hunter migration would follow. This was observed almost constantly the first few days of the season. Many geese were killed, but no one knew who actually shot the bird. Possession was often determined by the size of one claimant or by the mere flip of a coin. These disgusting spectacles proved one thing beyond a doubt--control of the firing line and the hunters there-on was absolutely necessary if goose hunting is to remain a great sport and not be degraded to a game of heads and tails or who is the larger. TABLE 5. COUNTY Baca Kiowa Prover-s Bent Crowley Pueblo Huerfano otero Las Animas Total GOOSE HARVEST IN THE ARKANSAS VALLEY, BY COUNTY, FIVE YEAR AVERAGE 1954-58, 1958 and 1959; BASED ON RESULTS OF RANDOM SURVEY. NUMBER AND PERCENT OF GEESE BAGGED Lakes within each Five year Average county influencing (1954-55-56 reported harvest. 51 and 58) 1958 1959 No. No. No. 10 % % 4 Two Buttes 6410 52.2 1910 52.4 8765 48 •. Eads and Blue 1949 15·9 2231 14.6 2681 14.8 Two Buttes and Eads 2000 16.3 1810 12.2 2641 14.6 1064 John Martin, Blue, 8.7 1328 8.6 2222 12.3 Horse Creek 420 Meredith, Henry 3·4 181 5·l 1380 1.6 Horse Creek, cherav Group, Dyes, Holbrook 92 95 193 48 12211 0.1 0.8 1.6 151 157 664 1.3 1.3 4·3 19 281 19 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.4 35 0.2 101 0.6 100.0 15205 100.0 18109 100.0 The 1959 hunter harvest of the Arkansas Valley goose flock was again estimated by random survey (Table 5). These data have ranged over the years from 1,312 in 1954 to the high of 18,109 in 1959 (Table 6). The Two Buttes Area again provided about 50 percent of this harvest. Fluctuations between years can be accounted for by differences in hunting pressure, weather and availability of populations to the hunter. Weather and hunting pressure apparently exert the greatest influence upon the harvest. �..31- TABIE 6. Year 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 GOOSE HUNTING SEASON STATISTICS, 1954-1959· Arkansas Valley State Hide Estimated Average Estimated kill season goose Dates of Stamp bag hunters Sales Season 11/1-12/30 11/1-12/30 11/9-1/7 11/2-12/31 11/17-1/15 10/26-1/8 32450 39107 36303 41794 41897 31431 7071 9054 9833 9113 10082 8888 1.04 1.54 1.05 1.39 1.51 1.61 7372 13904 10276 12656 15205 18109 ~.o Buttes Management Area harvest data for 1959 were gathered mainly by two seasonal employees. Actual collection of information started several day~ after the opening of the hunting at the Reservoir, since the first few days were spent attempting to control hunters and keep them wi thin the area wher-e hunting was permitted by court order. Consequently, the kill for this period was estimated by partial bag checks and gross observation. The balance of the season, firing line harvest data were gathered by parkins lot checks. The checkers collected information at the two heaviest used parking areas and recorded the number of cars in the remaining parking lots. In the areas worked, number of vehciles, number of hunters per car and hunter success was recorded for each day. This information was used to calculate the daily total number of hunters and their estimated harvest. Additional information was gathered regarding age ratio and general body condition of bagged geese. The enforced check of 1958 showed 7,343 hunters bagged 1,947 geese "hile the partial check of 1959 indicated 6,447 hunters took an estimated 2,000 geese. The hunter success calculated from these figures resulted in .27 goose per hunter per day checked in 1958 and .31 goose per hunter per day estimated in 1959· Age composition of the harvest was determined by the notched tail-feather method. Geese with any notched feathers were considered to be young-of-the-year. Bag checks contained 66.8 percent young-of-the-year birds and 33.2 percent subadult or adult geese. The 1958 bag data contained 52.1 percent young and 47.9 percent adults. This would seem to indicate satisfactory production for this flock both years. FLOCK DRAIN FROM WOUNDING LOSS: A reasonable estimate of the wounding loss must be included in total harvest data if this goose flock is to be properly managed. In the past, three methods have been used to determine this additional loss: (1) small game hunter random survey; (2) hunter bag checks; and (3) Reservoir shoreline dead goose carcass count. Small game random survey wounding loss figures were used for comparison to those obtained from bag checks and the dead goose counts of the reservoir shore. �-32- A calculated wounding loss of 17.8 percent was derived from the 1959 small Game hunter random survey. Hunters, during the bag checks, reported a wounding loss amounting to 19.8 percent, while a wounding loss of between 10-15 percent was estimated by the dead goose count. In 1959, the shoreline count could not be considered complete because no January count was possible. Snow and rain prevented a final count during this month and when runoff did occur, the waterlevel of the reservoir rose 14 vertical feet in 24 hours. This inundated the carcasses and made a final count for the year impossible. However, 232 total ·dead geese found in November and December compared favorably with past years. Shoreline carcass counts were known to produce a minimum wounding loss while other estimates may have been high because some geese known to have been wounded were later harvested. Geese in poor condition, checked in the bag, accounted for 1.3 percent of all harvested geese checked this year. This compared favorably with the 2.2 percent of 1958. BANDmG INFORMATION: A total of 5,194 geese have been banded at Two Buttes Reservoir since the start of banding in 1951. This has resulted in 1,360 band returns through July, 1959. The number of geese banded and the returns, by years, through 1959 are tabulated in Table 7. Distribution of Two Buttes band recoveries by date and area show the harvest pattern as the geese migrate southward (Table 8). This year's data strengthened past years' information, that Canada annually harvests about 50 percent and Colorado approximately 25 percent of birds banded at ~{o Buttes (Table 9). AGE AND SEX COMPOSITION: Age of all geese banded were determined by the notched tail-feather method, supplemented by cloacal examination. Sexing was by cloacal examination. Table 10 compares all available age data gathered since 1951, from both trapping and bag checks. The 1960 banding sample of 52.0 percent males and 48.0 percent females was similar to previous years. TABLE 7. Banded Year 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Totals NUMBER OF TWO BUTTES GEESE BANDED AND RETURNS BY YEARS, 1951-1959 Returns 1951 Number No. 644 1278 1478 41 81 12.6 182 516 529 526 5194 81 ~ 1952 1953 ~ No. 45 7·0 135 10.6 36 73 134 180 243 No. 1954 r 22 3;4 No. 5.6 5·7 9·1 62 84 168 ~ 4·9 5·7 1955 No. 14 47 73 3 137 ~ 2.2 3·7 4·9 7·3 �-33- TABLE 7 Year 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Totals TABLE 8. (Continued) 195b No. ~ 21 3·3 37 2·9 54 3·7 3 7·3 24 13·2 139 lot 6.6 7.8 12 40 Ilb 1958 No. ~ 8 1.2 1.2 15 2.1 31 2.4 1 1959 No. 4 O.~ 1.0 13 1.4 20 Total ;; No. 240 37.3 30·9 395 29.4 435 24.4 10 6 31 53 8 19 41 46 151 50 90 94 46 13bO 3·3 6.0 10.0 145 4.4 3·7 7.8 8·7 27.5 17.4 17.8 8·7 DISTRIBUTION OF TWO BUTTES BAND RECOVERIES BY DATE AND AREA 1951-1959 Number of Bands Recovered by 10 Day Period September October November 1 total 1 total total 2 2 1 2 3 3 3 12 4b 94 152 147 146 7b 87 369 47 30 10 17 Area Canada Montana & North Dakota Nebraska Wyoming & South Dakota Colorado Texas, New Mexico, Kansas & Oklahoma Other Flyways Total 12 TABLE 8. 1957 No. 9 1.0 13 2.6 39 3 7·3 2 1 1 3 3 3 1 17 3 22 16 4 55 1 2 4 21 3 45 1 62 8 128 2 28 2 6 91 107 123 30 9 321 - 46 94 152 149 147 1 1 82 378 (Continued) Grand AREA December 1 Total 2 2 Total 3 Total Jan. 1 Canada 611 3 3 Montana & North Dakota 1 8 1 Nebraska 4 1 12 70 7 Wyoming & South Dakota 11 1 1 Colorado 81 76 42 199 21 11 32 359 Texas, New Mexico Kansas & Oklahoma 48 1 11 10 15 13 20 90 Other Flyways 4 4 6 11 1 26 3 5 Totals 109 100 b6 275 1,175 49 3b 13 Periods 1,2 and 3 represent the dates 1-10,11-20, and.21-31 respectively. 17 �TABLE 9. DISTRIBUTION Recovery 1951 of; No. Area Alberta 28 35·1 Sask. 16 20.0 N. W. TerrIs 2 2·5 1.2 Hanitoba 1 B. C. Canada Totals 47 58.8 Colorado 20 25·0 Nebraska 6 7·5 Texas South Dakota 1 1.2 New Mexico Oklahoma Kansas North Dakota Wyoming 1 1.2 1 1.2 Montana Other Flyways 4 5·1 u. S. Totals 33 41.2 Grand Total 80 100.0 OF BAND RETURNS BY AREA AND YEAR 1951-1959 1952 1955 % No. % No. cJ, No. i 52 37 5 1 28.4 20.2 2.8 0·5 77 53 6 32·7 22.6 2.6 59 29 10 33·5 16.5 5.6 48 18 2 34.7 13·0 1.5 95 49 5 22 2 1 1 1 51.9 26·9 2.8 12.0 1.1 0·5 0·5 0·5 136 49 10 21 2 4 5 1 57·9 20.8 4·3 8.9 0·9 1.7 2.1 0.4 98 43 9 11 68 49 12 5 49.3 35·5 8·7 3.6 1 2 4 0·5 1.1 2.2 2 1 4 0·9 0.4 1.7 4 1 1 1 1 2 2 55·7 24.6 5·1 6.2 1.7 2·3 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 4 2.9 88 41.8 99 42.1 78 44·3 70 50·7 183 100.0 235 100.0 176 100.0 138 100.0 Table 9. (Continued) Recovery 1956 Area No. % Alberta 43 32.2 Sask. 13 9·7 N. H. TerrIs 6 4.5 Manitoba B. C. Canada Totals 62 46.3 Colorado 53 39·5 Nebraska 5 3·7 Texas 8 6.1 South Dakota 1 0·7 New Mexico 2 l·5 Oklahoma Kansas 1 0.7 North Dakota \-lyoming Montana Other Flyways 72 1.5 U. S. Totals 72 53·7 65 36 11 6 52.8 29·3 8.9 5·0 1 0.8 2 2 1.6 1.6 4 58 47·2 134 100.0 123 100.0 1957 No. 48 15 2 1958 % No. 39·0 12.2 1.6 53 24 2 - Grand Total 1954 1953 No. 3 1959 % No. % 37·1 16.8 1.4 53 11 3 34.9 7·2 1.9 1 0·7 68 61 10 6 1 2 44·7 40.1 6.6 3·9 0·7 1.3 2.8 2 1 1 64 44.7 143 100.0 79 43 6 6 1 1 2 1 55·3 30.0 4.2 4.2 0·7 0·7 1.4 0·7 Total No. % 461 216 38 2 1 33.8 16.8 2.8 .1 .1 1.3 0·7 0·7 718 403 74 85 11 15 9 5 1 7 9 27 52.6 28.5 5.4 6.2 0.8 1.1 0·7 0.4 0.1 0.5 0·7 2.0 84 55·3 646 47.4 152 100.0 1360 100.0 �-35- TABLE 10.--AGE COMPOSIT ION OF THE TWO BUTTES RESERVOIR FLOCK Check Station Banding Young of the Year Adult Young of the Year Year Adult No. No. No. No. "/0 10 '10 % 1951 1952 1958 1959 1960 343 649 346 214 266 53·3 50·9 66.4 42.2 59·9 300 627 175 293 178 46.7 49·1 33.6 57.8 40.1 356 46.8 404 53·2 929 361 47·9 1010 33·2 726 52.1 66.8 ESTIMATE OF FLOCK SIZE: Estimates of flock size before the hunting season are made by using band recovery data and.harvest information. It must be remembered that it is not possible to check the accuracy of this projection. This estimate is reached by using a simple proportion of the band recoveries from Colorado for anyone year to the estimated harvest for Colorado that year, as all band recoveries are to the total harvest. This added to the Ja~uary Inventory figure gives an estimated before hunting population. These estimates ranged from a low in 1956 of 56,250 through 106,650 geese in 1958 leaving the nesting areas to start the southward migration. Calculations indicated that about 120,000 birds left the far north breeding areas late in the summer of 1959 and started for the wintering areas. This year a series of cooperative aerial censuses were initiated in parts of Nebraska, New Mexico, the Texas Panhandle and Colorado, the major wintering area of the Arkansas Valley goose flock. Although only one aerial census was completed, it showed that in late November, this flock numbered about 95,500 geese. FLUROSCOPIC ~IINATION: The banding operations again included examination of each goose by X-ray for body shot. The techniques used remained exactly as described in the 1957 report and will not be repeated here. During the 1959-60 banding operations a total of 444 geese were observed for body shot. The total included 31 known or suspected cripples leaving a corrected total of 413 geese fluroscoped. Of these 413 geese, 44.3 percent (183 geese) had one or more pellets in the body tissue. Comparison of all young-of-the-year birds examined revealed that 30.6 percent (56 of 158 geese) had 1 or more shot in their body, while examination of adults (geese older than' one year) showed 69.4 percent (127 of 255) with body shot. Incidence of body shot for 1959-60 are tabulated by age and sex classes in Table 11. �TABLE 11.--INCIDENCE OF BODY SHOT OF GEESE Y BANDED AT THO sorrzs RESERVOIR, BY AGE AND SEX CLASSl 1959-60. Number Number Percent of Observed With Shot Class with Body Shot Class Adult Male 129 55.03 126 56 44.44 Adult Female Total Adults 255 127 69·40 71 Immature Male Immature Female Total Immature All Male 220 All Female 193 Total Geese 413 All figures corrected by Y 31 25 56 34.06 37·31 30.60 102 81 183 46.36 41.96 44.30 91 67 158 .ova.L of known cripples. RECOMMENDATIONS: Until such time that management information of this flocl\: becomes current and not at least eight months old, it is recommended that this study be continued. Further recommendations are as follows: 1. A coordinated population census program again be attempted in Nebraska, Colorado, New Mexico and Texas to determine the size and extent of the Arkansas Valley wintering goose flock. 2. A coordinated effort be made to determine the preseason population of this goose flock in the probable staging area of eastern Alberta and western Saskatchewan. This to be followed by a coordinated banding program in the staging area to determine the hunting season distribution, migration patterns and mortality of these geese. 3. Exploration flights to be inaugurated in the far-north to locate the breeding grounds for the Lesser Canada Goose of the Central Flyway. This to be followed by production surveys and a breeding grounds banding program. 4. A banding program be instigated at Two Buttes Reservoir at regular periods throughout the hunting season, to determine if firing line hunting is a major cause of the incidence of body shot found in these geese. It is felt the above recommendations are the minimum necessary for the factual management of the Lesser Canada Goose flock Wintering in the Arkansas Valley of Colorado and in the Central Flyway. Prepared by: Mitchell G. Sheldon Senior Game Biologist Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Biologist Jack R. Grieb Leader, "Haterfowl Date: January, 1961 --------~--~~~~-------------- Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �·January, 1961 -37- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------~~~------------- Project No. ~W_-_88~-~R~-~5~--------~ Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 5 ~~~~~--~--~----~~~--~~---- Work Plan No. 2 Ti t Le of Job: 1m Evaluation of Methods for Improving Goose Nesting Sites on Colorado Breeding Grounds. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Objectives: (1) To determine the effect of nesting structures and the clearing of islands, where practical, on the nesting success of the geese. (2) To determine the best type of nesting structure, most desirable location for a structure, and the best method for the clearing of the islands of brush and willow growth. (3) To determine whet.he'rgeese ,viII use the nesting structures and cleared areas of the islands. Procedures: Construction methods and procedures were described in detail in previous reports and will not be repeated here. Methods used during this segment consisted of inspecting each structure for condition and nesting activity along with field worl••of other jobs. Hhen possible the damage resulting from flooding or livestock was repaired.· Residents and users of the areas were again contacted for any observations about goose use of the artificial nest s~tes. . Results: The nest site structures east of the Continental Divide are all located on ponds and lakes, while those west of the Rockies are mainly on river-islands or in sloughs and lakes of the flood plain. Observations of the 85 nest platforms are classed by general location of East slope or West slope. Each specific area will be discussed individually under these headings. East-Slope: Bowles Lake platforms continued to be utilized 100 percent by nestinG geese. Again in 1959, the 19 useable structures each produced at least one brood of geese. Ground nesters at Bowles Lake were also highly successful this year. All five structures at Lake Bonfils on the Bel-Mar Estate were used by nesting geese during 1959. These, too, have proven to be 100 percent successful for creating additional nest sites. Ground nests on the estate we re also highly successful. Artificial nest sites at Johnson Ranch were used by nesting geese. These five platforms produced the only lUlown broods, as all ground nests were believed destroyed by terrestrial predators. �-38- College Lake ne st i ng si te platforms wer e salvaged, after being destroyed by inundation and ice. Enough materials were gathered to re~ocate four structures. No platforms ",ere used by nestinB geese this year. Nest platforms located in the Department's captive goose pen at Bonny have not been used for production by the pinioned geese. It is possible Dam, that they cannot easily get,upon them. Captive geese nesting on the ground were again highly successful at Bonny Dam. All areas considered, the 38 useable structures on the eastern slope were highly s~ccessful during 1959. They prove geese will use man-made structures where a shortage of natural nest sites exist. \Vest-Slope: April, May and June float trips down the Green and Yampa Rivers permitted inspection of each west slope nest platform for condition and goose use. These trips were primarily made to conduct field work for a goose nesting study. The observations will be discussed as the Yampa and Green River segments. Two more structures on the Yampa River were eliminated by flood waters eroding upon islands and livestock destroyed an additional strav platform. Brace wires wer-e repaired on several platforms that had been broken by ice or debris. This left 12 useable nest sites of the 25 originally constructed. Of these, geese nested upon three to produce broods during 1959. Three additional ones had "dummy nests" or forms made on the straw platforms, but no eggs .rere found. These forms are believed to be the results of newly paired geese going through some of the motions of nesting. If true, additional nests on platforms will be found next year. The Yampa River artificial nest sites were considered successful in 1959 .. because of the increased goose use. It appears that platforms could help alleviate ground nest loss due to flooding. Structures in Brown's Park on the Green River wer e left high and dry by the drying up of flood plain lakes and sloughs. This condition was brought about by the lack of flood waters filling the lake basins. .•Livestock destroyed one st.rav platform leaving 24 useable structures durine; 1959. These were probably undesirable to ne st.Lng geese because they were far from vat.er . No goose nestine; upon structures uas found in Brown's Park this year. Few ground nests we re known to produce goslings probably due to the drouth conditions that existed during the 1959 nesting season. Observations were again made of past vegetation manipulation upon selected islands in the Yampa River. Willows, since removal by cutting, have grown to such heie;hts they rendered the "improved" sites unsuitable for e;oose nesting. This confirmed the 1958 observations that vegetation removal woul.d have to be repeated every fe'\-, years to maintain a useable nest site. �-39- Conclusions: Eastern slope platforms continued to be extremely successful in supplementing natural nest sites for semi-wild breeding goose flocks during 1959. This would indicate success for man-made structures where a distinct shortage of prime natural sites exists. The increased goose use of artificail nest sites located on Colorado's west slope is particularly gratifying because of the multitude of natural nest sites found along the Yampa and Green Rivers. Furthermore, the breeding population densities are comparably lov in these areas; hence, the competition for nest sites is also correspondingly low. Observations indicate that the construction of nesting platforms in breeding areas could be quite successful where ground nests are destroyed periodically by floods. It is believed that several more years will be required before the west slope structures can be fully evaluated. Vegetation manipulation on islands by cutting willmTs and other brush was not successful because it would require periodic recutting to maintain the nest site. It wou Ld appear that a balanced beaver population could possibly serve the same purpose of retarding vegetation growth, where they would not conflict ,nth agricultural practices. Summary: (1) Two structures were lost to flood waters and two additional straw platforms we re picked apart by livestock, on the west slope. The remaining structures in Brown's Park were left high and dry by drouth conditions drying up the water areas. (2) This year three platforms on the Yampa River were used by nesting geese and all produced broodsj three additional ones had "dummy" nests upon them. These may indicate newly paired geese were selecting nesting areas for future use. None of the Brown's Park artificail nest sites were used by geese during 1959. (3) It is believed several more years are necessary for final evaluation of the west slope man-made nest structures. (4) All east slope structures were heavily utilized during this year except those at the Bonny Dam captive goose pen. Therefore, these were considered to have been extremely successful in supplementing natural nest sites. Recommendations: (1) Construction of additional nest sites to existing structures to be turned over to the Regional Land Managers. (2) Observations to be continued of each platform during field work of other projects to permit final evaluation of the west slope artificial nest sites. Submitted by: Date: Mitchell G. Sheldon Senior Game Biologist Approved by: January, 1961 ----------~----~~~-------------- G. N. Hunter --~----------~-----------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��January 1961 41 J8B COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGk~IONS PROJECTS State of Dolorado ------~~~~--------- Project No. w-88-R.,.6 Waterfowl Investigations Work Plan No. 1 Job No. Title of Job; Waterfowl Production Survey Period Covered: 1 April 1, 1960 to June 1, 1960 Objectives: To determine, through statistically reliable sampling techniques, the number of ducks and geese, by species, produced on Colorado waterfowl breed~ ing grounds. Procedure: After six years of intensive study, present breeding~pair and production surveys have been consolidated into a two •• week breeding-pair study in late May, and a two-week production study in July. One week of the breeding study req_uires roughly 30 to 40 hours of aircraft use. All other weeks of work are done on the ground usually in cooperation with local Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife personnel. On the basis of these studies, reports are made, as req_uired, to the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, which constitute Co.lor-ado':s part in.the annual cooperative breeding ground survey. ��43 WATERFOWL PRODUCTION SURVEY Mitchell G. Sheldon and Jack R. Grieb The 1960 breeding-pair surveys were conducted within the period May 16 to June 2. During this time, ground counts were made in the Yampa Valley and Brown:(s Park; and aerial counts were conducted in the South Platte, Cache la Poudre, and San Luis Valleys, and North Park. As for the past several years, intensive brooii surveys were not conducted this year due to a lack of time. Thus, this final breeding ground report considered only the breeding-pair surveys with last minute notes on weather and water conditions, accompanied by gross observations of early nesting success in the breeding areas. MErHODS All survey methods and sample areas remained the same as in the past years, with the exception of aerial transects in the San Luis Valley and the type of airplane used. In 1960 one observer was again used in the San Luis Valley, while the North Park transects were flown with two observers using a De Haviland Beaver airplane. WEATHER AND WATER CONDITIONS Weather and water conditions in Colorado during the spring and early summer were considered to be good for waterfowl nesting and production. In general, water levels in eastern Colorado were above average while in the rest of the State conditions were about the same as last year and below average. This was due to above normal precipitation in the eastern slope and a "dry" winter in North Park and the west slope. The snow pack in the high •• country appears to be near or below normal indicating short water supply for mid-summer. The writers believe, however, that the overall weather and water conditions in Colorado were and are favorable for waterfowl production and brood rearing this year. RES"G'LTS Examination of the duck breeding-pair estimates by area reveal the 1960 counts were up 72.3 per cent from 1959, and 70.5 per cent above the six-year average. (Table 1). ThiS, pOSSibly, was due to past and present drought conditions in the northern breeding grounds. Personnel cooperating on the 1960 counts were: Charles Hayes and Robert Ballou, U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife; Don Smith, Utah Game and Fish Department; Sam Clifford, Jack Grieb and Mitchell Sheldon, Colorado Game and Fish Department. �44 Table l,~-Summary of Colorado Duck Breeding Ground Conditions, 1960 with 1959 and the Six-year Average for Comparison. Total Estimated Breeding Pairs 6-year 1959 1960 1960* Area average San Luis Valley 6966 10759 7433 10759 North Park 3708 4856 4856 4767 South Platte Valley 1648 1386 5101 3340 Cache la Poudre Valley 1507 819 1524 1762 Yampa Valley 2658 2586 2999 2999 Brown's Park 125 62 96 96 'TOTAL 16,612 ' ~5 ;573 17,053 23,574 = *Inc1ude~ gadwall and shoveller found on South Platte and Cache la Poudre areasj not known to nest here but migrate so late that they are not counted in other area. Comparison of individual breeding ground estimates between 1960 and 1959~ showed that all areas were above last year with Brown t s Park ',the. Oh;:b.yrlat:~a; below the six-year average. This was believed to be caused by the below average water conditions in Brown I s Park as all lakes' and sloughs vrere com•.• pletely dry and water was found only in the streams. All reservoirs in eastern Colorado were filled to near capacity even at this late date. , Goose breeding conditions showed an increase in 1960 over 1959 and a satis~ factory increase over the four~year average, (Table 2). However, the Green River population was down from 1959 and the four-year average because all lakes and sloughs were completely dry in that area. The upward trend was encouraging as it reflected the success of the hunting restriction and protection program initiated for the Great Basin Canada Goose in parts of the Central and Pacific flyways. The closed season and reduced bag have reduced the kill of breeding and maturing sub~adult birds of this flock. However, populations are still critical and there appears to be a need for continued hunting restrictions. Table 2.-~omparison of Colorado Goose Breeding Ground Surveys~-1960j 1959 and Four-year Average. Total Observed Breeding Pairs . "PF6ur.~¥earaverage 1959 N~8't:i:ng Total Nesting Total Nesting Total Area' pairs Young birds pairs Young birds Young birds Yampa River 82 18 18 47 108 94 208 13 30 Green River 22 40 81 54 2 7 47 7 '0' 7 TCfrAL". 20 ',.. 52 ' 1;36 25 . :j]9.,. (5 J *Data gathered from one float trip in 1960 instead of several float trips made in past years. �45 Species composition of the breeding duck population was similar to past years, (Table 3). Mallards made up the bulk of the breeding birds (68.1). The bluewinged teal and pintail showed a marked increase while gadwall, cinnamon teal, shoveller and redhead indicated the larger decrease, however there was little change from the six-year average excepting the gadwall and shoveller. Any changes may in part might have been due to the late spring and varying water conditions around the State, and a dispersal into new areas as indicaned by the South Platte and Cache la Poudre study areas. Table 3.-~Species Composition of the Colorado Breeding Population 1960j 1959 and Six~year Average. Species Composition~Per Cent Number . of Ducks ... 6Year Year 1960 1960* 1960 1960* 1959 1959 ~es 61.7 . 57.5 68.1 63.4 Mallard 10290 9812 16213 16213 Blue •.• w.teal 6.6 6.1 880 5.4 1564 1564 927 5·3 Pintail 2291 .2291 1173 9·6 9·0 879 7·0 5·2 Gadwall 2288 8.2 8.9 8.9 l36Ji 1526 5·1 998 1.4 1.0 1.8 Baldpate 298 236 236 0·9 23l 1.1 3.8 Shoveller 256 3.4 672 563 965 3·9 2.8 2.6 Cinnamon 'feal 666 1101 666 6.5 649 3·9 2.1 1.8 Green-w teal 451 1.9 364 451 390 2·3 2.1 Redhead 581 549~1 549 2·3 5·5 933 3·5 1.4 0.8 1.8 Scaup 210 210 294 245 0·9 44 0.2 0.2 0.2 Ruddy Duck 81 44 45 0·5 •... Bufflehead 2 0.1 0.8 Canvasback 22 0.1 134 American merganser 125 ~.'J::nl. 96 96 0.7 0.9 0.4 0.4 ,.,;TOTAL :;,,,,,T6673 ';'17052 ''23'574.'2'5573',,TOO':O';TOO'.'O' ',TOO .;0' TO'O:O *Includes gadwall and shoveller observed in South Platte and Cache la Poudre areas, not known to nest here but migrate so late would not be counted in other areas. FALL FLIGHT PREDICTION ConSidering the varying water and weather conditions and the increased breeding population it is believed the fall duck flights from Colorado IS production will be well above average. Geese still present a critical, although improving picture and indicates a definite need for continued hunting restrictions for the breeding flock in northwest Colorado~ Submitted by: Date! M. G. Sheldon January, 1961 ----------,~~~---------------- Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��January, 1961 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Project No. Work Plan No. Title of Job: 1 Job No. 9 Survey of Potential Public Waterfowl Shooting Areas in Colorado ABSTRACT Due to three basic problems associated with waterfowl management, Colorado initiated an intensive wetlands inventory and evaluation program during the summer of 1960. These problems are as:.follows: (1) a steady decrease in the amount of waterfowl habitat and limited knowledge as to the extent of our remaining water areas, (2) an increase each year in the number of hunters taking to the field, and (3) the problem of providing public shooting grounds for the sportsmen. The term frwetlands inventorylr, as used in this survey, is defined as the systematic study of water areas (wetlands) within the state of Colorado to determine their: (1) location and extent, (2) types of classification, (3) importance to waterfowl and other wildlife species, and (4) importance as hunting areas and for other recreational uses. The main objectives of this survey are listed as follows: (1) To determine the amount of wetlands in Colorado, beginning with the irrigated portion of the eastern slope. (2) To determine the number and amount of wetlands leased for hunting, fishing, and other recreational purposes. (3 ) To set up a method to rate wetland areas in terms of value for acquisition as public hunting areas. (4) To establish a priority list of public hunting areas for presentation to the Cbmmission. The inventory was initiated on the eastern slope, with study areas limited to irrigated portions. The South Platte Valley was the starting point. The study was conducted on a county by county basis, in which the irrigated portion of each county constituted one study area. Only two counties, Larimer and Weld, were completed during the first summer of this inventory. A table of random numbers was used in selecting two sections in each township for intensive study. This produced a sampling intensity of 5.5 per cent. Mapping of each study section was accomplished by aerial photographs. �48 Determination of surface acres of standing water and associated marginal land and miles of running water was achieved in this way. Wetlands in this inventory were classed as: (a) reserviors, (b) natural lakes, (c) ponds and marshes over five acres, (d) ponds and marshes less than five acres, (e) streams and rivers, and (f) ditches and canals. In addition, each wetland area over five acres was classified according to the 20 types described by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Only four of the 20 types were found to occur in the two counties completed. A "Wetlands Evaluation Form" was completed for each of the wetland types mentioned above, except (d) and (f), that were found in each study section. Tabulated results indicated that there are 83.4 acres per section of wetlands in Larimer County, in addition to 0.35 miles per section of rivers and streams and 1.74 miles per section of ditches and canals. In Weld County these figures are 18.1, 0.06, and 0.77 consecutively. Combined figures for Larimer and Weld Counties indicated that only about one-third of the total wetland areas and acreage are open to the public for hunting. Leased hunting acreage amounts to approximately 25 per cent of the areas studied. The public can obtain fishing rights on 45 per cent of the total wetland acreage in the study sections. Only about one•.. fourth of the areas suitable for boating are of benefit to the public. �Sli'RVEYOF POTENT IAL PUBLIC WATERFOWL SHOOT ING AREAS Jack R. Grieb and Mitchell G. Sheldon INTRODUCTION Colorado initiated an intensive wetlands inventory and evaluation program during the summer dr 1960 in an effort to gain much needed information concerning the extent of wetland areas. The Bureau Of Sport Fisheries And Wildlife recently completed a wetlands inventory of the United States in which emphasis was placed on wetlands considered susceptible to drainage or other land-use changes. In regions delineated for inclusion in the inventory, most wetlands less than 40 acres in size "Were excluded because they were too ·difficult to survey within reasonable time limits. It is the opinion of many ~ualified men that wetlands smaller than 40 acres in size are the most important habitat for certain game species in certain sections of the country. It .a.Lso excluded many important habitats which are considered permanent in nature, such as large lakes and reserviors. In addition, the inventory does not contain sufficient ~uantitative data for a detailed habitat analysis. With the above in mind, it should be the goal of each State to .contribute its part by aiming their existing or future inventory at completing this picture. In this way, the surveying of wetlands smaller than 40 acres would be achieved and each State c~Qld carry on its own wetlands habitat evaluation and .analysis program. The States and Provinces are in a very early stage of development as far as wetlands inventory is concerned. An extensive survey of this type is vital to all regions in all flyways. Inventory of the Canadian Provinces is necessary because of the importance of breeding grounds, and of the Mexican States, because of their wintering grounds. A more intensive inventory of the "Wetlands of the United States is important in supplying .additional information concerning our breeding, migration and wintering areas. Information obtained from wetland inventories can be pooled by flyways and used to aid in the management of our waterfowl resource. This being the case, we can see how important it would be to have a standardized procedure for all agencies involved for carrying out the inventory. Much effort is now being made to establish this standardized procedure. At this time the Colorado survey is far from being completed; therefore, we should look at the material presented below as being only a progress report. Basis of Study In Colorado, as well as in other States and Canadian provinces, we recognize many problems associated with waterfowl management. This survey is based upon three of the more important problems. They are as follows: (1) A. steady decrease in the amount of waterfowl habitat and limited knowledge as to the extent of remaining water areas. �50 (2) (3) An increase each year in the number of hunters taking to the field. The problem of providing public shooting grounds for sportsmen. Water areas are being drained at a faster o_'ratethan we can establish new ones. During a 20 year period, the various State and Federal conservation agencies have restored or improved 4~ million acres of waterfowl habitat. During about eight years of that same period the U. S. Department of A~riculture in contrast drained more than six million acres (Trippensee, 1953). Had the importance of some of the drained areas been known, much effort could have been made to purchase or set them aside for water~owl use. An increase in the number of hunters taking the field is inevitable due to the rapid upswing in the human population. The wildlife manager has very little control over the population increasej therefore, he must center his attention on providing enough hunting to keep pace with the demand. This leads us to the problem of furnishing the public with shooting areas. Providing public shooting areas for the sportsmen is a problem Which Colorado is particularly interested. Fishing, hunting and boating clubs, as well as unorganized groups, are steadily increasing their hold on water areas through leases. In this way, relatively few sportsmen are taking advantage of many of our prime hunting areas. This is due in part to the comparatively low cost of leasing these areas. If a hunting club consistingl pf 20 members lease a large reservior at a rate of $200 per year, the individual cost is small ($10) and many other advantages are readily seen. Thus, to help solve this problem, we need to beat them at their own game j that is, the State IIIUJ?t also buy or lease areas for public use ~ Buying or Leas Ing of water areas for public use will act as a stopper against drainage of wetlandsj thus, preserving habitat while at the same time increasing hunting; grounds for sportsmen. Before entering into an extensive acquisition program, there are certain procedures that should be followed in order to increase the success of such an operation. Just because an area is available for lease or purchase, doesn't mean that we should acquire the property by considering this fact alone. We must find a means of rating wetlands as to their value to waterfowl and sportsmen. We must determine the characteristics of an area which produces good hunting and which encourages optimum waterfowl use. If an area is of no practical value in attracting and holding waterfowl, then it can't possibly be of any value to the waterfowl hunter. When rating .an area, recreational uses other than hunting should also be considered, since maximum use of an area will further justify its acquisition. Finding ,a means of rating wetlands plays an important part in the purpose of this survey. I, . Definition of "Wetlands Inventory" For the purposes of this survey, wetlands inventory may be defined as the systematic study of water areas (wetlands) within the state of Colorado to determine their: �51 (1) (2) (3) (4) Location and extent a. Numbers b. Acres of standing water and associated marginal land c. Miles of running water and associated marginal land Types of classification Importance to waterfowl and other wildlife species Importance as hunting areas and for other recreational uses. In this inventory, wetlands are referred to as lowlands covered with shallow and sometimes temporary or intermittent waters, such as marshes, swamps, bogs, wet meadows, potholes, sloughs, and river-overflow lands. Shallow lakes and ponds are also included as wetlands, as are the permanent waters of streams, rivers, reserviors, and deep natural lakes. The term, "marginal land" refers to any ground adjacent to a water area which is normally too wet for cultivation. Examples of this are riverbottoms and fenced grazing areas bordering marshes and other water areas. Since these lands are associated with water areas and usually contain plants typical of an aquatic or semiaquatic environment, they are considered as part of any wetland area. Therefore, the inclusion of marginal lands in this survey is necessary in order to obtain a true estimate of our wetlands. The classification of water areas into wetland types is essential in helping to inventory our remaining wetland resources. Wetlands involve wide variations in extent or duration of wetness. At one extreme, are basins or flats that undergo submergence seasonally, but are drained much of the summer. Other types include lands that are waterlogged or flooded during the growing season or at all times. The value of an area will vary with the type in which it is placed. Thus, we can readily see the usefulness in classifying wetlands into different types. Through careful observation and evaluation, it is possible to determine the importance of the different types of wetlands to waterfowl and other wildlife, as well as their value as recreational areas. Primary emphasis in appraising values of wetland types has been on waterfowl because of the great interest in the sport of wildfowling and because waterfowl populations are no doubt more affected by wetland losses than are populations of any other group of game species. However, many wetlands in all sections of the country should be preserved solely on the basis of their value as habitat for wildlife other than waterfowl. At least 50 fur or game species in the United States, exclusive of waterfowl, irihabit wetland to secure food, water or cover. Purpose With the above items in mind, the main objectives of this survey are listed as follows: (1) To determine the amount of wetlands in Colorado, beginning with the irrigated portion of the eastern slope. �52 (2) (3 ) (4) To determine the number and amount of wetland areas leased for hunting, fishing, and other recreational purposes. To set up a method to rate wetland areas in terms of value for acquisition as public hunting areas. To establish a priority list of public hunting areas for presentation to the Commission. PROCEDURES Determination.of study areas The inventory was initiated on the eastern slope of Colorado, with study areas limited to irrigated portions. It seemed impractical to inventory the dryland areas, since a very small percentage of the more important waterfowl habitat occurs in these areas. The South Platte Valley was the starting point. In this basin seepage and ponded water from irrigation, natural seeps and river-overflow contribute to the formation of numerous wetlands. The study was conducted on a county by county baSiS, in which the irrigated portion of each county constituted one study area. Only two counties, Larimer and Weld, were completed during the first summer of this inventory. The study areas consisted of 336 sections or 215,040 acres in Larimer County and 920 sections or 588,800 acres in Weld County. (Figure 1). Sketches showing the position of the study areas in each county are listed in Figures 2 and 3. Determination of study sections Due to shortage of time, it was considered impractical to inventory the wetlands in all sections of a study area. It was felt that a method of sampling the study areas would be adequate in obtaining the desired information; the resulting data could then be projected to obtain information concerning all sections in a study area. A table of random numbers was used in selecting two sections in e~ch township for intensive study. This produced a sampling intensity of 5.5 per cent. The resulting study sections were located on a Colorado State Highway Map. This enabled the observer to locate them with ease whenever necessary . . . Mapping of study sections Before visiting the study sections, it was felt that some knowledge concerning location of Various wetlands within each section was desira~le. This was accomplished by mapping obvious water areas on each study section with the aid of aerial photographs. Such a procedure was found useful in orientation of the observer when each study section was visited. Aerial photographs with a scale of eight inches to one mile were made available through the district offices of the U. S. Soil Conservation Service. �COLORADO S£/)(,WICK. LOGAN MOFFAT ROV" PHIU.IPS YUM.A WASHINGTON ~:;.~~ ~~~·~::S~:~:~·;;_;~~· . RIO SLANCO __ -,.---J. GARFlJ!.LD LINCOLN KIT CARSON MJ!.SA V1 W CHtrlNNJ!. MONTROSE I I PUE8LO CROWUY I __J XIOWA SAGVACHE PROWERS BENT SAN MIGVEL 'HINSDAle DOLORES RIOGHANDE LAS AIIIMAS BACA MOlfTEZUMA CONEJOS Fig. 1. A map of Colorado showing the location of Larimer and Weld Counties from which the study areas were selected for the summer of 1960. �LARI MER Fig. 2. A sketch of Larimer County, Colorado showing the location of the irrigated portion. S~mple sections were selected from within this irrigated portion. �55 WELD Fig. 3. A sketch of Weld County, Colorado showing the location of the irrigated portion. Sample sections were selected from within this irrigated portion. �Determination of surface acres of standing water and associated marginaL land, and miles of running water was also possible by use of aerial photographs. A planimeter was employed. to calculate acres of wetlands and a oyc Lomeber , or map measurer, for determining miles of ditches, canals, streams, and rivers. All study sections within a study area were mapped as completely as possible before entering the field. Maps indicating ownership of land were also available at the above offices. These proved useful in determining names of individuals having owne~.:s.hip of certain wetlands. ,_' -----~----- Visitation of study sections ----- After completing the mapping of all study sections within each study area, it was necessary to visit the sections one by one for the purpose of making ,a detailed evaluation of each water area. Wetland types: The wetlands included in this inventory were classified into the follOwing categories: (a) reservoirs, (b) natural lakes, (c) ponds and marshes over five acres, (d) ponds and marshes less than five acres, (e) streams and rivers, and (f) ditches and canals. The size which distinguishes ponds from lakes was set ,at 20 acres. In addition; each wetland area over five acres was classified according to the 20 types described by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Special Scientific Report: Wildlife No. 20, June, 1953). Only four of the 20 types were found to occur in the two counties completed. This by no means indicates that they are the only types found in Colorado. These four types are described below. (1) Type 1. Seasonally flooded basins or flats Soil is covered with water or waterlogged during variable seasonal periods, but well drained during much of the growing season. The vegetative cover usually consists of grasses, annual weeds, sedges, and smartweed. (2) Type 3. Shallow fresh marshes Soil is normally waterlogged and sometimes covered with as much as six inches of water during the growing season. Common plants consist of sedges, grasses and rushes. (3) Type 4. Deep fresh marshes Soil covered with from six inches to three feet of water during the growing season. Plants found on this type consist mainly of cattails, bulrushes and sedges. �57 (4) Type 5. Open fresh water Permanent shallow water areas closely associated with other wetland types. It also occurs in artificial ponds, lakes and reservoirs. Vegetation is mostly watermilfoil, coontail, water spikerush, pondweeds, and duckweeds. Location of wetlands: The study sections were visited one at a time,with all wetlands in a sectIOn located and evaluated before moving to another. Before appraising the contents of a study section, the area map was consulted to locate wetlands. Ditches and canals were followed on foot to check accuracy of the map. Only ditches and canals which carried water during most of the year, and those of sufficient width were included in the inventory, since they are most valuable to waterfowl. Generally those artificial waterways (ditches and canals) continuing through more than one section were large enough for inclusion. At this point, it may be desirable to determine the difference between ditches and canals. We. usually think of canals as being the main channels carrying water from the reservoirs to the irrigated land. Ditches, on the other hand, are thought of as smaller and less continuous branches of canals diverting water into individual fields. From the limitations given above, ditches would in no way be considered for inclusion in the inventory; but since the meanings of these two terms may overlap, they are both used to prevent argument. Points on the map suspected of containing a small pond or marsh were checked. Some of these proved to be non-existent or had been drained after the aerial photograph of the area had been taken. The section was then covered in such a manner as to locate any additional water areas that may have been overlooked. Wetlands evaluation: A separate form (figure 4) was completed for each of the wetland types, except (d) and (f), that were found in each study section. At times, a portion of a wetland area was found to lie outside the study section. In this case it was necessary to complete a form on that portion within the study section and at the same time complete one on the area as a whole. Only that portion within the study section was included in the inventory. The latter form, which evaluates those portions of a single water area inside and outside the study section, is not included in the actual inventory, but simply gives information on the area as a whole. The reason for this can readily be seen, since in an acquisition program, the State is interested in the entire area and not just a portion thereof. In the case of streams and rivers, this procedure was not followed, as obtaining information on the entire length of a river would be impractical. Before entering 'an area to be studied and evaluated, it was usually best to contact the landowner involved, since a certain amount of public relations is always desirable. Permission to enter the area, and valuable information necessary in filling out the form, were obtained in this manner. An explanation to the landowner concerning the inventory appeared to increase his cooperation. �FIOTJRE 4. WETLANDS HABITAT EVALUATION 1. Area name 2. Date of survey --~- Location. Observer(s) T_N;R_W; $ _ _ 3. Type of area: Reservoir- Lake Marsh Slough River Stream A-Estimated acres of water area Estimated acres of adjacent marginal land__ B-Type of surrounding area: Agricultural Grazing Flat Rolling etc _ C- Use of surrounding area_.....; _ 4. Source of water: A-When filled Ever go dry Spring fed Ditch from Stream (name) • When used Fluctuation in vertical feet How often S.eason. of dry period Fall Every year B-Water available: Spring ---_ 5. Access controlled by Owned now by --------------------------------------------6. Irrigation Stock Recreation None 7. Use of area now: A-Recreation: Hunting Fishing Boating 8. ·9. 10. _ Private Private Private Public Public Public None None None Leased Leased Leased ViaterSki _ _ _ B-Lessee and cost/year__~----~----~-------------------------------------C-Hunting records available: Yes No Acres of public land contained (show location on sketch) Federal funds used in construction or improvement: Yes No Type of waterfowl use: Ducks Geese A-Species and number seen during survey ~ _ B- Ducksz Spring: Species and number # days ~--------# broods Surmer: Species nesting _# days Fall: Species and number Winter: Species and number # days C-Geese: Spril')g: Number of geese ...J# days _ Stmmer: Number breeding pair Number broods Number moulting _ Fall: Date arrive Number of geese Number days _ \!linter: Number of geese # days _ Production benefits: V!aterin spring Every year _ A-Nestlng cover: Per cent of area, Types _ B-Brood cover: Per cent of area Escape cover _ Hunting benefits: Species and number using: _ A-Natural foods Type(s) _ B-Distanee to agricultural crops Type(s) _ C-Distance to Refuge area ~Name of Refuge area _ D-\'!aterin: Fall Winter Freeze over yearly~Time of freeze-up _ E-Cover for blinds Number of possible blinds _ --------------------------.~.---- 11. 12. ------Distance from and name_ F-Number ,of hunters will accommodate at one time of area of hunter supply G~If this area is not leased, is hunting permitted if permission is asked: yes no --- H_Does the owner plan to drain or reclai. this area in the future: yes no -- �59 13. Potential for other hunting: 14. 15. 16. Pheasant & Quail: Good Fair None. A - Dove: G90d Fair Poor None. Rabbit and ?quirrel& Good. Fair Poor None. Recreational Potential: A _ Fishing: Trout VJarm V/ater Now Possible _ BOating: Type Now Possible _ Camping and Picnic areas: Now Possible Facilities _ Observer's opinion of area for" recreation and Vlaterfo,d use and need for public use. Available for lease (long term~ or purchase: Lease Purchase Now _ ____ -(term of current lease) 17. Future _ Never,.....;. __ Photo: Yes No. 18. Additional (term of possible 1ease) Film pack # Negative # comments. 19. Sketch of area: c. I I. ..- _ _.__-------(attach photo to final form) �60 It was found that by talking to the farmer or rancher without taking notes encouraged him to talk more freely. No difficulty with landowners was encountered during the initial portion of the survey. In the case of reservoirs, it was usually necessary to contact the ditch companies concerned. When an area was leased by a sportsmens club, valuable information concerning hunting and fishing could sometimes be obtained by contacting one of the members. In order to complete the form, it was then necessary to walk around the area and observe conditions which would yeild the necessary information. The type of information obtained can be seen by referring to Figure 4. Items contained on this form are, in general, self-explanatory; therefore, a detailed account of its contents is not necessary. A few of the items produce only relative information, which is often difficult to obtain. This is particularly true of items lOB and ldc. Some information is entirely dependent upon the o~~nion of the observer, which could result in consistent but biased material. But this form supplies much valuable information necessary in conducting the survey, and in the future, it will prove to be of great importance in helping to perpetuate Colorado's wetland resources. Analysis ~_datal A.preliminary statistical analysis of data collected indicated that the sample size necessary for the desired results must be rather large, but it was determined that this large sample would be attained upon completion of the invent.ory. Other results of the statistical analysis indicated that at this time the inventory is progressing in a satisfactory manner. RESULTS The results presented here apply only to the two counties completed thus far in the inventory, and should only give an indication as to the final results. The more important information was selected from the data and placed in tabular form for greater convenience. Amount of wetlands: The total amount (acres and miles) of wetlands in the study sections of each of the two counties is given in Tables 1 and 2. Table 3 is a combination of Tables 1 and 2, giving the total water composition on 70 study sections in Larimer and Weld Counties. As might be expected, lakes and reservoirs and their associated marginal land comprise over one-half of the total acres of wetlands when the study of the counties are combined (Table 3). �Table L - Total Water Cornp~s,ition on 19 study sections in Lar imer Countv • •... )Tee of Are,!~ No.) Ave, akes,and eservoirs onds and Marshes 18 O~95 ver 5 AC1"4ts Surface Acres of Water 912.1 Acres of Marginal Land' Ave. Total Acres Ave. .. 10 0.53 42.5 - ,- 'CTALS 2 84 54** 10.16 1104.7 58,14 1.82 77.0 4.05 111,5 5.•• 87 - 38.8 2.04 287.0 15.11 329.5 16.55 6.70 0,35 __ - - - 33.101.74 ' 1.11 acres of wetland was determined ditches and canals. An 193.0 34,5 0.26 Miles '48.01 ',- , . Ponds and Marshes es~than 5 acres 21 treams and ivers 5 itches and gnals - fOlly total f* Excluding Ave. 2.2~ _ for each of these smaller - 1584.5** 83.39 39,80 2...Q_9. areas. ,_. (7\ Tabl~ 2L. •••.. Total Water Composition en 51 Study Sections ype of Area No. .akes and leservotrs 7 >onds and Marshes Ner 5 Acres 15 IfPonds and Mar'shes &SS than 5 Acres 36 ;treams and tivers 3 )i tches and :anals - rOTALS It 011y total ••.••Excluding Ave. Surface Acres of Water Ave. in Weld County. Acres of Marginal Land Ave. Total Acres Ave. Miles Ave• 0.14 258.4 5.07 96.] 1.88 354.5 6.95 0.29 82.6 ].62 127 7 2,50 2]0,3 4.12 75.5 ]e48 ----- 5.56 3.12 0.06 39.44 0.77 42.56 0.83 0,69 g F • : ' 0,06 32,7 0.64 "__ __ _ ?:'ll e1 61** 1.20 acres of wetland was;determined ditches and canals. 4.22 ---- for each of these smaller areas • 283,8 924.1**18.12 �Table 3._-_ Jota~_W_at_eLCoffiQQp_it:i()D_ en.70 Study Sections in Li3rimerand Weld Counties. Type of Area No. . Ave. Surface Acres of Water Lakes and Reservoirs 25 O.~6 1170.5 Ponds and Marshes Over 5 Acres 25 0.36 117.1 *Ponds and Marshes Less than 5 Acres 57 0.81 ----Streams and 8 75.2 0.11 Rivers Ditches and Canal. Miles 16.72 289.1 4.13 1459.2 20.85 ---- 1.67 204.7 2.92 321.8 4.60---- ---- ----- ---- 114.3 1.63---- 1.07 538.1 7.69 613.3 8.55 TOTALS 115** .1.64 Ave. 9.79 0.14 72.54 1.04 2508.6** 35.84 82.33 1.18 - - ,.;.;".:', e·;' Ave. Acres of M:JrginalLand Ave. Total·Acres Ave. "_J.,; ~ly Total acres of wetland was determined for each of these smaller areas. *-excluding ditches and canals. Table 4. _ Summary of the Total Wetlands·· in the Irriga_t_ep Po:r_tio]1p_ Qf_L_a:rim~r _a_nc:1_W_e1d_C_QYD!.ies. Total Irrigated Land* :ounty Sections _ Acr~~ Total Wetlands** Streams and Rivers Total ProTotal Acr_eMSection % iected Acres Miles/Section Projected Miles Ditches and Canals Total Miles/Section Projected Miles [.arimer 336 2l5.040_ 83.39 __lJ._02 21_t~B 0~J5 Neld 920 588.800 18.12 2•. 83 16.663 0.06 55... 20 0.• 17 JOB.AD fotals 1.256 803.840 35.84 5.60 45.015 • Study Areas from which sample sections were se1edted• •• Excluding ditches and canals. 0.14 175.84 1.04 1.306.24 _1~7_ ._6.0_____ •. __1.1.4. .5~A R) �Table 4 presents the acres of wetlands per section in Larimer and Weld Counties in addition to the total projected acres and miles of wetlands in the irrigated portions of the Counties. Although Larimer County has only about one~third as much irrigated land as Weld County, the larger projected acreage of wetlands in the former is due to a greater acreage of wetlands per section. This is largely due to the fact that Weld County has flatter land with fewer depressions and would seem to indicate that irrigation is practiced to a lesser degree than in Larimer County. An indication of this is seen in Tables 1 and 2, where Larimer County has a larger percentage of lakes and reservoirs than Weld County. Weld County, which is further from the mountains than Larimer County, has fewer miles df streams and rivers per section. The explanation for this is the tendency for smaller streams and rivers to converge when further from the mountains, making larger, but relatively fewer natural waterways, which results in fewer miles. In contrast, Larimer County being nearer to the mountains, has smaller, but more numerous streams and rivers, which results in more miles of natural waterways. Recreational U6eS! The recreational uses of 33 wetland areas in Larimer and of 25 wetland areas in Weld County are given in Tables 5 and 6 comsecutively. Table 7 gives the combined recreational uses on the 58 wetland areas in the two counties. Table 8 shows ~he type of ownership of the~;58 wetlands under consideration. Since only a very small percentage of the areas are owned by the public, it is obvious that the private landowner plays an important role in determination of the extent of future wetland resources. The results given below will refer largely to table 7. Hunting: Of 58 wetlands, 17 per cent are leased for hunting. This amounts to approximately 25 per cent of the total wetland acreage in the study sections. In addition, 20 per cent of the areas, or about 17 per cent of the total acreage are for private use. To make it even more discouraging, 25 per cent of the areas, which also yields 25 per cent of the total acreage in the study sections, are completely devoid of any hunting. This leaves only about one-third of the areas and acreage open to the public for hunting. Although not indicated in the tables, only 48 per cent of the areas or 43 per cent of the total wetland acreage in the study sections not leased for hunting are available for public use. The above figures speak for themselves, and they seem to indicate that a wetlands acquisition program by the State would be justified, at least in Larimer and Weld Counties. Fishing: The figures in table 7 aren+t as discouraging when the sport of fishing is considered. Leased and private fishing waters combined, make up only about 20 per cent of the wetland areas and acreage. The public can obatin fishing rights on 36 per cent of the areas or 45 per cent of the total acreage. This results in 45 per cent of the areas or 33 per cent of the total acreage being entirely absent of :L?ishing. Many of the latter areas are not suitable for fishing, since they have only rough fish or are completely devoid of fish to shallow waters; therefore, the type of use is listed as "none". �·... Table o. No. % Priyate 3 .. Recreational uses on 33 Wetland areas· in Larimer County .• Fishing Huntin9 (acres) Type pf Use :-" AMf, No· % Boating % &nt• No. % AIt,. o . ! . Y1 5.1 1 3,0 12.5 0,8 ·0 o 14 42.4 625.4· 40,5 13 39.4 912.1 59.0 4 12.1 377.6 24.4 Leased 5 15.2 330.9 2••4 4 12.1 230.0 14,9 4 12,1 320,9 20,8 I1ne 11 33,3 511,0· 33.0 15 45,5 391,0 25,3 25 75.8 847,1 54,8 9.1 78.3 33 100.0 1545,6 )CO,O Totals 33 lQO.O 1545.g 100,0 33 lOP.O * Excluding pond and marShes less than 5 acres and ditches and canals. Table 6. Recreational uses on 25 Wetland areas· in Weld County Hunting Fishing (acres) Amt Type of· Use No. % Amt. % No. % No. private 9 36.0 321.6 37,9 5 20.0 268.6 31.6 Public 8 32.0 124.9 14,7 8 32.0 159,5 Leased 5 20,0 298,~ 35,1 1 4,Q 16,7 ~No~n~e._ Q 1545.6 lOO.O Boating Amt. % 4.0 191.7 22.6 18.8 1 o o o o 2,0 2 8,0 39.3 4,6 ~3 __ ~12_,~Q~.1Q4~,~5~1~2~.~3-&11 __ ~44~,O~~40~4~,~8~_4~7~.~6 .=2~2 __ ~88_,~0~ __6~1~8~.~6~72_.~8~ _ I Totals 25 100,0 849,6 100.0 25 100,0 849,6 100,0 25 100.0 * Excluding ponds and marshe~ less than 5 acres and ditches and canals. Table 7. 849.6 100.0 Combined Recreational uses on 58 Wetland areas * in Larimer and Weld Counties. Hunting Fishing Boating (acres) No, % Arnt. % No. Amt. % % % &nt, % Type of Use No. private 12 20,7 400.0 ]6.7 6 10,4 281.1 11,7 1 1 7 191,7 B 0 Public 22 37,9 750.3 31.3 21 36.2 1071.6 44.7 4 6 9 377.6 15 8 Leased 10 17.2 629.5 26.3 8.6 246,7 10,3 6 10 4 360,2 ]5 0 None 14 24.1 615.5 25.7 26. 44,8 795,8 33.2 47 S1,O 1465.7 61, 2 Totals 58 100,0 2395,2 Q~'O 58 100.0 239~.2 100.0 56 100,a 2395·2 * Excluding ponds and marshes less than ~ive acres and ditches and canals. 100 a �Table 8, Type of ONnership of 58 Water Areas '* in Larimer and Weld Counties Lalimer 12jjal· % No· ." 6 24.0 18 31.0 57,6 19 76.0 38 65.6 2 6,0 0 Q 2 3.4 33 10Q,0 25 100,0 58 IDOeD Type of ONnership No. % Corporation or Company 12 36~4 Private 19 Public Totals No. ~ * Does not include ownership of ponds and marshes less than five acres in si'ze. �66 Of the 58 wetland areas studied in Larimer and Weld Counties, only Boating: 14 are of suf'ficient size to be of value to the public for speed-boating and water skiing. It was felt that .only those areas with over 75 acres of water surface would allow public use without creating a hazard. With areas smaller than this, only a limited number of boats could participate at one time, making it highly undersirable as far as the public is concerned. Four of the 14 wetland areas suitable f'orboating are leased, four are open to the public, one is for private use only, and five are listed as not being used. Two areas under 75 acres are also leased. The result is that only about onefourth of the areas suitable for boating are of benefit to the public. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS No conclusions or recommendations are made at this time, since the study has not advanced far enough to warrant such entries. LITERATURE CITED Martin, A.C., N. Hotchkiss, F. M. Uhler, and W. S. Bourn .. 1953. Classification of wetlands of the United States. U. S. Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Spec. Sci. Rpt: Wildl. No. 20. 14 p. Shaw, S. P., and C. G. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States, their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife. U. S. Dept. of the Interior, Fixh and Wildlife Service, Cir. 30. 67 p. Trippensee, R. E. 1953. Wildlife management. Vol. .u.. McGraw-Hill, New York. p. 193-194. Prepared by: Jack R. Grieb Mitchell G. Sheldon Date: January, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant .Coordinator �January, 1961 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State COLORADO Project No. w-88-R-6 Work Plan No. 1 Title of Job: Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 2 Trapping and Banding Ducks and Geese Objectives: (1) to trap and band ducks and geese for the purpose of obtaining migration and life history information. (2) To trap the Great Basin Canada Goose as a means of securing brood stock for transplanting in suitable nesting areas throughout the State for the purpose of enlarging the breeding range of this species in Colorado. Scope: North Park (Jackson County); the Cache Lp Poudre-South Platte Valley (Larimer, Weld and other counties); and Two Buttes Reservoir (Baca County). Personnel: Jack Randall, Charles Hayes and Jack Frost, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife" Elvy Wagner, Pat ZimmermFlll,Robert Tully, George Lingle, Lloyd Hl'>zzFlrd, Mitchell Sheldon, Robert Kitzmiller, and JAck Grieb, Colorado Game and Fish Department. Introduction: This report summarizes the banding activities of Project w-88-R-6 for the fiscal year, Apri.l 1, 1960 to April 1, 1961. Since the analysis of band recoveries will be done under another job (Plan 1, Job 3), little interpretation will be made of these data. The report will be limited to a factual description of number and'.10cation birds banded, with comments on goose weight data collected at Two Buttes Reservoir. Methods: Banding activities have been roughly divided into two phases --summer and winter banding. Summer banding was on the breeding grounds and emphasized the banding of young ducks, and adults which bred in the vicinity of the banding site. Winter banding included goose banding on the staging area in the east-central A.lberta, Canada and the wintering area at Two Buttes Reservoir in south-east Colorado. Winter duck banding was carried on at Bonny Reservoir, east-central Colorado. Three methods were used to trap and band ducks and geese during 1960-1961. (1) Drive trapping with the Hawkins type trap was used during summer duck banding; (2) the cannon net trap was used for winter trapping of geese in Canada and Colorado; (3) a Colorado duck trap was used for winter duck banding at Bonny Dam. Results: Table 1 lists the number of ducks banded by species and location. A. total of 2,271 ducks were banded during the past fiscal year, summer banding on Colorado breeding areas accounted for 857 ducks; 315 ducks were banded incidental to the goose banding program in east-central Alberta, Canada during September and October, 1960. Winter trapping after season at Bonny Reservoir banded 1,099 ducks during January, 1961. �68 Table 1. Species Number of Ducks Banded by Species and Location, 1960-1961. Total by North Park Bonny Dam Poudre Canada Species Mallard Gadwall Baldpate Green-winged teal Cinnamon or Blue-winged teal Shoveller Pintail Redhead Canvasback Lesser Scaup Ring-necked Hooded Merganser American Coot TOTAL 87 16 66 70 998 98 97 1 53 38 3 59 11 10 12 1,474 16 163 124 291 32 3 70 3 238 12 10 12 24 152 1 1 148 520 1,099 1 148 2,271 31'5 337 The number of geese banded by species and location are in Table 2. A total of 2,854 geese were banded during 1960-61. This total includes 68 Canada Geese banded in the Poudre Valley raised by the captive flock at Bonny Dam or the artificial hatching of wild eggs at Fort Collins. These were released as goslings to supplement preceeding plants investigating the re-establishment of wild breeding flocks. Table 2. -- Number of Geese Banded by Location and Species. Location Number Banded RossI Canada Snow Total Goose Goose Goose Geese Poudre Valley (Goslings from captive flock) 68 Alberta, Canada (Cannon net trap) 379 68 117 80 576 1960 - 1961. Remarks Experimental plant at College Lake, Larimer County, Colorado July, 1960. Banded on staging area, East Central Alberta, Canada. Release immediately after banding, September and October, 1960. Two Buttes Reservoir (Cannon net trap) 1,938 1,940 2 Released immediately after banding. November, December and January. 1960-1961. TOTAL 119 80 2,584 �The first attempt to band migrating Canada Geese on the east~Central Alberta, Canada staging-areas netted 576 geese during the September 20 to October 20, 1960 banding program. This total includes 379 Canada Geese, 117 snow geese and 80 rare Ross' Geese. A more detailed account of the Alberta, Canada goose banding program was presented to the Technical Committee, Central Flyway Waterfowl Council, March, 1961. All geese captured at Two Buttes Reservoir were again weighed, aged, sexed and fluroscoped. The purpose of this four fold operation has been repeatedly reported in past years and only this years' results will be presented here. During the 1960-61 banding program, five in-season trapping operations were carried out. These were to investigate the age-sex ratio, the weightcondition ratio and the body shot incidence periodically throughout the hunting season. One after-season trapping operation was conducted to compare to past years' bandings. A. total of 1,940 geese were banded and included two snow geese. The flock appeared to again consist of about 90 per cent Lesser Canada Geese and the balance composed of the large and little Canada geese in aggregrate. Results of the 1961 weighing study at Two Buttes Reservoir are in Table 3, where it is compared with past years' data. Table 3. --Average Weight of Geese at Two Buttes, During Banding Operations Number of Average Year Birds Weighed Weight, Pounds 1957 1958 1959 1960 527 521 516 440 6.68 5.88 5.45 5.54 FOUR YEAR AVERAGE 1,895 5·32 The 1961 average weight was the lowest found to date. Reasons for the decline in average weights 1957-61 are not fully understood at this time. This was probably due to factors other than available food, weather conditions or hunter harassment affecting the bird's opportunity to feed. Further analysis of the data may indicate other possible reasons for this weight differential besides the following possible factors; 1. Change in sub-species composition of the flock could greatly inf~uence the weight comparisons. For example, when a greater number of Ilttle geese would be present in the trapped sample, the average weight would be lowered and the converse true if there were an influx of the large geese . . 2. Age and sex ratio changes may effect average weights between years. An lncrease of birds-of-the-year and an increase of the smaller females could have caused considerable d.ifference in the weight comparisons. �70 3. An increase of wounded geese in the trapped sample could have also changed the yearly average weight comparisons. It is known, however, the geese handled during trapping operations have been mostly in fair to good body condition. 4. It was indicated that a trapped sample might not be a good indication of the age-sex composition of wintering flock at Two Buttes Reservoir. A skewed sample could have been obtained by capturing a large number of subadult (yearling, two year old or 3 year old) geese. These non-breeders are known to be gregarious and tend to congregate in large gaggles. This could have also affected the annual average weight comparisons. Consideraing all these factors, it remains impossible to explain this declining weight trend at the present time. It is believed to be a combination of all of these factors plus some still unknown, rather than anyone factor. Prepared by: M •.G. Sheldon Senior Game Biologist Date: January, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �January, 1961 71 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of COLORADO Project No. w-88-R-6 Work Plan No. Title of Job: Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations. Job No. 1 Waterfowl Migration Studies Objectives~ To determine the movement of waterfowl species into and through various portions of Colorado, during fall migration as an aid to: (1) Gather information for use in determining the best hunting season dates to choose for each area. (2) Gain data for use in r'eg'u.Lat.Lng future kill by species, if this should be necessary. Better interpret the results of waterfowl kill surveys, and thus (3 ) the effect of the regulations on the kill for each area. Methods: Migration records, by species, were obtained during three aerial waterfowl population counts in the Arkansas River Valley. This study was run concurrently with the Arkansas Valley wintering goose flock project. The study included the following resevoirs and lakes: Black, Blue, Cary, Cudahy, Dyes, Henry, Holbrook, J.ohn Martin, Meredith, Rutherford, Timber, Two Buttes, Cheraw and the Eads groups of lakes. The waterfowl population flights were made November 22, December 12, 1960 and January 4, 1961. Species were observed and recorded for each water area as the duck and goose counts were made. Results: Species present on the various water areas were noted in an effort to obtain the most accurate migration picture possible of waterfowl movements in southeast Colorado. , , Figure 1. Waterfowl Species Observed, by Date. Species Canada Goose Mallard Pintail Gadwall Baldpate Teal Redhead Canvas Back Scaup Goldeneye Merganser Coot * ** Arkansas Valley, Colo. 1960-61. Nov. 22 Dec. 12 Jan. 4 ** * * * ** * ** ** ** ** ** ** * * * ** * * Observed Peak Numbers Observed * * * ** �72 Figure 1 is a chart showing the species observed each flight. The single asterisk denotes that the species was observed. The double asterisk indicates the species were present in larger numbers than other observations and is designated as the :peak for that species. This report will be confined to a few brief remarks about the species observations indicated by the chart. 1. Mallards were present throughout the entire study, but peak populations were observed during the December 12, 1960 and January 4, 1961 flights. The larger populations remained more or less constant during the latter :part of the study. 2. Southern migration flights of pintail, gadwall, teal and coot were apparently over before the November flight, as few were observed. 3. The baldpate were observed in relative high and only a few remained during the December flight. 4. numbers the first flight No shoveller or bufflehead were observed during this segment of the study. 5. Redhead and canvasback were observed in larger numbers during the first flight and some still remained in December. However, redheads were absent the third flight while a few Cans were found during January. 6. The scaup arrived late and peaked during the December count. few remained the balance of the study. A 7. American goldeneye were the last migrants to be observed when a :few were noted during the third census flight. 8. Canada goose populations remained fairly stable during the three aerial census flights. The geese arrived in the Arkansas Valley about November 8, 1960, which coincided well with past years. The wintering population had stablized before the first flight on November 22nd and fluctuated only slightly the balance of the study. Food and water conditions were considered to be good throughout the entire area as they were during the last several years. Prepared by: Mitchell G. Sheldon Senior Game Biologist Date: January, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator �January, 1961 73 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO .. Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Project No. . . . . . Work Plan No. 2 Job No. . . 2 Title of Job: Experimental Studies on Improving Status of Canada Goo_se Populations. Period covered: April 1, 1960 to December 31, 1960. Objectives: (1) Development and evaluation of techniques for initial establishement and/or increase of goose population on all major drainages in the State. (2) Permanent establishment .of resident goose flocks on all large water impoundments and major river systems as determined by the preliminary -survey of goose nesting areas in the State. (3) Retention of resident and migrant Great Basin goose flocks within the State for longer periods of time during the migration season. (4) Increase the size of the Great Basin goose flocks wintering in the State. Procedures: (1) Experimental releases of Canada Goose goslings as nuclei for the establishment of resident breeding flocks on streams and lakes of suitable habitat. (2) Extablishment of captive flocks as a source of gosling supply, and where possible, artificial propagation and liberation experiments utilizing eggs collected from wild goose nests. (3) Formulation of measures designed to regulate fishing pressures as an aid in affording maximum protection for geese during the nesting season. (4) Recommendations for closure of restoration areas to goose hunting, where applicable, for a period of two years following initial release. Fifty eggs were taken from Bowles Lake and hatched by Officer Craw-ford using White Rock hens. Depending upon conditions, some eggs may be taken from the captive flock at Bonny Reservoir to be hatched in the same manner as above. All goslings obtained from the hatching program and from the captive goose flock at Bonny Reservoir were released at College Lake, one mile west o~ Fort Collins, Colorado. ��January, 1961 75 EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON IMPROVING STATUS OF CIANADA GOOSE POPULATIONS Jack R. Grieb and Mitchell G. Sheldon All efforts in 1960 were directed toward the establishment of a resident goose breeding flock in the Fort Collins area. The following is a narrative resume of these activities. Carry-over of geese from previous years. As a result of the aerator device which kept a portion of College Lake open throughout the winter, about 60 geese used the lake almost continuously until March. During this time, these geese were fed milo and baled alfalfa along the lake shore; and they would frequently fly to Dean's Lake (about one mile northeast) and Dixon Reservoir (two miles south) to graze along the shoreline. Beginning in March, numbers of geese using College Lake fluctuated from day to day. Obviously, the geese were unsettled, and those birds which had paired began scouting the area for nesting possibilities. Reports of goose sightings were received from numerous places in the Fort Collins area. It is a little difficult to interpret what happened to the geese during the spring and summer since close track could not be kept of all birds. The following is a list of birds and their activity during the spring and summer. 1. Two pairs nested on College Lake, laid six eggs each and hatched a total of 11 goslings. Of these 11, nine were raised to flight stage and two were lost to predation. At this time, it appears very possible that the predator species was northern pike which had been placed in the lake by the Fish Division of the Department. A. formal note of protest for this fish plant was filed with the Director pointing out the obvious conflict of interest with the goose work. No action was taken on this complaint. 2. One pair of geese nested on a small island in Dean's Lake, laid five eggs, and brought of five goslings. Five goslings were raised to flight stage. 3. One pair of geese nested on an island in Watson Lake near Bellvue, Colorado, about six miles northwest of College Lake. Six goslings were hatched, but as far as can be determined none survived to flight stage. This was due to a series of events which started when the geese were forced off Watson Lake with the beginning of fishing season accompanied by heavy fisherman use. The pair and brood moved to an irrigation ditch to the northwest of Watson Lake. According to a local farmer, the number of goslings in the brood decreased until finally there was none. WCO Crawford felt that this loss was due to coons. 4. summer. About 30 geese moved to Terry Lake where they spent the spring and �76 In late August and early September, all geese moved back to College Lake and remained during the ·fall and winter. This is significant for it accomplished two things: (1) it afforded ~ess opportunity for these birds to mix with migrant flocks, thus, there was less tendency that they would be lured away from the area; and (2) it permitted greater protection of this flock since hunting could be better controlled if the geese confined themselves to the College Lake area. 'Re'lease' of geese in 1960 = Fifty goose eggs were robbed from nests at Bowles Lake near Littleton, Colorado, April 15, 1960 (Propagation Permit No. 2-675). These eggs were transported to Fort Collins and placed under White Rock hens by Officer Crawford. A.total of 31 eggs hatched (62%), and were grown to flight stage. Thirteen goslings were removed from a lake in south Denver, May 25, The parents of these goslings were wing-clipped and released at Bowles Lake, and the young were brought to Fort Collins and held with those hatched by Crawford. 1960, because of a depredation complaint by Mr. John Eble. In mid-June, all goslings were placed in the holding and conditioning pen at the Game and Fish Nursery. On July 6, 25 goslings, hatched and partially raised by the captive flock at Bonny Reservoir, were brought to the holding pen at the Nursery. One of these birds was trampled during transportation, and subsequently, died. On July 18, 1960, all 68 goslings held at the Nursery were released on College Lake. With the addition of these birds the number of geese in the flock using College Lake was increased to 121. Protective measures! A. large part of northern Larimer County was closed to goose hunting by Commission regulation, to provide suitable protection to the introduced flock. The specific closed area was that portion of Larimer County west of U. s. 87, and north of U. s. 34. In addition, no hunting, trapping, or fishing was permitted in the immediate vicinity of College Lake. This closure was very effective, and no birds from the College Lake flock were known to have been taken by hunters. As previously reported, a side effect of this closure was to increase the number of migrant birds wintering in this area. Table 1 points out that numbers of geese wintering in this vicinity have been extremely scattered since 1948. However, with the establishment of the refuge during the 1959-60 hunting season the number of geese counted during the January inventory immediately increased. Thus, 660 geese wintered in this vicinity in the winter of 1959-60, and this number increased to 1,385 in 1960-61. This has management significance, because it reveals that geese will respond to protection. �77 With the increase in the numbers of wintering geese came an increase in the goose harvest. Often birds would use reservoirs or feed in fields outside the closed area. This gave hunters the opportunity for harvest, resulting in an increased goose bag in this area during the 1959-60 season. Tabulation of the hunter harvest survey is not complete at this time, but it is expected that goose harvest in this area for the past hunting season will again be above normal. Local sportsmen are aware of the refuge area, and what it has meant to them in terms of increased goose hunting. There is considerable backing amongst these persons for this management technique. Table 1. -- Number of Geese counted during the January Inventory in the Fort Collins area, by Year. YEAR"" 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 . NUMBER OF GEESE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 22 660 :.1385 Conclusions; During the coming breeding season, the College Lake Goose flock will be composed of yearlings, two year olds, and four or five adult pairs. It is not expected that the two year old birds will attempt to nest, thus, it will be another year before the effect of this program can be completely evaluated. However, consideration of all events which have taken place during the past year includingj (1) the number of geese which wintered at College Lake in 1959-60j (2) the four successful:.nesting attemptsj (3) acceptance of the area by released goslingsj (4) the return of birds from Terry to College Lake to winterj and (5) the retention of all these birds at College Lake during the past fall and winterj lead to the conclusion that the potential for establishing a resident goose flock in this area is very good. �Recommendations: 1. Goose eggs should again be taken from Bowles Lake and hatched with White Rock hens by Officer Crawford. 2. All goslings obtained flying at College Lake. for the 1961 program should be released free- 3. Effort should be continued to hold the breeding flock of geese on College Lake through feeding and mantaining open water especially during the fall and winter months. 4. The College Lake area should continue to be closed to all hunting, fishing, and trapping. 5. That portion of Larimer County north of U. s. 34 to the State line, and west of U. s. 87 should continue to be closed to all goose hunting for the 1961 waterfowl hunting season. Prepared Date: by: ~J~a~c-k~R~.~G~r-i~e~b~~~--~--Approved by: _~G.;;;i.;;;l~b...;.e...;.r...;,t__:;,;N... __ Mitchell G. Sheldon State Game Manager January, 1961 Ferd C. Kleinschni tz Assistant Coordinator �January, 1991 -79JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of: Colorado ----------~----------------- Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Project No. W-90-R-5 ;Improvement on Wildlife. ----------~~~--------- Work Plan 4 ------------------------- Title of Job: Job No. 2 ----------------------------- Evaluation of Natural and Agricultural Winter Cover. Period Covered: .December 1, 1959 to November 30, 1960. Abstract 1. Conservation officer crowing-count routes were transect~ mapped and the -eight transects surrounging each crewing statien were considered descriptive ef land-use patterns. 2. Additienal variables describing the physical and climatological patterns applicable to.each crewing station were obtained. 3. Analyses of data included calculation ef a multiple regression equation fer all ebservatiens and calculation ef linear cerrelatien coefficients within reutes. 4. Extent of range was f'ound to be the mos t important determinant of pheasant pepulatien levels, but it is pointed out tnat the range variable may be so all-inclusive as to. ebscure ether relatienships. 5. No. cenclusions are presented because the 1960 analyses are censidered primarily expleratery. Necessary revisiens of 'bpbh field and analytic metheds for future study are outlined. " Objectives: .:To. determine the ;Lrifluencesof various agricultural and natural cover types in attracting and pretecting :pheasants during the winter :period. Procedures: Since this was the first year Qf study beth field and analytic metheds were-censidered exploratery rather than infermative. The majer aims ef this segment were to refine the proposed survey methed and to. select an analytic precedure which weuld previde selective differentiatien ameng variables and give some indicatien of the preblems which would be enceuntered. Field Metheds: Each Censervatien Officer in the Colorado pheasant range has ene er mere pheasant survey routes censisting of ten crOwing-count stations. As originally planned, each ef these peints was to.be mapped using aerial photos and, subsequently, the maps were to.be planimetered. �-80- Preliminary "Work on the Windsor-Timnath routes hear Ft. Collins soon demonstrated that this type of field mapping could not possibly be completed within the time allotted for this job. Accordingly, a less intensive mapping system) .usIng transect surveys already available under another job plan, were used. On each crowing-count route) the total route was mapped using a transect every 0.2 mile. Transects were 240 yards long and were estimated 120 yards from each road shoulder. Land-use patterns describing each crowing-count point were calculated using the eight transects surrounding the point. In addition) a series of variables describing the elevation) extent of range and various weather factors were calculated for each point. , In all, 47 independent variables were measured for each of 336 crowing-count points on 42 different routes. Variables are listed and defined in Table 1. Between mid=April and mid-June of each year, Conservation Officers assigned to the various routes make four counts of pheasant crowing activity. The dependent variable selected for examination in this study was the single highest crowing count for each count station. Analytic Methods~ Two analysis procedures were selected for possible use. First, all variables were sub~~cted to a step-wise multiple regression analysis as programmed for the IBM 709. In this analysis) the machine first calculates direct correlation between each independent variable and the dependent varl:able (crowing counts). The single variable with the highest correlation is selected for use in the equation Y = a f bl Xl + b2 x2. At each succeeding step an additional independent variable is selected until all variables have been used or the entering F level for any variable is no longer greater than a pre-set limit. The second analYSiS, again programmed for the IBM 709, simply calculated linear correlation for each independent variable and the dependent variable Within each of the 42 routes examined. Regression equations within routes could not be calculated because of the small samples available. �-81- EVALUATION OF NATURAL AND AGRICULTURAL WINTER COVER L. Jack Lyon Analysis: For the step-wise multiple regression using alLvariables, the entering F level was set at .05 and the removing F level at .002. This means that an F greater than .05 was necessary for any variable to enter the equation and, further, ifthe F level for any variable dropped below .002 because of correlation with other variables that variable would be automatically deleted. Of the 47 independent variables pffered in this analysis, 38 were selected before the entering F drop~ed below .05. The first variable entered at F = 142.56 and F values thereafter dropped. Table 1 - Independent variables measured at crowing-count points on 42 pheasantsurvey routes, Colorado, 1960. Waste++ Waste+ Waste WasteGrain++ Grain+ Grain GrainFallow Pasture++ Pasture+ Pasture Sorghum++ Sorghum+ Sorghum SorghumMillet+ Millet Corn++ Corn+ Corn CornWoody1o ) Woody'- ) Clouds Time Uncultivated areas with dense, high-quality herbaceous cover. Cattails or other tall perennials. Good herbaceous cover. Annuals or perennials over 18t! tall. Fair herbaceous cover. Thin, or under 12" tall. No cover. Low annuals or bare ground. Small grain stubble over 18 inches in height. Small grain stubble 12 - 18 inches tall. Small grain stubble up :to 12 inches. Small grain stubble which has been partially disced, heavily grazed or otherwise treated to remove most of the cover value. Fall-plowed ground and areas of winter wheat. Sagebrush or other browse pastpre on which a woody perennial is the most important vegetative type. Pasture land which has been ungrazed and unmowed. Normally or heavily grazed pastureland. Unharvested sorghums standing upright. Partially or totally unharvested sorghums with windthrow or light livestock use. Sorghum stubble. Partially plowed or disced sorghum stubble. Unharvested millet. Millet stubble. Unharvested, ungrazed corn . Machine harvested corn, stubble partially standing. Corn stubble, cut for ensilage. Corn stubble grazed or partially plowed. These t.wo categories simply describe the presence of woody cover in quantities too small for inclusion in yardage estimates. Woody o are lone trees with cover at ground level and Woody - are lone, bare bole trees. The percentage cloud cover estimated by the WCO at the time the crowing-count was taken. The number of minutes after 60 before sunrise at which the crowing-count was taken. �Table 1 - Continued Breaks Contours Temp. Max. Temp.. Min. Precip. Temp. Wind Water Alfalfa+ Alfalfa AlfalfaFarm :61dg. Woody++ Woody+ Woody WoodyRange Beans Beets Truck Elevation The total number of edges encountered in traversing all transects. The number of 10-ft. contours crossed by lines drawn from the crowing-count point one mile north and one mile east. Average of the mean monthly maximum temperatures, November ..• March, at the weather station nearest the census route. Average of the mean monthly minimum temperatures, November-March, at the weather station nearest the census route. Total precipitation, November-March, at the weather station nearest the census route. the on-the~spot temperature at the time the crowing-count was taken. Estimated wind velocity at the time the crowing-count was taken. Open water surface - Lakes and streams. Alfalfa unmowed on the fourth cutting. Alfalfa stubble. Plowed orxdf.sced alfalfa stubble. Farmsteads, feedlots, etc., Woody plantings - 100% shrubs and thicket cover. Woody plantings 50 - 100% shrubs and other cover at ground level. Windbreak plantings - mixture of trees and shrubs, less than 50% ground cover. Orchard and other tree plantings - no woody cover at ground level. An ordinal classification of routes j.il.to five groups depending on the total size of the pheasant range around a census route. Harvested bean fields. Harvested beet fields. Other truck crop fields: tomatoes, potatoes, ont.ons jc.car-rouset.c . Altitude of'the crowing-count point. 'f· j �-83- quite rapidly to 1.04 on the 20th variable. The entering F values and standard errors of applicable regression equations for the first 30 variables are presented in Table 2. In examin~ng Table 2, it will be seen that the entering F value for successive variables dropped quite quickly for the first 15 variables and then tapered off to a consistent level near 1.00 until the 28th variable. At that point, another sudden drop occured. The final values in this series are not significant but the convenience of the break at 28 was considered sufficient reason to present 28 variables in the remaining tables ,of this report. Standard errors in Table 2 demonstrate an even more significant point. According to the theory of regression equations, the addition of any variable (even random numbers) will cause some reduction in the standard error of estimate. Additional variables cease to have a real meaning when the change in the standard error is not significant. Apparentl~, this stage was reached very quickly in the 1960 analysis. Only the second variable caused any real reduction in the error. And) by the time 17 variables were used, any improvement in estimate was obscured by rounding errors. The rising standard errors after step 22 are due to machine error and a lack of precision in data measurement. The important point to recognize is that variables added to theequation after step 2 have very little additional influence on pheasant populations in the presence of the variables already selected. This suggests either that (1) none of the last 25 variables has any influence on pheasant populations or that (2) all these variables can be considered of about equal importance. If the second alternative is correct, it is possible that fuar..ipulation of anyone of these factors will produce about :;the same degree of change in pheasant populations. The second phase of analysis was calculation of direct correlation coefficients for Y (crowing counts) and each of the 47 independent variables within each of the 42 census routes. With only eight observations per route, regression equations could not be calculated and even the correlation coefficients must be considered less meaningful than statewide coefficients. Nevertheless, comparisons among these data provide a preliminary evaluation of the importance of various components of the pheasant environment. Data in Tab~e 3 list the first 28 variables in the order of their appearance in the regression equation. These are compared to 28 variables listed in order of the strengths of linear correlation coefficients. In Table 4, all 47 independent variables are listed and the order of their appearance in the regression equation is shown. Following this, the ordered strengths of correlation coefficients, both statewide and on an average basis for five general regions, is shown. Discussion: It has already been noted that the field method finally used for this segment was based on data collected under Table 2. - Entering F values and standard errors for regression equations, stepwise multiple regression analysis, crowing-count data from 336 stations on 42 routes, Colorado, 1960. �-84- Table 2 - Continued Entering Step F 1. 2· 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 142.56 48.44 16.15 14·34 11.35 10.03 9·26 7·95 6·98 6.46 4.30 4.00! 3.89 r2':72 3·20 Standard error of estimate 17·53 16.tJ.0 16.04 15·73 15 .49~ 15·28 15·09 14·94 14.80 14.68 14.61 14·54 _~14;47 14~43 14·93 Entering Step F 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 .30 1.76 1.40 0·95 0.96 1.04 1.04 0.89 0·71 o",n· ok65 0.63 0·59 0.61 o.~o 0.17 Standard error of estimate 14.37 14·36 14·36 14·36 14·36 14·36 l!i:·36 14·37 14·38 14·38 14·39 14.40 14.41 14.43 14.45 �Table 3. - Order of appearance in step~wide multiple regression equation and order of strength for direct correlation coefficients, crowing counts and independent environmental influences, Colorado, 1960. Step :L 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Regression Equation Range Elevation Grain + Farm Buildings Woody + Temp. Maximum Woody'Grain Truck Temperature Alfalfa Temp. Minimum Breaks Clouds Corn GrainWaste CornSorghumSorghum++ Grain++ Woody Alfalfa+ Wind Corn+ Woody++ Sorghum+ Beans Statewide Correlation Range Elevation Grain + Fallow Alfalfa Pasture ++ Beans Contours Woody'WasteWoodyPrecipitation 'V[oody+ Sorghum++ Truck Grain Pasture Millet Corn+ Breaks Temp. Minimum Pas tur-e+; Corn++ GrainCorn SorghumWaste Woody '0 �-86- Table 4. - Order of appearance in regression equation, statewide ranking order of linear correlation coefficients and average ranking order within regions, crowing-counts and 47 independent variables, 1960. Variable Waste ++ Waste + Waste WasteGrain ++ Grain + Grain Grain, Fallow Pasture ++ Pasture + Pasture Sorghum ++ Sorghum + Sorghum Sorghum Millet + Millet Corn ++ Corn + Corn CornWoody 0 Woody Clouds Time Breaks Contours Temp. Max. Temp. Min. ppt. Temp. Wind Water Alfalfa + Alfalfa Alfalfa Farm Woody ++ Woody + Woody 0 Woody Range Beans Beets Truc}t Elev'. Order in Regrea,sion Equation 17 21 3 8 16 20 27 19 25 15 18:' ,,,(; 7 14 13 6 12 Ranking order of correlation coefficients Average within regions Northeast West San Luis StateSouthDry Irrig. slope Valley wide east 26 22 5 7 11 26 14 11 23 4 2 1 27 17 7 8 10 10 1 9 9 3 16 24 4 6 22 17 14 4 26 5 22 1 28~ ~ 4 26 21 19 15 17 26 18 23 19 25 28 9 20 8 10 4 20 3 11 17 23 8 10 27 6 11 4 1 13 19 17 24 13 18 14 6 16 19 27 20 r: 16 19 21 16 23 14 12 24 28 16 9 25 27 2 18 10 8 13 3 14 15 27 20 22 27 25 5 2 8 ",22 23 7 21 23 18 12 26 28 5 20 15 1 15 9 2 7 22 21 5 20 24 8 25 9 28 16 11 12 3: 10 6 22 21 25 15 28 2 12 21 12 10 24 23 11 6 7 13 5 26 19 12 4 25 18 5 13 17 11 1 7 24 15 2 :3 6 18 1 24 i~ 3 �-87- another job plan. These data were not nearly as specific as transects tied directly to crowing-count points might have been. Accordingly, no attempt was made to complete the whole series of analyses which should be possible for data of this type. The discussion which follows is intended only to describe the general approach to interpretation which will be used and to point out the possible sources of error in analysis. The first three variables in Table 3 appeared in the regression equation in the same order as~heir linear correlation coefficients. Apparently, Range, or more properly, extent of range, is the most important determinant .of pheasant population levels on a statewide basis (r = .547). At this point, it should be noted that the Range classification is, at best, ordinal data and may be suspect in an analysis of this type. Further, there is a very strong possibility that Range, as a non-discriminating function, actually represents the total influence of a whole series of environmental factors which combine to make some areas more suitable for birds than others. A ~artial breaakdown of factors represented by the variable Range can be shown by examination of the successive regression equations. Where Xl = Range, x2 Eaevation, x3 = Grain+, x4 = Farm Buildings, and x5 = Woody+, the first, five regression equations were as follows: Y' 8.03 + 9.85xl Y' 24.81 + 8.66xl - .0057x2 Y' 24.68 + 7.70Xl - .0054x2 + .015x3 Y' 20.66 + 8.33xl - .0057x2 + .017x3 + .046x4 Y' 19·43 + 8.34xl .0055x2 + .016x3 + i.,045x4 + .146x 5 It will be seen, in eXamlnlng the regression coefficients, that the addition of Elevation and Grain+ reduced the coeffic ient for Range and caused reductions in the standard error of estimate (see Table 2). These two factors, then, must be partial components of the variable described by Range. By the time a fourth and fifth variable are added, changes in the regression coefficient for Range and in the error of estimate are too minor to be considered important. Essentially, Range is such a good common estimator for all the important environmental factors that no individual factor can influence thE! quality of the estimate. The only way to determine the components of the variable Range would be to delete Range from the analysis and examine the factors vmch will replace it. �-88- Conclusions: Since 1960 was the first year of analysis no attempt was made to draw conclusions concerning the importance of various environmental factors. Field and analytic methods were b~th considered exploratory, and the major ob~ectives of the ~nitial study were considered to be fulfilled. Plans for the 1961 analyses will include discrete measurements of range limits so that interval data will be available for each crowing point. In addition, the survey method will be revised to provide a more exacting description of land-use patterns for each crowing point. It is planned to estimate four 400yard transects from each point. Finally, the analysis will be run a number of times, successively eliminating Range, Elevation and any other variables which appear to be so all-inclusive as to confound interpretation. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Approved by: ~~--~~~--~~------Senior Biologist G. N. Hunter State Game Manager Date: January, 1961 F:.C. Kleinschnitz A.sst. Coordinator �January, 1961 -89- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of: Colorado ---------------------------- Project No.:: W-90-R-5 Work Plan No. 4 Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Improvement on Wildlife ----------~--~~------- Job No. 3 ------------~~--------------- Title of Job: EVALUATION OF NATURAL AND AGRICULTURAL PHEASANT-PRODUCTION Period Covered: COVER December 1, 1959 to November 30, 1960 Abstract 1. Conservation Officer brood-count routes were transect mapped in July and August, 1960. 2. Based on comparison of beginning, ending and brood-sighting mileages, the location of each brood counted by Conservation Officers was calculated and the cover types around that location were summarized. Data for 422 broods on 24 brood routes were found to be usable. 3. Variation coefficients were calculatj=tifor each cover type encountered in brood-location summaries. 4. Compar'Lson of variation coefficients suggests that roadside waste cover, small grains and alfalfa may have important functions in pheasant production. 5. It is concluded that the extremely low precision of field data precludes more than tentative analyses. Methods for increasing precision in the future are suggested. Objectives: To detiermf.ne the cover types, or combinations of types, which are most effective in producing pheasants. Procedures: As a part of the management procedure for pheasants in Colorado, each of the pheasant~range Conservation Officers is assigned one of.more permanently located, 30-mile, brood-survey routes. Brood counts are conducted in August, and for each of three counts the officers write down their beginning mileage, ending mileage and the olometer reading for each pheasant observed. Thus, ~f the field notations are made accurately, it is possible to relocate every'brood sighted by Conservation Officers during the fall_brood surveys. And, if the cover pattern associated with each of the brood-location points is determined, the cover patterns related to pheasant production in Colorado can be summarized and examined. �-90- Accordingly, most of the brood-survey routes in the state were; mapped.durigg July and August of 1960. At one-tenth mile intervals, over the complete length of a route, the cover and land-use patterns were estimated on line transects 120 yards on either side of the road. Twenty classes of cover and a class describing total available edge for each point are outlined in Table 1. When brood-count surveys were completed at the end of August, data were copied from the WCO field sheets. Brood-location cover data were then determined by: 1. Comparing WCO beginning and ending mileages with those of the mapping vehicle to obtain a correction factor. 2. Calculating the corrected odometer reading for each brood observation. 3. Totalling the trans~ct information for the brood-location point and the three points on either side. �-91- EVALUATION OF NA'I'lJ"RAL AND AGRICULTURAL PHEASANT-PRODUCTION COVER L. Jack Lyon Analyses: The analyses of 1960 brood data are neither as complete, nor as accurate, as they might be. Several unexpected problems were encountered in converting the WCO data, and in each case, the precision of the final analysis was affected, Briefly, the problems .encountier-ed in converting the brood data were: 1. Many of the Conservation Officers record their field data to the nearest mile instead of the nearest tenth. Since precise measurements are unnecessary for management purposes:this cannot be considered an error. Nevertheless, conversion to brood-locations did require the assumption of an average tenth-mile value and the inclusion of seven transect points in each observation. For 1961, each of the officers will be contacted with a request for as much precision as possible in mileage records. 2. A few officers did not conduct the counts in strick accDrdance with management specifications. Typical deviations in this category included: a. Table 1. Failure to record both beginning and ending mileages. Land-utilization classes for brood-survey transect mapping, Colorado, 1960.. Symbol Definition W+ + Waste, or unused, area with dense, high-quality herbaceous cover, Cattails or other tall perennials. Waste area with good herbaceous cover. Annuals or perennials over 18n tall. Waste area with fair cover. Thin or under 12" tall. Waste area with no cover. Low annuals or bare ground. Small grains. Wheat, barley, oats, etc. Fallow ground. Pasture, woody type. Pasture land with an overstory of browse sagebrush, mesquite, etc. Pasture, ·ungrazed. Pasture land on which most of the seedheads and vegetation is present. Pasture. Normal utilization to overgrazed. Sorghum crops: milo, kaffir, sorgho, etc. Millet Corn W+ W W._ SG F P+ + P+ P S M C �-92- Table 1 - Continued A B Be Tr WE ¢ Alfalfa Beets Beans Other truck crops: carrots, cabbage, potatoes, etc. Windbreaks - perennial woody cover, usually in rows, with at least 20% cover at ground level. Trees - orchards and tree plantings with no "Cover at ground level. Forest land. Farm buildings. Open water. Breaks. The total number of changes in cover type encountered over the length of a transect. In effect, this is a measure of available edge. b. .'. Failure to record meleages for every brood seen. c. Failure to complete the entire brood route and deviation frof the prescriqed route. d. Conversion of actual odemeter readings to concur with the mileage total shown on each brood-route map. e. Arbitrary assignment of a hen to every brood - irrespective of whether the hen was seen. Most of these deviations are minor in themselves, and none of them were considered to be sufficiently important to invalidate the data for management purposes. Again, however, each type ofC:.dev.iation2re.duced. the overall precision of the brood-count data for research purposes. In the final analysis, it was necessary to discard nearly half of all brood records for one reason or another and to accept a lower level of precision for usable measurements than originally planned. Data for a total of 422 broods, from 24 brood-survey routes, were examined. Because the basic variability of these data was known to be large, no attempt was made to extract information through sophisticated statistical anal~~is. Instead, the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation (six) were calculated for each cover type within routes. Variation co-efficients are presented in Table 2, and means and standard deviations for the most important east-slope regions are presented in Table 3. Data for brood routes on the Western slope were insufficient to justify presentation of regional means. Discutrsion: The coefficient of variation is calculated by dividing the standard deviation of a set of data by the mean. This produces a quantity which expresses variability as a pure number independent of the unit of measurement. For purposes of discussion, then, the variation coefficients of Table 2 are all comparable. In effect, they measure the tendency for anyone �-93- cover type to occur consistently wherever broods are produced. A. high variability indicates occasional occurrence, and a low variability indicates consistent occurrence. Unfortunately, interpretation of these data is not simple and straight forward because variabilities have been artificially reduced for almost every landuse type measured. It can be seen, for example, that Fallow (F), particularly in the northeast dry~land, produces a consistently low ·coefficient of variation. Two conclusions are possible: Either (1) fallow is important in determining pheasant production, or (2) fallow is simply well distributed. If homogeneity is the true reason; which seems highly likely, the extension of brood location points for 0.7 mile practically insures inclusion of some fallow in each measurement. �-94Table 2 - Coefficients of variation for cover types at broad locations on 24 brood-survey routs, fall of 1960, Colorado Cover Type Route lA IB lC ID IE IF 2A. 2B 2C 2D 2E 2FG 2I 2J 2K 2L 2M 2N 3C 3D 3E 4A. 4BC 5A Route lA lB lC ID IE IF 2A. 2B 2C 2D 2E 2FG 2I 2J 2K 2L 2M 2N 3C 3D 3E 4A 4BC 5A N 56 7 30 14 20 14 17 36 11 14 19 38 18 13 11 17 15 15 3 17 12 7 16 2 N 56 7 30 14 20 14 17 36 11 14 19 38 18 13 11 17 15 15 3 17 12 7 16 2 w++ 4.10 0.85 4·38 3.06 2.00 2•• 60 3·00 1.91 3·91 1.73 .•. 2,59 2·73 C 7·31 1.00 2.12 2.29 4·56 1.40 1.~9 1.09 0·70 1.10 0·97 0.83 0·93 0·77 0·93 1.73 w+ 3·20 2·70 2·35 3.76 2.85 1.89 1.11 1.39 1.55 2.41 2·92 0·96 1.26 1.15 0.80 1.09 1.54 1.42 1.14 0.96 2.48 0.69 1.05 0.88 A. w3.85 1.98 1.99 4.40 2.56 1.17 1.12 1.09 1.20 2.24 1.92 2·31 3·95 0.21 1.36 1.73 9.59 Lt. '$Lt 2.98 1.53 3·60 1.09 1.79 0.88 2.75 0.18 B B SG F 0.40 0.46 0·79 0.86 0.62 0·78 0.88 0·35 0.63 0·72 0.85 0.84 1.19 1.26 1.01 1.66 1.07 1.88 1.21 ?·78 0.·50 1.00 0·79 1.26 0.60 1.61 1.23 2.14 0.46 2·31 0·54 0.87 1.01 0·79 1.12 1.45 1.7~ 1.4~ :L.Lt9 0.68 0·78 1.84 2.48 1.00 1.80 0.09 Tr Tr 1.05 -O·9T 1.17 1.16 0.85 1.17 0.87 0·90 0.61 0.82 0·97 2.69 2.43 1.07 1.35 3·47 1.17 W 0.61 0.21 0.88 0·33 0·93 1.04 0.67 0.69 0.96 1.00 0.83 1.08 1.01 0·93 1.03 0.82 0.17 0.76 0.60 1.08 0·57 0.48 ~.;ll 1.54 1.70 1.11 1.13 1.59 1.60 1.i8 1.80 1.35 1.54 5·97 1.99 1.54 2·34 1.89 1.93 3·30 1.73 1.92 10·95 1.71 1.91 2.25 ~.6Q 1.51 1.70 1.17 4·33 1.09 3·46 1.48 2·35 1.00 1.71 0·93 3·31 1.48 4.13 1.12 A.i4 4.11 2.02 3.46 1.71 2.89 1.21 1.41 1.41 P++ P+ P 1.98 1.44 2.06 1.43 2.62 2.08 2.39 1.11 2.18 1.91 1.27 1.43 1.29 1.52 LOR' 3·59 1.52 1.45 2·55 1.54 2·57 4·36 2·39 1.82 1.44 2·92 1.38 2.47 1.70 2~.. 26 0.86 ,4.12 1.32 1.88 2.68 1.66 0.83 1.73 1.56 4.14 1.28 1.59 1.11 3.47 9037 0·99 1.01 1.15 1.04 1.51 1.41 1.41 WE FE ~ 4.13 3·00 2·51 1.11 1.71 2·31 1.32 1.37 1.06 1•• 05 2:-.-43 4.46 1.42 2.24 -4.09 A:·75 {L. 7i 3·00 0·92 9·67 1.42 3·00 0·90 3·25 1.10 4.71 1.04 3.47 4.00 1.33 0.86 1.25 2.63 2·75 2.40 1.44 0·72 2.00 1.12 1.01 2·52 2.60 2.67 1.36 0.87 1.73 1.73 2.00 1.99 1.63 0.85 1.98 1.40 S 2.27 1.04 2·77 3.74 2·38 1.18 2.84 4.31 3·32 2.05 4·36 M 8.33 2.64 3·99 2.42 2.80 1.95 3.45 2.36 4·38 3·09 1.08 9.7·9 4.13 1.63 1.04 Br H2O 0.16 5·19 0.20 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.06 0.06 4.13 0.09 5·93 0.11 3·00 0.12 0.14 4·35 0.08 1.93 0.10 1.67 0.20 1.75 0.09 3·31 0.09 3.41 0.07 0.12 2.64 0.42 1.73 0.15 0.64 0.12 2.86 1.08 0.16 2·71 2.80 0·93 0.13 2·58 1.40 1.41 0.02 1.40 �-95Table 3. - Means and standard deviations for cover types at 422 brood locations on 24 brood-survey routes, fall of 1960, Colorado. Route NE dryland SE dryland w++ N x - w+ W 16·3 51.7 81.3 4·9 79·0 17·5 w- SG P++ F P+ P S 666.4 546.4 389·7 335·2 4.2 658·3 123·0 59.4 50.1 105·3 220.0 128.3 M 23·7 89·0 x 28.8 192.4 71.5 294.6 0.8 2·9 394.8 481.1 268.1 377·2 19·3 335.4 67.0 373.2 Irrigated SE irrigated X 6.5 104.7 163.81 28·2 30.4 172.5 191.4 44.6 359·5 165·1 324.1 241.4 8.7 61.5 51.9 136.5 152.1 230.2 9·1 51.7 3·4 23·7 x NE 2 15·6384.6 69.·8365.9 4.0 70.6 24'.0145.3 9.8 251.2 55.2 338.4 172.6 196.9 255·7 147.6 140·9 28.5 226.5 92·5 107·3 182.7 217',5 193.8 5·7 25·5 11.2 59·1 3·6 20.2 2.16 3·75 159·0 259·3 NE All SE x All Ne dryland SE dryland NE irrigated SE irrigated NE All SE All Route N dryland SE dryland NE Irrigated BE irri.• gated NE All SE All SE All 56.0 $3..5 312.4 336.4 215.4 313·8 5.8 157.6 25.9 221.9 7·0 52·3 43.5 125·8 10.9 224.3 45.3:295.1 3·17 0·97 3·57 0.58 0.61 11·93 0.16 2.48 1.53 3.60 0.68 0.78 3.47 1.11 ,4.68 1.65 1.17 l.66 0·90 1.46 5·97 2.22 1.51 5.68 4.47 0.95 6.00 2.06 5·63 1.35 0.50 4.43 1.23 2.18 0.92 5.46 1.64 0.80 1.18 1.49 1.07 1.47 4.47 6.22 4.15 1.41 2.40 1.32 1.48 1.61 2.02 C B Tr Tr WE ~ FB 0·75 4;47 3·25 5,27 1.06 5.60 Br ---:H2() 20·9 46.6 0·5 29.9 2·9 .53·7 x 63.7 '237·9 x 43·3 150.1 A B 0.6 3.8 2·50 273·9 1.79 1.63 12·3 .:.134·9 0.8 4·3 55·3 204.6 x 13·1 58.4 7·5 43·7 8.2 46.1 83.3 39·4 245.0 238.2 142.1 103.2 11.3 189~2 49.·5 50 .5 2lt.4 '.7'.104.7 x 142·3 127.6 51.1 24.2 249.9 212.0 ;·~118.483.0 x 23.3 118.3" 40.3 99.0 213·0 97.6 62.6 138.8 82.8 173·1 48.5 121·7 3·73 6.26 3·47 -- --.10.9.5 1.28 1.15 1.71 2.62 4.4~ 1.29 2.11 2.~22 3.43 1,-~ 2. ~J5 1. - 4.50 4.46 ~:~§ 3·46 1.52 2.22 2.0 2·51 30.2 4.6 6.97 1.1 8·9 24.1 2.8 25·0 86.6 x 191.8 207.5 NE. .dryland SE !ijYland irrigated SE irrigated NE All 108.4 231.2 21.2 115·9 93.9 178.3 132.0 17·4 478.0 162.7 3.1',9 3~1.0 216.6 13.6 215.8 198.5 74.2 254.6 0.4 1.6 63.1 73·5 0.8 1.3 8.6 30·7 0·5 1.1 0-.7. 21.0 1.2 40.2 9·4 50·3 2.2 68.4 .0.4 13·1 1.0 33·2 2.23 5.83 5·37 4.00 1.63 1.7~ ~.4 ·50 ~J~ 1.80 1.16 1.92 1. 6 2. 3 5 30·5 22.2 3·5 75·9 36.5 7·1 30.4 3·9 31.8 8.4 40.5 29·8 14.0 60.6 25·3 30·7 0.15 8.~0 0.12 0.11 3.42 0.19 0·74 0.13 - ~J1 �-96- Evaluation of the low variation coefficients, then, requires examination of the distribution of coefficients and of mean values for the cover types involved. A. cover type which produces a series of low coefficients not accompanied by extremely high coefficients elsewhere, or by a lack of variation in route to route means, may be considered to have a role in production. Of the 22 factors examinged in this study, 8 had variation coefficients below 1.0 on five or more:routes. Evaluation of these factors, based on the above comments, was as follows. Waste (+). Although 5 routes had variation coefficients below 1.0, 11 had coefficients between 1.0 and 2.0, and 8 routes :were above 2.0. This distribution makes it highly doubtful that such 'cover is important over any large portion of the pheasant range. Waste (W). Seventeen brood routes had variation coefficients below 1.0 and the remaining seven routes were between 1.0 and 2.0 for this cover type. Route means for the type ranged from 41.5 to 685.6. Based on these data, Waste (W) can be considered one of the important pheasant-production covers for Colorado pheasant ranges. Small grain (SG). One brood route had no grains at brood production points, 13 routes had variation coefficients below 1.0, and the remaining 10 routes were between 1.0 and 2.0. Small grain means ranged from 199.2 to 799.5. These data suggest a fairly strong production function for small grain. Fallow (F). One brood route:had no fallow at production points and on nine other routes the corfficient of variation was below 1.0. For ten routes, however, the coefficients fell between 1.0 and 2.0, and on four other routes coefficients were above 2.0. Considering that nearly all the low coefficients occurred on dryland routes with means between 324.0 and 700.7, it is doubtful that any direct relationship between fallow and pheasant production exists. Corn (C). Variation coefficients for corn ranged fairly randomly from 0.7 to 7.31 and there were six routes on which corn was never related to brood production. Thus, even though six routes had variatiof coefficients for corn below 1.0, it is doubtful that corn can be considered a pheasant production factor. Alfalfa (A). Variation coefficients for alfalfa ranged from 0.48 to 2.69 and there were six routes on which no alfalfa was recorded. This range is much narrower than that calculated for corn even though smaller means were recorded for alfalfa on nearly every route. Thus, it must be concluded that alfalfa has at least a minor effect on production. Farm buildings (FB). Although variation coefficints were below 1.0 on 5 broodcount routes, they were above 1.0 and 18 others and no relationship with pheasant production is suspected. Breaks (Br). Variation coefficients testing the influence of edge were below 1.0 on every brood route and, in fact, were below 0.20 on every route but one. �-97- These coefficients might suggest a role in production except that there was very little possible variability in the original measurements. The mean value for Br at any single transect point was about four and the range was approximately two to eight. Maintenance of even this variability in brood-production data, however, required at least seven similar measurements in a row. And, since these did not occur, the range around a mean of 28 was reduced to about 25 - 33. The low variation coefficients, then, are inherent to the data and it is not possible to truly evaluate edge as an influence in pheasant production. Conclusions: In the first year of study, the extremely low precision of fieldmeasurement data made any but the most tentative analyses J~p?SSible. Variation coefficients for each cover type were calculated on the basis of data describing brood-production points tied to 0.7 mile of brood route. Within this large area, there was some indication that roadside waste cover and small grains were important on a statewide basis and that alfalfa may serve a production function on irrigated pheasant ranges. Recommendations: During the second year of study, the major objective will be an increase in precision and reliability for field observations. To this end, three different approaches will be used: 1. Each of the Wildlife Conservation Officers will be contacted, either individually or through Departmental schools, and the necessity for absolute precision and accurapy in field notes will be explained. Most of the Officers are very conscientious abeam their work, and such contacts should add a minimum of 200 broods to us~ple data for 1961. ! 2. Follow-up letters will be mailed to all Officers at the beginning of the brood-count season. 3. All possible support will be accorded the Project Leader, W-37-R, in his .attempts to compile a statewide pheasant-census summary. To date, this data has gone only to Regional Offices, and it is possible that individual WCOls can see no real use being made of their data. A statewide summary -, should lend consideraply greater status to their work. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Senior Biologist Date: January, 1961 Approved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager F:.C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/98eac1bc69f65317e38e7f5e1ecb3a85.pdf d0a1af7d2207b576e75e304db890765f PDF Text Text April, 1961 1 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of Colorado ---------------------------------------------------------- Project No. W-10l-R-3 Work Plan No. 2 Title of Job Game Range Investigations Job No. 3 Rodent Effects on Deer Winter Range Period Covered May I, 1960 to January 15, 1961 ABSTRACT A study is being made in southwestern Colorado by the Colorado Game and Fish Department to learn how rodents affect deer ~nter range in a pinon-Juniper type. The study, located in Mesa Verde National Park, is in its fifth year. This fifth Job Completion Report presents the data collected and the results observed to date. Two three~acre plots have been established: one, a rodent Exclosure, the other, a Control with a dummy fence. Deer have free access to both. Trapping virtually eliminated the or,iginal rodent population in the Exclosure. Trapping and poisoning are killing those few which manage to gain entry. No visible changes in the vegetation as a result of rodent controls are evident. However, differences in browse and grass composit~on percentages have developed which are suspected of indicating changes in composition. Live trapping and marking of small rodents is being done to provide home-range data for the estimation of animals per acre. ��3 RODENT EFFECTS ON DEER WINTER RANGE Harold R. Shepherd INTRODUCTION Many winter deer ranges in Colorado are deteriorating. They are often marked by the die-off of woody shrubs and by a scarcity of seedling shrubs. Game biologist have become accustomed to blaming over-use by big game and livestock. However, there is reason to suspect rodents may be partiallyrepponsible. In Mesa Verde National Park, in southwestern Colorado, it is reported that bitterbrush plants have been found elsewhere in Colorado. It is suspected that in some areas rodents may be largely responsible for the scarcity of bitterbrush and mountain mahogany seedlings. In any sound program of game-range management all of the factors contributing to range use and deterioration should be taken into consideration, including the effects of rodents. A study is needed to learn how rodents affect deer winter range. Such a study was begun in August of 1956 in Mesa Verde National Park. It is expected that several years will be required to complete the study and accomplish its stated objectives. This is the fifth Job Completion Report on the continuing study. reports the progress made during the period May, 1960 to January, 1961 toward accomplishment of the long-term objectives of the study. Previous reports were published in the July issues of the Quarterly Progress Report of the Federal Aid Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department of the years 1957, 1958, 1959, and 1960. It OBJECTIVES The long-term, over-all objective is to study how rodents affect the composition, ground cover, and reproduction of vegetation in a pinon~juniper type deer range, with particular emphasis on browse plants. The objectives for the period covered by this report are as follows: 1. Collect plant composition and density data from established line transects. 2. Make photographic records of vegetation from permanent photo stations. 3. Collect pellet-group data from established pellet-group plots. Make total pellet count of exclosure and control plots. 4. Continue rodent control inside rodent exclosure. 5. Make rodent census, using established census trap lines. �4 6. So that rodent census data can be converted to animals per unit area it is necessary to obtain home-range data. Therefore, obtain homerange data by live trapping and tagging rodents according to methods developed by John Calhoun. 7. ~ke a collection of plants from the vicinity of the study, and press, identify, and mount them to provide an herbarium ~or positive identification of plants within the study area. 8. Pellet counts show that deer are using the control plot more than the rodent exclosure. To correct this situation a dummy fence is needed around the control plot so that deer use will be the same in it as in the rodent exclosure. Therefore, build a dummy fence around the control plot which will present the -same obstacle t.o.dee'ras does the one aroUnd the r:odent exc:;Lqs'lire, yet not affect the entrance of rodents. Construct the fence in the same manner and of the same materials as in the one surrounding the exclosure, excepting that the hardware cloth is to be omitted. PROCEDURE Lire Transects Plant composition and density data were collected from 70 permanent line transects, using the Parker-8avage method described in the July, 1958 report. Pellet-group Data Deer pellet-group data were collected form 70 permanent 1/100 acre plots as in previous years, and a total count was made of the pellet •.. groups within the rodent exclosure and control area. All pellet-groups were marked with paint for future identif'ication.. RodEn t Control The heavy, wet snow of the winter of 1959-60 froze on the fence and tore several small holes in int, permitting the entrance of rodents. ~o capture any rodents which might have gained entrance, trapping wa.s begun June 23 and continued intermittently until August 17. Snap traps were spaced approximately 15 feet apart over the entire 3-acre exclosure. The bait used was a mixture of equal parts of suet, raisins, peanut butter, and paraffin with some DDT to combat bait stealing Lnsec.ts . In addition to the trapping, 50 poison stations constructed of quart motor oil cans were distributed evenly over the area and baited with Warfarin-poisoned grain. These poison stations will be left out and kept baited all of the time in the future to pick up any animals which may gain entry. Small Mammal Census A. small mammal census was conducted within the permanent census area described in the 1959 report. The standard procedures of the Advisory Committee of the North American Census of Small Mammals was followed. Census data were reported to the Committee. �5 Photographic Records Photographs were taken of photo plots as described in previous reports •. Plant Collecting Additional plants from Mesa Verde and vicinity were collected and prepared for the study herbarium. Fencing the Control As ment10ned in previous reports, deer use has been slightly greater in the Control than in the Exclosure. It is thought this is due to the low fence around the Exclosure and the absence of one around the Control. To provide the same impediment to the entrance of deer into the Control, a dummy fence was constructed around it in ithe spring of 1960. Excepting the absence of hardware cloth, it is exactly like the fence around the Exclosure. Collecting Home-Range Data In order to accumulate hom~-range data by means of which census data may be coverted to an estimate of rodents per unit area, a grid was surveyed and snaked out immediately' north of the Control area. The grid is a square 600 feet on a side. Numbered white stakes grid it into 133 50~foot squares. Small rodents were live trapped with 50 live traps and toe marked. Trap locations were mived daily according to plan to systematically cover the grid. Records were kept of all capture and recapture locations to provide data from which home •.• range can be calculated according to the method of Calhoun and Casby. Deer-Pellet Weathering Experiment AS. described in the previous report, a deer-pellet weathering experiment was begun to learn how pellets weather under the influence of different site factors. Af'ter one year of weathering, sample pellets from each site were collected to be photographed in color. The color photographs will be used as an aid in more· correctly aging pellet gro1.1.ps. �6 RESULTS, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS Line Transect Data Number of Species. -The summary of lire transect data for 1960 is shown ip.Tables 1, 2, and 3. Within both the Control and Exclosure were recorded six species of browse. Six species of grasses were recorded for the Exclosure and five for the Control, Stipa comata not having been encountered along any transects in the Control. The same number of forb species were encountered in both the Exclosure and Control, but the kinds varied slighly. The same species of annuals were encountered in both Exclosure and Control. Percent DenSity, Composition and Me:an Number of Plants.--Total Plant density was greater in 1960 than in 1959, probably because of the greater precipitation in the winter months immediately preceeding the growing season. During the study, yearly precipitation has varied only slightly (Table 4). For example, there is only 0.55 of an inch difference in the precipitations for the first and the most recent years of the study. Although generally there are slight differences in denSity, composition, and number of plants in beth the Control and Exclosure as between the first and the most recent year of the study, these are thought not to indicate any changes due to treatment. However, there is a fairly large change in the composition figures for browse and grass which may indicate a real change in the vegetation. Browse composition in the Control decreased from 80.52 to 77.55 per cent, a decrease of 3.02 per cent, while in the Exclosure browse composition increased from 70.02 to 81.28, or 11.26 per cent. Meanwhile, in the Control grass composition increased ~i'om 11.12 to 14.56, QT 3.44 per cent, and it decreased from 20.33 to 11.00, or 9.33 per cent in the Exclosure. Thus the changes in browse composition: are approximately compensated by the changes in the composition of grass. If these changes in the figures represent changes in the vegetation it seems likely they are due to either rodent control, lessened use of browse by deer in the Exclosure, 9r a combination of these factors. Last year's report pointed out that the deer use in the Exclosure has been slightly less than in the Control. However, as stated in the discussion under Pellet-group Count, the deer use in 1960 was heaviest in the Exclosure. The reversal of the use trend in 1960 probably resulted from construction of the dummy fence around the Oontrol, the deer requiring a while to become accustomed to the new conditions imposed by the fence. With both areas fenced, the deer use now is expected to become the same in each. Visible Effects of Rodent Contro~ No bisible effects of three years of rodent control are evident in photographs. �7 Deer-use of Control and Exclosure Compared Pellet •.• group Plots.--Within the Control there was a mean of 2.57 pellet ..• groups per plot with confidence limits of 2.57 + 0.820 at the 0.05 level (Table 5). Within the Exclosure there was a mean of 3.46 pellet...groups:per plot with confidence limits of 3.46 + 0.994. From these data it can not be determined if there is a real difference in the deer •.. use 'Of the two areas. Total Pelleto.Group Count ••.• ...gincethepellet-group plot data could not be relied uponvto proVide an accurate estimate of the deer use within the Control and Exclosure, a total pellet count was made. The total counts are thought to provide a good estimate of the deer use of the two areas. It is est;Lmated that the Exclosure received 26.6 and the Control 19.8 deer-days use per acre (Table 5). The difference inaID.ount of use may have resulted from -the new fence around the Control Rodent Control Some rodents got into the Exclosure during the early spring through the holes torn in the fence by the snow. Summer trapping caught 147 Peromyscus maniculatus, 8 Peromyscus truei, 12 Microtus mexicanus" 3 Eutamias :mtnirrms,33 Eutamias pdri vi tatus, and 5 young cOttontails. It is thought that there were very few if any rodents left in the Exclosure by fall, and it is hoped that in the future the :poison :stations will h8.lp to eliminate any rodents that gain entrance through damaged fences or by other means. Small Mammal Census In the summ.er of 1960, the census was taken September 7, 8, and 9. In all, 228 small rodents were taken. These included 188 Peromyscus maniculatns, 27Peromyscus truei, 4 Microtus mexicanus, 2 Eutamias quadrivitatus hopiensis, and 7 Eutamias minimus (Tables 6 and 7). The total catch in 1960 was more than twice that in 1959, with the deer mice comprising the bulk of the -catch. There seems little doubt that the large increase in the population was due to the huge pinon nut crop of the previous fall~_ In the spring of 1960 numerous pinon nut caches were still to be found in rodent nests, and beneath the trees where nuts had been buried by chiprrmnks. The uneaten nuts in the caches sprouted, producing handfuls of young seedlings which usually died later from crowding and lack of water. Of the 188 Peromyscus maniculatus tak~n, 16 were adult males and 27 adult females. The adults comprised 23 per cent of the population; the rest were sub-adults and juveniles. Virtually none of the mice taken during the 3-day census were !l.nbreeding condition, and few females were lactating. This is contrary to the conditions prevailing in previous years. �8 Rome-Range Data Deer Mice Toe Clipped.--Live trapping began September 8 and was continued for only eight days. During this period 102 Peromyscus maniculatus were caught, toe marked, and released. There were 60 recaptures, 15 having been taken three times. The average distance mice wer~·taken from a previous point of capture was 75 feet. The greatest distance any mouse was caught from a previous capture point was 200 feet. Thirteen were caught at the same location more than once. True White-footed Mice Toe Clipped.-Twelve Peromyscus truei were caught and marked. There were 11 recaptures. One mouse was caught six times; this was a sub-adult female. The average distance traveled be-tween capture points was 145.9 feet, and the greatest was 350 feet. Other Rodents Toe Clipped.--Two meadow mice and six chipmunks Eutamias minimus were marked; none were recaptured. Botfly Larvae Infestation.-Many of the rodents, especially the deer and white-footed mice, were found to be afflicted with ~bles, botfly larvae. The warbles were under the skin, occuringusually as one larva on either one or both rumps. Occassionally they occurred on a femur or on the back. The warbles were all mature or nearly so. Often an animal which had a warble when first caught had lost it by the second capture a few days later. Large holes in the skin marked the places where warbles had crawled out, Mature warbles were chocolate brown in color and were approximately 18 mm long and 10 mm at the largest diameter.. The species of botfly has yet to be determined. Mice infested with warbles did not appear to be incapacited by them. RECOMMENDATIONS Statistically analyze transect data to learn if real differences exist in the vegetation within the Control and the Exclosure. Make a food habit study of rodents by analysis of the f!ontens of stomachs and cheek pouches and by ma~ng field observations on the kind of plants and plant parts gnawed or cached. Conduct a feeding study to determine the weight of forage plants eaten by rodents. Do this by feeding na.tive forage plants to livetrapped caged animals. From the data collected, estimate the competition existing between rodents and deer for range plants in terms of pounds of food eaten. . SUMMARY Additional data were collected futring the summer of 1960 to learn how small rodents affect a pinon-juniper deer range. The study was located in MeSa Verde National Park. �Table 1.•.••.• Line Transect Data for Rodent Exclosure, 1960. Species and Me~surements .' .... .' Amelanchier alnifolia (serviceberry) Artemisia tridentata (bigsagebru.sh) Chroysothamnus depressus (rabbitbrush) Cercocarpus montanus (mountainmaho~y) Purshia trident.ata (antelope bitterbrush) Symphoricarpos spp. .(snowberry) Tetradymia canescens (smooth horsebrush ) Total Browse Agropyron -smithii (western wheatgrass) Carex spp. (sedge) Koe1eria cristata (junegrass) Poa longiligula (longtongue muttongrass) Poa pratense ~Kentucky bluegrass) Stipa comata needle-and-thread grass) Sitanion hystrix (s~uirreltail grass) Total grass and sedge Artemisia gnapholodes Aster rubrotinctus Astragalus scopulorum Antennariaspp. Balsamorhizasagi tta Cirsium plattense Comandra umbellata Erigerondivergens cinereus Erigerondivergens divergens Eirgeron philadelphicus Erigeron spp. Eriogonum subalpinum Eriogonum umbellatum Helianthus nuttalii Lupinus aduncus Total Intercept (cm) 995 1931 1119 36 3465-9.90 -14 7560 ' Summary of 35 Transects. Percent Percent Total Density Composition Number (cover) Plants 2.8 10.70 19 5.52 20.76 92 3.20 12.03 70 .10 .39 1 37.25112 -........ ..-...... -..... .04 .15 1 21.56 81.28 295 Mean Number Plants .54 2.63 2.00 .03 3.20 ._..•.•• .03 8.43 6 1 203 739 .02 T .58 2.1 .06 .01 2.18 7.95 6 1 115 303 .17 .03 3.29 8.66 29 45 1023 ••08 .13 2·9 .31 .48 11.00 20 460 .43 .57 13.14 5 --.01 .. •... .02 .03 T .01 .02 --.04 ..•.....•• ....•.~ ..•... 7 12 1~_ 2 7 15 -~...•....••. 15 17 51 ....~ .....•-- _ ... ... .. - ii!t.~_ ••• ..•....•... .04 .05 -.15 ~ .••... ....-.. ... ...•.•. .05 •...•...... .08 .18 .Gl .02 .08 .16 ---,....•..•. .16 .18 ·55 •...,.~•.. ---- -15 2 M'",_ 3 5 1 2 7 6 .•..-....... .06 . ..•..•.....•.• .09 .14 .03 .06 .20 .17 - ..•.. .....•.•..... ... ...•..•. ....•...,.. 1 16 11 .03 .46 .31 ,......... --.. -........ _ ••..•... \.0 �Table 1 •••• -(continued) Species and Measurements Lithospermum angustifo1ium Linum lewisii Lactuca spp. Lomatium simplex Malvastrum coccineum Opuntia spp. Penstemoncomarrhenus Penstemon caespitosus Phacelia heterophyla Solidago petradoria Senecio spp. Tragopogon spp. Unknown forb Total forbs (perennials) Cordy1anthus wrightii Lappula Spp. Orthocarpus purpureo albus Polygonum sawatchense Total annuals Total vegetation (except trees) Pinus edulis (pinon pine) Juniperus utah-ensis (Utah juniper) Total trees Total Intercept (cm) -~•.. 13 ....-- Percent DenSity ~.cover) _ •••w_•.• - .04 •..,.•...•.. Percent Total Composfta on Number Plants ""'--- .14 ..•..- Mean Number Plants 6 -.,...,.,.. ...-..._- .17 ---- ...• ..•_- .. - ...-.- ........ 6 5 1 231 .02 .01 T .66 .06 .05 .01 2.48 3 2 1 4-7 .09 .06 .03 1.34 .51 1.9 .........-- --..--•.....•. ..-- .... 6.23 140 4.00 7 .20 143 153 .09 4.09 4.37 ••...... 177 .... •....~ -- ........ •••. 011 ___ -...... •...,... ... - ...•~ ... - -_ ......• a-I_ ••. _ ....-- -.....•.. _ •••.s.i ••• ••.••••• -.ja 579 1.7 ..•--,... 7 -,.,.... .02 .08 _*8_ 3 143 153 .01 .41 .44 .03 1.541.64 .._..27 ..... ---3 ·77 9301 26.6 100.00 1048 29·94 5i87 4019 9206 14.8 ll.5 26 •. 3 56.34 43.66 100.00 48 32 82 1.37 ·91 2.34 I--' 0 �Table 2 •..•• - Line Transect Data for Rodent Control, 1960. Species and Measurements Total In~er~ept Ame1anchier alnifolia (serviceberry ~ Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush Chrysothamnus Depressus (rabbitbrush) Cercocarpus montanus (mountain mahogany) Purshia tridentata (antelope bitterbrush) Symphoricarpos spp. (snowberry) Tetradymia canescens Total Browse 1411 1690 1259 287 3729 53 Agropyron smithii (western wheatgrass) Carex spp. (sedge) Koe1eria cristata (junegrass) Poa longi1igula (longtongue muttongrass) Poa pratense (Kerrtucky bluegrass) Stipa comata (needle-and-thread grass) Sitanion hystrix (squirreltai1 grass) Total grass and sedge Artemisia gnaP4alodes Aster rubrotinctus Astragalus scopu1orum Antennaria spp. Ba1samorhiza sagittata Cirsium plattense Comandra umbe11ata Erigeron divergens cinereus Erigeron divergens divergens Erigeron philadelphicus Erigeron spp •. Eriogonum suba1pinum Eriogonum umbellatum Helianthus nuttalii Lupinus aduncus Summary of 35 Transects. Percent D~nsity cover) 4.03 4.83 3.60 .82 9-37 -.15 Total Percent Composition Number Plants 12.98 23 70 15·55 80 11.58 2 2.64 106 34.31 1 .49 Mean Number Plants -~......• ..~- 8429 24.08 77.55 282 2.0 2.29 .06 3·03 .03 •...... 8.06 14 1 181 1302 .04 T ·52 3·72 .13 .~1 1.67 11.98 12 1 140 349 .34 .03 4.00 10.00 -_ ....• •....•.... .••...... ~ ...... -.....•. ....--- _ •..•.... ..... ,...-- •..•.•......... .24 4.52 .78 14.56 52 554 -.......• •.•........ •..--•..,... _ ...... •....••.. •....•......... ...•........ ....- 7 3 3 .02 .01 .01 .06 .03 .03 2 3 3 85 1583 --- ... 15 33 1 -- ._...-•... ' •...•.•..,.. 1.49 15.83 ....•....- ......... . -...- ... ••......• _ •..... .04 .09 T .14 ·30 .01 7 24 1 .06 .09 .09 -- ...•.•..•.. 2.00 .69 .03 .43 .57 .03 .03 .....•.- ..--~ ..--.--•. ~ .•...--- --- 21 21 10 1 .06 .06 .03 T .19 .19 .09 .01 15 20 1 1 ----- -- I-' I-' �Table 2.-(continued) Species and Measurements Lithospermum angustifolium Linum lewisii Lactuca spp. Lomatium simplex Malvastrum coccineum Opuntia spp . Penstemon comarrhenus Penstemon caespitosus Phacelia heterophyla Solidago petradoria Senecio spp. Tragopogonspp. Unknown forb Potal forbs (perennials) Cordylanthus wrightii Lappula spp. Orthocarpus purpureo albus Polygonum sawatchense Total annuals ~otal vegetation (except trees) Pinus edulis (pinon pine) Juniperusutahensis (Utah juniper) Total trees Total Intercent 4 3 ......•...••... -----....•.•. •..~--1.. Percent Density , cover) .01 .01 Percent Total Composition Number Plants .04 1 .03 1 ......••..... -- •.. ...- .•. ...~...•.• .w•••••• ~ .•..••..- ..•..-~--~ ---~ -.--- ••.-... Mean Number Plants .03 .03 ....u.•.... 1 59 .03 1.69 1.37 ---- -- ....•... T .80 ..•.•.... .01 2.58 -·91 2·93 48 .•....•..... ..-•..•... ...--.. ---- ..... - 319 "".,-- ... -- 3 734 .01 2.10 .03 6.75 3 190 .09 5.43 281 91' •••.••••• .01 ....••...... .03 3 .09 _~M'" 11 121 135 .03 ·35 .39 .10 1.11 1.24 11 123 137 ·31 3·51 3·91 10869 31.05 100.00 1163 33·23 6071 3894 9965 17.35 11.13 28.47 60.92 39.08 100.00 59 40 99 1.69 1.14 2.83 3 ~ �Table 3.-Summaries of Transect Data Comparedwith Respect to Treatment and Years. Year 1960 Control 24.08 Browse Grass & Sedge 4.52 2.10 Forbs .39 Annuals 31.05 Total Veg. 28.47 Total Trees MeanNumberPlants Per cent Composition Per cent Density Exclosure Dif. 21~56 ~2.56 2.90-1.62 1.70 + .40 ~44 + .05 26.6 -4.45 26.3 _-2.17 Control 77.55 14.56 6.75 ~.1.24 100.00 100.00 Exc'l.oaure Si.28 1l.OO 6,.23 1.64 100l'OO100.00 Did::. Control +3.73 8.06 •.. 3.56 15.83 •... 52 5.43 + .40 3 ·91 --.. 33.23 .~~~~ '2.83 Exclosure 8.43 13.14 4.00 4.37 29.94 2.34 Dif. + .37 •.• 2.69 •• 1.43 + .46 -3·29 - .49 Year 1959 Browse Grass & Sedge Forbs .. Annuals Total Veg. 27·15 26C86 Total Trees - - •.... •... 22.16 21.53 .......... ... ...-.. .••.•.... -4.99 -5.33 100.00 100.00 100.00 '100.'00'. -- Year '1958 . 24.40 Browse Grass & Sedge 5.21 2 .13 Forbs .12.16 Annuals 31.86 Total Veg. 26.77 Total trees 20.89 4.22 2.11 25.65 Browse Grass & Sedge 3.'54 2.43 Forbs .05 Annuals 31.86 Total Veg. 22.13 Total Trees . 28.25 20.62 ••. 3.51 - .99 ••.02 + .04 -3.61 . ...6.15 76.40 16.46 6. 72 .37 100.00 100.00 73.90 14.92 7.44 .56 100.00 '100'.-00 21.19 6.'14 2.83 .11 30.26 21.05 •.. 4.46 +2.60 + .40 + .06 •.. 1.60 ''';1.08 Year 195.7 80.52 70.02 ~.11.12 20.33 7.60 9.33 .16 .37 100.00 100.00 100.00' .. '100;00' . ....•, , ..•.•..•- ...•..-.. , , , r" ---- . 29.46 '2.49 . f-! W ....•-... 24.40 2.12 -5.06 •.. 37 . .•2.5 8.40---8.26 -1.5 20.77 18.39 + •72 7.60 5•72 + .19 1.17 1.65 .---~ 38.02 33.94 ..:..:..:..: '2'.os . '1;S2 .. - .22 -2.38 •• 1.88 + .48 . -4.08 ·~.26 ...10; 5 9.08 . 8.31 - ·77 +9.21 18.69 16.14 -2·55 +1.73 6.94 6.23 •..·71 + .21 .51 1.17 + .•66 _......... 35.40 31.86"'3.54 . .~..;...:...:. ·2.02····· ·1.'85·······.,; '.17 �14 Table 4•....... September •.. August Precipitation Mesa Verde National Park 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 September .98 .00 .98 1.06 October 1.25 3.43 1.19 2.56 November .83 2.09 ·73 1.01 December 1.59 1.06 .04 3 .• 02 January 2.57 1.25 .42 2.09 February 1.18 1.98 1.85 2.67 March 1.10 2.60 .16 1.01 April 1.47 1.08 2.05 1.42 May 1.24 .40 T .62 June ·79 .26 1.61 .49 July 2.34 1.04 ·39 .76 August 2.08 ~ 2·93 Totals 17.41 16.58 13·35 ---- .15 16.86 �15 Table 5 •.-,..peerUse in Rodent Exclosure and Control Area as Indicated by Pellet-Group Counts, 1960 Rodent E;lcclosure Control Area Pellet groups outside sample plots 597 558 Pellet groups inside sample plots 121 90 Tota1 Pellet groups 718 648 Mean )?e1Jet groups per plot 3.46 2.57 .490 .404 26.6 19.8 - Sx Deer~ys use per acre �16 Table 6.-Rodent Census Data, 1960 D/3.tetraps first set: September 6, 1960 Ti;me of day traps first set: 1:00 p.m. -4:30 p.m. Time of day traps were visited on the following 3 days: First day: 8:30 a.m •••. 12:00 noon Second day: 8:00 a.m. "'9:15 a.m. Third day: 8:00 a.m. -11.00 a.m. Weather: 1. From time of setting to first visit: Cloudy, cool, light sprinkle of rain in afternoon; partly cloudy and cool night and morning. 2. From first to second visit: Clear and warm day, clear and cool night. 3.. From second to third visit: Clear, cool night; partly cloudy and warm day. Type of trap: Snap trap, Museum Special Type of bait: Mixture oatmeal, peanut butter, raisins, suet, (DDT) Species taken: Peromyscusmaniculatus, Peromyscus tzruef., Eutamias minimus, Eut.amias g;ll1adrivitatushopiensis, Microtus mext.canus , Species First Day: SeEtember 7z.1960 Length in MM. Weight (gm) Total Tail Ear M 16.1 145 58 19 F 16.8 66 17 159 66 14 M 143 13·7 M 14.8 60 18 147 M 16.2 158 58 19 F 62 18 14.5 158 141 M 14.5 50 17 Sex P,.m. P.m. P.m .• P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. Capture Location l•.. l-N l-1..c 1•.. 2•.. C l••. 4.-N 1-4...s 1-6 •.. N 1-7 •.• N P ..• m, P.m. P .•• m .• P.m. P.m. l.~N 1-8...c 1•.• 10•.• N 1••10-C 1•.• 101-8 M M P.m. P.m. P.m. 1-12 •.• N 1-13-C 1••14 •.• c P.m. P.m. P.m:o P.m. P •. m. l•.• l4-N 1-15 •.. S 1-15 ..• N 1-16-c 1•.. 16..• N P.m. 1-18-C 11.5 15.9 17.8 15.9 15.6 140 153 168 142 144 54 57 61 58 59 19 19 21 20 20 14.5 17·2 19·5 152 159 159 63 66 55 21 23 22 M 13.4 15·7 12 .• 4 13·1 17·5 139 150 143 136 137 53 65 61 55 49 19 19 20 18 19 F 16.5 161 61 19 F M F F F M F M F F Remarks Hind Foot AdJi1t 19 18 SUbadu1t Testes Abd , SUbadu1t 19 Subadult Testes Abd. 20 SUbadult Testes Abd. 20 Subadult Not Lac. 20 SUbadult Warbled 19 Testes Abd. Ju,veni1e Testes Abd. 20 8ubadult Testes Abd. 19 M'lil t Not Lac. 19 Subadlllt Testes Abd. 20 Subadul t Left Rump 20 Warbled Not Lac. 18 Subadu1t Not Lac. 20 Subadult Not Lac. Adli1t 1 Warble Left 21 Side of Rump Testes Abd. 18 Subadu1t Not Lac. Subadu1t Testes Abd. 19 Suhadu1 t Not Lac. 19 20 Juvenile Not Lac. Subadult 1 Warble 19 Left Side Rump Testes Abd. 20 Adult Not Lac. �17 Table 6.-( continued) Remarks Weight (gm) -10.8 Length in MM. Total Tail Ear 151' 54 19 17.4 14.1 19.6 19.4 12·5 7·9 14.9 14.7 161 141 167 160 143 82 150 147 58 59 79 60 52 16 63 55 20 20 29 17 19 8 20 18 21 18 23 19 18 14 21 19 15.9 18.1 153 157 57 59 19 20 21 20 M 15.0 14.8 17·2 144 146 150 54 54 54 21 19 19 20 19 19 1l ••15"S 11-1~C 11-l8-N 11-l9-S M M M M 16.2 15·7 15.6 15.8 162 157 158 154 77 63 64 60 27 19 20 21 23 20 21 19 P.m. P .•. m. 11-l9-N 1l••20-S M F 22.2 15.7 172 164 68 64 20 20 20 20 P.m. 1U~l...c ? 17·5 132 50 23 20 F.m. P.m. P.m. P,.m. lll-l,..s 111-1~N 111 •.• 2..oC 111-5...s M M F F 14.8 17.0 20·5 18.5 148 152 151 150 54 50 56 55 20 19 19 20 19 20 17 18 P.m. P.t. 111-6...s 111-8...s F M 13.9 0 140 0 54 86 19 0 18 22 P .• m. P.m. P.m. 111 •.• ~ 111 ••• 10.••. N 11l •.• 11-C M F M 16.3 10·9 15·2 154 147 153 59 46 62 22 21 19 21 20 19 P.m. 111-11...s F 19·0 163 62 20 21 Sex P.m Capture Location 1-19..08 P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P •• m. M.m. P.m. P.m. l•.• 19"N 1-20 •.• S 11-2-N 11-3-N 1l •.• 4-s 11-6...s ll...6 ••. N 1l•• ,8...s F F F F M F P.m. P.m. ll...8-N 11-11-N M P .• m~ P·.m. P.m. 11.••• 13...c 11-14-c 11-14 •.• N F M P.t. P.m. P •. m. P.m,. Species F M F M Hind Foot 19 Subadult Not Lac. Partly eat en Adult Not Lac. Subadul t Not Lac. AdifLt Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. Sub,a.dul t Testes Abd. Juvenile Adult Testes Abd , Subadult Not Lac. Warble Left Side Rump Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd . Warbled Both Sides Rump Subadult Not Lac. Subadult Testes Abd. Adult Testes Abd. One Foot off 'Adult Testes Abd. Adult Testes Abd. ADult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd . Warble on Back Adult Teste,S Abd. Subadul t Not Lac , 1 Warble Left Side Rump Juvenile Eaten Warble Right Side Rump Subadult Test.es Abd , Adult Testes Abd. Adult Not Lac .• Subadult Not Lac. Warble Left Side Rump Juvenile Not Lac. Adult Testes Abd , Head Eaten Subadult Testes Abd .• Juvenile Not Lac. Sub adult Testes Abd. Leg MiSSing Adult Not Lac. Warble Right Side Rump �18 Table 6 •• -(continued) Species Sex P,.m. P.t. P.m. P.t. P.m P.m. P.m. p·.t P.m. P.m. capture Location 111.••. 11 .• N 111-12-S 111-13"'C 111-15-8 111-16 ••c 111-17-C 111 •... 18>-8 111-20-8 IV-I-N IV-l..s POot. P.m. P.t. P .. m. P .• m, P.m" P.m. P.m. P.m. F M M M F M M F Weight (gm) 15.0 18.3 11.5 18.1 13·0 14.6 16.5 18.4 15.0 1603 Length Total 164 178 142 177 141 142 158 183 144 150 in MM. Tail Ear 21 70 76 29 17 59 81 28 18 54 52 19 20 55 30 95 63 19 21 54 IV•.• I-C 1V•.• 2•.. N 1V-3-C 1V-5-S IV-5-G Iv;..4-N IV...6 .... N IV-7"S 1V-B-N F F F F F M F M F 19·0 12.0 21.5 13.4 16.8 17.4 12 •. 6 15.4 10.0 173 140 185 148 164 167 147 156 135 73 55 81 61 64 64 62 64 57 20 19 30 19 19 20 19 20 19 P.m. IV-9-S M 12.0 150 58 0 P.t. P·.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. IV-9-G IV•.. 11-S IV•.• 12•.• N 1V-16 ••S 1V-16-N M M F M F 20·5 16.2 12·3 12·9 12 •. 0 188 145 141 139 146 84 48 57 55 60 31 19 19 20 17 22 19 19 21 18 P'"t. P·.m. P.m. P·.m. P •. m. Ps.m •. IV-19-G 1V-19..s 1V•.• 20-G IV •.• 20-N Y••1....s V-1-N F M F M M M 20·5 16.5 18.6 17·2 20·9 16.8 189 156 158 154 154 147 86 59 51 60 62 62 27 20 21 19 20 21 23 20 19 21 20 20 P .. t. P,.m. P",m.• P.m •. P.m. P:.·m. P •. m. V.•.. l-C V ••• 2••• C Y-2-N V"'3-N V...6-N v•.• 6...c V ••• 10•• N M M M F M F 16.5 16.5 15.6 22.6 13·7 13.5 14.3 178 157 155 173 147 142 150 82 67 64 67 53 57 53 30 19 21 22. 20 21 21 23 21 20 20 21 19 20 M M Remarks Hind Foot 22 Subadult Testes Abd . 22 Subadult Testes Abd. Juvenile Not Lac. 19 Adult Testes Abd. 23 J:u.venileTestes Abd. 20 Subadult Testes Abd . 19 Subadult Not Lac. 19 Subadult Testes Abd. 23 Juvenile Testes Abd. 19 Subadult Not Lac •. 20 Warble Right Side Rump SUb adult Not Lac. 23 Juvenile Not Lac. 17 24 Adult Not Lac. Juvenile Not Lac. 19 21 Subadult Not Lac. Sub adult Testes Abd. 19 18 Juvenile Not Lac. 18 Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. 19 Hind Foot Missing 0 Subadult Testes Abd. Feet .and Ears Dried Up M Adult Testes Abd , Subadult Testes Abd~ Sub adult Not Lac. Sub adult Testes Abd. Juvenile Not Lac. Leg Gone Adult Not Lac. Adult Testes Abd. Adult Not Lac. Subadult Testes Abd. Adult Testes Abd. Adult Testes Abd. Hind Leg Gone Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Suoadult Testes Abd , Adult Not Lac . Subadult Testes Abd . Subadult Not Lac. Subadult Testes Abd. �19 Table 6.--(continued) Remarks P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. Sex Capture ..Loi;:ation V::'lO-C M F V-13-N M v-14-c 'V-15-N F Weight (gm) 14.7 12·9 14·9 22.2 Length Total 149 132 148 181 in MM. Tail Ear 22 54 21 45 21 56 74 19 P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. E.q.h. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. V-15-C v-16-N V-17-C V-20-S V-20-C V-20-N VI-1-N Vl-5-N Vl-5-G Vl-5-S vl-6-c Vl-7-C Vl-9-S VI-II-C VI-II-N Vl-1l-S Vl-12-N Vl-13-N Vl-14-s Vl-14-c Vl-15-N Vl-16-s Vl-17..,N M M M M M M M F F M M F F F M M F M M M M M F l5·1 15.6 16.1 21.3 39·3 13·9 15·1 14.0 18·9 15·3 17·2 19:·9 12·7 20.8 12.2 16.8 15·5 22.4 16.8 11.0 14.0 13·3 14.8 163 153 156 193 200 151 147 148 167 155 180 169 148 163 141J. 149 148 190 152 13·7 147 149 0 69 63 65 88 83 62 57 50 67 63 80 62 58 62 56 61 60 80 57 53 56 62 0 19 20 23 29 18 20 17 20 20 19 28 21 21 21 21 19 20 29 18 20 21 19 20 20 20 19 22 31 21 19 20 18 20 23 20 20 19 20 20 20 22 19 20 20 19 18 P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. E:.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. Vl-19-N Vl-19-S Vl-20-N Vl1-1-S V11-2-C Vll .• 4-s Vll-5-S Vll-6-c VlI-10-C Vll-10-S VII-10-N Vll-11-S Vll-12-N Vll-12-S V11-14-S Vll-15-S Vll-16-s F F F F F M M F F M F F M M M F F l7·6 19·8 19·5 20.0 14.7 20·3 16.1 15·4 13·9 17·4 22.2 15·5 37·4 15·2 15.8 14.1 19·0 162 170 178 178 146 160 160 151 154 161 164 147 202 149 162 148 165 63 70 79 74 56 59 67 61 63 59 57 57 89 62 67 58 62 20 22 27 20 20 21 18 20 20 20 22 19 18 21 19 19 20 19 20 21 18 18 21 19 20 19 20 19 20 31 20 20 20 18 Species Hind. Foot 19 20 21 20 Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. Sub adult Testes Abd. Adult Not Lac. Warble Left Flank Subadult Testes Abd. Sub adult Testes Abd. Subadu Lf Testes Abd. Adult Testes Abd . AdUlt Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Sub adult Testes Abd. Sub adult Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. Sub adult Testes Abd. Sub adult Testes Abd. Adult Not Lac. Subadult Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. Subadul t Testes Abd . Sub adult Testes Abd . Sub adult Not Lac. Adult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Subadul t Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. Tail gone Adult Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. Subadult Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. Subadult Not Lac. Adult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. Sub adult Not Lac. Sub adult Testes Abd. Adult Not Lac. Sub adult Not Lac. Adult Testes Abd. Sub adult Testes Abd. Sub adult Testes Abd. Juvenile Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. �20 Table 6.--(continued) Species ·r· ' Sex P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. Capture Location V11-19-S Vll-20-N VIII-I-C Vlll-l-S Vlll-4-N Vlll-6-s Vlll-7-S Vlll-9-N F M M M M F M F Weight 'Length in :MM. (gm) Total Tail Ear 25.0 86 194 24 14.9 156 21 67 22·3 187 87 31 12.8 148 63 19 146 13.7 20 63 14.5 149 21 56 20·5 172 28 69 147 0 15·3 55 P.m. E.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. VIII-I0-N Vlll-ll-S Vlll-12-N Vlll-13-N Vlll-15-N V111-15-S Vlll-16-c Vlll-17-N Vlll-18-s Vlll-18-N F F F F F F M F M M 13·3 36.9 15.6 13·2 18.2 12.8 14.8 15·5 14.1 17·3 150 188 162 149 148 155 155 155 145 0 62 70 67 63 52 62 63 64 61 0 18 16 21 21 19 20 19 20 17 19 P.m. P.m. vn i-as-c Vlll-20-S F F 13·9 13·0 142 153 56 64 19 18 P.m. P.m. P.m. l-l-C l-l-S I-l-N M F F P.m. P.m. 1-12-S 1-16-c M F 13·8 15·3 147 137 66 58 18 18 20 19 P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. M.m. P.m. 1-19-N ll-l-C 11-6-s 11-7~N 11-12-C, 11-14-N 11-20-S Ill-l-N 111-7-C, 111-10-C 111-11-N 111-14-s M M M M F M M M M F F M 18.0 12.6 20·3 12·3 19·6 18·5 16.0 13·0 19·9 11.1 24·7 12.2 148 132 168 134 172 143 154 142 155 128 121 133 68 57 65 59 80 63 70 58, 62 55 14 " 65 18 17 20 19 26 19 19 16 17 17 12 16 20 19 21 ~O 23 20 21 18 18 20 21 P.m. 111-17-C F 20·5 153 70 18 19 I Remarks " Hind Foot 24 Adult Not" Lac; 20 Subadul t Testes Abd . 25 Adult Testes Abd. 20 Juvenile Testes Abd. 21 Juvenile Testes Abd. 18 Subadult Not Lac. 23 Subadult Testes Abd. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. Head Eaten 19 Subadult Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. 30 20 Subadult Not Lac. 21 Juvenile Not Lac. 21 Subadult Not Lac. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. 20 Juvenile Testes Abd. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. 19 Subadult Testes Abd. 20 Subadult Testes Abd . Tail Off 19 Juvenile Not Lac. 21 Subadul t Not Lac. Second Day: September 8, 1960 142 61 14·3 18 20 13.6 146 18 21 70 11.2 148 65 20 19 18 Subadult' Testes Abd. Subadult ,Not Lac. Juven:i,leNot Lac. Partly Eaten Juvenile Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. One ,Leg Off Subadult Testes Abd. Juvenile Testes Abd. Adult Testes Abd . Juvenile Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. Juvenile ,Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. Juvenile Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. Juvenile Testes Abd. One Leg Gone Adult Not Lac. Warble Right Femur �21 Table 6.--(continued) Species Capture Location Sex P.m. P.m. P.m. E.IIi. P.t. P.m. P.t. P.m. E.m. P.m. E.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. E.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. rv-a-c lV-9-N lV-12-S lV-12-N lV-13-S lV-15-S V-l-S V-6-N v-14-s v-14 .• c v-16-c v-16-N V-20-S Vl-l-S Vl-2-N Vl-2-S Vl-5-S Vl-16-s Vl-19-C Vl-20-N Vll-2-C Vll-4-c Vll-5-S Vll-10-C Vll-12-N Vll-14-N Vll-18-N Vlll-l-N Vlll-2-N M M P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. Vlll-3-C Vlll-9-? Vlll-9-S Vlll-14-c Vlll-18-N Vlll-20-C E.m. l-l-N Third Day: F 52.1 September 9, 1960 210 85 17 30 P.m. M.m. P.m. 1-3-S 1-6-c 1-8-N M F F 150 133 0 F M F F M F M M M F M M M F M M M F M M F F F M F M F M F F M M F Weight (gm) 20·5 13·1 18·5 33·7 16·3 20.1 20.0 17·9 44.8 14.3 46.9 13·9 15.8 ~.5 14·9 22·9 14.2 36.9 21.8 19·1 16.2 16.6 14.5 15·1 12.2 16.8 20.0 20.0 12.2 Length Total 144 126 140 181 165 160 105 139 219 141 209 134 144 134 130 186 147 189 159 145 149 135 136 140 124 143 162 148 0 in MM. Tail Ear 18 63 61 18 20 54 81 15 80 26 70 17 86 29 18 60 92 17 61 20 15 95 18 57 66 17 68 20 58 17 26 89 64 17 82 15 18 72 66 20 67 19 69 17 20 58 63 17 58 17 63 17 20 72 64 19 16 0 14.2 16.8 10·5 13·2 20.0 13.6 145 136 134 144 170 134 71 59 61 67 87 58 15·7 28·5 12·5 67 28 0 20 19 17 19 25 18 18 12 18 Remarks Hind Foot Subadult Testes Abd. 19 Juvenile Testes Abd. 19 Adult Not Lac. 20 Adult Testes Abd . 27 Juvenile Not Lac. 22 Subadult Not.Lac. 21 24 Adult Testes Abd. 21 Subadult Not Lac. Adult Testes Abd . 32 Subadult Testes Abd. 20 Adult Testes Abd. 31 Juvenile Not Lac. 20 Juvenile 19 20 Juvenile Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. 22 Adult Not Lac. 24 Juvenile Testes Abd. 21 Adult Testes Abd. 30 22 Sub adult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Laa. 21 Juvenile Testes Abd. 20 Juvenile Testes Abd. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. 19 Juvenile Not Lac. 20 18 Juvenile Not Lac. Subadult Testes Abd. 20 Adult Not Lac. 20 Adult Testes Abd. 19 18 Juvenile Not Lac. Tail Gone Juvenile Testes Abd. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. 19 Juvenile Testes Abd. 17 24 Adult Testes Abd. Juvenile Not Lac. 20 19 19 19 Adult Not Lac. Warble between Hind Legs Juvenile Testes Abd. Adult Not Lac. Juvenile Partly Eaten Tail �22 Table 6.--(continued) S])ecies Cap;ture Location 1-10-C 1..... 11-N 1-14-c 1-20-C 11-5-C 11-6-s 11-7-C ll-ll-N lll-l-N 111-8-s Sex Weight (gm) 15·7 13.8 15.0 15·5 14.1 23.4 16·3 18.6 18.4 15·9 15·1 18.0 13·4 Length in MM. Total Tail Ear 148 18 70 131 52 19 135 19 59 135 65 19 136 65 19 125 25 13 142 58 19 66 149 19 157 17 75 144 66 19 ,18 60 131 64 139 17 139 65 15 P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. M.m P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. lV-l-N lV-9-S F F M M F F F F F M M M F P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. lV-17-N lV-20-S V-19-C Vl-l-S Vl-5-S Vl-5-N Vl-9-S M F M F M F M 20·5 15.8 l8.4 16.9 21.5 21.8 15·7 155 126 145 144 171 159 0 67 57 67 66 75 69 0 17 17 18 17 27 18 17 P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.t. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.m. P.t. Vl-12-C Vl-13-C Vl-14-s Vl-20-N Vll-l-N Vll-l1-S Vll-15-C Vll-15-S Vlll-l-N Vlll-14-c Vlll-18-c F F F F M F F F F F F 17·3 19·3 27·3 26.8 1,5·0 18.0 17·2 22.8 12.1 15·0 21.2 130 150 195 149 145 165 146 159 126 134 186 61 74 94 77 65 79 65 59 59 59 100 16 21 29 18 18 26 17 21 15 18 21 rv-i-c Remarks Hind Foot 20 Subadult Not Lac. 20 Juvenile Not Lac. Subadult Testes Abd. 19 20 Juvenile Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. 19 Adult Lactating 19 18 Subadult Not Lac. 21 Adult Not Lac. 20 Adul t Not Lac. 21 Juvenile Testes Abd. 18 Juvenile Testes Abd. Subadult Testes Abd. 19 Subadult Not Lac. 17 One Leg Gone 20 Adult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. 19 20 Juvenile Testes Abd. 20 SubadultNot Lac. 24 Subadult Testes Abd. 21 Adult Lactating Subadult Testes Abd. 19 Tail Gone Juvenile Not Lac. 19 22 Adult Not Lac. Adult Not Lac. 23 21 Adult Lactating 20 Subadult Testes Abd. Subadult Not Lac. 23 20 Adult Not Lac. 20 Adult Not Lac. Juvenile Not Lac. 17 20 Juvenile Not Lac. 22 Subadult Not Lac. �23 Table 7.--Sex-Age Composition of Rodent Catch by Species and Day Peromyscus maniculatus Males Adult First Day 12 Second Day 3 Third Day 1 16 Total Sub-adult 48 9 4 61 Females :Tbtal Juvenile .. 6 66 13 5 24 25 10 101 Adult 17 3 7 27 Sub-adult 18 6 6 30 Juvenile 15 10 5 30 Total 50 19 18 87 Peromyscus truei Males Adult First Day 7 Second Day 1 Third Day 0 Total 8 Sub-adult 7 1 1 9 Females Juvenile 0 0 0 0 Total 14 2 1 17 Adult 4 1 2 7 Sub-Adult 0 1 1 2 Juvenile 0 1 0 1 Total 4 3 3 10 Juvenile 1 0 0 1 Total 1 1 2 4 Microtus mexicanus Males First Day Second Day Third Day Total Adult 0 0 0 6 Sub-adult 0 0 0 0 Males First Day Second Day Third Day Total Adult 1 0 0 1 Sub-adult 1 0 0 1 Females Juvenile 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 Adult 0 1 2 3 Sub-adult 0 0 0 0 Eutamias quadrivitatus hopiensis Females Juvenile 0 0 0 0 Total 2 0 0 2 Adult 0 0 0 0 Sub-adult 0 0 0 0 Juvenile 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 Eutamias minimus Males First Day Second Day Third Day Total Adult 1 4 0 5 Sub-adult 0 0 0 0 Females Juvenile 0 0 0 0 Total 1 4 0 5 Adult 1 0 1 2 Sub-adult 0 0 0 0 Juvenile 0 0 0 0 Total 1 0 1 2 �24 Two three-acre plots have been established. One, the Exclosure, is fenced against rodents but not deer. The other, the Control, is unfenced against rodents but is surrounded with a dummy fence similar in appearance to the fence around the Exclosure. Deer pellet-group between plots. conts have determined the comparative deer-use Through intensive trapping and poisoning, rodents have been reduced to a minimum inside the Exclosure. However, during the winter of 1959-60 an invasion of rodents into the Exclosure was.effected through the holes torn in the fence by abnormally heavy Snow fall. This necessitated increased trapping the following summer to eliminate them. A rodent census patterned after the standard procedures of the North American Census of Small Mammals was run on three consecutive days in September. Using 480 snap traps, 228 small rodents were taken. These were comprised of 215 deer and white-footed mice, 12 meadow mice, 36 chipmunks, and 5cottontails. The total catch in 1960 was more than twice that in 1959. Generally, few changes in vegetation attributed to rodent control have been noticed during the study. However, differences in browse and grass composition percentages have developed which are suspected of indicating changes in composition as the result of either rodent control or differing. amounts of deer-use in the Exclosure and Control. No visible effects of three years of rodent control are evident. A.grid was staked out near the Control in which to live trap and toe mark rodents for the accumulation of home-range data. The homerange data will be used in conjunction with census data to estimate rodents per acre in the area of the study. D~ing the eight days, 122 rodents were live trapped, toe-marked and released. There were 60 recaptures. The greatest distance any rodent traveled between recapture points was 350 feet. It was found in September that many mice and chipmunks were infested with mature botfly larvae. However, the afflicted animals did not appear to be incapacitated by them. BIBLIOGRAPHY Please see Colorado Quarterly Report, July, 1959, pp. 185-187. Prepared by: Harold R. Shepherd Biologist Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �April, 1961 -25- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ----------------------------- ------------------~------- Game Range Investigations 1 --------------------------- Job No. Project No. Work Plan Title of Job: Period Covered: W-IOI-R-3 .L ----------~~---------------- Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study July 15, 1960 to March 31, 1961. OBJECTIVES For sound winter game range management, it is necessary to know the percentage of annual growth game may be permitted to remove yearly~from key browse plants without injury to the plants. Also , it is important to know the effect of different intensities of use on the amount of forage produced. The Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study is a long-term clipping experiment simulating different intensities of game use on five key species of browse plants: big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, serviceberry, and oakbrush. The purpose of the study is to attempt to learn how the yearly removal of certain percentages of the annual growth stems and of old stems affects the plants and their forage production. PROCEDURE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Twenty-four 10-foot square plots have been established for each plant species, and these have been fenced from game. Plots were randomly selected to receive specific treatments. Three replications are provided for each treatment. Plants in the 3 plots of a replication have been subjected to the following treatments: (a) Yearly, 20,40,60,80, and 100 percent of the annual growth stems have been removed in random fashion. (b) Three plots for each plant species serve as controls,receiving nO treatment. (c) Two years' stem growth.was removed from each plant one year; yearly thereafter, all stems falling within a maximum diameter were removed to simulate destructive use. The following records are colleoted yearly: (a) Total number of annual stems removed from each plot. (b) The lengths of 100 annual stems removed from each plot. (c) The green and air-dry weight of stems and leaves removed from each plot. �-26(d)!The number of annual stems produced and the lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. (e) The number of live and dead plants in each plot. (f) Photographs of the plots are taken from established photo hubs. (g) Observations are made on general plant vigor, disease, seed production, etc. FINDINGS Field Work - Field work on the study began July 15, 1960 with a crew of 4 men. The first 2 days the crew practiced clipping. Actual clipping began on bitterbrush plots July 18. Clipping was completed with mountain mahogany', plots September 2. Data Collected - The following data were collected for each of the 5 species: 1. Total number of annual stems removed from each clip plot. 2. The lengths of 100 annual stems in each plot. 3. The green and air-dry weights of stems and leaves removed from each clip plot. 4. The number of annual stems produced and the lengths of 100 randomly selected annual stems for each control plot. 5· The number of live and dead plants in each plot. 6. A. photograph was made of each plot prior to clipping. 7. Observations were made for each plot of the general plant, vigor, disease, seed production, and effect of clipping. Data Analysis - Statistical analyses of the 1960 data were made by the mathematics department under the direction of statistician Jack R. Grieb. Additional analyses are now being made of'data from earlier years which have not yet been subjected to analysis. Preparation of Final Report - Considerable work has been done toward preparation of a final report on the study. This includes co~p11ation of data for analysis on the separate weights of stems and leaves and on the size of leaves. Conferences relative to the results of the study have been had with plant ecologists, physiologists, and others. Rechecking of the data and correction of errors is in progress preparatory to a complete statistical analysis. Prepared by: Ha~r~o~l_d-~R~.~S~h~e~·p~h~e~r~d~~------Approved by:__~G~i~l~b~e~r~t_N~.~H~un~t~e~r Senior Biologist State Game Manager Date: Bpril, 1961 Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator �-27- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ---------------------------------------- Project No.: W-10l-R-3 -----------------------~---------- Work Plan Title of Job: Period Covered: 1 Game Range Investigations Job No. 3 -------~~-------------------- Forage Plant Utilization by Elk on Controversial Ranges. April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961. ABSTRACT A. study of the utilization of herbaceous forage in the summer of 1960 on Cold Springs Mountain was accomplished by the method of clipping and weighing vegetation from paired plots at key sites. Six sets of plots were established on open range land occupied by antelope, deer, elk, sheep, cattle and horses. Three sets of plots were established on Department owned lands of the upper Cal~oway tract that are used mainly by elk, deer, and antelope. Welded wire cages were put up to protect one of the 9.6 square foot plots of each set. Pellet group transects were read at each site or set at the time of clipping in September, 1960, in order to obtain indices to the amount of use by each class of animal. Results showed that utilization averaged a high 77.4% on the open range lands due mainly to the excessive stocking by cattle and sheep and some few horses. Utilizatiln by deer and elk on open and Department ranges was light. Drastic adjustments are needed in livestock operations on the open range and are so recommended. A study was begun on the Blue Ridge in Middle Park to determine utilization of forage by elk for the winter-spring season of 1960-61. Preliminary checking by hor-sebackc of'ctihe upper Pine River drainage and the Sheep Mountain areas of the San Juan National Forest resulted in finding that summer range use ~as not heavy enough by elk to warrant intensive studies such as was accomplished on Cold Springs Mountain. ��-2~- FORAGE PLANT UTILIZATION BY ELK ON CONTROVERSIAL RANGES Bertram D. Baker COLD SPRINGS MOUNTAIN Objectives: 1. 2. 3. To determine the percent of'utilization of forage plants by big game animals on selectkldkey sites of Department lands on Cold Springs Mountain,Mof'fatCounty, "'1nthe summer season of 1960. To determine thepercent;ef'utilization of forage plants by both big game and domestic livestock onseleGted key sites of open range adjacent to the Depar~ment property on Cold Springs Mountain. TQ obtain an indication of the rates of stocking by antelope, e;Lk, deer, sheep, cattle, and horses at or near the selected key sites under 1 and 2 above. Procedures :' Forage Production-Utilization The clipped weight method was employed to determine the production of protected and $protected plots in pairs. Differences of yields from the plots subsequently gave the amounts and percents of forage utilized. Onjlune 1 and 2, 1960, Northwest Regional Land Manager Hal Boeker, Biologist Ray Boyd, and I selected thr.ee key areas on the open Cold Springs Mountain ranges adjacent to the fenced Department property (upper Calloway tract) . Two key sites were then selected on a key area . The key sites were .chosen as places that had vegetati vecover wi thuniform composition and density. A 4 x 4 x 2 foot welded wire cage was placed over the center of a 9.6 square foot circular plot and secured to the ground with long hooked steel rods at the corners and short hooked stakes midway between corner-s for the cage bottom. Baling wire ties were made to s'ecurethecagesides to the corner support rods . The unprotect.ed p.lot center was marked with a short steel stake aftercare had been exercised in'choosing a 9.6 square foot circulararea as nearly comparable as possible to the vegetation protected by the wire 'Cage. Unprotected plots were located a minimum of 20 feet from the caged plots. The three open range key areas thatweres'electedwere (1) near the spring at Spark's Corral with both key sites in the meadow type, (2) north of the total exclosure -which straddles the north Department boundary fenCe with one key site -in sagebrush and one in a small meadow, and (3) in the bfgmeadow east of the' southeast corner of the tract of Department land withrboth key sites in the meadow. On June 2, three key sites :were selected on the Department owrred range �-~that is under fence and protected from livestock use. Paired plots were established (1) ina small meadow with a spring south and within sight of the exclosurementioned in the second key area in the previous paragraph, (29 near the north edge of an extension of the large meadow which extends into the southeast corner of the Department property, and (3) on the first sparsely covered sagebrush bench southwest of the southeast property corner. The paired plots were established in the same manner as described previously on the open range. . . In summation, a total of six paired plots we~e placed on open range lands, and three paired plots were located on the upper Calloway tract under Department ownership and management. Following the summer season of use the original crew and P:bincipal Game Biologist Richard Denney returned to the paired plots on September 27 and 28, 1960. We clipped and retained in paper sacks the herbaceous vegetation from the 9.6 square foot circular plots at the nine key sites. Despite the timing o~ this post=use clipping which made the vegetation on most of the plots mature and essentially cured, green-weights were recorded in the field using a Chatillon's Improved spring balance that was graduated in 10 grams to a 500 gram capacity. The latter equipment was suspected of not being sufficiently accurate, and the weighing was repeated on September 30 upon my return to headquarters. An Ohaus triple beam balance was used in the re-weighing and proved the inaccuracy of the spring balance. The sacks were opened after the re-weighing September 30, and the vegetation was allowed to air-dry until February 3, 1961. The vegetation was then weighed in the air-dry condition on the Ohaus balance to an accuracy of 0.1 gram. Notes were made about the plant composition on the plots at the time of clipping mn September. However, the production and utilizatin are based upon the total herbage and are not separated by category such as grasses and forbs. The browse plants were not clipped where they occurred~ue mainly:to the difficulties involved and also to the apparent light use fuadeof them in the summer by all classes of animals. The plot size of 9.6 square feet was employed because the yield from it in grams times lO is equal to pounds per acre. Even though no direct .application is made of this conversion in the present study, the data could have some future uset'ukness.wt, thregard ·to adjusting stocking rates and carrying capacities. Animal Stocking Rates In September as the clipping was carried out, random transects of ten 0.01 acre circular plots were checked for currently depbsi ted pellet groups. The transects were counted near each set of'paired clip plots. Regardless of the 'Possibilities ·for making errors in the identification of the 1>eilets, particularly wherea:ritelo:pe,sheep, deer, and elk all had been present , the procedure gaveresults;that should he -eons.i.der-ed to be fairly sound indices to the am,aunt of use of the site'Sby the various classes of animals. �-3!L- Findings: The results of the clipping of the paired plots at key sites on the Cold Springs Mountain ranges are summarized in Table 1. The excessive stocking of livestock. (plus light to moderate numbers of deGrand elk) on the on the open ranges is shown concluively by the high percentages of u:tilizationof the total herbaceous forage at each key site. The average utilization of 77.4% for the six sets of open range plots is in keeping with the current widespread poor condition of the ranges on the Mountain. Further evidence of the abuse that the open range is sustaining is shown in Table 2. This table summarizes pellet group counts on 0.1 acre (ten 0.01 acre plots) transects at each set or site. If the average days use per acre are converted to acres per ADM and per sheep-month, stocking rates of 1.3 acres per ADM for cattle and horses combined and 1 acre per sheep-month result. Generallyspe:aking, stocking ,rates by deer and elk were light at all sites. Antelope numbers using the key areas were known to be low. However, absence of.the animals .as shown by Table 2 might be misleading. This could have resulted from misidentification of the pellets. Additional note'S were kept for each key site or set of paired plots regarding Jllants Jlresent as well as other pertinent observations. This information will be presented in following paragraphs in the order of listing of the plots in Tables 1 and 2. Paired plots at the Spark1i s Corral Spring No. 1 sitecontained Junegrass (Koeleria cristata), bluegrass (Poaspp.) ~ sedge (carex spp.), slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum), fescue (Festuca spp.), needle and thread (Stipa comata) J blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), rush ~Juncus spp.), common dandelion (Taraxacum spp.), shooting star (Dodecatheon spp.), beardtongue (Penstemon spp.), western yarrow (Achillea lanulosa) cinquefoil (Pontentilla spp.), phlox (Phlox spp.), and pussytoes (Antennaria spp.). The number 2 site plots had the same plants plus western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii),gentian (Gentiana spp.), and thistle (Cirsium spp.). The open range Exclosu:re No.1 site 'p.Lotis had Junegrass, bluegrass, rush vetch (Astragalus spp.), aster (Aster spp.), mat muhly (Muhlenbergiarichardsonis), western yarrow, iris (Iris missouriensis), big sagebrush seedlings (Artemisia tridentata), and pussytoes on them. The Exclosure No.2 site 'Plots in the sagebrush contained ~inewoods needle grass (Stipa pinetoru:m), squirreltail (Sitanion hystrix), -bluegrass, Jup.egrass, western wheatgrass, sedge, fleabane daisy (Erigeronspp.), phlox (Phlox longifolia and spp.), delphineum (Delphineum spp.), stonecrop (Sedum stenopetalu:m), clover (Trifolium spp.), and big sagebrush predOminating. The open range Southeast Gate No. 1 set of plots had plants of mat muhly, bluegrass, cinquefoil, and an unknown composite in addition to those listed next for the No .2 site plots. The No. 2 site plots were covered mainly by a grass that was tentatively Lderrt Lf'Led as a bentgrass (Agrostis, spp. )" other plants present were Junegrass, rush, sedge, common dandelion, iriS, and clover. �Table 1. Summary of results of clipping paired plots for production and utilization, Cold Springs Mountain, Moffat County - September, 1960 - Plot size of 9.6 sq. ft., circular. NET W1IGHT OF FORAGB NET \'lEIGETOF FORAGE UNGRA~D PLOT (gros.)GRAZED PLOT (grams) Meadow TY~;3 AVE. 2l.t.8 * Application is significant only in general comparison with results of average from plots on Department lands. ..,J..J..J.,J.'.J.J.,.J.J.'/".J."/ .... ,.,., # rrirtrtnr;'rirtfirJT.fi,.ffi,.i'I.rli,!;!;f!fll.i-fr Table 2. 1 . ... .. 'L" 'L'·',,·', 1';,/ f! , tf}.tit.f;j: ff ,{Iiif'/: "L" fff·!,f,.frr'rf /r f·l.fL"'·/.J./'./'/"/=/./=/.,./,'!"'·,"""J.',J../,··/.I-/.iJ.##·' r, IT,f;}:.tlI,..i,'TI'rir;fiil ,,.'/,;-1 ihfihfd=,f,flfJJ,fir,'tfrfr,.j:':l=ir,rtrtr Summary of stocking rate indices of animals near paired utilization plot sites, Cold Springs Mountain - September, 1960 - Ten 0.01 acre plot transects. NUi',lBER OF DAYS USE PER ACR1 KEY 3IT1 LOCATION. NAH~. &: VEGEJ'A'l'J)~.li; T1PE Deer Elk Cattle Sheep Horses Sage Grouse Open range: Spark's Corral Soring'No.1: Meadow ----16 5 22 5 2 0 Open range; Spark' sCorra:L_~}:LI':i.ng lio. 2; Meadow -- .- 62 . 21 15 2 0 Open range; Cold Spgs. Mtn. Excl. No.1; Ivleadow l~ 1 3l---~------2 0 Open range; Cold Spgs. l'1tn.Excl. No.2; Sagebrush 0 4 2 1 1 pellet group Open range; Southeast Gate No.1; lvleadO\v 0 0 31 48 2 0 Open range; Southeast Gate No.2; Headow 1 2 23 ~-----r---------6 OPEN RANGB, OUT SIDE G. cc F. ,PROP., ALL TYPES Ave. 7+ 1+ 22 30 2+ --Dept. range; Cold I:3pgs. Htn. Exclosure; lv1eadow 2 12 0 0 3!1 9 pellet groups Dept. range: Southeast Gate; Meadow 4 10 0 0 0 0 Dept. range; Bench; Sagebrush 4 4 0-----1-2/ 0 0 PROT:t:.CTED RANGE. ON G. &: F. PROP •• .ALL'r_Y?.b..S Ave. 3+ 8+ 0 11 Horse pasture for animals of Department personnel. g; Few sheep in trespass. ~ . �-3~- Approximately thirty elk ran by within 100 yards of the ing was in progress. No. 2 site as clipp- On the Department range, the Exclosure set of plots on the meadow type had vegetative cover composed of mat muhly, Junegrass, western wheatgrass, bluegrass, sedge, rush, .mustard (Cruciferae), iris, mountain dandelion (Agpse±:is: spp.), vetch or loco, western yarrow, big sagebrush seedlings, and a legume (Leguminosae). It was noted that many rabbit pellets were present on the grazed plot, and considerable utilization had been made of the plants with the characteristically angular cutting by rabbits in evidence. A jack rabbit trail crossed the grazed plot. Three sage grouse and a doe and fawn mule deer were observed in the vicinity of this site at the time of clipping. The high producing wet meadow site at the Southeast Gate set of plots on Department property contained several grasses that werenotreadilyindentifiable. A wild barley (Hordeum 'SPp.) was one of'those of doubtful indentification. Timothy (Phleumspp.), rush, sedge, bluegrass, cinquefoil, and common dandelion were also recorded as being present on the plots. No current utilization upon the herbaceous vegetation could be seen on the plots nor in the vicinity despite signs of'elk and deer in evidence (see Table 2). If light utilization had occurred, it was probably obscured because the vegetation was green for the most part and still growing at the time of clipping. The Bench site plots near the southeast corner of the property contained Junegrass, bluegrass, bearded bLuebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) , stonecrop, balsamroot (Balsamorhiza hispidula), big sagebrush, shrubby buckwheat (Eriogonumsirrtpsoni), and black sagebrush (Artemisia~~).: Careful examination of the unprotected plot befo,reclipping yielded no sign of current utilization on any of the plants • Thus it has been assumed that at least part of the reason for the high percent ofutiliza:tionfound here could be accounted for througho.riginal differences in the amounts of vegetation on the "'Plots. Discussion: The fact that the distribution and composition of plants in t1iesagebrush is so highly variable tends to make the paired plot procedure more unreliable for this type. The utilization found on the two sets of plots in the sagebrush (Table 1) are the extremes for the series in each cas~ high for the sites on Department lands and low for the sites on open range. Admittedly, the entire results are subjectt.b severe criticism in regard to statistical validity even where the highly homogenous meadow types were sampled. HoweVe.r, shaky the results migh~ be in the light of sound statistical procedure, the common sense ~approach·employed on this study and on many others similar to it before certainly warranted the 'eff'o±:t expended. Recommendations: The stocking by domestic animals on the open range in 1960 appears to have been much more than that which the vegetation and soil can sustain. Adjustments are definitely in order on what might be considered one of the most abused mid-elevation summer ranges in Colorado. The stocking rates of the elk and deer are perhaps no greater than lowmoderate (less than proper) even under the present excessive use by livestock. �-3~- Nevertheless, increasing the;numbers of game animals is not advocated at the present time in all good conscience. In the event that improvements are made in future livestock management on the Mountain, .itis very likely that the big game herds can be allowed to increase in size. THE BLUE RillGE Objectives: The broad objectives of this job originally called for work to be dorieon controversial spring or summer elk ranges. I:ri1960 it became apparent t,hat there was as much or more interest by the Forest Service in what influence the elk might have on winter-spring range's in the state, particularlyon the Rio Grande National Forest in southwestern Colorado. Since -proj.ectpersonnel had no experience withthe fjairedplot method for clipping forage with relation to the winter season and elk utilization of forage then, the Blue Ridge was chosen for a small scale trial. The area selected also qualified as being controversial on the basis of the past experience of Project Leader Richard Dl§'nney. Thus the results would be 'of imIilediatevalue in local management considerations. I Procedures: The Blue Ridge is understood to be the local name for and synonymous with the Williams Fork Mountains. Only a small portion of the Ridge was chosen for study near the northwestern end just west of the crest in the grassland type. The key sites are located by rough approximation to be in Sections 3 and 8, Township 2 South, Range 79 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Summit County. The land is under the jurisdiction of the Arapaho National Forest. Beginning at the forks of the access road on top of the Ridge, six key sites for sets of paired plots were selected at irregular intervals near and on both sides of the road as the road swings southeast atop the crest of the Ridge. Both conical and box t;ypes of welded wire cages were employed to protect the vegetation on one plat of the paired sets. Methodology otherwise followed that described for the Cold Springs Mountlain study. All key" sites were on south, southwest, or west exposures where elk would have access to the vegetation in the winter and spring of 1960-61. Plant composition of the plots was recorded as this portion of the field work was done September 29, 1960. Findings: Results are not available at the time of preparation of this report because the clipping and weighing probably cannot be accomplished this year (1961) until late April at the earliest. Recommendations! On the basis of fall observations, it appears that neither the light summer use by cattle nor 'the winter use by elk plus a few deer are great enough to cause concern. Unless this judgment is erroneous as determined when the results are available, I would .not recommend further intensive work on this area. �-35- SAN JUAN NATIONAL FOREST Objectives: 1. To.check out the validity of reports of excessive use by elk of summer ranges on portions of the San Juan National Forest. 2. To instigate plans for studies to determihe the amounts of forage utilized by the elk (and livestock where present) should problem areas be found. Procedures: Pro~ect Leader D<ick Denney, Biologist Ray Boyd, Wildlife Conservation Officer Gene Bassett, and I, all representing the Department, and Range Staff Officer Paul Lundell and District Ranger Howard Stagelman of the San Juan National Forest rode areas of the upper Pine River in reconnaissance of summer ranges where the Forest .Service suspected excessive numbers of elk were damaging the vegetation and soil. The dates of the field work:were August 1 to 4, 1960. Places that were investigated included Snowslide Canyon, the alpin:e.• tundra between Snowslide and the North Fork of the Pine River, <the North F0Ilk drainage, Weminuche Pass, lower Rincon la Vaca, Rincon la Osa,and the alpine-tundra of Mesa Lato at the head of South Canyon Paso. Another area on the San Juan National Forest which the Forest Service thought bore scrutiny was the high Sheep Mountain range near Lizard Head Pass. On September 8, 1960, Biologist Ray Boyd, Southwest Regional Game Manager Don Bogart, District Wildlife Conservation Officer Bill Fischer, and District Forest Ranger Bert Roberts rode the Sheep Mountain area including a domestic sheep allotment. Findings: On none of the areas visited during the Pine River reconnaissance were -we able to find where elk had been utilizing the forage in any appreciable extent. The North Fork drainage that was of particular interest had very little sign of elk in it, and what was present was old. This North Fork area has been closed to grazing for several years, and from all appearances, its poor cindition had undoubtedly been caused originally by abusive use by sheep that had been permitted until closure, and attributed since to the resultant soil loss and erosion. The Sheep Mountain ride produced similar results in that very little elk sign or use was noticed on areas under question. Utilization-by permitted sheep was judged as heavy under a dry season and poor growth conditions. Thurber'S fescue (Festuca thurberi) was observed as the dominant species with little other plant cover between the bunches. Recommendations: In keeping with the results of the preliminary investigations, no intensive studies are recommended nor planned for in the future on these two areas of the San Juan National Forest. Prepared by: B. D. Baker Date: April, ------------------------- Apprpved by: G. N. Hunter State Game Manager 1961 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��April, 1961 -31JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of: Colorado ----------------------------- Project No. Work Plan Game Range Investigations W-IOI-R-3 3 --------------~----------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Job No. 3 Transect Analysis and ~pplication April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961. ABSTRACT Five game biologists, including the project leader, met with the Departmental field employees and cooperating Federal land~use agencies personnel to instruct them in the standardized big game range ana.lysLsct.echni.ques developed by an inter-agency game range committee. The techniques employed in this work were: production-utilization transects and the extensive transects. Pellet group counts and angle-gauge readings were also made in both methods. In the spring of 1960, the five biologists assisted in running 50 measured production-utilization transects in 23 game management units in 21 W.C.O. districts. Forty one extensive transects were also run. In the fall of 1960, the five biologists ran a total of 31 measured transects with 14 W.C.O. 's in 16 game management units, of which 19 transects were newly initiated ones. Selected transect data were analyzed by graphing the summary of findings on charts for Yisual aid in game management meetings and to help in the interpretation of the findings. ��-39BROWSE TRANSECT ANALYSIS AND APPLICATION Richard N. Denney INTRODUCTION The actual production of forage, the amount of use made of this forage by specified animals, both wild and domestic, and the condition and trend of the range have long been problems facing the wise administration and management of both land and game management agencies. As more of these facts become established and applied to management, the closer the solution to the ever-present question of carrying capacity on wildlands will be. Objectives: The immediate objectives of this job are to instruct Department field employees, such as Wildlife Conservation Officer, Conservation Aides, Trappers and Wardens, in the proper and uniform use of available range analysis methods ¥d techniques. They will be assisted in determining relative herd size, carrying capacity, annual forage production, utilization, density, condition and trend. The net result is to provide methods whereby big game season recommendations can be made by field personnel based in part on range data. Procedure: Range Investigation personnel will meet with regional and district field personnel, and cooperating agency personnel, and review maps of their respective big game range areas. Key areas, representative of large areas of critical or concentrated winter game range will be selected within each district. At least one browse transect (a lO-plant sample of a key species) will be established and permanently marked within the key areas. Annual browse production and subsequent utilization will be measured and recorded for each tagged branch. These measurements will then serve as a guide inthedetermination of production and utilization by means of an extensive lOO-plant survey over a wide area surrounding the browse -transectsi te, or in game-use areas located where there are not established measured transects. Pellet group counts, to determine animal days use, will accompany -each of the two typesof'transects. In addition, woody plantd~sity will be determined by means of the angle gauge. Results: In accordance with the objectives and procedures enumerated abov~, the project leader held an inter-agency meeting in Buena Vista, Colorado, prior to field work in the spring, with the regional game managers, game biologists, regional and local Forest Service staff men, land local B.L.M. district men. The objective of this meeting was to go over the big game range analysis procedure as set up by the inter~agency committee, to acquaint those charged with training the w.e.o. 's in a standardized approach and unified interpretation of results. Most of those present had taken part in establishment and re-reading of browse transects, but quite a few had never been on an extensive transect before. Also, at this meeting we explained the theory of the angle-gauge for reading woody plant ground coverage and in one and a half days of field work everyone was given the opportunity to take part in each phase of the methods, i.e. measuring stems, figuring utilization from measurements, classifying browse plants as to age and condition class, making pellet group counts, reading the angle gauge, and pacing points and estimating utilization onextensives. �-40- Work schedules wer~:made up with regional game managers so that :the fiologists could plan the work with the W.C .0. 's in each region as dictated by need. Although measured transects had been adopted by the Department and the other two agencies since 1955, it was surprising how few field men vere familiar with the proper manner of conducting them This was especially true of extensive transects, which were run in the 1960 spring for the first time for most persons. Table 1 indicates in summary form the transect work performed by each of the biologists. The W.C.O. district is listed since the W.C.O. wasn't always present for the field work. Bert Baker ran a total of five transects in four different W.C.O. dis .... tricts in three game management units on one browse species (mountain mahogany). This work included five extensive transects as well. It is interestingto note that the browse coverage ranged from five to 15 per cent in the area in which he worked, and utilization ranged from 27 to .81 per cent. Ray Boyd ran six transects on four species in four W.'C.O. Districts in four game management units. This includes seven extensive transects as well. The woody plant densities he encountered ranged frof six to 26 per cent. Utilization was from zero to 32 per cent. Dick Denney ran 17 transects in seven W.C.O. districts in eight game management units on five browse species (mahogany, bitterbrush, sagebrush, serviceberry and squawapple). Densities ran from 11 per cent to too dense to measure. Measured use was from one to 92 per cent. Twelveextensives were conducted. �Table 1. MEASURED BROWSE PRODUCTION-UTILIZATION TRANSECT WORK IN THE SPRING OF 1966 IN COLORADO. . , , . . . . . Biologist Unit W.C.O. District Species Transect Per Cent Utiliz. Bertram D. Baker 79 79 80 80 81 Hawker Hawker McDonald Cochran Denton Cemo Cemo Cemo Cemo Cemo HoddingCreek N.Tracy Canyon Alamosa R.Tri. E.Pinos Creek Bighorn 81 31 27 46 32 31 41 41 53 55 55 Jones Hess Hess Boyd,G. Benson Benson Amut Amut Q,uga Feru Putr Putr Alkali Canyon Lands End Admin.Pasture Minnesota Creek A-l A-2 25 32 33 41 42 42 43 43 43 43 43 44 44 44 47 47 Reser Cemo Red Dirt Creek Dunham Amut Starkey Gulch Dunham Cemo W.Rifle CTeek Hess Artr Whitewater Basin Woodward:'W. Cemo Anderson Gulch Lowery Pera W.Divide Cr. ~BuJ:j::db.g Creek Hood Cerno" Hood Janeway Cemo Hbbd 1Xmut ,:'Crown#1 Putr Hood Crown #2 Terrell Amut Mecham Ranch Stinking Spgs. Terrell putr Q,uarry Terrell Amut Terrell Cemo Toner Creek Terrell Amut Snowmass Terrell Amut Castle Cr~ek Raymond J. Boyd Richard N. Denney John T. Harris 1 10 15 17 11 12 11 20 69 69 38 8 8 59 34 92 20 40 18 69 58 15 30 13 1 43 74 50 63 2 69 11 58 19 15 16 32 5 16 33 1 49 30 47 2 Wilson 21 Wagner 21 Wagner 24 Goosman 24 Goosman 24 Goosman 24 Gore 24 Gore 24 Gore 24 .Goosman 24 \ Goosmsn Cele Cemo Amut Amut Q,uga Q,uga Amut Amut Q,uga Amut Putr Cold Spgs. Mtn:.. Willow Creek Trail Canyon Buford #1 Buford #2 Buford #3 Hicken Ranch Buford C-9 East Sweetbriar West Sweetbriar West Sweetbriar 48 12 17 27 12 18 21 43 64 21 9 2 12 10 3 Fischer Q,uga Putr Cemo Q,uga Q,uga Lone Dome Beaver Rim Beaver Point Chicken Cr. Cherry Creek 49 87 77 60 0 13 29 19 5 0 I Harold R. Shepherd 32 7 Angle Gauge Days Use/Acre Deer Elk Other Density 71 71 71 73 73 2 2 13 6 13 13 9 ffi 4 1 13 ), " 15 6 15 15 26 26 26 1 1 11 29 18 17 21 8 8 2 53 12 19 Too dense 31 21 21 Too dense 18 18 12 11 Too dense 13 14 1 Sheep 5 18 5 2 Cow 15 12 8 Cow 16 3 Cow 12 2 Cow 12 2 Cow 21 33 15 8 1 0 34 37 28 36 30 30 28 27 50 ... �Table 1 - Cant rd. - MEASURED BROWSE PRODUCTION-UTILIZATION SPRING OF JL960 IN COLORADO. Bialagist Unit Harald R. Shepherd Cant'd. 73 73 W.C .0. Dl,.st±:ict- Spe€;les Amut Amut Quga Quga Quga 74 76 :::'78:' Nate: Transect Per Cent Utiliz. Cherry Creek Hallerville Junctian Cr. Gaat Carral Cr. Canifer Hill 9 83 90 10 62 TRANSECT WORK IN THE Days Use/Acre Deer Elk Other ---- Angl,e,9.8:.u,ge Density o o 50 61 12 1 13 37 32 28 25 8 17 17 Standard Symbal Key: Cema- Cercacarpus mantnus, AmutAmelanchier utahensis, Attr- Artemisia tridentata, Pera -Perapnyllum ramasissimum, Putr ••Purshia tridentata, Cele Cercacarpus ledifalius, Quga - Quercus gambeli, Feru Fendlera rupicala, and Chna- Chrysathamnus bauseasus. Jahn Harris ran 11 measured transects with five species (curl-leaf managany, mauntain mahagany, serviceberry, gambel's aak, and bitterbrush) in three W.C.O. districts in three game management units. Eight extensive transects were run in additian. Measured transects shawed use fram nine to' 64 per cent, and densities ranged fram 14 to' 36 per cent. Harald Shepherd canducted 11 measured brawse transects an five species, (mahagany, serviceberry, bitterbrush, aakbrush and squawapple) in five game maIJ.@:gement units. Utilizatianranged fram 'zerO'to' 91 per cent, and graund caver by waady plants varied fram 13 to' 50 percent. In summatian af the springaf 1960 transectwark, the five bialagists listed abave canducted a grand tatal af 50 measured brawsetransects and 41 extensive transe'Cts in 21 W.C.O. districts in 23 game management units in the big game (deer and elk) winter ranges of Calorada. Their wark dealt with a tatal af eight different browse species impart ant in the bulk and quality af winter game farage. During the caurse af the spring wark an transects :and incidental to' regular praject activities in the summer, the bialagists were an the laakaut far evidence of wintering game populatians and indicatians of key areas an which to' establish new transects with the W.C .0. 's in the fall. The data abtain:ed an the brawse transects, i. e. grawth index, utilizatian, pellet-graup caunts, days use per acre, percentage af age and canditian classes in the extensives, etc., were analyzed by the -relrea:bchandr; management persannel with the fieldmen to' indicate the pass1i.nlerangecanditian and trend, the inter-relatianships af the variaus factars, and the inter- �pretation in terms of management for that specific herd or management unit. Incidental to these specific objectives, of course, it developed that many of the W.C.O's also learned to properly identify certain browse species and to determine what constitutes annual growth. In an attempt to better present the transect data in a visual manner for use at game management m.eetings where it could be used to a more advantage in setting seasons, the project leader constructed 16 charts or graphs similar to Figure:;3. Figure 3 represents data gathered during a five-year period in one game management unit (24 - White River) and is the average for all the measured transects on four ~rf'ive species during this period. The growth, or production index is simpIylffue average length of the measured twigs. Utilization is the percentageo:f ?!illualgrowth browsed during the winterperio.dcalculated from pre-use and post-use twig measurements on tagged branches. Days use per acre are calculated from the pellet group count data for each class of animal indicated. After the Denyer game management meeting the project leader called a special meeting on br-owse range., while the personnel were in town,along with Forest SerV'iceand Indian Service personnel, on May 24, 1960. Problems, suggestions and m.odifications encountered in the wide-scale spring work were discussed so that a standard approach could be maintained into the fall work on transects. One of the most difficult arbitrary definitions in the work for most of the men to accept was':that of a decadent browse plant geing one in which at least 25 per cent of the foliage crown was dead, regardless of the age and apparent vigor of the individual plant. This was discussed to great length, a.ndwhile attending the Western Association of Game and Fish Coqunissioners Conference in: Salt Lake City in June, 1960, I discussed this and some possibie,alternatives with William Dasmann, whose system of age and condition classification we employ in our browse technique. As a result we _t'e'lt it best to continue with his use of the term to avoid the possibility of differences of opinion and interpretation entering into it. Since many measured transects had been set up without guidance and consequently were on more ,JI;hanonespecies of browse or were not in a key area, etc., a special attempt was made to initiate new transects in representative winter ranges and work with the W.C.O.IS who needed more in their districts. Areas were selected by the biologists, the regional game managers, the W.C .O. 's and in some cases by the cooperating agencies. Table 2 contains the basic data on measured transects setup by these five biologists state-wide during the autumn 01' 1960. Bert Baker worked primarily in the San luis Valley, conducting a total of 13 measured browse transects, of which six were newly established, in seven W.C.O. districts in six game management units, dealing with two browse species. �,, 1tJ "r:c , r j , i i " , ! . .. ~ ; , 64- , i " I 6 , I .. I ..'... '50 I ; :, ! I ~ i ~ : 1 I I " ,I I , : I , i ! ! ' --\ ,I i-': .• ';' I 1 , -, \ ,.I. i;:i . I ! ; : I-l '. i IiI ;---/0 i I i, 10 .j 9 8 :7 :6 -s '4; '3 ~ :z. I , ,i i i I o~~~~~--~~~~~~~-tt~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /955-56! :/957-38 i :: /956':'057', ,S7;ons~Tsi , Itf ~~f~~ )(;fhS~~~' ! i i : i I . : : !. I ; , ~ ; ! :: ,~: i/.92.:..5.9;~' !1/g.59~6o:: If m,h$e~! :/1 ~nf~ : 1 ~ ;. ;.! i : ! ' I ;i : : i I :: I ; j ; E2vrc3.'MEASUR£DBROWs£7iUNsECt.DATA. '{/nif 24 WhiifeRiver- /95S~:60~ .5-Z9-61. ; , I �-45-- Ray Boyd ran eight measured transects, o:fwhi.ch five were newly:initiated, on :five :species in three W.C.O. districts in four game management uhits. Dick Denney ran and established :four new transects in three W.C.O. districts in three game management units on one browse species. Two o:fthese were in the ute Indian Reservation with Bert Baker to aid in the newly-opened opportunity to bring game management to the lands previously closed to nonIndian hunting. Table 2. MEASURED BROWSE PRODUCTION-UTILIZATION Biologist Unit Bertram D. Baker 68 TRANSECTS, FALL, 1960, COLORADO W.C.O. District Species Transect Location 68 56 56 79 80 80 81 81 81 81 82 82 Hawker Hawker Smith Smith Cochran Schultz McDonald Denton Dent.ci>rFl. Denton Denton Hawker Hawker Cemo Cemo Cemo Cemo Cemo Chna Cemp Cemo Chna Cemo Cemo Cemo Cemo Turquoise Gulch .Muddy Spring O'Haver Lake G'Haver Lake #2 Pine Cone Gulch Soda Creek Alambsa River Triangle Conejos River La Jara Reservoir Gibhorn Ward Gulch South Piney Creek North Crestone Creek 52 53 53 54 54 55 55 55 Eo:yd, G. Boyd, G. Boyd, G. Evans Evans Benson Benson Benson Cemo Feru Amut Quga Quga Amut Putr Putr Hubbard Canyon #2 Minnesota Creek #1 Munsey Creek #1 Soap Creek #1 Second Dry Creek #2 Horn Gulch Almont A-l Almont A-2 Newly established. Newly Newly Newly Newly established. established. established. established. Richard N. Denney 43 43 75 77 Hood Hood Bassett Vavak Cemo Cerno Cemo Cemo Light Hill William's Mountain Sixshooter Mesa Cat Creek Park Newly Newly Newly Newly established. established. established. established. John T. Harris 18 28 Greer Greer Putr Amut Wolford Mountain Harsey Gulch Raymond J. Boyd Remarks .' !-, .. • ,. '. Newly established. Newly established. Newly established. Newly established. Newly established. Newly established. �-~Table 2 - Continu.ed , , , ... W.C.O. ,Biologist .. Un.Lti. .Distric,t Harold R. Shepherd , , . Species 71 71 73 73 Waters Fischer Fischer Fischer Putr Putr Putr Quga 74 Mason Mason Cemo Quga 74 Transect Location Remarks NeVTly established Glade, Sandrock B-7 Hoppe Point, Glade B-3 Newly established Dolores, B-4 Newly established Schoolhouse Draw, Newly established Dol. B-3 Barnes Mountain Newly established Hermosa Creek Newly established John Harris ran two measured browse transects with one W.C.O. on two species in two game management units. Harold Shepherd initiated six new measured transects in three W.C.O. districts in three game management units on three browse 'species. During the fall of 1960 this project ran a total of 31 measured browse transects, which included 19 newly established ones; in 14 W.C.O. districts and in 16 game management units on six browse species. During December, 1960, and January, 1961, the project leader and various biologists met with the cooperating agencies and worker fUrther on the final evolvement of the big game range analysis which has been in the developmental stage for several years. In additiion to the production-utilization and extensive tranEtect work as discussed herein, it entails a basic jOb of;t;y:ping and mapping big game winter ranges. This in itself i/3a big job, and one;which should have been done many years agp. The browse scorecard will be employed to determine the condition and trend of these brush ranges also. Recommendations - It has become apparent in this study over a wide area with many different W.C.O. IS and other agency personnel that the proper relative value of this type of work has not beem:recognized or accepted. It is 0'0vious that this job is primarily an obligation of the Game and Fish Department inasmuch as it is its responsibility to manage the game resources of the state, and inasmuch as it is the one agency of those participating which has state-wide 'coverage and personnel. The proper management of wildlife must be based on sound factual information, and this is the brush-rotbts level approach that browse transect work embodies. The backbone of the 'economy of the Department is big game hunting, and as such, work to sustain this must be given top priority by fieldmen. This is seldom the case, however, and many W.C.O. 's feel that the "other fellow" should run these transects---namely the biologists or the Forest Service primarily. Occasionally they willi6etin on �ane ar two. readings, ar in same cases anly the spring readings, and feel that they are daingtheir part. Admittedly many W.C .0. 's have heavy wark schedules, but priarities and wark budgets can help assign dut1i:.es in their praper perspective. A cancettedpragram af caordinated scheduling at the regianal and district levels af the actual dates and areas af thefieldwark with the Forest Service and the B.L.M. far each W.C.O. will be necessary to. realize the greatestpatential fram this work. It is r-ecommended that browse range analysis techniques cantinue to.be emplayed and further tested until a statistical evaluatian may be made~ and the techniques perfected to. the paint that they may be turned aver to management entirely. Prepared by: Richard N. Denney Prin:eipal Bialagist Date: April, 1961 Approved by: Gilbe'rt N. Hurrbe'r State Game Manager F. C. Kleinscbnitz Asst. Coardinatar ��April, 1961 -49- JOB COMPTIETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT State of: Colorado Project No. W-10l-R-3 Work Plan Game Range Investigations 3 --------------~----------- Ti tle of Job! Job No. Determination of Stem;,Weight per Unit Length Period Covered: April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961. ABSTRACT The data from four years of browse clipping, measuring and weighing were compared from the Crystal River and Mesa Verde areas. Climatological data for the same period were compared to see if any correlation exists with the stem lengths and weaght per unit length. Insufficient data was found to be usuable from Little Hills for comparisons. It was found that approximately 65 per cent of the green weight of mountain mahogany, serviceberry and bitterbrush remained in the air-dry weights. Average stem lengths are related quite closely to the total precipitation of the current and apparently the preceding~year. This relationship shows Lhe:same trend in this study of four years for the month of April precipitation as the annual total precipitation. The weight per unit of length in this study has shown that mahogany and serviceberry average .052 and .055 grams per inch in the Crystal River area and .058 and .059 grams per inch in the Mesa Verde area, respectively. Bitterbrush averaged .024 and .017 grams per inch in the same two respective areas. Apparently types of growing season covered in this study for four years haven't much influence on the weight per unit length. Temperatures haven't been shown to exert much effect, other than extremes, of course. Possibilities of application and recommendations discussed. for further study are ��DETERMINATION OF STEM WEIGHT PER UNIT LENGTH Richard N. Denney INTRODUCTION In big game management the range, particularly winter range, is one of the basic requirements on which we have the least amount of data or understanding. Since it is a fundamental resource on which big game are supported, the browse species comprising the bulk of winter feed should be more closely investigated. One pha.se of such study has to do with the annual production and what ;itmeans in terms of game populations. The time~will come, perhaps not for ten years or~ore, when the actual harvest of game to be removed from specific game management units will be designated by number and sex. Before this intensive management can come about, however, we must be able to determine the annual fluctuating carrying capacity of a given range unit. To do this will require much information that we don't have as yet, but it is felt that any preparation to meet this condition when it becomes necessary is will' justified. This job end-eavers to help attain this goal by developing a technique which may result in ca.lculating the yield of browse range in pounder per acre, depending on composition, density, condition and production index. Objectivesr The immediate objectives of this job are to determine the weight in grams per unit of length on stems of various selected browse species, and to determine, if possible, the factors which may effect this weight or total production. The ultimate objective is to develop,or provide data to help base the development of, a method for determining the quantitative yield per acre of a given winter range when otherfa.ctors, such as vegetativecomposition, density, condition, trend, and sample production of the area, are known. Procedure: The fpurtljyear of clipping, measuring and weighing of three key browse species in the Crystal River area was performed this segment of the :project. The previous three years' work was done independently by the project leader before being reassigned to Federal Aid work last year. We obtained applicable data from the 12 years of Mesa Verde clip plot study work in which 100 stems of each browse species in three replications were clipped, measured and weighed. It was hoped Jtha:t comparable data from the 12 years of Little Hills experimental pasture studies in which stem length measurements were taken on selected species could be obtained. The data from these sources are to be compared to see if average stem lengths by year and weights per unit of length, where availaple~'_are correlated in any manner. If so, then perhaps a method of projecting a total per acre production figure will be developed if composition, density, and sample production of a designated winter range area are known. If there is no correlation, the possibility of differences due to weather and site factors will be -considered. �RESULTS Geographical and General Climatological Data Generally speaking the three areas Under consideration are very similar in many respects. For'example, although there is 1,000 feet difference in altitude between the Mesa Verde and the Crystal River, the difference in latitude apparently helps equate the altitudinal difference, and the average annual precipitation is very similar. The longitude of all three locations, the Crystal River, Little Hills, and Mesa Verde, is also quite close (Table 1). Table 1. - GEOGRAPHICAL AND GENERAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA,FOR THE THREE STUDY SITES FOR 1957 THROUGH 1960. ....Area County Crystal River G~rfi~ld 6,000' Little Hills Rio Blanco 6,200 Mesa Verde Montezuma 7,070' Elevation Latitude Longitude Avo Temp. Av. Prec. I 39-34 107-20 40-00 108-12 12.45" 37-12 108-g9 19·52ft Characteristically, the winter ranges in all three areas are primarily mixed browse-pinon-juniper types, with considerable areas of sagebrush parks. Also, they are primarily deer winter ranges. The specific area weather data will be presented in tabular form with each area discussion. The Crystal River weather data is actually that recorded at the Glemmod Springs station, 14 miles away, but the other sites have their own stations. Crystal River Area Beginning with Oct ober- , 1957, the writer began clipping the annual growth of three key browse species in the vicinitY,of Carbondale on the Crystal River. These species were mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus), serviceberry (Amelanchier utahensis), and bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata). This clipping was performed each fall at as nearly the same time as the work schedule would permit, usually October or early November, after growth had ceased, after the leaves had fallen, and before deer moved into these winter ranges. This was done for four years, 1957 through 1960. Each species was clipped in a separate area where it was the dominant browse species, and where deer are known to winter commonly. An attempt was made to clip all or nearly all the availap,le current annual growth on a fairly representative cross-section of the age and condition classes of the particular �-$3- species at each of the three sites. The twigs were cut at the p,ud scale scar-s' with apair of side-cutting pliers and put into paper sacks. When 350 to 400 stems had been cut, they were immediately brought in~o the office and weighed before they had a chance to dessicate. Then each twig was measured to the nearest eighth inch and recorded. Originally, some of the 1957 stems were individually weighed and measured, but since the average weight per unit of length was sought, it was felt that individual weighing was too tedious and unnecessary, so each length was recorded and the total weighed in grams. The weighing was done on a triple-beam scale to the nearest hundredth of a gram. After measuring and weighing green, the sacks were stapled and put aside for several (6 to 12) months until the stems were considered to be air-dry, when they were weighed again to obtain the dry weights. The total inches produced per species were divided by the number of stems measured to obtais the average stem length or "growth Lndex ", The total grams, both green and air-dry, were divided by the total inches produced to yield the weight in grams per inch of stem per species. Also, the relationship of the air-dry forage to the green forage was calculated and expressed in per cent. Airdry weights were only taken on the Crystal River for the Las tct.hr-eeyears, and the sack of bitterbrush for 1959 was accidently destroyed. I• The data for this area on three species is presented in Table 2. It is interesting to note that the per cent of green weight that remains when air-dried is relatively consistent, ranging from 62.0 to 69.1 per cent with an overall for the three years of 63.7 per cent on mo~ntain mahogany. The range on serviceberry was from 60.8 to 65.1 per cent of green weight, with a three year figure of 62.7 per cent. Bitterbrush showed a range of 65.6 to 67.1 per cent dry material with a two year dry weight percentage of 66.7. It appears that all threesspecies contain an average of 64.1 per cent crude dry material compared to live or green weight. Since dry weights probably do not reflect the same amount of variation that green weights do because of differences in types of growing season, the time and weather at the season on the year clipped, and possible delays and consequent dessication of green materials before being weighed, the airdry weights will be used primarily for comparison purposes here. Air-dry weights of mahogany ranged from .051 to .055 grams per inch, or a three year weight of .052 grams per inch. Serviceberry ranged from .052 to .059 grams per linear inch, with an overall weight during this period of .055 grams per inch. Bitterbrush ranged from .023 to .026 grams per inch, with a .':, two year figure of .024 grams per inch. �Table 2 - CRYSTAL RIVER AREA BROWSE DATA SUMMARY, 1957 THROUGH 1960. Species and Item Mountain Mahogany Number of stems Total inches produced Grams total green weight Grams total air-dry weight Per cent dry of green weight Inches average stem length Green grams per inch Air-dry grams per inch Serviceberry Number of stems Total inches produced Grams total green weight Grams total air-dry weight Per cent dry of green weight Inches average stem length Green grams per inch Dry grams per inch Bitterbrush Number of stems Total inches produced Grams total green weight Grams total air-dry weight Per cent dry of green weight Inches average stem length Green grams per inch Air-dry grams per inch 1957 1958 1959 400 278 1131.03 916.30 81.55 84.50 58·35 50·30 62.0 69·1 6.75 4.07 2.29 .1065 .0747 .089 .052 .055 439 2963.33 315.65 484 2847·54 420·90 5.88 .148 340 2332.04 112.65 6.86 .048 1960 578 1030·55 83.~0 52;90 63.0 1.78 .081 .051 306 373 1323.82 500.80 104.~9 45.10 68.80 27.40 60.8[" 65·1 1.64 3·55 .079 .090 .052 .055 447 963.05 94.60 57·70 60.9 2.15 .098 .OS9 165 356 713·68 759·50 28.80 38.80 18·90 65.6 2.13 4·32 .040 .051 .026 462 1456·50 50·50 33·90 67.1 3·15 .035 .023 It is evident that while the moisture content of the three species is similar, the weight per untt of length for bitterbrush is less than half that of mahogany and serviceberry. According to Table 2,'the most variable factor from year to year appears to be the average stem length. For example, mahog~y with a four year average of 424 stems, ranges from a high in 1957 of 6.75 inches progressively downward to a Low of 1.78 inches in 1960. Serviceberry, based on an average of 402 stems, averaged 5.88 inches in 1957, with a low of 1.64 inches in 1959, and up again in,1960 to 2.15 inches. Bitterbrush,,?-veraging 386 stems, showed a similar growth pattern to serviceberry, averaging 6.86 inches in 1957 with a low of 2.13 inches in 1959, and up to 3.15 inches in 1960. ' The clippings 'were made from similar but different plants of each species �-55- in the same site each year to get away from any effects of previous clipping. Equal representation according to the age and condition class structure of the area was striven for, as indicated in Table 3. Table 3 - LOCATION, NUMBER, AGE AND CONDITION CLASS OF JlII@'REE SPECIES OF BROWSE PLANTS CLIPPED FOUR YEARS IN THE CRYSTAL RIVER AREA OF COLORADO, 1957-60. Species Year Number Mountain Mahogany 1957 2 2 2 1958 1960 1957 4 1959 Serviceberry 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 8 1958 2 4 1 1959 4 1960 1 5 3 4 1 Bitterbrush 1957 1 2 4 1958 2 3 3 1959 2 1 4 1960 3 3 3 1 Age and Condition Class * Site Location Young, light to no hedging Mature, moderateJ.yl1e.dged Mature, tightly kedged Young, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged Young, moderately hedted Mature, tightly hedged Young, light to no hedging Mature, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged South slope of mixed browse-pinon-juniper type between Jerome Park and Dry Park, 6 miles west of Carbondale, Colo. Total browse ground cover averaged 25.2 per cent. Mature, tightly hedged Decadent, tightly hedged Young, light to no hedging Mature, tightly hedged Decadent, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged Dacadent, tightly hedted Young, light to no hedging Mature, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged Dacadent, tightly hedged. South slope near measured browse production-utilization transects on Prince Creek, 4 miles southeast of Carbondale, CO[o. Total browse ground cover averages 21.6 per cent. Young, moderately hedged Mature, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged Dacadent, tightly hedged You*g, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged Decadent, tightly hedged Young, moderately hedged Mature, moderately hedged Mature, tightly hedged Young, !Roderately hed~ed Matur.ej/ moderately hedged Decadent, tightly hedged Southeast slope of Red Hill, 3 miles north of Carbondale, Colo. Average browse ground cover 11.2 per cent. *Age and co~dItion classes according to Dasmann (1951). �-5:6- Tables 4 and 5 show the 1957-60 temperature and precipitation for the Crystal River area, as recorded for Glenwood Springs. Table 4 -l957 TEROUGH1960 data used TEMPERATURES AND ANNUAL:ME:.AN FOR THE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO, AREA. .. ".," .. ,.",-,," ,. , .. , ,.- Year. .. Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunJul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec . Annual 1960 25.5 26.7 40.0 48.8 56.7 66.9 72.0 69.3 63·2 49·7 37.7 26.1 48·5 1959 26.7 29.1 36.9 46.5 55.9 67.4 70.0 67.8 58.1 48.2 36.1 30.4 47·8 1958 23.3 33.9 36.3 44.8 59·0 66.1 68.2 70.6 61.0 51.0 36·9 31·3 48.5 1957 23:5 33<.8 39.2 45.3 52.2 62.4 69.4 67.9 58.4 50.4 32.0 26.2 46.7 Mean 24.8 30.9 38.1 46.4 56.0 65.7 69.9 68.9 60.2 49·8 35.7 28.5 47·0 Table 5 - 1957 TEROUGH 1960 PRECIPrrATION BY MONTH AND YEAR FOR THE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO, AREA. Year Jan Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1960 .57 1.27 2.43 1.19 .69 .68 .10 .97 1.19 1959 1.27 2.25 Feb Mar .36 1.81 .98 2.45 Sep Nov Dec Annual .80 1.28 .84 12.01 .23 ·98 17·93 .56 1. 50 1.13 10.64 Oct .49 1·75 3·33 2.03 .46 1.47 1.24 1957 3.63 1.10 1.44 2.97 3.15 2.21 .67 1.95 .22 2.21 1.96 1.22 22·73 Mean 1.48 1.52 1.37 1.66 1·30 1·38 .52 1.21 1.64 1.40 1.24 1.04 15.80 .69 ·38 .17 .82 .43 1.84 1958 It can be readily seen that the 1957 total precipitation was much higher than average, in fact, it was 4.12 inches higher than a long-time average. This, coupled with the average stem length for 1957, leads one to the assumption that all factors were very favorable for a good growth year in 1957. On the other hand, precipitation during 1958 was below normal, but the poorest average stem length didn't show up generally until 1959, leading one to surmise that there may be a residual effect of a drought year, perhaps due to low vigor ora lower supply of ground water, a year after the low period. �-57- Mesa Verde Area The data for the three species of browse to be compared with the Crystal River area were supplied through the courtesy of Harold 1!. Shepherd, who has been working on the Mesa Verde clip plot study for all but two of its 12year duration. Three hundred stems of each species were clipped, weighed green and airdr!ted in grams, and measured in centimeters.. These clippings were from plants selected in the general vicinity of the fenced plots, and exclusive of the control plots. One hundred stems were clippedJfrom each of three plants of each species, except that 31 and five mahogany plants were clipped to obtain 300 stems in 1950 and 1959 respectively, and 61 serviceberry plants were clipped to obtain 300 twigs in 1960. Air-dry we Lght.s during these four years were made two to eight weeks after clipping, and were stored in cloth sacks. The writer doesn't know if the age and condition class of these plants was determined or recorded. The Mesa Verde data were converted from centimeters to inches to be comparable with the Crystal River data, and the data for each set of 100 stems were calculated in total for each species for each year. The data for the Mesa Verde on the three browse species is presented in Table 6 for the four year period. While the percentage of dry weight to green weight was relatively consistent from year to year in the Crystal River area, it ranged from 62.6 to 81.4 per cent on mahogany, 50.1 to 7916 per cent on serviceberry, and 46.5 to 103.0 per cent on bitterbrush in the Mesa Verde area. Air-dry weights of mountain mahogany ranged from .044 to .061 grams per inch, or a four year weight average of .058 grams per inch. Serviceberry ranged from .042 to .071 grams per inch, with an overall weight during the period of .059 grams per inch. Bitterbrush ranged from .015 to .025 grams per inch, with a three year figure of .017 grams per inch. As indicated in Table 6, the average stem length is a factor evidencing much variation. Mahogany, ranging from a high in 1957 of l;74 inches to a low in 1959 of 0.93 inches, went up to 3.52 inches in 1960. Serviceberry doesn't reflect the same variation at all, ranging from 1.71 inches in 1958 to 1.24 inches in 1960. Bitterbrush ranges from a high of 2.85 in 19~7 down to no growth in 1959, then up to 2.18f.Jinchesin 1960. These average stem lengths are based on 300 stems of each species each year. Tables 7 and 8 show the 1957-60 temperatures and pre¢ipitation recorded at the Mesa Verde National Park. data as �-58- The total precipitation _n 1957 was 12.39 inches above a long-time average, being more than twice as much as the 1958 total precipitatioh. Tab!e 6 - MESA. VERDE AREA.BROWSE DATA. S~RY, 1958 1957 Species and Item 1957 THROUGH 1960. 1960 1959 Mountain Mahogany Number of stems 300 Total inches produced 1723.15 161.10 Grams total green weight 100.80 Grams total air-dry weight 62.6 Per cent dry of green weight Inches average stem length 5·[f4 Green grams peT inch .093 Air-dry grams per inch .058 300 300 1668·39 278·74 16.10 155·50 12.20 102·30 65.8 75·8 5·56 ·93 .058 .093 .061 .044 300 1054.68 72.60 59·10 81.4 3·52 .069 .056 Serviceberry Number of stems Total inches produced Grams total green weight Grams total air-dry weight Per cent dry of green weight Inches average stem length Green grams per inch Air-dry grams per inch 300 439·55 49·10 25·00 50.1 1.47 .112 .057 300 513·23 44·50 35·40 79·6 1.71 .087 .042 300 472.87 26.70 20·90 78·3 1.59 .056 .044 300 373·42 37.40 26.40 70.6' 1.24 .100 .071 Bitterbrush Number of stems Total inches produced Grams total green weight Grams total air-dry weight Per cent dry of green weight Inches average stem length Green grams per inch Dry grams per inch 300 855.67 25.80 12.00 46.5 2.85 .030 .015 300 419·88 10.10 10.40 103·00 1.39 .024 .025 300 653·03 12·30 9·90 80.5 2.18, .019 .015' Table 7 - 1957 THROUGH 1960 TEMPERATURES AND ANNUAL MEAN FOR~HE . COLORADO, AREA~ Year Jan Feb ~r Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov ~lliSA. VERDE, Dec Annual 1960 25.6 26.5 41.0 49.0 55.8 68.9 73.7 72.4 66.2 49.5 41.5 28.6 49·9 1959 32.9 31.6 39·2 49·3 57.7 69·5 74.1 69·7 63·1 51·7 39·5 33.6 51.0 �-59- Table 7 - Continued - Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 1958 31.1 36.7 33.7 44.6 60.9 69.5 72.2 72.5 64.2 53.8 40.238.7 51.5 1957 29·7 38.8 38.2 43.6 50.5 65.2 69·1 67.2 63·3 49·7 33·5 33.5 48·5 Mean 29.8 33.4 38.0 46.6 56.2 68.3 72.3 70.4 64.2 51.2 38.7 33.6 Table 8 - 1957 THROUGH 1960 PREDIPrrATION BY MONTH AND YEAR FOR THE MESA VERDE, COLORADO, AREA. Year Jan Feb Mar Apr 1960 2.04 2.67 1.01 1.42 1959 .42 1.85 .16 2.05 1958 1.25 1.98 2.60 1.08 Dec Annual ·92 2·97 16.27 T :.L.61: ...]9 2·93 1.06 2.56 1.01 3·02 17·06 .40 ;~6;L.o4·.1.391.98 1.19 .73 1.70 13·94 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct .62 .49 ·76 .15 .60 2.62 Nov 1957 5.23 1.49 1.20 3·66 3.37 1.14 4.31 3.53 .00 3.43 2.09 1.00 30.81 Mean 2.31 1.99 1.24 2.09 1~09 .88 1.62 2.00 ·91 2.45 1.19 2.17 19·52 Stem lengths, except for serviceberry, also reflected the indication that 19157 vas a favorable one for growth production. Little Hills Area Little Hills, as used here, refers to the location of the Little Hills Game Experiment Station on the Dry Fork of Piceance Creek approximately 35 miles west of Meeker. Game-proof fenced pasture studies on the effects of game and livestock use at different intensities on typical deer winter range vegetation have been conducted continuously since 1948 here. Although no weighing has been performed, it was felt that it might be possible to compare average stem lengths from the pastures with similar data from the CrystalrRiver and Mesa Verde areas where weights have been recorded, and thereby project calculated weights if a correlation existed between the other two sites. �-60- Analysis of stem length data from Little Hills shows that comparable data exists only for serviceberry for 1957 and 1958. other species measurements weren't made for the same period of time cove:redin this study. In reality,!there are insufficient data from Little Hills to allow any reliable comparisons. While Little Hills weather. dat.a show the same temperature and precipitation fluctuations as those exhibited generally by the Crystal River and Mesa Verde areas, there are also voids in this data. Generally, temperatures and precipitation average lower than in the other two areas. The Little Hills area, then, will not be used or referred to any further in this report. Discussion: Although it was planned to compare browse growth data from three deer winter range locations in Colorado, sufficient comparable data are available for only two sites--the Crystal River and Mesa Verde. The aifferent classes of data from the Crystal River are surprisingly consistent, while they exhi~lt much variation in the Mesa Verde. Whether these differences are due to real annual plant differ~nces, or perhaps are due to different methods of collecting and treating the material, is not known. Green and Air-dry Weights For example, Crystal River mahogany had a range difference of 7·1 per cent compared to a Mesa Verde mahogany range difference of 18.8 per cent in dry compared to green weights. The three-year mahogany dry weight percentage was 63.7 on the Crystal and the four year figure on the Mesa Verde was 67·7 per cent. Serviceberry ranged in difference 4.3 per cent on the Crystal and 29·5 per cent on the Mesa Verde, with an average of 62.7 per cent on the Crystal and 68.3 percent on Mesa Verde---the perceptage of green weight that airdry weight represented. Crystal River bitterbrush ranged in difference 1.5 per 'cent,Mesa Verde had a 56.5 percent spread, with dry weight to green weight averages of 66.6 and 67.0 percent, respectively. Average Stem Length and the Weather With the exception of Mesa Verde serviceberry, most of the species showed the,same pattern of average stem growth during the four year period. Without det?iled statistical analysis, itapp~ars that the weight per unit. of length doesn't have much correlation with the type of growing season, but that generally there is a direct correlation between average stem length and the precipitation. �,~c> , ~ I , , , ,,/O"Z'/ , -I-~Q •.. " cbs .. , 'I , :>e.q ",oN Gni' •... , I~~ : -•. v""r:t:I ,:...k:', " i>W I, : J<lV t.W 'e~·.,.·· --j , , -- f.. ( , .; ! ! _-'- .....• _'- , , , •..•... ( '-'--,-"- . .-- -I-I- ,!- , I 1 i "I" 1 ' /. I" I ! I ~,- " ! ,I ":_,1 i., i" .] ' - ~.,-, . ,, , - I , r'·,', -:,-' ---r- '- :;..-.:- I I' I , . i" :I! I ;',1 I :' i i .,. I· : I ! ' i'l i! \ I i .I i I ".. l ,",' "I." 1I~ -i-----~ ! .! IDrtU ,,£.t:ZZ ~ : :'1 i 'I , , ',I ' , ! 'j i ! I ' ! ,, I, I , , , I i .! I ..• L. , , i , , l.,' 1 ,J I I'''!'' • , , , .: I �I .: _._ ... L'.:. 7 6.0' I' 1 I . ~ "_."~,J ..~'"-~~"~~?:-~:=.~':.'-'"~'~'"~~. ..:.-.":~~::~-~.: ~:::.::" ~... ~.-~-.~:-: .... 1~:··~·~-~~:=~~~E.~!~E~~~~=_::~=:~+~~;~::·:~f~~·::~~.~'=E"·::·].·.~:·~ :::. 6· ...............c.~~o~?f~~~.s&~~t:(j-~t-:;I· _. b 4.0 ..,..: iTt.~~:-~-~r~-;-;;::+~·-~:;l)~\---... ··i:+-~~:-;;~(:(·····c :•..;'.: L::.Ll:' s..~ ~ b. " ~o '() a J. ~ III <A l. :. ~ /'~ :r ~f& " ':h--~':-:'~= 1'-1\)- ~ '.~ ~ ~ ~ ·z-_· /.0 ;0., r ....- . ..':: I' -...- . r~ -"_L .A I·... j;~~~=..•.··:;···l. .. --0 ~"-,:-~~~ . ~'<l l...l.. __ tJ ~ .•...•.. ~ ~ ........ .. · ~ __ --,-:,~---::,..........--::--..,....-::----=---..-..--~-'-"::..La:--i--,---:---:-~--:~.;,t-~~~1,.,-~~ ~-.,,..-----.,--,.--:---J s..~~ ~ t·l~"l·!)§~3'.yo M~~'~~~"S u·t \.~"c:: .•..•~ ~ l·U ;~'; ~.~'h'\) '~.'~~.~~;k~7~:.?~'~.~_ ~~~~~~:;t~~~I()~~--~.~~ 1t~:t~~~9~:L)Q ~~·t ','" ;::;3vre:~, He.:icV Verde ___ . p':'ec/j:u.·£~,.}t/ol7 .. ' . ~ .. ~ ..C}···~.~·"}~-.~/~~o"t.V) . c;.nd oYercJleJ're,,:": /eny.l-h"per. ~~~,~~c,'n~1ser;v;ce.be.rr7': Q"d.~;¥er.6r.wsh, . 'O.~ ..~ • .,.;. ,: 'r=: kr=mo~.inl-Q,,"n" .•.•... ----'.-....!..........-. ; ""'.' l �In comparing total precipitation and growth index (average stem length) it is observed that the current stem growth isn't directly attributable to that specific season's total precipitation, but may be due to a lag, perhaps of more ground water or increased good vigor from a good growing ,season before, or conversely, the decreased ground water and lowered vitality from a poor growing season preceding. For example, from browse transect data and records in nor-thwescern Colorado we find that the growth index for the 1956 growing season was fairly good, and from this study we see frorrfgrowth and precipi tationdata that 1957 was very good (Figures 1 and 2). The total annual precipitation in 1958 ~as the lowest ,for the four year period in both study areas, yet the average stem lengths were generally the second highest of the period. Mesa Verde serviceberry and bitterbrush, though, were the highest and lowest,r-espectively, except for 1959 when pitterbrush had no neasurable growth there. Then in 1959 total precipitation viaS the second highest in this study period, and yet annual growth was generally lower than the 1958 season when precipitation (total annual) was low. The 1960 precipitation was below the four year average, and yet growth was generally up over the 1959 growth. We've been concerned mainly with total annual precipitation thus far, but perhaps the needed amount at certain critical times of the year is the key to the production question. It may be coincidental and of too short a study duration, but the month of April precipitation in both the Crystal River and Mesa Verde areas shows a trend in relationship annually comparable to the total annual precipitation curve. For example, curves formed by graphing January through May, January throuth June, February through June, March through June and September through June cumulative precipitation by years ref:)..ect the same relationship of peaks and troughs as the annual total precipitation. As far as this study has revealed, temperature doesn't seem to have too much bearing on the average stem length, barring extremes, when the precipitation level favorable t.ogood growth is attained. Weight per Unit ,of Length The\·.differencein weight pertinit.of length, in this case grams per inch, seems very insignificant between mountain mahogany and serviceberry and between the Crystal River and M~sa Verde areas. Bitterbrush in both cases is considerably lighter per unitt length, but weights vary somewhat in the two areas (Table 9). ' �-64- Table 9. - AIR-DRY WEIGHTS IN GRAMS PER INCH FOR THREE BROWSE SPECIES SHOWING ANNUAL AND AVERAGE DATA,FOR 1957-60. Species 1958 Crystal River Ave. 1959 19bO Air-dry Grams per Inch Mesa Verda: 1957 1958 1959 19bO Ave. "%M6.unta±rn, Mahogany Serviceberry .052 .055 .051 .052 .058 .061 .044 .056 .058 .052 .055 .059 .055 .057 .042 .044 .071 .059 Bitterbrush .026 .023 .024 .015 .025 .015 .017 It seems, likely xnat there may possibly be a higher moisture content during a good growing season than during a poorer one. The data here is insufficient to draw any such conclusions. Application - With a history of precipitation, and resultant annual production known for several years, it may become possible to predict the amount of growth to be expected the ensuing summer. It may take, of course, many more years of correlation to substantiate this assumption. If then, the average stem length could be predicted early, or actually determined from existing measured browse transects in the fall, the actual weight per species per average twig length could be calculated. Before this has any real meaning, the average number of annual growth stems per plant would have to be arrived at through intensive investigation during different types of growing seasons and for each age and condition class within each major species. To be of any value, of course, the composition, condition and age classes, and de~sity of a given unit of range has to be ascertained. A,technique for typ~ng~;J mapping, and classifying as to condition and trend, as well as determining density, of browse ranges is in the developmental stage now py an 'inter-agency committee in Colorado. Perhaps in time, when administration requires the data for morecritical game management in specific areas, we'll be able to provide them with some of the necessary tools to do the job in terms of browse rang production and carrying capacity. Recommendations - It is recommended that this type of investigation be continued, and others into production capabilities of different age and condition classes of key browse species be initiated. Prepared by: Date : Richard N. Denney April, 1961 ----------~--~--~-------------- Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator 11'. �April, 1961 -65- JOB COMP~TION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of: C~o~l~o~r~a~d~o Project No. W-38-R-14 _ Deer - Elk Investigations Job No. 1 Work Plan No. Title of Job: Experimental Trapping and Marking Techniques Period Covered: April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961. 5 ABSTRACT A portable trap was set up on Hill Creek on the South Fork of the White River. The main reason was to see if elk could be successfully trapped in a portable type trap. A.total of 52 elk were caught, counting recatches. The sex and age makeup of the trapped animals was one yearling bull, 17 mature cows, and nine calves. One cow elk was killed in the trap, but no other injuries occured. All elk trapped were ear-tagged and marked with white plastic collars on their necks to facilitate summer observations. Objectives: 1. To obtain as much information as is possible from a review of literature regarding different methods of trapping big game animals. 2. To continue work on the experimental deer and elk trap at the Sapinero Game Management Area, with the idea of developing new types of gates that will allow any number of animals to enter the trap and at the same time effectively seal them in. 3. To continue development of the net catching device which will make handling of the animals easier and safer for both the animals and the personnel working on them. 4. To ma~k and tag all animals caught with specially designed tags, ribbons in their ears, and plastic collars for their necks. Bells will also be tried if they are available. 5. To follow up on any reports of marked animals in order to determine the distance traveled, and summer range area compared with winter range area. �-66- Objectives - Cont'd. 6. To run several snowshoe and Sno-Cat counts in the trapping area to observe movements of the marked animals. 7· To teat the drug dosages recommended by veterinarians through use of the Cap-Chur gun as an incidental part of this study. The animals can be more easily handled when tranquilized and dosages can be recorded incidentally. Procedures: 1. The reviews of literature on trapping methods and techniques will be carried out by a student or students at Colorado State University, College of Forestry and Range Management. These students to be chosen by professors in the school of Wildlife Conservation. 2. Bait deer and elk into the experimental trap with alfalfa hay, salt, and other types of bait. Tag and mark all animals caught with ear tags, ribbons and collars, and bells. Deer and elk will .. be induced to jump into the net holding device for easier handling. 3· Any reports of marked animals will be checked out to get the following information: a. b. c. d. 4. Distance traveled. Ease of identification. Summer range vs. winter range area. Map recoveries and sightings, such information to be used for management purposes. Enlist the aid of a veterinarian to help work out the dosages for the drugs used. �-6ct- EXPERIMENTAL TRAPPING AND MARKING TECHNIQUES Raymonq C. Boyd and M. C. Coghill Results: The review of literature on methods of tagging and marking big game animals has been completed and is in the hands of the biologist in charge of this job. Since the information contained in this review is of limited interest, it was decided not to publish it in the quarterly reports. It is available from the files on the trapping job in the Regional Office in Montrose, Colorado. The review of literature on trapping methods is being worked on by two junior game management students at C.S.U., and should be in our hands by about June 1, 1961. No new work was accomplished on the experimental gates this past segment. A new gate was constructed for use in the portable trap, but no 'Particular modifications were incorporated into it. With the expansion of the elk tagging and marking program, especially in the White River Plateau area' under Work Plan 2, Job 7, we will have to construct three more gates which will have some modifications incorporated into them. The plans for these modified gates will be included in the completion report for the next segment. Another phase of this job was investigated during the past segment; namely, could elk be trapped in a portable corral-type trap? Accordingly, one of the Department's corral-type deer traps was taken to the South Fork of the White River and set up on Hill Creek. The panels were eight feet high and four feet wide, constructed of 1 x 4 lumber with 2 x 4 side braces and a 1 x 12 at the top and bottom. When the trap was assembled we found that it was too small, so another 18 panels were borrowed from the Little Hills Experiment Station and incorporated into the trap. The corral was about 40 feet in diameter when completed. A.metal one-way gate was installed, and a special pipe frame to hold the net catching device was 'Put up on the south side of the trap. The electric trigger mechanism was also utilized in this trap. The jump gate over the net was modified in that a drop gate was used in place of a swinging gate. This proved very successful as it was much faster and the animals did not get in the way of the closing gate •.. The winter of 1960-61 was another very light one in thiis area, and did not lend itself at all to efficient trapping. This was evidenced by the fact that elk did not come down on to the winter ranges, but stayed on the intermediate ranges and in some cases actually remain~d on their summer ranges. In spite of the light winter and availability of forage, we were able to �68- catch a total of 52 elk in the trap on Hill Creek~ This total includes all recatches. One cow elk was killed in the trap, but this was the only injury experienced on all of the elk. A. total of 27 elk were actually tagged and banded. The results are shown in Table 1. All the elk trapped on Hill Creek were marked with white plastic collars around their necks. These collars are easily visible for one-half mile with binolulars. Two banded elk were also observed from the air while flying the South Fork area of the White River elk trend. The collars were very easy to see, and should give us good information on movements when they are observed during the summer months. Table 1 - ELK TRAPPED AND MARKED ON HnL CREEK, RIO BLANCO COUNTY, WJNrER 1960-61. Date Sex 1/31 Male Yearling W - 1 1/31 1/31 1/31 2/3 2/3 2/6 2/10 Female Female Female Female Male Female Female :Mature Calf Calf Mature Calf Mature Mature W - 2 W - 2 W - 3 W - 3 W - 4 w- 4 W .... W - 5 5 6 WW - 6 W - 7 W - 7 W - 8 (Red) 2/10 2/15 2/15 2/15 2/19 Male Female Male Male Female Calf Mature Calf Calf Yearling W - 9 w- 9 W - 10 W .•....10 W - 11 W - 11 W - 12 W - 12 W - 13 W - 13 2/19 2/22 2/25 2/27 2/27 3/2 Female Female Female Female Female Female Oalf Mature Mature Mature Mature Mature W - 14 W - 14 W- 15 'W - 15 ·W··il·16W - 16 W - 17 W- 17 W - 18 W - 18 W - 19 (White) 3/2 3/2 3/3 Female Female Female Mature Calf Mature 20 W - 20 W ... W - 21 W - 21 W - 22 (White) 3/5 3/5 3/5 3/6 3/6 Female Female Female Female Female Mature Mature Yearling Mature Calf W - 23 W - 24 W - 25 W - 26 W - 27 W - 26 W - 27 2/6 Female 1726 1726 ------_._._---------- Age Tag No. W - 1 Remarks W- 23 W - 24 w,..25 -...-------------'-------~--.-------- ..... ---;....-------------------- •...--,_.-..-.- Calf White plastic collar, recatch 8 times White plastic collar Collar pulled off in net Wh.ite·;plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, white tag :pulled out White plastic collar White -plastic collar White plastic collar Collar pulled off in net White plastic collarj this cow had a crooked nose White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, red tag pulled out White plastic collar White plastic collar vlhite plastic collar, red tag pulled out White :plastic collar White~plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar Cattle tags, taken with Cap-Chur gun, released on Grand Mesa, Delta County �Figure 1 - Portable Trap on Hill Creek) showing paneled frame for holding the net catching device, and construction of the panels used in the corral portion of the trap. White River National Forest, January, 1961. �-69- No elk were caught in the trap at the Sapinero Game Management Area this yearj however, three large bucks were trapped and tagged. Very few elk came near this trap, again because of the light winter. Table 2 - DEER TRAPPED AND MARKED ON EAST ELK CREEK, GUNNISON COUNTY, WINTER 1960-61 Date Sex Age 3/7 3/10 3/18 Male Male Male Mature Mature Old Tag No. S - 6 S - 7 S - 8 S - 6 S - 7 S - 8 Remarks Antlers shed Antlers shed Antlers shed ; incisors worn completely down. One opportunity arose during the past segment to use the Cap-Chur gun on an elk. A.calf elk had traveled down into an agricultural area near Delta, Colorado and it soon became necessary to remove it to another less populated area. The drug FlaxedilR was used in the projectile syringe and a calculated dosage of 2 3/4 mg. of drug per pound of body weight was administered with the gun at a range of about 15 feet. The elk was completely paralyzed in 7~ minutes and was out for l~ hours. While we were hauling the elk away, the veterinarian who was assisting us on this job noticed that the elk was having difficulty in breathing and accordingly administered 3 cc. of TensilonR, the antagonist for FlaxedilR. The effect of the antagonist was almost instantaneous, her breathing smoothed out and no further trouble was experienced. The elk was tagged and released on Dry Creek on Grand Mesa in Delta County. One tag was returned from the trapping at the Sapinero Game Management Area. A.bull elk that had been tagged as 2-point (2 - 2) yearling on East Elk Creek on March 18, 1960 was killed as a 4-point (4 - 4) bull October 17, 1960 on Big Mill Creek. This was a distance of about 12 miles airline from the trap site. Table 3 - TAG RETURNS ON DEER AND ELK KILLED DURING THE 1960 BIG GAME SEASON, SOUTHWEST REGION. Spp. Date Tagged Date Killed Age when Tagged Deer Elk 2/13/57 3/18/60 11/6/60 10/17/60 Yearling Yearling Tagging Where Distance Location Killed Traveled Yrs. Bia:Ty"Cr<~~'BillyCr. Same Area Mill Cr. 12 Miles 22 YI'S Elk Cr. Age when Killed 4t �-70- Recommendations: The following recommendations are those improvements suggested by the crew that ran the portable trap on Hill Creek during the past segment. 1. The Net Catching Device - Make the mesh in the net smaller, not more than six ~nches. The two collars that were lost and the three tags that pulled out were all caused by an elk getting its head through the net. It is felt that a s,maller mesh will stop this from happening. Also, they suggested that new nets be made of white rope, rather than the dark green that was used in the net that we operated on Hill Creek. 2. The Panels Around the Net (see picture) -:These panels should also be painted white in order to make the area around the net seem more open to the animals. 3. A. suggestion that came out of our trip to Wyoming was to have a smaller crowding pen off the main corral of the trap. The thought being that the elk could not run as much, and being crowded together would tend to jump quicker into the net when the gate was opened. 4. It was also suggested that the jump gate be lowered and a pit dug under the net to keep the elk from touching the ground. 5· While the portable trap wor-ked extremEZ1y 'lQell,we still feel that a more satisfactory trap can be built if it is of a permanent nature. Thus, we propose not to abondon the portable trap, but rather to hold it in reserve for special lfone-shotlftrapping, and also to build three permanent type pole traps in the vicinity of the South Fork area. These traps to fulfill objectives for both this work plan and also for Work Plan 2, Job 7, of this project. 6. Since the main reason we have been plaCing collars on the elk is to get summer observations, a field book for recording sightings of banded elk has been worked out, and will be distributed to Forest Service personnel, Game and Fish personnel~ and other persons who might have occasion to see one of the marked, elk during the summer of 1961. All sightings will be plotted on maps, these sightings to be used in management and in serving as the basis for other work under the White River Elk Study. Acknowledgements: The writer would like to acknowledge the great help and.assistance given this job by two members of the Fish Division, Colorado Game and Fish Department, Mr. Charles Taylor and Mr, Joe Papez, both of the Bel-Aire Rearing Unit, Meeker, Colo. These men did most of the trapping and marking on Hill Creek. Without their help this job could not have been completed as successfully as it was. The assistance of the Project Leader, State Game Manager, the local W.C.O., and others who helped set up the trap is also gratefully acknowledged. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd M. C. Coghill Date: April, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator �April, 1961 -75- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of: Colorado Project No. W-38-R-14 Work Plan No. 4 Deer - Elk Investigations Job No. Title of Job: Study of Deer Losses on Colorado Highways Period Covered: April 1, 1960 through March 31, 1961. 3 Objectives: To determine the various factors that affect the loss of deer by automobiles on Colorado highways. tlocedures: A large deer-auto accident report from was distributed to all the field men of the Colorado Game and Fish Department when this job started in 1959· The number of forms that were returned led us to question the value of the information that we were getting. Accordingly the form was simplified and put into a ~mall sheet which would fit the field notebooks carried by each man and this f~m was put into use in January, 1961. Since that date the deer-auto accident reports h~e been coming in in much greater numbers and from a wider area of the state. ' All data compiled below are taken from the large forms sent in from April, 1960 through December 31, 1960, and from the small forms that have been received since January 1, 1961 through the end of the project year. All forms were to be filled out as completely as possible, but were to be sent in if only the location of the kill and the sex and age of the animal killed could be determined. Results: From personal experience in traveling the state the writer knows that there are several areas where large numbers of deer are killed by automobiles from which we have no reported kills. The figures listed below, then are an absolute minimum figure. It is not compulsory that dirvers who hit deer in Colorado report the accident to either the Game and Fish Department or to the State Patrol. Much information cannot, therefore, be collected on the amount and kind of damage and whether injuries occurred to the people involved. �-76- Class of Deer Killed - 288 reported deer kills) 2 reported elk kills Age - Sample Size - 283 animals Adult 201 - 71.2% Fawn 82 - 28.8% Unknown -5Sex - Sample Size - 270 animals Male --- 92 - 34.1% Female ---178 - 65.9% Unknown - 18The two elk that were killed were a cow and a calf. Amount of Damage to the Automobile Sample Size - 52 reports listed cost of repairs Average cost per accident - $124.33 ($10.00 to $1)000.00) Time of Accident Sample Size - 88 reports listed the time the accident occurred Midnight to 2:00 a.m. --- 8 2:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m 4 4:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. -- 5 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. -- 4 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. - 1 10:00 a.m. to 12 Noon 0 12 Noon to 2:00 p.m. 0 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.-- 1 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.-- 8 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.--31 8:00 p vm . to 10:00 p.m. 17 10:00 p.m. to Midnight - 9 9.1% 35.2% 19·3% 10.2% Location of Accident Sample Size - 232 reports listed location of highway kills On a Known Crossing -- 167 Not a Known Crossing - 65 71·9% 28.1% County of Acc:i.dentand Highway (by Regional boundaries) Southwest Region Archuleta ---- 9 Delta ------- 2 Gunnison -----16 La Plata ---- 12 Montezuma --- 6 Mineral ----- 1 Highway 160 Chimney Rock and vicinity Highway 50 Sapinero to lola Highway 160 & 550 east of Bayfi1ed) north of Durango �·--77- county of Accident and Highway (Continued) Montrose ---- 1 Mesa -------- 3 Ouray ------- 8 Pitkin ------ 6 Rio Grande * 17 Saguache --3 Highway 160 South Fork to Del Norte * The two elk were killed in this county in addition to the 17 deer. Northwest Region Eagle -------- 5 Grand -------- 10 Garfield ----- 36 Moffat ------- 12 Rio Blanco --- 51 Routt -------- 3 Summit ------- 1 Highway Highway Highway Highway 40 north of Kremmling 24 Debeque to Rifle 13 north of Craig 64 Meeker to Piceance Creek turnoff Northeast Region Boulder ----- 2 Clear Creek - 2 Jefferson --- 1 Larimer ----- 23 Sedwich ----- 1 Park -------- 11 Weld -------- 1 Highway 66 Lyons to Estes Park Highway 285 Bailey to Kenosha Pass Southeast Region Chaffee ---- 4 Custer ----- 1 El Paso ---- 29 Fremont ---- 2 ~Huerfano --- 1 Las Animas - 1 Prowers ---- 1 Pueblo ------:1 Teller ----- 4 Highway 87 north of Colorado Springs Month of Accident Sample Size - 288 reports listed the month animal was killed �-78- Month of Accident (Continued) January) 1961 --- 85 Accidents February) 1961 -- 37 If March) 1961 ----- 56 If April) 1960 ----- 16 If May) 1960 ------- 3 If June) 1960 ------ 8 If July) 1960 ------- 8 Accidents August) 1960 ----- 5 If September) 1960 -- 7 If October) 1960 ---- 13 If November) 1960 19 If December) 1960 --- 31 If Discussion: It is obvious from the above data that there is a bias in the number of accidents reported each month because the first three months of 1961 were the first times the new smaller forms were used. The reports came in much better. The greatest mortality suffered by a single class of animal is in the mature female classification. This is consistent with the information that was reported on in the last segment. The amount of damage done to the vehicle was almost $26.00 less than that reported in the last segment. There doesn't seem to be any special reason for this drop. We had almost the same number of reports on the amount of damage done for the two segments. It is very interesting to note that the time of the accident occurring fits almost exactly with that found in segment 13 of this job. In the 1959-60 report there were 61.5% of the deer killed between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 10:00: p.m) while 63·6% of the deer killed in this report were struck during the same period of the day. These figures tend to show that the hours indicated are the ones of greatest deer activity) and this is borne out by the data collected under Work Plan 6) Job 1) in 1957) '58) and '59) which showed that the most active hours for the deer were between 5:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. with a peak at 7:30 pvm . Slightly more deer-auto accidents occurred on known crossings this year t4an last. This may indicate that while our-deer~crossipgs are"knoWIl) the'si;gns that are put on the highway to warn the motorists do not do much good. This particular phase of the highway loss job is being investigated during the present segment) but not enough data has been collected to report on at this time. We are specifically thinking of whether the crossings were marked or not. Many of the figures listed above do not check across because of the way the reports come in to the biologist in charge. Many field men do not list the sex of a fawn) and in a few cases the location of the accident was noted but no information concerning the animal killed was written down. All-in-all) the information contained on the smaller form is more useable and much easier to summarize. �-79- Recommendations: Continue the study using the smaller form) and now that the problem areas are showing up on the map) go into the field and use the longer form to get detailed information on causes and possible solutions. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Date: April) 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager .,.•Ferd C. Kleinschni tz Assistant Coordinator �80 Figure I - Small Form for reporting deer-auto accidents now being used on this job Back of form General Front of Form Map of Vicinity: DEER-AUTO ACCIDENT REPORT fill out one form for each accident or highway kill. Date of Accident or Report Time of Accident (if known) ------_ County _ Road No. (Fed. , State, Co. ), _ Location~ _ On Known Deer Crossing Reported by: Officer ------------------------------Title -------------------------------- Send Completed to: forms Ray Boyd 1130 South Third Montrose, Colorado at End of Month 0 No 0 Yes 0 No 0 Crossing Marked Yes 0 Fawn 0 Sex 0 Deer Killed: Adult No. Killed, this accident _ No. Injured, this accident _ Damage to Vehicle Approximate Personal Fatal 0 (if known) _ $ _ Cost to Repair Injuries: NoneD Minor 0 Serious 0 Not Known 0 �81 DEER-AUTC ACCIDENT REPORT (Follow-up forrn to be used on serious G & F Region Counry __ Speed Limit Date _ _ ..:toadNo. (Fed., ~ Exact Location areas) State, Co.) _ ----------------------------- ------------ .:::toadSurface - Check four (4): Straight Road On Curve Blacktop Gravel Grade Hillcrest Lane Four Lane Roadside Features Open Field __ On Fill Fenced Agriculture ----------- Concrete Other Features Level Two Dirt (road slick when wet, etc.) On ------- - Check as applicable: Type crop __ Canal Brush __ High Weeds __ Private Public Land accidents highway: Yes Suggestions for eliminating Unfenced No at this point up to this date Type of deer population involved (.m;i£ration, Time of year most accidents In Cut __ _ drawing game across Number of deer-auto __ :billboards Land Type of Fence Timber occur resident herd, _ etc . ) ----------------------- the deer-accident (over) problem in this area: _ �Detailed Map of Vicinity: . (or staple map to this sheet) Filled out by: Local Officer __ Biologist '-- __ ---,. _ _ �~FF~··---··----·------ $.WI;" --- --r~iACi<SON!ROUTT \.. , -- j eo B°r:::.4 o CNr<f • ~! j I i ~- -----on-,.".,,; i _-"Y i_-_' o,"""!' l j 01'••••• ,Jb. ",.1• M', ""~ .-w,... i I • ----r·:.I I .~ ~/,a.- ~:.rt/I" ~ Mapof Colorado showingthe locations of highwaykilled deer, April 1, 1960 thru March31, 1961. Each dot represents one highwaykill, the mapshowing 288 reported kills. �April, 1961 -83- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of: Colorado Project W-38-R-14 No. Deer - Elk Investigations Job No. Work Plan No. 9 Title of Job: Comparison Period April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961. Covered: 2 of Air and Ground Deer and Elk Counts ABSTRACT Six plane counts, three each for two observers, were obtained on Cedar Ridge this year preceding the ground drive. Dwight Owens, Department observer, counted from 56 to 67 percent with an average of 61 percent; and Ray Boyd, Observer, counted from 38 to 52 with an average of 44 percent of the actual number of deer on the area. All three of the counts by Owens and one of the counts by Boyd were among the highest percentages recorded on this area by fixed-wing aircraft. Forty-five drivers and five observers saw a total of 308 deer. This compares with 291 in 1960, the smallest number ever recorded on this area. There was almost no snow on the study area this year. The data from these counts, and last-year IS counts, indicate that aerial counts may be signifi-cantly affected by differences in background (up to 1810), observers (up to 1710) and other (up to 1410). Such variability suggests that an indicated population increase or decrease of 20 percent or more could be falsely interpreted, the change being due to count-variability factors alone. Objectives: 1. To determine factors required to correct air counts for different snow and flight conditions and to work out an easily recognized set of standards to permit an accurate selection of the proper correction factors by the aerial observer. 2. To determine whether air-to-ground deer ratios will remain the same from one vegetative type or type of terrain to another;and 3. To determine whether air counts will consistently tally the same percentage of elk as are present on the ground from time to time and from area to area. �-84- 4. To make similar air-ground correlation counts using a helicopter. Procedure: Select deer and elk areas representative of aerial population trend areas on which deer and elk are counted annually. Such sites must possess features of terrain which make it possible to obtain a potentially total ground count of the deer and elk present. Air crews count the area as many times as possible and practical (without distrubing the herd) prior to each ground drive. Information thus obtained is analyzed to determine the consistency of ratios and sources of variability. Also, data on ground conditions (snow-cover, etc.), flight conditions, and visibility is tabulated to determine the effect of various conditions on the counts made. At present, annual air-ground correlation counts are being made on the Cedar Ridge deer-wintering area and the Sapinero elk-wintering area. Such counts are usually made in February, weather permitting. In addition, when possible, a helicopter will be tested for counting efficiency on both the deer and elk study areas. COMPARISON OF AIR AND GROUND DEER AND ELK COUNTS John Harris Results: Six plane counts, three each by Dwight Owens and Ray Boyd, obtained on Cedar Ridge this year preceding the ground drive. Dwight flew Bud Betts in the Cessna-175 and Ray flew with Norm Hughes in the Piper-150. A summary of the counts is given as follows: wer-e Owens, Cessna-175 Date Feb. 9 9 10 Counting Conditions Counting Time No.Deer Snow Light Air Start End Total Counted -33 2 1:10--PM 1:50 40Min. 205 2 3 2 4:05 PM 4:45 40Mln. 184 3 1 3 8:05 PM 8:40 35Min. 173 Average 187 *~Deer Counted =sr: 60 56 61 Boyd, Piper-150 9 10 11 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 1 10:21 AM 9:15 AM 8:27 AM 10:58 37 Min. 160 9:55 40 Min. 117 1 9:12 45 Min. 129 Average *Actual number of deer on the area as determined by the ground 135 drive. 52 38 42 44 �-85- The procedure used in making the aerial counts of the area was the same as that used in making the regular annual game management trend counts. Total counting times varied somewhat depending upon wind velocity and air stability. A.total of 45 drivers and 5 observers patticipated in the ground count. Drivers counted 152 deer which cut back through the drive line and observers counted 156 deer which left the area for a total count of 308. This compares with 291 in 1960, which was the smallest number ever recorded on this area. There was almost no snow on the study area this year. All three of the counts by Owens and the February 9th count by Boyd (5210) are among the highest percentages recorded on this area by fixed-wing aircraft. The previous high of 5610was recorded in 1959 by Owens. Aerial counts, on this area, since 1952 (excluding this year's counts) have averaged about 4210· Background (snow cover) was very poor for all counts, light conditions (visibility) were only fair to poor and the flying conditions (air stability) vere judged as fair for three of the counts and good for the other three-counts are seldom made under poor flying conditions. Thus, data for this year was probably collected under some of the worst possible conditions with regard to big game aerial counts. Intensive work on this area in 1955 showed that snow conditions (background) alone could cause such counts to vary as high as 1510; counts in 1959 varied up to 1810. Counts this year varied 1110for Owens and 1410for Boyd with background conditions remaining essentially the same. No air-ground correlation counts were made on the Sapinero Elk-Study Area this year due to a light winter and unsuitable snow conditiLDns. Also, the helicopter was not available for testing this year. Conclusions: An average of all three percentages counted by each of the observers (Owens-61%; Boyd-44%) should tent to minimize the variability due to other causes and indicate the difference between observers (1710)-- which appears to be significant. Thts difference may be due, in part, to the following: 1. Difference in Aircraft: Cessna - side-by-side, observer can view both forward and to the side. Piper-150 ~ tandem, no forward visibility possible for observer. 2. Observer Technique: Owens - directs plane pattern and elevation using hand signals. Boyd - observes steadily while piolt makes standard pattern. 3. Experience: Owens - 9-10 years, had counted deer before. Boyd - 1 year, had never counted deer before. �-86- 4. Familiarity with area: Owens - had probably counted thi.sarea 30-40 times in last 10 years. Boyd - had never counted this area before. 5· Individual differences: Eyesight, color perception, etc. 6. Deer leaving the area (Not too likely on Oedar Ridge). 7· Duplication - neither observer felt this factor was important. In summing up, it appears that aerial counts may be significantly affected by differences in background (up to 18%), observers up to 17% and others up to 14%. Thus, it is possible that, in some cases, an indicated population increase or decrease of 20% or more could be falsely interpreted, such change being due to count-variability factors alone. Observer variability could be more effeciently tested by using the similar planes,flight technique, time of flight, background and flying conditions and possibly the same piolt. Any aerial counts by fixed-wing aircraft would be subject to the abovementioned variability factors -- trend counts as well as total however, would indicate that the variability encountered would probably be to a somewhat lesser degree. Recommendations: Continue air-ground correlation counts with emphasis on elk and use of the helicopter. Standardize as many factors as possible to specifical+y test observer differences. Consider possibilities of using similar aircraft, flight technique, etc. for annual trend counts. Continue emphasis on making as many counts as possible with aircraft prior to the ground drives. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: April, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator �April, 1961 -89- State of: Colorado Project W-38-R-14 No. REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Deer - Elk Investigations Job No. Work Plan No. 9 Title of Job: Population Period April Covered: JOB COMPLETION Estimated 4 Based on Sex and Age Ratios 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961 ABSTRACT Two pre- and two post-season sex- and age-ratio counts were made of the White River Elk Herd. These data were correlated with the 1960 card survey and check station kill figures, and projected to indicate a post-season population of 2,149 elk in this herd, the lowest estimate yet obtained. A total of 366 elk were sexed and aged (by dentition) at the Rifle and Idaho Springs big game check stations. These data indicated a differential age composition between bulls and cows, and about 36% annual mortality, from all causes, for the White River Elk Herd. A total of 1,209 elk were killed on the study area in 1960, the greatest kill on this area since 1956, and the Rifle and Idaho Springs stations checked 52.7% of them; 30.3% were aged by dentition. Sex - and age-ratios have been used annually in experimental census of the White River Elk Herd since 1957. Generally the technique involves the correlation of a known herd quantity with the kill figures and, by use of ratios or proportions, projecting for total population. The Main White River Elk Herd was chosen for this study because the extent of seasonal boundaries and movement had been.cde Li.mfted by past studies. In addition, the game management unit boundaries and herd unit boundaries coincide closely making it possible to use the annual elk-kill figures for the units involved. The Rifle and Idaho Springs Big Game Check Stations annually check 50 to 60 percent of the elk from the units involved. Age smaples and jaw collections have been.made of the White River animals since 1958. �-90- Correlation of card survey and check station kill data since 1957 has shown that there is very little bias by hunters in reporting elk kill by sex. Objective: To determine the applicability and accuracy of these techniques. Procedure: Four sex- and age-samples were made of the White River Elk Herd as l. July) 1960 pre-season cow-calf 2. September) 1960 pre-season sex-ratio count. 3· November) 1960 post-season sex-ratio count. 4 February) 1961 post-season sex-ratio count follows: count. 0 The July and September counts were made with a Cessna Helicopter and the November and February counts were made with a super-charged Hiller 12-E copter. All classification waS done by Dwight of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. Owens) a qualified aerial observer The original counts were recorded on a small tape-recorder and later extracted for analysis. This procedure improved observer accuracy and made possible a larger sample. Aerial photographs were taken of some of the larger groups later classification) and to check observer accuracy. of elk for The counting was confined to Areas E and X as found in the 1960 big-game map. This included game management units 23) 24) 25) 33 and 34 which covered the area contributing to the Main White River Herd. Special effort was made to count the complete area and to treat each of the five units equally. Thus) the total area involved was flown for each sample; not just concentration areas. Additional effort was made this year to increase sample size to 1)000 animals. As elk were encountered) they were sexed. Since the samples taken were of a binomial nature) the random distribution of the animals) as they occurred) was considered sufficient. Only total groups were classified. Age samples of the White River Elk were obtained at big game check stations during the 1960 hunting season. The aging technique used was developed by Dr. Don C. Quimby) Montana State University) Bozeman) Montana. �N ,I I SCALE: ~ • FIGUREI STUDY -- WHITE RIVER ELK AREA) COLORADO. STUDY AREA LEGEND GAME MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY _ HI G HWAY .,:::==:= SECONDARY ROAD RIVER~ CREEK~ PEA K .~~:1::,,J UNIT _ -------' �3.5nA- 3,0 ~ f- ~ o ....• d 5wu ~~ > 49 E.S. UNIT33 50 E.S. UNIT 34 51 E.S. 33834 52 A.O. 5!\ 400"'VAL. A.0.12813 KILL 54 550VAL. YEAR 55 56 AND TYPE 750VAL.I.150VAL. -----JFiGU R E_~~_~IOI_AL~WHLTE Rnt£B 261 33, a 34; 194 8 - 57 58 OF SEASON 1,200 VAL. 750VAL. 59 750YAL. 60 675VAL. 6" 62 63 ELK_Ji_EIi 0, UNIT S 12.13,23.24.25. I �V r-,r-......... ~ .00 ~ ~ Cl ~OO ~ ~ ~ i: --- ""-, 11'ln, I (/) (/) 400A W o (.) ::> (/) ~ I -....... --- --"- -~ I-" 20') IQQ An (/) z 0 I- ':'! I--. 600 ~ :> / 1\ 1\ V I'" ~ In· ~ I?nn l tocc lsoo 0 1\ ~ ...J ~ a:: w ~ 14nn ::> z 200 I "~-""-- / - TOTAL ~ »: I I I \ <, w ...J&QQ. I I ~o I I ~ - .._.- 1/ BULLS ~ ... _-- .._-------_._------ '- -. / ~\ V "'"'"- ~V ~EAF LINGS I"""""" ,.... 55 - CA VES 56 e7 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 YEAR 3.-- COMPARISON FIGURE SUCCESS MAIN RATIO. WHITE OF HUNTING VALIDATIONS. RIVER AND PRESSURE" KILL; UN ITS - 2 3, 24,25,33 1955 - a 34, �-.- 1,00 J 90 / en z ~ 80 .-« \ \ \ / 0 -l « > rOt 600 ~ V 50C -, 70 ~O -l -l ,.. q\\' \..S - " •.... _ r-,/" V 50 ~ u... 0 ~ .- ~ z40 w o a:: w .c.... ~O""S 30 / __- 1"t=..f:>,R\..~ ~ <, .....••II'"""'" ~ V -. •••••••••••• 20 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 0,:) YEAR FIGURE4.--COMPARISON OF VALIDATIONS AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF KILL. MAIN WHITE RIVER", UNITS 23.24 ..25,;33834; 1955- �70 60 50 ~ c,owc: ~~ •....~ - - cows - ~ ~ CALVES I-~ -- ~ AVE.46 IAVE.43 1-40 Z 1LI (.) 0::: CALI.£S 1LI 0..30 ", I ~ ro-- --~ AVE. 30 I bZ II ~ U.u..s..- _ - I""""" 20 ~ B I---~ 10 ----- ~- ~ ~ YEAR -57 TOTAL 449 CLASSIFIED 58 59 60 368 668 752 61 PRE- SEASON 62 , ~WE.II 57 58 59 60 607 769 541 1,1.20 POST- 61 SEASON FIGURE 5.-- PERCENT COMPOSITION OF PRE- AND POSTSEXSEASON AND AGE- RATIO, MAIN WHITE RIVE R: 1957- 62 �1.00L~ , 9001Il~--~----~--~-----+----~----+-----~--~-- _ 8001r-~~-----+----~----+-----~---+----~----~---- 700j-~~-----r----~----+---~~---+----~----~--~ ~ ~C~--~-----T-----r----+-----~--~-----+----~-w III ::E :::> z 500~~--~~----r---~-----+----~----+-----~--~--~ 1\ , 40e~~~~~-r----~----+-----~---+----~----+---~ 300~-+---~"'-+-----+-------+--l-----+------+---- '~~- <, 2001r---~-----+----~~--+-----~--~----~----~--~ I" ~ IOO.!-------+----~..•• .-+-~---=-~--'_--+-------+-------'~"""...---+-~-------+---.. -----j-------+-----III YEARL. bR 3. 2 DEATH 5 AG E 4 FIGURE 6.-- MORTALITY MAIN WHITE COHORT OF RATE ~ --............:~ ~ 6 AND SURVIVAL RIVER AGE SAMPLE) LOOO ANIMALS 1960. I 8 7 9 CURVE S., BASED ON __ �7.00( G,OOP AVE. ANNUAL INCRE~30% 5.0(~O LIGHT CALF MORTALITY (NE <, 0::: W ID ~ 4 O( 00 .) J r- __ AVE. H~NTER 25% aWOUNDING LOSS-IO% lv l ~~ 1 Z l --- 1--- _ -- ---- KMOD. AND 3.0L U J WINTER OTHER L OSSES J I ~ --- 1--- II - ---- - - -.+- 2,00 P I,OOw JAN. JUNE 1957 OCT. JAN. JUNE 1958 OCT. JAN. JUNE 1959 OCT. JAN. JUNE 1960 FIG U R E 7. - - I NO I CAT ED LIFE EQUATION FOR THE MAIN WHITE RIVE R ELK HERO;BASEO ON AVAILABLE FACTUAL OAT AI I 957 - 60. OCT �-- I--- 12 II w 0: U I « '.w ----- U) ::> u, 9"""""" 0 8 _____ Vc_. U) ~ « 7 0 I :.:: ...J 6 w r-, -,- ---, \-\\ / / \/ 5 4 7•... 60 \ z 0 r« Ol \ N ...J r- ::> rz w (.) 40 I \ r\- -- f----- 0: W Q. 30 ~V~32_ - --- _ \,,./ 20 ~ "I X w 0_ zU) -w J:J: r-0 ~~ 00: <.!) -, V· 3 1\ 2~ ~ "\ V .. --;;;; '\ I YEAR 55 56 57 58 59 10 16 23 26 NO. TRAN. 3 FIGURE BROWSE 8.-- WINTER 33834; 1955- SPECIES. RANGE MAIN 60 TRANSECT WHITE RIVER. 61 62 63 ANALYSIS. KE Y UNITS 23.24.25. 64 �-91- It is based on replacement of the incisors and premolars (up to 3 years) and progressive wear of the molors and premolars (after 3 years). Only the lower jaw (mandible) is used for aging by this technique. Some other characteristics noted which helped to supplement and verify the age c~assifications were size, coloration and antler development. Jaw boards were also used to standardize the classifications. The total kill for this herd is extracted annually from the game management card-retrun (projected) kill for the respective units involved. It is then compared with the check station kill figures to determine hunter bias in reporting kill by sex. POPULA.TION ESTIMATES BASED ON SEX AND AGE RATIOS John T. Harris Results: Pre-Season Counts -- The 1960 pre-season cow~calf and sex-ratio counts were made from Sweetwater Lake, a resort area on the eastern side of the study area. The cow-calf counts were conducted from July 14 through the 17th. and the bull-cow counts were made from September 26 to 29th. Results were as follows: July -- 675 (65.9%) cows and 377 (34.1%) calvesj total - 1,052 September -- 91 (12%) bulls, 127 (17%) spikes, 325 (43%) cows, 209 (28%) calvesj total - 752 In July, several large herds of 100 to 300 animals were observed, and several large groups of 10 to 20 bulls were seen. Most of the elk were found on the north portion of the White River Units within the Flat Tops Wilderness kxee.. A substantial increase in the number of animals seen in the Sleepy Cat and Pagoda Peak Areas was also evident. Total helicopter time spent on the July counts was 13 hours and 5 minutes including cross-country both ways. In September, most of the animals were found on the north portion of the study area as in July. The rut was on and almost all herds seen were near the timbered n:bim· of the Flat Tops Wilderness Area and adjacent high country. This made counting difficult since the elk, being near cover, would run for the timber upon approach of the coptei, Total copter time spent in counting was 9 hours, 50 minutes. On both the July and September counts, early morning flights were the most productive. Most flights were started at daylight (about 4:30 AM) and were completed about 7:30 AM. Evening ~lights were attempted but discontinued because of poor light and failure of the elk to move out into the open parks until too late. �Post-Season Counts -- The post-season counts were conducted from Glenwood Springs on the southern boundary, and Meeker on the western boundary of the study area. The November flights were made from November 29 to December 2nd. and the March flights were made from Eebruary 21 to March 2nd. Results of these flights were as follows: Nobember 30 (3%) bulls, 63 (7%) spikes, 451 (47%) cows and 409 (43%) calves; total - 953 March ---- 35 (3%) bulls, 56 (5%) spikes, 522 (47%) cows and 507 (45%) calves; total - 1,120 In November, the major concentrations of elk were observed on the northside units in the South Fork, lower Beaver and lower Lost Creek areas. One bunch of approximately 250 elk was observed at the confluence of Lost Solar Creek with the South Fork. Lesser concentrations were observed on the southside units on No-Name Creek, the north side of Storm King Mountain and the Deep Creek-Sweetwater Creek Divide. A. definate downward migration was evident this year as compared to the 1959 November counts when the elk were found in essentially the same locations and at the same elevations as observed during the pre-season September counts. A relatively low number of bulls seen per cow became evident as the counts progressed. This was the first year that this became obvious. Total copter time spent on these counts was 9 hours, 50 minutes, not including cross-country time. The March post-season count was made again to supplement and confirm the November count, with special attention to the cow-calf ratio. As usual, .about three-fourths of the elk were found on the north-side units 23 and 24, some up to 11,000 feet. A. total of 17 wounded elk were observed during these counts. The March count data corraborated the November data with respect to the low number of bull seen per cow. Both counts, involving classification of over 2,000 animals, indicated that mature bulls (older than spikes) comprised only about 3% of the herd -- most of these were small-antlered two- and three-year olds. Very few trophy-sized animals were observed, and spikes did not appear too numerous. Total copter time spent on these counts was about 15 hours. weather delayed these counts at intervals. Inclement The March counts were taken throughout the day, weather and air conditions permitting. Since the elk were on winter range, the early and late flights were not necessary to see a 6.ufficient number of animals. Due to a relatively light winter this year, they were not as concentrated as they normally are at this time of year. �-93- Kill·-- The 1960 elk kill from the hunter card survey was compiled for the five units involved. In addition, the check station kill figures for these units were compiled to check and adjust the total precentage kill by sex and age. The figures are tabulated as follows: Table 1 -- Kill figures, by unit, from the 1960 card return* and check station survey, White River Units, Areas E and X. Unit No. 23 24 25 33 Bulls Cows Calves Total 271 24 156 451 308 112 10 430 39 25 67 3 107 43 150 '34 89 22 ,111 Total 814 358 r;209 37 Percent 67.3 29·6 100.0 3·1 'Check Station Kill: Total 439 167 31 637 Percent 2q:,3 68·9 4.8 100.0 *Game management projected kill from late card returns. Perceht 37 36 6 12 .. 9 100 , , , .. 100 The total elk kill in this area last year (1959) was 964 with 500 validations. There were 550 validations issued for this area in 1960. The total kill this year (1,209) was 23% above an average of the last three years (982) . A. total of 52.7% of the White River elk were checked through the Rifle and Idaho Springs Check Stations this year. Comparative figures for past years were 55·9% in 1957, 52.2% in ~958 and 62.2% in 1959. The R~f.~e Check Station checked 368 or 58% and the Idaho Springs Station ch~cked269 or 42%. The percentages checked by these two stations are comparable with figures since 1957. The percentage kill by sex and age from the check stations is considered the most accurate since the animals are sexed and aged by department personnel. Comparison of these data with projected card-return data since 1957 has indicated that sex and age reported by the hunters is sufficiently accurate in most cases. The percentage kill from check station and card returns for the 1960 season is given as follows: Bulls Check Station Kill Card Return Kill Cows 68.9 2b.3 67·3 29·6 Calves 4.8 3·1 As usual, the card return kill percentages indicate a tendency of hunters to report calves as cows rather than call them calves. �Discussion: 'The results of any census technique based, on ratios are no better than the raw data fed into the system or formula. The pre- and postseason classification counts are nesessarily samples of the population and are subject to the various biases and shortcomings inherent in sampling any population of wild animals. At present, there is no suitable statistical method for measuring the accuracy of these samples. The kill data from card returns, from the standpoint ofclassificat:Lon accuracy, is considered sufficient. In addition, the size of the kill, from the standpoint of formula, affects the final population estimate to a much lesser degree than the change in pre- and post-season sex ratios. However, future emph~sis will be placed on proper analysis and interpretation of such post-mortem data. This year's total post-season population estimate of 2,149 is the lowest yet obtained for the White River Herd by this technique. It may be compared with 2,952 in 1957, 3,161 in 1958 and 7,102 in 1959· Since all other known factors relating to this herd indicate a fairly stable population from 1957 to 59, it appears that this technique is resulting in estimates of too low precision to be of management value. This may not be the case, however, with better interpretation of the data, and close correlation of vital statistics from the classification counts with the age-composition data. The age-composition data indicates an overall mortality rate (36%) which would appear to be fairly high when compared with other known facts relative to this herd. This could be due, however, to the relatively poor sample of the older age classes. There were less than 10% differences in the pre-season July and September cow-calf counts and the post-season November and March bull-cow and cow-counts. This would indicate that the basic mechanics of the tecbJJ.iquehave been imporved probablY due to larger sample size and better area coveIlp,ge. The similarity in the July and September counts would indicate that, for management purposes, only September counts should"be',su:E'ficien"t; ..'"The best time for the post-season counts appears to be more closely associated with the type of winter or wintering conditions (weather, snow depth, etc.) rather than any given date. Recommendations: 1. Continue trying to classify 1,000 animals for the pre- and postseason ratios. 2. Try to obtain a larger age-composition sample. 3. Analyze age-composi tcLon sample by sex, if possible. 4. Obtain statistical advice relative to analysis and interpretation of sex-ratio and age-composition data. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: April, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Assistant Coordinator �April, 1961 -91JOB Cm~PLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS STATE OF PROJECTS COLORADO --------------------------------- Project No. W-37-R-14 Work Plan No.1; ; ---------------------------- Title of Job: Game Bird Survey Job No. 1 Pre-nesting Studies (preparation for application pheasant crowing-count of the census method and sex ratio counts in management) • Period Covered: April 1, 1960, through March 31, 1961. Abstract: Specific types of information needed to determine changes in the pheasant breeding population were recorded on specially devised forms. Analyses of these data showed improvement in pheasant sex ratios during the winter of 1960 (more hens per cocks than during previous years), but some reduction in over-all pheasant numbers. The greatest reduction in pheasants appears to have occurred on the dry1ands of the northeast and east-central area. Statewide breeding populations were comparable to those in 1959. Objectives: (1) To establish permanent, representative crowing-count census routes. (2) To establish permanent zones or areas for making sex ratio counts. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in the standardized crowing-count and sex-ratio count procedure. (4) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. (5) To eventually turn crowing eounts and sex-ratio counts over to managemen t., Techniques Used: The majority of time on this job was spent on objectives No. 4 and 5. Specific activities involved: (1) analysis of pheasant census data to determine types of information that should be recorded annually, and (2) assembling 1960 census data for use in compilation of state-wide reports. �-~Pheasant Pre-nesting Studies Wayne W.' Sandfort Findings: Fonns, shown in Figure 1, were prepared for use in recording specific types of pheasant census data obtained during pre-nesting studies. Types of data needed to provide complete information for use in all types of analyses are as follows: A. Crowing-Count Data 1. 2. Number of stations per route (from which count obtained) Number of counts made on each route 3. Total calls per route (based on highest counts per station) 4. Average calls per two-minute period * B. .Sex-Ratio Data 1. Winter Counts a. Total miles driven b. Total 5unutes during counts c. Total hens d. Total cocks e. Total unclassified birds f. Total pheasants g. Average number of hens per cock * h. Birds per mile * i. Birds per minute * 2. Spring Counts a. Total miles driven b. Total minutes during counts c. Total hens d. Total cocks e. Total unclassified birds f. Total pheasants g. Average number of hens per cock * .h, Birds per mile * i. Birds per minute * All types of data tabulated above have been, or should be, recorded on summary fOrmS for specific management units, for game management regions, and statewide. Types of data marked with an asterick are used to determine actual trends in the population or to determine effectiveness in harvest. T,ypes of data not so marked are used in calculating or determining· population trends and sex ratios. A summary of data for a portion of the types listed above, is given in Table 1. �-100Table l.--SUMMARY OF PHEASANT BREEDING POPULATION DATA, COLORADO, 1960. Crowing Breeding Count Population 1/ Sex Ratio Data Data Indices ..;.. . Hens/Oock Birds/M11e Biids/Minute Area Northeast Region Tablelands. and East-central South Platte Draiilage Southeast Region Southwest Region Northwe~t Region STATE-WIDE 2.85 9.859 2.756 42.4 163.2 2.54 1.93 2.96 1.21 3.072 2.322 7.034' .551 .897 .600 1.481 .143 34.3 23.1 15.2 8..4 121.4 67.7 60.2 18.6 28.8 106.8 2.71 5.094 1.368 Y Spring breeding population index based on the formula: P .C H = Spring breeding population index = Average calls per two-minute period P = C .;.CH = Average number of hens per cock (from winter sex ratio counts) Comparison of data in Table 1 with similar information for the years 1956-1959 (Shown in Tables 1-5, Quarterly Progress Report, Game Management-Federal Aid Division, April, 1960, pp.42-43) indicates there was some improvement in state-wide sex ratios (more divergence) when compared with previous years. The number of birds observed during winter sex ratio counts shoWed some decrease compared with 1959, as was the case with the state-wide crowing count index. The greatest reduction in pheasant numbers appeared to have occurred in the dry-farmed areas of the tablelands and east-central portion of the state. Improved sex ratios compensated for reduction in total breeding numbers and the state-wide breeding population in 1960 was comparable to that of the preceding year. Recommendations: It is recommended that work continue on final assembly of sex-ratio and crow-count data and that sample, state-wide reports be prepared to show the manner by which data may be put to most effective use. These reports and preparation of a final publication, incorporating methods and procedures used in the pheasant inventory system, will continue to be given consideration under Segment 15 of the Game Bird Survey project. Gilbert N. Hunter state Game Manager ......;A~p:;:.:n:.;:·:.;:1.L,_1...::9~6:.::l......; _ Prepared by: Da te: .__ Wayne W. Sandfort Approved by: �-lQ1- (TYPE OF DATA) Year Name of Management Area Nortneast RegIon {Taolelande ana:East-central Area Amhurst Paoli : Bonny Management Area : Burlington Area (north) Eckley-Yuma Fleming-Leroy . Holyoke-Flem:ing : : Julesburg-Amhurst : : ..o· :. Lone Star-Akron •.•.. : Seibert-Flagler : Wages-Clarkville-Haxtun .. : : 'Irq-Vernon . ALL AREAS IN REGI ON : ". · · ··· ·· · 0 0 0 0 0 · · · · · · · · · 0 Northeast Region (South Platte Drainage) Balzac-Snyder-Narrows Brikhton-F irestone Derby-Aurora-Littleon Evans-Gilcres~illiken : GreeleY.-Eaton.Seve ranee Julesburg-Crook Keenesburg-Prospect V.-Hudson Lafayette-Longmont-Valmont Me ad-Be rthoud-Love land Proctor-Sterl ing waterton-Morrison .. Winds or-Timnath-We llington Woodrow-Brush-Fort Morgan ALL AREAS IN REGION . o· ..· · · · · ·· ·•.· · ·· ·· · · : 0 0 : 0 : : : · : : 0 · · : 0 · ..: 0 · 0 · · · 0 · •. ·· · 0 · · · · · · · ·· · · : · 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southwest Region Del ta-Cedaredge DeI~Olathe-Montrose Nucla Bedrock-Paradox ·•. 0 ·.. : .. 0 · Southeast Region 0 .0 0 : 0 0 ·0 St. Charles M.-Avondale-Vineland Cheraw-Rocky Ford-Hawley Fort Lyon-Las Animas-Keller Lamar-Bristol-Holly Konantz-Stonington-Midway ALL AREAS IN REGION 0 0 .0 : 0 : 0 · · · · : ..· · ·•.•. · · •. : · · Figure l.--Form For Recording Pheasant Census Da ta-- (Cont I d on ~rext Page ). 0 �-102;. Southwest Region (Continued) Cortez-Lewis Bayfield-Allison LaGarita-Center-Monte Vista Monte Vista-Morgan-Bountiful .: ALLAREAS IN REGION·----------------------- . ·· ·· · · : : . ~~ __~ __~ I : · . I ~ Northwest Region Rifle-Silt Grand Junction-Fruita-Ma~ck~ ALLAREAS IN REGION · · .· ~ __~ __~~ __~ __~ ..· ~ ___* AIlJ AREAS IN STATE Figure l.--Fonn For Recording Pheasant Census Data--(Cont'd FromPreceding Page). �April, 1961 -103- STATE ~ JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS ~CO~L~O~RA~D~O~ _ Project No. __ W~-...:;3....:.7_-.;;.;R-_l_4~; Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. 1 ----------------------- Job No. 3 Title of Job: Pheasant Brood Surveys. Period Covered: April 1, 1960, through March 31, 1961. Abstract: Data from pheasant brood surveys were assembled for the state and recorded on specially prepared forms. Analyses of these data indicate there was some reduction in pheasant numbers in the dryland portions of northeastern Colorado and in northwestern Colorado during 1960, when compared to 1959. Some improvement waS shown in other areas of the state. Data indicate statewide pheasant populations during the fall of 1960 were up slightly over 1959. Objectives: (1) To standardize methods for ascertaining annual pheasant production. To establish permanent, representative brood-count routes in (2) all Colorado pheasant range. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in the standardized brood-count procedure. (4) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. (5) To eventually turn pheasant brood surveys over to management. (6) Preparation of final report on this phase of study. Techniques Used: Activities on Job No.3 of the pheasant work plan during the project year involved: (1) analysis of pheasant brood-count data to determine specific types of information that should be recorded annually, and (2) assembling 1960 census data for use in compilation of state-wide reports. ��-lQ-5Pheasant Brood Surveys Wayne W. Sandfort Findings: The same type of forms as shown in Figure 1 of the Job completion Report for Work Plan 1, Job. No.1, this publication, were used in recording information obtained during pheasant brood counts. Specific types of broodcount data needed for complete analysis of reproductive success and population trends are shown below. Types of data marked with an asterick indicate actual indices that can be used in determining population trends. Other types of data are used in calculating these indices. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k, Total miles driven Total minutes during counts Total hens without broods (broodless hens) Total broods Total number of hens wi thou t broods, plus t~tal broods (index of total hens) Total hens observed Total cocks Total young Total unclassified pheasants Total pheasants observed Average number of young per hen (number of young divided by index of total hens) * 1. Average number of young per brood * ---m. Per cent of hens wi th broods (successful breeders) * n , Birds per mile * o. Birds per minute * p , Broods per mile * Most types of data shown above have been recorded in the past. Attention, however, has not been given to the number of broodless hens. This has resulted .in calculation of young-per-hen figures based on the actual number of hens observed. Erroneous young-per-hen indices have resulted and no information is available on the per cent of successful breeders. Data from brood counts in 1960 are given in Table 1. Comparison of young-perhen data with similar information contained in Tables 1-5, Quarterly Progress Report, Game Management-Federal Aid Division, April, 1960, pp. 51-53, show a slight reduction in state-wide reproduction success compared to 1959. Other information (birds per mile, birds per minute, broods per mile, and the fall population index) indicates a slight increase in state-wide pheasant populations occurred in 1960, compared to 1959. Increases are indicated for the South Platte drainage and the southeast and southwest regions, with decreases in the important tablelands area and in the northwest region. ��April, 1961 -107- STATE CF COLORADO Project No. W-37-R-14 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Work Plan No. _1"", _P_h_e_a_s_an_t_s Title of Job: ; Game Bird Survey ; Job No. 5 Pheasant hunter check. Period Covered: April 1, 1960, through March 31, 1961. Abstract: Work was continued during the project year, April 1, 1960, through March 31, 1961, on assembling pheasant check station data from 1947 to the present time. Some progress was made, but considerable work remains on analysis and preparation of material for final publication. Objective: To prepare a final report of Federal Aid Check Station activities 1947-1954, and to incorporate additional data for the period 1955-1960. Procedure: Work during the fiscal year, April 1, 1960, through March 31, 1961, involved continuation of the gathering' of harvest information. Specific attention was given to recording: (1) opening date, (2) opening day of the week, (3) length of season, (4) shooting hours, (5) bag and possession limits, (6) number of hunters, (7) total bag, including adults, juveniles, and unclassified birds, (8) birds per hunter, (9) birds per hour, and (10) the per cent of young and adults in the bag. These data were recorded for specific check stations within the state. Findings: Al though some progress ias been made on gathering of pheasant check station data, considerable work remains on analysis and preparation of material for final publication. Specific information is not included here to eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort. Recommendations: Use of pheasant check-station data obtained from 1947 to the present time will be possible only when these data have been completely compiled and analyzed. It is recommended work continue along this line under segment 15 of the Game Bird Survey project. Prepared bys Wayne W. Sandfort Approved by: Date: April, 1961 _ Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��AJ?ril, 1961 -109- .roo COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE OF C~o:;.;;LO=!RADO;..;.;;..; _ Project No. W-37-R-14 Work Plan No._· l~,_Phea_s_an __t_s Title of Job: Pheasant range mapping. Period Covered: Personnel: April Game Bird Survey _ Job No. 10 1, 1960, through March 31, 1961. Roger L. Evans and Wayne W. SanMort Abstract: Planimeter work on pheasant density maps, which show irrigated ~ ~~armed areas, elevations, and precipitation zones, was carried out to determine square miles of range for these categories by density class. Data are tabulated. for eastern Colorado, but analysis is incomplete. Generally , it can be seen that highest pheasant densities in eastern Colorado occur on dryland areas at elevations between 3,000 and 4,000 feet, where the annual precipitation ranges from 16 to 18 inches. OJ:f,Jectives t (1) (2) (3) (4) To assemble all available information on pheasant range and distribution. To complete pheasant range mapping. To compile data and prepare distribution and density maps of Colorado pheasant populations. To show correlation between pheasant distribution and denSity and soils, elevation, and precipitation (by use of overlays). To prepare a final report on this activity. Proceduress Pheasant range mapping has been carried out as described by the outline contained in the Colorado Quarterly Report, April, 1960, p. 60 Although objectives have generally been fulfilled, some work remains ons (1) final printing of the state-wide pheasant density map (revised for a specific printing process), (2) planimeter work on the maps of the northwest and southwest regions to determine square miles of pheasant range within specific precipitaion belts for irrigated and dry-farmed areas and for various population densities , and square miles of range for various densit1a. and elevations (l,OOO-foot contour intervals), (3) planimeter work to determine square miles of pheasant range containing specific soil types for various population densities, and (4) preparation of material for final pUblication. Specific work under segment 14 was confined to determination of square miles of range of various densities for specific precipitation belts and elevation ranges within the southeast and northeast regions. Activities involved detailed planimeter work on map overlays covering 30 eastern Colorado counties. �-liOPheasant Range Mapping Wayne W. Sandfort Findings: Principal data obtained during work on this job are summarized in Tables I and 2. Although analysis is incomplete, general inspection of information in these tables shows the highest pheasant densities in eastern Colorado occur on dry-farmed areas at elevations between 3,000 and 4,000 feet, where annual precipitation ranges from 16-18 inches. Pheasant densities generally decrease as higher elevations are encountered. �Table 1.-SQUARE MILES OF PHEASANT RANGE FOR VARIOUS POPULATION DENSITIES AND PRECIPITATION ZONES WITHIN IRRIGATED AND DRYLAND AREASz EASTERN COLORADO, 1957. Ppt , Zone Sg,uare Miles of Pheasant Range (Av, annual AII Classes cIass 2 r-aanf'e.LL in cIass 4 cIass 3 cIass 0 cIass 5 Irr. nryIana inches) Irr. I>ryIana Irr. I)ryIana Irr. l)ryIana Irr. I)ryIana Irr. DryIana 10-11 11-12 12-13 1)..,.14 14-15 15... 16 16-17 17-18 18-19 20-30 TOTALS 137.6 712.0 419.2 530.6 657.6 392.9 181.8 161.7 0.0 6.8 3200.2 0.0 13.2 10.5 606.8 0.4 233.9 26.3 618.4 592.3 278.0 95.0 1653.3 68.9 1429.4 429.6 181.3 167.4 1785.3 114.0 . 331.9 1754.7 667.2 4.2 1340.9 0.0 14.0 43.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 8840·.4 2219.4 1400.9 0.0 34.2.4 26u.l 232.4 170.3 25.6 76.0 10.5 0.0 0.0 1121.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.2 8.3 174.5 446.4 261.0 0.0 906.4 0.0 30.5 81.2 3.7 32.8 67.8 157.7 61.6 0.0 0.0 435.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.5 3.1 76.9 188.1 296.8 0.0 581.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 141.9 412.1 0.0 0.0 554.0 150.8 10.5 1691.7 234.3 1356.8 644.7 1044.7 1748.3 1290.3 1531.0 667.6 1964.1 529.5 2479.9 238.0 3054.7 0.0 615.6 0.0 6.8 6976.2 12283.1 I 8 I �-ll2- Table 2.--SQUARE MILES OF PHEASANT RANGE FOR VARIOUS CALSSES OF POPULATION DENSITY AND ELEVATION.! EASTERN COLORADO, 1957. Elevation (lOOO-foot Square Miles of Pheasant Range intervals) Class 0 Class) Class j Class 4 Class 2 All Class 3,000-4,000 2818 1022 652 523 554 5570 4,000-5,000 7308 2027 1131 460 10926 5,000-6,000 1770 554 244 2600 33 6,000-7,000 117 18 135 7 000-8,000 28 28 Ail Elevations 12,041 3,021 2,027 1,010 19,2)9 »4 Recommendations: Specific recommendations are not possible until final analysis of data has been made. This analysis will be included in the final report on this study. Prepared by: Wayne W. Sandfort Date: April, 1961 Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator .1 �-1l3JOBCOMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE<F C;;;..O~L~ORADO;.:;;,;;:;;;...;;... _ Project No. W-37-R-14 ,• Work Plan No.3· ~---------------------' Ti tIe GameBird Survey Job No. 2 Mapping of sage grouse range. Period Covered: April 1, 1960 to )larch 31, 1961. Abstract: Data gathered on distribution of sage grouse and sagebrush and density of sage grouse were compiled and transferred to 48-inch Colorado state maps. The detail on these large maps including, Forest Service lands, contour lineS, county lines, towns, streams, and highways, helped in accurately transferring information from the original !-inch scale county maps. The amount of detail present on these maps made the reduced 8-inch by ll-inch maps unsuitable for printing. Objectives: (1) To assemble all available information on sage grouse range and distribution. (2) To complete mapping of sage grouse range. (3) To compile data and prepare distribution and density maps of Colorado sage grouse populations. TeChnhfpOSUsed: The sage grouse distribution and the denSity classification were tbBsized for a fall population from number of birds observed and place of observation. Data on occurrence and relative abundance were obtained during strutting ground counts, brood counts, hunting season checka, ground and aerial big-game counts, and interviews with ranchers and Department personnel. The amount of range available provided insight into possible range and densities in some instances. Where data were limited, guesstimates were made"on numbers and dens! ties of grouse. Sagebrush range was traced and planimetered from Soil Conservation Service range type maps. Findings: Information gathered in 196~6l is reported in abstract only. Time ordinari~ allotted to completion reports has been used in compiling a final report covering all sage grouse work done in Colorado on distribution, inventory, and harvest. A rough draft of this final report is partially complete and will include work done to April 1961. A new job, Work Plan III, Job 6, has been established to allow for complet~on and publication of this report during 1961. Recommendations: Final report completed and published. Prepared by: Glenn E. Rogers Date: April, on sage grouse work in Colorado should be Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter state GameManager 1961 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coorarnator ��April, 1961 -1:J-5JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS STATE OF __ ..;;C~O.;;;;LO.;;,;RA~D~O _ Project No. ~W~-~3~7-~R~-_14~ Work Plan No. ~3 Title PROJECTS ; _ Game Bird Surveys Job No. 3 Breeding season studies, sage grouse. Period Covered: April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961. Abstract: Sage grouse census handbooks were completed and delivered to Department personnel. A total of 2,300 sage grouse cocks was counted on 87 strutting erounds in Colorado during 1960. The Northwest region led with 1,012 cocks on 50 strutting gr-ounds, followed by the Nor-theas t region with 861 cocks on 23 grounds, and the Southwest region third with 427 cocks on 14 strutting grounds. Objectives: (1) To locate and map as many sage grouse strutting grounds as possible. To select permanent, representative strutting grounds which can be counted annually; these counts to be used in determining changes in breeding population from year to year. (3) To prepare forms and record books for systematic recording of information. (4) To instruct other Department personnel in a standardized method for determining trends in the sage grouse breeding population. (5 ) To eventually turn over sage grouse strutting ground counts to management. (2 ) Techniques Used: Department personnel and local ranchers were interviewed as to location of strutting grounds. Roads were cruised from before daylight to about one hour after sunrise in sage grouse ranf,e, with stops at approximately one-mile intervals to listen for strutting birds. Aerial flights were made over saLe grouse areas. All strutting grounds were counted at least once. When possible, several counts were made with varying times, personnel, and methods. Maps were made of the strutting grounds from aerial photographs obtained from the Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service, and the Commodity Stabilization Service. Vvritten descriptions of the roads used and mileage traveled were attached to the maps. Findin[s: Information gathered in 1960-61 is reported in abstract only. Time ordinarily allotted to completion reports has been used in compiling a final report covering all sare grouse work done in Colorado on distribution, inventory, and harvest. A rouf,h draft of this final report is partially complete and will include work done to April 1961. A new job, Work Plan III, Job 6, has been established to allow for completion and publication of this report during 1961. �-1l6Recommendations: Final completed and published. Prepared Date: bYI report on sage grouse work in Colorado should be ~G.:..le;;..:nn~..;:;E~ •....:.:R.:..ol5.ge;;..:r;..;s;....... ~·APproved April, by: Gilbert N. Hunter S tate Game Liiager 1961 F. C. Kleinsclmitz Asst. Coorarnator ' �, ' JOBCOMPLETION REfoRT I, INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATEOF ~ject CO;...;LO-.....,;RADO..._.._ No. ~~w-~37~-~R~-14~--------~--j Work Plan No. _3~ Title ~~~~B~i~rd~S~u~rv_e~y ; ~Jo_b~N~o_.~, _ _ ~S~ag~e~gr~o~u~s~e_b~ro~o~d~s~u~rv~e~y~s~.~ _ Period Covereds April 1, 1960 to )larch 31, 1961. Abstract: Sage grouse census handbooks were completed and delivered to Department personnel. During 1960, 56 counts were made on 21 brood count routes with 2,126 sage grouse counted. Of the 2,126 sage grouse counted, 692 were adult, 994 were young, and 440 were unclassified as to age. Objectives: (1) To standardize methods for ascertaining annual sage grouse production. ( 2) To establish permanent, representative brood count routes in all Colorado sage grouse range. (3) To instruct other Department personnel in a standardized brood count procedure. (4) To prepare fonns and record books for systematic recording of infonnation. (5) To eventually turn over sage grouse brood survey to management. Techniques Useds Departmental personnel and local ranchers were interviewed to ascertain location of sage grouse. As many trips as possible were made in the ear~ morning and in the late evening OR roads through sage grouse range. Records of sage grouse observed, age and number of birds, time of observation, and mileage traveled were kept from each trip. Findings: Infonnation gathered in 1960-61 is reported in abstract only. Time ordinarily allotted to completion reports has been used in compiling a final report covering all sage grouse work done in Colorado an distribution, inventory, and harvest. A rough draft of this final report is partially complete and will include work done to April 1961. A new job, Work Plan III, Job 6, has been established to allow for completion and publication of this report during °1961. Recommendations: Final report completed and published. ~pared Date : by: Glenn E. Rogers April, 1961 on sage grouse work in Colorado shouid be Approved bys Gilbert N. Hunter State GameManager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. cooratnator ��JOB COMPLETIOO REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS state of COLORADO --------~---------------- Project No. W-37-R-14 j ------~~~~--------- 4 (lame Work Plan No. ----------------------- Title of Job: Chukar Partridge Production Studies Period Covered: July 2 through AUgust 16, 1960 "j Bird Survey Job No.2 Abstract: Counts of chukar broods and adult chukar s were made between July 2 and August 16, 1960 in 52 major chukar areas within seven countie! in the state. A total of 2,109 birds was observed in 39 areas, with an age ratio of 3.70 young-per-adult. This ratio indicates reproduction in 1960 was the second highest of a six-year period of record. The average brood size in 1960 was 9.0, also the second highest on record. No correlation was noted between the age of chicks and average brood sizesj probably because of an inadequate sample. The peak of chukar hatching in 1960 appears to have occurred during the period of June 17-25, about a week later than in 1959. Good chukar production in 1960 appears to have been related to above normal precipitation and temperatures in February and March, which resulted in ample green feed, apparently necessary during the reproductive period. Data obtained during this investigation have been useful in determining success in development work with the chukar. These data also prompted recommendation! for a 2O-day hunt during the fall of 1960. Objectives: (1) (2) TO determine annual production qy chukars. To determine the factors or conditions responsible for reoroductive success. '}echniquesUsed: Counts of young and adult chukars were made in fifty-eight areas during mid-summer, 1960, to determine reproductive euccess qy these birds. SurTey techniques and specific typee of data obtained are described in the Quarterly Report of the Game Management-Federal Aid Division for October, 1959, p. 99. ��CHUKAR PARTRIDGE PROD~CTION STUDIES Wayne W. Sand£ort F1nding~1 Principal data obtained during thi~ investigation pertain to Toung-per-adult ratios, average brood sizes, the peak hatching period, and factors responsible for reproductive success. Information pertaining to these four categories is presented in the following sections. Young-per-Adult Ratio I ~ Counts of 2,109' chukar s were made in 39 areas during late summer, 1960. 'lhisgroup was composed ot 1,655 Toung, 447 adults and seven unclassified chukars, giving a figure of 3.70 young-par-adult during the 1960 breeding season (~ble 1). As sho1ll'l in 'nible2, reproduction during 1960 was the second highest of a six..;yearperiod of record, being surpassed onlT bT the spectacular hatch of 1958. Table l.--CHUKAR PARTRIDGE PRODUCTION COUNTS! JULY 2 THROUGH AOOUST l6l 1960. Date of Birds O>served Young/Adult County Area Count YoungldUlts Uhclass. Total Ratio Delta Alkali Creek 6 41 7 35 Angel' 5 &inch 7/30 48 39 9 Escalante Canyon 272 369 7/2~ 97 Hargrave's Ranch 6 10 1/23 4 Indian Rock ~nch 26 8/13 31 5 Little Peach valley 2 1 1/30 3 North Fork Jell's Oulch(Guzzler)1/26 11 15 4 62 Oak creek 1/27 69 7 Smith Fork B 7/29 46 54 Jell's Gulch (Guzzler Ill) 21 125 146 1;'29 Well's Gulch (Guzzler /12) 6 1/2B 39 45 Well'e Gulch (Guzzler 17) 14 25 7/27 39 Sub-totals 686 810 3.73 184 Garfield Camp Gulch (Guzzler) East Salt Creek (Douglas Pass) Parachute Creek Prairie carlTon Rifle Creek ~8t Salt Creek (Baxter Pass) Sub-totals 7/26 1/26 B/2 7 8/26 7/11 Bo 35 3B 21 19 11 2 21 174 3 $6 101 54 49 2 21 3 230 3.11 ��-123- Table 2.--SUMMARY OF CHUKAR PARTRIDGE YOUN~PER-ADULT COLORADO, 1955-1960. No. of young No. of Adults Year Observed Observed 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 ALL YEARS 186 219 186 1424 676 1655 4346 RATIOS, WESTERN Young/l00 159 165 100 292 400 102 132 186 488 169 441 310 218 1563 Adult~ Average Brood Size Chukar partridge broods averaged 9.0 young-per-brood during 1960; the second highest average of a five-year period (Table 3). Both average brood sizes and young-per-adult ratios indicated good reproductive success in 1960, giving good correlation between these two indices. As indicated in the Quarterly Progress Report, name Management-Federal Aid Division, October, 1959, p, 102, this correlation j s often not apparent. Young-peradult ratios, however, provide the most accurate measurement of reproductive success. Table 3. --SUMHARY OF CHUKAR BROOD-COUNT 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 ALL YEARS DATA, COLORADO, 1956-1960. 53 448 14 52 116 568 82 728 43 388 244 8.5 8.3 10.9 8.9 9.0 10.2 Data tabulated in Table 4 show relationships between age of chicks and average brood sizes. It is Logi cal to assume that broods would conta i n fewer chicks as the birds aged, because of mortality from various causes. Figures in Table 4, however, show brood sizes were high at the age of 11-20 days, and increased in numbers from 21 to 60 days. Obviously, data are inaccurate and unreliable, probcbly because of inadequate samp.l.e s for the various age classes. �-124- • Table 4.-CHUKAR PARTRIDGE BROOD SIZES AS RELATED TO AGE OF BROOm, WESTERN COLORADO, 1960. Number of Total Average Age in Days Broods Observed Number of young Brood Size 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 0 10 11 12 8 4 III 62 104 13 38 11.1 5.6 8.6 9.1 9.5 Peak Hatching Period Aging of young during brood counts and calculating apprOXimate hatching dates was employed in 1959 and 1960 to determi ne approximate hatching peaks for these years. As shown in Figure 1, the peak of hatch in 1960 appears to have occurred durjng the week of June 11-25, about one week later than in 1959. Factors Affectirig Reproductive Success As explained in previous reports, reproductive success by the chukar is dependent upon a complex of climatic conditions and their relationship to the production of green feed, orimarily, in the winter and spring months. Upon analysis of young-per-adult ratios and weather records for the paet several years, it is apparent that the conditions which make the difference between poor, fair, or good reproduction are QUite precise or epecfrf c , A good rain at a critical period in the late winter or early spring seems to make the difference between a poor or a good hatch. Just when green feed should be available is difficult to determine accurately, but it a ooear-e this is most important during February, March, and April. Follow1ng this period, it appears extreme drought conditions have little affect on reproductive success by the chukar and survival of the young. Information b,y Miller (1959) shows that the spectacular chukar hatch of 1958 was preceded by a wet fall in 1951. Green grasses were abundant during the fall and winter of 1951 and during early spring, 1958. Starting in March, 1958, however, one of the driest periods in western Colorado history started, and persisted, generally, until the winter of 1959-60. This drought was responsible for very low production by chukars in 1959. Although growth of grasses 1n the fall of 1959 was poor, above normal precipitation in February and March, 1960, in conjunction with warm temperatures (Table 5) apparently was sufficient to provide sufficient green feed to insure good reproduction 1n 1960. This brief break 1n the drought resulted in good chukar production in spite of the fact very dry weather followed in the months of vay, June, and July. �-125- 28 26 19.59 ---- 24 1960 22 20 18 ~ 16 \ 0 ~ ft.4 0 14 ,, \ .\ \ \ ,, , J.t 10 :z: \ I 12 i8 ,, , \ \ I \ I \ --- --~ \ \ 6 ,,, " ,,, 4 ,, , 2 'e- - - - - - - ..... "'..••..•. 0 May 30 June 1 June 8 June 17 - 16 - 2.5 June 26 - July 4 July July .5-13 14-22 •.. July 23Aug. 1 Hatch1nglnterval Figure l.--Peak of Chukar Partridge Hatching, We!!tern Colorado, 19.59-1960. �hble 5.-- MONTHLY WEATHER RECORDS, GRAND JUNCTION, .uOJ'lORADO, AlJG'O'ST, 1959, . Month Year August September October November December Je:r:Jll1J.r7 February 1959 Ma.roh April May June July !fHROUGH JULY, 1m PreciFitation Departure Inches f:romNormal 0.98 0.82 0.66 0·50 0.88 0.33 1.26 1.06 0·74 0·35 0.17 0·13 n n n ·n 1960 n "n II " " -0.22 -0.20 -0.18 -0.05 +0.20 ..0.27 +05.61 +0·~9 ...0,01 •... 033 ..0.28 ..0.66 Temperature Departure Average f:romNormal ·75·3 64.6 52.4 38.1 32.2 26.6 ~~:3 42.4 53·1 61.4 74.6 79·5 -0·3 -2·7 -2.0 -0·5 +3·7 +2.6 •.• 2.7 +1.2 +1.3 -0·7 +3.4 +1.3 Analys1s and Recommendat1ona1 Data obtained during the summerof 1960 has b'een V8!uable in determining success in development of chukar populations in various parts of the state. Farther insight of 1"actors responsible 1"or chukar production has been obtained. F1nd1ng.s1"romth1s study showedgood reproduction by chukars during 1960 and. :prompted.recommendations :1"ora 2O...(laychukar hunt during the 1"all of this year. ~8e recommendations were accepted and passed by the Gameand Fish Commissionand the chukar will be legal game f:romNovember5-24, 1960, with a bog lim1t of three birds and. a possession limit of six. Devel~t 01"huntable chukar populations in new areas ~f the state in recent years indicates there are still additional areas that should support these birds. Since production studies are perhaps the most important measure of success in development work, it is recommendedthese investigations continue throughout the duration 01"the stocking program. Literature Cited: Miller, .Tim. 1959. Chukar partridge production studies. Colorado G and F Dept. Quarterly Report, October, l?P. 99-107· l'J:epared by: WayneW. Sand:rort DateI April, 1961 Approvedby: Gilbert N. Hunter State GameManager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �April, ].961 -12~- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE OF C~o~l~o~r~a~d~o~ Project No. W-37-R .•• 14 Work Plan No. 4 Title of Job: _ Game Bird Survey Job No. 5 Location of Chukar Partridge Release Sites. Period Covered: June 1, 1960 through September 30, 1960 Abstract: Five general areas, containing 10 specific release sites, were selected for release of approximately 1,050 game farm chukars during late March or early April, 1961. Half of these releas~s will supplement previous plants, one release will be made in the vicinity of a new, artificial water development, and four groups of birds will be placed in new areas in attempts to further extend the range of chukars in southwestern Colorado and in the upper Colorado River area. Objectives: (1), (2) To locate suitable areas within the state for the release of wild-trapped and game-farm chukars. To obtain necessary written agreements or permissions from land-owners (private or federal) to assure necessary protection for birds released. Techniques Used: General areas within the state, where chukar have shown the best development, were determined from studies under Job No.2 (Chukar Partridge Production Studies), and Job No. 8 (Adaptability, Survival and Population Checks) of the chukar partridge Work Plan (4). Information available at present indicates areas for suitable chukar development are generally restricted to lower elevations in western Colorado, where there is an abundance of rough, rocky country, low precipitation, and mild winters. Although it appeared likely chukar populations could be developed along the eastern foothills of the Rocky Mouttains in the Canon C~~y~ea, adaptation of this bird here has been unfavorable. ]Wain areas where chukars have succeeded include: (1) the Gunnison River and tributaries in Montrose, Delta, and Mesa Counties, (2) the Dolores River and tributaries in Montrose, and Mesa Codnties, (3) the Grand Mesa foothIIIB and surr~g areas in Delta and .sa Counties, (4) the BookclillS Mountain Range in Mesa Iind Garfield Countles, and (5) the Brown's Park Area in Moffat CoUnty. With the exception of the White River Area, open hunting seasons have been held in all these areas. Searches for chukar release sites were made within major chukar areas mentioned above, with attention given to the policy of placing chukars within a reease area for three consecutive years. Success in development of huntable hukar populations in the Brown's Park area indicate establishment of the species may be possible in additional areas where climate (mainly winter weather) is 0 �omewhat more severe than that in current, main chukar areas. With this in mind, additional inspections were made in the southwest part of the state and ~ in the upper Colorado River area. During the selection of new release sites, attention was given to environmental factors, such as food, water, and terrain, to human disturbance, and to filling gaps in presently" occupied range. Wbare necessa.ry, landowners were contacted to obtain permiSSion for release, to gain this support in protection of birds, am to obtain verbal approval or public hunting in the event chukars develop to huntabIe numbers. Findings, Five general areas were selected for the release of apprOximately 1,050 game-farm chukars during the early spring of 1961. These areas includet (1) the southwestern portion of the state, (2) the Bookcliffs Mountain range along the north am .at side of the Grand Valley in llesa and Garfield Counties, (3) the lower White River drainage, (4) the Upper colorado River area around Sweetwater, and (5) the Brown's Park area in northwestern Colorado. Specific release areas within these general localities, with 'legal descriptions and the approximate numbers of birds to be released, are shown in Table 1. Table I.-LOCATION OF CHUKAR RELEASESITES FORTHESPRINGOF 1961. Approx. No. or Nameof Release Site Birds to be Genera! Specific Legal Description Released County Southwest IicEIiiiOCanyon 1l0ntezuma Sec. 34,T36N,Rl71r 100 (Bill Vancil Place) McElmo Canyon Montezuma Sec. 33,T36N,Rl8W 100 (Jack Meadows Place) Disappointment Creek San 1liguel Sec. 6,T42N,R16. 100 BookclU'fa Dr)" Canyon (Guzzler) !I Columbus ~on (Guzzler) Coal Creek !! Garfield )(esa )lesa Sec. 1,T6S,Rl04w Sac. 34, T9S,RlOCJlr Sec. 20,TlOS,R98W 100 100 White River skUll Creek 1/ Wardel Ranch-Y Moffat Rio Blanco Sec. 3l,T4N,RlOOW Sec. 25,TIN,Rl04W 100 100 Eagle Sec. 23, T3S,R66w 100 }loffat Sec. 11, T6N,RlO2W Upper C01orado River --swietwater Area (Willow Creek) Brown's Park Jack Springs TOTAL Y Y Supplements to original releases. 106 150 1,050 �Release of chukars within areas described above should make the best use of the existing supply of birds during attempts to increase the range and members of this species. Although small groups of chukars were released in McElmo Canyon during the early 1940 's and results were unfavorable, climate, terrain, and general food and cover conditions indicates this area should support chukar populations. Chukars have been established in Montezuma Ubunty, utah, which lies west of McElmo Canyon in Colorado. The proposed chukar release in Disappointment Creek Valley sbbuld test an area typical of vast habitat in the southwest portin of the state. In the Bookcliffs area, supplemental releases of chukars at the Dry Canyon guzzler and in Coal Creek should aid in hastening development of higher chukar populations. The Columbus Canyon release will involve original stocking in the vicinity of an artificial water development. White River releases will supplement chukar populations recently established along the White River proper and along the south face of Blue Mountain in Moffat County. The Upper Colorado River area could perhaps be called a truly experimental release. This new area is typical of considerable range along the Coabrado River and its tributaries at higher elevations. If birds adapt themselves in this locality, there will be great potential for further extension of range in Eagle County. The Brown's Park area has shown excellent chukar ~velopment in a relatively short amount of ti~e. The Jack Springs release will supplement bird placed in this area during 1959, and is designed to extend the range of chukarS along the south and east portion of the Brown's ParkL.area. Recommendations: This survey should be continued as long as game-farm or wildjn·a.ppedchukars are being released to aid in placing birds in the most suitable areas. lresent p'Lans call for development work with the Chukar through the spring of 1962. Extension of chukar releases beyond this year may be desirable if current, favorable development of lhis species continues. Prepared by: Wa~e Date: A;Erilz 1961 W. Sandfort Ap,proved by: Gilbert N. Hunter state Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��April, 1961 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE~ ProjeGt No. C_OL_O~~~~ _ If-37-R-14 ; GameBird Survey --~~~--~---------------------------------~-----------; ~J~o~b~N~o~.~6 _ Work Plan No. 4, Chukar Partridge TiUe of Jobl Trapping and transplanting Period Covered: Personnel, (including release of game-farm stock). March 17-29, 1961. Roger Evans, Willis Mansfield, Glenn Rogers, Dwight Owens, Wayne Sandfort, Little Hills personnel, District Wildlife Conservation officers, and local sportsmen. Abstract: CIle thousand and seventy-three chukars were removed from holding pens at the Little Hills Experiment Station and the Rocky Ford GameFarm during the latter part of March, 1961, and stocked in previously selected areas. Birds were released in ten areas within seven counties in western Colorado. Objective: To increase Techniques Used: the range and numbers of chukar partridges. Game-farm chukars were loaded from holding pens at the Little Rio Blanco County, and the Experimental GameFarm at Rocky Ford, and distributed in previously selected areas. Birds were transported by vehicle to release areas, where they were permitted to walk or fly from shipping crates. Hills Experiment Station, �Chukar Partridge Trapping and Transplanting WayneW. Sandt ort Findin,ss A total of 1,013 game-tam chukars W88 released during. the latter part 0 Karch in 10 areas. All birds were placed in western Colorado countdaa, Several of tJ:le 1961 releases were designed to test adaptability of chukars in new areas. Birds released in Disappointment Creek and llcElmo Canyon should determine suitability of two specific types of expansive range in southwestern Colorado. The Willow Creek release, near Sweetwater Resort, will test possibilities of extending chukar population~ along the Colorado riverat higher elevations than where they now occur. Additional birds, with the exception of a small group placed in Price Creek, supplemented populations in previously stocked areas or filled gaps within presently occupied ranges. Sixteen chukars were released on the Alex Urie ranch, Price Creek, by game management personnel. Table l.--REIEASES OF CHUKAR PARTRIDGES I GAME-FARU STOCK» MARCH, 1961. nate or umber or ~irQs Nameof Release Site County Release Cocks Hens Tot81 Price Creek (Urie Ranbh) lloffat 3/20161 8 8 16 Jack Springs Moffat 3/24/61 50 100 50 Skull Creek Moffat 3/24/61 28 41 69 White River (Warden Ranch) Rio Blanco 3/24/61 58 108 50 Willow Creek (Sweetwater Area) Eagle 3/11/61 50 100 50 Dry Canyon (Guzzler ) Garfield 3/29/61 50 100 50 Coal Creek Mesa 3/11/61 50 50 100 Columbus Canyon (Guzzler) Mesa 3/11/61 50 100 50 Disappointment Creek San Miguel 3/28/61 61 69 130 KcElmo Canyon Montezwna 3/29/61 125 125 250 TOTALS - ALLAREAS 1 073 Y !I Release by game management personnel. Recommendations: Chukar partridges continue to show development in western Colorado. It is recommendedselection of suitable sites and release of garnefarm stock continue on a limited basis as long as potential developnent with this species exists. Prepared by: WayneW. Sandtort Dates April, 1961 Approved 1;>y: Gilbert N. Hunter S tate GameManager F. C. Kleinschni tz Asst. Coordlnator �April, 1961 -133JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE OF COLORADO ------------------------------ Project No. W-37-R-14 j Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. 4, Chukar Partridge ; Job No.7 Title of Job: Experimental habitat developnent (providing water through the use of gallinaceous guzzlers). Period Covered, June 7 through September 14, 1960. Abstract: Intensive investigations were carried out in the Weilis Gulch study area, Delta Count,r, from June to September, 1960, to determine the effects of guzzlers on chukar partridge presence and developnent. Surveys were made to detennine relative use and the number of chukars in the vicinity of three additional water developnents. Partial findings show the intensity of use of guzzlers by chukars is: (1) significantly greater for young chukars than for adults, (2) greater during July than for June and September, but not August, and (3) greater at the oldest guzzler (in Weliis Gulch) than for three more recently constructed units. Estimated populations for two guzzlers within the Weilis Gulch study area were found to be significantly greater than those for their respective control areas without water. Estimated chukar populations in the vicinity of seven established guzzlers in 1estern Colorado during the summer of 1960 totalled 407 birds. Population estimates varied from 10 to 150, with an average of 58 chukars per guzzler during the peak period of use. Objectives: (1) To find the extent of gallinaceous' guzzler effect on chukar partridge population development in western Colorado. (a) To determine the chukar population indices on areas with and without guzzlers. (b) To determine the amount of movement of chukars between areas with and without guzzlers. (c) To determine the amount of movement by chukars between guzzlers within one area (WeUI s Gulch proper). ( d) To determine the distribution of chukars on areas with and without guzzlers. (e) To determine the survival and increase of recent (Karch, 1960) chukar releases on: (1) uninhabited range in the vicinity of a newly established (June, 1959) guzzler, (2) inhabited range in the vicinity of a newly established (November, 1959) guzzler, (J) inhabited range in the vicinity of previously established (1953 and 1954) guzzlers, and (4) control areas without guzzlers. �-134(f) To determine the relationships between intensity periods of guzzler use, weather conditions, and forage conditions. (2) To determine chukar partridge use of gallinaceous guzzlers, additional to those in Wellls Gulch. Techniques Used: Main activities on this investigation were confined to the Wellis Gulch guzzler study. Techniques used during this second summer of study were similar to those described in the Quarterly Progress Report, Game Management Federal Aid Division, April 1961, pp. 97-100. They included specific methods to: (1) describe and compare various sections of the study area, (2) detennine chukar distribution, (3) determine period and intenSity of guzzler use by chukars, (4) determine movements of chukars, and (5) obtain local weather data. Banded and neck-tagged chukars were released at specific points within the area during the spring of 1960 to facilitate additional study of the effects of artificial water developments on chukar populations. In addition to the intensive investigation of four guzzlers in the Wellis Gulch area, several checks were made of three additional guzzlers to determine relative intensities of use by chukars and to obtain an estimate of the population of birds serviced by these developments. �Experimental Habitat Development For Chukars Ken E. Nicolls and Wayne W. Sandfort Findings: Complete details of findings (also techniques) from this investigation are not included here. Time is being devoted to ·final preparation of the report, and data will be available in a master's thesis to be completed in June, 1961, by Ken E. Nicolls. Additional publication may be used in reporting of final data. A portion of the findings on use of guzzlers and relative abundance of chukars in the vicinity of these developments is summarized below. Wellis Gulch Study Area Data are given in Table 1 on observations of chukars at guzzlers during the months of June, July, August, and September. Statistical analyses of these data indicate that the mean (average) intensity of use was: (1) significantly greater for young chukars than for adults, (2) greater during July than for June and September, but not August, and (3) greater at the oldest guzzler (Well's Gulch No.1) than for the three younger guzzlers. Table 1.--SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS ON FOUR GUZZLERS IN v'ELL'S GULCH AND lll'TENSITY OF THEIR USE BY CHUKAR PARTRIDGES FROM JUNE TO SEPTEMBER, 1960. Intensity of Guzzler Number of Birds Seen Use (Number per hour Obser- Obser- Total of Observation) (Including Repeats) Gu7z1er Number vation vation Hours Young Tota! Aault Total Young Observed Aault Number Date and Location o. 3 0.00 o. 3 0 2 0 0.00 0.15 6 0.75 0 7/8 60 North Fork 1.88 1.38 0.50 11 15 7/26/60 Well t s Gulch 0.00 0.15 0.15 6 0 8/15/60 1.88 1.43 0.71 10 15 9/11/60 2.50 0.00 2.50 20 0 9/13/60 7 Wellts Gulch 1 2 3 4 5 6 6/28/60 7/12/60 7/27/60 8/15/60 9/9/60 9/15/60 8 8 8 8 9 7 0 5 17 8 33 12 0 0 50 28 12 20 0 5 61 36 45 32 0.00 0.63 2.13 1.00 3.56 1.71 0.00 0.00 6.25 3.50 1.33 2.86 0.00 0.63 8.38 4.50 4.89 4.57 2 Wel1ls Gulch 1 2 3 4 5 6/27/60 7/11/60 7/28/60 8/16/60 9/9/60 8 8 8 8 8 12 15 15 10 0 20 0 73 21 0 32 15 88 31 0 1.50 1.88 1.88 1.25 0.00 2.38 0.00 9.13 2.63 0.00 4.00 1.88 11.00 3.88 0.00 1 Wellis Gulch 1 2 3 4 5 6 6/29/60 8 8 8 8 7 8 17 50 20 37 10 16 40 243 129 79 52 22 51 293 149 2.13 6.25 2.50 4.63 1.43 2.00 7.13 5.00 30.38 36.63 16.13 18.63 9.88 14.50 8.86 7.43 4.75 2.15 1/13/60 7/29/60 8/16/60 9/11/60 9/14/60 116 62 38 �Population estimates (Table 2) were obtained by trapping and banding in the tour sample areas with guzzlers. Traps were placed both at guzzlers and in areas surrounding guzzlers. Population estimates, therefore, apply not only' to the guzzlers themselves, but to an area around the guzzlers. When tested statistically, estimated populations for Well I s Gulch No. 6 (North Fork) and Well's Gulch No. 1 were found to be significantly greater than those for their respective county line and Alkali Gulch controls without water. Table 2.--TOTAL CHUKAR PARTRIDGE POPULATION ESTIMATESFRCIATRAPPING ANDBANDING DATAFORFOURAREASIN WHICHGUZZIERSHAVEBEENINSTAlLEDANDTWOCONTROL AREASWHB GUZZLERS HAVENOTBEENINSTALLED,SUMMER, 1960. 99 Percent Confide·nce Interval Estimated Population Area County Line 16 North Fork Wellis Gulch 22.06 lB.77 to 26~18 30.27 26.03 to 43.96 /17 Wellis Gulch 89.85 69.05 to 206.02 12 Wellis Gulch 20.33 14.19 to 78.10 III 'Wellis Gulch 56.52 52.87 to 57.09 Alkali Gulch ALLAREAS 11.11 230.14 9.89 to 12.33 Checks of Established Guzzlers (Exclusi ve of Well's Gulch study Area) Several general observations made at guzzlers area are tabulated in Table 3. outside of the Wellis Gulch study Table J.-GUZZLER CHECKS,GARFIELD COUNTY,1960. Date Observat.Lon Guzzler 13 Prairie Canyon· Four adult chukars observed in area and two other groups June 0, 1960 heard calling. Food conditions poor. Guzzler full. Two adult chukars in the vicinity of the guzzler. An July, 1960 estimated population of 50 chukars in the area. November, 1960 Forest Service employee reported 50 or more chukars in the immediate vicinity of the guzzler. 5 �-137'" Table 3.--GUZZLERCHECKS,GARFIELD COUNTY, 1960.--eontinued. Date Observation Guzzler #47 Camp'Gulch June ,1960 June )0, 1960 July 26, 1960 .Four pair (8 chukars ) observed ~ thin 150 Tards of the guzzler. Feed relatively poor. Cheatgrass and ricegrass headed but stunted.'in growth. Guzzler tulle Forty-nine chukars observed using the guzzler (7 adults and 42 young). Additional birds calling. Weather dr;y and hot. Food conditions poor, but believed adequate for chukars. One hundred and one chukars observed using the guzzler. Other groups calling that were not observed. Range very d17. Estimated 1$0 chukars in the area. D19gorvon Guzzler 15~ June . 0, No use of unit by chukars noted. a few birds in the general area. poor. Summary, Chukar Populations in Vicinity of Established Droppings indicate Food conditions very Guzzlers, 1960 A total of 407 chukars was estimated to be using seven guzzlers during the summer of 1960 (Table 4). Use varied considerably, with the CampGulch Guzzler (No.4) and Wellis Gulch Guzzlers (No. 1 and No.7) showing the most use. Table 4.--ESTIMATEDCHUKAR POPULATIONS IN THEVICINITYOF SEVENESTABLISHED GUZZlERS, SUMMER 1960 Guzzler Number Area Estimated Population i Well I s Guich 57 2 Well's Gulch 20 ) Prairie Canyon 50 CampGulch 4 150 Dry Canyon 10 6 North Fork, Well's Gulch )0 Wellls Gulch 1 90 s TOTAL 1101 . RecOIIIIIendationsJ Intensive studies and general observations indicate artificial. water developmenta, installed specifically for chukars, are responsible for the presence and abundance of this species within several areas in west-central Colorado. It is recommended that surveys be conducted within dry, but otherwise potential chukar habitat, to select specific sites for installation of additional water developments. Prepared by: Ken E. Nicolls Date: April, and WayneW. Sandfort Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State GameManager 1961 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. COordinator ��~l., 1961 JOBCOMPlETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATEOF C.;..;O;.;;LO~RA __ D __ O Project No. W-37-R-14 _ ; GameBird Survey Work Plan No. 4, Chukar Partridge ; Job No. 8 TlUe of Job: and Population Checks. AdaptabilitYI Period Covered: Flrsonnels Survival, June 30J 1960, through March 15, 1961•. Dwight E. Owens, Glenn E. Rogers, Ken E. Nicolls, and W~e Ti. Sandfort. Donald M. Hoffman, Abstract: Field checks were conducted in 59 areas in seven counties to obtain information on the population status, adaptability, and survival of chukars in Colorado. Information from additional areas was obtained from sportsmen, local residents and Gameand Fish Department personnel. A total of 2,109 birds was observed during single surveys in 39 areas. A population estimate of 1,925 chukars was derived from these observations in conjunction with sign of birds and verbal reports. The population estimate for 1960 was about 15 per cent higher than in 1959. A map has been prepared which shows the distribution of chukars in 1960 and points of introduction of birds during the period 1951 to 1961. It is recommendedthat population checks continue and that effort in transferring routine census work to managementpersonnel. Objectives: be expanded (1) To determine the adaptability (2 ) (3) and survival of chukars in areas of new or recent releases, and in areas of established populations. To determine dispersal of birds from the point of original introduction. To evaluate the environmental factors in relation to the increase or decrease of this species. Techniques Used. Field checks were conducted in 59 areas in seven counties duririg~960, Which contained both established populations and new release groups. Surveys usually were carried out with a vehicle and on foot during the early mornings or in evenings around cultivated fields, waterways, reservoirs, guzzlers, and other areas where birds commonlyconcentrate. Methods of determining the presence and numbers of chukars included actual observations, calls, tracks, droppings, dusting areas, and reports by Department personnel and local residents. Data on chukar populations, in areas other than UJOse actually surveyed, were obtained from verbal reports by sportsmen, local reSidents, and Depart.-nt personnel. �Populations of chukars in 86 specific areas were estimated, and a statewide distribution map was prepared. Movement of chukars to unusual localities was recorded. �-141- Chukar Adaptability, Survival, and Population Checks Wayne w. sandfort Findings: Information obtained during the survey is divided into twocategoriess (1) chuKar census and population estimates, and (2) distribution. These are discussed in the following text. Census and Population Estimates A total of 2,109 chukars was observed during the summer of 1959, this total representing the maximumnumber of birds observed in areas during a single survey. From these figures and accompanying data, the total population within 86 portions of the chukar range was estimated to be about 1,925 birds. Estimated populations for counties and for specific areas are shown in Table 1. Table l.--CHUKARPARTRIDGE OBSERVATIONS ANDSUMMER POPULATION ESTIMATES,1960. population· Date of DaxLmUffi B1ras 06servea Estimate Adults Young Unc1ass. Tot8l Count Area County Delta --r:- ~lkali Creek 2. Angell s Ranch 3. Big Dominguez 4. Black Canyon 5. Broughtonls Orchard 6. County line (Guzzler study area) 7. Escalante canyon B. Hargrave I s Ranch 9. Hotchkiss Ranch 10. Indian Rock Ranch 11. Little Dominguez 12. Little Peach valley 13. North Fork of Gunnison 14. North Fork, Wellis Gulch 15. Oak Creek 16. Peeple IS Orchard 17. Point Creek 18. Redlands Mesa 19. Smith Fork 20. Tongue Creek 21. Welll s Gulch (Guzzler #1) 22. WeIll s Gulch (Guzzler 12) 23. Wellis Gulch (Guzzler '7) Sub-Total 7 7/30 8/13 6 9 7 7/28 7/23 Specific Sign only No survey, " 97 6 369 10 272 4 No survey, 1960 31 26 5 7/26 7/27 4 7 8/16 No survey, Sign only No survey, Sign only 1 8 21 6 14 184 3 2 No survey, 1960 15 69 11 62 1960 1960 54 46 No survey, 7/29 7/28 7/27 1960 " data "not available 8/13 8/13 7/30 7/29 41 4B 35 39 1960 125 39 25 146 45 39 686 870 50 100 75 200 100 50 750 50 25 200 75 50 25 25 200 100 75 50 200 25 175 15 100 2,775 �Table l •• --CHUKARPARTRlOOE OBSERVATIONS ANDSUMMER POPULAT,LON ESTHIA'JES,1960. Continued. . . Date of Ma.x:um.un Birds Ubserved POpulAtion Count Adults Young Unclass. Totu Estimate County Area Garfield 24. CampGulch (Guzzler) 25. Canyon west Doug. Pass 26. carbondale 27. Cottonwood Creek 28. Dry Canyon 29. East Salt Creek (Doug. Pass) 30. Grahm Mesa 31. Parachute Creek 32. Prairie Canyon 33. Prince Creek 34. Rifle Creek 35. West Salt Creek' (Baxter Pass) SUb-total 1/26 7/4 6/30 1/26 8/2 7 8/16 1/11 21 80 Sign only No survey, " . Sign only 19 35 No survey, II 38 101 1960 " 54 1960 49 2 2 No survey, 21 3 56 1960 21 3 174 230 150 25 ? 25 25 125 25 250 50 25 100 50 850 )lesa -,0:- Anchor Canyon 31. Coal Creek (Cameo) 38. Coal Gulch 39. Debeque Canyon 40. Gateway (Dolores R.) 41. Horsethief Canyon 42 •.. Hunter Canyon 43. John Brown Creek 44. Kannah Cr. (lower) 45. Lapham Wash 46. Kannah Cr. (upper) 41. Plateau Creek 48. Rapid Creek 49. Ruby Canyon 50. Stove Canyon 51. Watson Creek 52. West Creek (near Gateway) 53. Windy Cr. (S. Kannah Cr.) Sub-total 7 Sign only 8/2 Sign only 7/15 2 24 8/2 8 13 7/21 20 123 -No survey, 1960 -- reports 1/11 26 88 -Reports, 1960 Reports, 1960 7/5 Sign only, 1960 1/9 8 42 6 7/26 38 112 No survey, 1960 No survey, 1960 4 . 23 7/2 No survey, 1960 Sign and reports 7/27 Sign only 7 25 26 21 143 114 100 50 150 300 50 200 25 50 156 27 15 25 100 400 50 ? 150 . 25 200 50 537 1,975 2 2 9 59 9 58 6 1 68 67 13 106 425 6 Moffat 54. 55. 56. 51. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. Blevins Ranch Bull Canyon Calloway Place Chukar Springs Green River Irish Canyon Jack Springs Simos Ranch Spitzie Draw Sterling Springs 1/19 7/19 7/19 7/20 7/20 7/20 7/20 7/18 7/20 28 91 91 286 875 Reports, 1960 7 21 4 1 3 2 7 42 Note: ..- 50 100 125 50 100 75 50 150 50 125 5 10 2 153 Chukars observed and reported at springs and in other reported above for Moffat County, Brown's Park area. 91 areas other~an thC'¥'. �Table l.-CHUKAR PARTRIOOE OBSERVATIONS AND SUMMER POPUIATION ESTIMATES" 1960. Continued. Date of Maximum Birds Observed Population county Area Count Adults Young unclass. Total Estima~ Montrose 64. Black Canyon No survey, 1960 200 65. Blue Creek Reports, 1960 50 66. Bostwick Park No survey, 1960 50 67. Cottonwood Creek Development unfavorable ? 68. Dry Creek Development unfavorable ? 69. Duckett's Draw No survey, 1960 25 70. Mesa Creek Reports, 1960 75 71. Olathe Gap No survey, 1960 25 II 72. Paradox Valley 100 • "1 1 11 73. Red Canyon 7/29 250 9 74. Red Rocks Ranch 8 Incomplete data 50 75. Roc Creek 46 150 7/27 9 37 76. Shirm Park No survey, 1960 50 77. South Canal No survey, 1960 100 18 1 Sub-total 1,125 38 57 Rio Blanco 78. Little Hills 79. Skull Creek 80. Staley Mine (White River) 81. Wardells Ranch (White R~ver) Sub-total 75 50 100 25 -------~~---..~=---~--'"""'I(""'M"I""---_:::r.it__- 118 250 .Fremont County 82. Four-mile Creek 83. Red-rock Canyon 84. Priest canyon 85. Twin Mtn. area 86. Wilson Creek Sub-total Development unfavorable Development unfavorable 7/20 2 11 9 7/18 Development unfavorable 7/18 Development unfavorable -------~--~~--~---~~-----~--~ 11 2 9 25 GRAND TOTALS 7/25 7/27 7/26 7/27 10 64 54 Sign only 7 47 54 Sign only & reports 17 101 425 1,,586 98 2,109 ? 50 ? ? 75 7,925 As shown in Table 2, the population estimate for 1960 is about 15 per cent higher than for 1959. The number of birds observed in 1960 was approximately 20 per cent greater than in 1959. As in the two previous years, the summer of 1960 was very dry, birds concentrated around agricultural land and water, and it is believed a fairly accurate estimate of the chukar population was obtained. Habitat of the chukar is such, however, that all estimates are believed to be conservative. �-~-.~-,,I~ "77"::= .. ,":-: r .•_. . -_ .. _ .. - - - -. ~-;,;:;- .. - I . Ulgend ; --- ..•I General outline • Points of introrluctjon, 'X Some dispersal I of range \ -~ 1951-1961 I I 1.•. 86 a b c d ------,----.--:;:0-·1 ..--,.c points, Key numbers, for with Table 1 use I 1960 I I WRAV\ :in conjunction New r-e Lea ses , 1961 ~ Columbus Canyon, Mesa County Df sappof.rrtmerrt Creek, San Yi guel County ~ l:cElmo Canyon, Montezuma County Willow Cr. (Sweetwater area), Ea gl.e County Game Yellow I: I···· '6 ~ C CHEYENNE WIEL ..L.S I I --KIOw;--1 I I 1• I PRo.;;;;--1 •, • I .~_.-J , • I wOT 6-'MQFI&LD L~~! I Car";ZD ~_-2£! Figure l.--Chukar Partridge Range in Colorado, 1960 cr..! ~ I i .LJ �Table 2.--FIVE YEAR SUMMARY, CHUKAR PARTRIDGE POPULATION ESTIMATES, 1956-1960. Year Max. No. Birds Observed Population Estimate 1956 936 375 2,678 1,698 2 050 1957 1958 1959 1960 4,465 2,255 10,440 6,850 7,925 Distribution Through the release of approximately 10,295 game-farm chukars during the period 1936 to 1945 and as a result of the release of an additional 8,411 wild-trapped and game-farm chukars from 1951 to 1960, open hunting seasons on this species have been possible in fivewestem Colorado counties. Development has been generally favorable to date and it appears there is potential for additional expansion of the range and numbers of this species. Information is given in Figure 1 which shows: (1) the general range of chukars during the summer of 1960, (2) approximate points of introduction of release groups in 42 areas during the period 1951 to 1960, and (3) a few 1960 observations which indicate a portion of the dispersal and/or stocking of add! tional range that is occurring.,_ Recommendations: Data collected during chukar population checks are useful in evaluating the success of the chukar development program and in formulating recommendations for hunting season. It is recommended these studies be continued indefinitely, with continued effort being made to map and describe major chukar areas, to outline census procedures, and to prepare forms and record books for recording long-term, census data. Prepared by: Date e Wayne W. Sandfort Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter --~--~----------------------State Game Manager April, 1961 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��-147JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS STATE CF COLORADO Project No. W-37-R-14 ,. Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. 4! Chukar Partridge ; Job No. 9 Title of Job: Chukar hunter check. Period Covered: September 17, 1960, through January 4, 1961. Abstract: A pre-season hunt on chukars was held September 17-20 in the northwestern portion of Moffat County. This was followed by a 20-day hunt, November 5-24, in Mesa and Delta Counties, and in the western portion of Garfield County. Shooting hours were 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The bag limit was three birds and the possession limit was six. . Information on hunting activity and chukars was obtained through general checks during the pre-season in Moffat County, from a check station at the mouth of Escalante Canyon during the first two days of the regular season, by means of a special, controlled hunt in the V.elll s Gulch" guzzler" study area, and through general, statewide analyses of verbal reports and Vdldlife Conservation OfLicer contact data. Hunting pressure during the pre-season was very light. Although birds were abundant, the total harvest in the area probably did not exceed 25 birdsc Weights of 10 chukars during the mid-September hunt ranged from 12.48 to 19.68 ounces, averaging 15.18 ounces. Bursa depths in nine young birds averaged 18.33 rom. Ninety-three hunters bagged 92 chukars during 274 hours of hunting in Escalante Canyon during the first two days of the regular season. These figures show .99 birds per hunter per day, and .336 birds per hour. The age ratio was 55.9% young, and 44.6% adults. This ratio, however, may be in error because of inaccurate aging techniques. Reproduction counts the preceding July showed 73.7% juveniles in the population. The 1960 hunter success in Escalante (.99 birds per hunter per day) was the best of the three years of open season on this species; .82 birds per hunter occurring in 1958, and .11 birds per hunter attained in 1959. The three-year average shows hunters in this. area will bag about .74 birds per day during the early part of the season, and it will take about 4.0 hours to obtain one bird. An estimated harvest of 300 chukars was obtained in Escalante Canyon durinr, the 20-day hunt in 1960. Evaluation of the effect of this harvest on the population can best be made during mid-summer, 1961, when chukars ar,ain concentrate in valley areas. ~eights of chukars in Escalante Canyon, in 1960, ranged from 13.74 to 23.62 ounces, averaging 18.57 ounces. Data from this area during the period 1958-1960, �-148- show chukar weights will range from slightly over 3/4 of a pound to slightly over l~ pounds during an early November hunt. The average weight of 198 chukars, bagged at this time of year, was 18.29 ounces. A near equal number of sexes has occurred in the bag during early November hunts in Escalante Canyon. Some difficulty has been encountered in accurately sexing birds and refinement of sexing techniques is needed. Measurements of the bursa of fabric ius have been used as an indicator of age in chukars during the open season. Average depths have been 13.8 mm. in 1958, 16.0 Mm. in 1959, and 18.2 mm. in 1960. Slowness of this aging technique and chances for error because of resorption in early-hatched young, indicate there is need in refinement of aging techniques. An experimental hunt in the Vie 11 I s Gulch -guzzler" study area showed birds to be widely dispersed from water developments during the November hunt. Ve~ low hunter success resulted. Evaluation of available data indicates the total harvest of chukars in Colorado from 1958 to 1960 has been as follows: 250-400, 1958; 50-100, 1959; 500-1,000, 1960. The annual total kill has been a very small percentage of the estimated population. Combination hunts of sage grouse, cottontail rabbits, and chukars are recommended for northwestern Moffat County in attempts to create hunting interest in this remote are a, Ear-Lier- seasons (perhaps early October) for chukar hunting are recormnended for areas other than Moffat County, so that hunters can obtain birds before the late fall dispersal of this species. This could be followed by a regular hunt in conjunction with Gambel's quail and pheasants. During establishment of future seasons consideration should be given to restricting seasons in Escalante Canyon and liberalizing them elsewhere, so that more equitable distribution of hunting pressure and harvest will be obtained. Objectives: (1) (2) To determine the success of hunters during the open season. To collect various data on chukars in Colorado, which may include: (u) crops for food habit analysis, (b) weights, (c) incidence of parasitis~, Cd) molting characteristics, and (e) sex and age ratios. Techniques Used: A pre-season chukar hunt was established by the Game and Fish Co~sslon on September 17-20, 1960, in that portion of fame management unit 2, lying north of State Highway 318 and the Green River, but not including Spitzie Draw in Brown's Park. Counts of several hundred birds and reports of a thousand or more chukars in this small area in northwestern Moffat County prompted recommendations for this initial hunt in this area. The regular chukar season was established on November 5-24 within Delta and Mesa Counties, and in that portion of Garfield County lying west of the New Castle-Buford road and west of Garfield Creek. During both the pre-season and the regular season, shooting hours were 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The bag limit was three birds and the possession limit was six. �Information on chukars and hunting activity was obtained: (1) through general field checks in the Brown's Park area, Moffat County, during the special pre-season, (2) at a check station near the mouth of Escalante Canyon, during the first two days of the season, (3) from a controlled hunt in the Wellis Gulch "guzzler" study area, (4) from general reports by sportsmen and Department personnel, and (5) through analysis of Wildlife Conservation Officer, contact reports. Additional data will be forthcoming from the statewide random smallgame survey for 1960, but are not available at this time. Following the two-day check of hunters from Escalante, several spot-checks were made during the remainder of the 20-day season. In addition, five brief surveys were made in this canyon following the season to evaluate effects of intensive hunting. Special forms, as used in previous years, were utilized in recording data on hunting pressure and hunter success, and in tabulating data on chukar weights, sex, age and bursa depths. No organized effort was made to obtain chukar crops for food habit studies in 1960. Twenty-six crops, however, were obtained incidental to other work. These were forwarded to the Department of Forest Recreation and ~ildlife Conservation, Colorado State University, for analysis. This analysis is being conducted by two game management students during the 1960-61 school year. The controlled chukar hunt in the \l/ell'sGulch" guzzler" study area was designed to obtain additional information on chukar movements in relationship to artificial water developments. Chukars with various colored bands and neck tags were . released in the Vicinity of water developments and within dry, control areas during the spring of 19qO. This was followed by intensive investigation during the summer of 1960 to evaluate effectiveness in extending the range and numbers of this species (Nicolls and Sandfort, 1960). During the controlled hunt, groups of hunters were aSSigned to each of five sections of the ~ell's Gulch study area, and data were recorded on amount of hunting effort, number and locations of birds observed, numbers of recovered bands, and color of neck tags on bagged birds. Findings: Results of chukar hunter checks during the 1960 hunting season are given under appropriate he adf.ngs below. Since this activity has been terminated as a Federal Aid activity, principal data obtained during the first three chukar seasons in Colorado are also summarized. Pre-season Hunt Two hundred and eighty-six chukars were observed in 10 localities in the Brown's Park area, Moffat County, during brief checks on July 18, 19, and 20, 1960. Reports indicated at least 1,000 birds were present. Good development of chukars in this area prompted reco~~endations for a special chukar season. Since this area lies considerable distance from human population centers it was believed advisable to combine this hunting with that on sage grouse and cottontail rabbits; these small game species are abundant in the same general area. The sage grouse season, however, was established in August, leaving only chukars and cottontail rabbits as legal game during the September 17-20 hunt. �-150 •. The season, as held, can be summarized as: "a lot of birds and practically no hunters." On the opening week-end, several groups of chukars, totalling in excess of 200 birds, were observed by the. local Wildlife Conservation Officer, Ed Wilson, and the writer. Five hunters, not resident to the Park, were checked. Some hunting was carried out by at least four local residents. A total of 10 chukars were sexed, aged, and weighed during the first two days of the season. Additional reports of hunting indicated the total kill in the entire area probably did not exceed 25 chukars. Data from the 10 chukars that were checked are summarized in Table 1. Table l.--CHUKAR PARTRIDGE WEIGHTS, BROWN'S PARK AREJ., MOFFAT COUNTY, SEPTEMBER 17-18, 1960. Sax Age No. of Birds Minimum Weights Ibs. ozs , Maximum Weights IEs. ozs. rsr: 15.74 0.69 1 Average Weights ozs. Female Immature Mature 5 Inmature 4 10 1 1 12.48 0.69 1 • Male ALL BIRDS 14.12 0.69 12.89 12.48 19.68 19.68 1 0.16 15.18 Bursa depths in nine young birds varied from 15.5 to 22.0 mm. Averages for immature females and males were 19.20 mm. and 17.25 mm., respectively. The average depth for all birds was 18.33 mm. Rough terrain in the Brown's Park area, and running and climbing habits of the chukar, resulted in low hunter success in spite of an abundance of birds. Regular-Season Hunt Considerable publicity was given to chukar hunting prior to the 1960 season, including description of specific chukar areas and best hunting techniques. Before the season opened however, chukars followed their normal habits, withdrawing in large numbers from many of their common, summer concentration areas. Hunting around "guzzlers", and in many of the canyons which contained large groups of birds, as late as mid-October, was very poor. Escalante Canyon Escalante Canyon was again the most popular hunting area in the state, probably receiving more hunting pressure than the rest of the open areas combined. A �-151- graveled road running the length of the canyon, nearness to a main highway and population centers, and considerable un-posted hunting areas, all contributed to the popularity of Escalante Canyon. Although no actual violations were observed, shotgun shells lying in tpe middle of the road indicated that considerable road-hunting and shooting from the public road was occurring. It was the unanimous opinion of local residents in the canyon that the 20-day season was excessive, more from the nuisance angle than from detrimental effects on the chukars. Hunter Success Results of the hunter check during the first two-days of the season, and of follow-up surveys during and following the remainder of the season, are given below. Three-year summaries of data collected from this area are included where appropriate. Table 2.--CHUKAR PARTRIDGE HUNTER CHECK, ESCALANTE CANYON, DELTA COUNTY, NOVEMBER 5-6, 1960. Birds Birds Number Age Birds Bagged Hours Cripples per per Of % % Hunters Hunted AdUlt Young Total No. % Hunter Hour Date Young Adult Nov. 5 165 48.6 51.4 56 38 36 1.32 74 19 18 Nov. 6 109 16.7 15 .165 83.3 .49 3. 37 3 21 18.6 .99 51 TOTALS 41 .336 55.4 44.6 274 92 93 I .448 Table 3.--THREE YEAR SUMMARY, CHUKAR HUNTER CHECKS, ESCALANTE CANYON, DELTA COUNTY, 1958-1960. Number Birds Birds Age Birds Bagged Cripples per per Of Hours % % Hunter Hour Young Adult Year Hunters Hunted Adult Young UncI. Total No. % 122 23 15.9 148 .82 .272 75.4 1958 30 92 24.6 448 148 1 6 0 .11 .041 16.7 83.3 1959 57 5 1960 41 51 274 92 21 18.6 .99 .3)6 55.4 44.6 93 220 44 16. 7· .74 .253 6$.$ TOTALS 298 870 76 144 34.5 Information was obtained from 6) hunters in 1960 on the number of chukars observed. During the first day of the season, 26 hunters saw an average of about 19 birds each. On the second day of the season, 37 hunters observed approximately four birds each, reflecting the effects of the initial days hunt. In 1958, hunters saw about 20 birds each during the first two days of the season. No infonnation was gathered in 1960 on locality of kill of chukars or on the use of hunting dogs. In 1958 it was found that approximately 16.4% of the birds were bagged in the valley area and 8).6% were taken on the rocky slopes of the canyon. In 1958 dogs were used by about 11% of the hunters, with most of these finding the dogs ineffective in locating birds. �-152Following the complete check of hunters during the first two days of the 1960 season, only limited data are available on hunting pressure. Reports, however, indicate considerable hunting continued on week-days as well as on week-ends during the remaining 18 days of the season. One party of four reported bagging a total of 36 chukars in this area during the course of the season. As indicated earlier, local ranchers reported considerable hunting pressure. Harvest of chukars from this area was estimated to be around 300 birds. In spite of this, reports of several hunters during the latter part of the season indicated large groups of chukars remained, mostly on high benches above the valley. Counts of chukars in ESCalante Canyon from November 30, 1960, to January 4, 1961, indicate that chukars experienced heavy harvest in this area during the 20-day hunt. Total counts ranged from eight to 48 birds. Effects of the 1960 hunt can best be evaluated during reproduction counts in July, 1961, when birds should again be concentrated in the valley area. Miscellaneous Data Information on chukar weights, sex, and age, was gathered during the 1960 season. Sex was determined by general appearance of the birds in conjunction with presence and appearance of spurs. Age was detennined by measurements of the bursa. As with hunter success, three-year summaries of principal data are given. Weights.--Eighty-six chukars were weighed at the Escalante check station in 1966. Data from these weights, and a summary of all birds weighed during November hunts, are shown in Tables 4 and 5. Table 4.--GHUKAR Sex PARTRIDGE Age i\EIGHTSz ESCAlANTE CHECK STATION NOVEMBER 5-6, 1960. Numoer Weig ts Minimum Of Maximum Average Birds Lbs. Ozs. Lbs. Ozs. Lbs. Ozs. fi Female Immature Mature All Females 25 8 0 0 13.74 15.64 1 1 1.77 2.80 0.42 1.53 )) 1 1 0 I).74 I 2.80 I 0.59 16 16 32 1 1 1.80 2.94 1 1 1 1 3.45 5.28 1 1.80 I 5.08 7.62 7.02 I 4.:37 0 0 14.25 1 6.86 1 13.74 1 7.62 1 2.79 2.57 Males Immature Mature All Males Unclassified Unclassified ALL BIRDS 21 86 �-153Table 5.--THREE-YEAR SUMYARY,CHUKAR PARTRIDGEWEIGHTS, EARLYNOVEMBER, WEST-CENTRAL COLORADOz 1958-1960. Number Weights of Minimum Maximum Avera~ Age Lbs , Ozs. Birds Lbs , Ozs. Lbe. <hs. Sex: Female All Immature Mature Females 69 21 90 0 0 0 13.29 15.6h 13.29 1 1 1 2.76 h.31 fiq1~ Immature Vature 5h 31 85 0 1 0 1S.hB 0.98 lS.h8 1 1 1 21 196 0 0 1h.25 13.29 1 1 1 1 1 0.22 L20 0.51 6.29 8.83 8.83 1 1 1 3.h3 5.18 6.86 8.83 1 1 2.79 2.29 . . Males All Males h.m Unc.La ssd Hed Unclassified ALL BIRDS Sex.--Sex ratio able she, sex of 65 birds was de t.ermf ned in 1960"1th data showing a near equal -- 33 females and 32 males. One adult hen oo s se ssed sour-s of cons i derWith sex of t.hf s bird bef nz verifjed by :inf'D8ctjon of ovar-i e s, Durdrig the three-year check at Escalante Canyon, 9n .femalef' and 85 mal e s have been recorded, showing a near equal sex r at.J o in the bunt.er+s hag. Age.--Age of birds, a s shown in Table 2, waf' de t.er+.i ned by check! ng for and measuring the bursa of f'abr-I c i u s , Bursa de ot.h ranged I'r-om fl.O "!1'11. to 27.0 mm, in birds cIa esd f'Led as young, with an aver-ace deot h cI' 13.8 mT'1. This compares with an avera ge dent.h of 16.0 mm, (one bird) in 1959, and 16.2 mm, in 1958. It is oossible that an earljer r.atch may have occurred ill 1960, when compared with 1958. '!his would account for the shor-ter- bursa deot.hs in 1960, shown above. 1"oie would also account for greater weights :in 1960 (1 lb. 2.57 oas , ,aver<~Q:e), compared to that of 1 lb. 1.99 ozs., in 1958 (Sandfort, 1959). Indicated advancement in age of young birds during the 1960 hunt, when compared to 1958, also may have caused greater diff:icn1ty in differentiation between young and adult birds. This may account ill part for the 101" age ratio (55.h% young) shown in Table 2. Reoroduction checks on July 28, 1960, :in Escalante Canyon, showed 73.7% juvenHe birds j n a total count of 369 (see comp.le t ion report on Chukar Partridge Renroduction St.udies, t.hl s oub Lf ca td on }, TIle latter Jnf'or-nat.f on Jndf cat.e s much better reor-oduct.f on occurred in tho f: area durjng1960 than- that shown by checks of birds dur:ing the hunting sea son , Well I s Gulch Study Area Information contained in the comnl e t.f on l"~port for Illork Plan li, Job 8 (ada:"'tahjJity, sur-vi vaL, and nooul.atd on checks), thi f' oub Lf cat i on, indj cates a ::~nrox:i"TIately h75 chukarE occurred in the vicinity of guzzlers and in dry-canyon, control areas, during La te+ summer-, 1960. Results of the controDed hunt within five specjfic secti on s of the Well's Gulch study area, however, f ndf cat.a birds were djff:i cuLt to find during the November hunt, and had probably -noved to other portions of the ~eneral range. (Table 6) �-154•. One tagged bird was recovered from the group of four shot. This bird had been released in the same general locality during the preceding spring. Table 6.--CONTROLLED CHUKAR HUNT, WELLIS GULCH STUDY AREA, DELTA COUNTY, NOVEMBER 5, 1960. Color of Leg Number III To tar Bands and Neck Hunting Hours Birds Section of Study Area Tags Party Hunting Observed County Line (Delta~esa) (Dr,y) North Fork, Wellls Gulch (Guzzler) Wellis Gulch Guzzler #2 & #7 Well I s Gulch Guzzler 1/1 Alkali Creek Basin (Dry) TOTALS Blue Yellow Green and Blue & White Red White 3 3 6 5i 3 3 9 6 Birds Shot 0 0 4' 14 16 0 0 75 40t 75 0 0 0 0 4 4 All Areas Open to Chukar Hunting A summary of field checks by Wildlife Conservation Officers in western Colorado during the open season on chukars indicate contacts were made with about 25 hunters. This is not a true measure of actual hunting pressure, however, as reports were received on chukar huntine activity in several areas where no contacts were made. General information on chukar harvest indicates the total kill in 1960 was 500-1,000 birds. This compares with an estimated harvest of 50-100 birds in 1959 and 250-400 birds in 1958. Recommendations: Findings from the chukar hunter check in 1960 and during the two preceding years, show, without doubt, that the chukar is rather hard for hunters to obtain. Rough terrain, remoteness of some of the areas, lack of familiarity with terrain and hunting techniques, the running and climbing habits of this species, and generally widespread dispersal of birds following fall rains, all contribute to low hunter success. Initial seasons on this species also show that hunters concentrate in Escalante Canyon, leaving many important chukar areas virtually unhunted. In view of the above, the following recommendations are made: 1. Establish chukar hunting in northwestern Moffat County concurrent with that on sage grouse and cottontail rabbits. The third Saturday in September is recommended as the opening date for both chukars and sage grouse in the area. Chukars would be too small to hunt during ~arlier periods. 2. Consider establishment of pre-seasons on chukars in all areas of the state so that hunters may bae some of the birds before the late fall dispersal. Such a hunt could perhaps be held concurrent with that on turkeys. Additional hunting could be permitted in conjunction with that on Gambells quail, and pheasants. �3. Restrict hunting of chukars in Escalante Canyon to a week or 1e~s and liberalize huntjng in other areas through pre-, extended-, or postseasons. This should aid in better distributjon of hunting pres~re and in better utilization of the chukar resource. Literature Cited.-Nicolls, Ken E. and wayne w. Sandfort. 1960. Experimental habitat development providing water through the use of gallinaceous guzzlers. Quarterly Report, Game Mgmt.-Fed. Aid Div., Colo. Game and Fish Dept. AprH, pp , 95-116. Sandfort, Wayne W. 1959. Chukar hunter check. Quarterly Report, C~me Mgmt.Fed. Aid Div., Colo. Game and Fish Dept. January, op. 53-58. Prepared by: rsyne W. Sandfort Date: Aprj 1, 1961 Approvedbys Gjlbert N. Hunter State Qgme Manager F. C. Klejnschnjtz A~st. Coordjnator ��-157- STATE OF Project JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIOnS PROJECTS C.;..;O;.;;..!L..;;.ORA~D...;;.O _ No. _....;W~-..::3..:.7....;-R~-....;:14;;;;;;;.... _ G~ Work Plan No. 4, Chukar Partridge Title of Job: Mapping Period Covered: ; Bird Survey ~J~o~b~N~O~._=l~O of zones and routes for chukar partridge _ census. April 1, 1959, through March 31, 1961. Abstract: Limited work was carried out to map and describe zones and routes for use during chukar partridge census wi thin concentration areas. Field data were gathered in five localities. Work is pending on describing specific census procedures to be used and on preparation of forms and record books for systematic recording of long-term census data. Objectives: (1) To standardize (2) (3) (4) methods for detennining annual chukar partridge production. To establish, map, and describe zones or routes for use during counts of chukar broods and flocks. To instruct Department personnel in a standardized census procedure. To prepare forms and record books for ~stematic recording of infonnation. Techniques Used: Written descriptiam of concentration areas within important chukar range were prepared. These Llcluded directions and mileages needed to gain access to the areas, in addition to description of specific sites or localities where chukars are commonly observed. Findings: Information was gathered in only five chukar areas during the project year because of more pressing duties on other jobs. Preparation of maps of these and other important concentration areas, description of census methods, preparation of special record forms, and assembling record books for district and regional personnel, must be completed to fulfill objectives of this job. Work will continue under sement 15 of the Game Bird Survey project. Prepared Date: by: Wayne W. Sandfort April, Approved by: Gilbert N." Hunter State Game Manager 1961 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator . ��Aprll, 1961 -159- JOB COMPLETION REPOR! INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State ot C~O~L~O~R=A=DO~ _ Project No. W-37-R-14 Work Plan No. 6 Ti tle ot Job: Experlments.l habitat improvement tor Game Bird Survey _ ; Job No. 1 scaled quail. Period Covered: March 16, 1960 to Karch 15, 1961. Abstract: Five windmill cover development plots ranging in size trom one-tourth acre to one acre were tenced during April, 1960. The original plantings ot trees and shrubs within the tive plots were almost complete tailures. A replanting ot the tive plots was made in February, 1961 using stock secured tram Oklahoma tor the most part. Census studies during August 1960, December 1960, and January 1961 showed that there were no re.sident scaled quail within any at the tive development study areas or tive controls, allot which sre one square mile in size. Scaled quail counted near the study area were recorded. Originally, the selection at the windmill development sites was made on the basis ot there being little or no scaled quail cover. To date, no scaled quail cover has been established and census studies indicate that no scaled quall have moved into any ot the study area8. Objectives: To determine the value ot water and cover developm~nts ln lncreas!ng the range and numbers at scaled quail. �-160- Procedure s: ( 1) Selection of areas tor experimental habitat improvement. _' Map study areas. ~~~ Conduct pre-development surveys to determine populations of scaled quail on study areas. (4 ) Regular census of study areas. a. Area winter covey counts b. Area brood counts. c. Comparison with population trends as indicated by census data. �-161- EXPERIYXNTAL HABITAT IMPROVEMENT FOR SCALED QUAIL Donald M. Hoffman Introduction '.rhisreport covers the development work and evaluation studies of the five windmill cover development sites and controls in southern Baca County. Acknowledgements The fencing and tree and shrub plantings within the five windmill cover development plots was accomplished by C11fford A. Moser, Donald Parrick, and Alfred Heins for the most part. Walter Schuett, warren Snyder, and the writer also assisted with this work. Results of Study The fencing of five windmill cover development plots varying in size from one-tourth acre to one Bcre was completed in April, 1960. By mistake, two control plots ( numbers 2 and 5 ) were fenced and two proposed development sites were left unfenced. This should not, however, materially alter the study. Table 1 shows the trees and shrubs planted within the plots ~date. The trees and shrubs planted in April, 1960 were secured from the Departmental nursery near Fort Collins, Colorado. Only a very few of the potted western red cedars out of the many seedlings planted survived the first year. Probable reasons for this poor survival are: (1) Most of the plants tried are unsuited to the dry climate found in the extreme southeast part of the State. (2) The past growing season was unusually dry in Baca County. (3) The tree and shrub stock was planted in April while improved soil moisture conditions are normally found in late February and early , March. (4) The overflows from three of the windmills did �-162- furnish water to the plants as Was planned due to changes in grazing procedures and less water belng pumped than usual. A trlp was made to the U.S. Southern Great Plalns Field Statlon at Woodward Oklahoma wlth Clifford A. Moser on February 14, and 15, 1961. As a result or ,this trlp, a varlety of planting stock was secured which should withstand dry conditions better than that tried earlier. The summer brood count searches during August, 1960 and the late rall- wlnter census in December, 1960 and January, 1961 showed no scaled quail withln elther the development slte study areas or controls. Scaled qual1 observed during the fleld checks in the vlcinity of the study areas but not actually within the one square mile units were recorded and are shown under remarks in Table ~. The windmlll cover development sites were originally chosen by U.S. Forest Service personnel because of their lack of scaled quail cover. The first attempt to secure scaled quail cover through tree and shrub plantings failed. The replanting of the plots has been completed and survival of the stock will be checked at a later date. Limited experlmental transplanting of chella cactus was also carried out within one of the five plots. Plates -1- through ~ show views of development plots 1,2, and 5 following fencing and views or the corresponding unfenced control plot locations. Durlng the late fall- winter census studies of scaled qual1 within the study areas, a record Was malntained of the numbers of golden eagles which were observed resting on the windmill towers. In three checks to each of the ten wtndmills regularly checked in .De cember- and January ( or a total or thirty checks) there were thirteen golden eagles observed restlng on the towers. Two bald eagles were observed in southern Baca County dur~ng the study period but noqe were observed within the study areas. �'l'ab1e 1 NUMBERS OF TREES AND SHRUBS PLANTED WITHIN WINDMILL COVER DEVEOPMENT PLOTS BACA COUNTY Replanted February, 1961 Planted April, 1960 • as s::: oM CD t- t:. ~ as s::: as ~ Plot No. 1 2 .s::: r-I .5 ::s Clc to H r-I oM 0 ;3: as UI ~ ::s g .p J.4 Q) El s::: ::s as r-I 't1 Q) 0 e s::: as oM to UI UI M CD ,0. ~ J.4 CD -5 to s:: • toas ;3: ::s p:: fl r-I Q) ., to Q) 0 J.4 OJ o Q) H H CD od r-I Q) • • s::: UI Q) x • Z ~ oM g 't1 oM .0 H .p >a 0 ~ i . 27 101 51 52 60 .p °Ul Q) 0 0 ~ ::s r-I rd r-I as E-4 Q) M r:a1• H 0 ~ o H 0 CD t' J.4 ~ H H as ~ CD ,0. r-I p:j 0 ::e: r-t UI ::s 3 76 38 10 66 75 30 295 15 17 20 18 4 39 39 22 40 20 15 178 19 21 19 19 73 63 35 38 319 16 17 35 17 Totals 164 ___ 212 2Q2 271 R6 20 95 , "0 3 .p s:: s:: oM =- al 18 oM H J.4 Q) Q) EI Clc 0 oM s::: ::s ...., Q) as H s::: EI CD oM .p UI H CD 0. Q) 0 UI s::: UI .s::: 3 ,0. 0. s:: to s::: as 0 r-I UI ::s +' .p ::s +' 0 as 0 as I r-I r-I r-I 0 +3 0 ~ as I 0 124 M 0 124 0 ::e: co 5 5 10 15 99 6 21 26 118 5 12 13 10 110 .p Q) 5 270 25 5 H s::: 12 12 13 12 3 as oM UI CD 291 22 76 71 24 60 27 CD ,0. ~ as 0 5 5 ::s p:j a E-t 103 5 20 98 26 146 I 1~"~97 79 99 77 18 21 10 27 69 41 26 564 I 6 * Only e very few of the red cedars survived trom this planting. 11 18 �Table ....L. CENSUS OF SCALED QUAIL ON EXPERIMENTAL HABITAT DEVELOPMENT AREAS AND OONTROLS ( WINDMILL SITES) BACA COUNfY ConPlot trol Gen. No. No. Lac. SE 1 Bisonte 10 SE Bisonte 2 NE ProJect Hdo. Size of Brood Oounts Fal1~Winter Census Study No. No. Grain Area Date counted Dates Quail Used? 1 sq. mile 8-24-60 1 sq. mIle 8-24-60 BE 3 Edler BE 30 Edler 4 5 & mile 8-24-60 1 sq. m1le 1 sq. mile 8-24-60 1 sq. mile 8-24-60 8-24-60 0 o o 0 12•• 8-60 to 12-21-60 12-8-60 to 12-21-60 l2-S=60 to 12-21-60 12-8-60 to 12-21-60 12-14-60 to 1-5-61 Yes No broods located " in gen. violnity. Oensus- tracks of a tew pheasants .7 mi. S ot well. No quail seen In gen. area. o Yes No broods loeated in gen. vIcInity. Census- no quail seen in gen. vioin1ty. 0 Yes No broods located 1n gen. vicinIty. Census- no auail seen 1n lil:eD. vlcinltJ. o Yes No broods located in gen. Censu8- no 0 12-14=60 to 0 Yes to 0 Yes 1 sq. ~23-60 0 to 0 Yes 1 sq. mile 8-30-60 0 Kirkwel~ ~'-~y-ou to 0 Yes SE 1 sq. S::22-60 :r 6- All quail vere scaled unless otherwise shown. No broods seen in gen. vicinity. Census•.• no auail seen in lZ:en. vicin1 tJ • ~-, and 4-11 at Ormisted plaoe (.7 m1 S ot well). 1 brood also 1 m1 Nand 1 a1 well. Oensus- 5 quail at Orml_stedplace. , -- t~ ( ~ +- No broods located 1n gen. vioinity. Cenaua- n~ '1 ouail seen 1n g~n. vicinity. t$ Y 8-23---60 0 0 • W Ye8 1 sq. mile sw-- _ 0 S Prater Barn SW 4C Prater Barn SO Kirkwell mile • o ~60 1 sq. NE 20 Project Hdo. 0 .;.Rem&;r~ ..k:!:.,;9:!.· 0 Yes I �-165- Recommendations Procedures outlined should be continued to show whether the development of scaled quail cover through tree and shrub plantings is possible near windmill sites in southern Baca Oounty. Routine area ses.rches and census studies should be continued to show the use made of the development site areas and controls by scaled quail. Summary The f1ve windmill cover development plots were tenced and the initial planting ot trees and shrubs was made in April, 1960. Due to an almost complete failure of the original plantings, a replanting using more drought resistant species was made in February, 1961. To date, no scaled quail have moved 1nto the study areas each of which are one square mile in size. Prepared by: Donald M. Hotfman Approved by: Ferd O. Kleinschnitz Assist. Federal Aid Date: April, 1961 Ooordinator �-166- PLATE 1. Plot #1. Location-Cal Thompson Lease SE of Bisonte, Baca County. May 24, 1960. PLA.TE 2. Plot #lC. Location-Cal Thompson Lease SE of Bisonte, Baca County. May 24, 1960. �.• PLATE 3. Plot #2. Location-J. Deen Lease NE Project Headquarters, Baca County. May 24, 1960 . •• PLATE 4 . Plot #2C. Location-J. Patterson Lease NE Project Headquarters, Baca County. May 24, 1960. �-168- PLATE _5_. Plot #5. Location-Walt Dunlap Lease SWof Ki.r-kwe Ll , Baca County. May 16) 1960. 6. Plot #5C. Location-Fred Mizer Lease BE of Kirkwell, Baca County. May 23) 1960. PLATE �April, 1961 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS State ot PROJECTS C_O~LO~RADO=;=_ . ,. Job No. , Pro'Ject No •. _.-.;;;.W--.3,,-?-.....;;R;.;;,.-.....;;1;;..4.:..__ Game Bird Survey Work Plan No. 6 Title ot Job: Mapplng ot scaled quail range 2 Period Covered: March 16,1960 to March 15, 1961. Abstract: The mapplng ot acaled qual1 range through the dellneatlon ot major cover types was accomplished ln portions ot Pueblo, Otero, Las Anlmas, Baca, and Provers Counties durlng the present report period. A comparison ot scaled quail numbers observed by oover type along ten establlshed summer trend routes ln 1959 and 1960 showed that the sand sagebrush - grassland type contalned the hlghest average density ot scaled quail during the tyO perl ods sampled. Vense cholla cactus- grasslands, cedar breaka, and dry land tarmlands types tollowed ln this order. ObJeoti ves: (1) To assemble available lntormation on scaled quail range and dlstribution. (2) To complete mapping ot scaled qual1 range. (3) To compl1e data and prepare distrlbution and density maps ot scaled quail populations. Procedures: (1) Determine perimeter ot scaled qual1 range by county. (2) Determine denslty ot scaled quail populations. (3) Planlmeter yarious units ot populatlon density to determine square miles ot various denslties and total range tor eaoh county. (4) Prepare wrltten description ot range tor each countJ (5) Prepare distribution and density maps ot range. ��-171- MAPPING OF SCALED QUAIL RANGE Donald M. Hotfman Field mapping ot scaled quail range aooording to major oover type delineation has been oontinued using prooedures outlined in the April, 1959 Job Oompletion Report. The tollowing peroentages of scaled quail range south ot the Arkansas River by counties have been field mapped to date: Approx. per oent County ot range mapped Huertano Pueblo Otero Las Animas Baca Provers Fremont Ouster Bent 100% 100,$ 100.% 80.% 66% 15.% 0,% 0.% 0% Table 1 shows a comparison of soaled quail numbers by maJor-oover type along ten established summer trend routes for 1959 and 1960 •. Previously, comparisons were made of soaled qual1 numbers Observed by oover type during routine field oheoks but this did net give a oomparison of densities. By oomparing soaled quail numb.rs observed by oover type ooourrence along established routes, a muoh better comparison is seoured sinoe the amount ot eaoh cover type along the routes can be· oaloulated. Scaled quail densities calculated in birds per mile oounted along the trend routes during the summers ot 1959 and 1960 averaged highest in the sand sagebrushgrassland type, followed by dense cholla cactusgrasslands, ceda.r breaks, dryland fa.rmlands, irrigated tarmlands, saltbush-greasewood washes, and sparse cholla oactus-grasslands in this order. Three cover types oocurring within scaled quail range were not sampled adequately along the seleoted route. so t~at oomparisons can not be made. These types are river bottoms, shortgrass grassle.nds, and mid-type grasslands. Tree plantings whioh hold an attraotion for soaled quail are not oonsidered in the oomparisons made. �Table -1A COMPARISON OF SCALED QUAIL OBSERVED BY OOVER TYPES ALONG TEN TREND ROUTES No. ml1es samrled * . a) Oover Type Numbers scaled ~ ot total qual1 observed**Blrds/ml1e** ml1es 1960 1959 1960 1959 (b) (0) (d) (e) (t) Ave. blrds/ ml1e Rank (Column g) (g) Sand sagebDush-grassland b5.70 27.51 767 327 5.84 1.66 3.75 1 Dense cho11a cactus-grasBiand 64.10 26.83 444 287 3.46 1.49 2.48 2 Cedar breaks 33.15 13.88 228 145 3.44 1.46 2.45 3 Dryland farmlands 20.10 8.41 131 85 3.26 1.41 2.34 4 Irrlgated farmlands 13.10 5.48 27 48 1.03 1.22 1.13 5 21.75 9.10 56 36 1.29 .55 .92 6 Sparse cholla oactusgrassland Rl ver bottoms 15.75 6.59 2 0 .06 .00 .03 7 2.50 1.0.5 0 0 .00 .00 .00 Mldtype grasslands 0.25 .10 1 0 2.00 .00 1.00 Shortgrass grasslands 2.50 1.05 0 0 .00 .00 .00 Totals Average 238.90 100.00 1656 928 - 1.52 - 2.50 Saltbush-greasewood i washes 3.47 Mlleages based upon runnlng each of ten routes onoe. ** Routes runtwloe,eaoh in summer of 1959 and three tlmes eaoh in summer ot 1960. *** Sample insuffloient • Oalou1ations: (b) ::. (e) Sum of ~a) a = aoL2 X 100 (f) =. .....ill a (g) = Sum of2 e + t - - - *** - I ~ i\J. I �-173Summary Additional areas within scaled quail range south of the Arkansas River were field mapped aocordingto vegetative cover types during the report period. In addition, an analysis ot cover composition along the ten ~stablished trend routes Was completed. The numbers ot scaled quail observed along these routes during the summers ot 1959 and 1960 were compared with the cover types in whioh tound. Prepared by: Donald M. Hoffman APproved by: Ferd C. K1etnschnitz Assist. Federal Aid Date: April, 1961 Coordinator ��April, 1961 -175- JOB COMPLETION REPORf INVESTIGATIONS PROJEC!S Stat. ot O;;;..;O-.;;LO=RADO=~ __ ProJect 10. W-37-R-l~ ; Work Plan Bo. _.;;.6 ; Job title ot Job: ot Census ~eahnigues tor Dayalop.ent Game Bird Survey .0. J Scaled ~uail. Period Covered: Karoh 15, 1960 to Karch 15, 1961. Abstraot: Part I. Winter Coyey Counts. Area winter covey counts were continued within three toraerly establi.hed units and one additional unit was censu8ed. An average ot only 4.08 scaled quail per square mile was counted on a total ot twenty-tiTe square .iles compared with an average ot 17.56 scaled quail per 8quare mile counted in a total ot eighteen square mile8 tor the previou8 winter. The severe prolonged ~1nter stor.. during early 1960 ire thought to be the aain caU8e ot thi8 reduoed 80aled quail population. �Part II. Brood Counts. During the summer ot 1960, ten established brood coun. trend routes were each run three ditterent tiaes at Tarious time ot day by the writer. The tolloving table shows the results ot comparing the 1960 summer scaled quail populations With the 1959 populations as indicated b.1 the trend route counts. SCALED QUAIL TREND ROUTE DATA 1959 .AND 1960 No. ATe. Young/ Brood • Birds/ Hile Young to ATe. fetal .Adult Covey "u~il Size Counted Batio 8.92 :3.47 14.45 1656 284 : 100 (2counts) 49 8.09 (:3counts) 1.52 11.08 725 242 : 100 (:3counts) Broods Recorded se , Bo. Routea.Counts.(Routes) 1959 10 1960.. 10 2 66 (2counta) • Includes miscellaneous broods personally counted as well as those counted along establishe~ routes • •• Calc_lations tor 1960 based upon the two highest out at the three counts made except where indica~ed. The main reason tor the lower scaled quail population in 1960 as indicated b.1 the study is thought to be the prolonged period ot deep snows and cold weather on the eastern slope during the past winter period. The scaled quall population in the area south or U.s. 160 in Baca and eastern Las Animas Oounties was not hurt as severely as the aore northern quail areas. It Was round that highest counts were recorded Btartl~ the routes approximately torty tiTe minutes atter sunris •• �-1((- Objectives: (1) To determine methods tor ascertaining annual changes in scaled qUail populations. , representatiTe scale4 quall brood count routes and census areas within the range ot the species. To instruct other Departmental personnel in the procedures. To prepare torms and record books tor the s1stema~io recording ot intormation. ~o eventually turn scaled quail brood oounts and winter census work over to management. (2) To establish permanen~ Procedures: I. Winter Covey Counts. (1) Selection ot areaQ or routes tor trend counts. (2) ~escription ot methods and times tor malting eounts. (3) Gollection ot tield data. (4) Analysis ot tield data. II. Brood Counts. (1) Seleotion ot brood count routes. (2) Description ot methods and times tor making counts. (3) Collection ot tield data. (4) AnalysiS ot tield data. �-178- DEVELOPMENT OF CENSUS TECHNIQUES FOR SCALED QUAIL Donald M. Hotfman Findings Part I. Winter Covey Counts. Procedures used in securing wintering period area covey counts during the present report period were sim1l1ar to those used In earller counts. Procedures used In censusing the establlshed units during the wintering period ot 1960-61 consisted ot: 1. Preliminary balting and search ot study area tor scaled quail coveys. , a. Whole maize was scattered at a varying number ot sltes. 1. Near water holes. 2. Areas wlth good scaled quail cover. 3. Areas where coveys have been observed in past. b. These sites arerebaited as needed so that teed is available during a two week study period. ' 2. The census unit is rechecked tor scaled quail coveys at least two more tlmes (usually more) during the two week study period. a. Feed areas are checked caretully for tleld sign. b. Locations ot good cover are searched. 3. All scaled quail coveys located and locations ot field sign found are recorded on fleld forms. Areas in whIch fleld sign is tound are double checked to secure counts ot quail • .' 4. All census units establlshed'to date are six or seven square miles in size since areas this size can be thoroughly searched within the available time." 5. Some portions ot all census units can be worked with the use ot a vehicle but many' areas must be checked on foot. 6. The time consumed in the field work within the census units averaged trom nineteen to twen.ty hours tor the most part. 7. Persons baving accurate intormation on scaled quail covey locations and numbers were contacted when possible. �-179- Results of the area w1nter1ng counts ( Table .1 ) showed a much lower wintering scaled quail population compared with that ot a year ago. In the wintering perlod ot 1959-60, an average ot 17.56 scaled quail were counted per square mile on a total ot elghteen square miles sampled. In the wintering period ot 1960-61, an average of only 4.08 scaled quall were counted per square mlle on a total ot twenty t1ve square mlles censused. The main reason tor this much lower scaled quall population was the severe late w1nter storms which pers1sted over the southeastern part ot the State 1n early 196e and caused a substantial loss in b1rds. Past exper1ence has shown that late Winter and early springb11zzards can be disastrous to scaled quall populations. The winterlng period covey counts as outlined do not accurately measure over,-wintering populations because they are completed betore late winter. The counts do, however, give an 1ndicat10n ot populatlon levels going 1nto the late w1nter per10d. • �Table 1 A OOMPARISON OF SOALED Q,UAIL WINTERING Name ot Unlt County Approx. Slze , ot Unlt Vogel Canyon Otero 6 sq.ml1es Carey Dam Bent 6 sq.ml1es Dye, Glover, Brlght u.s.r.s. lease Baca 6 sq.ml1es (1959-60) 1 sq. ml1es (1960••61) Almagre Canyon Las Anlmas 6 sq. ml1es Dates Oounted 12-8-.59 to 1-6-.60 12-8-59 to 1-6-60 1•.• 12-60 to 1-27•.• 60 OOVEY OOUNTS 1~22;.o(rumbers Oounted Number 00veY8 109 5 167 9 40 2 Date. Oounted 11-1~60 to 11••29•.• 60 1-10-61 to 1-24-61 12-14-60 to 1••,5-61 - 12~O-ol Numbers Oounted Rumbel Covey 51 3 0 0 29 2 ~, no counts - - Totals 316 16 11-18-60 to 12-2-60 I co 0 22 1 102 6 Summary: Counts during the 19.59-60 wlntering period averaged 17.56 scaled qual1 per square ml1e within the elghteen square ml1es censused. Counts durlng the 1960-61 wlnterlng perlod averaged 4.08 scaled qual1 per square ml1e wlthin the twenty-tive square miles oensused. ' I �-181- Part II. Scaled Quail Brood Counts. Introduction Scaled quail brood counts during the summer ot 1960 were continued along the order ot those run in 1959. Only minor changes were made in regard to route locations and methods. Experimentation was carried out to determine the best time ot day tor counting broods and standardization ot methods. All counts were made during the present report period by the writer. Results ot Study A young to adult ratio ot 242 : 100 Was calculated for the 1960 brood count season trom July 25, 1960 through September 3, 1960 based upon a sample ot 928 scaled quail counted in three counts each along ten trend routes in southeastern Colorado. at these, 412 were young, 170 were adults, and 346 were unclassified. A total ot 52 separate broods were accurately counted along the ten trend routes in three counts. at these, three were thought to have been repeat counts. An additional 18 separate broods were counted in miscellaneous Checks bring the total tallied to 67. It WaS oalculated that the sample size was suttioient to estimate within ~en per cent 01' the true mean. There Was an averageot 8.09 young per brood in the 67 broods acourately counted. The aver.age length of the ten routes run in 1960 Was 23.89 miles ( Table -1...) • An average speed ot 14.39 mph was maintained tor all routes including the time when the vehicle was stopped to tlush birds. Three replicate counts were made along eaCh ot the ten routes making a total ot thirty counts. In addition, several counts were made during periods ot high winds or other poor conditions and were disregarded as being unreliable. �In a comparlson ot early mornlng counts (Table -2-), It was tound that routes started 45 mlnutes atter sunrlse produced 17.80 per cent more scaled qual1 observed than those started 15 mlnutes prior to sunrlse. On only one out ot the elght routes on whlch comparatlve counts were made were more quall observed on the earlier count. Fewest observatlon. ot scaled quail were made during the late P.M. counts but in comparatlve counts along the ten routea, only ten less blrds were recorded tor the evening count. compared with the early morning counts started 15 ainut •• prior to sunrise. During the 1959 brood counting season, one late P.M. and one early A.M. count was made along each ot the ten established routes. In 1960, three seriea ot counts were made along each ot the ten routes. In order that the counts can be compared during the two brood counting seasons, the two highest ot the three counts made ln 1960 Were used to compare with the two counts made In 1959. Table -l- AnOWS t~. results ot the 1960 brood counts. Based upon the two hlghest count. out ot ~he three counts made on each route, there were sa average ot 1.52 scaled quail counted per mlle and an average ot 21.81 blrds were counted per hour. An average covey slze ot 11.08 was recorded durlng the study. In 1960, a total ot 67 separate broods averaglng 8.09 young per brood was recorded durlng the study perlod. Ot these, 49 were ta1l1ed ln the three counts on the ten estab11shed routes. By comparlson ln 1959 (Table~) , there was an average ot 3.47 blrds counted per mile and an average covey s1ze ot 14.45. In 1959, a total ot 100 aeparate broods averaglng 8.92 young per brood were ta1l1.ed durlng the study perlod lncludlng 66 counted in the two counts on the ten established routes. Table -1- shows that the overall decrease in scaled qual1 populations 1n southeastern Colorado in 1960 compared with 1959 as indicated by sWIller counts . along ten established trend routes was 56.22 per cent. The pop~at10n in the area south ot U.S. 160 in Baca aDd 'eastern Laa Animas Counties Was not reduced to the extent that the area north ot U.S. 160 WaS. A reduction ot 43.25"per cent was calculated tor the �area south of U.S. 160 compared with a reduction of 75.26 per cent tor the area north of U.S. 160. The prolonged period ot deep snows and cold weat:taer on the eastern slope during the past winter is thought to be the main reason for the population decline a8 shown in the study. Area covey counts completed in southeastern Colorado durlng the late fall period showed that the scaled quall populatlQn went into the winter perlod In good shape. It was observed that tactors or condltions which may have a detrimental etfect on counting scaled quail along trend routes include: (1) h1gh w1nds. (2) heavy vehicular traftic. tH recent borrow plt grading by malntenance creWs. 'Other game and predatory specles observed in conjunction wlth scaled quall brood counts along the ten establlshed routes Include one lesser pralrle chlcken hen wlth eeven chicks; twenty-three wlld turkeys including hens and young; twenty phee.sants Including hens, cocks, and young; two ducks; numerous mour.i~ doves; cottontail rabbits; Jackrabbl ts;tOlll" antelope; one coyote; two badgers; and mlscellaneous hawks, owls, and eagles. Recommendatlons Continuatlon of brood counts along establlshed trend routes is recommended in order that comparatlve data can be gathered each year to further test the methods. �Table ....L TREND ROUTE INFORMATION Route Name ot No. Route Total Tlme County( les) ()oounts) Average Tlme 1 Smlth Oanyon OteroLas Anlmas 2hrs 50mln S7mln 2 HlgbeeOarey Dam OteroBent 4hrs 32mln 3 Aplshapa Sandsage Otero 4 Le Sage Ranoh Las Anlmas S Campo Sandsage E. Baea 6 Campo Sandsage W. 7 'Total Mlles ()oounts) Average Mlles Vegetatlve Types SamRled 41.7 13.9 Dense oholla, oedar breaks, gressewood, dryland. lhr 3lmln 70.2 23.4 4hrs 40mln lhr 33m1n 61.6 20., Cedar breaks, dense oholla, lrrlgated, greasewood, rlver bottoms. Dense oholla, sandsage, greasewood, sparse oholla. 4hrs S5mln lhr 38mln 84.6 28.2 Shrs 4Smln lhr 55mln 99.4 33.1 Baoa 5hrs l2mln lhr 44mln 67.8 22.6 Sandsage, dryland , dense oholla. Oarrlzo Mtn. BaoaLas Anlmas ,hrs 20mln lhr 47mln ,7.0 19.0 8 KlrkwellState line Baoa ,hrs 20mln lhr 47 mln 66.3 22.l 9 0F &I Dltch FremontPueblo 6hrs 40mln '2hrs13mln 94.3 31.4 10 Holly Prowers 4hrs 3,mln lhr 32mln 74.0 24.7 ~ense yuooa, cedar breaks, sandsage, spa~se oholla, dryland , lrrlgated, river bottoms.' . Dense cholla, sandsage, oedar breaks, dryland, shortgrass, river bottoms. Cedar breaks, greasewood, dense cholla, sparse oholla, rlver bottoms, dryland. Sandsage, ~ryland, irrlgated, dense oholla, shortgrass. TQTALS 49hrs 49mln --------- 716.9 238.9 ~en8e oholla, sparse oholla, lrrlgated, greasewood, rlver bottoms, dryland. Sandsage, dryland, dense oholla. ~ Average length ot routes ----------------------------Average mlles per hour for all routes----------------Average tlme tor runnlng routes ---------------------- 23.89 mlles 14.39 mph 1 hr 40 mln. t �-185Table 2 BROOD ROUTE COUNTS-- 1960 Date & Birds Observed Total Repeat ~otal Time Young Adults Unclass. Broods Broods Bird. Series I 8-16-60 (PM) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 8-1-60 ~PM) 0 0 2 0 6 0 7-28-60 PM~ 0 0 0 6 ~60 (PM 0 2 0 0 0 2 26 8-9-60 (PM~ 10 2 5 0 41 8-2)-60(PM 45 12 0 0 5 57 4 2 9-1-60 IPIiI 20 87 0 111 9••2-60 PM) 18 21 2 0 42 3 8-1,....60 PM) 0 IJ 0 0 0 7-2s,...60(PM)0 16 0 0 0 16 Total 50' 11 138 0 281 93 Route No. Repeat Birds 1 2 3 If. 0 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 l5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 l5 6 7 8 9 10 ,. B-11-60(AM) &'2-60 ~AM) 7-29-60 AM) 8-S-60 ~AM) 0 0 9 0 a..9w60 AM) 5 8-24-60 (AM) 0 9-t2-60 (AM) 24 a-3O-60~AHl 57 8-16..-60AM 5 7-26..60(AH) 2 Total 109 8Ml1.60 ~AM) 0 8-3-60 AM) 28 7-3O-60(AK) 7 8-6-60 (AM 19 23 S-2~60~AM 8-2"...60AM 16 49 9-)-60 8-31.-.60AX 50 8-17••60 .AM 12 6 7-27-60 AM Total 210 lAX 0 2 5 0 7 0 S 12 3 2 43 0 46 8 7 10 14 7 14 77 Series II 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 38 0 19 44 3 6 43 0 1 0 2 144 15 Series III 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 2 25 4 0 2 27 5 0 8 0 1 1 61 26 0 0 o . 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 e 0 0 42 16 0 1 59 0 0 2 140 50 19 73 112 8 18 296 0 3 35 11 25 S6 23 86 64 19 3~~ 3 0 0 0 11 If. 0 2 20 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 21 0 12 35 Series I (PM) counts started to end approximately when too dark to count. Series II (AM)counts started approximately 15 min. prior to sunrise ( when barely 1iJht enough to count). Series III(AM)counts. All but 3 an~ #10 started approximately 45 min. atter sunrise. ~utes 13 and #10 started approximately 15 min. prior to sunrise. �Table ...l... BROOD ROUTE OOUNT OOMPARISONS -- 1960 • Route No. Two H1shest Oounts Oomblne~ Total Total Ave. Covey Slze •• Broods Blrds Blrds/ Hour Broods/ Hour Blrds/ Ml1e Broods/ Ml1e 1 0 3 3.00 1.58 0.00 0.11 0.00' 2 2 37 16.00 12.21 0.66 0.79 0.04 3 2 25 6.50 8.06 0.65 0.61 0.05 4 2 27 11 •.50 8.26 0.61 0.48 0.04 5 6 106 11.58 27.68 1.57 1.60 0.09 6 7 80 13.43 23.05 2.02 1.77 0.15 7 7 197 23.12 55.18 ·1.96 5.18 0.18 8 14 176 12.82 49.30 3.92 3.98 0.32 9 2 27 7.00 6.09 0.45 0.43 0.03 10 3 47 5.80 15.31 0.98 0.95 0.06 Totals 43 725 a Average covey size b "'versge : Average : G d Average : e Average : t Young to adult ratl0 11.08 21.81 pirds per hour. 1.35 broods per hour 1 •.52birds per mile. 0.09 broods per mile. . 412 : 170 or 242 : 100 (trom routes using data from 3 counts). * BASED UBON TWO HIGHEST OOUNTS OUT OF THE THREE OOUNTS MADE ON EACH ROUTE • •• REP~ OBSERVATIONS NOT DISREGARDED. ~ ~ t �-187- Table 4 .SUMMARY OF COUNTS -- 1960 I. Scaled quail observed ~~d broods counted - repeats not disregarded. Total Birds 281 Total Broods 11 Series II (very early AM counts) 296 , 15 Series III (AM counts started 45 min. atter sunrise for most part) 351 26 Total counted on ten routes (3counts) 928 52 Series I (late PM counts) II. Percentages of observations repeats - three counts •• thought to have been Number broods counted accurately along routes Number broods thought to have been repeats Total Percentage ot broods recounted Number ot birds counted along routes Number ot birds thought to have been repeats Total Percentage of birds recounted • 52 -~ 6.13 928 114 814 14.00 Repeats calculated from area descriptions where birds were observed in most cases and recording of accurate mileages from checkpoints in others. �-l88- Table ~ A COMPARISON OF EARLY MORlIING COUNTS - Route No. No. observed starting approx. 15 min. prior to sunrise. 1960 No. observed starting approx. 45 min. atter sunrise. 1 o 3 2 2 35 3• •• - 4 o 25 5 50 56 6 19 23 7 73 86 8 •• 112 64 8 19 264 311 9 10 • Totals - 17.80 per cent more scaled quail were observed on the counts started approximately 45 minutes atter sunrise compared with those started approximately 15 minutes prior to sunrise • • Both AM counts started 15 min. prior to sunrise on routes #3 and /110 • •• Only on this one route out ot the eight on which comparative counts were made were there more birds observed during the earlier counts. �Table -6 A OOMPARISON OF 1959 AND 1960 SUMMER SOALED QUAIL POPULATIONS IN SOUTHEASTERN OOLORADO AS INDIOATED BY TREND ROUTE OOUNTS * - Route No. No. Miles 1 1:3.9 2 :3 7 11 14.75 :3.00 64 :3 2.:37 .11 2 2:3.4 2 :3 24 5 14.06 16.00 2:39 :37 5.61 .79 :3 20.5 2 :3 20 4 12.00 6.50 , 188 25 4.6:3 .61 4 28.9 2 :3 :3 4 16.00 11.50 ' 19 27 .:3:3 .48 5 :3,.1 2 :3 14 1:3 11.00 11.58 106 106 1.59 1.60 t; 6 22.6 2 :3 ·22 9 17.11 13.4:3 :31:3 80 6.92 1.77 'f 7 .19,.0.: 2 ~ 19 11 16.56 2:3.12 270 197 7.11 5.18 8 , 22.1 2 :3 19 1:3 20.57 12.82 296 176 6.7:3 3.98 9 :31,.4 2 3 6 5 11.25 7.00 27 .74 .4:3 10 24·Z 2 ~ 11 .4 11.2a S.Ba 47 114 4Z :30 145 79 --- 1656 725 2, :3 14.5 - .2S Total 2:38.9 20 - g.32 7.9 11.08 165.6 12.5 :3.47 Ave. 23.89 14.45 - 1.52 NOT disregarded. Oalculations tram two oounts in 1959 and two highest oounts * ,Repeats out at three made in 1960. ** Ino1udes sIngles and pairs. ' .** Covey - three birds or more. �'fable ...1A COMPARISON OF NUMBERS OF SCALED Q,UAIL OBSERVED IN TWO COUNTS ALOm TEN TREND ROUTES - 1959 AND 1960 • I. Area North of U.S. 160. Total Birds 12bO 1 12:22 64 2 239 3 4 188 37 25 19 27 9 10 47 27 114 47 671 166 Route No. Total 75.26 Per Cent Decrease II. 3 Area South of U.S. 160. Total Birds 1252 106 12bO 313 80 7 270 197 8 296 176 985 559 Route No. 5 6 '.:eo tal 106 Per Cent Deorease 43.25 Per Cent Decrease All Ten Routes 56.22 • Repeats NOT disregarded. One late PM and one early AM count made in 1959. One late PM and two early AM counts made in 1960 - the two highest oounts out of the three used in calculations. �-191- Table -.!L ANALYSIS OF DATA Brood ~izes Observed , 01a88 Number 1 2 1 Total 1 1 2 1 11 111 1111111 1111111111 11111111 111111111 111111 111111 S 6 7 8 9 10 3 7 10 8 9 6 6 2 11 11 11 12 13 14 15 16 2 4 5 1111 11111 -- o 1 1 67 Total a. Sum ot X 542 b. N o. Mean 67 (X) 8.09 2 d. Sum (X - X ) e. Standard deviation (8) 8:: t. 717.59 ·V 7t~·59 V 10.71 ::3.27 (8 Standard error ot mean ) X 8 i :: 3.27 - - ~ .40 V 67 g. Oonfidence Limits X + t.05 • ( .05 level) s_ x - 8.09 t 1.996 x .40 = 8.09'" .80 �Table ~ (Cont.) h. M1n1mum number ot samples needed N= ( t.05) - 42:~~ -- 61+ ( .10 2 - 42.2~ = 266 .1 (8) • X ) 2 .05 level N= ~ t.02l ( .05 i. Young to adult rat10 * - • - 2 2 .10 level 2 (s~ X ) 412: 170 242 100 * From routes using data from 3 counts. Repeats not disregarded. �Summary An average ot only 4.08 scaled quail per square· mile were counted on a total ot twenty tive square miles durlng the past wintering period compared with an average ot 17.56 scaled quall per square mile counted on a total ot eighteen square miles tor the 1959-60 winterlng period. In a comparison ot summer scaled quail populations in 1959 and 1960 in southeastern Colorado as indicated by trend route counts, it was tound there was a . reduction in overall population ot 56.22 per cent in 1960. The main cause ot this reduction is thought to be the preceeding severe winter which prevailed over the scaled quall range. The area south ot u.S. 160 was not hurt as much as that north ot U.S. 160. A young to adult ratiO ot 242 : 100 was calculated ln 1960 compared with 284 : 100 in 1959. In 1960, there were 1.52 scaled quail counted per mlle along the trend routes compared with 3.47 ln 1959. In 1960, a total ot 49 scaled quall broods were counted in three counts along ten established trend routes compared with a total ot 66 broods counted in two counts along the ten established trend routes in 1959. Prep~red by: Donald M.Hotfman Date: April, 1961 Approved by: lerd C. Kle1nschnitz Assist. Federal Aid Coordinator ��April, 1961 -195- JOB COMPLETION INVESTIGATIONS Stat e ot __ C;:,;O:.::LO=RADO=:.:-_ Project Ko. I-J7-R-14 Work Plan 10. _.;;.8 !1tIe ot Job: REPORT PROJECTS ,. Game Blrd Survey ; Job 10. _...;2;;;.... _ Oensus ot lesser pralr'.e chlckens Abstract: A total ot seven lesser pralr1e ch1cken dlsplay grounds have been located to date. Slx ot these grounds are 1n Baca County and one 1s located ln Provers County. All are wlthin ~he sand sagebrush vegetat1ve type. An lnorease ln numbers ot lesser pra1rle ohlckens was observed on allot the three d1splay grounds whlch vere looated dur1ng the spr1ng ot 1959. A total ot 48 lesser pralrle ch10kens and a m1n1mum ot 39 cocks were oounted on seven dlsplay grounds durlng the spr1ng ot 1960. . Fleld observatlons durlng the present report perlod 1nd1oated that the lesser pra1r1e chlcken populatlon w1thln the state ls extremely low at this tlme. ObJectl yes: (1) To determlne changes ln populat1ons (2) To looate new tlocks where posslble. ot known tlocks. �Procedures: I. II. Census ot known tlooks through early spring counts ot males on display grounds. Looation ot new populations. A. Early morning listening checks during early spring period in Baca and Prowers Oounties where lesser prairie chiCkens have been reported in recent years. B. Mapping ot areas in which lesser prairie chickens are located. �-19'7" CENSUS OF LESSER PRAIRIE CHICKENS Donald M. Hottman Findings The three original display grounds located during the spring ot 1959 were again counted during the spring ot 1960. In addition, tour more display grounds were located through early morning listening cheeks. Table -1- shows counts made ot lesser prairie chickens on all grounds. Figure -1- shows the approximate locations ot populations ot lesser prairie Chickens discovered to date. Table ~ shows a comparison ot popUlations on the three display grounds located during the spring ot 1959 and recounted during the spring ot 1960. It Was tound there were 64.29 per cent more cocks on these three grounds during the spring ot 1960 and 77.78 per cent more birds were counted on the three grounds during the spring ot 1960 compared with the counts made dur1ng the spring ot 1959. Favorable weather conditions during the nesting season in 1959 was undoubtedly a major tactor in the increase ot birds present on the three grounds during the spring ot 1960. It was tound that in all three eases the birds returned to the original areaa tor booming. From the tie1d work accomplished on this Job to date, it is apparent that the resident population ot lesser prairie chickens within the State is extremely low at this t1me. Recommendations It 1s recommended that early spr1ng counts ot10cated �Table -1 Lesser Prairie Chicken Display Ground Oounts Ground Number Name ot Ground county Date & Time Apr.22,60 7 5:30 A.M. Apr.26,60 10 5:00 4.M. Apr.15 &16,60 6 4:55 A.M. Apr.26,60 5:45 A.M. 7 Apr.26,60 2 6: 15 A.M. May 10,60 6 4:50 A.M. M~ 18,60 1 4: 2 A.M. 1 Holly /I 1 Prowers 2 S. ot Cimarron River #1 Baca 3 Baca 4 Dye, Glover", Bright Lease III S. ot Oimarron River #2 5 S. of Cimarron River #3 Baca .baQ& 6 Rane s Ranch #1 Baca 7 Perkins, Tanner Lease #1 Baca TOTALS --- Spring 1960 Oocks Hen. Unc1ass. Total " 2 - 9 - 2 12 - 11 •• 7 5 - - - , ~ \0 2 6 ••• •• 1 1 2 48 , co �Table A Comparison -2 ot Lesser Prairie Chicken Display Ground Counts On Three Grounds Located During Spring, 1959 Spring, 1959 Cooks Hens Unclass. Total Ground 4 Holly #1 s. ot Cimarron River #1 Dye, Glover, Bright Lease #1 TOTALS * The majority, - 2 - - Spring, 1960 Cocks Hens Unolass. Total 6 ., 8 10 2 ••• 9 - 2 12 • 8 • 2 2 - 4 6 4 8 18 6 5 - 11 23 7 2 32 it not all these thought to have been cocks. Per Oent Inorease Cooks 64.29 Total birds on grounds 77.78 1 t-' \0 \0 1 �MAP OF COLORADQ F';;FAr------ -----, RO-;;rr --!j;.c;r.;oif'\.. oC'~'>'\ j I Httlttr'/Atw.fl I r~"7 ,i ~'L.} - "IfWV f ! ~ c'"'" • ! I. .•...L'-'------------------l , I • MwtttIJIo"o 0"_"'/ , \ oDllnAfwJ 0"0,.6V7 :RIO 8I.AN~ ,.AV 0"'" ",.8. ~ 0_z.r. j r----\_, -', . \'- .1. I kON1YlClSF -- - _.J , ' H-' • I . h;' . ,SAN ~moAk'" OVh --------------{ 1GUFJ. "Lo, i-;d i 6.- ,.:-----1- CROWin:- MONrRosr I • I ~U). , o fSAiwACH7- i I , '.'1 , •......•.. ~iI ) FlGURE 1 Approximate Location ot Lesser Prairie Chicken Display Grounds /( /''-'--~ . 0_ _ ~lrsA;w. 0'_", 0,.,* 0(Jf(/~ 0/IHfwI' ..•. t" .• .11f 0,_ _N. 0_ �-201- display grounds be continued along with checks to locate new flocks. A larger number ot established display grounds should be loca.ted it possible in order that population trends may be more accurately determined. Summar~ A comparison ot populations ot lesser prairie chiokens on three display grounds loca.ted during the spring of 1959 and recounted during the spring of 1960 showed an increase in cocks of 64.29 per cent and an increase in total birds observed on the grounds of 77.78 per cent. These figures are trom a comparison ot counts on only three grounds. Four more display grounds were looated during the spring of 1960 bringing the total known grounds to seven. A total of 48 lesser prairie chickens were counted on the seven grounds Qr an average of 6 86 birds per ground. Considering only oocks, a total of 39 cocks were observed on the seven grounds or 5.57 cocks per ground. 0 It is apparent at this time that the resident popUlation of lesser prairie chickens within the State is extremely low. Prepared by: De t e : _ ... __ Don~:J:.(~Lli!_)!9.f.r~~f! Approved .&~11,_1_9_~J.. _ by: Ferd C. Kleinschnitz nsGTst. Federal A1.d Coord~nator ��l\pril) 19G1 -203- JOB COMPLETION INVESTIGATIONS State of Projeot PROJECTS ~CO~I~JO~RA~D~O~ _ . W-37..• R-14 No. Title of Job: Experimental Job No. hHbitat lesser prairie Covered: Game Bjrd Survey J 8 Work Plan No. Period REPORlr 1mprovement for chickens. March 16, 1960 to March 15, 1961. Abstrftct: The initial development work on a. 160 acre tract southwest of Campo in Baca County within lesser prairie ohicken range was completed during the report period except for minor fencing. The fencing '\villbe completed by U.S. Forest Service personnel in the near future. HabitAt manipulation steps used to improve the traot in a cooperative effort with the U.s. Forest Service and the Campo Sportsmen's Club were those recommended under Job 1 Work Plan 8 vJ-37-R-13 ( April, 1960 Job Completion Report). Objecti ves: (1) To study methods of re-eotablishjng lesser prairie chickens w1thin formerly occupied range through habitat manipulation. (2) To develop suitable preas for the release of Wild stock to increase the range and numbers of lesser prairie chickens. �-204- Procedures: (I) Development steps: a. Fenctng of tract i! needed. b. Reseeding of preferred taller grasses if needed. c. Establishment of permanent game bird water. d. Establjshment of permanent cover through planting of trees a.ndshrubs. (;2)Mapping of study area. (3) Evaluation of success of habitat manipulation in developing better lesser prairie ohioken habt tat. �~205~ EXPERIl-iEN'l'AL HABITAT IMPROVEMENT FOR LESSER PRAIRIE CHICKENS Done.1d M. Hoffman Introduction Th1s job was it1tiated at a time when it appeared that wild stock for restocking areas could be secured from one of the bordering States. Efforts to secure transplanting stock have not produced results to date. Steps which were recommended under- Job 1 Work',P1an 8 ( April, 1960 Job Completion Report) to benefit lesser prairie chickens through habitat manipulation of isolated tracts are: (1) Fencing the tracts to exclude cattle. (2) Reseeding of tracts with taller preferred grass species. (3) Development of permanent water sources. (4) Tree and shrub p1antings. A 160 acre surplus grazing tract administered by the U.S. Forest Service located two miles west and two miles south of Campo in Baca County Was selected to be developed toward experimental habitat improvement far lesser pre.irie chickens , Acknowledgments The work accomplished on this job has been a coopera.tive effort between the Department of Game and Fish, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Campo Sportsmen's Club. The Department of Game and Fish furnished a vB.riety of tree and shrub plants, a guzzler unit complete with fence for permanent water development, assisted wi th tree and shrub plantings, guzzler construction, and provided technical advice for the development work. Field checks to locate populations of lesser prairle chjckens and scaled quail were also made wi thin end near-the area whrch W8.S developed. The U.S. Forest Service furnished the land, fencing �-206- - mater1als for the perimeter fence; reseeded grass and other food producing species within the area; and assisted With fencing, pla.nting of trees and shrubs, and installation of guzzler. The Oa.mpo Sportsmen's Olub members as atated With the perimeter fencing and tree and shrub plantlngs. The labor and materials contributed by the many individuals from the three organizations has been appreciated. Findings Ta.ble -1- shows the initial development work which has been accomp11.shed within the 160 acre tract southwest of Oampo ln Baca. Oounty to improve the habitat for lesser prairie chickens. Spring listening checks' durIng Ma.y, 1960 through the area which was developed and vicinity showed the existence of a small population of lesser prairie chickens appr-oxfma't eLy two e.ndone-ha.lf miles due south of the area which Was developed. One cock we.s observed on a sme.lldisplay ground at this loce.tion on two different mornings. No lesser pre.iria chickens have been observed within the developed area to d.a.t e, Spring counts and listening checks will be continued during the coming spri.ng period. Sce.led qual1 have been observed on several occasion.s wi thin one-half mile from the area but to da.te none have been observed within the development area. Much of the development work should attract and hold scaled quail as well as lesser prairie chickens. Mapplng activities to show location of the area, major vegetative cover types within the area and vicinity, soil types within the area and vicinity, and land ownership according to Federal lands or privately owned Land s have been completed. It will be several years before the success or failure of the grass reseeding and tree and shrub plantings can be evaLua.ted , Future checks must be made wi thln the area to determine this. �Table 1 LESSEI{'PRil.IB.IE CHICKEN HABITAT IMPROVEMENT ~lORKACCOMPLISHED V/ITHIN 160 ACRE TRACT, BACA COUNTY Sec.20 T34S R46W. Date Completed Spring, 1959 Work Accomplished Personnel and Materials Trees, shrubs, and grass planted: U .S. Forest Service/personnel and 120 Colulea ap. (3 sp.) 500 Squawbush Campo Sportsmen's Club members. 150 Tamarix (3sp.) 200 Russian olive Plants fUrnished by Dept. of Game 30 Crab Apple (3 var.) 100 Hackberry and Fish with most from Dept. 20 Grapevine 6 N.M. Locust nursery near Fort Collins. 50 Pond. pine 50 pampas grass Spring, 1960 Trees and Shrubs planted: 50 Squawbush 50 Hybrid roses 60 Red cedar 30 Sand cherry 94 Chinese elm 30 Wild Plum 30 N .}'1. Elderberry 17 N.M. Locust Creosoted posts to west fence installed * May 2, 1960 Area reseeded to grasses and other food producing species including: . side-oats grama ( Vaughn strain), blue stems ( sand and little), blue gra.ma, sand dropseed, broom corn, sand lovegrass, yellow sweet clover, and alfalfa ( 3 var.) November 10, 1960Ga1linaceous guzzler installed and fence completed around unit. - -~ --- - -~ ------- Dept. of Game and Fish personnel. Plants furnished by Dept. of Game and Fish with most from Dept. nursery near Fort Collins. U.s. Forest Service personnel and Campo Sportsmen's Club members. Posts furnished by U.S.F.S. u.s. Forest Service personnel. All seed except sweet clover and alfalfa furnished by U.S.F.S. Sweet clover and alfalfa from Dept. of Game and Fish nursery. Dept. of Game and Fish personnel, and U.S. Forest Service personnel. Materials furnished by Dept. of Game and Fish. * The barbed wire to complete this fence has not as yet been installed. This will be done in the near future by U.S.F.S. personnel and the Campo Sportsmen's Club. I I\) o -.J 1 �-208- In order to evaluate the success or failure of the habitat improvements in establishing lesser prairie chicken range, a transplant of wild stock would be desirable since native populations are 80 low. If populations of the species in other areas increase to a point where this is possible, a limited livetrapping program would be desirable. Recommendations With the completion of the initial development work on one 160 acre tract, it is recommended to l'lithhold the development of other tracts until a source of wild stock for transplanting can be located. Ohecks to locate lesser prairie chickens in and near the developed area will be made under Job 2 v~ork Pla.n 8 ( census of lesser prairie chickens). The survival of the grasses, trees, and shrubs should be checked within the area in the future. In addition, the use made of the area by scaled quail should be determined since the development work completed should also improve the habitat for this game bird species. Summary The initia.l development work on a 160 acre tract southwest of Oampo in Baca Oounty within lesser prairie chicken range has been completed except for minor fence building to be done by U.S. Forest Service personnel. Habitat manipulation steps used in this cooperative effort by the Department of Game and Fish, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Oampo Sportsmen's Olub included fencing, grass reseeding, tree and shrub plantings, and installation of a game bird guzzler. Prepared Date: by: Ds>na.1dM. Hoffma.n April, 1961 Approved by: Ferd O. Klelnschnitz Assist. Federal Aid Ooordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/934cc9425abbecb04d74ba30eb4988a9.pdf ca083f80925b3e1ac995ac68cb257ecb PDF Text Text July, 1960 -1- JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of ~C~o~l~o~r~a~d~o _ Project No. W_-~9~6_-_D_-_4 _ Wild Turkey Development _ Job No.1 Work Plan NO. l=- Title of Job: Population Period Covered: July 1, 1959 to June 30, 1960. Status Summary: A total of 1,796 turkeys were observed in the annual census check of turkey populations. Of these, 241 were observed by the field biologist and 1,555 were reported by other individuals. There were 31 observers who made a total of 48 observations. The average number of turkeys per flock was 37.43. These large counts are a result of an abundance of food since the flocks often break up into smaller groups which wander widely when food is scarce. Objectives: 1. To check progress of recent transplants of turkeys. 2. To assist W.C.Os in becoming familiar and proficient in gathering pertinent data on the numbers and sizes of turkey flocks in their respective districts. 3. To prepare maps showing the location of plants in historical and nonhistorical ranges. Then, prepare a comparative report on the two type ranges. Procedure: 1. To make regular survey trips into recent to hunting). A. As often as possible to take W.C.Os them in methods of gathering needed B. Recording specific flock data a. Flock location b. Flock shift- and reasons where c. Wintering flock counts planted areas (those not yet opened on these trips. data. This will assist possible 2. Prepare maps of transplant areas - western slope. There are few experimental plant areas on the eastern slope. A. In historical range B. In non-historical range a. Gather data on development b. Show present status c. Find reasons for present status if possible C. Prepare reports for comparative studies. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Date: July, 1960 Approved by! __--:::-G.;:.i;::.lb-:=-e.::..;r:,.t::~H~u::;;n.::..;t:.:e:.;:r _ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �Figure 1. Prime young pinon pine in the fall of 1959· Heavy seeding of pinon pine was general over the entire western slope in the fall of 1959. This made an excellent food buffer for the entire area for the rough winter that followed. Photo by M. L. Burget. �Figure 2. Prime acorns in the fall of 1959. There was not as good a crop as in the fall of 1958 but it was good and helped the turkeys over the rough winter of 1959-1960. Photo by Martin L. Burget. �-3Wild Turkey Population St.atus Martin L. Burget The major portion of the turkey population counts was done by Wildlife Conservation Officers this past season. The resultant information was furnished first to the Regional Game Managers and it is possible that the compiled data are not complete. A severe winter followed a heavy crop of mast. Pinon nuts were in unusual abundance. These rich nutlets were available to the turkeys even through heavy snows. Naturally many more turkeys survived because of this unusual benefit, than would have under less favorable conditions such as in the winter of 1951. At De Lt.a, the Burkey Brothers Lumber Company was asked if they would doze a trail to reach. some turkeys wintering in the Love Mesa .area. (They were opening a road for logging operations in the area). When they dozed int.othe area they noticed large dark patches in the pinons and oaks where the snow had melted away. Using glasses they found the turkeys had raked the needles .and leaves back onto the snow causing ittb melt out and leave open feeding areas for the birds. They supplied ear corn for the turkeys and the birds soon found this and used it freely. As usual during the Big Game Season, reports on large numbers of turkeys were brought in from much of the turkey range in southern and western Colorado. MO,st of these reports -vereof birds beyond the reach of feeders in the winter months. Some feed was distributed by private planes. Whether this was found and utilized by the turkeys is not known. Even places where regular feeding areas have been maintained and used regularly by the turkeys in other years, were neglected by the birds this season. Where birds came in they fed lightly and irregularly. One Government trapper - William Terrell - found turkeys at the top of south facing rims along the Colorado River Canyon not far from New Castle. They were feeding on pinon mast and .acornswhere they could find them. One point of interest was that the turkeys vere banded into large flocks. As many as 15 flocks containing over 100 turkeys were reported. These were scattered throughout western and southwestern turkey ranges. The largest was east .of the Devil Creek ranch in Archuleta County where the count was over 140 birds. This flock count was verified at more than one hundred by W.C.O, Vavak, with the use of binoculars. Other flocks ranging in size from thirty .•• five to seventy ... fivewere quite common. One revelation of this large flock activity is that food is abundant. When foods are scarce the flocks break up int.o smaller groups and scatter more. In at least one case the hunting season did some real good. At the Bershenyi place on Fourmile Creek south of Glenwood Springs more than 100 turkeys came in to work on an oat patch in mid-September. During the hunting season, it was known that some twenty turkeys -were killed from this flock. After the season not more than twenty turkeys ever cane into the ranch at one time, and these only stayed for part of a day. Up until February not a single turkey fed on his silage pit. Evidently the shooting left a lasting impression on these turkeys. The following statistical data are arranged according to date. In many cases the figures have been reduced to compensate for possible over-estimation by untrained observers. �-4Statistical Data: YEAR 1959 cmJ""'NTY DRAINAGE LOCATION OBSERVED REPORTED Archuleta Beaver Cr. Baldy Mtn 60 II Navajo R. King R. 48 Devil Cr. Chris Mtn 62 "n Little Nav. C.onfer Hill 41 It Blanco R. Red Ryder R. 29 n Navajo R. 8~ mile 37 Coyote Cr. Bisbee R. " 3 T n Stalstimer Cr. Cavasone Cr. 9-29 48 Devil Cr. 9-29 E. Chirrmey R. 10 " Beaver Cr. 9 -30 Monger R. 18 " 10-23 Garfield Fourmile Bershenyi 61 10-26 Archuleta Beaver Bally Mtn 10-27 Beaver Cr. "" 40 " 10-;]2 Garfield Fourmile Cr. Diamond M. 38 11... 13 " Bershenyi R. " 27 11-13 " Rifle Cr. Hatchery 50 11-13 Rifle Cr. " 16 " 11-13 Delta t:ncompahgre Love Mesa 31 11-13 Mesa " Pinon Me.sa 15 ll~17 Montrose Log Hill " 73 DATE 9 -14 9 ~20 9 -24 9 -28 9 -28 9 -28 9-28 10-26 10-26 10-26 10-28 1960 Archuleta " " " Beaver Cr. " " Stalstimer Bally Mtn. Turkey Sp. Bally Pko Archuleta C. 7 39 17 9 10-19 Devils Cr. Willow Spring " 15 10-20 " " " 35 " 10~20 " Ranch fields 15 " t' 10-24 Stalstimer Notch 11 10~27 Navajo R. Gardner R. 47 " 10-27 " " Confer H. 9 11-10 " King R. 46 " 11-11 Devils Cr. Lee R. " 87 ll~ll " " Chris Mtn. 46 ll=14 Montrose Horsefly Cr. ute Area 77 11·~18 " Cottonwood Hill R. 36 ll-19 " Res. Area 16 " 11-21 " Tahaguache l~per Basin 39 1 -10 Delta Love Mesa 84 2 -15 Escalante C. Picket Cor. " 75 2 -15 Ouray Burro Cr. Gunn R. 46 2 ~16 " Billy Cr. Refuge 16 2 ~17 Garfield Fourmile Bershenyi (Oct 15)115 2 ~18 Baldy Cr. Porter R. " 75 2 -18 Divide Cr. Arthur R. " 34 Totals 241 1555 241 Total ·1796 Total observations 48 Average flock 37.43 plus Total Number of observers 31 REPORTED BY Range Rider Mr. King C. Vavak Highway Mt. School Bus Burget Burget Ford &Mitchel Mrs. Monger Bershenyi-Jackson Burget Ranger Reser Jackson G. steele Hatchery Helper Log Cutter B. Hoover Hunter-T.Morgan Burget Burget Burget 2 Hunters Hunter Hunter Hunter Hunter Burget Burget Burget •.• Mr,King C. Vavak C. Vavak Mill Workers J. Howlett L Rutledg~ Hc;nter Mill Worker Co White C. White C. Morgan B. Jackson B. Jackson Jackson-Ford .e- �July, 1960 -5JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of Colorado --------------------------------- Project No. W-96-D-4 --------~-------------------- Work Plan No. 1 ---------------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Wild Turkey Development Job No.2 Brood Counts July 1, 1959 to June 30, 1960 Abstract: Data gathered on western Colorado turkey range for the season of 1959-1960 showed excellent brood development. While the scope of activity was narrowed considerably by assigning the collection of these data to district W.C.Os, it is gratifying that so many reports came through to the author. A total of 62 broods with 449 poults indicated an upward trend or increase, with 6.93 poults per brood against 6.7 in the 1958-59 season. Weather contributed to this difference. Objectives: 1. To establish permanent, representative brood count areas in all turkey habitat. 2. To gather information on poult rep~oduction and survival as an index to reproductive success. 3. To assist W.C.Os in gathering comparative data on established trend areas, as game management tools. 4. To test and compare express periods (dates and hours) for gathering brood information. Procedures: 1. Location of brood checking areas on newly planted sites. 2. W.C.Os were taken on trips to assist them in learning about methods of checking in their own districts. ��-7Wild Turkey Brood Counts Martin L. Burget Areas where hunting 'seasons have not been opened on the western slope include the following districts: Cow Creek and Billy Creek in Ouray County:; Cedaridge Green Mountain - South Grand Mesa area in Delta and Mesa Counties; Dominguez area in Mesa County; Pinon Mesa area in Mesa County; Stove Canyon, Douglas Pass, Salt Wash area in Garfield County; Glenwood Springs - Rifle area including Elk Creek and Canyon Creek; Derby Creek - Red Creek in Eagle County; Basalt state property area in Eagle County and the Little Hills area in Rio Blanco County. As many trips as possible were arranged with W.C.Os of these districts. Contacts were made with Forest Service personnel, range riders, oil workers, etc. Everyone seemed interested .and a better over-all understanding of wild turkey development within these areas was obtained. The turkey record books were turned over to the District W.C.Os early in the spring of 1959. The simplified form appealed to the men. The summer of 1959 was rather dry. This contributed to good nesting and brood raising conditions. While the records carried in this report are not too extensive, they do show a trend toward good and widespread development. Although the weather was dry there was evidence of a good moisture reserve in the ground. Native grasses matured early which gave the young turkeys a boost. There was a heavy infestation of grasshoppers which also gave the turkeys a lift. Pinon cones made the best crop in years and other foods were equally plentiful. The turkeys nested high and many of them stayed high into the fall and winter months. Best hours to check broods: Generally turkey observations are made by trained searching or by sheer accident. If they see you or hear you approaching you just will not observe them. Observations over a period of some eighteen years reveal the fact that wild hens are much better mothers than tame ones. If there is heavy--,rgrowth and the dew clings to this the hens will brood their poults until late in the morning giving the moisture time to dissipate. Hens have been seen hovering their young poults as late as nine or ten o'clock in the morning. A rain will cause the same type of action. The presence of poults is often revealed by a hen moving through deep grass or weeds almost aimlessly. In such cases the poults are feeding about her in the weeds and grass while she is looking out for their safety. The observer may come on these hens almost any tirre of day, but is most likely to see them between seven and ten o'clock in the morning. Then, again between four and seven o'clock in the evening. The time between these periods is usually spent in some small glade where sun and shadows furnish a natural color portection for the birds. Here the foods tak.en earlier are allowed to digest. Basic management depends on natural reproduction. The controlling circumstances in turkey repr-oduction are pretty much as follows: l·-rnumber of eggs; 2 - hatchability of these @ggs; 3 percentage of a brood raised to maturity; 4 - predator reaction; 5- parasitic reaction; and 6 - disease factors. A brief report on these factors that have resulted from field studies should be covered under brood count findings. >- �-81. Normal clutches of eggs average from eight to fifteen or sixteen. This depends on the age of the hen. The mQst common average comes in the range between 11 and 13 eggs. 2. Hatchability is almost 100%. Several nests have been f'O.undafter hatching with one or two eggs remallllllgunhatched. In all cases where these shells have been opened they were found to contain nearly mature embryo in them. In such cases the hen started setting before completing her clutch of eggs because of cold weather and the hatched birds needed to go to water before the hatch was completed, or the hen was disturbed and left earlier than she should. Wild turkeys are unlike passerine birds that remain in the nest until their feathers have developed to a point that they can fly before moving. These receive their water from insects upon which they feed. Turkeys must have water within thirty-six hours of hatching. Evidently the hens realize this and move before the eggs are completely hatched in a nest. 3. The percentage of poults raised to maturity averages close to half of the eggs hatched. There are known instances where percentages of the maturingp.oults run much higher and other inst.ances where they are less. One of the high observations this year was of 33 poults with three hens observed on August 3, 1959. Thesewere more than half grown. 4. The larger predators such as bobcats and coyotes are pretty well controlled. It is the nest-preying predators, skunks and magpies, that are the present greatest threat. 5· Parasites. Turkeys are subject to body parasites like all animals. Where birds are well fed and healthy, body parasites are not important. The turkeys rid themselves regularly of body vermin by dusting and preening their feathers. In weak or sick turkeys it 'sa different story. In such cases the parasites become a major problem. 6. Disease factors. Wild turkeys are subject to the common diseases of poultry. Usually close contact with domestic poultry is the source of infection. Three major outbreaks of disease are known where heavy losses occurred. Onewasan outbreak of poultry cholera at the Sporleder ranch on Trujillo Greek, Las Animas County in 1947. Another was a blackhead infection which killed about 38 birds out of 50 near the Halverson ranch on Bally Mountain, Yellow Jacket Divide in Archuleta County in 1950. The third was at Thompson Park in western LaPlata County in which the causative organism was never known. �Figure 1. These are areas that have been planted and in which ideal brood count areas can be located. These will be mapped in the future in larger scale. �-9- l ; STATISTICAL DATA BROOD COUNTS Date ~y 25 28 June 1 July 2 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 17 :1.1 29 29 30 Aug. 1 3 27 27 27 Sept. 4 9 9 19 23 24 24 24 28 County Drainage Location Obsd. H P Garfield Fourmile " Shallbarger Kellogg R. lb fI " Crystal Sp. " Fourmile Tabaguache Horse Fly Log Hill Crystal Sp. Montrose tr fI Garfield " It fI fI Mesa Archuleta II Garfield " II La Plata If " " " " " " " II It Garfield Mesa La Plata If fI Archuleta Mesa Re-Cap Martin R. Pine R. Bear Cr. Beaver Cr. Dose R. Dose R. East Valley Bear Cr. Monger R. Cherry Cr. Starvation Cr. Fruita Res. So. Res. Stove Canyon Stove Canyon Res. Devils Cr. W. Turkey R. fI fI Chimney Rock 1 9 Beaver Cr. Kelly R. 1 7 fI II Kelly R. 2 13 Navajo R. King R. 4 35 Dominguez Canyon Totals 10 82 Observed Reported Totals 10 Hens It 52 It 62 82 Foults " 367 It 429 Observers - 19 Average Brood 6.93 plus per hen. Reported by B. Jackson B. Jackson 10 I{~llogg R. Upper Area Mesa Log Hill Martin R. Martin R. " " W. Elk Cr. Hawkins R. M. Elk Cr. Sramex R. Divide Cr. Record R. Fruita Res. Fruita Res. Snowball Cr. Macht R. fI Wright R. Fourmile Cr. Kellogg R. " fI 1 Reptd. H P 2 13 B. Jackson-J. Sharp 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 5 7 15 13 11 10 13 10 13 12 15 19 10 22 B. Jackson J. Howlett Survey-ors D. McClure R. Hoover Mr. Martin F. Dunham Mr. Sramex Mr. Record D. Jerome Mrs. Macht Mr. Wright B. Jackson 1 3 3 2 1 14 33 17 13 6 B. Jackson B. Jackson Summer Res. Ed. Womer Mr. Monger 1 7 4 1 9 45 31 9 Mr. Frame D. Jerome D. Jerome Mill Worker M. Burget··· M. Burget M. Burget M. Burget Tourist 1 7 52 367 �-10- Listing of specific Brood Count .areas time of check period. 1. Cow Creek ••Billy - These areas were not .open to hunting Creek Area in Ouray County ••.W.C.0. Harvey Cox. 2. Cedar Ldge .» Green Mountain •..South Grand Mesa Area - Ouray and Delta Holmes Fullenwider and Gail Boyd. 3· The Dominguez Area- Counties - MeSa'County .•..W.C.0. William Mink. 4. The Pinon Mesa AreaLittle .at Dolore:sArea Mesa County..also. W.C. 0 Dudley Jerome. 5· stove Canyon ..•.Douglas Pass - Salt Wash Area'- Garf'ield This include.s the County •..W.C.Os Dudley Jerome and Hugh Jones. 6. Glenwood- Rifle Area in Garfield C:ounty - includes Rifle Creek, Divide Creek, Canyon Creek, Garfield Greek, South Canyon Creek, Fourmile Creek and Crystal River Areas. This area vas opened to hunting .last f'all. These .areaswill not be included in the counts in the 1960-61 check period. W.C.Os Dunham, Lowery, Reser and Hood. 7· Derby Creek •..Red Creek Area in Eagle and Routt Counties - W.C.Os R. Rosette and M. Graham. 8. Basaltst.ate property 9 . Little Experimental p.ersonnel. Hills Li ttleHills Submitted Date: by: Martjp ••Eagle County .•.W.C.O.:..R. Terrell. Station L. Burget ••.Rio Blanco County- Approvedbyf __ W.C.'0. W. Gooseman and .:G;;::i;:;;lb.;-.e.;;.;r;:..t::-;N:.:..;... ~H~un:;;;;..t:..:e:;;r~ _ State GameManager July , 1960 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordina.tor �July, 1960 -11- JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of Colorado --------~----~~------------------ Project No. Work Plan No. ~W_-~9~6_-~D-_4 _ 2 ------------------------------- Wild Turkey Development Job No.1 Title of Job: Trapping and Transplanting Period Covered: October 1, 1959 to March 15, 1959. Abstract: Weather and food conditions which are controlling factors in wild turkey trapping were both good and bad during 1959-1960. Weather in portions of the range was good while in others it was unfavorable. Food conditions generally were very good. Hunting seasons - two on western slope ranges, both of which were longer than usual - moved the turkeys into back ranges and they stayed there. The Burkey Lumber Company opening a road into Twenty-five Mesa country in February found turkeys in considerable numbers where snow was 3~ feet on the level. Turkeys never came down to normal wintering ranges in any numbers anywhere. It was known that the turkeys were in or near the areas but they refused to come in to feeding areas or to stay in for any length of time. Numerous feed grounds were set up but they failed to lure birds. Where they stayed would have required special equipment to work with them. Again only two catches of turkeys were made. One at the Devil Creek turkey management area and the second on the eastern slope at the ranch of John Sakariason. The first catch included eight gobblers and four hens. The second catch was taken to the Big Salt Wash area north of Lorna in Garfield County. A note on the use of the cannon net trap indicates it is successful where only one trapping try is to be made in an area. Usually the turkeys leave the area and do not come back again. Objectives: 1. To restore Merriam's wild turkey to as many suitable locations within the known former range and other unoccupied sites as feasible. ��-13Turkey Trapping and Transplanting Martin L. Burget Introduction: The summer of 1959 had been extremely dry. However, two conditions to encourage the production of desirable food crops were present. One, the pinon pines were loaded with baby cones in the fall of 1958. If these were not affected by the dry weather they would make a mass of feed for the turkeys during the winter. Second, the bad late frosts that destroy the oak blossoms in late spring did not come. The crops of oak mast ,and many of the other shrubs was not as heavy as in 1958 but itwas still well above average. Just before the turkey season opened October 3-12 the first heavy rains came on the western slope. Back roads were rendered impassable with water running everywhere. During the hunting season the turkeys that had worked down within trapping range were dbserved closely. There was no use feeding as this would have put the turkeys in a more vulnerable position. Flocks were numerous and of good ,size. Indications were that there had been an excellent increase during the season and that poults had matured early. Even public relations relaxed and ranchers that never- before allowed hunting on their property opened and these same ranchers gave excellent help in locating the birds. Then, one rancher begged us to trap on his land this fall as the birds were increasing too ,rapidly. Effect of hunting on turkey activities: The season which lasted t.en days kept the turkeys stirred up. By the close of the regular season many f'Locks had been separated. The flocks of turkeys observed could be found in smaller groups, three or four to around thirty, depending on how much they had been disturbed. Vocal protest at sight of humans was given forth in no uncertain. way. They spooked at every unusual sound or movement which indicated that they were afraid. 'Pherexamt.natd on of birds killed in late afternoon often showed the cropa completely empty. This indicated that the turkeys were even afraid to eat regularly. Five days after turkey season closed the big game season opened. The author was out checking hunters at the Devil Creek ranch.. This was before 5:00 a.m. The first shots were heard around 6:15 a.m. The gobblers began protesting at once. Hunters reported seeing turkeys sitting around in trees in the middle of the day. This is unusual behavior. Normally turkeys loaf or rest in low trees or shrubs in the middle of the day, and it is not unusual for numbers of them to sit under low pines and preen or sleep for short periods while scouts pick about close by to give an alarm at the approach of dangers. So, the )luntingseasons do have an effect ,on the turkey's activities and 'peace of mind. As the big game season advanced turkey reports began coming in thick and fast. One genJeral report of large flocks banding together over much of the range indicated that food was plentiful. The pinon pine seed crop was the heaviest in many years. Indian groups came in to gather the nuts commercially. It was not unusual to see dozens of cars out along the highways with families gathering this sweet ••. meated mast. One hunter report.ed killing a large buck with more than a gallon of pinon nuts in his stomach. So, the deer as well as humans gave the turkeys some competition. �-14Fellewing the big game season en the western slepe a secend wild turkey seasen ran frem Nevember 14 thru 22. Evidently this later seasen upset the trapping I>:r'egram. Mest of the turkeys moved into. back ceuntry and just ,didnIt return. Then, there was a difficult winter in the seuthwestpartef the state. Hewever, east and nerth ef the Devil Creek ranch, ene flock ef mere than 100 turkeys was reported by several hunters. Anether fleck farther nerth hadfrem 75 to. 100. The first fleck was courrbed .as they moved acressa small park by a hunter using binoculars Lookf.ng fer game when he spetted the turkeys. His count was 143. W.C .0. Vavak of Pagosa Springs reperted two. similar flocks a little farther east, ene in Riley Park, the ether on the feet .of'Chris Mountainebserved en the same af't.ernoon . He t.oo, had been using glasses, but he 'was sureseme ef the turkeys had meved through befere he st.arted counting . Neither of these flecks came to.the Devil Creek ranch. Mr. William Jacksenwas again requested to. leek after pessible trapable flecks near Glenweed Springs. He has d.ene a geed jeb but the turkeys just did net comedovn , W.C.Os Dunham and Lowery were alerted at Rifle fer pessible trapping areas in the Elk Creek er the Divide Creek areas. One feed ground was set up in Divide Creek at the Leren Arthur ranch. The turkeys came in irregularly. Mr. Arthur fed but the birds wereenly mildly interested. The pessible reasen is that the entire hillside eastef the Arthur preperty is covered with pinen trees. Lewery and Clark Ferd teek a sherttrip up the hill and feund the greund had been werked as theugh a bunch ef hegs had been reeting there. Needles were windrewed, the duff had been werkedup to. a d:epth ef several inches. Up until mid-February there was net mere than six to.ten inches of snow in this Divide Creek area. Then several heavy snows built it up to.twenty inches but trrapp Lng cond.Ltiensd;Ud net impreve. Mating season wasceming en and quarreling and fUSSing was theerderef the day so. that this sllethad to.be abandened. On Alkali Creek, seuth ef New Castle, en the Frank Porter ranch there were a t.etal or thirty~ight turkeys last year. It was known that there was anether large concentzratifon.of'turkeys justseuth of there en Bally Creek. A drillingeutfit that had been working up en Bally Creek was to. ellen the read in that .area but the heavy snewfarther up the cr-eek.pr-event.edthis. The last report of turkeys where men withsnowshees had gene up to.the eil rigs was that there were mere than ene hundred turkeys in the fleck en Bally Creek. Inducement feeding was dene near the Perter ranch but ,enly 22 birds were attracted. At the Devil Creek ranch a similar preblem develeped. First there were eight turkeys, then twelve, then eighteen and then twenty. Snew piled up to. three feet en the level but seuth slepes kept .epening up between storms. Clark Ferd rode en herseback, used the jeellwhere he ceuld, then checked en snewshees witheut lecating the turkeys. It was quite evident that the leggingeperatiens nerth ef the ranch reacted as we expected itweuld. It is net so.much the taking ef the timber but the denudingef the greund cever that disturbs the turkeys so.much. The birds which did shew up at the ranch were mainly gebblers. Again at Cenfer Hill seuth ef Pagesa Springs, trapping cenditiens did net develep satisfacterily. Turkeys came to. feed irregularly, never develeping a censistent feed pattern. At the Gardiner place near Chreme where they had begged us to.trap the turkeys it was feund that the birds had net been seen since the late turkey seasen. The turkeys never came back in any numbers at the King Ranch en the Navajo. River either. �-15El:3.stern Slope. In Sarcillo Canyon John Sakariason consented for us t,Omake a catch of turkeys. He had been feeding since the first .of December. They had cleaned the food plot early and the turkeys became restless duet.o the severe storms starting in lat.eNQYember. The main bunch of turkeys left his area in late December. There were still between thirty and forty turkeys left so he continued to feed. In February, they began building up. By March 1st, there were nearly one hundred again . At this time stormy weather made travel almost impossible but Clark Ford was able to make a catch of fifteen, on Wednesd13,y,March 9th. Since he had only six crates he banded and loaded the twelve turkeys after banding and releasing the others. W.C.O. Hugh Jones and a local resident assisted with the release near Loma at the old Coal Mine on the old Baster Pass road directly west .of the Stove Canyon release. Statistical Data: Catch No.1 Sex Tom Hen Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen at De~il Creek Turkey Ranch Thursday January 21, 1960 at 3:30 p.m. Delivered to Upper Sarcillo Canyon at lHOO a.m., January 22, 1960 Band 4I4 415 416* 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 Age Mature 2 years Remarks Wing bands only on these *Band lost 2 years Mature 2 years 2 years 2 years 2 years 2 years 2 years mature 1 year Catch No. 2 at Sakariason Ranch north of Weston at 6:00 a.m. Wednesday, March 9 These turkeys were taken to the Coal mine area on the Big Salt Wash north of Loma, Colorado. Released at 10:30 a.m. on March 10, 1960. Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen 476 477 478 479* 480 481 482 483* 484 485 487 488 489 491 mature mature mature Died *Lost Band mature mature mature *Lost Band mature mature mature 2 years mature juvenile These birds banded and released at trap. 2 years Hen 490 mature Hen 492 mature Hen 493 �-16- React.ions of turkeys to the Cannon Net Trap. up to the present, March 15, 1960 the cannon net type turkey trap has been put in use six times. It was first used on November 11, 1954 when 14 turkeys were caught. Other attempts were made with varying success in January, 1955, January, February, November and December, 1956. The most startling result of the use of the net trap was that further feed baiting in those same areas was a waste of time because in no instance were the birds ever lured back to feed again. With the use of the slattype trap, it is often possible to make mQre than one catch in the same winter. Submitted Date : by: Martin L. Burget Approved by: _-;::.G,J..~· ;::;lb;,:..e.:.;r:..t~N:.:.-. ~H~un:.:;;:.;t...,;e...:r _ State Game Manager -..::.J.::u~ly~,i:.._.:l:;.::9:..:6..:.0 _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �-17Supplemental Trapping Report A complete compilation of trapping and transplanting records was deemed a worth-while activity in order to review all records and to have a single master list for future reference. At the same time, the project leader wished to make a comparison of the release areas in both historical and non-historical range as a means of analyzing any differences. This is the information included in this special report. A total of 1,136 turkeys have been trapped in 19 trapping seasons. The number of birds killed by accidental injury was 27 with a total live delivery of 1,109. These were composed of 343 gobblers and 766 hens. The average catch per' season was 58.42. The largest total in one year was 122; the smallest 12. One of the most unusual surprises is the fact that 553 turkeys were trapped at the Devil Creek Turkey Management Area. This is an average of 32.53 birds par trapping year, not counting two years when no trapping was done there. This sizeable removal could indicate that turkeys have a greater tolerance to removal or harvest than has been exerted on anyone area so far by hunting. From transplant areas, 197 turkeys were caught making a total catch of 750 on the western slope. There were 122 turkeys moved to the east.ern slope to such areas as Monument Lake, Trinidad (ten miles northeast), Purgatoire Canyon, Higby area, Tallahassee Creek near Canon City and two areas near Salida. The catch on the eastern slope was 359 birds not counting losses. The smaller number for the eastern slppe is due to the fact that consistent trapping did !?-gtgegin until 1949. Before that time, two catches were made in February, ~. ..) 1942dJnear La Veta and another catch in 1945· Y Original records still on file indicate that four hens were caught in a pole trap and two hens in a wire-mesh (maze-type) trap on February 10, 1942 on Indian Creek (west .of Spanish Peaks). Two of the hens were released immediately to prevent injury in the wire trap. The other four hens could not be banded (lack of hands) so they were weighed and released at the site because the flock wintering in Indian Creek was too small to allow reduction.:-.: Six more hens were caught in a portable wire trap on Echo Creek near La Veta between February 22 and 27 (band31-6) and released at the Ralph Callin Ranch on Red Greek west .of Pueblo on or about February 28. This release is not noted in the above figures, therefore, the total live birds should be 1,115· �-18Complete Trapping and Transplanting Record Year - 1941-42 Source Hen Mar. 6...142 Turkey Ranch 9 This was the total caught that year. Tom 3 Total 12 Year - 1942-43 Dec. 9-'42 Feb .•4-'43 Feb. 9-'43 Mar. 14•.'43 Mar.18-'43 Not Dated Tom Total Source Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Hen 7 3 12 7 2 Ranch Ranch Ranch Ranch Ranch Ranch 3 3 2 Total 31 Total 11 7 7 12 2 39 8 39 Tom Total Disposition: Beaver Creek Salters Canyon Lost Canyon Chicken Creek Callin Ranch Year - 1943-44 Nov. 25-'43 Nov. 28-'43 Dec. 7.,;;.'43 Dec. 14-'43 Dec. 27-'43 Jan. 14-'43 Mar. 7-'44 Mar. 10•.144 Mar. 16-'44 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch 'Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Hen 7 19 8 4 Total 4 3 45 Total 14 12 11 10 3 10 60 Disposition: Beulah ATea 3R Ranch Big Muddy Mesa Verde Park Purgatoire River Hardscrabble Creek 4 2 1 4 3 1 15 60 �Figure 1. Second release area was at Salters Canyon. Eight birds released here were listed in the Beaver Creek records. T. 39 No) R. 16 W.) Sections 28 & 29 �Figure 2. Chicken Creek Release - T. 36 N., R. 13 W., Sections 13-14. �Figure 3. East Canyon- East Montezuma County. Release area near an old mill site - Oct. 30, 1944 - 12 turkeys. T. 35 N., R. 12 W., Section 13. �Figure 4. Clay Creek Release area northeast of Norwood. Two Releases containing 22 turkeys - one Jan. 8, 1946 and one Nov. 22, 1946. T. 44 N., R. 12 W., Section 7 �-19Year - 1944-45 Nov. 19-'44 Nov. 24-'44 Dec. :.1-'44 Dec. 9-'44 Dec. 15-'44 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Total Hen Tom Total 6 4 1 1 2 4 3 11 44 Total 12 11 33 Disposition: 14 13 3 14 Cherry Creek Florida Mesa East Canyon Sawmill Canyon Year - 1945-46 Oct. 30-'45 Nov. 7-'45 Nov. 11-'45 Nov. 30- '45 Dec. 18-'45 Dec. 31-'45 Jan. 8-'46 Feb. 13-'46 Total 44 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Chicken Creek Tulr"keyRanch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Total Hen Tom 9 3 5 13 6 13 4 6 4 55 5 6 4 3 26 81 Disposition: East Canyon Dead Man Gulch Mancos Mesa Oak Creek Indian Creek (west slope) Clay Creek Webber Canyon Total 1946~7 Year ;;.,. Nov. 22- '46 Dec. 4-'46 Pec. 30- '46 :Jan. 19-'47 Feb. 12- '47 Feb. 14-'47 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Vorhees Ranch Faulk Ranch Turkey Ranch Total 12 16 9 11 Salida 12 9 12 81 Hen Disposition: clay Creek Tabaguache Basin Chicosa Canyon Hudson BrotherS Bre~ders Banded only Hayden Ranch Total Tom 3 9 4 24 1 E.S. 9 6 3 2 10 7 Band 6 E.S. 65 19 12 28 10 9 6 E.S. 7 12 84 Total 84 �-20Year- 1947-48 Nov. 13- '47 Nov. 29-'47 Dec. 12- '47 Dec. 16-'47 Feb. 14-'48 Source Lone Dome Feed Area Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch West Carlin Ranch Total Dd.sposition~ Disappointment Canyon Cottonwood Creek Talahassee Creek Talahassee Creek Salida Cottonwood Area Banded Markers Total Year- 1948.•49 Hen Tom 11 6 10 6 5 38 2 5 E.S. Total E.S. 3 E.S. 5 E.S. 15 53 13 11 10 9 6 4 53 Source Turkey Ranch Lone Dome Turkey Ranch Martinez Canyon Mancos Vorhees Ranch Faulk Ranch Turkey Ranch Total Hen Tom Total 12 4 13 3 3 6 10 7 58 4 16 4 17 4 5 9 12 13 80 Gardner - Williams Creek Hudson Brothers Ranch Hayden Creek - Salida Cow Creek .•. Ridgeway Log Hill Mesa - Ridgeway Faulk Ranch Vorhees Ranch Released as markers Total 16 18 14 9 12 2 2 7* 80 Nov. 13-'48 Dec. 8-'48 Dec. 30-'48 Jan. 8-149 Jan. 13- '49 Jan. 19- '49 Feb. 4-'49 Feb. 14-'49 4 1 2 3 2 6 22 Disposition: * Banded and released because flocks of sufficient .size for trapping were not found in a trapping area or because a sufficient number of birds had already been taken from that particular flock. �Figure 5. Log Hill Mesa Release. This area is on the Uncompahgre proper and around five miles northwest of the Community of Ridgeway. On December 30, 1948 twelve turkeys were taken to this area. These were made up of nine hens and three gobblers. T. 46 N., R. 8 W., Sections 30-31 �Figure 6. Canyon Creek., seven miles west of Glenwood S:prings. This area is about one and one half miles up Canyon Creek. On January 16, 1951, fourteen turkeys were released in this area. There were five gobblers and nine hens in this flock. r. 5 S. JR. 89 TN., Section 25. �Figure 7. Mancos Hill north of Highway 160 - looking across East Mancos Canyon. Release on December 18, 1945. T. 36 N., R. 12 W., Section 22. Nine turkeys including three gobblers. �-21Year - 1949-50 Dec. 22-'49 Jan. .9- '50 Feb. 8-'50 Jan. 11-'50 Jan. 26-'50 Feb. 9-'50 Feb. 23-' 50 Feb. 24- '50 Feb. 28-'50 Mar. 14-'50 Mar. 17-'50 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Cousin Springs Sporleder Ranch Cousin Springs Turkey Ranch Purvis Ranch McDonald Ranch Purvis Ranch Caple Ranch Caple Ranch Total 36 Deer Creek - Salida Gardiner Area Current Creek - Canon City South Dakota Williams Creek - Gardner Turkey Ranch Total 11 11 11 16 6 1 56 Hen 9 8 1 9 7 2 1 Tom 2 1 2 2 5 1 4 1 1 20 Total 11 9 1 9 ~2 9 5 3 4 2 1 56 Disposition: Year - 1950-51 Jan. 16- '51 Feb. 3- '51 Feb. 20-'5.;L Mar. 5-'51 Source Hen Turkey Ranch 9 Table Mountain 2 Table Mountain 2 Cottonwood Creek-Tab. 6 Total 19 Tom 5 1 6 Total 14 3 2 6 25 Disposition: Canyon Creek - Glenwood Elk Creek- New Castle Total Year - 1951-52 Dec. 27-'51 Jan. 14-'52 Jan. 20-'52 Source Walton Ranch - Sug. Walton Ranch Middlemist Ranch Total 14 11 25 Hen 7 Tom 3 10 17 1 4 Disposition: Bob Dodge Ranch Middlemist Ranch 10 11 Banded only --t,.........,1,----"""2':""1 To a Total 7 3 11* 21 �-22Year- 1952-53' Oct. 14-'52 Dec. 10-'52 Jan. 5-'53 Jan. 13- '53 Feb. 5-'53 Feb. 12-'53 Feb. 14-'53 Source Hen Jake Light Can. 10 Ben Lane Ranch 7 Ben Lane Ranch 4 Andreoli Ranch 3 Turkey Ranch 4 Turkey Ranch 6 Stevens Ranch-Cucha. 6 40 Total Tom Total 6 3 5 2 3 4 2 25 16 10 9 5 7 10 8 65 Disposition: New Castle-Elk Creek Macht Ranch,Pagosa Spgs. Moab, Ut.ah Poi terey Canyon Jake Light Canyon Turkey Ranch Ben Lane Ranch Andrioli Ranch Stevens Ranch Total Year - 1953-54 Jan. 4-'54 Jan. 10- '54 Jan. 28-'54 Feb. 4-'54 Feb. 8-'54 Mar. 1-'54 Mar. 7-'54 Source Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Four Mile Coliifer... 1Ull Conifer Hill Santa Clara Creek Mesa De Maya Total 5 7* Banded only 15 10 1* 5* 5* 9* 8* 65 Hen Tom 21 9 3 4 6 8 3 2 3 51 1 9 Disposition: 16 Cedaredge Rifle Creek Hatchery Perry Park Ranch Turkey Ranch Fourmile Conifer Hill 6 Total 11 15* 6* 6* 60 Banded only Total 21 12 5 7 6 8 1 60 �-23- Year - 1954-'"55 Nov. 11-'54 Dec. 16-'54 Jan. 13-'55 Jan. 25-'55 F'eb. 3-'55 Feb. 8- '55 Feb. 17-'55 Feb. 21-' 55 Source Beaver Creek Turkey Ranch Conifer Hill Elk Creek Mud Creek Mesa De Maya Mesa De Maya Turkey Ranch Hen Tom Total 8 7 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 15 7 10 10 20 10 5 6 9 17 6 Total 6 57 24 2 7 81 Disposition: 7* Banded only 3 2* 14 17 10 11 Mesa De Maya Santa Clara Creek Mesa De Maya Montana Divide Creek Rifle Cedaredge Mud Creek Turkey Ranch 8 Total Year - 1955-56 Noy. 14-'55 Nov. 24-'55 Dec. 6-'55 Dec. 16-'55 Dec. 9-'55 Dec. 29-'55 Jan. 27-'56 Jan. 27-'56 Jan. 31-'56 Feb. 11-'56 Feb. 17-'56 Feb. 29-'56 Source Cottonwood Creek SE Cottonwood Creek Cottonwood Creek Cottonwood Creek Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Sarcill0 Canyon Turkey Ranch Mud Creek Sarcill0 Canyon Sarcill0 Canyon Norwood Total II If If 9* 81 Hen Tom Totals 3 2 2 4 11 6 7 2 6 1 5 3 1 2 4 7 10 4 11 9 4 4 56 Disposition: Butte Creek Plum Canyon, Perry Park State Turkey Ranch Apishapa property Basalt property Billy Creek property Derby Mesa Little Hills Elk Creek Turkey Ranch Total 14 13 4 7 12 9 16 11 1* 7* 94 38 8 5 16 9 1 13 13 7 4 4 94 �-24Year - 1956-57 Oct. 19-156 Nov. 5-156 Nov. 30-156 Dec. 10-156 Dec. 12-156 Dec. 22-156 Dec. 29-156 Jan. 5-157 Jan. 24-157 Feb. 23- 157 Mar. 16-157 Mar. 19-157 Source Cottonwood Cr. E.S. Sarcillo Can. East Canyon Cr. Sarcillo Canyon" " Turkey Ranch Sarcillo Canyon" " Canyon Creek San Miguel Can. " " Mud Creek-Mancos Fourmile Can. Lightner Creek Turkey Ranch Total 10 7 14 7 3 4 78 Soldiers Canyon, Pritchet Mount Evans Management Area Paul Wolf Ranch Frisco Canyon Muddy Creek Buckhorn Creek - Larimer Co. San Miguel Canyon State Turkey Ranch Stove Canyon Red Dirt Creek Monticello, Utah Mesa Verde Park Fourmile Creek Lightner Creek Turkey Ranch Total 14 11 9 2 2 15 4* 5* 12 12 15 10 2* 4 5 122 "" Hen 10 6 8 9 Tom 4 4 5 3 6 12 4 5 1 44 Total 14 10 5 8 12 6 10 19 18 12 4 4 122 .Disposition: Year - 1957-58 Nov. 20-157 Nov. 27-157 Dec. 29-157 Jan. 1-158 Jan. 15-'58 Jan. 22-158 Jan. 27-158 Feb. 18-158 Mar. 6-158 Source Sarcill0 Canyon Sarcillo Canyon Sarcillo Canyon Turkey Ranch Turkey Ranch Sarcil10 Canyon Okanela Lodge Cottonwood Creek Turkey Ranch Total Hen 2 5 6 11 5 6 9 3 1 48 Disposition: ::13obShumaker Ranch, Milsap Cr(~;10 Nate Patton Ranch, Rice Mt. 14 Utah St.ate 15 Box Ranch - Las Animas Co. 5 Oak Ridge - Pinon Mesa 13 Big Dominguez Canyon 10 Little Dolores - Pinon Mesa 11 Turkey Ranch 4* Total 82 Banded only Tom 2 2 8 2 2 9 2 5 2 34 Total 4 7 14 13 7 15 11 8 3 82 �-25Year- 1958-59 14-'59 19-'59 Feb; Feb. Source Fourmile Creek Sarcillo Canyon Total Hen 6 8 14 Tom Total 7 10 15 25 4 11 Disposition: Utah State Crystal Spring Bershenyi Ranch - Glenwood Elk Creek - NewCastle Sarcillo Canyon Tot.al Year - 1959-60 Jan. 31-'60 Mar. 9-'60 Sonrce Turkey Ranch Sarcillo Canyon Total 10 2 4 3 6* 25 Hen Tom 5 7 3 10 15 10 Total 12 13 25 Disposition: Sarcillo Canyon Sarcillo Canyon Big Saltwash - Lorna 12 2 11 Total Note - No birds that these totals. Summary. .d.Led .ab traps 25 or in transit However,you will note that .or at releases are included in these are accounted for in the ��-27A Comparative Study in Wild Turkey Development in Historical and Non-Historical Range At the beginning of the wild turkey development program in Colorado the placement of birds was based on the premise that ranges that had supported numerous flocks of turkeys historically, should, under well planned and carefully supervised stocking practices support turkeys today if the habitat was relatively unchanged and if some form of control could be exercised over sizeable acreages. The changes in range and land use and the abusive practices through settlement and development under sharply rising population trends is well known. This expansive pressure is growing year by year. The purpose of this paper is to record the response of transplanted birds in both historical and non-historical range and their success in spite of changing land status. The struggle for a balanced land use program between the lumber industry, the stock raiser, the farmer and the hunting and fishing sportsmen is just in its infancy. The lumberman wanted the last stick of timber that could be cut profitably. The stockman (cattle and sheep) wanted the last spear of grass to top out his herds or flocks so they could be placed ona high priced market. The hunter and fisherman wanted some place in this picture where he could relax and be reasonably successful in his hunting and fishing pursuits. The struggle still goes on. Into this overall picture nature has also taken a rather silent but devastating part. Watersheds are washed out by spring floods that spread rich topsoil to parts unknown. Valuable shrubs are dying by the thousands each year from overgrazing and browsing. Small streams dry up for a period of from three to eight or ten months each year. Many of these were thriving trout streams wi thin the memory of many older settlers. Then, in the spring these streams become raging torrents, washing everything within reach into great piles of debris. It is only recently that land use agencies have been awakened to the serious~ ness of these problems. Efforts at re-foresta.tion, re-seeding of range and cutbacks in grazing have only been initiated in recent years. What our director, Mr. Thomas L. Kimball,said in a recent t~aining school is vital as far as game rehabilitation is concerned. "You can grow a hundred deer while you are growing one shrub to support it." In all too many cases the top soil has been washed a'Way and there is no top soil to grow the shrub in. Again, the vital food and life-giving water are no longer present to grow that shrub. As an example, in Coyote Park, southwest of Pagosa Springs, a large area of National Forest was fenced and closed to grazing by cattle and sheep for a period of seven years. Reseeding was done where it seemed feasible. In the seven years there was no marked upswing of growth. The area is cut by gullies washed during spring runoffs. The problem of l"eyegetation requires time and that time will not be completed in the lifetime of many of the technicians 'Who are struggling with the problem today. Another element that should be understood is competition. The turkeys' principal competitors are deer, cattle and sheep in that order. Since these are all ruminants, their habi tsare similar. Normal browsing may run from 30% to 50% of the current years growth. It is on the current year's growth that the fruits, berries and mast are produced. When the going gets rough, deer and cattle will exceed this normal browsing. It has been shown and observed that in drowth periods �-28- or severe winters, deer and cattle will take as much as two or three years growth in a single winter. The wild turkey is not a bud-eater like the grouse. While his choice of foods is highly varied he must depend on a somewhat limited choice in .••.. winter when foods are hard to get. A normal winter choice of foods may be composed of acorns, pine and pinon nuts, fruits of rose haws, thornapples, serviceberries (dried on the brush like raisins) skunk berries, kinnikinnick berries, all types of grass and weed seeds and elk sedge and succulent grasses growing along spring streams. There are many more things that the turkey would use if they were available. When heavy browsing occurs, plants will not produce mast and fruits so the turkeys must take a less desirable choice of foods. Pine and pinon are not so susceptible to browsing setbacksj however, their cyclic habits in producing seed often make barren years and the pine seed crop is rather uncertain. The pine seed and pinon nut are high in natural oils and when available are excellent and desirable turkey food items . • 1 Lower Dolores River: This area, some fifteen miles down river from the town of Dolores was known as prime turkey range historically. Robert Dunham, members ~of:;theAkin family and other living pioneers who homesteaded in this region in the 1880's attested to the abundance of turkeys from 1874 to 1900. With this encouraging historical background, it was only natural that this should bea starting point for the rehabilitation program. Further encouragement for this choice was the fact that a careful physical examination of the area corresponded closely to presently occupied range in the area extending from Pine River east through Chimney Rock, Pagosa Springs and southeast to the Navajo River Basin. The first year increase of 46 poults from 9 hens and 3 gobblers, by actual count, gave further justification to this choice. By the end of the 1942-1943 trapping season, a total of 25 hens and 6 mature gobblers had been released in the general area around the mouth of Beaver Creek and Salters Canyon. Five hens and two gobblers were released on February 9, 1943 bringing the total to 32. It should be noted that only live releases were counted in these totals. Development Following the release of additional birds during the 1942-43 trapping season, the development in this area began to show real progress. Various agencies including the Forest Service, the stockmen and the general public were all interested in this turkey restoration. For this reason, reports began coming in from many sources. These had to be adjusted tocweed out .duplication. Birds were reported in 1943 in Ferris Canyon, Cabin Canyon and Dry Creek or Dry Canyon (this is the stock drive through this area). Stock riders in this area began reporting br-oods.on the tableland between Dolores and Disappointment Valley - this is known as the "Glade" (not Glade Park). During the spring the first nests were observed near Hoppe Point (a point of tableland or mesa jutting out to the Dolores River rims between Beaver Creek and Ferris Canyon). Two were observed in a single afternoon's checking. TheY- were not far apart and not far from a stock watering pond in the area. Only a few days later, a Forest Ranger, Mr. Knoblock was mending a stock drift fence in the same general area and located two more. In the first two nests there were eleven and fourteen eggs, in the second pair there were eleven and thirteen eggs. �TURKEY TRANSPLANTS HISTORICAL RANGE IN �-29By the fall af 1943 fram reparts and persanal abservatians it was believed that the papulatian had risen to'clase to'twO'hundred turkeys in this area. The prablem af distributian ance the birds begin to'became established in an area is eased by the natural drift to'ather desirable areas. Turkeys have a tendency to'vander a lat which may serve tva purposes in the pattern af their activities. First, it acquaints them with the areas surraundingtheir range, reveals desirable raasts and hiding areas far pratectingthemselves fram predator activities and, secand, it reveals areas where faads are abundant and readily available. Fram 1944 an, the develapment was gaad and distributian general. Turkeys shawed up in Hause Creek, Big and Little Bean Canyans. There were turkeys an the Turkey Creek Flat area near McF~e Park (a natural stand af panderasa pines left as a memarial af the fine timber that was harvested in the area). Numeraus stack watering pands an the "Glade" and Granath Mesa area shawed turkey sign in the spring and summer manths. Turkeys maved intO'the Nar.raguinnep Canyan area and distributian in general was highly satisfactory. Chd:cken Creek: Chicken Creek which is narth and just a little east af the cammunity af MancO's at the east end af Mantezuma Caunty was the site af the second release area. There is a definite tie-in between this plant and thase made an the Dalares River. Bath are west af the La Plata Mauntains, a spur range af the San Juan Mauntains. The MancO's River and the Dalares River drain aut af twin basins at the faat af these twO' ranges. The release paintabaut five miles fram MancO's was an the edge af Chicken Creek Canyan. The tva releases af six turkeys each were made an the rim af the canyan which at this paint is ! mile fram the caunty raad. The first releaseaf three gobblers and three hens an February 4, 1943 was fairly simple. There was snaw an the graund but it was fairly well packed. The carry wasabaut ane-faurth mile. On February 9, when the second release was made, the picture had changed camplet.ely. Over thirty inches af fresh snaw had fallen. Snawshaes, a tabaggan, and a team and sleigh were secured to'haul the cratie«. as near the release area as possible . The team campletely played aut befare getting within the quarter mile mark. Therewere faur men in the crew and the authar was the anly ane familiar with snawshoes. It taak faur haurs to'move these birds to't:re canyon rim. A trail had to'be broken and the crates and tabaggan dragged and pushed to'the point af release and back again. A few days later, the turkeys were abserved in a campact flack when a snawshoe trip was taken to'the canyon . Later that winter they move:d·~taa straw stack abaut twO'miles fram the rims and alsO'were feeding under same secand grawth pines and aaks still farther fram the release area. Develapment During the spring af' 1943 as the snaw began to'gO' aut and traveling became easier, the flock drifted to'the northeast and warked up taward Turkey Creek. Later a nestaf 14 eggs was faund in ane af the shart sidecanyans leading intO' Chd:cken Creek. All eggs hatched and a few days later a rancher, Mr. Merle Cax, faund a small turkey that had drawned in an irrigatian ditch. In July that year a hen with thirteen paults was abserved near an irrigatian reservoir. This was �-30up Chicken Creek about one and one-half miles. In the late fall of 1943, Mr. Cox counted a total of fifty-six turkeys running together. Two hens with broods were reported by a Mr. Wallace not far from the Turkey Creek rims in August of 1943. It is quite evident that all these birds got together that fall and wintered near some straw stacks on the Cox Ranch which is less than l~ miles from the release area. He had raised oats and the turkeys worked in his stubble fields until they were snow-covered too deeply for them to scratch out. Then supplemental feed was furnished and they came to this occasionally until spring. They lived mostly in the Chicken Creek Canyon rims during the winter. These flocks showed excellent development over the first few years. The spread was hardly believable. The splitoffs took them into Turkey Creek Canyon, back into the Jersey Jim Look Out area. One flock moved into the Mud Creek Basin. It was not long until the main flock coming back near the original plant site increased to around eighty to one hundred birds. These flocks ranged about one mile down the canyon from the release area so traps were set in and several catches were taken to move into the areas farther west aridnorth. Lost Canyon - Glenco Area Release! The morning of March 14, 1943 word was received that 7 turkeys had been caught at the Turkey Ranch and were to be released in Lost Canyon. The only way to get the birds to the canyon this time of year was via the railroad. Arrangements were made for the section crew to haul the birds the next morning. They were working in the Millwood area so it would not cause any inconvenience. They hauled the turkeys on a trailer for some distance and then were carried about i: mile to the point of release in Cox Canyon. The balance of the day was spent carrying out work on predator traps until the section crew returned that evening. The second historical fact connected with this release was that the turkeys were all hens. This plant was made up of six mature and one young hen. Our best efforts failed to catch gobblers to add to this plant. However, there were six known hatches and a total of thirty-six poults for the season. Evidently these hens had been mated before they were caught and the eggs were fertile when layed in Lost Canyon. Careful checking proved that there were no tame turkeys that could be contacted in this area. During the summer of 1944 the development continued from the mating of young gobblers. As near as could be checked there were more than 120 turkeys in this general area in the fall of 1944. Some of the birds worked up toward Hay Camp Mesa during the summer but came back into the canyon during the winter. A little supplemental feeding was carried on by railway crews in bad weather. These men seemed to enjoy it and were interested in the development of these flocks. Considerable comment was made regarding this fatherless plant of turkeys. In a number of books on the subject including Leopold's report on his Missouri turkey study, there was a general feeling that yearling wild turkey gobblers do not mate. If this were true then this flock of turkeys would not have increased during the summer of 1944. In discussing this problem with Mr. Carhart, the Coor~ dinator, concerning the introduction of gobblers into this flock, it was his opinion that we should let it ride for a year and check the results the following year. If this experiment had come two years later it would have been valueless. By that time birds from Chicken Creek and the Mancos plants drifted into the headwaters of �-31Lost Canyon and Turkey Creek. While the waters of the Mancos River drain into the San Juan River and the water from Lost Canyon drains into the Dolores, the headwaters are not far apart and the land barrier is a flat divide. It was only a short time until the birds were intermingling from the two divides in pa~t of their summer range. Two things were noted in all of these Montezuma County plants. One was the rapid rate of development and, second, the rapid way in which they filled in the spaces between the plants. Mancos Me.sa, East Creek and Webber Canyon: Development in this area in the east .end of Montezuma County was closely tied together. All of the small streams in this area flow directly into the three heads of the Mancos River (East, Middle and West Mancos). These streams all head on the southwest corner of the La Plata Range and the basin is between the "Rampart ff on the north and Madden Peak on the south. The Mancos Divide runs up on the foot of Madden Peak. Within this area there are several mountains that are not named in the county maps. The plants started with a release of 12 turkeys in East Creek, some five miles downstream from Highway 160 on October 30, 1944. Then on December 9, three birds were caught. It was hoped to put these in with the first release but snow had piled up, so the birds were released near the highway with the hope they would join the birds down the canyon. This did not occur; however, in the summer the one hen with two gobblers managed to bring off a brood of nine and raise them. On December 18, 1945 a release of nine turkeys including three gobblers was made on Mancos Mesa about five miles north of Highway 160 and on the rim of east Mancos River Canyon. These birds flew into the canyon at once. This was what had been hoped. There was a lot of good feed up the East Fork of the canyon. Then, there was little danger of the birds being disturbed in this area. The only possible source of disturbance was cattle ranging in the area in the summer months. On December 18 (same date as above) a release of 12 turkeys including five gobblers was made at the mouth of East Canyon in Webber Creek, south of Mancos. It should be noted here that .eighteen of these last birds were from a catch made in Chicken Creek. They were taken from a flock of more than eighty turkeys feeding in lower Chicken Creek. Development The turkeys in this area never seemed quite satisfied with their':hew home. There was a lot of movement, indicating that, for some unknown reason, they were restless. There was heavy stock use in the area. However, there was lots of oak, pinon pine, juniper and the other shrubs associated with these types. In general they looked like our best ranges in the Dolores River area. One thing that may have caused part of this disturbance was the presence of a lot of deer in this range. In any case the drift in the first two of these releases was to the north. Within three years the bulk of the birds from East Canyon and Mancos Hill had '. drifted to the north and had crossed the East Mancos River Canyon and during the summer, were ranging well up into the quaking aspen-spruce belt. This was just below the old Red Arrow Mine. The Elast Mancos birds had drifted across the headwaters of the Mancos River and were mixing with the Chicken Creek and Lost Canyon flocks. �-32- The development wassatisi'actory but the birds were hard to follow. The Di.amond Match Company had put ina mat.chstick factory at Mancos and the workmen reported seeing birds .and finding nests well up toward the Red Arrow mine dur-Lng spring and summer months. This was at elevations close to eleven thousand feet. These timber cutters and haulers were very cooperative and would make a special effort to report birds. Some predatory activity was seen and noted on nesting hens. These were some of the first such activities noted and brought to our attention. The flocks in Webber Canyon went down Webber Creek and stayed near the south end of Mesa Verde Park. They were reported all the way from the foot of East Mountain (near the release area) to Mancos Springs. This last area is on the Ute Reservation. It was only this past summer that several large flocks were reported in this general area. There is a lot of range in this area that is seldom reached by range riders or others and a considerable development .could have built up around the west end of the Mesa Mountains without being observed. There .are no roads in this area eastoi' Mancos Springs. Then there have always been some reports of turkeys on and along Webber or Middle Mountain. This mountain stands out by itself between East Mountain and Mesa Verde Park. It is so rugged it is next to impossible to climb . Some of the bighorn sheep from Mesa Verde Park moved over there about two years after their release at the Park. On a trip around 1950 to this mountain on horseback both sheep and wild turkey sign were found. Thompson Park - Cherry Creek Area: This area lies adjacent to the East Canyon and Mancos Divide release areas. However, since these birds moved east and south we will t~eat the plants here separately. This is at the west end of La Plata County, south and west of the La Plata Mountains. The first release known as "Cherry Creek" was near the ranch home of Mr. Ross Frame. There were portions of three releases in the area: November 19th, 24th and December 1, 1944. The total number of birds was 15 which included four gobblers. The first shift of these birds was to the north near the D. & R. G. Railway tracks onto a small spring creek known as Starvation Creek. Development The Cherry Creek birds drifted north and east. The first year, turkeys and broods were reported north of Cherry Creek Park (a Forest S.ervice installation) and nearly to Mayday, an.".old mining area at the lower end of La Plata River Canyon. In the fall of 1945 the birds drifted back to the release area where they were fed by Mr. Frame. There was enough indication i'rom observation and reports that there had been an excellent increase. In February, 1946 a trip was taken on snowshoes and an actual count of'84 turkeys was made. If there had been no loss of parent stock this would have made an increase of nearly six poults per hen. It shouiLd be noted that .seven of the eleven hens were juveniles when released. A few days after this count a banded hen was noticed with a large group of poults within fifty f'eet from the road. A check with glasses showed the group consisted of one banded hen and sixteen non-banded birds. While there is noway of proving that this one hen raised a brood of sixteen turkeys, it is true that they were with her. Several times nests have been reported as containing sixteen eggs. It is generally conceeded that wild turkey nests seldom contain more than 14 eggs. �-33Later checks on this release indicated a continued good development. However, in the spring of 1949 a Mr. Denny - living east of Cherry Creek Park - reported finding a turkey so sick and weak in the fall of 1948 he was able to catch it by hand. He said it was covered with a form of grey lice. There had been other reports of sick turkeys both domestic and wild in this area during the summer of 1948. A careful check in the area on foot failed to reveal any sick or weak turkeys. The winter of 1948-1949 was rather severe. One check trip was made into the Starvation Creek area. Fox tracks were noted and some fox scats also revealed portions of turkey bones and feather content. Three traps were set in the area and four foxes were caught in just over a week. Feed was put out for the turkeys and no further predation was noted. Dead Man Gulch: The second release of 13 hens and 3 gobblers was in what is known as Dead Man Gulch behind the Sponsel Ranch. It is also behind a large butte and five or more miles south of the Cherry Creek release. Four days later a catch of all hens was made and thirteen hens were released in the same area. Over a period of three years these turkeys split three ways. The first split noted was from reports of turkeys in Hay Gulch and the Fort Lewis College Campus district. This i$.directly east .of the plant and into a coal mining area. The second split was to the south and west down Cherry Creek. Turkeys showed up in both of these districts the first year. Then, during the hard winter of 1948-49 they drifted into the more or less ba;r.:renareaof what is known as Sunny Side. This is a pinon-juniper break area. Birds were reported in this district for three years. Either they drifted farther south into the Mesa Mountains or they may have blended with the birds at Mancos Springs. Aqimas and Florida River Plants~ Here there were three releases as follows: Saw MilillCanyon - December 15, 1944 Eleven hens and three gobblers Indian Creek - December 13, 1944 and February 13, 1955 Eight hens and four gobblers Both plants made south and west of Durango on Animas River Florida Mesa ••. December 9, 1944 Eleven hens and two gobblers Plant north of Falfa on old Durango Highway These three releases were designed as a probable fill-in between occupied and planted range. Under normal development it was expected that these ranges would fill in a solid block of turkey range reaching from Wolf Creek Pass to the Lower Dolores area in San Miguel County. This would tie occupied range into the southern border of counties in southwest Colorado including Piedra, La Plata, Montezuma, Dolores. and part of the San Miguel. �-34A plant of turkeys had been moved from the Devil Creek Turkey Ranch area and the inclusion of some Arkansas birds to the Hermosa Creek area in 1937 or 1938. These birds had not developed. As far as ~ould be determined there were eight or nine of these birds still surviving in 1941. Development When the plants were made in Sawmill Canyon and Indian Creek there seemed to be a lot of dissatisfaction on the part of the turkeys. They stayed along the Animas River during only a part of the first year. Some of them drifted south along the lower Florida Mesa area. Some were reported north in Ridges Basin, which is the first valley to the north of the release area. Then in the spring of 1946, a band No. 358 was picked up in Lightner Creek. This was from one of the hens planted in Sawmill Canyon. There was no indicat.ion that the bird had been killed in losing the leg band. Rancher Stewart reported a number of wild turkeys in his area and was quite happy with the prospect. While the turkeys remained in the Sawmill Canyon area they never built up in numbers. There are some still there. The same is true of Indian Creek. The main development of turkeys showed up in Lightner Creek and Junction Creek and the Hermosa area. There are three bald mountains in this general area .and it is a little awkward to distinguish them. However, there are good turkey developments in all of them. The first is at the head of Lightner Creek and shows some of the best turkey development in this district. The highest turkeys are at the head of Hermosa Creek in the summer. A ranger who was lost in that area in the summer of 1958 reported seeing three large flocks of turkeys, the largest numbering over 100. This was in September of 1958. In the Florida Mesa area a diligent search was made for turkeys in the spring and summer of 1945. Finally the ditch rider, a Mr. Brown, report.ed turkeys in the Horse Gulch area. This was around eight miles north of the plant area. In 1946 the turkeys began showing up on the Florida River. Another flock was reported on Bally Mountain No.2 (this is east of the Animas and between the Animas and Florida River) and north of the Vallecito cut-off road from Durango. Consistent reports of turkeys have been received from sheep herders in this general area ever since. The flocks ranging farthest north were seen near Transfer Park on the upper Florida River. There has been a lot of fluctuation in this general area because of unusually hard winters in 1948-1949, 1951-1952, and 1957-1958. However, the birds have increased favorably within a year or two following such heavy decimations. Disappointment Release Area: Disappointment Valley is the norther.n-most point of known historical range. On November 25, 1947, fourteen turkeys (2 gobblers) were trapped at the Lone Dome feed ground in Dolores Canyon and transported to this area which completed the gap between known historical and non-historical range on the western slope. The area lies more than forty miles northwest of Dolores and around 25 miles southeast of Norwood. The release area was midway between Buckhorn Lodge and Cedar postoffice. �-35Development The birds were fed by a rancher and stayed close to the release area during the first winter. Then the first fall some of the young birds came back up in the canyon but were nearer the Elkhorn Lodge. The flocks split and one flock stayed on some hills west of Elkhorn while the second flock moved north near the summer camps of the Youngs and a Mr. Bourchard. The second year's development showed much wider distribution and a movement up toward the Lone Cone Mountain area. Birds were also reported around Groundhog Reservoir. Another flock also showed up in the Gourley Reservoir area which is north of the release area and nearly halfway to Norwood. Another flock was reported in the Hog-Back area which is the south rim of Disappointment Valley and would indicate that birds were close to the flocks planted in the Beaver Canyon area and ranging in the summer months on the Glade. This area is closer to the area known as Black Snag which is the site of a ranger summer station. Birds are still ranging in these areas but the development is not as outstanding as it has been in some of the places. Summary of Transplanting in Historical Range in Western Colorado: Since conditions throughout the Montezuma and Dolores County areas are quite similar in character, the entire general area will be evaluated together. Development started with the original plants on March 6, 1942. All of the turkeys trapped during the first two years except two young gobblers were released in these two western counties. These included Beaver Creek and Salters Canyon on the Dolores River below the town of Dolores with the release of 32 turkeys; Chicken Creek with the release of 12 turkeys; and Lost Canyon with the release of 7 hens. This made a total of 51 turkeys planted here in the first two years. During the trapping season of 1943-1944 sixty turkeys were trapped. Fifty of these were sent to the eastern slope and ten birds were released in Mesa Verde Park. In the trapping season of 1945, forty-four turkeys were trapped at the Devil Creek Ranch. These were all delivered east of the original area except three that were released in East Canyon, Montezuma County. It should be noted that these plants tie in closely with the original releases. Cherry Creek received a plant of 14 turkeys, Florida Mesa 13, Sawmill Canyon 14, and East Canyon 3. In the trapping season of 1945-1946 the rest of the original area reeeived plants to complete the stocking. East Canyon received 12; Dead-man Gulch (south of Cherry Creek) received 16; Indian Creek (northeast of Sawmill Canyon) received 12 and Webber (south of Mancos) received 12. Mancos Mesa received 9 to fill the area along East Mancos River. This made a year total of sixty-one. In this entire area which embraces parts of three counties, a total of 166 turkeys had been released. Of these, 19 had been trapped from newly planted areas. The balance of 147 had been trapped from the Devil Creek Turkey Management Area. Development Development withIn these areas was wi t.h varyf.ng degrees of success. The development in Beaver Creek for the f'Lr st two years has been shown to be approximately 200. In the plru"t at Chicken Creek the first year's increase was nearly fifty poults. First year in Lost Canyon showed an average of six poults per hen, with second year checks revealing more than one hundred birds. The releases in East Canyon, Mancos Mesa, and Dead-man Gulch were less rewarding and because of �-36the natural spread, more difficult to check. A positive check on the Cherry Creek release showed seventy poults from ten hens in a single yearTs development. In the Sawmill Canyon and Indian Creek releases there was dissatisfaction on the part of the turkeys and a lot of movement in the first few years. However, the development .and spread of the birds continued and showed that they were going to take hold. While it is extremely difficult to get a complete and accurate census on turkeys, the early reports and observations indicated an excellent increase over the first few years. By 1948, even with some setbacks from bad weather conditions and light food crops, an actual count in the Dolores River area, showed approximately 400 turkeys. The other areas too, showed good development and it was felt that an open season would be beneficial in spreading the turkeys. The first ITQiltingseason then was opened in 1949. The first nine years of turkey development had been excellent. Food conditions varied some but these were offset in the earlier years of the program by using supplementary feed. In the first years of development the filocksbanded together. This was good as the flock locations were known and could be reached in most cases. When the going got rough there were always interested citizens and rangers or Game Department employees ready to give a hand in seeing that the turkeys received feed at the time it was needed. Many ranchers volunteered to haul feed and scatter it. Everyone reported turkeys when they saw them. Rangers kept records of observations which were much appreciated. Even lumbermen and loggers gave many good reports in the earlier days of the development. One unusual case was recorded in the Dolores Canyon and Thompson Park areas where the birds seemingly disappeared after the winter of 1957-58. When the downtrend in turkey population became known, investigation disclosed that a rancher in the area had bought pen raised stock from a New Mexico source and turned them loose with the Dolores Canyon turkeys. It is possible that disease such as pu.Ll.orum, coccidiosis or blackhead could have run through this entire area .causing great damage or even destruction of entire flocks. In the case of pullorum disease, which is one of the most common infections in poultry, it is the poults or chicks that are .mostadversely affected. The causitiveorganism Salmonella pullorum may be transmitted to the yoUng by the mother. The organism is in the blood stream and may be transmitted to the egg in the process of development. Disease, of cour-se , is only one of the possible links in a chain of circumst.ances that may have been the underlying cause in a breakdown in wild turkey development. It should be noted that nearly all of the gallinaceous wild birds are subject to diseases of poultrY. Directly or indirectly this is traceable to the encroachment of man into the native range of the wild birds. other population depressants include weather, food, and predation. In .any one of these causes for a breakdown in development there should be evidences left that would show the cause or the result of it. In the case of weather and short foods there should be remains revealing starvation as a cause. In predation there should be feathers and bony scraps left to show cause of death. In case of disease there should be sick birds or emaciated carcasses left to show the underlying causes. However, where the diseases were active on young poults there might not be very much evidence left. Field checks within the problem area did not reveal much sign of any sort. Further, there were no reports or at least, few reports of sick or diseased birds. �-37Even if the introduction of diseased or half tame turkeys could have been one of the basic factors in this breakdovm in numbers, it hardly seems feasible that evidences of the results of this introduction could have covered so large an area or been responsible for the present state of the turkeys in this district without being discovered. It is now quite evident that weather played a specific part in this breakdown. In checks during the summer of 1959 there was a constant reference to t.re fact that the turkeys did not show up in the summer of 1958 like they had in other years. Non-Historical Range: Original historical investigations did not indicate any turkeys farther north on the Western Slope than the Disappointment Valley. In 1943, Mr. Arthur Carhart, former Federal Aid Coordinator proposed : "The most strategic move in the filIl:therance of the hunting possibilities, would be to make a determined effort to establish the birds at some point in the Uncompahgre Valley, westward from Montrose and Delta, to be used as a future source of transplanting stock for that whole region." In some of the early tries at stocking wild turkey in various parts of the state two tests had been made in this area. One at the Porter Ranch about two miles up the San Miguel River from Naturita. The other was on the Sheets Ranch near the old Ute Post Office. The results of these two tries were similar. In both cases the turkeys crossed with t.ame turkeys on these ranches and apparently were lost to predators. During the first examination of this Uncompahgre range, food types 'Were found to be satisfactory, roosting areas plentiful and water was available. This was all to the good. However, because of the great amount of flat country on the Plateau which would make summering range, and the long distances from this range to suitable wintering areas, it was believed to be inadequate or marginal habitat. The Uncompahgre Plateau lies in a northwest by southeast direction and is made up of a .series of mesas and deep gorges. The south drainage is carried by the San Miguel River and thence to the Dolores River. The principal land mass is a high plateau with radiating flowages running from a .central high range. Ma,st of the streams are small except in spring runoffs and a lot of the lower land forming the divisions between the streams have considerable flat land in them. Three main areas were chosen for the first releases. No.1, Tabaguache Basin, which has a lot .of' south facing s.Lope along the West Rims. No.2, The Ute Area, where the ranchers had ceased raising tame turkeys. And, No.3, Clay Creek, along the south end of Sandborn Park. It should be noted that all of these plants were north or east of the San Miguel River. The river rims offered some winter havens for the turkeys in case they were needed. These rims opened either south or 'West and would bare up rather quickly after st.ormperiods. The first release in this area was made at the mouth of Clay Creek on January 8, 1946 and consisted of nine turkeys, three gobblers and six hens. The second release was a supplemental release at the same site the following fallon November 22, 1946 composed of three gobblers and 10 hens. �-38The next release was the largest ever made in one place. A catch of 28 turkeys (four gobblers and 24 hens) was made at the Devil Creek Turkey Area and the plan was to divide them into two flocks in the Tabaguache Basin. The weather and the road conditions were bad on December, 4, 1946 and a big snowdrift at Coyote Spring changed the plan resulting in the release of all birds at one place. On February 5, 1947, thirteen turkeys were caught in the Chicken Creek area and released at the Ute Ranger Station on Ute Creek about one and one-half miles below the Ute postoffice site. The following day, two mature gobblers from the same trapsite were released at this same spot. , - Development - Clay Creek Area The first two years these birds spread considerably over what is commonly called Sandborn Park. The main bunches went into Hanks Valley, while anonhezr. group traveled southeast into an area known as the Craig Point area. This was ideal turkey range. It has heavy stands of prime ponderosa timber dotted with small parks and islands of large oaks. The rims along the San Miguel River are covered with pinon pine and junipers with all the associated shrubs. Other splits have occurred from time to time with the turkeys moving up or down the park area so it was extremely difficult to get accurate checks. However, with checks that could be made and reports from Game Department personnel, Forest Rangers and stockmen the development seemed highly satisfactory. Some of these turkeys moved across the river toward Norwood. Others moved up the San Miguel into the Beaver Creek district while still others moved into the old Sam's postoffice area. Development of Tabaguache Basin and Ute Creek The Tabaguache turkeys split the first season. A small bunch worked across the Cottonwood Creek area and toward the Ute plant. These soon intergraded and the development took off at a good rate. It was only a short time until turkeys were reported around Iron Springs and the Selesca Ranger Station. Wintering range showed up along the San Miguel rims and in the Cottonwood Creek drainage. Frequently these birds were found wintering in the pinon-juniper types on south-facing slopes. The highest reports have been noted in the head of Horsefly Creek which drains into the Uncompahgre River Basin. There now is always a good flock that summers and raises poults in the Johnson Springs area which is well above the release site. The first movement of the Tabaguache Basin birds was that they moved into the lower basin. The next split took part of this flock up on 25 Mesa and into the head of Roubideau Canyon and Escalante Canyon. This winter (1959) it was reported that more than 100 turkeys were wintering in the head of El3calante Canyon at an old homestead known as the Picket Corral. There have been few setbacks of any consequence in any of these areas since the plantings in 1946 and 1947. Cow Creek and Loghill Mesa Development On December 8, 1948, four turkeys were taken from the Lone Dome Trap area to Cow Creek northeast of Ridgeway and east _of Highway 550. Then, on December 30, 17 more turkeys were caught at Turkey Ranch. Four were added to the Cow Creek plant and 12 were taken to Loghill Mesa at the southeast end of the Uncompahgre Plateau. One turkey was dead in the crate at time of planting. In the Cow Creek plant there were two gobblers and in the Log Hill Mesa there were three. �TURKEY TRANSPLANTS NON-HISTORICAL \ IN RANGE �TURKEY TRANSPLANTS IN NON-HISTORICAL RANGE �-39At the time of release on Loghill Mesa~scratching sign was found which showed that birds from some other plants on the Uncompahgre Plateau had already moved into this area. This was all to the good. Observations and reports from this area since have shown a consistent development. In Cow Creek, the first year checks indicated better than thirty poults. The second year there was an even better development. In 1949 - December 22, a second strengthening plant was put into Burro and Deer Creeks. This was another stream flowing into the Cow Creek area. After the State purchased the Billy Creek property (1955) it was decided to try another plant in this general area and three gobblers and six hens were released to give this area another boost. It was felt that since there would he a full-time custodian in the area, these flocks might be built up to trapping strength in a short time to supply stock for other nearby areas. At present this area is showing excellent progress and turkeys are showing in much of the adjacent habitat. Another thought expressed by some of the W.C.Os is that some of these birds are crossing the Highway into the Loghill Area. The Uncompahgre area was opened to hunting in 1954 or 1955 but there has never been much pressure thereuntil the past two years. Last fall (1959) more turkeys were taken and the interest is picking up. The Cow Creek district is not yet open for hunting but should be in the next couple of years. This indicates that turkeys can and will fill into non-historical range if food and range conditions are satisfactory. Derby Mesa - Red Creek Area: When the Glenwood Springs area showed promise there was considerable pressure to try some plants farther up the Colorado River. On January 27, 1956 twelve turkeys were trapped in Main Elk Creek and taken to Derby Creek .about five miles up from Burns postoffice. On February 29, 1956 four hens were trapped in tre Norwood area and added to this plant. Then on December 12, 1956 twelve turkeys were taken to Red Dirt Creek and released at the mouth of the canyon. Development It is too early to evaluate this planting area. In 1958 more than forty turkeys were reported in the W Mountain Area .-.near the head of Derby and Red Dirt Creeks. A second flock was known to be ranging on the west edge of Red Dirt Creek on Derby Mesa proper. Another flock went up Sunny side Creek while still another flock showed up about five miles south of McCoy. If these turkeys survived the hard winter of 1957-1958 they should make it. There is still a small bunch near the mouth of Red Creek also. Stove Canyon and Pinon Mesa: As early as 1953, turkeys had been reported in the Douglas Pass .ar'ea . There were never any confirming sight records picked up on these reports. There had been some pressure by Department personnel and requests by Grand Junction sportsmen to make plants of turkeys both in the Douglas Pass and Pinon Mesa areas . Preliminary examination of the Douglas 'Pass area in 1956- which was a dry season - were not very assuring. The average rainfall for.the area in recent years had been quite low. Food species lacked fruits or the fruits were dried until they were valueless as food. However, better conditions were found ata higher altitude in �-40Stove Canyon. Rose haws were plentiful and the thornapple thickets were loaded with mature fruits. There were also good roosts in the canyon. Pinon Mesa which is south of Glade Park and also southwest of the Colorado National Monument indicated general conditions much like those on the Uncompahgre Plateau. It is lower in elevation and good pinon crops are a rule rather than an exception. The first plant in the area was in Stove Canyon. This was of ten turkeys (one gobbler) trapped at Okanella Lodge in Canyon Creek. These turkeys were trapped and delivered the same day, December 29, 1956. 'Then two mature gobblers were trapped and released at the same site on March 16, 1957. These were taken from a catch made in Lightner Creek. Two releases were made in the Pinon Mesa .area in 1958. The first plant was made from a catch at Devil Creek Ranch on January 1, 1958. The second catch was made atOkanella Lodge on January 27, 1958 and delivered on the Little Dolores. Development It is too early to evaluate either of these plants. There were more than sixty turkeys in the Stove Canyon the first year. Then around 150 were in the same area in 1958 with an unknown quantity in 1959. The spread has been excellent as turkeys are showing up in canyons east .and west of Stove Canyon and broods were exceptionally good. In P'Lnon Mesa the turkeys are showing up heavily in areas around and to the south of the release area . The Dulk of the birds have moved up onto the mesa. Therevere so many pinon nuts this last fall that the trees were simply loaded and in some areas Indians were imported to pick them to sell to the commercial trade. Two large flocks or nearly 100 turkeys were reported in the area with a number of smaller flocks. Glenwood Springs - Rifle Area: Frequent trips for a period of three years had shown that the mast crops in this area produced more consistently than they did on the historical range farther south. The first release of turkeys was on January 16, 1951, in Canyon Creek about of Glenwood Springs. There were five gobblers and nine hens. On February 3, 1951 three turkeys were trapped on Table Mountain near Rye, Colorado and were taken to the Ranger Station on West Elk Creek northwest of New Castle. There -was one gobbler in this catch. Then on March 5, 1951 six hens from the Hill Ranch on Cottonwood Creek (Uncompahgre area) were trapped and added to this release making nine turkeys in .all. Then on February 5, 1953 five turkeys trapped north of Pagosa Springs were taken to Main Elk and released at the Morrison Ranch. seven miles northwest Development Development in this general area was rapid .and steady. In 1953 sixteen turkeys were seen moving into South Canyon Creek. Then the turkeys in Canyon Creek began spreading. More than forty turkeys were observed in East Elk Creek and more turkeys showed up in Main Elk Creek. There were turkeys in Three Mile and Four Mile Creeks south of Glenwood Springs. Turkeys showed up in the Crystal River Ranch west of Carbondale. Then, in only a short time turkeys showed up in �-41Alkali and Garfield Creeks. To keep the development active seven turkeys were trapped at Turkey Ranch and taken to Divide Creek on December 16, 1954, and 10 more trapped on Conifer Hill south of Pagosa Springs were added to these on January 13, 1955 making a complete plant of 17 turkeys in the Divide Creek area. To continue plants in this general area, a catch of six turkeys on Conifer Hill was taken to the Rifle Hatchery on February 4, 1954. On January 25, 1955 a catch was made using the net trap. One hen and three gObblers (one gobbler died in transit) were released directly north of Rifle. The other five gobblers were taken to Cedaredge. On February 3, 1955, 12 hens were trapped at Mud Creek near Mancos and added to the above release of gobblers. In the 1955-1956 trapping season a catch of 12 turkeys made at the Turkey Ranch containing nine hens and three gobblers and taken to the Basalt Management Area completed the plants in the Glenwood - Rifle area. This made a total release of 67 turkeys in the general region with all but twelve in Garfield County. These twelve were in Eagle County at the Basalt property. Development in the Rifle area worked under a somewhat different pattern. The birds planted directly north of Rifle stayed in the general area two years. However, the birds had split and a flock showed up on West Rifle Creek at the CV Bar Ranch. Another spl:itwent over on the "Government Road" (Highway 13) at the Rees Ranch and developed there about two years. Eventually turkeys showed up in the Parachute Creek north of Grand Valley. South of the Colorado River in the Divide Creek area the development was rapid also. Reports were coming in from the Divide Creek area and turkeys showed up in Main Creek. Then surprising as it may seem a small flock moved into the Colbran area at the foot of Grand Mesa in Mesa County. The spread was so wide and development sufficient that no further stocking was felt to be necessary. Cedaredge Area: The first release in this area (near Milk Creek) was made on January 4, 1954 composed of three gobblers and nine hens. The next release was on January 25, 1955 .consistingof five gobblers taken from East Elk Creek. On February 3, 1955, six hens were added to these. The release was made in Milk Creek about six miles south of Cedaredge. This area had an abundance of feed but the brush was so thick it was almost impenetrable. The amount of coyote and bobcat sign made it necessary for W.C.O. Fullenwider to carryon an intensive trapping program. The turkeys stayed intact for the first winter after release then began spreading out. By 1956 a flock of 75 had moved into La Rue Creek, which is around ten miles south of the release area. There is still a small flock in the release area but others have spread out along the foot of Grand Mesa and Green Mountain. Big Dominguez Development: There was a complaint that the Big Dominguez Canyon and Cottonwood Creek were barren of turkeys even though the author had seen turkeys and found sign after the Uncompahgre releases in both of these areas. The Dominguez lies north and east of Escalante Canyon and Cottonwood Creek lies to the south between Escalante and Roubideau Creeks. It was decided to try to make a plant in both of these canyons but at the time plants could be made it was found impossible to get into Cottonwood Canyon for the release. As a consequence, only one plant was made in the �-42Big Dominguez in 1958. Five hens and two gobblers were released on January 15. Then, three hens were added from the Turkey Ranch on March 6, 1958. Turkey sign and tracks were seen and there were reports from hunters in the two years this plant has been active but it is too early to draw any conclusions in the possible development of these areas. Comparisons in Non-Historical Range: Two of the non-historical ranges have developed to a point where hunting seasons have been openedj the Uncompahgre in 1955 and the Glenwood Springs-Rifle area in 1959. The Uncompahgre area has never been hunted seriously. This is due to the fact that while deer hunters report a lot of turkeys in the area the local hunters are not sufficiently sure of the locations where birds can be found to t.ake much chance. The Glenwood Springs area was new last year and the hunters only sampled it. However, the hunters were quite successful and that should encourage lllOreto take par.t another year. The desired result of scattering certain flocks was successful and that was a valuable help. Development On a straight comparative basis it would seem that the non-historical range has a slight edge on historical ranges. With a few rare exceptions the non-historical range is in a position to have less human interference. Another advantage is that .it is lower in altitude. Weather, which is one of the most important i'actors has for the most part been less severe in non-historical range though the predator pressure is thought to be greater than in historical range. On a numerical basis 166 turkeys have been released in historical range while in non-historical range to date 289 have been released. On a geographical basis this latter area covers about three times as much land area as the former ranges . Analysis and Recommendation: The prime purpose of distribution in trapping and transplanting has been to develop huntable flocks over a larger area. It should be noted under this whole program there has been a good general buildup of turkeys in occupied as well as planted ranges. When the wild turkey program was st.arted in Colorado in 1941 there vere turkeys in only four counties in western Colorado. Today, after eighteen years this has been expanded to a total of fifteen counties. While it is tru.ethat some of these counties have only a few flocks , it is also true that the possible stocking range has been fairly well filled. There is little difference in historical and non-historical range development if the areas are well chosen by qualified technicians. There are basic needs for the si.lpport.ofgame animals and birds. If these are supplied within the range chosen, the animals and birds will thrive if given the proper supervision needed. If these basic needs are not met they will not develop in a;p.y range that might be chosen. Submitted by: Martin L. Burget Date! J_u_l.::..y.:...,--..;19;..6_o _ Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �-43- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS State of PROJECTS Colorado -------------------------------- Project No ..-.- W_-~3~8_~~R_-l~3~ _ Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 1 5 ----~--------------------Title of Job: Experimental Trapping and Marking Technique ----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--------------Work Plan No. Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Abstract: One deer and four elk were tagged and marked during the past trapping season. At least 16 more elk were trapped but escaped for various reasons. The three main problems that arose this last year have apparently been solved. One new group trap was constructed above the Ellgen property on 2nd Dry Creek which should catch more deer than the trap on East Elk Creek. Objectives: 1. To obtain as much information as is possible from a review of pertinent literature regarding different methods of trapping big game animals. 2. To have a complete review of literature done on techniques and materials used in marking big game for .iJ:ositiveidentification at later dates. 3. To continue work on the experimental deer and elk trap at the Sapinero Game Management Area, with the idea of developing new types of gates that will be ~ermanently set and allow any number of game animals to- enter the tra~ and at the same time effectively seal them in. 4. To continue develo~ment of the net catching and holding device which will make handling of the animals easier and safer for both the animal and the personnel working on it. 5. To mark and tag all animals caught with cattle tags in both ears, brightly colored leather collars for deer, and various dyes for the backs of elk. 6. To follow up on any re~orts of marked animals in order to determine distance traveled, and summer range area compared to winter r~ge area. 7. To run several snowshoe and Sno-Cat counts in the tra~~ing area to observe movements of the marked animals and have both a ~lane and a helico~ter count the area to see if a "Lincoln Index" can be run by use of marked vs. unmarked animals. 8. To use the Cap-Chur gun on both deer and elk in the group trap with the objective of finding the maximum and minimum dosage of the nicotine alkaloid used in the projectile syringe. �-44, .... Procedures! 1. The reviews of literature on trapping methods and techniques and materials for marking the animals will be carried out by a student or students at Colorado State University, College of Forestry and Range Management. 2. Bait deer and elk into the experimental trap with alfalfa hay and salt. Tag and mark all animals caught with ear tags and such plastic materials as are available from various manufacturers. Deer and elk will be induced to jump into the net catching device for easier handling. The complete plans for the trap, net, and experimental gates are to be found in the Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly Reports for October, 1958 and July, 1959. 3· Any reports of marked animals will be checked out to get the following information: a. b. c. d. Distance traveled. Ease of identification (color fastness). Summer range vs. winter range area. Map recoveries and sightings, such information to be used for management purposes. 4. Enlist the help of a veterinarian to help work out the dosages for the Cap-Chur gun to make it more efficient and faster acting. 5. When the experimental gates seem to be working satisfactorily, work out the cost per animal trapped and marked so that economic justification for a continued trapping program can be set up. �-45Experimental Trapping and Marking Technique Raymond J. Boyd and M. C. Coghill The winter of 1959-1960 was the second 'very,light winter in succession in the Sapinero area. The elk did not come down to their normal winter ranges until late in February, 1960. The snow depth did not exceed 30 inches and did not .reach that depth until about March 4, 1960. By March 10 the snow had melted down to 6 inches. Another storm put the depth back to 18 inches on March 18. Trapping was stopped about March 25 because the elk no longer came to the trapping site. In spite of the light winter we caught at least 20 elk in the trap. It was not possible to tag all of these animals for the reasons listed below. However, indications are that we can catch elk in the group trap in a light winter, so it should be possible to catch large numbers in a heavyvinter when feed is hard to get. Three new problems developed this year, each of which have been solved as far as is known at the present time. On February 23, while flying the West Gunnison elk trend, four elk were observed inside the trap. Af3 the plane circled the area the elk simply ran out of the trap. Subsequent investigation showed that .the electi':ictrip had worked perfectly and released the gate, but the crossbar holding the gates open had fallen in such a manner as to prop one of the gates open, which allowed the elk to escape. This condition has been eliminated by fastening one end of the bar, on a swivelJ and hooking the other end to the Solenoid release. This keeps the bar from falling to the ground, and should stop any trouble of this type in the future. On March 7 the electric release was activated and the gates closed behind 12 head of cows and calves. Af3 the trapping crew approached the trap the elk began to mill around and push at the gate. One of the elk, a calf, hit the gate extremely hard and succeeded in jamming one of the hinges. The next time it hit the gate its head went between the bars of the gate and in trying to back out, the gate was forced open and stayed that .way because of the jammed hinge. All 12 animals escaped. In order to eliminate this factor, a "safety" bar was constructed which could be dropped in front of the gates by the trapping crew if animals were in the trap. It is obvious that the animals do not fight the gates when they trap themselves, but do seek a way out when the crew approaches. The release for the safety bar is located about 100 yards from the trap and the animals do not have a chance to fight the gates before the bar is dropped, preventing the gates from being opened until the bar is reset. This arrangement allows the principle of the gates to be fully utilized until the trapping crew approaches the trap sj;te. The bar was used successfu.lly two different times after it was installed. Since it was noticed that the calf had gotten its head between the bars o,fthe gate, several wooden slats four inches wide were wired vertically betw@.en the bars to stop either deer or elk from getting their heads caught. �-46- The third problem that developed was that the net was plenty big enough for deer, but some of the elk nearly jumped over it. A new net frame has been const.ructed that is two feet longer, which should eliminate this problem. The old net will be used on the new group trap that has been constructed on 2nd Dry Creek, which should catch more deer than the trap on East Elk Creek. The animals caught and tagged this year were all ear-tagged with the new shield type ear tag, one silver tag and one red tag, both numbered the same. The one deer tagged was also marked with a 2~ inch wide leather collar covered with "Rocket; Red IT colored plastic material. One elk was marked with a similar collar, while two cow elk were marked with a four inch white plastic collar, trade~ mark "WeblonlT, which is a vinyl-impregnated nylon material. Cine spike bull was caught, but we could not put a collar on him because his head was too large to fit through the collars we had made up. Table 1 - Deer and Elk Tagged During the Winter 1959~60 Sapinero Game Management Area .. ..... Date Tagged , , , ; , , IYrarch5, 1960 March 5, 1960 March 10,1960 March 18,1960 March 18J1960 . Species Sex Age Right Ear Tag Left Ear 'rag Deer Elk Elk Elk Elk Female Female Female Male Female Yearling Mature Mature Y~arling(?) Old S-l..,white S-2-white S... 3-white S-4-white S-5-white S=l-red S~2-red S=3-red S4=red S~'5-red Remarks Red collar Red collar White collar No collar White collar Recommendaltions: The experimental trapping program at the Sapinero Game Management Area has been very successful from the standpoint of learning how to run the trap and how to hand:l.= the animals caught. We have also learned that elk can be induced to enter a trap even in a light Winter, which indicates that we can expect to catch large numbers of animals in the event a heavy winter makes food hard to obtain. All of the problems that have arisen during the past two winters seem to have 'been solved, but it will take a heavy winter before we can say t.hat the trap and net. are entirely satisfactory. Also, enough animals are marked with collars so that at least some time sho'cld be spent in trying to locate some of the marked animals by using a plane and observ= ing elk on the calving areas in the Gunnison National Forest. Pr-epar-ed by: Date t Raymond J. Boyd M. C. Coghill J'u.ly 1960 -------------~~~-------------------J Approved 'by r Gilbert N. Hu.nter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -47JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado Project No. W-38 .• R-13 Work Plan No. 4 Title of Job: Study of Deer Losses on Colorado Highways Period covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 .. Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 3 Abstract: Most of Colorado's deer highway kills appear to be due to lack of alertness by the driver. Most accidents happen when the weather is clear, on known deer crossings, and on straight road. Does more frequently are killed than bucks or fawns. More deer are killed between 4 p.m. and 10 p.m. than any other six hour period. The average damage to a vehicle hitting a deer is $150.64. Objectives: To determine the various factors that affect the loss of deer by cars on Colorado highways. Procedures: A uniform deer-auto accident report form was distributed to all Conservation Officers. These forms were to be filled out and returned to the project leader. R~sults: A small portion of highway kills were reported from some Conservation Officers districts, therefore, the findings listed here must be indicators of general conditions. It is not compulsory that drivers killing deer on Colorado Highways report the incident. Too often very little information could be collected on many of the highway kills. Class of deer killed: Bucks Does Fawns :-:-nknown Information on driver: Based on a sample size of 131. 40·9% 53.5% 3.0% 2.6% Based on a sample size of 131. Driver identified 42% Driver unidentified 58% No driver injuries were reported. Contributing factors: Fat.Lgue Headlights glare Drinking Poor vision (one eye, etc.) �-48- Amount of damage to automobile: Sample size 47. Average $150.64 (Nothing - $481.00) Time of Accidentt Based on a sample size of 83. 4 a.m. - 10 a.m. 10 a.m. ~ 4 p.m. 4 p vm . - 10 l' .m , 10 p.m. 4 a.m. 20.5% 2.4% 61.5% 15.6% - Weather: Based on a sample size of 108. Clear Rain or Snow Fog Cloudy 70.4% 6.5% 0.9% 22.2% Location of Accident: Based on sample of 102. Known crossing Not a known crossing Road surface type: 64.7% 35·3% Based on sample size of 116. Black top Dirt 98.0% 1.8% Other road information: Based on sample size of 122. Accident on curve Accident on straight road Accident on hill crest 22·~10 68.9% 8.2% Conclusions: Study should be continued with a more simplified form. Prepared by: Paul F. Gilbert Date: Approved by: July, 1960 ----------~~~~---------------- Gilbert N. Hunter --~~~~--~~------------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -49- State of Project JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Colorado ----------------------------------NO. __ ~W~-~3~8_-~R_-~13~ Work Plan No. _ 4 ----~----------------------- Deer-Elk Job No. Investigations 4"" ", ' """"" " Ti t le 0 f Job: ~Exp:::£::.:::e.:.r.:::i;:.:m:::e::.n:..:::t.:::a:::l~S::.n:::o.=w__:..;M:::e.::::l: _ Period April 1, 1959 through Covered: March 31, 1960 Abstract: Last year's experiments indicated that dusting snow with the proper amount of carbon black could be used to hasten snow melting. This year an attempt was made with fair success to mechanize the blower device. Objective: To determine if it is practical to use carbon black products to hasten snow melting and to devise an efficient method of dispensing such products. Procedure: The same square carbon hopper was used this yearj however, in place of using a hand driven forge to produce the blast of air going into the hopper, a gasoline motor driven device was used. This cons~sted of a surplus army blower of the type that was used to force warm air onto aeroplane motors. The heating device was removed as it was of no value. The air was forced into the hopper with the aid of a 3 inch flexible tube and out the other end of the hopper. The carbon dispersion was only fair, probably because of the weak blast of air put out by this device was not sufficient and there was a tendency for the carbon material to pack in the hopper. An agitator of some sort could be devised to correct this. Recommendations: should be used. Prepared by: If any further tests along this line are made, a bigger blower Paul F. Gilbert Approved by: ----~--~~~~~------Date: July, 1960 ----------~~~~~------------ G~il~b~e~r~t~N~.~H~un~t~e~r~ _ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �Fig. 1. Mechanized charcoal blower. Motor blows air through square hopper and back underneath trailer through the three inch hose. �Fig. 2. Melting begins shortly after charcoal dust is applied. �July, 1960 -51JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~~~~--------------- Project NO. ~W~-~3~8~-~R~-~1~3 _ Deer-Elk Investigations _ Job No. Work Plan No. ~5~ Title of Job: ~D~e~n~t~i~t~i~o~n~an~d~Ag~e~-~W~e~i~g~h~t~C~o~r~r~e~l~a~t~i~o~n~ Period Covered: October 15, 1959 to April 15, 1960 1 _ Abstract: A total of 75 deer were weighed at the Little Hills Experimental Station during the winter of 1959-60. Mature bucks were heavier than usual but mature does were lighter. Yearling bucks were lighter but yearling does were heavier. All fawns were considerably heavier. Objectives: To determine weight groups for the Piceance Creek area. Techniques Used: Trapped deer were tagged, aged, and weighed on platform scales. ��-53Dentition and Age-Weight Correlation Don G. Smith Trapping operations during the winter of 1959-60 were confined to the Little Hills area near Meeker,. Colorado. Incidental trapping was done near Gunnison. Weights are from deer wintering in the Piceance Creek area. A total of 75 deer were aged and weighed. Size, weight, and dentition were used to classify age groups. A new age group was used this year -- old deer-which will continue to be recorded. The condition of the animal is also noted. New trapping record books were used to facilitate records. Results are presented in Table 1. Table 1. Age Average Weights by Age Class Average Weight Number in Pounds Trapped Sex Weight Range Comparison with . 6-year Average old old bucks does 0 3 139·3 133"'0144 mature mature bucks does 7 10 167·7 135· 5 132..,215 117-154 heavier lighter yearling yearling bucks does 12 2 122.4 123·5 104... 136 120-127 lighter heavier fa:wn fawn bucks does 24 17 74.8 71.8 49=91 58-87 heavier heavier No old bucks were weighed due to the selectivity of the trap although some were caught in wing and group traps. Mature bucks were heavier than usual as one buck weighed 215 pounds. Mature does were in good condition although they averaged six pounds lighter than usual. One only weighed 117 pounds. Yearling bucks were down as one buck weighed only 104 pounds, but they were heavier than those trapped last year. Yearling does were up slightly over the six year average and considerably up over last yearj however, only two yearling does were weighed. Both sexes of fawns were heavier than the six year average although buck fawns·weighed slightly less than last year. The condition of most of the deer appeared good, especially the fawns. Feed was no problem as the spring of 1960 arrived earlier than for many years. A total of 227 deer were trapped, of which 135 were tagged. Details of the trapping operations are reported under a separate report, the Little Hills Grazing Study, Project 101~R, Work Plan 2, Job Number 1. A new group type trap was used to stock the experimental pastures with good results. �-54. . . . . . .. Deer Tag Returns: A total of 14 deer tags were returned this year compared to 10 last year. Most of them were from the Piceance Creek and Douglas Creek areas. The distance from trap site to kill varied from 1 mile to 75 miles. Outstanding distances included a buck from Picenace traveling 75 miles east to Hammond Creek; a buck from Radium traveling 50 miles to Dillon, and:a buck from Dry Creek near Sapinero traveling 60 miles to Middle Cottonwood Creek near Buena Vista. Results are presented in Table 3. Table 3. :ragging Date 1959 Report on Deer Tag Returns ... Tagging Round Cow Age & Sex Tag Tag 11/25/58 fawn buck mature doe 3/5/58 mature buck 12/9/58 2/18/56 yearling buck 12/15/53 yearling buck 2/14/57 mature doe 2/6/57 mature buck 1/31/54 mature doe 12/12/54 fawn doe 12/13/56 mature buck 1/12/56 mature doe 2/15/56 fawn buck 12/22/56 mature buck buck 12/30/53 fawn 1646 A 1757 1683 2322 1072 2931 2922 269 291 A 1302 A 1623 Trapping Site Date. of Kill of Kill Distance 1647 A 1758 1684 LLttle Jlills Nov. '59 Cathedral Blfs. 25 mi. Little Hills Nov. '59 Dry Fork 1 mi. Little Hills Oct. '59 Dry Fork 2 mi. Little Hills Oct. '59 Dry Fork 1 mi. Little Hills Oct. '59 Hammond Cr. 75 mi. 1792 Lit,tle Hills Oct. '59 L-0-7 Mtn. 15 mi. 1783 Little Hills Oct·.'59 Piceance Cr. 4 mi. 1130 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 East Douglas 10 mi. 1135 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 Cathedral Blfs. 5 mi. 1604 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 East Douglas 10 mi. 1181 Cathedral Cr. Oct. '59 East Douglas 10 mi. A 1303 Radium Oct. '59 Near Kremmling 15 mi. A 1624 Radium Nov. '59 Near Dillon 50 mi. A 817 DrY'Cr- Gunn. Sept '59 Mdle. Cottonwood 60 mi. (20 mi. west Buena Vista) There were 30 deer caught which had been tagged during previous years. Most of the recatches were from recent years although several were from 1950, 1951, and 1954. However, the two does tagged in 1951 and 1954 died in March, 1960. The report is presented in Table 4. �-55~ Table 4. Date " , , , , , ... .... Trapping Record of Recatches 1959-60. Sex . , ; , , . , , ,Af!,e , Left Ear . , . , , , 3/4/60 12/30/60 1/21/60 12/5/59 12/30/59 1/20/60 2/38/60 1/6/60 1/28/60 2/23/60 2/1/60 1/24/60 1/24/60 1/6/60 2/27/60 1/21/60 12/31/59 2/20/60 1/6/60 3/1/60 2/8/60 buck mature ,"A3000 doe mature doe mature 98 doe old 198 doe 'mature doe old 191 doe mature A 1415 doe mature A 1420 buck mature A 1426 doe mature A 1428 buck mature A 1432 doe mature A 1449 doe matur~ A 1457 buck mature A 1484 doe mature doe mature 1639 doe mature 1662 doe yearling 16'79 doe mature 1681 doe mature A 1792 doe mature 1798 1/24/60 12/29/59 12/18/59 2/17/60 3/4/60 1/16/60 2/20/60 2/28/60 2/23/60 doe mature doe mature doe mature doe old buck mature buck yearling buck year ling doe yearling doe mature 2944 A 1906 A 1939 A 1945 A 1965 , ..Right .. Weignt' Oondition , ., . . Remarks . . . . . . . Ear A 14 A 22 A 319 A 395 A 1416 A 1419 A 1425 A 1427 A 1431 A 1450 A 1458 1512 1638 1663 1680 1682 A 1793 1802 1803 1863 A 1905 A 1936 A 1938 A 1944 A 1964 1970 137 148 128 143 143 143 186 130 135 130 143 138 133 147 152 129 120 good good good poor good good good good fair good good good good good good good good good good good fair good good good good good good good good good Tagged 12/19/56 Tagged 12/30/56(N'ew tags ~~~~ Tagged 2/12/50 Tagged 316/51 Died 3/29/60 Tagged 11/26/54 Died 3/29/60 Tagged 1/28/50 Tagged 1/26/59 Tagged 1/28/59 Tagged 2/4/59 Tagged 2/4/59 Tagged 2/9/59 Tagged 2/18/59 Tagged 1/6/59 Tagged 1/12/59 Tagged 1/26/57 Tagged 11/21/58 Tagged 12/3/58 Tagged 12/7/58 Tagged 12/8/58 Tagged 12/31/58 Tagged 2/17/57 Leg broken Killed 3/29/60 - Weak Tagged 2/27/57 Tagged 2/27/57 Tagged 2/14/56 Tagged 2/23/59 Tagged 3/8/59 Tagged 3/8/59 Tagged 3/10/59 Tagged 3/7/59 Tagged 11/22/56 �-56TRAPPING REPORT LITTLE HILLS EXPERIMENTAL . Table 2. Deer tagged during the winter of 1959-60 Date.. , Sex . Age buck Right Ear A 322 Weight 11/17/59 Left Ear A 321 12./3/59 12/9/59 12/11/59 12/12/59 12/13/59 12/13/59 12/15/59 12/17/59 12/17/59 12/21/59 12/24/59 buck fawn A 325 buck fawn A 1974 buck fawn A 1981 buck fawn A 1983 doe mature A 1986 buck fawn A 1987 buck yearlingA'J.989 doe yearling A 1992 buck y~arlingA 1994 buck fawn A 1995 doe old A 1998 A 326 A 1976 A 1982 A 1984 A 1985 A 1988 A 1990 A 1991 A 1993 A 1996 A 1997 80 75 65 57 137 65 126 127 130 78 133 fair fair fair good fair good good good good good good 12/29/59 2/25/60 2/25/60 2/26/60 2/26/60 2/26/60 2/27/60 2/27/60 2/27/60 2/27/60 2/28/60 2/28/60 2/29/60 2/27/60 2/29/60 3/1/60 3/2/60 3/2/60 3/3/60 ~3/3/60 3/5/60 3/5/60 3/5/60 3/6/60 12/31/59 12/30/59 1/1/60 1/1/60 1/2/60 1-/3/60 buck fawn A 2000 buck yearlingA 2501 doe fawn A 2504 buck yearlingA 2505 ,doe mature A 2508 buck fawn A 2509 doe mature At25IL doe fawn A 2514 buck mature A 2515 buck yearlingA 2518 doe mature A 2519 doe fawn A 2521 doe mature A 2526 buck fawn A 2524 buck fawn A 2527 doe fawn A 2529 doe old A 2531 doe fawn A 2533 doe yearling A 2536 buck mat.ure A 2537 buck yearlingA 2540 doe old A 2542 doe mature A 2544 doe yearling A 2546 'buck fawn A 2801 doe fawn A 2804 doe fawn A 2806 buck mature A 2808 buck yearlingA 2810 buck fawn A 2811 A 1999 A 2502 A 2503 A 2506 A 2507 A 2510 A 2512 A 2513 A 2516 A 2517 A 2520 A 2522 A 2523 A 2525 A 2528 A 2530 A 2532 A 2534 A 2535 A 2538 A 2539 A 2541 A 2543 A 2545 A 2802 A 2803 A 2805 A 2807 A 2809 A 2812 87 good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good fair good fair good good good good good good good good good good good good , , , , , .. STATTON , , , . mature Condition fair 91 72 78 140 84 , , . , . Remarks 2 pt. shot with Cap-Chur gun Had broken leg Open sore on back •.•doctored Shot #5 April 25, 1960 2 pt. 2 pt. Incisor teeth missing Died Mar. 1, 1960 3 pt. 3 - 2 pt. Antlers shed Shot #4 April 26, 1960 3 pt. 2 pt. pus in eye Shot #4 May 13, 1960 �-57'rable 2 (Continued) Date 1/3/60 1/4/60 1/4/60 1/5/60 1/6/60 1/6/60 1/7/60 1/7/60 1/7/60 1/'T/60 1/8/60 1/8/60 1/10/60 1/12/60 1/13/60 1/14/60 1/14/60 1/14/60 1/18/60 1/19/60 1/20/60 1/21/60 1/21/60 1/21/60 1/21/60 1/22/60 1/23/60 1/23/60 1/23/60 1/2'5/60 1/25/60 1/2'1/60 1/)8/6" I v ! _ 1/28/60 1/29/60 1/30/60 1."/ 130 /6 o 1/3-:,..160 2/1/60 2/2/60 2/4/60 2/5/60 2/5/60 2/6/60 2/6/60 I .. " 2/7/60 2/7/60 2/8/60 2/9/60 Sex Ag§ Left Ear doe fawn A 2813 buck fawn A 2815 buck fawn A 2817 aloe mature A 2819 buck fawn A 2821 buck yearling A 2823 buck fawn A 2825 doe fawn A 2827 bllck fawn A 2829 buck mature A 2831 doe fawn A 2834 doe mature A 3835 doe yearling A 2838 buck fawn A 2840 doe fawn A 8841 buck faw.n A 2843 doe mature A 2845 buck fawn A 2847 buck faw.n A 2849 doe fawn A 2852 buck fawn A 2854 baek fawn A 2856 bu.ck yearling A 2858 doe fawn A 2859 doe fawn A 2861 buck yearling A 2864 doe mature A 2865 b~ck fawn A 2868 doe matare A 2870 fs;w.;.'1. doe A 2872 doe fawa A 28'74 buck yearling A 2876 doe mature A 2877 doe fawn A 2880 doe mature A 2882 doe fawn A 2884 d.oe matu.re A 2885 buck fawn A 288'7 buck mature A 2889 ·buck fawr.:. A 2891 ·01:i.ck yearling A 2894 -b~ICk fawn A 2896 ~t·c.:.:re buck A 2897 buck yearling A 2899 d.oe fa;TNYl A 2902 doe yearling A 2904 doe ma+ure A 2905 doe old A 290'7 buck fawn A 2910 Right Weight Ear A 2814 79 A 2816 A 2818 85 A 2820 A 2822 89 A 2824 136 A 2826 76 A 2828 87 82 A 2830 180 A 2832 A 2833 58 A 2836 133 120 A 3837 68 A 2839 A 2842 72 A 2844 85 A 2846 117 A 2848 74 A 2850 A 2851 74 A 2853 76 A 2855 49 A 285'7 104 A 2860 74 A 2862 77 A 2863 126 A 2866 124 A 8867 78 A 2869 139 82 A 2871 A 2873 73 120 A 2875 A 2878 144 A 2879 74 A 2881 137 A 2883 70 A 2886 145 A 2888 47 A 2890 192 A 2892 77 128 A 2893 82 A 2895 A 2898 154 A 2900 115 62 A 2901 A 2903 115 A 2906 132 A 2908 144 A 2909 73 Condition good good good good good good good good good good fair good fair good good good good good good good good good good good good. good good good good good good good good good fair good good good. good good fair good good good good, Remarks Shot #4 :May 6, 1960 Died in #4 Mar. 1960 2 pt. 4 pt. sawed horns Found dead 2/15/60 Died in #4 2/20/1960 2 pt. 2 pt. Old Tag A=22 replaced Shot #5 April 22y 1960 4 pt. Died :MarchJ 1960 2 pt. 3 pt. 2 pt. Shot l\1ay11, 1960 �-58Table 2 (Continued) Age Date Sex 2711/60 2/11/60 2/11/60 2/11/60 2/12/60 2/12/60 2/12/60 2/13/60 2/13/60 2/13/60 2/13/60 2/16/60 2/16/60 2/16/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/17/60 2/18/60 2/18/60 2/18/60 2/18/60 2/19/60 2/19/60 2/19/60 2/19/60 2/15/60 2/20/60 2/20/60 2/21/60 2/21/60 2/21/(Jo 2/21/60 2/23/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 2/24/60 buck yearling A 2912 A 2911 buck yearling A 2914 A 2913 doe fawn A 2915 A 2916 doe fawn A 2918 A 2917 doe fawn A 2920 A 2919 doe mature A 2922 A 2921 buck fawn A 2924 A 2923 buck mature A 2926 A 2925 doe old A 2928 A 2927 buck mature A 2930 A 2929 doe mature A 2932 A 2931 buck mature A 2934 A 2933 fawn doe A 2936 A 2935 buck fawn A 2938 A 2937 doe fawn A 2939 A 2940 buck mature A 2941 A 2942 buck mature A 2944 A 2943 doe old A 2945 A 2946 buck fawn A 2948 A 2947 buck yearl~ A 2949 A 2950 buck mature A 295l A 2952 doe fawn A 2954 A 2953 buck fawn A 2955 A 2956 buck mature A 2958 A 2957 buck mature A 2960 A 2959 bu.ck fawn A 2961 A 2962 buck fawn A 2964 A 2963 bu.ck yearling A 2966 A 2965 buck mature A 2967 A 2968 buck fawn A 2969 A 2970 buck matiure A 2972 A 2971 buck yearling A 2974 A 2973 buck fawn A 2976 A 2975 doe old A 2978 A 2977 doe, mature A 2980 A 2979 bu.ck yearling A 2982 A 2981 buck yearling A 2984 A 2983 ma+ure A 2985 A 2986 doe ma+are A 2988 A 2987 buck buck fawn A 2989 A 2990 mature h- 2083 A 2991 doe (button) doe mature A 2992 A 2993 buck yearling A 2994 A 2995 doe fawn A 2996 A 2997 buck mature A 2999 A 2998 'buck mature A 3000 A 14 2/21/60 2/25/60 2/25/60 2/25/60 3/4/60 Left Ear Submitted by: Don G. Smith Date! July, 1960 Right Ear Weight Condition 119 123 58 72 58 125 71 161 141 215 154 good good good good good good good good good good good good good good fair good good good good good .' good fair good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good - :L2'7 good good good good good Approved by: Remarks 2 pt. 2 pt. Antlers shed Antlers shed 4 pt. Antlers shed 4 pt. Broken back - shot 3 pt. Antlers shed Antlers shed 4 pt. 3 pt. 3 - 4 pt. Antlers shed 2 pt. 2 pt. Antlers shed - wore hair off body 2 pt. Antlers ahed Recatch 12/19/56 Retagged with A 3000 Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -59JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~--~~~----------------- Project No. Work Plan No. ·_W~-~3~·8~-R~-~1~3~ 6 _ Deer-Elk ..... ----~--------------------- Job No. Investigations , . , , , 1 Tit le of Job: M::.::::.et.::;h:::.o:::d::::s:::.....:o:.:f::......::Ev::..:.;a::l:.::ua::::..::t Period April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Covered: Objectives: (a) To determine if any actual loss in production of alfalfa occurs from spring grazing by deer or elk, and if such a loss occurs, how much. (b) To correlate the actual amount of use by game animals on the test plots, as to number of animals and length of time, with changes in production so that estimates of game numbers may be converted to change in pounds of hay produced. Procedure: METHODS AND MATERIALS The procedures and equipment used in this segment differed slightly from those used in the previous two segments, so each will be discussed under the appropriate heading. Alfalfa Plots The plots were 200 feet x 200 feet (40,000 square feet) in size. The plots that were randomly selected to be fenced were enclosed with two strands of 39-inch woven wire hung on 10-foot steel posts. The posts were already in place, being ham~ mered into the ground during the fall of 1958. The wire, however, was not put into position until just before growth started in the spring. This allowed every plot to receive fall, winter, and early spring use by the deer. The wire was not taken down until harvest of the hay was started. After holding several meetings with Dr. Elmer Re mmeng a , Department of Mathematics, Colorado State ~niversity, Fort Collins, Colorado, going over the statistical analysis of the previous years work, it was mentioned that eventually the q~estion would be raised as to the accuracy of the Analysis of Covariance test on the hay weight data. In other words, how large a difference must there be between the amounts of hay produced from the grazed vs. the ungrazed plots before it could be detected? The appropriate statistical test of this question is known as the "Power of the Analysis-of-Variance Tests" or more simply the Phi Square (~2) Test (Dixon and Massey, 1957). �-60When the hay weight data from the 1958 study year (Boyd, 1958) was subjected to the Phi Square Test, the accuracy was such that we could detect a difference as small as 1,000 pounds per acre 95% of the time. ThiS, of course, is not nearly accurate enough to be used in an arbitration or court case. It was necessary, therefore, to predetermine a difference in production that would be acceptable, insert this figure into the formula, and based upon the known variation between the plots of each treatment, determine the sample size necessary to meet the chosen difference in production. After a discussion with the State Game Manager, Mr. Hunter, we decided that we must be able to detect a difference as small as 300 pounds per acre before the data would stand up in court. When the 300-pound figure was inserted into the formula and solved for the required sample size, we found that 70 plots would be needed to satisfy the requirement. Because the treatments were divided into five replications each, we would need a total of 14 sub-samples from each plot. In order to make the harvest and analysis Simpler, we divided each plot into 20 sub-plots in the following manner: Each plot was divided into four strips, each 50 feet wide and 200 feet long. Each strip was then subdivided into 16 sub-plots, 12 feet wide and 50 feet long, giving a total of 64 sub-plots in each plot. From these 64 sub-plots 20 plots were randomly chosen that were to be harvested and have the hay weighed (Figure 1). While the sub-sample included 100 plots instead of the original 70, iGtwas felt that not enough additional work would be entailed to harvest the additional 30 plots and also that the accuracy might be increased beyond the 300 pound req::..irement. Since the mower that was to be used on the harvest of the damage study plots had a six-foot Sickle, it was very simple to determine what hay was to be included inside a sub-plot, and which hay was to be left out. After the hay had been mowed down and allowed to cure, it was raked with a side delivery rake into windrows that only included hay from an area 12 feet wide, this being shown by two mower swaths. Each windrow was then divided into 50-foot sections and the appropriate ones marked for weighing. After the hay had cured in the windrow, a John Deere baler was pulled along the piled hay and all the hay from a 50-foot section was put into one bale. These bales were weighed as they came out of the end of the bale case (Figure 2). The scale that was used to weigh the bales was a Chatillon beam balance, accurate to the nearest 1/4 pound. Deer Counts The number of deer 'asing the alfalfa field were determined by counting them from the observation tower that is located on the north edge of the field. The tower floor is 18 feet from the ground, which placed the observer and his binoculars about 23 feet above ground level. From this vantage point it is possible to see 'he entire field, and in no case can a deer be on the field without being observed. �-61During the daylight hours the deer were counted everyone-half hour with only the assistance of binoculars. After dark it was necessary to use the 1,250watt spotlight mounted on the roof of the tower. With this light and a pair of good binoculars it was very simple to get an excellent count of the deer on the field. When the light was used the deer did not seem to be bothered to any great extent because it was rarely on for more than one minute, this being about the length of time it toaR to count the field. The deer were counted every hour after dark until midnight. Thereafter the count-s were made every other hour. The follOWing night the deer were counted on the hours that were skipped the previous night, and so forth. Weather Obseruations Direct readings were taken on two different weather phenomena during the 1959 study period. The air temperature was recorded on a J. P. Friez Thermograph, ML-77. This machine recorded the tenrp.eratureon a gral':ti· ... for a seven-day period. The instrumentwas checked with a registered weather observer thermometer at the Montrose County Airport. The line on the chart or graph can be read to the nearest 15 mdrnrbesJ if such accuracy is needed. The wind velocity was measured by an anemometer that was mounted on the northeast corner of the roof of the tower. The dial on this p:articular in:str"tlment showed only total miles .of wind, and could not be read at any time to get the velocity at that particular moment. The dial was rea,deach evening just before counting began and was again read when counting ceased. This gave a figure which was the total miles of wind that had blown between the two readings. This figure, when divided by the number of hours in the period, gave an answer that was the average speed in miles per hour for that particular period. The instrument used was manufactured by the J. P. Friezand Sons Company of Baltimore, Maryland, and is their Model ML~80. �FIGURE 1SAMPLE DESIGN FOR ONE- ACRE ALFALFA PLOTS r+: X 17 16 X X 15 14 13 12 II X X X X 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 X 3 2 X X I STRIP I STRIP 2 200 • X X X X X X X " , L-- 200' X X STRIP 3 X STRIP 4 �Fig. 2. Weighing Hay from Sample Plots at Billy Creek, 1959. �-63Methods of Evaluating Deer and Elk Damage to Alfalfa Raymond Boyd The various types of analysis that were applied to the data gathered at the Billy Creek Game Management Area did much toward answe-ring many of the questions that arose after the 1958 study year. Each of tne items of information gathered in the course of the 1959 study year will be discussed separately under the appropriate headings. Alfalfa Production Plots Mowing of th,e alfalfa field and the plots contained in it was sta.rtedon June 24, 1959 when the hay -was about one-fourth in bloom. After the hay was baled, it was weighed sub-plot by sub-p.lot; as explained in the previous section on methods. The weights of the hay produced from each plot, the total amount being shown instead of the 20 individual weights from each plot ,are tabulat.ed in Table 1. Table 1. Number of Pounds of Alfalfa Produced from 200 Sub-plots in 1959 at the Billy Creek Game Management Area. Treatment Replrucation Fenced Unfenced 1 - 2 3 - 4 5 - 6 7 - 8 9 - 10 651.25 Ibs. tI 879·75 745.00 tI 497·50 tI 608.00 tI 839·00 Ibs. 472.50 tI 1,056.75 tI 770.25 tI 380.00 tI Total 3,381. 50 Ibs. 3,518.501bs. In determining if there is any significant difference between the total amount of hay produced from each series of sub-p.l.ot s , the data may be subjected to a simple tlTtItest (Snedecor, 1956). The calculated tlTtIvalue for 198 degrees of freedom is 0.6008. The values t .05 = 1.97 and t .01 = 2.601 being taken from the table tlValues of tit (Snedecor, 1956). Since the primary reason we ran the damage study for an additional year was to increase the accu.racy of our analysis, it is necessary to subject the hay weight data to a Phi Square Test (Dixon and Massey, 1957). �-64The data was substituted into the foliLowing formula, where "d' is the quantity we need to solve for. All other items in the formula are taken directly from the "T" test calculations. n = t 1.97 s = 12.9 n = (.05) t2 s2 d2 and 2.60 (.Ol)(Snedecor, 1956) 100 Solving for d; d = 2.53 for each sub-plot This means that we can detect a difference as small as 2.53 Lbs . per sub-plot This figure is meaningless unless we expand it to a figure comparable to the difference in pounds per acre. We can easily do this by Irru.ltiplying the d = 2.53 by 72.6, which equals 183.56 pounds per acre 95% of the time. If we further -want to refine our accuracy to the 95% level we merely substitute the figure 2.60 for t .and solve again for d. This answer (3.35) times 72.6 tells us that we may.detect a difference as small as 243 .5 pounds per acre 99% of the time. 95% of the time. c. Deer Count Data was begun the evening of' April 20, May 19, 1959, at which time counting was suspended because of the lack of' deer coming onto and using the field. The counting of deer using the alfalfa field 1959 and continued on a more or less regular basis until During this period of time a total of 5,990 deer were counted on the field. Thi£ figure is an absolute minimumbecause of the f'act that the deer were not counted all night every night of the counting period. On the basis using the field. the field. of' 21 counting nights, we found an average of 285 .deer :per night This breaks down into an average of' nearly 24 deer :per hour using Weather Observations During the course of the damage study two different types of information were gathered concerning the weather conditions at Billy Creek during the spring grazing season. A. Air Temperature - As was mentioned before, recorded by use of' a thermograph. the air temperature By reading the graphs from the instrument it was possible temperature at the same time that the deer were -courrbed , was to obtain the air In order to determine if there was any relationship between the air temperature and the number of de.er counted, it is necessary to subject the data gathered to a "Coefficient of Correlation Test" (Snedecor, 1956,). Table 2 shows the calculations of the Coefficient for the air temperature vs. deer count data. �~8:b,le,2,- Coe,fficient 1959 of ,Correlation . SumF Doc Dy = = 171 N on Temper,ature-Deer Count Dat.aj Billy Greek, , ~~~:,J:L8 ," Sum Fx . Dx = 33 SumFx ... D;x2 = 49,592 SumFy . Dy = 223 SumFy ; . ,"\ . 0/ r = 0.14 = 25,455 ,!",'! B. Wind Velocity - The wind velocity could only be approximated because of the limitations of the instrument used in the study. There was a total of 541.4 miles of wind during the period April 20, 1959 through May 16,1959, inclusive. This figure shows onf.y wind that blew.during the counting periods. Thisaverage:s out to 4.75 miles :of wind per hour. There is no way that .a correlation analysis can be run on the -wind velocity vs. deer numbers data., nor can a regression equation be set up. DISCUSSION The purpose of this section is to discuss the results brought out in the analysis of data section and to interpret them with the idea of answering the questions posed in the objec't fves j namely, (1) to determine if any actual loss in production occurs from spring grazing by deer or elk, and if a loss occurs, how mucrr; and (2) to correlate the actual amount of use by game animals on the test plots, as to number-sof animals and length of time, with changes in production so t4at estimates of game use may be converted to change in pounds of hay produced. Alfulfa Plots Since the main reason we ran the experiment for -anaddi tional year -wasto increase the sample size in order to bring about greaterac-curacy, -weneed only to examine the results of the "T" test to see if there are significantd1fferences hetween the means of the replications of the two treatments, and if significance is not .shovn, then the calculated lid" from the Phi Square Test would indicate just what .accuracy we had in our experiment. The "T" value of 0.6008 obViously does not exceed the 95%level of 1.97 or the 99%level of 2.601, thus we can state that there is no statisticallysignificant difference between the amount of hay produced from the unfenced and fenced plots. With a calculated difference of 2Y,3.5pounds per acre with 99%confidence, we can be assured that our experiment was extremely accurate because an amount of hay this small on an acre could be mis-sed by a sloppy job of mowing, ,a dull Sickle, or a poor job of raking. �-66"" Deer Counts The methods used in this study to determine the numbers o.f deer using the field were, in the opinion of this writer, the best available and gave very accurate .data as to numbers and time of feeding. In Figure 3, the hourly fluctuations in deer numbers is .shown, The graph indicates that the hour between 7:00P.M. and 8:00 P.M. is the time of'night that the greatest number of deer can be counted. This compares to the 1958 results which indicated that the hour between 6:30P.M. and q'::30P.M. was the be:st time to count. These two series of times.compare very .favorably with each other, and tend to giveeach other support . ., Weather Observations When the deer counts -were correlated with air temperature at the time of each count, very little if any relationship -was indicated by the calculated "r o.f 0.14. ll As was mentioned in the 1958 report (Boyd, 1958) the -wind velocity data was not the he.st type to work with because the actual speed o.fthe wind at any given time could not be determined. The wind did affect deer numbers on the field in that they seemed more nervous and tended to move around quite a lot whenever strong winds began to blow. It is intereBting to no~that the average wind velocity in 1959 was 4.75 miles per hour, while the average velocity in 1958 was 4.14 miles per hour. This striking similarity between two different years' wind data would tend to cancel out any effect wind would have had .on deer numbers from one year to the next. Conclusion Since this experiment was designed to allow all factors such as weather, disease, insects, etc. to be constant on all of the plots, the only factors that might affect the amount of hay produced are soil differences and animals grazing on the alfalfa before it is mowed, in this case deer. By using the "Analysis of Covar-Lancee'on the 1957 and 1958 data we determined that spring grazing by deer had no reducing effect upon the production of alfalfa. When the study was slightly redesigned in 1959 we were able to run both a trTIrtest and an "Ana.LysLs of Variance" upon the data, which again showed no statistically significantdifferenceB in production between the grazed and ungrazed plots. Further, our accuracy, as determri.nedby the "Power of Analysis of Variance." test, was so good tha.t.any #.f'ferences in production could be :attributed to harvest practices and not to grazing by deer. The same statement made at the conclusion of'the 1958 study bears repeating here, at the end of the 1959 study~ IISincewe have already determined that there is no significant difference between the yields of' the plots, spring grazing by deer had no harmful effect upon the amount of hay produced from the field. II �-67SUMMARY 1. The actual amount of' hay produced f'rom 200 sub-p.Lotis -was determined by weighing all of the hay from each plot right after it wa.s baled. One •.. half of' the plots were fenced ,agl3.instdeer grazing, the other 100 were left open to free deer use. 2. Totl3.lproduction from the 100 ungrl3.zed:plots was 3,381.5 pounds while 3,518.5 pounds were produced f'rom the grazed plots. These two f'iguresare not statistically different from each other. 3· Deer USing the alfalfa field during the early spring, mid-April through mid •.. May, were counted from an observation tower, with the assistance of a 1,250-watt sel3.rchlight, every hour all night. A total of 5,990 deer were counted using the field during the 1959 study year. 4. An13.1ysis of the times deer were counted indicated that betwe,en 7:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M. is the best time to count deer, as this was when maximum numbers used the field. 5. Correlation of' air temperature ,and numbers of deer did not show any relationship. An fir" of' 0.14 was calculated f'rom this data. This figure conf'irms the calculated "r " for 1958, which was :•.•0.3. 6. Wind velocity did not apprecil3.bly aff'ect deer numbers. It was interesting to note, however, that the average wind velocity for 1959 was 4.75 miles per hour, while the average velocity in 1958 was 4.14 miles per hour. Recommendations for Further Study It is apparent that further study into the actual damage phase of this study would be merely repetitious and any additional work on this phase should wait until a court test of these results can be made. At the time of this writing an arbitration hearing is pending that will use these study results to deny any damages to the complaining pa.rty. Submitted Date: by: _--=.:R;::a:::..ym.:::::o;:::n;::d:....;.:,Y..:,.-=.B.=0JLy.;::,d:.--_____ Approved by! _-::G;:::i.;:1...:.b..:.e;:..r...;.t.. .....;;:::H;::un:;;::' ;,:t..:e..;:.r _ State Game Manager July 1960 F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst, Coordinator ----------~~~~~-------------- �FIGURE 3 - AVERAGENUMBEROF DEER' USING THE ALFALFA FIELD AT BILLY CREE~( APRIL 20, 1959- MAY 16,1959 50 I 0\ ex> I 0 ..., L&J Z ::;:) 0 o 0:: 20 L&J CD i ~ 0:: L&J 10 ~ o~ ~ ·6:00 7:00 6:30 8:00 7:30 P.M. 9:00 8:30 10:00 11=00 1:00 12:00 2:00 HOUR COUNT WAS TAKEN 3:00 A.M. 5:00 4:00 _ �July, 1960 -69JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ----------------------------------- Project No .W":3'8-R-13 --------~----~--------------- Work Plan No. 6 ----------------------------- Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 5 Title of Job: Methods of Preventing Deer and Elk Grazing on Alfalfa Beriod Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Objectives: To determine methods of lessening or preventing deer and elk grazing on alfalfa in the spring. Results: The press of other duties concerned mostly with Work Plan 6, Job 1, did not allow very much time to be spent upon actual field work on this job. However, several meetings were attended with Fish and Wildlife Service personnel the past year which shed a new light on this particular research job. It seems that the Food and Drug Administration has not yet set allowable limits on the amount of chemical residue that is acceptable, should the various types of repellents we intended to test be used, on crops that are to be eonsumed by humans or consumed by animals that are to be killed for human consumption. For these reasons the Denver Wildlife Lab did not want to do any spraying of alfalfa fields until these questions have been answered. They are, at the present time, working on the problem and hope to have some definite answers in the near future. It was not possible to do any actual field spraying as set up in the P.S.&E. for this job, so a negative report is necessary for segment 13 of this job. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be placed on the inactive list until such time as it becomes feasible to do field spraying of alfalfa with animal repellents. Prepared by: Raymond J. Boyd Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter ----~----------~-------------~~--~--~~-----------State Game Manager Date: July, 1960 --------~~~~~-------------F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -71JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------~~~~~--------------- Project NO. ~W~·-~3_8~-R~-~1~3~ Work Plan No.6 _ --~~-------------------- Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 6 Title of Job: A Study of'.the Monetary Value of Fruit Trees Period Covered: Apr-LL ,1" 1959, thru March 31, 1960. Objective: To find the total value of fruit trees as to the various species, age classes and varieties. Procedure: The greater part of the data presented in this report was gathered by personal interviews of fruit growers in the Paonia area. Prices quoted on young trees were taken from nursery catalogs that are available f'rom the various sales houses that handle this type of stock. . . Results: 1. Initial cost of nursery stock. Most fruit growers in this area, or most others as a matter of f.act, buy root grafted nursery stock direct from commercial nurseries. The cost of'apple trees, 2 to 3 feet high, is about 65¢ a piece, while young trees 4 to 6 feet high go from 85¢ to $1.00 a piece. Cherry trees cost on the average of $1.00 a piece, while peach trees are 80¢ to 9O¢ a piece. These figures are subject to change almost yearly, and were taken from 1960 fruit grower catalogs. 2. Planting cost. There are several items to be considered when figuring the cost of planting young fruit trees. First, the exact location of each tree haa to be stakedj this usually being accomplished with the aid of surveying equipment. The holes for the trees are usually about 18 inches deep and 18 inches across. Depending upon the operation, they are dug either with a mechanical digger or by hand. By working steadily, it is possible for a man to dig 10 to 12 holes per hour by hand. After the holes are dug, it takes an average of 15 minutes to put a tree into the hole and properly tamp and pile the dirt around the roots. �-72- 3· Maintenance Cost. A general rule-of-thumb used by most growers in this area is $1.00 per tree per year for pruning, spraying, disking and irrigation. Actually, there is very little pruning of fruit trees until they are 7 to 8 years old, after which pruning every y~ar is the rule. Fertilizer is an extta CO$t which is not considered in the above figure of $1.00 per tree per year. A good grade of trace element commercial fertilizer, 10-10-10 type, costs from $70 to $100 per ton, with a normal application rate of 100 to 200 pounds of the material per acre. 4. Harvest Cost. The picking of the fruit is done generally by transient workers and high school students. Picking is done on a piece type of work, in that the pickers get 12¢ to 15¢ per box for picking apples or peaches. It costs another 3¢ per box to haul the fruit to the packing house. If the grower does not have his own boxes, he must rent them from the packing sheds. 5. Taxes. According to the assessor's office in Montrose County, Colorado, the tax assessment on orchards is not different from the assessment on other types of irrigated farm lands in this area. The:refore, in order to determine what the taxes would be in any area where trees were being damaged, it would be necessary to contact the local tax assessor to determine values of the trees. 6. Expected Productive Life of Various Fruit Trees. Peach trees have a rather short productive life compared to apples. They will average about four years of age before they begin to produce fruit in comme~ial lots, and ~ive to six years before they get into peak production. Thereafter, they produce quantity crops until 15 to 18 years have passed, after which their production begins to go down hill. Apple trees, on the other hand, are six to ten years old before they begin to produce large amounts of fruit, and do not reach maximum production until 13 to 15 y~ars have passed. After 40 to 45 years have gone by, the trees begin to produce less and less fruit. Discussion: It is possible to generalize a formula to determine the total cost of a young fruit tree if it has been 100% damaged by game animals. There are several factors that cannot be exactly tied down to a specific cost, and for this reason~ it would seem best to use prices and costs in the local area to complete the formula. �-73Labor costs in the planting costs section are difficult to determine, should be ~igured according to local conditions. and AB was mentioned above, the taxes on ~rui ttrees are very nearly the same as those for other types of irrigated land, so the cost of a tree chargable to taxes should be figured locally on the going assessment for that type o~ land. On the basis o~ the ~oregoing information, it is possible to set up a ~ormula which will enable too Game Damage Officer to move exactly determine the actual cost of a ~ruittree i~ it has been damaged by deer or elk. Therefore, the following formula is proposed: I + P + Mey) + H(y) + T :: Total Cost ofa Tree, where I = Initial cost of seedling replacements. P = Planting costs (must be costs at time o~ replanting). M ::Maintenance cost. H = Harvest cost (may not apply as young trees do not produce much fruit). Y Number' of years damaged tree has been in ground. T ~ Taxes on the tree, prorated as to cost per tree. It must be remembered, however, that some costs cannot be figured because of their intangible nature. For instance, if an orchard was 100% damaged after it had been in for two or three years, what value could be assigned the trees beyond that determined by the formula. In other words, if the field had been in grain or hay, what amount of money could the farmer have realized from that crop, instead of the money he realized from a reduced fruit crop. , , Recommendations! It is recommended, therefore, that this formula be proposed to the Game Damage men for their consideration and comments. If it seems to fit practical field application after the damage men examine it, it should be put into use during orchard damage periods. Prepared by: __ R..... aym~o_n_d...;.....:J;;.,..., ....;;B::.,:,o::.::y~d~ Approved by! __ Date! ~J ..... u~1~y~,~19~6~o~ -=G;,-i_lb.,..e ..... rt-",._N_. -,:H~un_t_e_r_ .•...... _ State Game Manager _ F. C. IG.einschnitz ABst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -75JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado --------~------------------------- Project No •__ Work Plan No. ---.:..W:•.. ~3_8-...;:R;.;..-...;;:1:;;:::3 : Deer-Elk Investigations "6 ' ----~--------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Job No. 9 Experimental Night Census of Deer April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Objectives: To find methods of counting deer and elk more accurately while they are grazing on agricultural fields in the spring. Procedure: The main criterion the Game Damage Officer or local WCO has for determining the amount of use on alfalfa or other crops in the spring from grazing deer or elk is the nightly counts done by the local conservation officer. Since the greater portion of the actual counting is done at night from a pick-up with the assistance of a spotlight, there are certain areas in fields that cannot be seen from a road. The counts can be mare accurately made if these "b'llnd ' areas could be counted along with the rest of the field. An Army surplus "Sniper-Scope" has been obtained and will be used to see if these "blind" areas can be counted on foot by the use of the in~ra-red beam thrown by the scope. Results: Since all of the work on this job had to be done at night, no work was accomplished because of the press of duties under Work Plan 6, Job 1. All of the nights that might have been used to test the Scope were spent in the observation tower at Billy Creek. However, several factors have been brought to light during the course of three years intensive study of deer numbers as part of Work Plan 6, Job 1. An analysis of the all~night counts for three years at Billy Creek indicate that the hour between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. is the best time to count deer on alfalfa fields in the spring, as this was when maximum numbers of deer were ~sing the fields. Since the spring damage period lasts approximately six weeks during April and May of each year, there is still quite a lot of daylight during the best counting period. The design of the "Sniper-Scope is such that complete and absolute darkness is needed in order for the scope to operate at all effectively. Therefore, it would seem that the S~Qpe has very little practical application in areas where use occurs only during the spring. ll �-76It may be that further counts of deer in areas where use occurs all summer long will show that counts after dark are more effective in obtaining estimates of game numbers. Should this be the case, the use of the Scope should be a very great help in obtaining these counts. Recommendations! An area of summer~long use by deer on crops has been chosen for a similar "damage" study starting probably in 1961. The rfSniper-Scope" should be tested in this area to see how effective it is, if only to have such information as: 1. 2. 3. Effective distance Clarity. Ease of handling. of light beam. Any uses that the Law Enforcement Division might have for this Scope should be tried in order to see if it has application in their type of work. Prepared Date~ by! _..;:.;R.::aym~o.:.;n::.d::......;J::..:... •...;:B:.:0::.J:y~d:...._ Approved by: July, 1960 ----------~~~~~---------------- Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -77JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS .. .. , State of , .... Colorado Deer-Elk Investigations Work Plan No. 6 ----------------------------- .... . , Job No. 10 Title of Job: Methods of Evaluating Elk Use on Native and Seeded Pastures Period Covered: April 1, 1959 through March 31, 1960 Objectives: 1. To determine the amount and kind of pasture grasses eaten by elk. 2. To determine methods of easily arriving at these f~es. Procedure: (a) Conduct a complete review of literature relative to the food habits of elk during the period of the year that use occurs, and also their preference of plants that are available in the areas where these claims of damage are coming from. (b) Contact the fOUT Regional Game Managers to determine the extent of pasture use by elk that may be included in future damage claims to the Department. (c) Set up a problem analysis and study plan to be followed in future years in order to answer the 'questions posed by the objectives. Results: (a) The review of literature has been assigned to a junior Game Management student at Colorado State UniverSity, Mr. Jim Ells. The review is rather large in scope and he has not completed it either to his or his professor's satisfaction. However, it is in process and should be in our hands for use if this job is reinstated in the future. (b) A Questionnaire was sent to the four Regional Game Managers to ascertain the extent of pasture use by elk that might conceivably be reported as damage in the future. The replies to the Questionnaire are summarized below: ?outhwest Region - Don Bogart, Game Manager One area near Pagosa Springs has enough use on 200 acres to make control necessary, but no claims have been filed to this date. This use takes place in the spring. �-78Northwest Region - Dick Denney, Game Manager Four different areas have enough elk use of pasture to varrant some ~omplaints. Damage claims have been filed in two cases, but not paid. The use is during the spring, and a little summer- use in one case on Cold Springs Mountain. An undetermined number of acres are affected in these four cases. Northeast Region - Hal Swope, Game Manager One general area, west of Fort Collins, near the boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park, is haVing rather heavy use by the elk on grass meadows. There have been many complaints, but only one claim filed to this date. Payment of this claim is pending Commission action. About 1,000 acres are affected in this area. The use period is April to June, during which time some control measures are being utilized. Southeast Region - Stan Ogilvie, Game Manager One ranch is having enough elk use to make them put in damage claims for the past two years, one of which has been paid and the second one will be paid, according to the Game Manager. The use takes place during the winter and spring and is heavy enough (about 135 elk) to warrant control methods. Approximately 4,800 acres are affected. (~) This research job has been dropped from Segment 14 of Project W-38-R. The administrative staff of the Department decided that the problem is not widespread enough to warrant an extensive study on the situation. Therefore, this job will become inactive until such time as it is determined to renew the study. Prepared Date: by: __ R.:....aym::..-.o.:..n.::.d~J.:...•...;;B:...o:..::y:...:d~ Approved by: __ .July 1960 ----------~~~~---------------- -=G.:::.i;::lb~e.:.:r:..t.;,.....:N:.:...:. ~H~un~t:..:e:;:r:.-. _ State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -79JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------------------------------ Project No.__ ~W~-~3_8~-R~-~1~3~ Work Plan No. : 9 --~------------------------ Deer-Elk Investigations Job No.2 Title of Job: Comparison of Air and Ground Deer and Elk Counts Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: A total of six counts, three each by the airplane and helicopter, were made on Cedar Ridge preceding the ground drive. The plane recorded from 38% to 56% with an average of 47% and the copter recorded from 74% to 78% with an average of 76% of the actual number of deer on the area. The 56% recorded by the airplane, and all the percentages recorded by the copter, were the highest yet recorded for these ~espective types of aircraft on this area. Forty-seven drivers and six observers saw a total of 291 deer on Cedar Ridge the smallest number ever counted on this area. This low number was due, however, to the light winter in Middle Park this year rather than a faulty ground drive. Count variability due to snow, light and flying conditions appeared to be significant -- up to 18%. Objectives: (1) To determine whether air counts will consistently tally the same percentage of elk as are present on the ground from time to time and from area to area. (2) To determine whether air-to-ground deer ratios will remain the same from one vegetative or terrain type to another, and (3) To determine factors required to correct air counts for different snow conditions and to work out an easily recognized set of standards to permit an accurate selection of the proper correction factors by the aerial observer. Procedure: Select deer and elk areas respresentative of aerial population-trend areas on which these animals are counted annually. Such sites must possess features of terrain which make it possible to obtain a potentially total ground count of the deer and elk present. Air crews count each study area as many times as pOSSible, under different conditions, immediately prior to each ground drive. Information thus obtained is analyzed to determine the consistency of ratios. Also, data on ground conditions (snow cover), flight conditions and visibility were tabulated to determine the effect of various combinations of these three factors on the counts made. Departmental pilots and observers use an easily recognizable set of standards for classifying such factors -- snow, light and air conditions. In addition, special effort is being made to obtain similar information using a helicopter. ��~81- Comparison of Air and Ground Deer and Elk Counts John T. Harris Introduction: Air-ground counts on Cedar Ridge since 1952 have shown that .aerial crews count an average of 42 percent .of the deer population on this area . Intensive work on this area in 1955 indicated that snow conditions (background) could cause aerial counts to vary as high as 15 percent. Since these counting conditions affect the number of animals counted from the air, they would influence trend counts .as well as total p.opulation counts, elk counts as well as deer. Present research is designed to de:t.erminecorrection factors for the standardization of aerial population surveys. The annual population data gathered in Colorado is of a trend nature; therefore, the emphasis has been placed on determining variability due to counting conditions rather than percent of animals counted. R~sults: Three airplane (Cessna-175) and three copter (Hiller 12-E) counts were obtained on Cedar Ridge this year preceding the ground drive. Air courrts were made on February 11, 12 and 13 and the ground drive followed the last flight on the 13th. The counts are summarized as follows: AIRPLANE COUNTS: Date 2/ll 12 13 Observer Ow:ens !I !I Counting Conditions Snow Cover Light Air I I I III II I III I I Counting Time Start End Total 9:30AMl'O:00 30Min. 7:50AM 8:20 30Min. 7:25AM 8:00 35Min. No. Deer Counted 164 143 III HELICOPTER COUNTS: Owens 11 III III II 4:40PM 5:05 25Min. 217 12 III I I 8:45AM 226 9:15 30Min. Evans 13 III II I 8:20AM 9!00 40Min. 214 *Percentage of the actual number of deer on the area as determined by the gr-ound drive. !I % Deer Counted* 56 49 38 75 78 74 A tot.al of 47 drivers .and 6 .observers partidi.pated in the ground courrt. Drive~s c.ounted 172 deer which cut back thr.ough thedirve line and observers c.ounted 119 deer which left the area for a total count of 291 deer. An excellent drive line Vlas maintained and it was the opinion of thosewh()Supervised the drive that .an accurate count was obtained of the deer using Cedar Ridge. This is the smallest number .of deer yet recorded on a ground drive. The three plane counts averaged 139 deer or 47% of the actual numiberof deer on the area . The copter counts .averaged 219 or 76% of the deer on the area. Both plane and copter counted exceptionally high pmentages as compared to past counts. Plane CO"Qlltssince 1952 have averaged about 42%; copters usually recorded between 50% and 60%. The February 11th plane count of 164 which represents 57% of the deer is the highest ever obtained by a fixed-wing aircraft on this area. All the copter counts were the highest percentages yet reco[lded. �-82- The highest plane count was obtained under excellent snow, light and flying conditions, the other two being made under poor snow-cover. All three copter counts were made under poor snow (background) conditions with three variations in light and air conditions. Past studies have shown that snow-cover (background) is the most important single factor contributing to variability in aerial counts. Conclusions: The low wintering 'popu'Lat t.on of deer on Cedar Ridge was probably due to the relatively light wdnter in Middle Park in 1960. This area isa critical or key 1'0rtion of the Middle Park deer range and is heavily used in hard winters. The high percentage of the deer counted by l'lane and copter this year could be because the pilots and particularly the observers are becoming experienced at flying the Cedar Ridge area. Another explanation, and one which has not been indicated until this year, is that the high counts (percentage-wise) could be associated with the low number of deer on the area. Thus, as numbers decrease per unit oi' area they may tend to concentrate more, or not form so many small scattered groups, resulting in a less complicated sequence and distribution pattern from the standpoint of the observer. Such a pattern might develop only after a certain low 1'0intin the population is reached. Intensi ve work on this area in 1955 showed that snow conditions or background could cause aerial counts to vary as high. as 15%. Maximum and minimum counts by the airplane this year (38% to 56%) indicate that the variability in aerial counts could vary up to 18% due to snow, visibility and flying conditions alone. The copter counts, which showed little variability, were all made under the same snow conditions tending to su.pport the above theory. The low count by the airplane (111) on the 13th is unexplainable. It was made under similar snow and air conditions as the plane count on the 12th (143), and under better light conditions. There is a possibility that some oi' the deer may h;ave left the area between these two counts; however, results of past experience and consistency of the copter counts would appear to rule out this possibility. The high l'ercentageof the deer counted and the consistency of the counts by the helicopter emphasize the value of this aircraft for big game work. The increased amount oi' information which can be derived from their use (both in quantity and qv.ality) should eventually justify their added expense. They are especially valuable in obtaining sex- and age-ratios. Even though the ratio of air to ground counts may remain fairly consistent, the variability due to .snow, light .andair conditions appears to be significant (up to 18%). Since the.se countingcondi tions affect the number of animals. counted from the air they would be applicable to trend counts as well as total population counts; elk as well as deer. Thus, we could falsely interpret a 15% increase or decrease in popu.lation since such increase or decrease could have been due to counting conditions alone. Trend-count data can be standardized by either makiugthe counts under similar conditions each year or evolving correction factors for the conditions normally encountered which affect such counts. Since there are years when it is not possible to count under comparable conditions, the latter alternative would appear to be the most practical, and would result in comparable counts annually regardless of con~ ditions. �ESTIMATED (Actual) TREND 600 POPULATION- COUNTS----- MEAN TREND COUNT.· • .-.. . 550 500 450 400 0::: w w. 0 IJ.. 0 a: w (D 350 300 250 200 ~ => z 150 100 ,." \ ,,\ \ , ~ \ I '"\ 50 , ,,...." •••••• ~ •••• '•• " •••• \ •• " 1"( \ /, NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY WINTERING ,,...- ---- ••••••••• MARCH APRIL MAY PERIOD Figure 1.-COMPARISON OF TREND COUNTS WITH TOTAL POPULATION ESTIMATES;' CEDAR RIDGE STUDY AREA, PARSHALL, COLORADO, 1958-59. �-83Ground drives are presently the best means of obtaining a total count. Since they require considerable outlay of manpower and materials, they are the limiting factor in the amount of information obtained annually. This research has been stepped-up considerably, however, by increasing the number of aerial counts (under varying conditions) made prior to the ground drives. Management Value: The management value of standardizing aerial counts, both f)Tom area to .area and from year to year, is obviousj especially since aerial trends are going to be a primary consideration relating to population factors under the proposed score-card system ·of herd-unit analysis in Colorado. Recommendations: 1. Continue emphasis on making as many counts as possible with both plane and copter prior to the ground drives. 2. Design experiments to adequately evaluate the influence of the counting conditions. 3. Compile all previous air-ground correlation counts and make a correlation analysis of the total numbers of deer and the percentages .counted. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: July, 1960 Approved by: _---;,G,.,.i_l..,.b_e_r_t_N ..... -"..H_un_t_e_r State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator _ ��July, 1960 -85JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ---------------------------------- Project No. Work Plan No. W_-~3_8_-R_-_l~3~ _ 9 --~---------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 3 The Pellet-Group Count Technique April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: The pellet group census technique was again tested on Cedar Ridge in 1960. Both 0.01 acre and 100 square foot plotisizes were tested. These data were compared with aerial and ground counts to determine the accuracy of this technique with regard to trend and total population estimates. Sampling accuracy was found to be within 20 percent with 95 percent confidencej however, the pellet counts did not detect the decrease in the 1960 population from that of 1959. Total population estimates from pellet counts were higher than the known wintering population this year. Objectives: (1) To field test this technique on Cedar Ridge in Middle Park to determine its applicability as a method of obtaining trends and/or total population estimates of deer using winter concentration areas. (2) Depending upon the success and feasibility of this trial, the mechanics of such a method can be set up for trial in other applicable areas. Procedure: Eighteen randomly located transects, each consisting of 25 mechanically spaced plots, were established on Cedar Ridge in the fall of 1957. Sampling intensity and design were predetermined by ~mall-scale measurements to properly sample the area. The 18 transects traverse the area from north to southj they vary in length from about one-quarter to slightly over two miles, and in width (distance apart) from 100 to 900 yards. Pellet groups were stamped out or removed when the plots were first established to eliminate error in the spring counts. Pellet groups were counted in May, 1960 and analyzed to determine sampling accuracy, trend value, the most efficient plot size (.Ol:'acre or 100 square foot) and the total wintering population of deer on Cedar Ridge. Arrival and depart~e of the deer herd was determined by close observation during the fall and spring migration periods. Plots were counted by two men -- one counting the smaller 100 square foot plot and the other counting the .01 acre plot. Strewn-out groups were recorded in fractions. Seven aerial and one ground count were made on the study area in 1960. Results of these counts, especially the ground counts, were accepted as the best estimate possible of the total number of deer present on Cedar Ridge. ��-87- Pellet Group Count Technique John T. Harris .. , . Introduction: This intensive su~dy of the pellet-group census tehcnique, initiated in 1957, was conducted on a portion of the Middle Park mule deer winter range in northwestern Colorado. The Cedar Ridge study area is a critical segment of the Middle Park deer winter range. Annual counts from 1955 until 1959 have indicated that this area winters an average of 626 deer, with 396 being the lowest, and 801 the highest number yet recorded during the period. Aerial and ground counts in 1960 showed an al'proximate 291 deer on Cedar Ridge this year -- the lowest yet recorded. Results of this study to date have indicated that the sample (established in 1957) is detecting the number of pellet groups deposited annually to within 20 percent accuracy (95 percent confidence), and the 1959 pellet counts correctly detected an increase in the wintering p:opu1ationon Cedar Ridge over that of 1958. Sample size projections have indicated that 100 square foot plots are the most efficient from the standpoint of total sample size. Total population estimates from pellet counts have been canservative with the 1958 estimate being 23 percent, and the 1959 estimate being 33 percent below the known wintering populations for the same years as determined by aerial and ground countis. Results: The 1960 pellet .count data were analyzed relative to the following questionst (1) How many pellet groups were deposited on Cedar Ridge during the winter period? (2) How did the total population estimate, derived from the pelletgroup data compare with the actual number of deer wintering on the area? (3) Did the number of pellet groups reflect the population trend? and (4) What is the most efficient plot size? Statistical analysis of these data was required to ascertain: the sampling accuracy achieved, plot-size efficiency and to derive confidence limits both for the pellet counts and total population estimate. Results of the 1958 and 1959 pellet counts are given for comparison where applicable. Analysis of similar data in past years has shown that individual plot totals give a more satisfactory analysis than transect totals; thus, this year's data was anallfzed by plot only. A total of 662 pellet groups were courrted on the 0.01 acre plots this year. This compares with 611 in 1958 and 717 in 1959. In addition, 214 groups were counted on the 100 square foot plots .as compared to 172 in 1958. The 100 sqllare foot plots were not counted in 1959. Table 1 gives a comparative analysis for the two plot sizes. �-88Table 1 -- Cedar Ridge Pellet-Count Analysis, 1960 - 100 square footan,d .0..01 .8:e~e plots, 18 transects, 446 plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison 100 sq.ft.plots 0.01 acre plots Size of plot (radius) Sample size/ttansect Total sizeo:f ':sample Percent of area sampled Total pellet groups counted Average groups/acre Averag.e deer days-of-use/acre Average No. groups /plot Range Standard deviation Standard error of mean Coefficient of variation Confidence interval t.10, 445df t.20, 445df Sample size t.05, 445df .10 acc. .20 acc. ·30 acc . 5 ft.,7·7 in.(.0023 ac.) .0575 acre 1.03 acres 0.02 213·9 208 16.4 11 ft., 9 .3 in. .25 acre 4.46 acres 0.10 661.8 148 11.7 0·99 .046 206% 1.48 o - 19 2·35 .11 158% .48 + .07 .48 +" .06 1.48 + .18 1.48 +" .14 0.48 o - 5 1,500 375 172 859 239 48 Total Populat.ion Estimate: An aerial photograph of Cedar Ridge wasplanimeteredto determine the total acreage of the area sampled, found to be 4,544 acres. Close observation in the 1959-60 winter showed that the deer began to move onto the study area about November 15, and almost .all were on winter range by December 10. The migration from the area the following spring was from April 15 until May 20. Generally, the winter of 1959-60 was a relatively light .one for the Middle Park area, including the study area. The above information was graphed and the total herd days on the area were derived by equally dividingthe intervals which deer moved onto and off the area. Thus, a total of 160 herd days was computed for 1960. This compares with 150 herd days in 1959 and 160 in 1958. The formula used in estimating total population was as follows: Number of Deer ~ (pe'$let groups acre) defecation rate acres) days For Cedar Ridge these values were computed as follows: Size of area censused Estimated herd days Defecation rate Average 'pellet group?!acre 100 sq.ft.plots 0.01 acre plots 4,544 160 12·7 208 4,544 160 12·7 148 �-89The 1960 total population estimates were derived as follows: o .01 acre plots: 100 sq.ft .plots No. Deer = (208) . (4 544) (12.7) . (1 0) 6 = (~48) . (4,544) (12 .7) . (160 ) = 652,512 2,032 = 321 = 2,032 = 465 Confidence interval t.05, 445 df ::: 465 ~ 157 deer 321 ~ 59 deer It should be noted here that the confidence limits placed on the population estimates express only the variability due to samP:ling.; One ground count was made on Cedar Ridge on February 13, 1960. 291 deer were counted on the study area at this time. A total of A supplementary aerial count was made on March 23 to see if the wintering population of Cedar Ridge was remaining relatively stable. A total of 216 deer were counted at this time. This aerial count, when adjusted by correction factors derived from long-time studies on the ar-ea , indicated that the wintering population numbered at least .as many as before, or may have increased slightly. The ground-count-total of 291 was accepted as the sustained wintering population for 1960. The estimated population of 321 for the 0.01 acre plots was 10 percent and the estimate of 465 for 100 square foot plots was 60 percent greater than the known wintering population of 291. Estimates in 1958 and 1959 were both conservative being 77 percent and 67 percent respectively for 0.01 acre plots. The 1958 population estimat.e, using 100 square foot plot data, was only 63 percent below the actual population. These figures are tabulated as follows: Table 2 Year 1958 1959 1~60 Comparison of total population estimates from pellet counts with actual population, Cedar Ridge Study Area, Parshall, Colorado, 1958-60. Pellet-Count Estimates Actual Population 0.01 acre plots 100 sq.ft.plots (Ground Count) 305 + 70 381 +" 74 321 "+ 59 371 ~ 94 465 + 157 396 566 291 �-90~ The 1960gra1.IDd-drive .figure was within the can.fidence limits of the 1960 p:ellet-group estimate using 0.01 acre plat .datia. This was also. the case in 1958 'With the 100 square foot plot estimate. Annual winter-martality studies an this area showedthe 1959-60 winter lo.ss to. be negligible, thus, it wauld have no. ma.,'berialeffectupan the pellet-caunt ,data. Trend Value: Accardingta thegraund-caunt figures, there wasa49 percent decrease in the actual wintering papulatian, from 566 in 1959 to. 291 in 1960. Pelletcaunts, however, shawed anly an 8 percent decrease, and the estimated papulatian shaweda 16 percent .decr'ease fram the 1959 estima.t.e. This year I sestimate, based an the 100 square fo.at plat .data showed an 18 percent increase as .camparedto. the 1959 0.01 acre plat estimate (100 square faot plats 'were natcaunted in 1959). A t-testwas nat madebetween the 1959 and 19600.01 acre plat data since the can.fidence limits at the .10 level show an averlap-indicating that the 1960.change (downwardtrend) was nat detected. Discus sian: The primary aim or this investiga.tian was tacampare papulatian and trendestirnates fram pellet groups with the best po.ssible est.imat'es of knownpopulatians . Standard SBmplingprocedures and techniques -wereused. Sampling .intensi ty was samewhatgreat.er since it was desirable tao.btain the best passible 'estimate of' the numberaf pelletsdeposi ted an the study area. A fairly canclusive repart ~ written-up fo.r this study in 1959. It ~ cancludedat that time that the abjectives af this job had, for the most part, been fulfilled. Pellet .caunts were made one mo.reyear, however, to. abtain addi tio.nal infarmatio.n relative to. the mast efficient plat size. Theall-time law -wintering populatio.n an the study area this year, supplied some addf,tianal info.rmatian relati veta sampling accuracy . hawever7 Since the impo.rtant .findings to. datel:!:ave been mentianed in the intraductary remarks, anly the results of the 1960caunrt;Swill be mentianed here. Sample size proj.ectians still indicate that this sample (established in 1957) is detecting the number of pellet groups depasi tedannually to. within 20 percent .aceuracy (95 percent confidence ) . The 1960 pelletcauntsdid fram that af 19159. not; detect the decrease in the -wintering populatian Sample size pro.j;ectiansfrom the 1960dat.a subst.antiate the findings of past years •.. - that 100 square foot plats are the most efficient , particularly from the stiandpo.lrrt.of tat.al sample size. This was evident again this year even cansidering t.he lowerw1ntering papulatianand resultant great~r variability in pellet countis, The tatal papulatianestimates far bath plat Sizes, which have been canser •.• vative in the past, exceeded the knawnwintering papulatian this year. This is prabably due to. the greater variability in the number af pellets caunted per plat which is assaciated with a cansiderably lawer wintering papulatian than that af 1959, and the resultantdrap in pellet group density. �-91Conclusions: The pellet group census technique boils down to a sampling problem. Generally, the s.amplingaccuracy, design, etc. aee dependent upon the density of pellet groups. The pellet-count technique is probably of greatest value, from a management standpoint, in determining population trends, concentration areas, and for comparison with ram.ge-use information. Total population estimates from pellet-count data requires factual information of a nature that would make it impractical to use this technique under the presentday management program in Colorado. Such estimates, however, may be practical and desirable for an intensive type of study. The data lend themselves well to statistical analysis making it possible to place confidence on the populat.ion estimates . . , , . Recommendat.ions: No f'urther field work is planned for the pellet-group study since other proposed jobs and work schedules will result in inadequate manpower and time to carryon such a study. However, if and when it can be resumed, application of the pellet-group technique for determining population trend on a herd-unit basis should be considered. Such application should be based, at least in part, on the results of this investigation. Prepared by: Date: John T. Harris Approved by :_~G~i;::lb~er;:.t-:::--;N:.:...-:H:.::;un:.;;:;:.,.t;... _ State Game Manager July, 1960 ----------~~~~~----------------- F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -93- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------~~~~~--------------------- Project No. W-38-R-13 Work Plan No. ----~----------------------- 9 : Deer-Elk Investigations Job No.4 Title of Job: Population Estimates Based on Age and Sex-Ratios Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: Two pre- and two post-season sex- and age-ratio counts were made of the White River elk herd. These data were correlated with the 1959 card survey and check station kill figures, and projected to indicate a post-season population of 7,102 elk in this herd. Objective: To determine the applicability and accuracy of age and sex ratios in population counts. Procedure: Four sex- and age-ratio estimates were made of the White River elk-herd as follows: (1) July, 1959 pre-season cov-ca1f ratio count. (2) September, 1959 pre-season sex-ratio count. (3) November, 1959 post-season sex-ratio count. (4) March, 1960 supplementary post-season sex-ratio count. The July counts were made with a Bell H-13 helicopter and the rest were made with a Hiller 12-E copter. All classification was done by Dwight Owens, a qualified aerial observer of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. The original counts were recorded on a small tape-recorder for later analysis. This facilitated counting and made possible a larger sample. Aerial photographs were taken of the larger groups of elk for later classification, and to check observer accuracy. The counting was confined to Areas E and X as found in the 1959 big game map. This included game management units 23, 24, 25, 33 and 34 which covered the area conttibuting to the main White River Herd. Special effort was made to count the complete area and to treat each of the five units equally. Thus the total area involved was flown for each sample not just concentration areas. Additiilina1effort was made this year to classify at least 500 animals for each of the four counts . .A!£, elk were encountered, they were sexed. Since the samples taken were of a binomial nature, the random distribution of the animals, as they occurred, was considered sufficient. Only total groups were ciassified. �-94Age samples of the White River elk were obtained at big game check stations during the 1959 hunting season. The ageing technique used was developed by Dr. Don C. Quimby, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana. It is based on replacement of the incisors and premolars (up to 3 years) and progressive wear of the molars and premolars (after 3 years). Only the lower jaw (mandible) is used for ageing by dentition. Some other characteristics noted which help to supplement the age classification are size, coloration and antler development. Elk-jaw boards, using assigned-age jaws, were prepared to aid in the standardization of the ageing technique. The jaws used were from varibus Colorado elk herds. The writer and Dr. Quimby} using a large collection of known-age ja~s, assigned and verified the ages of the study j,aws. The total kill for this herd is ext~acted annually from the game management card return (projected) kill for the respective units involved. It is then compared with the check-station kill figures to determine hunter bias in reporting kill by sex and age. �-95- Population Estimates Based on Age and Sex Ratios John T. Harris Introduction: Sex- and age-ratios have been"".usedannually in determination of'the number of elk in the White River herd since 1957. Generally the technique involves the correlation of a known herd quantity with the kill i'iguresand, by use 'of ratios or proportions, proj ectingfortotal population. The main White River elk herd was chosen for this study because the winter and summer range boundaries of this herd, which uses the White River Piateau, could be fairly well defined -- having been determined by various other studies. In addition, the game management unit boundaries and herd unit boundaries coincide very closely which makes it possible to use the annual elk-kill figures for the units involved. The Rifle and Idaho Springs hunter check stations annually check 50 to 60 percent of the elk from the five main White River Units. Correlation of card survey and check station kill data since 1957 has shown that there is very little bias by hunters in reporting elk kill by sex. Thus, it was concluded that the bull-cow-calf kill ratios used in the formula projections were suf'ficiently accurate. Past year!s sex- and age-ratio counts and herd estimates are given for comparison where applicable. Results! Pre-Season Counts -- The 1959 pre-season cow-calf and sex-ratio counts weremaCLe frOm Sweetwater Lake,a resort area on the eastern side of the study area. The cow-calf counts were conducted from July 23 through the 25th and the bull-cow counts were made from September 21 through the 23rd. Results were as follows: July -- 40 bulls, 30 spikes, 362 cows, 242 calves; total 674 September ~- 66 bulls, 63 spikes, 256 cows, 161 calves; total 546. In July, the cows and calves were in both small and large herds, and the calves were easily distinguished. The largest herd observed was slightly over 200, mostly cows and calves. Several herds of 75 to 150 were seen. The bu.lls were more solitary and difficult to find, and they were seldom seen in groups with the cows and calves. Spikes were difficult to distinguish because of short antlers (still in velvet) and coloration similar to the cows. It was found that the morning counts were the most productive. Most flights were started at 4:45 a.m. and were completed by 7:30 a.m. Evening flights were attempted but discontinued because of poor light and failure of the elk to move out into the open parks until too late. Of the 674 elk classified in July, 489 or 72 percent were on the Flat ..•. Tops Wilderness Area. Game management unit 24 contained 62 percent, 23 percent 'Were in unit 34 and 15 percent in unit 25. No elk were observed in units 23 and 33. In September, the elk were more scattered, the older bulls having collected their harems for the rut .and the single and young bulls moving steadily in search of cows. Almost all the elk had moved into the heavy timber at the heads of the various creeks and rivers which drain the White River Plateau. The largest groups �-96- were observed on the headwaters of Doe, South Fork, Park, and Lost Solar Creeks in unit 24; Sweetwater and No-NameCreeks in unit 34; and Grizzly C:r-eekin unit 25. Nineteen elk were observed in the Cline-top Mesa area in unit 33. No elk were seen in unit 23. Post Season Counts-- The post.-season counts were conducted from Glenwood Springs on the ~outhern boundary of the study area. The November;flights were made from the 18th. through the 20th and the March flights the 16th through the 19th. Results of these flights were as follows: Novemher 28 bulls, 53 spikes, 238 cows, 222 calves; total 541 March -- 59 bulls, 52 spikes, 324 cows, 516 calves; total 951. The Novembercounts found the elk in the same genet-al areas, and at the same elevations in most cases, as the September count. A slight downwardmigration was noticeable on the South Fork of the White River. The greater ~ortionof the elk were counted on Elk Creek in unit 23; Park.and Lost Solar Creeks and the headwaters of the South Fork in unit 24; and nor-bhxrf Storm King Mountain in unit 34. No elk were seen in units 23 and 25. Mature bulls and spikes were running with the cows and calves at this time and very few lone or small groups of bulls were found. Morning nights ~ainwere found to be better for counts than evening flights. The March post-season courrt was made to supplement.and .conf'irm the November count, especially with regard to the bull-cow ratio. The majority of the elk (69 percent) were courrbed ion the north-side units 23 and 24 on the South Fork and Yellow Jacket .areas, and on Heaver, Lost, Elk and Miller Creeks . The other 3l percent were found on the south-side units 33, 34 and 25;()n Canyon, Elk, Deep, Sweetwater and Red Dirt Creeks. In November, the elk were 'on their winter range -with the largest .concentration being on the South Fork of the White River between Buf'ordand the CampGrOlmd. These counts were taken throughout the day, weather and air conditions ~lr'mitting. Since the elk were concentrated on winter range, the early and late flights were not necessary to see a suf'ficientnumber of' animals. Kill - .•.The 1959 elk-kill from the hunter card surveyvre.s compiled for the five units involved. In addit!Lon, the check station kill figures for these units were compiled to check and adjust the total percentage kill by sex and age. These figures· are tabulated as follows: �-97- T,8:.b,le 1 -- Kill figures, by unit, from the 1959 card return* and check staticn . tctal kill, White River Units, Areas Eand X. . . .... .. . . . . . . . . ~. . . . . Unit N.c. Bulls Percent Tctal Ccws Calves 23 116 38.9 230 29 375 24 274 72 13 37·2 359 25 4 44 4·7 33 7 11.2 61 8 108 33 39 8.0 41 34 32 78 5 Total 100.0 266 964 639 59 Percent 6.1 100.0 66.3 27·6 Check-Station Kill: Total 20 600 321 219 Percent 60.2 100.0 36·5 3·3 * Game Management projected kill from late card returns. . . , , , , , , , , . The total elk kill for this area in 1957 was 984 and 999 in 1958. Tberewere 1,000 validations issued fcr these units in 1957, 600 in 1958 and 500 in 1959. A total of 62.2 percent of the White River elk were checked through the Rifle and Idaho Springs Check Stations this year. Comparati ve figures for past years were 55.9 percent in 1957a.nd 52.• 2 percent in 1958. The total White River elk checked by the Rifle .and Idaho Springs Stations for the past three years were: Check Station Idaho Springs Year Rifle 201 (36%) 350 (64%) 1957 1958 248 (48%) 273 (52%) 201 (34%) 1959 399 (66%) The percentage kill by sex and age from the check stations is considered the most accurate since the animals are sexed and aged by department personnel. Table 2 •.. - Comparison of percentage kill (by sex) of check staticn and card returns, White River Units, 1957-59· 1957 1958 1959 Sex Check Sta. Card Ret. Check Sta. Card Ret. Check Sta. Card Ret. Bulls 59::-3 60.2 65.0 66.3 63·4 57·9 Cows 31.7 36.0 30.6 27·6 36·7 ·36·5 Calves 6.1 6.0 5·4 5·7 3·3 3·3 There is a greater discrepancy between check station and card return sex-ratio percentages in 1959 than the two preceeding years. lJsually these comparisons indicate a slight tendency for hunters to report calves as bulls or adults -~ the 1959 data indicates the opposite. Percentage of calves killed, as indicated by card-return projections almost doubles that of check stations even though 62 percent of the total animals killed were sexed at check stations. Herd Estimate -- The 1959 pre- and post-season counts were converted to ratios and compared with the total kill from card returns. The following calculations were made to determine the size of the elk population before and after the 1959 hunting season. �-98- Pre-season ratio Kill... Post-season ratio " Bulls Cows Calves 46 639 34 100 266 100 64 5,9 93 X ::::number of females in the fall .46 X :::: number of males in the fall X - 266 :::: number of females ;after .46x - 639 :::: number of' males after .34(x-266) also before hunting season . before hunting season. the hunting season . the hunting season •. ••number of' males after the hunting season . .46x - 639 = .34(x-266) :::: .34x- 90.44 .46x - .34 = 639- 90.44 Thus: .12X = 548.56 X :::: 4,571 fe~J:es and in the fall before the hunting season . .46x 2,103 males in the fall .64x 2,925 calves in the fall before the hunting season. 9,599 Total fall population. 964 = Total kill. 8,635 Total post-season population composed of: 1122 (13%) bulls, 3798 (44%) cows and 3711 (43%) calves. Year Similar proj:ections Total Herd Estimate 1957 1958 2,952 3,165 before the hunting season. for the two preceeding years are: Composedof: Bulls Cows Calves 1,627 1,465 293 383 1,032 1,317 It was the opinion of all concerned that the 1959 pre- and post-season sexand age-ratio samples were the most accurate yet obtiaf.ned . In addition, two preand two post-season counts were made. The 1959 herd estimate (8,635), however, more than doubled that of the two preceeding years . Thus, as a supplementary check on the accuracy of the estimates, all ratios available from the three year's sample data were formulat.ed With the respective kill figures. Results of these proj.ections are tabulated as follows: Table 3 -- Comparison of' sex- and age-ratio River E.lk Herd 1957-59. post-season herd projections, White Year Rat.io BUll/COW Bull/Unantlered Bull/Calf Cow/Calf 1957 2,952 2,551 2,363 355 1958 3,161 3,624 3,460 2,034 1959 8,635 33,105 80,026 811 The 1959 kill classifications from card r~t:urns were adjusted from the check station kill percentages by sex and age (Table 1). This was deemed justifiable in view of the large sample checked th;r'ough check stations (62 percent), and he cause animals at check stations were classified by experienced personnel. �-99- Card-Return Kill Adjusted Kill -- Bulls 639 581 Cows ""2bb 352 Calves 59 31 Total 964 964 The adjusted kill was formulated with the pre- and post-season sex;... and ageratios resulting in a projected herd estimate of 7,102 composed of 1,065 bulls, 3,125 cows, and 2,912 calves. These figures were accepted as the best possible estimate from the data obtained this year. ~ing Studies -- The aging technique was tested at the six big-game check stations during the 1959 hunting season. A total of 219 jaws were collected at this time. Eighty-one jaws from the White River Herd were included in this collection. They were aged as follows: 12 calves, 14 yearlings, 15 two, 11 three, 4 four, 9 five, 6 six, 4 seven, 2 eight, 2 nine, lover-ten and 1 over-15 years old. These jaws were collected mainly for the purpose of supplementing the Lnformation regarding the development and wear of elk teeth in Colorado, and to improve accuracy of the aging technique. Effort -was made to collect older-age and abnormally developed jaws. Therefore, this samp.Lewas considered unrepresentative of the age composition of this herd, and was not used for a herd estimate. Discussion: This study has resulted in several facts for consideration: The 1959 sex- and age-ratios were believed to be the most accurate yet obtained. There was no difference in the July and September cow/calf ratios. There was a considerable discrepancy in the number of calves per cow observed during the November and March post-season counts, but the bull-cow ratio remained the same. The 1959 total herd estimate more than doubled that of the two previous years. Check station kill figures indicate that there may be too much bias or too large an error in the sex- and age-classifications from card returns. A much greater percentage of animals are found on the north part of the stmdy area as compared to the south. More .emphasis will be placeg.,next year, on securing adequate pre- and postseason ratios. Double checks will be made of each ratio again to determine how large a sample is needed and when to take it. In addition, more emphasis will be placed on securing equal classification counts on the north and south portions of the study area. The similarity in July an<f.September cow-calf ratios indicated little to no calf mortality during this period. Further, the September cow-caIf ratio will probably be sufficiently accurate. The Much greater number of calves (66 percent) recorded in March, than in November, indicates several possibilities as follows: (1) Observer error in recognizing the older calves (four months Older), (2) Calves whose mothers were killed in hunting season (October) may have had time to join the groups as winter progressed -- they may have been single and scattered in November, �-100(3) An extra heavy cow kill, (4) Mistaking yearling cows for calves so late in the year -- adult cows appeared fairly easy to distinguish. It should be noted that the bull-cow ratio remained exactly the same for the March counts as the November counts, with almost ,double the number of animals being counted. This helps to corroborate the theory that error exists B"omewhere with regard to the calf counts. Since a sufficient sample of the kill is secured annually at the check stat1.ons, these data will be used to adjust the total projected kill from card returns. Coruf:idencelimits were not placed on the total herd estimate this year since there is obviously more work necessary relative to the basic mechanics of this technique. The accuracy of the final estimate depends upon the accuracy of the data oQrbained, and since three samples are involved (pre- and post-season ratios, and kill) there is a much greater chance for variation than where a single sample is necessary. The kill data is considered sufficiently accurate plus the fact that, from the standpoint of' the formula, it is .a mrLnor source of error. The accuracy of the pre •.•and post-season ratios is much more important with regard to the magnitude that they affect the final population estimate. Future emphasis will be placed on the proper technique mechanics for obtaining these ratios, and a proper analysis technique for evaluating their accuracy. Recommendations: season ratios. (1) Try to calssify 1,000 animals for both the pre- and post- (2) Obtain July and September pre- and November and March post-season again to double check these ratios. (3) Attempt to obtain comparable counts counts on the north and soirth rpor-t Lons of the area. ( 4) Adjust the total. projected check station data. kill classification from card returns using Prepared by :_.-:.J..:.o,::hn~;:;.T_ .....;::H;.:;;arr;.:;;;:;.;:;.i;,;:s _ Approved by: Gilbert N. Hunter State Game Manager Date1 J_U~ly~,~1~9_6_0 _ F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator �July, 1960 -101•.. JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ---------~--~~~----------------- Project NO. ~W~-~3~8~-R~-~1~3~ _ Work Plan No. -------~---------------------- 9 Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 5 Title of Job: ~In~v~e~s~t~i~g~a~t~i~o~n~o~f~O~t~h~e~r~C~en~su=s~T~e~c~hn~i~q~u~e~s~ _ Period Covered: May 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: Deer trend counts were employed in Poudre Canyon and Middle Park to evaluate this technique. Work to date has shown that the number of counts necessary to detect annual trends depends upon the accuracy desired. An average of a number of trend counts appears to be more desirable than a single count. Comparison of browse utilization, pellet-group counts and aerial counts on elk winter range were made from 1957-60. The fluctuation in these factors from 1957-58 and 1958-59 were inconsistant both in percentage change and direction of change (increase or decrease). In the 1958-59 winter the amount of utilization decreased while elk days•.. of-use/acre and aerial trend counts increased. Objective: To run small-scale tests of census techniques which appear to have the greatest possibilities for attaining the objective of this work~lan--to determine a census method or methods suitable for use in the management of big game in Colorado. Procedure: Two types of census techniques were investigated to determine their applicability, accuracy and feasibility for use on Colorado deer and elk ranges. These techniques were tested relative to selection of a method whereby Wildlife Conservation Officers could obtain adequate appraisal of big-game herd trends in their respective districts. �-102- Three experimental areas were selected in Poudre Canyon for the collection of basic data on walking-cruise techniques. Altitude and seasonal distribution were considered in selection of these trend-study areas. They were about five miles apart at elevations of 6,500, 7,000 and 7,500 feet covering an upper-] middle and lower segment of the main Poudre Canyon mule deer winter range. Each census strip was approximately two miles long. Intermittant counts were made on these three areas throughout the 1958~B9 wintering period. General statements concerning weather, snow depth, temperature, and animal condition were recorded relative to each walking count. visibility In addition, a two-mile walking--cruise census strip was selected on the Cedar Ridge area in Middle Park, Colorado. This strip was checked at intervals throughout the winters of 1959 and 1960, and the data were compared with information derived by aerial, ground and pellet-group counts being employed on this area. In USing the walking onuise techniques, the observer walked along a predetermined strip and recorded the total number of animals seen. The trend-count data were analyzed to determine the relationship of such counts to actual population, and the number of counts necessary to obtain reliable management information. Elk pellet-group counts were made on 15 range-production and -utilization transects on the South Fork of the White River from 1957 until the present. This information was compared with the degree of utilization on key-browse plants, and aerial trend counts for the same area. �-103- Investigation of Other Census Techniques John T. Harris Introduction: New census methods are constantly being developed and reported in the literature. Some of these may have immediate application, or it may be desirable to compare them with census techniques presently being studied. In addition, it may be desirable to make certain modifications of the methods presently being tested, or to employ some special census technique adaptable to certain situations, such as the meadow counts or track counts presently used for the White River deer herd. Such information could be valuable for comparison with results of other census techniques. This j)J:tase of the investigation was designed to allow a certain measure of flexibility in the job for making tests and comparisons where they are considered desirable. The 1959 data is also included in this writing since field work for that year was completed too late to report this job in that segment. Cruise counts were made on the three Poudre Can¥on study areas between November 18, 1958 and April 30, 1959. Walking time on these counts varied from 45 minutes to l~ hours with the average being 1 hour. The amount of snow on the ground was the main factor contributing to an increase in walking time. A total of 11 walking-trend counts were made on the lower trend-count strip, and 7 each on the middle and upper strips. Counts were begun on November 18 and continued intermittently until April 30. Snow depth varied from 0 to 20 inches during the study period. Generally, the deeper snow depths were encountered on north slopes and drainages. Visibility was generally good to excellent. The Poudre trend-count data were analyzed to determine the number of counts necessary to obtain a reliable average of the number of animals seen. A summary of this analysis is tabulated as follows: Table 1. Poudre Canyon Walking Cruise Counts, 1958-59. Trend-Count Area Narrows Camp Gr. Kelley Flats Washout Gulch ,500 7,000 7,500 ',' 7 Total No. Trend Counts 11 7 Total Deer Counted 208 199 83 Average 11.86 18.09 29·71 o ... 49 Range o - 19 9 - 53 Standard Deviation 16.8 5·4 15·7 Standard Error 5.06 2.07 5·93 Coefficient of Variation 92.8% 46.2% 52.8% Confidence Interval t.10 18.09 19.17 ~'.11.82-.;>4Q02 29. 71 .~ 11. 5 n "t.20 11.86 L. 2.98 18.09 l6.94 29.71 8·54 Proj. Sample Size .10 ace. 6 191 51 It It It .20 acc. 48 13 17 n n It .30 acc. 21 8 6 �-104The Cedar R;idgewalking-trend counts were analyzed both with regard to minimum number of counts necessary and how the counts compared with the actual wintering population of deer on this area for both years. The variability analysis and projected sample sizes from these data are given as follows: 1959 "1960 Total No. Trend Counts 13 Total D~er Counted 468 363 Average 31.2 28.0 Range o - 71 6 - 59 Standard Deviation 20.7 16.5 Standard E;r-ror 5.34 4.6 Coefficient o:fVariation 66.3% 59.0% Confidence Interval t.10 20·7i 9·4 2.8i8 " "~,20 20·7 17.2 2816 Proj. Sample Size .10 ace. 94 166 " If ".20 acc . 24 41 " If ".30 acc. 10 18 -rr A close approximation of the time which deer began moving on, and off, the Cedar Ridge area was obtained relative to pellet group census work being conducted on this area during the same year. In addition, a good estimate of the actual wintering population of deer on this area was obtained through ground drives, aerial counts and pellet-group counts. This information was compared with the trend-count figures to determine if such counts were indicative of herd numbers. Figure 1 graphs this relationship using the 1958-59 data. It is evident that a single trend count could have varied considerably depending upon when it was taken. The counts varied from 0 to 71 deer while sampling a relatively stable population of over 550 animals in 1959. There appeared to be little correlation between snow, temperature, visibility and the npmber of deer seen. Visibility, however was good to excellent on 13 of the 15 counts, and was classified as fair on the remaining two. The 1960 data averaged 28 deer as compared to 31 in 1959 resulting in a 9.7 percent decrease. Ground-count figures were 564 in 1959 and 291 in 1960 -- a decrease of 48 percent in the actual wintering population. The browse-transect data and annual game management. elk-trend figures were tabulated to determine if there was any consistency between the degree of utilization of key-browse species, pellet counts and aerial trend counts on the South Fork of the White River. The aerial trend figures were extracted from the annual game management elk-trend counts for the South Fork area. Figures for 1957 were not available since trends were not flown.on the South Fork that year due to inclement weather. Browse production figures were also included since percentage utilization is directly related to the amount of'annual growth produced. �-105A summary of the comparisons made is presented in the following tables! Table 2 .. .Ae.onrparison.ofpellet C.ounts*.,. aerial-trend counts .and b.rows.e. utilization*, South Fork, Whi+e River, 1951"':60. . Winter Comparison 1958 1959 1957 Production...Total inches 1,612 1,812 2,277 2,956 1.56 1.73 Growth Index (inches) 2.15 2.24 Utilization - Total inches - Percent 928 54.4 866 40.4 956 33·7 658 40.0 Pellet Count - Total groups Elk days-of-use/acre 302 15·9 185 9·5 282 14.5 310 16.0 371 406 , ... Aerial trend count *From 15 key-browse production-utilization Table 3. transects. A comparison .of the percentage increase (I.) or decrease (-) in browse production, utilization and pellet counts from 1957-60; and aerial trend c.ounts from 1958-60; South Fork, White River. Percentage Change 1957 - 58 f 25·7 I- 24.3 1958 - 59 . f 29.8 I- 4.2 1959 .•.60 - 14.0 - 6·3 I- 18·7 Elk days-of-use/acre - 38.8 I- 52.6 .;.. 52.6 Aerial trend counts --- f f 60·9 Comparison Production - Total inches Growth Index Utilization (percent) 9·4 Discussion: The Game Manager is interested in the minimum number of counts necessary to detect herd trends with reasonable accuracy. This analysis showed that the number of C01IDts necessary is dependent upon the number of deer seen. 'I'hns., if a high number of deer are consist~tly counted, fewer counts would be necessary. The number of counts necessary could be minimized by making the counts during the period of greatest concentration each year--the cirtical period. However,since winters vary both in severity and occurance .of the critical periods, it w.ould be difficult to determine the proper time for comparable annual counts. The Cedar Ridge data, when compared with actual population figures, shows that considerable variation can occur in trend counts when counting a relatively stable population. �-106- Dice (1938) said frNosingle statistical sample, unless it is very large, can give more than a rough approximation of the size of the population from which it was taken. If possible, therefore, several sample plots should always be counted and the mean of these samples used as the basis of calculation. '.'. . It is obvious that the greater the number of samples and also the greater the size of the individual samples the more accurate the calculations of the populations will he." The average of all trend counts on a given area may reflect the population trend; however, more than two year's data would be necessary to determine this. Rasmussen and Doman (1943) reported a method of winter spot counts in which small census areas were selected on the upper, intermediate and lower limits of deer winter range in each management unit. "These 'spots' usually consist of a small drainage or other unit of from 1 to 3 square miles having well defined houndaries. One man is used in counting each area and routes of travel are carefully described and recorded and no estimates are made .... Total numbers seen from year to year will indicate population trends." The authors considered the method the most practical technique for determining trends of mule deer on western ranges. Such studies reported in the literature, however, were not designed to evaluate trend counts in terms of accuracy, sampling adequacy, and their relationship to actual population. The comparison of browse utilization, pellet group counts and aerial trend counts on the South Fork eLk winter range does not show much consistency. However, since only four year's data are available and consequently, only three periods of measured change (increase or decrease) in the factors investigated, definite conclusions regarding their relationship G)v:,:trend value cannot; be made. More annual data of this type are needed to make such determinations. Such inconsistencies as the increase in pellet groups and aerial trend-count figures (1958-59) and a corresponding decrease in utilizatipn could have been due to the amount and availability of the browse (more produced), inefficiency of the sample, etc. Utilization, pellet counts, and aerial trends were consistent in showing an increase in 1960 although not of the same magnitude. Pellet counts have been systematically used 80S an indicator of deer presence since the 1930's. Most authors who have used this technique agree that the amount of sampling necessary to analyze a given area depends upon annual pellet group dens i ty and desired accuracy (Robinette, et .al., 1958). Pe Ll.et -courrt trends on the South Fork apply only to the key range-areas. Sample inadequacy is inherent in trying to obtain quantitative data on large, often highly variable and not readily accessible big-game winter ranges such as the South Fork. Thus, the only alternative left to the game manager is to obtain as representative a sample as possible, or to confine his population-and range ... trend measurements to the key orc":titical areas. Proper application of such a sample and the information obtained, therefore, depends lipon the judgement and experience of tihe game manager. �-107McCain and Taylor (1956), in reference to estima-bes oi'big game numbers based on consumption of key i'orage species st.ated, "As additional data i'rom subsequent years became available, this trial-and-error method of computing the herd size would become more and more dependable. A principal objective of management is to balance use by game against i'orage production and see that the surplus i'orage is harvested but not overused. This method permit.s a start in that direction without the necessity of knowing the exact size oi'the deer herd. II Young (1938) stated that numbers of animals should be correlated with range trend to add meaning to range condition. Recommendations: Continue the South Fork pellet-group counts and range utilization measurements for annual comparison with the aerial trend counts. Make special effort to obtain comparable aerial-trend counts for the South Fork each year. Such counts should be made exactly as they are made each year i'or management purposes. Literature Cited Dice, Lee R. 1938. Some census methods i'ormammals. Jour. Wildl. Mgt., 2(3)j 119-130. McCain, Randal and Walter P. Taylor. 1956. Methods oi' estimating numbers of mule deer. In The Deer of North America. Stackpole Co ., Harrisbury, Pa OJ and Wildl. Mgt. Inst., Washington, D.C. 668pp. (pp.431-438). Rasmussen, D. I. and E. R. Doman. 1943. Census Methods and their Applications in the Management of Mule Deer. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf ,, 8:369-379. Robinette, W. LeSlie, Robert B. Ferguson and Jay S. Gashwiler. 1958. Problems involved in the use of deer pellet group counts. 18pp mimeo (to be published in Transactions of the 23rd North American Wildlife Conference). Young, Vernon A. 1938. The carrying capacity of big game range. Jour. Wildl. Mgt. 2(3) j 131-134. Prepared by: John T. Harris Approved by: ----------------------------Date: July, 1960 ----------~~~~~----.----------- Gilbert N. Hunter --~~~~----~~-----------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator ��July, 1960 -109- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ----~~~~~----------------- Project No. W-38-R-13 Work Plan No.__~9~ Deer-Elk Investigations _ Job No.6 Title of Job: Application of Selected Census Techniques Period Covered: April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 Abstract: Application of the aerial-strip census techmique in the Middle Park Area resulted in a total projected estimate of 12,610 deer in this herd. The sample, although relatively small, yielded considerable information relative to technique mechanics and sample variability. Introduction: This phase of the census-study work plan was initiated,"last year for the purpose of conducting large-scale or herd-unit application of the census techniques being tested. This was considered necessary to ascertain the efficiency, practicality, and proper application of the census techniques as they would be used on a management basis. Objectives: To test the management application of census techniques being studied. Procedure: The aerial-strip census technique was employed in Middle Park on March 11, 1960. This effort was an experimental attempt to use this method to make a total census of the wintering deer herd in this area. A total of five north-south strips were flown at an alti~ude of 200 feet while c~xnting a strip 200 feet wide. Flying was done with a Cessna 175 with a pilot and observer. All flights were made under the same flying conditions: light-l, air-l and snow (background) -3. The pilot guided on prominent terrain features which were pre-determined and roughly mapped-out before the flights. An air speed of 75 miles per hour was maintained while counting the strips. All observing was done from the right side of the plane, and only those deer seen within the 200 foot (estimated) sample strip were counted. The observer trained his eye in estimating this strip width by some pre-flight trials over a measured course. area. A total of 207 deer were counted over 69 miles (total sample) of the sampled These courrt s are as follows: �-110Table 1 -- Aerial-strip census counts, Middle Park mule deer winter range, March 11, 1960. Flight Time Total Total Deer Deer Seen! Length of . .. .• Strip Direction Start Finish Minutes Minute Counted Stri;2 (mi. ~ , 1 2 3 4 5 South-North South-North North-South South-North North-South 10:30 10: 57 11%20 11:36 11:54 10:48 11:13 11:30 11:45 11:56 18 16 10 9 2 6·9 1.0 ·3 5·9 5·5 23 20 12 11 3 ,., 124 16 3 53 11 The number of deer seen per strip was found to vary greatly (3 to 124); however, this was due, in part, to the difference in strip length. Thus, these data ~re put on a deer seen per minute basis for standardization. This too resulted in a high variation between strips (.3 to 6.9). The total size of the area sampled was calculated to 485 square miles, and the total size of the sample was 7.84 square miles. This resulted in an average of 26 deer seen per square mile on the area counted, and a projected total of 26,610 deer on the Middle Park winter r~ge are~. Due to the small number of strips counted, and the wide variance in the number of deer seen per strip, no statistical analysis was made of these data. Discussion: This year!s experimental aerial-strip census was emplpyed on a herdunit basis in the Middle Park area to determine if the technique would be usable under such conditions. No measure of confidence was placed on th~ herd estimate since the data were not subjected to statistical analysis. The study did, however, give some valuable information regarding proper technique mechanics, and the degree of sampling variability which might be incurred. This information will be used as a guide in employing this census technique in subsequent years. It is evident that a larger sampie is necessary, the sample should be stratified and the count variability should be analyzed on a deer seen/minute or deer seen/mile basis. In addition, the beginning and ending of the sample strips should be fairly well defined to facilitate determination of the size of the area sampled. This area will vary from year to year as dictated by the extent of winter range being occupied. Recommendations: (1) Obtain a larger sample in future trials at least 20 or more strips. (2) Consider roughly stratifying the sample area with regard to deer density. (3) Pre-determine and define the beginning and ending of each sample strip. (4) Analyze on the basis of deer seen/minute or deer seen/mile. Prepared by: John T. Harris Date: J_u_l~y~,~1~9_6_0 Approved by: _ ~G~il~b~e~r~t~N~.~H~un~t~e~r~--------State Game Manager F. C. Kleinschnitz Asst. Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/79e159ffe0d94ee5f82d231278a06968.pdf cf78e4233287a0a7799ec4489434b3c0 PDF Text Text October, .1 - State of; COLORADO Project W-41-R-12 No. Work Plan No. JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS Bighorn Sheep Survey Job No. 1 Title of Job: Census and Distribution Studies Period Covered: April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961 4 on Herds Throughout the State. Abstract: During the past segment, 523 bighorn sheep were observed in 17 major sheep ranges in Colorado. Few intensive surveys were conducted so that comparisons with previous surveys are not practical. The sex ratio of 338 mature sheep observed was 63 rams per 100 ewes. This compares favorably with previous surveys. Reproductive success appeared to be satisfactory with the observed lamb-to-ewe ratio being 53:100. Objectives: 1. herds considered To determine the increase or decrease the most important for management. and sex ratio of individual 2. To determine the number of lambs born in relation ewes in the more important herds. to the number of 3. To determine the survival of the yearly lamb crop. To show annual trends of lambing success, to learn survival of lambs to yearling age and general trends for management. Techniques Used: During segment 12, 17 major areas were visited either on foot, horseback, or by use of a tote-gote and records made of bighorn sheep observed. Sheep were classified as to sex in the case of mature animals and the young into lamb and yearling classes. Herds located in areas of lower elevation were visited during the winter months while those at higher elevations were surveyed in summer. Depending on accessibility of the area, from two days to as much as two weeks were spent in each locality searching for and observing the sheep. 1961 ��3 BIGHORN CENSUS AND DISTRIBUTION STUDIES George W. Jones Statewide bighorn sheep census and distribution studies were conducted from 1944 through 1956. Relatively little data are available for the 3-year period following until this job was reactivated in 1960. Methods: Sheep surveys of sufficient intensity to determine yearly trends require considerable time and effort. For this past year, the work was concentrated on making counts of as many localities as possible in order to determine areas where hunti.ng might be permitted. Few intensive counts which might be compared with previous surveys were made. For this reason, counts consisting of fewer sheep than observed on previous surveys do not necessarily indicate a decrease in the population. Sheep Counted: Presented in Table 1, are counts made in the 17 major areas visited. A. total of 523 sheep were observed, of which 480 were classified according to sex and age; In general, sheep seen appeared to be in good shape and. most herds observed consisted largely of young animals with few decadent sheep present. This indicates that most of the herds were in a vigorous condition. Sex Ratios: A. total of 338 mature sheep were classified as to sex. Of these, 131 were rams and 207 were ewes for a sex ratio of 63 rams per 100 ewes. This compares to the sex ratio of 64 rams per 100 ewes observed on the Tarryall during 1948-49 (Jones and White, 1950). However, the observed sex ratio during the present study may be somewhat in error due to more intensive observations in areas inhabited by rams for the purpose of locating huntable herds. Sex ratios in local areas varied from an excess of males in the Ouray and Gunnison areas to none observed in the Snowmass area. Lamb Crop: Conclusive information on lamb crops and survival have not been determined since intensive census work and periodic observations of anyone particular area were not made. Some indication of the success of the 1960 lamb crop can be obtained by reviewing records of sheep observed during the latter part of the year. A. total of 107 ewes, 57 lambs, and 47 yearling sheep were recorded from July through December, 1960. This indicated a lamb-to-ewe ratio of 53:100 or that 53 percent of the ewes were accompanied by lambs. During the 1945-46 observations on the Tarryall, 49 percent of the ewes were accompanied by lambs and in 1948-49, 56 percent had lambs. �4 Table 1. -- Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Counts, By Area, 1960-61 Area GORE RANGE Gore Creek Booth Creek Booth Creek Officers Lake Polk Creek Pitkin Total OURAY AREA Engineer Mountain (east side) (Bear Creek) (Cow Creek) (Cow Creek) Total Month Surveyed Aug. '60 Sept. '60 Mar. '61 Sept. '60 Sept. '60 Sept. '60 Rams Ewes Lambs Yearlings Total 6 11 3 9 5 2 3 25 5 11 2 5 9 57 3 4 8 July July July Oct. '60 '60 '60 '60 SANGRE DE CRISTO Deadman Creek Crestone Lake Gibson Peak Cotton Lake Total July '60 Sept. '60 Sept. '60 Sept. '60 SNOWMASS AREA Maroon Peaks Pearl Pass Total Sept. '60 Sept. '60 GLENWOOD AREA Rifle Hogback Elk River Elk River Monument Glenwood Canyon Total May '60 May '60 Dec. '60 Dec. '60 Dec. '60 PIKES PEAK Glen_Eyrie Total .Dee.'60 2 2 2 7 12 3 24 30 2 9 3 2 2 3 10 1 7 12 12 12 43 2 3 1 1 3 2 9 14 5 5 b 6 4 1 2 3 6 15 5 11 12 25 "~-- 10 6 12 29 58 4 11 11 5 5 7 7 27 27 2 2 4 .4 1 6 ~13 3 5 2 1 4 b 7 7 3 4 2 4 6 18 18 4 4 �5 Table 1- -- Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Counts, By Area, 1960-61 CONT. Month Surveyed Rams Ewes Lambs Yearlings Total Area TARRYALL AREA China Rock Graveyard Sugarloa:Ji Total Dec. 160 Dec. 160 Dec. 160 BATTLEMENT AREA Battlement Mesa Battlement Mesa Total Jan. 161 Feb. 161 7 3 10 6 3 9 4 2 b 17 8 25 COLLEGIATE AREA Cottonwood Creek Chalk Cliffs Total Mar. 161 Mar. 161 8 10 18 10 9 19 7 5 12 25 24 49 BUFFALO PEAKS N. Highway 24 Horseshoe Mtn. Northeast Rim Mosquito Total Mar. 161 Aug. 160 Sept. 160 Mar. 161 5 6 4 4 14 5 20 27 6 58 14 12 17 3 Not .Classified Not Classified Not Classified 6 7 9 8 12 2 22 ARKANSAS-TEXAS CREEK June 160 Greenhorn Mt. Total 5 5 17 17 GEORGE'JIOWN Georgetown-Empire Total Nov. 160 3 3 8 6 8 b 4 4 21 21 EAGLE AREA Brush Creek .Red Bluffs Total July 160 Mar. 161 1 4 5 3 1 1 3 1 1 6 4 10 TAYLOR RIVER Elmer s Place Above Almont Total May 160 Mar. 161 5 5 10 5 8 13 j 4 13 22 22 1 5 b 11 18 29 �.r fU - Table 1. -- Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Counts, By Area, 1960-61 CONT. Area MARSHALL PASS Ouray Mountain Sheep Mountain Total Month Surveyed June 160 June 160 GUNNISON AREA Black Canyon Feb. 161 Cimarron-Sapinero Feb. 161 Total BOOK CLIFFS Roan Creek Parachute at Grand Valley Total TOTAL ALL AREAS * Nov. 160 Rams Ewes Lambs 2 7 9 9 15 24 2 3 5 Yearlings Total 13 25 38 5 5 10 5 5 10 1 1 1 1 Nov. 160 131 207 62 Includes 43 unclassified sheep observed on Tarryall. 80 523* �- 7 - Since information is not available regarding the 1959 lamb crop, no conclusion can be drawn concerning the survival of those lambs to the yearlings observed during this study. , ' Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be continued so that more information can be obtained regarding the present status of Colorado's bighorn sheep herds. Literature Cited: Jones, George W. and Claude E. White. 1950 Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep surveys and investigations. In Three Year Summary Report. Federal Aid Section, Colorado Game and Fish Department. Prepared by: George W. Jones Date: October, 1961 Approved: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1961 -9 - REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO State of Project JOB COMPLETION No. W~-_8_8_-R~-6 _ Job No. Work Plan No. 1 Title of Job Waterfowl Kill Suryey Period October, November covered: Waterfowl and December, Investigations 5 1960 Abstract: Results of the 1960 random survey of waterfowl hunters reveals that of the 30,592 Colorado duck stamp buyers, 29,480 hunted ducks bagging an estimated 147,400 and crippling an additional 22,257 for a total hunting loss of 169,657 ducks. The average season duck bag per hunter was 5.0 birds, and mallards again accounted for more than 65 percent of the harvest. Duck kill estimates by county revealed that the eastern slope again accounted for about 82 percent of the total state harvest as in the past. High kill counties were Wel~ Larimer, in that order. This was one of the poorest duck seasons experienced in Colorado since the beginning of the surveys in 1954. For geese, an estimated 14,107 hunters bagged an average of 1.11 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 15,659 birds. In addition, another 4,087 birds were reported wounded for a loss of 20.7 percent, and a total hunting mortality of 19,746 geese. The Southeast Region again accounted for more than 87 percent of the total harvest with Baca, Prowers, Bent and Kiowa the high counties, in that order. Weld county showed a large increase in goose harvest over past years probably as a result of more geese wintering in this area in 1960. Procedures: This random survey of Colorado small game harvest is a cooperative venture between Federal Aid Project w-88-R and the Game Management Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. Techniques were the same as those used in the past, with randomly selected hunters notified immediatley preceding the season, and a sample questionnaire included to show the questions that would be asked. A.fter the season, the hunters were contacted a second time and requested to fill out and return the questionnaire. One follow-up letter was sent to all non-reporting hunters after an interval of about two weeks, and the sample was concluded when the response to this follow-up had dropped off. Questionnaires were sent to 10,000 randomly selected license buyers in 1960, and a total of 6,286 responded for a return of 62.9 percent. Of the 6,286 returns, 1,446 reported that they had not purchased a license, 2,902 reported hunting and 1,938 bought a license but did not hunt. Most of the hunters in this last category were found to have purchased a combination hunting and fishing license which was used for fishing only .. Thus, of the total license sales of 175,799 during 1960, it is estimated that 125,582 hunters hunted one or more species of small game. ��- 11 - WATERFOWL KILL SURVEY Jack R. Grieb Colorado duck stamp sales are plotted in Table 1 revealing that the 1960 sales of 30,592 were the lowest in the last six years. This decrease is attributed to adverse advance publicity which stressed the low supply of'ducks and forecasted a poor hunting season. Table 1. -- Duck Stamp Sales for Colorado Year Number of stamps sold 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 30,592 31,431 41,897 41,794 36,303 39,107 32,450 Percent change from previous year + + + 2·7 24·9 .02 15·1 7·2 20·5 Table 2 classifies Duck Stamp buyers by the type of hunting in which they engaged for the past seven years. Thus, it appears that number of duck hunters were down signifieantly, and number of goose hunters were normal compared to previous years. This was caused by the decreased length of the duck season, and the increased length of the goose season during 1960. Average number of days hunted for waterfowl was slightly above 1959 but well below previous years. Again this is attributed to the length of the duck season. Table 2. -- Estimated Number of'Duck and Goose Hunters, Average Number of Days Hunted and Season Length, by Year. Year Number of duck hurrber s Number of goose hunters Average number days hunted for ducks and gees~ 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 29,480 29,060 38,773 37,166 34,793 37,816 31,834 14,107 13,647 14,705 12,057 12,477 17,634 12,136 6.05 5·70 5.78 6·52 7·37 8.87 7·64 Season length (days) ducks geese 60 50 90 75 75 75 60 75 75 60 60 60 60 60 Bag and possession limit ducks geese 3-6 4~8 4~8 5"':lO 5-10 5-10 5-10 2-2 2,...2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 �- 12 - Duck Harvest Hunting statistics of the 1960 season are tabulated and compared with past years in Table 3· This reveals that the total retrieved kill of 147,400 was considerably below normal and similar to the low harvest year of 1959. In addition, it was estimated that 22,257 birds were crippled for a wounding loss of 13.1 percent permitting an estimated total hunt.ing mortality of 169,657 ducks for 1960 in Colorado. Table 3. -- Duck Harvest Statistics, 1954-1960. Year Number of hunters Average seasonal bag- Total estimated har-vest ': 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 29,480 29,060 38,773 37,166 34,793 37,816 31,834 5·0 4.2 6.1 6.8 5·9 6·7 5.6 147,400 122,924 236,515 254,587 185,737 253,367 179,856 Wounding Loss Percent number 13·1 15·5 12·3 14.1 16.3 13·1 14.5 22,257 22,417 33,088 41,679 36,195 38,182 30,396 Total estimated hunting mortality 169,657 145,341 269,603 296,266 221,932 291,549 210,252 Species composition of the 1960 bag is listed in Table 4 and compared with the averag~ of the six previous years revealing that the total 1960 duck harvest was 29 percent less than the six-year average. This reduction is attributed to a decrease in the number of waterfowl hunters combined with a decrease in the average seasonal bag from the norm. Species composition for 1960 was similar to the six-year average, probably due to the opening date in late October which emphasized the harvest of mallards and other later migrating species, and missed the peak migration periods of the earlier migrants. Duck kill and hunting pressure by 10-day intervals of the season is tabulated in Table 5, indicating that the harvest was greater during the earlier intervals of the season decreasing toward the end but picking up during the last 10 days. The number of hunters participating in each interval decreased from beginning to the season's end, and this appeared to be the main reason that harvest decreased as the season progressed. Comparison of the average bag by periods points out that the best hunting occurred during the last 10 days of the season. Considering all factors, Colorado had a duck season which was considerably below normal in terms of harvest despite the fact that migration and winter concentration inventories indicated an average population in Colorado throughout the hunting season. �- 13 - Table 4. -- Species Composition of the Bag. 1960 Species Mallard Pintail Green-winged teal Blue-winged teal Cinnamon teal Baldpate Gadwall Shoveller Canvasback Redhead Scaup Goldeneye Bufflehead Ruddy duck Ring-necked Wood duck Hooded merganser Black duck Unknown and other kinds Coot Number killed 101,707 4,127 9,728 3,832 Percent of total 69.0 2.8 6.6 2.6 o 1,032 19,015 1,032 t 1,032 295 147 147 t 0·7 0.2 0.1 0.1 4,864 147 3·3 6-Year average 1954-1959 Percent Number of total killed 65.3 134,642 6,898 3·3 19,128 9·3 8,000 3·9 t 41 1.1 2,364 2.0 4,210 1.3 2,709 1,948 ·9 1.1 2,323 .8 1,570 .2 464 .2 354 .4 870 t 19 t 19 t 10 8 t Percent change 1960 from 6-year average harvest - 24.5 - 40.2 - 49·1 - 52.1 1/ - 56.3 351.7 - 61·9 2/ 2/ - 34.3 Y II 1/ II 1/ II II 20,950 45 10.2 t - 76.8 Total 147,400 100.0 206,572 1/ Estimates too small for accurate comparison. Closed season. 100.0 - 28.6 0.1 Y g; Table 5. -- Ducks Bagged and Hunting Pressure by 10-day Intervals of the Season 1960 Dates Oct 2 Nov 5 15 25 5 15 Estimated Birds bagged Percent of Number of total kill ducks 20.1 29, 27 18.1 26,679 24,911 16·9 21,963 14·9 13.8 20,341 16.2 23,879 Estimated hunting Pressure Percent of Number of total hunters , 0 29·2 9,109 30·9 8,756 29·7 7,016 23·8 22.1 6,515 6,102 20·7 Average bag by eriods 3· 2·9 2.8 3·1 3·1 3·9 �- 14 Goose Harvest Hunting statistics of the goose season presented in Table 6 estimates 14,107 (12,722 resident and 1,385 non-resident) bagged an average of 1.11 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 15,659 birds. In addition, another 4,087 birds were reported wounded but not retrieved for a wounding loss of 20·7 percent. This permits a total hunting mortality estimate for Colorado during 1960 of 19,746 geese. Comparison with past years reveals that 1960 was only an average goose season in terms of harvest, and considerably below 1958 and 1959 in regards both harvest and hunter success. Table 6.-- Goose Harvest Statistics, 1954-1960. Year Number of hunters Average seasonal bag 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 14,107 13,647 14,70;c5 12,057 11,541 17,364 12,136 1.11 1.61 1.34 1.21 ·98 1.02 .67 Total estimated harvest Wounding percent loss number Total estimated hunting mortality 15,659 21,972 19,704 14,589 11,310 17,711 8,168 20·7 17·8 22·3 23·5 21.6 18·3 22.8 4,087 4,730 5,655 4,473 3,116 3,884 2,410 19,746 26,702 25,359 19,062 14,426 21,248 10,578 Six-year average goose harvest is 15,575 -- 1954-1959 Species composition of geese killed was similar between all seven years of the survey being 90 percent or above Canada geese. The remaining percentages for the seven years were 1I0therand unknown species of geese, and were actually probably Canada geese which the hunters were not able to correctly identif,y. ll The 1960 goose hunting season was characterized by excellent water and food conditions in the Arkansas Valley during the fall and winter periods. Census figures taken at weekly intervals in the Arkansas Valley indicate a normal number of geese were present in Colorado during most of the season. However, the birds seemed to be distributed on all water bodies rather than concentrated on one or two as in the past. While hunting success dropped in 1960, the season may still be regarded as successful compared to norms of the past seven years. �- 15 Table 7. -- Duck Kill by Region and County. Waterfowl Region ~County NORTHEAST Cheyenne Kit Carson Lincoln Logan Morgan Phillips Sedgwick Washington Yuma NORTHEAST TOTAL 1960 Duck Kill Number killed Per cent of total 88 840 486 7,269 8,092 0 6,456 2,373 988 26,592 .06 ·57 ·33 4.93 5.49 SOUTHEAST Baca Bent Crowley Huerfano Kiowa Las Animas Otero Prowers Pueblo SOUTHEAST TOTAL Estimated 1960 hunting pressure Per cent Number of total hunters Six-year average 1954 - 1959 Number killed Per cent of total 4.38 1.61 .67 18.04 38 298 224 1,226 1,860 38 743 333 333 5,093 .13 1.01 .76 4.16 6·31 .13 2.52 1.13 1.13 17.28 963 2,688 2,176 10,393 14,165 432 6,168 2,617 4,366 43,968 .47 1.31 1.06 5.06 6.89 .21 3·00 1.27 2.12 21·39 4,835 4,083 3,302 634 1,887 752 2,034 6,397 2,064 25,988 3·28 2·77 2.24 .43 1.28 ·51 1.38 4.34 1.40 17.63 259 1,079 855 112 259 147 557 1,377 631 5,276 .88 3·66 2·90 .38 .88 ·50 1.89 4.67 2.14 17·90 1,796 4,418 4,890 1,107 2,853 1,929 2,310 6,371 5,069 30,743 .87 2.15 2.38 ·54 1.39 .94 1.12 3·10 2.47 14.96 CENTRAL Adams Arapahoe Boulder Douglas Elbert El Paso Jefferson Larimer Weld CENTRAL TOTAL 10,495 2,521 9,448 206 295 722 2,255 10,981 31,234 68,157 7·12 1.71 6.41 .14 .20 .49 1.53 7.45 21.19 46.24 2,081 929 2,527 74 112 333 522 2,156 6,209 14,943 7.06 3·15 8.57 .25 .38 1.13 1.77 7·31 21.06 50.68" 10,296 1,646 10,274 90 533 1,550 1,945 16,546 36,374 79,254 5·01 .80 5·00 .04 .26 ·75 ·95 8.05 17·70 38.56 SAN LUIS VALLEY Alamosa Conejos Costilla Rio Grande Saguache SAN LUIS VALLEY TOTAL 2,255 1,710 236 4,319 3,626 12,146 1.53 1.16 .16 2·93 2.46 8.24 483 147 38 817 298 1,783 1.64 .50 .13 2·77 1.01 6.05 5,126 3,261 796 5,168 5,706 20,057 2.49 1.59 ·39 2·51 2.78 9.76 �- 16 Table 7. Waterfowl Region and County NORTHWEST Garfield Moffat Rio Blanco Routt NORTHWEST TOTAL WEST CENTRAL Delta Mesa Montrose Ouray WEST CENTRAL TOTAL SOUTHWEST Archuleta Dolores Hinsdale LaPlata Mineral Montezuma San Juan San Miguel SOUTHWEST TOTAL HIGH COUNTRY Chaffee Clear Creek Custer Eagle Fremont Gilpin Grand Gunnison Jackson Lake! Park Pitkin Summit Teller HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL Duck Kill by Region and County, Cont1d. 1960 Duck Kill Estimated 1960 hunting pressure Number Per cent hunters of total Number killed Per<cent of total 1,194 59 516 59 1,828 .81 .04 ·35 .04 1.24 112 74 38 74 298 3,714 4,805 1,194 2·52 3.26 .81 9,713 6.59 Six-year average- 1954 - 1959 Number killed Per cent of total .38 .25 .13 .25 1.01 2,261 800 1,055 1,560 5,676 1.10 ·39 ·51 .76 2.76 410 817 298 1.39 2·77 1.01 1,525 5·17 3,485 6,372 4,184 380 14,421 1.70 3·10 2.04 .18 7·02 .13 .01 .02 1.09 .11 .63 1,533 1.04 186 .63 147 .10 38 .13 264 30 31 2,247 219 1,293 1,680 1.14 224 .76 351 4,435 .17 2.16 177 .12 74 .25 944 4 593 1,297 1,447 .46 .29 .63 ·70 338 595 351 341 499 383 93 81 6,966 .16 .29 .17 .17 .24 .19 .05 .04 3·39 427 398 .29 .27 38 38 .13 .13 147 118 .10 .08 38 112 .13 .38 29 1,296 .02 .88 38 338 .13 1.15 t �- 17 - Table 7. -- Duck Kill by Region and County, Cont'd. Summary by Region Waterfowl Region and County Number killed Per cent of total Estimated 1960 hunting llressure Per cent Number hunters of total NORTHEAST SOUTHEAST CENTRAL SAN LUIS VALLEY NORTHWEST WEST CENTRAL SOUTHWEST HIGH COUNTRY 26,592 25,988 68,157 12,146 1,828 9,713 1,680 1,296 18.04 17·63 46.24 8.24 1.24 6.59 1.14 .88 5,093 5,276 14,943 1,783 262 1,525 224 338 TOTAL OF REGIONS 147,400 100.00 29,480 1960 Duck Kill Six-year average 1954 - 1959 Number killed Per cent of total 17·28 17·90 50.68 6.05 1.01 5·17 .76 1.15 43,968 30,743 79,254 20,057 5,676 14,421 4,435 6,966 21·39 14·96 38.56 9.76 2.76 7·02 2.16 3·39 100.00 205,520 100.00 �- 18 - Table 8. -- Goose Kill by Region and County. Waterfowl Region and County NORTHEAS'J; Cheyenne Kit Carson Lincoln Logan Morgan Phillips Sedgwick Washington Yuma NORTHEAST TOTAL SOUTHEAST Baca Bent Crowley Huerfano Kiowa Las Animas Otero Prowers Pueblo SOUTHEAST TOTAL CENTRAL Adams Arapahoe Boulder Douglas Elbert E1 Paso Jefferson Larimer Weld CENTRAL TOTAL SAN LUIS VALLEY Alamosa Conejos Costilla Rio Grande Saguache SAN LUIS VALIEY TOTAL 1960 Goose Kill Number Per cent killed of total Estimated 1960 hunting pressure Number ~er cent hunters of total Six-year average 1954 - '1959 Number Per cent killed of total ·55 .83 1.10 8.54 22 51 9 143 543 4 82 29 129 1,012 .14 ·33 .06 ·92 3.48 .02 ·53 .19 .83 6.50 3,809 1,399 855 117 1,010 155 583 1,555 350 9,833 27·00 9·92 6.06 .83 7.16 1.10 4.13 11.02 2.48 69.70 6,803 1,257 580 126 2,071 57 164 2,107 80 13,245 43.67 8.07 3·72 .81 13·29 ·36 1.05 13·52 ·51 85.00 39 38 233 545 .28 .27 1.65 3.86 78 117 155 1,205 124 ·79 31 .20 277 432 1.77 2.76 6,123 1,907 462 39·10 12.18 2·95 1,815 246 738 2,246 92 13,629 11·59 1.57 4.71 14·34 ·59 87.03 523 185 3.34 1.18 505 272 ..117 3.58 1.93 .83 237 23 29 1.:52 .15 .19 31 153 307 307 1,506 .20 ·98 1.96 1.96 9.62 39 233 350 1,088 2,604 .28 1.65 2.48 7·71 18.46 15 10 86 43 633 1,076 .10 .06 ·55 .28 4.06 6.91 61 ·39 78 155 39 ·55 1.10 .28 17 79 3 .11 ·51 .02 61 ·39 272 1.93 99 .64 �- 19 - Table 8. -- Goose Kill by Region and County, Cont "d, Waterfowl Region and County NORTHWEST Garfield Moffat Rio Blanco Routt NORTHWEST TOTAL WEST CENTRAL Delta Mesa Montrose Ouray WEST CENTRAL TOTAL. SOUTHWEST Archuleta Dolores Hinsdale La Plata Mineral Montezuma SanJuan San Miguel SOUTHWEST TOTAL HIGH COUNTRY Chaffee Clear Creek Cust.er Eagle Fremont Gilpin Grand Gunnison Jackson Lake Park Pitkir:\ Summit Teller HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 1960 Goose Kill Number killed Per cent of total Estimated 1960 hunting pressure Number Per cent hunters of total Six-year average 1954":' 1959 Number killed Per cent of total 3 .02 53 .34 ·55 8 .27 10 33 .05 .06 39 .28 39 .28 ... i 31 31 .20 .20 116 3 .21 .82 51 ·32 .27 4 .03 .27 .03 3 .02 29 .19 4 .03 3 �- 20 Table 8. -- Goose Kill by Region and County. Cont'd. Summary by Region Waterfowl Region and County 1960 Goose Kill Number Per cent killed of total NORTHEAST SOUTHEAST CENTRAL SAN LUIS VALLEY NORTHWEST WEST CENTRAL SOlJTHWEST HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL OF REGIONS 432 13,629 1,506 61 2·76 87·03 9.62 ·39 31 .20 15,659 100.0 Estimated 1960 hunting pressure Number Per cent hunters of total Six-year average 1954 - 1959 Number Per cent killed of total 1,205 9,883 2,604 272 39 116 38 8·54 69·70 18.46 1.93 .28 .82 .27 14,107 100.00 1,012 13,245 1,076 99 56 51 4 36 15,579 6·50 85·00 6·91 .64 ·36 ·32 .03 .24 100.00 �- 21 Waterfowl Harvest by County The reader is cautioned that information presented in this section of the report is subject to a great deal more error in accuracy than estimates in previous sections, since the original sample has been broken down to a county basis, thus decreasing the sLze of samples on which to base estimates. This is probably even more true of geese than ducks, since there were many more duck hunters. Consequently, it is realized that in some counties, both duck and goose kill have been over-estimated, and in others, under-estimated. However, despite this error, these data represent the most accurate information on this subject possible at the present time. It is hoped to increase the accuracy of county data in the future. Tables 7 and 8 compare the 1960 duck and goose kill respectively with the average of the previous seasons, by county, within each waterfowl region. These regional divisions of the state were located on the basis of waterfowl migration, location, and topography, and permit a closer evaluation of kill, yearly changes in kill, and the effect of different types of hunting seasons on various portions of Colorado. Regional recap of the 1960 duck season as summarized at the conclusion of Table 7 shows that the harvest decreased in all regions of the State compared to the Six-year average. This was undoubtedly a result of the short seasons and small bag limits plus the difficulty in establishing a season for any particular portion of the State which could take advant~ge of peek migrating duck numbers. The resulting season was definitely a compromise designed to furnish everyone with a little shooting without favoring any particular group. These compromise seasons are never statisfactory but are the best that can be done under the circumstances. The eastern slope again contributed to the bulk of the duck harvest being about 82 percent in 1960 which is similar to previous years. Weld and Larimer were the high two harvest counties, in that order. The 1960 goose harvest compared to the six-year average in Table 8 shows that total harvest was very similar to the average. Also, that the Southeast Region again accounted for more than 87 percent of the total goose bag, with Baca, Prowers, Bent, and Kiowa the top harvest Counties, in that order. Other Regions showed similar harvest past years with the exception of the Northeast which decreased, and the Central which increased. The reason for the decrease in the Northeast is unknown, but the increase in the Central is believed caused by management procedures which almost doubled the number of geese wintering in this area. Prepared by: Date: Jack R. Grieb Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1961 - 23 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of COLORADO Project No. W-96-D-5 Work Plan No. 1 Title of Job: Wild Turkey Population Status Period Covered: July 1, 1960 to June 30, 1961 Objectives: Wild Turkey Development Job No. 1 (1) To check the changes in population status (increase or decrease) of recent transplants of wild turkeys to record success of transplants or to follow-up on causes of failures. (2) To compile records of population checks made by conservation officers. Abstract: A.lot of wild turkey information flowed through the Grand Junction Regional office in 1960-61. Something new in turkey hunting occurred in western slope ranges in the fall of 1960. (1) There were two birds allowed on one license. (2) Two seasons, one October 3-12th, and one November 19-27. Then, Montrose County sold more turkey licenses than Las Animas County for the first time in turkey hunting history. The Uncompahgre Plateau is beginning to gain a reputation as a prime turkey range as well as prime deer range. Over-all, the western slope had its best turkey development in 1960, this is revealed through the number of reports received from big-game hunters. One of the questions asked at check station was, "Did you see any turkeys?" It is surprising how many hunters replied with an affirmative answer to this query. last fall. Pinon Mesa has developed to a place where a season was requested It was felt best to give it another year. Another area showing promise is the Red Creek, Derby Mesa area in south Routt County. The statistical data which carries only a small part of the over-all population and much of which has not yet been opened to turkey hunting shows the following figures: a total of 43 flocks; total birds 1,398 turkeys; 29 observers with an average of 32.51 plus birds per flock. The smallest flock was 5, the largest 107 which was reported at the Hill ranch near the old Ute Post Office. ��- 25 Wild Turkey Population status Martin L. Burget Findings: A. lot of wild turkey information flowed through the Grand Junction Regional Office in the fall and winter of 1960 and 1961. Something new in wild turkey management was the two birds per license with an increase in hunting days during the season. The season consisted of two periods, one in October 3-12, the second one late in November 19-27, on western slope turkey range. There were a lot of comments and arguments for and against both the seasons and bag limits. However, there was an increase of interest in turkey hunting and hunting pressures in areas that had not been hunted much in the past. e.g. Reports indicate that Montrose County had the highest license sales record in the state. Thus the Uncompahgre Plateau came into the picture as a prime turkey range as well as highly desirable deer range. Montrose County was slow in realizing that the turkeys had become so abundant. The inner circle of Game and Fish employees had seen this rise through the ever increasing flow of reports from hunters coming through the check stations and field reports to W.C.O.s. However, they too were caught a little off balance. The area is large. Conservative maping of the area this year reveals the fact that there are more than 643 square miles of occupied turkey range in Montrose County. Of this there are 532 square miles of concentrated range where the turkeys congregate either in summer or winter or both. Garfield County is showing a rapid rise. While none of Mesa County was opened to hunting in 1960 the turkey population is spreading rapidly. There are still less birds per square mile of occupied range in Mesa County than some of the adjoining counties, there is a larger block of occupied range in the county than either Montrose or Garfield. This will soon be another prime turkey range in the next few years. It was necessary to weed out duplicate reports and pick up some of the spurious ones. Turkeys have been reported in ranges where they could not possibly have been. Some of the reports had to be upped because of later reports showing more birds than the original reports. One W.C.O. recently reported that the only birds he had seen recently were gobblers. "He guessed' that all the hens were setting.lI This is a good sign. As a sidelight on foods, a number of crops were brought in containing a number of small bulbs. The turkeys had been digging about six inches deep for some of their foods. It had been our first thought that these were either Dog tooth violet - Erythronium sp., or spring beauty - Claytonia spp. The crops were sent to Fort Collins to the University and they reported them to be of the potato or nightshade family - a Solanum sp. In the Big Salt Wash releases of the past two years, the shift had been toward Baxter Pass area. Two flocks ~ere reported in the summer and fall of 1960. w.c.o. Dudley Jerome felt that these might have drifted into the area from Utah. Actually there is more attractive range in Colorado than in utah. Once you drop over Baxter Pass into Utah the area is virtually desert. �- 26 Procedure: Survey trips will be made into recently planted areas (those not yet opened to hunting.) (1) Speci~ic flock data will be recorded as follows: a. Flock location. b. Flock shift--and reasons for specific shifts, where possible. c. Wintering flock counts. (2) W.C.O.s will be requested to accompany the project leaders during surveys so that they will become familiar with the methods of gathering needed data on the population status of turkeys. The Pinon Mesa turkeys have developed throughout the entire area. Down into the Little Dolores Valley and on west and south into Coates Creek drainage. There were signs of birds in 2V Creek when it was examined in the summer of 1960. Reports of birds came in fast enough that Mr. Jerome wanted to open a season in the fall of 1960. It was the authors suggestion that the birds be given one or more years to become thoroughly established. Some turkeys worked down into North East Creek in April 1960. The flock consist.ed of a gobbler and five hens. They fed for about two weeks in one of the Taylor Ranch alfalfa fields. The birds were seen by a number of the ranchers living along highway 141 leading from Sweetwater to Gateway. They moved back in the Pinon Mesa area before the first of May. Evidently these were late nesting hens or they had lost a first clutch of eggs. �- 27 Statistical Data: Year *1960 Date 10-21 11-15 11-20 11-24 11-28 11-2 11-7 11-7 11-7 11-15 11-16 11-19 11-23 11-23 11-27 12-20 11-27 11-27 ll-? ll-? 11-18 11-23 11-20 11-16 12-16 12-19 12-? 12-? 12-30 12-30 3-? 3-? 3-? 3-? 3-? 3-? 3-21 3-21 3-21 3-21 1960 12-? 12-? 10-? County Garfield Delta Delta Delta Ouray Garfield Garfield Garfield Garfield Pitkin Garfield Garfield Garfield Garfield Montrose Montrose Montrose Garfield Garfield Garfield Garfield. Garfield Garfield Garfield Mesa Mesa Garfield Garfield Garfield Garfield Routt Routt Routt Routt Pitkin Pitkin Eagle Eagle Garfield Eagle Mesa Mesa Mesa Drainage Location Reptd. Rifle Cr. So. of Hatchery 11 Dominguez Dominguez Can. 28 Dominguez Near Cattle Gd. 63 Dominguez Dominguez Can. 84 Uncompahgre E. Fork ~ 33 Fourmile Near Bridge 05 M. Rifle Cr. C. V. Bar 26 Spring Cr. Crystal River 17 Roaring Fk. S. E. Carbondale 18 Capitol Cr. Trapist Mon. 12 Mitchel Cr. King Mtn. 30 Alkali Cr. Porter River 52 No Name Cr. Bridge 07 Crystal R. Crystal River R. 12 Cottonwood Cr. Hill River 107 Iron Spring Celesca RS 72 Crystal R. Crystal River 05 Crystal R. Crystal River. 06 E. Mam Cr. Forest Area 54 Rifle Cr. N. of Hatchery 46 Rifle Cr. Power Plant 14 Rifle Cr. Steele R. 07 W. Elk Cr. Boudens R. 13 W. Elk Cr. Reservoir 13 Stove·Cn. Old Ranch 27 ? Colo. Monument 26 M. Rifle C.V. Bar R. 41 Elk Cr. Ryden R. 15 Divide Cr. Philpot R. 75 Divide Cr. Record R. 67 Egeria Cr. King Mtn. 31 Rock Cr. McCoy 15 Red. Cr. Water Tender Cabin 22 Willow Cr. 19 Crystal R. Crystal R. Ranch 41 Crystal R. Redstone 17 Frying Pan R. Refuge 18 Missouri Or. Missouri Cr. 38 Roading Fk. Carbondale 42 Cattle Cr. Rentfle R. 35 Coates Cr. 63 Hightower Cr. Hightower RS 68 Plateau Cr. Vega Res. 03 Reported By W. Sandfort G. Rogers-R. Evans Mr. Easter Mr. DeVoe Mr. Burkey H. Templeton N. Bain W. Peterson W. Jackson J. Hyrup D. Kiel F. Porter G. Rogers Blue - Jackson J. Howlett Range Rider D. Denny D. Denny G. Rogers Hunter G. Steele Steele - Dunham Dunham - Lowery F. Dunham D. Jerome D. Jerome F. Dunham F. Dunham F. Dunham F. Dunham Rosette Rosette Rosette Rosette W. Kenny : W. Kenny B. Terrell B. Terrell B. Terrell et al Terrell-Jackson Hunter Hunter Fisherman Observers 29 I Average number of turkeys per flock 32.51 * Dates were the dates of the report not observations Prepared by: Martin L Burget Date: October, 1961 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz ��October, 1961 - 29 JOB COMPLETION DEVELOPMENT State of Project REPORT PROJECT COLORADO -----------------------------No. W-96-D-5 Work Plan No. 1 Title of Job: Wild Turkey Brood Counts Period Covered: July 1, 1960 to June 30,1961 Wild Turkey Development Job No. 2 Abstract: Data gathered on western Colorado turkey ranges indicated that Colorado had its best development in the summer of 1960. Two trips were taken into the Rifle, Derby Mesa, Grand Valley area. One trip to the Pinon Mesa area with W.C.O. Dudley Jeromej and one trip to the Stove Canyon, Roan Creek area with W.C.O. Hugh Jones. Reports coming in from field men, ranchers and forest rangers confirmed this development. Two things were indicated by these reports: (1) the successful nesting of a large percentage of hens, and (2) the successful rearing of a high percentage of the broods. Statistical data on nine broods in non hunted turkey range showed an average of 8.78 poults per brood. This is rather high but it is from a small sample. The overall average would probably be smaller. Most of the brood information now flows from the field men to the Regional Game Managers. This then, is used in game management activities. A, brood of 16 poults was seen in the Trout Creek Pass area in July. Mr. Adams is with the FWS on Basin Studies. Objectives: (1) (2) Procedure: (1) (2) To gather brood information in areas where hunting seasons have not been held. To compile brood information gathered by W.C.O.s within established trend areas for use in management of this species. Location of brood checking areas in newly planted areas. (Some of these areas have already been set up. These and additional areas should be checked and tested to determine their value in obtaining comparative data.) W.C.O.s will be requested to accompany the project leaders during brood-count surveys. Assistance will be given to these District personnel in showing them methods for making brood-counts within their respective areas. ��- 31 - Wild Turkey Brood Counts Martin L. Burget Findings: (Western Slope) Field travel time was cut back in the summer of 1960. Since the gathering of data has been turned over to the W.C.O.s most of the data gathered goes directly to the Regional Game Managers. For this reason there is not too much information coming to the author for reporting material. Then too, on the project basis, only the areas that are not hunted are checked by Federal Aid personnel. A list ·ofthese areas were sent in in the July 1960 quarterly, page 7. These will not be repeated here. Where any hunted area broods show in this report the information was volunteered by the field men and sent direct to me. Indications from reports and overall development of turkeys in 1960 show it to be the best years development in the state since the program was started in 1940. This could mean only two things; (1) large broods and high maturity of the poults hatched. The spring was rather dry. This contributed to the hatching of the eggs. Then, (2) the summer was dry and this helped in the overall development. Late frost destroyed a lot of the mast crops but the staples came on later and supplied the needed foods. Recent reports indicate that the bulk of the turkeys came through the winter in good shape. The high livability of poults forms a basis of good development. The one main deterent to good hatching of turkey poults is a late cold and wet spring, this has happened a few times since 1940. The result was a reduction in the number of broods observed and the average number of poults per hen. Note p.24 1I0ctoberQuarterly Report 195211, 1ILatespring storms during the spring of 1952 nesting season over much of the eastern slope turkey areas undoubtedly caused some reduction in brood sizes. Donald M. Hoffman. lI - By way of contrast on the west.ern slope in 1951 an extremely dry spring occurred. The results are shown in the October Quarterly Report on page 26 where a total of only fifteen broods were observed and repor+ed , This was a low brood count for the area and showed the following results: 15 hens showed an average of 5.2 poults per hen. In the Yellow Jacket-Devil Creek area 8 hens averaged only 3.75 poults each. The brood in this group that had 14 poults was observed at the turkey ranch. When weather gets too dry and the hen ist.oo far from water to dampen her breast and temper the eggs for hat.ching the inside skin of the egg dries down on the poults suffocating them and they die in the shell. �- 32 - Statistical Data: Date 1960 Country Drainage Local (1960) Observ. P H June 7 June 29 July 12 July 12 July 12 Sept 30 * July 15 Garfield Garfield Garfield Garfield Garfield Mesa Park Elk Creek W. Rif. Cr. Stove Cr. Stove Cr. Stove Cr. Glade Cr. Trout Cr. 5-Spgs C.V. Bar 1 12 Cuddy R. Cuddy R. Cuddy R. Glade P. Trout Cr. Pass Reptd. H P 1 13 1 1 1 3 1 2 4 10 23 16 Reported by Dunham - Fisher Dunham - Fisher H. Jones - Burget H. Jones - Burget H. Jones - Burget D. Jerome Mr. Adams * This report by Mr. Adams was picked up April 27, 1961. The observation was made about July 15, 1960, in a dry canyon north west of the hot spring on Trout .Creek Pass. Note - Reports from hunters indicated that there were many turkeys in non-hunted turkey ranges. More than 100 turkeys were observed in Dominguez canyon area. These were reported by a Mr. DeVoe. There were three flocks with the smallest around 27 then 33 and a third flock of around sixty. Several large flocks were reported seen in the late season in the Coates Creek area. This is south and west of Pinon Mesa. The areas designated for special brood observation in these areas were: The Cuddy Ranch in Stove Canyon area north of Fruitaj and the Fruita Reservoir area on Pinon Mesa. This area is aboutnihe miles south of the Glade Store. Prepared by: Martin L. Burget Date: October, 1961 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federa:l Aid Coordinator �October, 1961 - 33 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of: Colorado Project No. W-96-D-5 Work Plan No. 2 Wild Turkey Development J.obNo. 1 Trapping and Transplanting. Title: Period Covered: October 1, 1960 to March 15, 1961 ABSTRACT Six feed grounds were established to concentrate turkeys for the purpose of trapping this season. These were set up in the following locations: Dominguez Canyon, Escalante Canyon, the ute area east of Nucla, Alkali Creek, Divide Creek, and the State Turkey Ranch. Escalante Canyon was the only area where a catch of turkeys was not made. Slat-type, portable traps were mainly used. One catch was made with the cannon net. The cannon net is a nylon braided netting 40 feet by 50 feetJ pf ~-inch mesh, set off by three mortar-type cannons. Forty turkeys were caught with this device during one shot, but seven escaped under the edge before \ being banded. The stationary trap at the Turkey Ranch is a pole-type structu~e made from small spruce poles. The ends of slat and pole traps are enclosed by canvas gates that are closed manually. hens. One-hundred-one turkeys were trapped and banded, including 22 toms, and 79 Divided on a sex and age basis, there were: 46 1 14 40 mature birds (11 toms and 35 hens) 2-year bird (one hen) l-year birds (5toms and 9 hens) juvenile birds (6'.t.omsand 34 hens) Disposition of the birds described above was as follows: 12 turkeys 14 turkeys 15 turkeys 15 turkeys two toms and 10 hens to Big Salt Wash area, near Baxter pass, Garfield County. two toms and 12 hens to West Mam Creek, southwest of Rifle, Garfield County. four toms and 11 hens to Wallace Creek, south of Grand Valley, Garfield County. three toms and 12 hens to Lands End Peak area, near Paonia, Delta County. �- 34 2 toms to Mitchell Creek near Glenwood Springs, Garfield County, (Game Management) 18 turkeys -- four toms and 14 hens to Idaho 20 turkeys -- five toms and 15 hens to Oregon 5 hens were trapped at A.lkali Creek. These were banded and released in the area. Objectives: 1. To restore Merriam's wild turkey in areas within the State found to be suitable habitat. 2. To transplant turkeys to as many suitable locations within the known former range and other unoccupied sites, as feasible. 3. To create huntable surpluses of wild turkeys wherever possible. �- 35 - TRAPPING AND TRANSPLANTING Martin L. Burget Findings: Trapping during the 1961 season was confined to the Western Slope. Field surveys in the Eastern Slope areas did not disclose trapable concentrations of turkeys. The Hunting Season The wild turkey hunting season this year involved two major changes: (1) two;turkeys were allowed on a single license for the first time since seasons were opened in 1949, and (2) two seasons, with longer periods during each season, were opened on Western Slope ranges. Dates were October 1-9, a nine-day periodj then November 19-27, for an additional nine days, making 18 days in all. Former seasons had ranged up to five days. Results of the 1960 hunting season, as compiled by the Game Management Division, are as follows: Hunters -- 1541 (Based on licenses sold) Hunters with licenses that did not hunt -- 39 Double kills -- 224 Success 51.7% (based on hunters in field) Success -- 37.2% (based on licenses sold) From general reports the hunting season was quite satisfactory to the hunting fraternity. Indications were that a larger percentage of large gobb I'er-s. .: were taken than usual. Weather was favorable during both periods. The winter had not set in and r-oads over most of the turkey range were open to pickups or jeeps. It is the writer I s opinion that the opening hour is still tioo .earIy', especially for the late November season. An opening time of 6:30 a.m., would be much more satisfactory. This is attested by numerous reports and requests from both Department personnel and hunters at the Grand Junction Regional Office. Preparation for Trapping General reports.. Big-game hunters repo:6te'd -seeing mor:e';tur~ys:thanever before. Many of these birds were in newly stocked range. This indicated excellent development. Open weather permitted more free access of hunters to' back-range areas, resulting in better coverage of the range and observation of turkeys. Many of these reports were of large flocks, which were supported by reports by other hunters in the same general areas, giving an excellent crosscheck on the turkey development for the year. �- 36 - These reports also indicated that the early season had not hurt the turkeys materially. In a good many cases these observations revealed that a strong upswing in wild turkey development had occurred during 1960j this resulting from successful hatching, and the successful brooding and rearing of a large percentage of the young. Problems of trapping. There are several problems involved in the turkey trapping program. Principal ones develop~bec~use of disturbance during the big-game hunting season, and the fact that the birds have just been through a hunting season themselves. Flocks of turkeys may be widespread, and cannot be concentrated in baited areas. Where birds are ranging in areas not too close to big-game hunting about November 1, they can generally be lured to feed grounds much better. Where areas are posted against hunting, natural refuges and concentrations-f6f-turkeys may develop. Where ranchers of this sort are favorable to turkey trapping, feeding can be ,started prior to the time the big-game season closes. Weather may be the most important single factor controlling turkey location and movement. As a specific example, in 1959 weather was favorable and the result was one of the best pinon-nut crops in years. Acorns also wer-e plentiful. The birds stayed back in the pinons and could not be lured to trap grounds anywhere. In 1960, late frost destroyed most production of mass crops and berries throughout turkey ranges in Western Colorado. As the result, turkeys came to feed grounds freely. Early snows may also influence turkey movement into lower ranges for the winter. These same snows, however, if deep, may make the trapping program more difficult because of access problems. Travel to the turkey feeding areas sometimes must be made on horseback or snowshoes. The Trapping Program, 1960-61 This has been one of the most successful trapping seasons in K-numbeX'_of years. Since the author could not travel, the program was carried out on a cooperative basis. Wayne Sandfort guided and assisted with activites. Roger Evans worked in most of the trapping areas, baiting, setting up traps, observing flocks, and assisting with trapping. Dwight Owens and Glenn Rogers helped in preliminary work and in capturing and moving turkeys. Clark Fork looked after the ranch turkey flocks, hauled feed, traps, and made special-trips to assist in caring for turkeys that were evidently short of feed. William B. Jackson, as usual, kept track of turkeys in and around the Glenwood Springs area, getting at least three feed: grounds activated besides doing some good public relations work. W.C.O.s taking an active part were John Howlett of Nucla, Bob Mangus of Norwood, Gail Boyd of Paonia, and Furman Dunham and Marion Lowery of Rifle. There were others who assisted with feeding and gathering information. These included,Department personnel, interested ranchers, and sportsmen. In two cases our :bilots assisted in hauling and releasing turkeys. In most cases this assistance was volunteered and was beyond the pressing demands of a heavy schedule of other duties. This assistance is highly appreciated. �- 37 - Results of seven successful trapping attempts during the 1960-61 season are summarized for specific areas below: Big Dominguez Canyon, Mesa County Catch Data: Date: December Time of catch: Number trapped: Trapping crew: 20, 1960 8:10 a.m. 12 (2 toms, 10 hens) Wayne Sandfort, Roger Evans, Dwight Owens Disposition of birds: Method of transportation:: Pickup Date and time of release': December 20, 1960, at 2:10 p.m. Area of release: Big Salt·Wash Creek, Garfield County Release crew: Wayne Sandfort, Roger Evans, Martin Burget, and Walt Woodward Band Number 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 437 438 439 440 441 Sex Hen Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Hen Age Juvenile l-Year Juvenile Juvenile Mature Juvenile l-Year Mature Mature Juvenile l-Year l-Year State Turkey Ranch, Archuleta County (First Catch) Catch Data: * Date: January 13, 1961 Time 7:05 a -. m. Number t.r-apped.i, 17 (4toms, 13 hens) Clark Ford, Wayne Sandfort, Sam Clifford Trapping crew: Disposition of birds: Method of transportation: State Airplane Date and time of release: January 14, 1961, 11:00 a.m. Area of release Harry Robinson Ranch on Deer Creek, near Whitebird, Idaho .. Idaho Department .of Game and Fish Release Crew: * No project cost involved. �- 38 - Band Number 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 Sex Tom Tom Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Age Mature Mature Mature Mature Mature Mature Juvenile 2-Years Mature Juvenile Mature Mature Mature Mature .Mature Mature Mature Hill Ranc.h, West of ute, Montrose County (First Catch) Catch Data: Date: January 13, 1961 Time: 8;15 a m , Number trapped: 9 (5 toms, 4 hens) Trapping crew: Roger Evans, Tom Barnes, John Howlett, Bob Mangus i Disposition of birds: A. Idaho Department of Game and Fish "I.Method of transportation: State Pickups and State "Beaver" Airplane Date and time of release: January 14, 1961, 8:30 a.m. Release crew: Idaho Department of Game and Fish Band Number 453 Sex Hen Age Juvenile B. l'aonia. ' Area, Delta County Method of transportation: State Pickup Date and time of release: January 13, 1961, 3:00:p.m. Release crew: Gail Boyd Band Number 443 444 445 446 447 452 * No project costs involved. Sex Tom Hen Hen Tom Tom Hen Age Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile �- 39 C. Mitchell Creek, Garfield County Method of transportation: state Pickups and St.ate "Ce sarra" Airplane Date and time of release: January 13, 1961, 3:00 p.m. Release crew: Neal Van Gaalen Band Number 451 454 Sex Tom Tom Age Juvenile Juvenile Divide Creek Record Ranch, Garfield County Catch Data: Dat.e: January 26, 1961 Time of catch: 7:10 a.m. Number trapped: 33 (ltom, 32 hens) .:Tr13.I>ping :crew : Wayne Sandfort, Glenn Rogers, Dwight Owens, Roger EV.ar16 . \ Disposition of birds: A. West .Mam Creek, Garfield County Method of transportat~on: State Pickup Date and time of release: January 26, 1961, 10:30 a.m. Release crew: Roger Evans, Furman Dunham Band Number 456 460 :.,",'464 4"65 467 469 470 471 474 494' 497 499 Sex Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Age Juvenile Mature Juvenile Mature Mature Juvenile Mature Mature Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile B. Wallace Creek, Garfield County (South of Gr13.udValley) Method of transportation: State Pickup Date and Time of release: January 26, 1961, 10:30 a.m. Release Crew: Glenn Rogers, Marion Lowery Band Number 455 458 459 461 462 463 466 468 472 473 495 500 Sex Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Hen Hen Age Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Mature Mature Mature Juvenile Mature Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile �- 40 - C. :Paonia}) Delta, County Method of transportation: State Car Date and time of release: January 26, 1961, 1:15 p.m. Release crew: Gail Boyd, Wayne Sandfort, Jim Miller (U.S.F.S.) Band Number ',I· Sex Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen 301 302 303 304 305 306 475 496 Unbanded Age Juvenile Mature Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Juvenile Mature Juvenile Juvenile Frank Porter Ranch on Alkali Creek, narfi:eJ4-9ounty Catch Data: Date: February 27, 1961 Time of Catch: 8:20 a.m. Number trapped: 5 (all hens) Trapping crew: Roger Evans, William Jackson Disposition of birds: Method of transportation: State Pickup Date and time of release: February 27, 1961, 8:40 a.m. Area of release: Frank Porter Ranch (banded and released in area as markers) Release crew: Roger Evans, William Jackson Band Number Sex Hen Hen Hen· Ken Hen 307 308 309 310 311 Age Juvenile Juvenile Mature Mature Mature Hill Ranch, West of ute, Montrose, County Catch Data: Date: February Time of catch: Number trapped: Trapping crew: 17, 1961 8:10 a.m. 20 (5 toms, 15 hens) Glenn Rogers, Roger Evans, Wayne:Sandfort, John Howlett Disposition of birds: Method of transportation: Pickup truck TrollL trap site to Denver, commercial air lines, Denver to Portland, Pickup truck from Portland to release site. �- 41 Date and time of release: February 18, 1961, 3:00 p.m. (total lapse of time between catch and release, 30 hours and 50 minutes) Area of release: Oregon, near The Dalles. Release crew: Oregon Game Department Sex Hen *Tom Hen Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Tom Hen Hen Hen Hen Tom Hen Hen Hen Band Number 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 .. ' 328 329 330 331 332 Age Mature 1-Year Mature 1-Year 1-Year Mature Mature 1-Year 1-Year 1-Year 1-Year Mature 1-Year Mature Mature Mature Mature l•. Year 1-Year Mature *When turkeys are eight months old they are considered as 1-Year old. State TlirRey Ranch, Archuleta County (Sec:ondCatch) Catch Data: Date: February Time of catch: Number trapped: Trapping crew: 7, 1961 7:00 avm . 5 (all toms) Clar.k and Nadine Ford Disposition of birds: A. MaID creek, Garfield County Method of transportation: State Pickup Date and time of release: February 8, 1961, 9:30 a.m. Release crew: Clark Ford and Furman Dunham Band Number 422 423 Sex Tom Tom Age Mature Mature �- 42 B. Wallace Creek, Garfield C~un;ty Method of Transportation: State Pickup Date and time of release: February 8, 1961, 10:45 a.m. Release crew: Clark Ford, Marion Lowery Band Number Sex Tom Tom 418 419 420 Age Mature Mature Mature TOlJl Data from the above sections are given in Table 1, to summarize disposition of wild turkeys during the 1960-61 trapping season. Table 1 - DISTRIBillION OF WILD TURKEYS TRAPPED IN WESTERN COLORADO, 20, 1960 -- FEBRUARY 17, 1961. 'Area of Release Number of Birds Toms Hens DECEMBER Dates of Release West Salt CrB. (:$:axter:.'pass, .Area):'2 10 December 20, 1960 Idaho 4 14 January 14, 1961 Paonia 3 12 Mitchell Creek 2 January 13, 1961 (3 Toms, 3 Hens) January 26, 1961 ( 9 Hens) January 13, 1961 Mam Creek 2 12 Wallace Creek 4 11 5 January 26, 1961 (12.: Hen s ) February 8, 1961 (2 Toms) January 26, 1961 (l::.T'dW,l:1 Hens) February 8) 1961 (3 Toms) February 28) 1961 15 February 18, 1961 Alkali Creek Oregon Total 5 22 79 Summary: Wild turkey trapping during the 1960 - 1961 season was one of the mos+csucces sru l Jofj.':eecent,:seas:ons. It was carried on under a strictly cooperative basis in which Federal Aid and Department personnel made up the team. The 1960 hunting season was the most .succes st'u.L to date. Statistics are as foIlows: license sales, 1)541; double kills on a two-turkey-per-license basis) 224; success ratio on basis of hunters in field) 51.7%; and success on basis of licenses sold) 37.2%. Hunters and Department personnel reported more turkeys than usual in the field. There are several factors that influence wild turkey trapping. These include; (1) the big game season soon after the turkey season) (2) prolonged �- 43 - big-game seasons in some areas occupied by turkey , this keeps the birds stirred up and in back country, and (3) areas posted against hunting which may form islands of refuge where birds can be trapped if ranchers are favorable. Feed grounds can be established much earlier in such areas. In addition to the preceding factors, weather is an important factor controlling wild turkey trapping. It influences food production, movement of birds to lower ranges, and accessibility during actual feeding and trapping of birds. In the trapping season of 1960 and 1961, one-hundred-one turkeys were trapped and banded. Seven more were caught in the cannon net trap at Divide Creek, but escaped under the edge of the net before being banded. Recommendations: Since the cooperative trapping plan worked out very well this season, it is recommended that it be continued. There are a number of areas that have had excellent turkey development and provide both good hunting and birds for restocking over a period of years; then, for reasons beyond our control, birds have lost out and only a few small flocks remain. The principal areas referred to occur in Montezuma and Dolores counties. There are also a few areas on the Eastern Slope that are reported to be having the same type of problem. A. re-stocking program is recommended for such areas and could be handled as a Federal Aid or Game Management activity. There would need to be some public relations activity in these areas before re-stocking, and development should be carefully watched at it progress. In most of these areas careful examination has shown them to be prime turkey range. It is recommended that at least three of these areas receive a plant of turkeys this year if stock is available. The areas recommended are Beaver Creek, northwest of Dolores; Chicken Creek, northeast of Mancos; and East Mancos River, north of Mancos Hill. An ecological survey will be made of these areas and sent in with the P.S.&E. for segment six of Project W-96-D. Prepared by: : Date: Approved by:__~La~u~r~e~n_c_e~E~.~R~i~o~r~d~an ~ Ma __r_t_i_n __L_. __B_u_r~g~e_t __ Assistant Director, Research October, 1961 ----------~~~~~~~-- Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1961 - 45 - SUPPLEMENTAL JOB COMPLETION REPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT State of ~C~O~L~O~RA~D~O~ Wild Turkey Development W-96-D-5 Project No. Work Plan No. _ Job No. 1 --------------------------- Title of Job: Location of Transplant Sites. Period Covered: July 1, 1960 to June 30, 1961 3 ------~------------------- Introduction: The following two biological reports are on additional areas added because the recommended ground for turkey plants had already been filled. There are many more areas recommended but these were not too far distant and have been examined and brought up to date for the purpose of planting this season if turkeys are available. Area No.1 Mesa. Kannah Creek-Lands end Area. This is on the southwest end of Grand The Kannah Creek-Lands end Area lies some twenty miles southeast of Grand Junction. It is not far distant from where some turkeys purchased from Missouri or Arkansas were released over twenty years ago. This experiment did not succeed as the birds were crossed with tame stock originally and did not have the necessary stamina to succeed. This area lying up the main fork of Kannah Creek on the foot of Grand Mesa, lies mostly within the Grand Mesa National Forest. The altitude is from about 5,300 feet to 8,000 feet. It appears to have much of the general characteristics of parts of the Uncompahgre that are showing good development at present. There is an abundance of water and other combinations look favorable. Foods: 1. The general type is Pinon-Juniper in the lower areas grading back to Pine-Spruce as the slopes advance. Foods available: 1. Oak, Quercus sp. 2. Pinon, Pinus sp. 3. Juniper, Juniperus sp. 4. Serviceberry, Amalanchier sp. 5. Mountain Mahogany, Cercocarpos sp. 6. Skunkbrush, Rhus Trilobata sp. 7. Rose, Rosa sp. 8. Four-wing Saltbush, Atriplex canescens sp. 9. Sage, Artemisia tridentata 10. Chokecherry, Prunus sp. �- 46 11. 12. Willow) Salix) sp. Mountain mahogany) Cercocarpos sp. Grasses: Grasses and Forbs are abundant especially around spring areas which are plentiful in the area. Kinds: l. Native blue grass) Poa sp. Indian Rice grass) Oryzapsis sp. 3· Blue gramma) Bouteloua gracilis sp. 4. Brame grass) Bromus tectorum 5. Wheat grass) Agyropyron sp. with an abundant supply of native weeds and various types of flowers. 2. B. Extent of area: This area extends around Grand Mesa from the Land'!s End district to the Cedaredge turkey range. The range runs from the Cedar break (pinon-juniper type at about 5,500 feet elevation) to around 8)500 feet in the spruce aspen type. This area is rough and broken. There are numerous flats and pockets affording the turkeys wonderful resting and feeding areas. Birds from Cedaredge have moved to the west but there is much area yet unfilled. C. Water: Water is no problem. Numerous small streams) springs) and ponds cover the area. Much of the Delta and Grand Junction water supply comes from the Grand Mesa mountain on which there are hundreds of natural and artificial lakes and ponds. D. Predators: Most of this Grand Mesa country is beef pasture. The principal predators are coyotes and bobcats. They have been kept at a minimum by Government trappers. E. Land Ownership: The release area is just in the edge of the National Forest - Grand Mesa National Forest and the surrounding ranchers are interested in the introduction of wild turkeys. The birds will be afforded the best protection possible. F. Roosting Sites: Roosting sites in the form of large ponderosa pine trees) cottonwoods in the draws and large utah juniper and pinon along the lower areas) will give the turkeys plenty of roosting areas. Some large oaks will also give plenty of resting or loafing areas. G. Elevation of Area: The elevation of this area is from 5,300 feet to 8,500 feet. The slope of the area is south and southwest. Much of the area is covered with brush and small parks. This makes it ideal from a nesting and escape cover standpoint. �K A ,~N R HeR ££.K RE..LERSE RRt::.-R 5' 7 8 12, ,(. __ G RR i'foNATI OTlA 2.0 J{ -+ M £s~ L 2. , F +----hl __ --+-_4--L--L ~\I T-{ g- Q �S vvt:E TWATE~ R E..LERsE ARER 14- -i: 3-S RIV~RI I 19 -zb !ForrLsST tJ I ,30 I 7..'1 121 ~7 --,I 3I .32 1~3 J 3'+ 2S- �Kannah Creek transplant site area Showing the creek f'Lowi.ng through a basin of ponderosa pines. This area shows an abundance of shrub and tree cover throughout the range. This view is looking west and the Uncompahgre Plateau is showing in the background. �Sweetwater Release Site There is sage in the foreground. View is facing north northwest looking across Hack Creek. Cottonwoods and oak show along the creek with young cottonwoods in background center. On the steep slopes are large pinon and juniper intersperced with oaks, serviceberry and mountain mahogany etc. �- 47 H. Nesting Cover: ------rrhere are hundreds of nesting sites in this area. Most of this range is on south or west facing slopes. This makes easy escape in cases where the hens are disturbed on their nests. I. Escape cover: Escape cover is abundant. See item G. J. Weather and Moisture: Weather in the lower areas is rather dryas it borders on desert type lands. The higher range has an abundance of moisture most years. This season has been exceptionally dry. It is our recommendation that this area be planted with one or two substantial releases of turkeys, whenever the birds are available. This would mean about twenty-five turkeys and should complete the planting of turkeys along the south and west face of Grand Mesa. Area No.2: Sweetwater Lake Area. Wild turkeys have been reported in the Hanging Lake area, Big Creek area! and No Name Creek area within the past three years. These birds evidently driftedintb this range from the plants in Elk Creek and Canyon Creek. A number of requests have been made for a plant of turkeys in the Sweetwater Lake area for as much as five years or more. This area at the east edge of White River National Forest. All of this general area is known as the 'Flat Top' country. The turkey range lies primarily in the canyon~ leading into the Colorado River. Along the bottoms of these canyons and tile small feeder streams there is an abundance of food species and a plentiful water supply. The author has examined this area, but present checks were made by Wayne Sandfort accompanied by W.C.O. James Reser and Forest Ranger Paul Reedy from the Forest office at Glenwood Springs. Winters can be severe in some of these areas so it is necessary to keep a constant check on the food needs of the birds over these periods. The food crops have been more consistently stable in these areas including Glenwood Springs and the Rifle area than they are farther south on the western slope ranges. Physical factors resulting from examination. Name of Release area. Sweetwater Lake Physical inventory A. Foods Available General type Oak - Pinon - Juniper with large cottonwoods along creek. 1. Oak - Quercus sp. 30% ground cover 2. Pinon - Pinus sp. 15% ground cover 3. Juniper - Juniperus _monosperma and utahensis 15% ground cover 4. Cottonwood - Populous spp. 5. Serviceberry - Amalanchier sp. 6. Mountain Mahogany - Cercocarpos spp. 7. Roses - Rosa spp. 8. Skunkberry - Rhus trilobata 9. Chokecherry - Prunus spp. �- 48 10. 11. 12. Snowberry - Symphoricarpos sp. Mountain Elderberry Grasses and Forbes a. Wheat grasses - Agropyrum spp. Introduced b. Native blue grass - Poa spp. c. Native Indian Rice grass - Oryzopsis spp. d. Brome - Bromus tectorum. Introduced e. Brome - Bromus inermis. Native f, Forbs. B. Extent or size of Proposed Area: There is plenty of room for good development in this area. There are probably five townships along the front of the area with unlimited summer range. This area should cover the tie in between Red Dirt Canyon - Derby Mesa area and occupied range to the west. C. Water Factors: Water is abundant in the area. Drainage is from the Flat Top area, with streams, springs, ponds and heavy flowing creeks. D. Predators: Kinds: Principally coyotes and bobcats. These are controlled by Fish and Wildlife trappers and some local trappers in winter. A. few golden eagles and also some bald eagles work along the Colorado River. These could cause some disturbance. E. LandOwnersh~p: The release area is on one 160 acre tract .owned by a Mr. Mooney and, a Mr. McKinney. Both of Victoria, Texas. During most of the year the ~d is worked by a Mr. Robert Tharp. The area is open to big game hunters by permission during the regular hunting season. Nearly half of the land is under B.L.M. control in the lower reaches, while the higher areas are on WhiteRiver Forest Land. Both of theseagenc:Lesare highly cooperative in wild turkey development. »: F. Elevation - Desirable Slope: The elevation at release site is approximately 7,000 feet. There are many miles of south facing slope that opens well during the winter months. The summer range will run up to 9,000 feet, which is quite normal for turkeys especially in the San Juan Basin area. G. Roosting sites: These are plentiful in the form of large cottonwoods, large pinon and juniper trees. In the higher ranges these will be supplemented by large oaks ponderosa pine in pockets and spruce. H. Nesting cover: a. Nesting cover is plentiful in this area since the predator load is light, nesting cover and nesting disturbances should be at a minimum. b. There is plenty of nest sites close enough to water so that the turkeys should have little or no problems in this respect. �- 49 - Escape cover: Cottonwood trees, juniper and pinon trees intersperced with large oaks for escape cover. The brush clumps are closely enough spaced to care for any winged predators that might be lurking about. I. J. Weather and Moisture Factors: There are heavy snows in this area some winters. However, the south facing slopes are.open quickly. This area on the weather charts shows plenty of moisture for excellent conditions. Recommendation: We would recommend that this area be filled with one or two substantial plants - twenty-five to thirty turkeys as soon as turkeys are available. Prepared by: ~Ma~r~t~i=n~B~u~r~g~e~t _ Approved by: Laurence E~ Riordan A.ssistant Director, Research Date: ~O~c~t~o~b~e~r~,_=1~9~6=1 _ Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal A.id Coordinator ��October, 1961 - 51 - JOB COMPLETION DEVELOPMENT State of Project REPORT PROJECT COLORADO No. W-96-D-5 Wild Turkey Development Work Plan No. 1 Ti tle of Job: Mapping Period Covered: July 1, 1960 to June 30, 1961 Job No. 6 of Wild Turkey Range Abstract: The first step in this range mapping development was to assemble an atlas for the western slope counties containing wild turkeys. Data gathered showed that turkeys had drifted into three new counties on western slope range. These are Routt, Pitkin, and Gunnison. The amount of range covered in Pitkin and Gunnison has not yet been assessed. The maps have been prepared containing the following information: 1. 2. 3· 4. 5· A. perimeter line covering all the range where turkeys have been seen or reported. Winter concentrations - where the turkeys assemble for winter periods. Summer range - concentrations. Normally the concentration in winter are more marked than the summering concentrations. (More birds per square mile.) Some birds use the same ranges both summer and winter - these are also marked. Intermediate range - the areas the birds move through from summer to winter ranges. Original tracings were made on county maps using a scale of ~-inch to the mile. Then, overlays were traced over these. The overlays will be photographed in color to be projected and traced on a smaller scale state map. These maps and overlays were sent to the W.C.O.s for confirmation and adjustment to the proper places. In almost every case the lines were adjusted by the field men. To these maps will be added lines indicating hunted and non-hunted range for the year 1960. Weather data affecting turkey development and other pertinent data will also be added. It was decided to carry out this mapping program over all the turkey range of the state and eastern slope maps have been sent out. Most of these maps have been returned but a few are still not in. A. planimeter was used and the square miles of turkey range for the western slope area has been measured and computed. In five counties in the Northwest Region there are 1944.0 square miles of occupied range. Then, in eleven counties in the Southwest Region the total is 4075.3 square miles. The balance be prepared of the data will be worked up and the entire state turkey range will and reported in the next segment of the project. �- 52 - Objectives: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Procedure: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) To assemble all available information on wild turkey range and distribution. To complete wild turkey range mapping. To compile data and prepare distribution and density maps of Colorado wild turkey populations. To show correlation between turkey distribution and density and elevations, vegetative types, precipitation, and perhaps soils, (by use of overlays.) To determine possible, potential wild turkey range through comparisons between present range characteristics and similar areas as indicated by map overlays. Determine perimeter of wild turkey range by county. a. Information from available records and Game and Fish Department personnel. b. Inspection of habitat believed to support wild turkeys. c. Interviews with ranchers and farmers. Trace outline of range on overlays, placed on county maps, scale !-inch per mile. Attempt to devise a system of density classification to show relative density of this species within their range. Perhaps merely concentration areas will have to be shown. Planimeter various units of population densities to determine square miles of various densities, and total turkey range for each county. Prepare a written description of turkey range for each county. Prepare distribution maps of turkey range. a. Photograph turkey range on county map sections in kodachrome. b. Project photos of turkey range, reducing these to a suitable scale on a state map. c. Trace outline of turkey range reproducing distribution to the smaller scale. Prepare base maps, showing the outline of turkey range and density within this range. d. Prepare elevation, vegetation, and precipitation map overlays for use with turkey distribution and density maps. �- 53 - Mapping of Wild Turkey Range Martin L. Burget Findings: The first step in this activity was to assemble an atlas of the counties containing wild turkey flocks. This brought out some new information. It was revealed that three new counties on the western slope contained turkey flocks in the fall of 1960, these were Pitkin, Routt, and Gunnison. The turkeys had drifted into these areas from plants made in nearby counties in summer movements. On these maps tentatively occupied ranges were outlined in pencil. The range was divided into five specific types: 1. Complete range - under perimeter line. This includes the entire range covered by turkeys. 2. Areas where the turkeys move from winter to summer ranges and return, this is marked occasional range. 3. Summer concentration areas - those areas where turkeys are most often seen and observed or reported by W.C.O.s, forest rangers, sportsmen, ranchers, etc. Usually summer concentratio~s are not as closely grouped as winter ranges. 4. Winter concentrations - areas where foods are abundant and the turkeys congregate for mutual protection. 5. A fifth situation is the range where birds concentrate for both summer and winter range. These are ,all separated on the maps so that the markings are distinct. Procedure. 1. The original tracings were on the county maps. Then these were traced on overlays for photographing purposes. The maps with the overlays were sent to the W.C.O.s to check and adjust to fit the present range within each W.C.O. district. Local officers were requested to come to the Grand Junction office to make these checks. In every case the range lines were enlarged by local officers. In some cases flocks showed up in areas where we had never seen them before. There was a letter sent out with these maps explaining what was desired, the response was excellent. Procedure 2. -- Once the maps were returned they had to be adjusted and coordinated. This coordinating process was to adjust the lines where they crossed county sectional boundaries and where the occupied ranges cross from one county to another. Another problem was to check the shading lines so there would not be breaks in the continuity of the maps. Once these factors were worked out the overlays were inked showing all details. Procedure 3. -- The marking process on these maps was as follows: (1) perimeter lines were drawn completely about the entire range area, then, short marks along these lines indicate the turkey range was inside this area. *See specimen sheet. Winter and summer range was enclosed within these perimeter lines. The shading on winter range is shown by parallel lines at t-inch intervals running east and west. Summer ranges are shaded by perpendicular lines at tinch intervals running north and south. Where the area is occupied both winter and summer both of the above markings are used and the area is shaded by t-inch squares. �- 54 - All open range (unshaded por t i.orj 'I-ri thin the perimeter lines is occasional range. These are the areas the turkeys use to migrate through from summering to ;vintering ranges. * See wild turkey range legend sheet. Procedure 4. - Planimeter data for western slope turkey ranges. TABlE 1. -- SQUARE MIlES OF WILD TURKEY RANGE, County Total Range Northwest Region Eagle 136.8 Garfield 814.8 Mesa 860.4 Rio Blanco 95.6 Routt 36.4 Total 1944.0 Southwest Region Archuleta 982.8 Costilla 208.8 Delta 126.8 Dolores 359·2 Hinsdale 2 43·2 LaPlata 533·6 Mineral I 52.0 Montezuma 499·2 Montrose 643.8 Ouray 215.6 San Miguel 374.3 Total 4075.3 TOTAL 6019.3 WESTERN COLORADO, 1960 Seasonal Range Summer Winter Both 66.8 195.6 146.0 26.0 24.8 146.8 34.4 51.2 126.6 31.2 52.0 36.0 80.0 299·6 39·2 209·6 1107·6 1566.8 19·6 290.6 302.0 30.6 18.0 67.8 105·2 642.8 191.0 124.8 90.0 30.0 181.6 130.0 233·2 15·6 18.8 721.2 1364.0 106.0 28.4 546.4 737.4 Occasional Range 32.4 260.8 307·2 39·0 1116 443t6 84.4 50.8 251.8 12.0 270.0 -16.0 273.6 111.0 70.4 117·5 1701,.1 2352.1 Planimeter data was gathered from the areas marked on the final maps. Since it was decided to include all of the state development and range under this general program the maps for the final program will not be completed for at least one year. Present plans are to revive project W-39-R for this general completion work. Procedure 5· -- This is in process of development and part of the write-up is prepared. Further field work is needed to complete these studies. , I �PERIMETER SUMMER , WINTER BOTH . WILD T !RJ( EY �~'-- ~. ~ .- --- ~ :111~ z, .• ~ $ - ~.. ..~ ~~ :,.. ..• ~ ~'IIIII" •••• jjJII •• -. ~~ - ~.~":::J ........ , ,1 J:-' r ..."- . ~ ~ ...• i~ .. •. /. ~ ~ , • IJ , ~ Il "..•.. .,. IIIr. If •• ~ Ia IIJ -~~ :oil ., L ~ I t~ ,.. """""' """ -J tl -~ -" �- 55 - Procedure 6. -- Since it was decided to include the entire state range under this mapping program, it was felt this part of the procedure should wait until the eastern slope maps are ready and the whole state worked up at one time. There are some other data that should be included in these maps. This is to be included in the next segment write-up. It includes actual areas open to hunting in 1960 and potential areas that will be opened shortly. Part of the area is ready for hunting in the fall of 1961. Besides this, weather and moisture factors will be added to these maps. In this way the general factors affecting turkey development can be shown on a single set of maps. Within the range write-up, the pertinent facts will be shown regarding turkey development up to and including the year 1960. Prepared by M_a_r_t_i_n __L_. __B_u_r~g_e_t _ Date: ~0~c~t~o~b~e~r~,~1~9~6~1~ _ Approved by I'8JlrenceE. Bj ordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1961 - 57 - State of Project JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS \ COLORADO No. Work Plan No. w-88-R-6 Waterfowl 2 Job No. Ti tle of Job: Investigation Period Covered: April 1, 1960 to March 31, 1961 of the Arkansas Surveys Valley Wintering and Investigations 4 Goose Flock ABSTRACT Water, food, and weather conditions were satisfactory for the Canada goose flock in the Arkansas Valley of Colorado during the winter of 1960-61, and were not such that they provided an unusual influence on the distribution of birds in the Valley. Three inventories in the Arkansas Valley revealed about 30,000 birds with the highest count in January (31,360). Estimates for the entire flock including Texas wintering areas was 97,000 geese. First flights arrived November 8 and built up rapidly during the next several days. Hunter harvest was equal to the seven-year average, and the number of goose hunters remained high despite decreases in stamp sales. This indicates that duck and goose hunting should be considered independently of each other. The wounding loss study estimated a loss of about 15% of the total hunting mortality. About 2,000 geese were banded and fluoroscoped at six intervals during the fall and winter season at Two Buttes Reservoir. Analysis of these data reveal: (1) the cannon-net method may not constitute a good sample of the population age and sex ratio. Actually, the checked bag at the check station may be more accurate. Check station age ratio was 54.5% birds of the year. (2) it appears that the sex ratio is close to 50:50. (3) two methods are discussed for using fluoroscopy as a measure of hunting pressure. (4) there is no evidence that the firing line at Two Buttes exerts undue pressure on the wintering Canada geese. (5) limited information on the accuracy of fluoroscopy, aging, and sexing techniques used in this study reveal that these are well within reasonable limits. ��- 59 - Investigation of the Arkansas Valley Wintering Goose Flock Jack R. Grieb and Mitchell G. Sheldon INTRODUCTION: Background and need for this study is given in the 1957 job completion report. This year a new phase of study was initiated concerned mainly with evaluating the effect of the Two Buttes firing line on the flock, movement of birds by sex and age class, and distribution of birds throughout the flyway of this flock. By the same token, analysis of the previous years information indicated that the feeding habit portion of the study had been completed so that phase was dropped from operations during this segment. I OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine the fall movement of Canada geese into the Arkansas Valley and the size of the wintering flock. (2) To evaluate the sex and age composition of the flock through a comparison of various techniques. (3) To investigate wounding loss at Two Buttes Reservoir. (4) To evaluate the effect of hunting in the Two Buttes area on the incidence of body shot in the geese. (5) To investigate the distribution of this goose flock from Two Buttes during and after the hunting season. PROCEDURES: Techniques and procedures remained the same as reported in previous years. A complete hunter check was obtained through operation of check stations, and birds were trapped, banded, and fluoroscoped with complete records of age, sex, and number of shot kept for each bird. RESULTS: WATER, FOOD AND WEATHER CONDIT!ONS: Water levels in the major reservoirs of the Arkansas Valley were excellent for wintering geese. It is true that John Martin and Horsecreek reservoirs were very low, but geese seem to prefer this situation in John Martin, and seldom use Horsecreek regardless of water levels. Food conditions in the Valley seemed best in the Two Buttes area, but satisfactory elsewhere for geese. Food did not appear to be an influencing factor on the distribution of geese throughout the Valley. Weather conditions were considered fair for goose hunting. to be fewer storms throughout the season than in the past. There seemed Considered in total, water, food and weather conditions were satisfactory for the goose flock, and were not such that they provided an unusual influence on the number and distribution of Canada geese in the Arkansas Valley. MIGRATION MOVEMENT AND WINTERING POPULATION: Three aerial censuses were used to determine the Canada goose movement into, and wintering popUlation of, the Arkansas Valley - (Table 1). These flights were coordinated with similar ones in the Texas Panhandle so that it was possible to determine the status of the entire flock rather than just that portion wintering in Colorado. �- 60 - Table 1 -- Aerial Canada Goose Counts, Arkansas Valley, Colorado, by dates, 1960-61 Reservoir Meredith Henry Dyes Holbrook Horsecreek Blue Cheraw Eads John Martin Bonny Dam Rutherford Carey Arkansas River Two Buttes TOTAL November 22 December 7-11 January 4-5 3,645 35 15 20 100 8,055 2,000 2,655 5,375 2,290 150 1,100 75 8,400 2,525 155 3,200 150 9,775 30,635 11,000 29,730 2,300 10,740 5,500 100 100 65 12,200 31,360 According to ground observations, the first substantial flight of geese reached the 'I'wo Buttes area on November 8, and rapidly increased to their wintering population level during the next several days. Results of the three surveys show little change in numbers from November 22 to the January inventory. Undoubtedly there was movement into the area during this time, some of which replaced those birds harvested while others continued on into the Texas Panhandle. Comparison of January inventory information for this Canada goose flock, in Table 2, shows a decrease of about 6,000 birds this year. However, this does not indicate a flock decrease since a larger number of birds were found wintering in Texas. Actually, when comparing total flock counts, it is found that this flock probably contained more birds this past season throughout the entire winter range than ever before (estimated at 97,000). Table 2 -- January Inventory of Canada Geese, Arkansas Valley, Colorado, 1948-1961 Year Goose Count Year Goose Count Year Goose Count 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 4,798 12,286 13,170 19,320 30,463 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 20,236 20,280 25,110 24,212 24,617 1958 1959 1960 1961 35,894 44,660 37,394 31,360 HUNTER HARVEST: Check stations were operated again this year in the Two Buttes management area. This permitted collection of a variety of information relating to harvest and hunting pressure. Tabulation of this information reveals that 6,387 hunters took 1,344 geese during the season of which 612 (45.5%) were adults, and 732 (54.5%) were birds-of-the-year. Table 3 compares the current goose harvest in the Arkansas Valley with the seven-year average indicating a harvest during the past year which is close �- 61 - to the average. Baca County, which harvest is furnished by Two Buttes, again accounted for almost half of the total Arkansas Valley harvest, further emphasizing the value of this area to geese, and to goose hunters. Table 3 -- Goose Harvest in the Arkansas Valley, by County. Seven-year Average, 1954-59, 1960-61, Based on Results of Random Survey. Number and Percent of Geese Bagged 7-year average 1960-61 County Lakes No. No. % % Baca Kiowa Prowers Bent Crowley Pueblo Huerfano Otero Las Animas TOTAL Two Buttes Eads and Blue 'I'woButtes and Eads John Martin, Blue, and Horsecreek Meredith and Henry 6,969 2,093 2,073 51.5 15·5 15·3 6,123 1,815 2,246 44.9 13·3 16.5 1,267 610 91 130 9.4 l~.5 0·7 1.0 1,907 462 92 14.0 3.4 0·7 54 13,522 0.4 100% 246 13,629 1.8 100% Horsecreek, Cheraw group, Dyes, and Holbrook Table 4 lists goose hunting season statistics for the past seven years indicating that despite the lowest stamp sales of the entire period, the number of goose hunters remained only slightly lower than the record year of 1958. This points out that despite a rather poor duck season, hunters continued to enjoy the goose season the same as during periods of good duck hunting and high duck stamp sales. Obviously, duck hunting and goose hunting can be classified as independent of each other. Year 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 Table 4 -- Goose Hunting Season Statistics 1954-1960 Arkansas Valley Estimated Average Stamp goose season Estimated Dates of Season Sales hunters bag kill 11/1 12/30 32,450 1.04 7,071 7,372 11/1 12/30 1.54 39,107 9,054 13,904 11/9 1/7 36,303 1.05 9,833 10,276 11/2 12/31 41,794 1.39 9,113 12,656 11/17 1/15 41,897 1.51 10,082 15,205 10/26 - 1/8 31,431 1.61 8,888 18,109 10/26 - 1/8 30,592 1.39 9,838 13,629 WOlJNDINGLOSS: Again estimated by three methods as follows: (1) Small game hunter survey indicated a loss of 20.7 per cent of the total duck harvest mortality; (2) check station information permits calculation of loss on the firing line of 9·7 per centj and (3) the dead goose count along the lake shore (257 dead birds) estimates wounding loss at about 17 per cent. It is believed �- 62 - that the check station count is low probably because the hunters are beginning to condition their answers so as not to reflect on the firing-line type of hunting. Also, the random survey information is undoubtedly slightly high. Considering all of the surveys it is believed that the actual wounding loss would be in the vicinity of 15 per cent. BAND RECOVERY INFORMATION: More than 7,000 Canada geese have now'been banded at Two Buttes Reservoir since 1951. Usually this section of the report would list recovery information from this banding by state and county. This year, however, a comprehensive listing will not be made because a switch in analysis procedures from McBee cards punched from information received on flimsy reports to a copy of the IBM master deck at the Bird Banding Office in Patuxent is in process. This deck has not been received in time for this writing and analysis will have to be postponed until the next progress report. SPECIAL BANDING INVESTIGATION: This year a great deal of emphasis was placed on trapping, banding, and 'fluoroscoping geese at intervals throughout the fall and winter season. Table 5 lists the number of birds banded by interval. The total of 1,996 geese banded does not include 113 geese placed in the cripple pen which were in poor shape when captured. These birds were banded but not considered a part of the sample since it was believed that they were unduly attracted to the baited area because of their inability to fly away from the reservoir to feed. Preliminary analysis of information gathered during this interval has yielded some interesting and thought-provoking information. It is presented under appropriate sub-headings in the following: Table 5 -- Two Buttes Banding Results by Interval: 1960-61 Interval Date 1/ Number of Birds 1 11-21-1960 11-29-1960 12-09-1960 12-19-1960 12-29-1960 1-14-1961 278 245 171 225 439 638 1,996 2 3 4 5 6 TOTAL Date when most birds banded. Sometimes birds banded day previous or day after date listed. Especially true of Interval 6, after hunting season banding. AGE AND SEX COMPOSITION: Age determination of all geese banded was by notched tail-feather method, double checked by cloacal examination. Sexing was by cloacal examination. Table 6 compares the per cent of young between the banded and checked bag (check station) samples revealing considerable difference between the two. Therefore, it is possible that either one or both methods are biased to some degree. Consideration of sampling techniques for each method indicate that �- 63 - check station information may be a more valid measure of age composition for the Two Buttes wintering goose population for the following reasons: 1. It is believed that firing-line harvest has less tendency to be selective by age or sex than other harvest methods, and there is better opportunity for an adequate sample of age eLas ses, since all geese pass over the firing line. 2. Trapping was confined to one spot of the reservoir shore. Birds were baited to this area, and there is a distinct chance that for any particular instant in which the net was fired, the baited area could have been occupied by a population of geese which were not representative of the entire population. This was especially noticeable in the first catch when 80 per cent of birds trapped were adults, and a majority of these males. It is likely that these were a group of sub-adults which definitely resulted in a biased age sample for that catch. Considering all these things points out the need for investigation into the reliability of the banded sample as a measure of the age ratioj or, the possibility of a differential migration between family groups and yearlings through or into the Two Buttes area. Table 6 Datel/ Age Composition of the Two Buttes Reservoir Canada Goose Flock, 1960-61, as Estimated by Banding and Check Station Results. Banded Sample Check Station Per cent Total Per cent Total young birds young birds 11-8 to 11-25 11-26 to 12-4 12-5 to 12-41 12-15 to 12-24 12-25 to 1-8 1-11 to 1-15 TOTALS 1960 1960 1960 1960 1961 1961 20.1 26·5 28·7 40.9 48.5 44.2 37·9 278 245 171 225 439 638 1,996 55·9 62.0 43 ·5 59.8 535 295 239 199 76 54.5 1,344 35·5 ?J Trapping and banding generally took place in the middle of each date interval listed above except the first (11-21-60) and the fifth (12";29-60). Not a satisfactory sample. All information on sex ~atios was derived from the banding operation. In the light of information distovered in the age analysis the following may be open to question. However, there is no reason to suspect that the sex composition is out of proportion and certainly calculation of the per cent males and females for each of the banding intervals indicat.es an evenly balanced sex ratio, Table 7. �- 64 Table 7 -- Sex Composition of the Two Buttes Reservoir Canada Goose Flock, 1960-61 Interval Males Per cent Females Per cent Total Per cent 1 2 3 4 5 6 157 129 98 117 ,215 331 1,047 56.5 52·7 57·3 52.0 49.0 51.9 52·5 121 116 73 108 224 307 949 43.5 47·3 42.7 48.0 51.0 48.1 47.5 278 245 171 225 439 638 1,996 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTAL FLUOROSCOPY: Total results of the fluoroscopy operation by banding interval are presented in Table 8, revealing a change in the estimate of percent of birds (both adult and juvenile) with one or more shot between intervals. Naturally there is a high difference between adults and, juveniles explained the same as in previous reports by the fact that this is the first year's hunting on juveniles while adults have been subjected to two or more years depending upon their age. Table 8 -- Per cent of Birds with Shot, by Age Class and Banding Interval, 1960-61 Banding Interval Age Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total A.dult No. birds % with shot 222 56.8 180 57.8 122 54.1 133 54.9 226 64.6 356 62.6 1,239 59·6 278 50.4 245 48.6 171 49·1 225 45.3 439 51.3 638 51.6 1,996 50.1 . 1/ Juvenile No. birds % with shot Y Birds of-the-year. Much effort has been made in the past to determine a .method of measuring hunting pressure by means of the per cent of birds in the population carrying shot. It is my opinion that this may not be a valid criterion since the per cent carrying shot may, and probably does, depend on a number of different factors each of which singly or in combination act to change the per cent of total birds carrying shot independently of the hunting pressure. Some of these are listed as follows: 1. Age composition of the population. If each age class component of the population is present in the same proportion year after year then age composition will have little effect. However, if breeding success is sporadic with varying size yearling populations entering the population universe year after year then it is obvious that the per cent of total adults with shot will vary from year to year and valid yearly comparisons can not be made. �2. To eliminate the potential error in number I, it would be necessary to confine all analysis to birds-of-the-year or juveniles. But here again the size of the crop may have important bearing on the per cent carrying shot since the larger the crop with a stable hunting pressure, the less probability of the birds with shot. Thus a measure of age composition of the flock along with annual production would seem necessary to ad.equately make fluoroscopy a workable technique. DISTRIBUTION OF FLOCK HUNTING PRESSURE: One of the prime motives for increasing the banding effort was to establish, if possible, the effect of the firing line at Two Buttes on this goose flock. Actually, in considering the information, it is recognized that it is not possible to separate the firing line from the surrounding area thus inferences made must include the Two Buttes area in general. Two methods were used to make these estimates. 1. Juvenile met.hod. Figure 1 graphs the regression lines of the per cent of adults and juveniles carrying shot by interval. Since the intervals are representative of 10 days and interval 1 is correspondent to November 21, further that the geese entered the area about November 8, then interval 0 will approximate the per cent of juveniles carrying shot on arrival in the Two Buttes area. Thus, substitution in the juvenile prediction equation Ye := 2.9x + 21.7 estimates that about 22 per cent of the juveniles were carrying shot upon entrance into the area. This number subtracted from the per cent of juveniles with shot after the hunting season (39%) allows an estimate that about 17 per cent acquired shot in the Two Buttes area. Further, that the Two Buttes area contributed a little less than half of the shot to the juvenile class while other areas contributed more than half. 2. Adult method. This method requires that a measure of per cent of adults with shot be made at the beginning of the hunting season at Two Buttes, and after the hlmting season each year. Then the post hunting season rate of the previous year compared with the pre season rate of the present year determines the per cent of adult birds which acquired shot in the interim between the two measures. This method is based on the premise that birds-of-the-year are counted as adults in the post season banding results so that the difference between this rate and the adult rate in the pre season banding in Colorado should estimate the per cent of new birds with shot. Results are as follows. At the close of the 1959-60 season, 44.3 per cent of all geese fluoroscoped (413) were found with one or more shot. Using the adult prediction equation (Figure 1) for the beginning of the seasonJ x=O, it is estimated that the per cent of birds carrying shot was about 53 per cent for an increase of about 9 per cent. At the close of the season in 1960-61 the per cent of adults with shot was 62 per cent, this is again an increase of 9 per cent and indicates that about half the total increase in shot occurs in Colorado when the birds are wintering here. This is very close to the estimate by the juvenile method. Consideration of both methods leads to the conclusion that less than half of the birds newly acquiring shot, during the past season, at least, wer-e shot at Two Buttes, with more than half receiving their shot prior to their arrival at Two Buttes. Actually this compares very favorably with band. recovery information. As previously indicated, current data have not been analyzedj however, analysis from 1951 through 1959 have indicated. that of the total returns for that interval, almost 53 per cent were from Canada, and about 29 per cent were from Colorado. �Figure 1 -- Regression of Per cent Length of Season. of Birds with One or More Embedded Shot with Per cent of birds with shot 70 Ye = 1.5x Adult + 53.4 J/ 60 50 Ye=2.9 Juvenile 40 x +21.7 ~I 30 20" 10 1 2 4 3 Banding Interval 0\ 0\ �It is difficult to compare the 29 per cent band recoveries to the 40 to 45 per cent of birds with shot since (a) Colorado recovery rates have varied from about 20 to 40,1 per cent throughout the years, thus it is necessary to compare this per cent with the Colorado per cent of band recoveries for the year in question; and (b) the per cent of band recovery rate is a fixed entity since the bands were placed on the previous year. On the other hand, the per cent of birds carrying shot is an increasing figure and only those birds staying in the Two Buttes area all fall and winter are subject to change according to the Two Buttes pressure. Considering all of these things it is believed that these preli.minary data do not reveal that birds in the Two Buttes area are receiving proportionately more hunting pressure than other parts of the flyway, thus it is felt that the firing line and the surrounding area are not detrimental to this flock. INDICATED ACCURACY OF SEXING, AGING, AND FLUOROSCOPING CANADA GEESE: The information for this section is definitely limited, but is included since it d.oes list information pertinent to the accuracy of this work. A total of 81 birds were captured twice throughout the trapping season when and comparing the results of both times the birds were handled it was found that: (1) Two of 81 birds were sexed differently between times. Since there was a 50-50 chance of being wrong it is estimated that the error is 1/81, or about one per cent, (2) Three of 81 birds were aged differently between times. Again a 50-50 chance of being right or wrong and the error is estimated at 1.5/81, or about t.woper cent. (3) Considering whether a bird did, or did not have shot it was found that eight of 81 birds "were'Bwitched 'between the two observations. Again there is a 50-50 chance of being right so that the error is estimated at 4/81 or about five per cent. (4) In determining differences in number of shot per bird (much more difficult than (3) above) a difference was found in 13 of the 81 birds examined more than once. Thus the error is estimated at 7.5/81 or about nine per cent. Since catagory (4) has not been found to be useful in present analysis work it has little bearing on the accuracy of data presented. The rest are considered to be well within the limits of accuracy. RECOMMENDATIONS: Obviously, this study is beginning to produce some extremely important information. The very fact that it appears that the firing line does not place an excess burden on the population is wor'bhwhLLe management information. This must, however, be checked! In addition, other related stud.ies should be initiated so that management of this flock can be improved. The following are the recommendations for the 1961-62 season. 1. Three banding efforts should be made during this season. a. At least 500 birds should be trapped, banded, and fluoroscoped as soon as possible after they have arrived in Colorado. �b. At least 500 bi.rd should be trapped, banded., and fluoroscoped about the second week of December. c. At least 500 birds should.be trapped, 'banded, and fluoroscoped after the hunting season. 2. Check station information should.be mai.ntained on total harvest by age class. In addition, a measure of hunting pressure should be obtained by estimating the number of shots fi.red each day, 3. We must inititate investigation into the reliability of the bait trapping technique. This is a horse~after-the-cartproposi.tionJ but it is highly important, wtJ. the longer we wait the more important it becomes. 4. We must study other segments of the Arkansas Valley flock to determine if the information we ascertain at Two Buttes is applicable to the rest of the area. This should be done with banding at the Eads Lakes after the hunting season to start with, and perhaps expanded to other areas later if necessary. 50 We must continue to cooperate with the Cooperative Goose Flock Investigation of the Central Flyway so that we can d.etermine the annual status of this flock and its distribution between Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Nebraska. Prepared by: Jack Ro Grieb Leader, Waterfowl Project Mitchell G.Sheldon SeriiorGame Biologist Date: October, 1961 Approved by: Laurence E. Ri.ordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �October, 1961 - 69 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------------------------------- Project No. W-95-R-4 Investigations of Diseases and Parasites Affecting Game Animals Study of Lung Nematodes of Bighorn Sheep Job No. 1 Job No. l-a Period Covered: March 1, 1959 to February 28, 1960 Experimental transmission of lungworm infection Abstract: Experimental transmissions of lungworm were attempted to determine the interval of time between exposure to infection and clinical detection of the infection (prepatent period), the duration of the infection, and the effects of varying intensities of the infection upon the host. The method used in attempting artificial infections consisted of rearing the first-state lungworm larvae to the infective stage in suitable intermediate host snails. Infective larvae were dissected from the snail and administered orally either sheathed in their shed cuticles or unsheathed, or they were injected unsheathed and in saline solution intravenously or intraperitoneally. Periodic fecal analysis was used to indicate infection when first-state larvae could be demonstrated. Infection of the rabbit was verified by examination and dissection of the lungs following sacrifice of the animal and revealing the adult parasites. Infection of a domestic rabbit via the intraperitoneal route demonstrated that it was possible to establish an infection by all of the methods tried. Attempted infection of a hybrid (bighorn-domestic) and a moufflon ram was unsuccessful. Objectives: The ultimate objective is the best possible control or management of lungworm disease and associated pneumonia through a better understanding of the epizootiological factor. More specific objectives are: 1. Determination of prepatent period (interval of time between exposure and the appearance of first stage larvae in the feces) should be made as accurately as possible because such information would allow us to time the acquirement of infection in wild populations particularly for young animals, and would also indicate the necessary length of quarantine necessary to detect infection. �- 70 - 2. Determination of period of patency (duration of infection) to learn to what extent the problem is one of reinfection or cumulative infection. This would indicate the time necessary to develop a lungworm-free herd through eliminating danger of reinfection. 3. Record any observations which may have bearing on resistance or susceptibility to infection. 4. Study the effects of varying intensity or duration of lungworm infection with associated symptoms, gross lesions and histo-pathology (where possible) in experimental animals. 5· Eventually to test possible treatments or chemotherapeutic agents which may be indicated in the literature. �":" 71 - Experimental Transmission of Lungworm Infection Richard E. Pillmore Artificial transmission of a parasite from an infected host animal tio an uninfected one is important in demonstrating the complete life cycle of the parasite. Artificial transmission studies also provide a means for det.ermining the time required for the parasite to complete its various stages of development, and for studying the duration and effects of infections varying in their intensity. The lungworms of bighorn sheep were studied first because of their association with mortality of the bighorns. Two species of Protostrongylus are found inhabiting the lungs of the bighorns in Colorado. They are P. stilesi and P. rushi, and of the two P. stilesi is the most prevalent. Since no uninfected bighorn sheep were available for transmission studies it was necessary to find either an alternant host for this species or depend upon other species of the genus Protostrongylus and their respective hosts for transmission studies. Studies of land snails as the intermediate hosts for these lungworms has shown that the snail species which were found suitable for one were suitable for all of the species of Protostrongylus. Furthermore, the larvae of all the species developing within these snails were so similar all through their development that they could not be distinguished from each other with any reliable degree of certaility. Infected lungs wherein the identity of the adult parasites could be identified were used as a source for the first-stage larvae of the following species of ProtostrongylUs: P. stilesi from bighorn sheep, P. rushi also from bighorn sheep was never found independently from F. stilesi~ P. sylvilagi from Nuttalls' cottontail, P. boughtoni from snowshoehares, and P. macrotis from mule deer. The snail hosts were exposed to the first-stage larvae recovered from the infected lungs in Sarayuse staining dishes. The larvae which succeeded in establishing themselves in the snail tissues were allowed to develop to the infective-stage larvae which are characterized by being doubly encased, first in a dark brown striat.ed covering, then a thin clear one. Both coverings are derived from shed cuticles, and the anterior ends are open. Larvae have been administered to the experimental hosts while still in the snail host, after being dissected from tihe snail but still ensheathed in their cuticular coverings, or after removal from the ensheathing cuticles by gentle manipulation of a microscope slide cover-slip to force the larvae from t.he coverings into water. Unsheathed larvae were administered to the experimental hosts orally in water, or were injected (intravenous or intraperitoneal) in saline. Periodic collection and examination of fecal pellets for first-stage larvae were made and in rabbits all of the infections were confirmed by examination and dissection of the lungs after sacrifice of the host. The results of all of the artificial transmission attempts are tabulated in Table 1. �- 72 - Table 1. Results of Attempted Infection of Experimental Hosts with Lungworm Experimental Hosts Lungworm Species Total Attempts Successful Attempts Hybrid sheep P. stilesi 8 1 Dom. sheep P. stilesi 2 0 Dom. goat P. stilesi 3 0 Moufflon P. stilesi 1 0 Dom. rabbit P. stilesi 16 (4)* Dom. rabbit P. sylvilagi 10 3 Ad. cottontail P. sylvilagi 9 5 Dom. rabbit P. boughtoni 4 0 Ad. cottontail P. stilesi 2 0 Mule deer P. macrotis 5 3 * On four occassions nestling rabbits were given injections of infective larvae of P. stilesi, first-stage larvae were not found in the fecal, samples checked, adult worms were not found in the lungs, yet first-stage larvae were found when the lungs were Baermanized. With respect to the possible infection of nestling domestic rabbits with P ..stilesi it was hoped that .addf.t.Lona'L attempts could be made to confirm the Infections. The New Zealand white rabbits were used as before but all litters were lost to cannibalism of the females which in some cases had in the past raised litters. Since I was unable to expose nestlings to P. stilesi larvae, I divided the infective larvae of P. sylvilagi, on hand, into four lots and administered approximately 25 to each of four of the adult rabbits by intraperitoneal injection. All four rabbits were latter sacrificed and infection was demonstrated in one, by a single adult worm. Two sheep were also exposed to artificial infection during 1959. One was ahybl'id ram, born in 1955 to one of the half-breed ewes at the Cheyenne Mount~in Zoo, and the other a moufflon ram loaned by the zoo. The hybrid ram received approximately 73 injected into the juglar vein and 40 given orally on Sept,ember 10, 1959 and an assistant reported larvae in two fecal samples collected on October 15th and 28thj however, I was not able to confirm this in Latie r samples and it is not included as a successful attempt. The moufflon received 92 larvae by injection into the juglar vein and 52 orally which were still in the snail tissues. �- 73 - Regardless of the route of larval administration to the experimental hosts, whether oral, intravenous or intraperitoneal or whether the larvae were unsheathed, sheathed or st.ill in the snail for the oral route, infections have resulted in at least one animal. The shortest prepatent period observed was for P. sylvilagi in the domestic rabbit infected via the intravenous route and this-was only 21 days. For P. macrotis in deer it was between 40 and 54 days and for P. sylvilagi in the-Audubons' cottontail between 35 and 54 days where all infections were via the oral route. There remains much that could be done to develop a more complete picture of lungworm transmission, and certainly transmission studies are needed to determine the effects of lungworm infections. In all of my work the infections were light and the defense mechanism of encapsulating and calcifying the adult worms in the lungs was observed in some of the rabbits which had been infected. ) Prepared by: Date: Richard E. Pillmore October, 1961 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz -=~~~~~~~~~--~~ Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1961 :.. 75 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ------~~~~~------------ Project No. W-95-R-4 Investigations of Disease and Parasites Affecting Game Animals Job No. 1 Study of Lungliematod-es·9J Bighorn~Shee1l Job No. l-b Study of lungworm infection trends in sheep Period Covered: March 1, 1959 to February 28, 1960 Abstract: A.modified Baerman technique for the recovery and enumeration of first-stage larvae is described. The improved accuracy over a direct Baermanization of the material is discussed. It was surprising that larval counts from fecal material stored over a year by the modified technique gave higher yields than original analyses made when the material was relatively fresh. Objectives: 1. Establishment of a standard technique for the indirect determination of trend in the intensity of lungworm infection in bighorn sheep herds. 2. Modification of Baerman or ZN SO 4 flotation techniques to obtain a better, more efficient quantitative method for lungworm study. ��-- 77- Study of Lungworm Infection Trends in Sheep Richard E. Pillmore Throughout the study of lungworms of the genus Protostrongylus an indirect ,means of measuring and evaluating the prevalence and intensity of the infection among bighorn sheep was sought. It was assumed that some relationship must exist between the intensity of the infection and the discharge of the firststage lungworm larvae in the feces of the infected animals. This problem was reasoned to be primarily one of finding suitiab.Le methods of recovering and enumerating these larvae from the various samples of fecal material, for comparison of the individuals or groups sampled. A suitable technique would enable game managers to adjust hunting pressures tio the trend of the infection in each herd. In addition to benefitting the management of oighorns directly, the technique would be .of considerable value to the study of lungworms. As a result of the initial research the problem has been found to be morecomp.lexthanoriginally expected and has shown the need for more basic information of the biology of the larvae and their production and movements within the ho..st. Results have been encouraging too. Initially several techniques were tried for demonstrating the presence of first-stage larvae in the feces, but the Baerman technique seemed the most promising and practical means of 'processing a numoer of samples. Through a process of gradual modification to increase the efficiency of t.he larval recovery thetechnique'evalved to the following procedure. 1. Collect samples consisting of approximately 20 pellets and only from freshly deposited pellet groups. The samples may be placed in suitable containers, such as paper bags for each sample on which the locality, date of collection, and comments regarding the conditions or the source animal may be written. Polethelene bags or other containers may be used. 2. Transport and store samples collected in paper bags dry and not exposed to extremes of temperature. Samples collected in polyethelene bags should be stored fresh without drying in the freezer. 3. Prepare all samples by air drying at room temperature to reduce weight variation to a minimum. 4. Weigh samples to the nearest tenth of a gram. This will permit results to be expressed either as larvae per gram or as larvae per fecal pellet. 5. Soften the sample in approximately 50 ml of 0.3 normal sodium hydroxide solution contained in a 200 ml Erlenmeyer flask for about two hours. 6. Mi.x and throughly comminute the sample by shaking with glass beads or beating it up with a rotary beater as blender. �- 78 - 7· Increase the volume of the sample to 200 ml, shake throughly and then withdraw a one-tenth alequot by means of a suitable pipette. I used a 10 ml pipette with a quarter-inch orifice and fitted with a rubber bulb. Two 10 ml alequots were then withdrawn for the one-tenth alequot of the sample. 8. Filter the alequot onto a moistened, cotton filter pad cut to fit a porcelain filter funnel (60 mm in diameter) attached to an evacuated filter flask. When there was sufficient vacuum pressure the moistened cotton is sufficiently cOrrJIlressed that it will trap all larvae and sediment. 9. Transfer the cottom filter pad to a supporting disc of wire mesh acout an inch from the top of the Baerman funnel which is filled nearly to the top with warm water. The stem of the funnel is closed by a piece of rubber tubing and a clamp. When the compressed cotton pad is placed in the water the pad is expanded permitting the larvae to move freely between the fibers but not the sediment. 10. Withdraw 10 ml of the water from the stem of the funnel by releasing pressure on the clamp after six hours. The 10 ml will contain the larvae. 11. Count the larvae with the aid of a suitable stero-microscope and a small Petri dish with a grid etched on the bottom. If larvae are too numerous it is better to wash the larvae into a suitable graduated container or tube, adjust the volume of water in the container, shake throughly then withdraw a smaller alequot for counting. The magnification and lighting should be such that any contaminating nematode larvae can be detected and eliminated from the tally. A mechanical tally register is virtually essential in counting since it can be used without interruption of the visual ~c~ivity of counting. Some experience is necessary for recognizing Protostrongylus first-stage larvae and distinguishing them from Dictyocaulus and other nematode larvae which might be encountered. Results obtained by the use of this procedure were generally better and more consistent than were obtained by any other method tried. Fecal sarrJIlles were collected frequently over a period of several months from two penned bighorn ewes during 1958. These samples consisted of more than the recommended 20 pellets and after analysis by direct Baermanization of twenty pellet samples drawn from the sample, the balance of the sample was preserved and stored in paper bags packed into cardboard cartons. When some of this material was checked by the modified technique a year or more later I was surprised to find that the larval counts were actually higher than when the material was relatively fresh. For cOrrJIlarison these results are plotted in the following graph. �- 79 - •. (20) /\ i \• 600 I I _. \. . ..- ... \. / ,,... ... . ••• e •••• \ .:,. : / ••• : o \ -, 0 / •: 21) ./ .: o (13) • \ \(13) • /(7) 300 • .0 .' ... , I I I ••0 .• ' 200 ... • JOO' .0 I I •..•.•• 100 • o " ----,' (82) I , I •• , , I •• (23j--- ' ,,'113) " .~--r---------.~--------~--------~.--------~-FEB. JAN. MAR. APR. Figure 1. Average Numbersof Larvae per Fecal Pellet for Samples Collected in 1958 from two Penned Bighorn Ewes. _____ ___ -1958 Analyses by direct Baerman technique 1959 Analyses by modified Baerman technique (dry) ..---.-. 1959 Analyses by modified Baerman technique (frozen) of all analyses regardless f····· .• Average analysis. of method and time of �-.80 Not all of the samples collected in 1958 were analysed in 1958 and for all of the samples which were analysed in 1958 there was not a corresponding sample for 1959 analysis. In addition to the samples which had been stored in paper bags in a dry condition there were also some samples which had been collected in 1958 which had been stored wet and frozen in polyethelene bags. The most reasonable explanation for the higher counts obtained in the 1959 analysis is a more efficient technique for recovering and enumerating the first-stage larvae. In the Federal Aid Quarterly for July 1959 (page 88) the minimum number of fecal samples to give results within a standard deviation of the true mean 95 percent of the time was calculated to be 2,220. This result was obtained using the 1958 data for 23 consecutive samples and the formula: N =(t .(5)2" (s )2 ( .05 x) 2 Assuming that the large value for N was due to the method of analysis an improved technique should result in a lower value for N if the 1959 analysis data were used. A. similar computation was made and the new value for N was only 53.5 when computed on the basis of the numbers of larvae per pellet, and only 37.6 when computed on the basis of the numbers of larvae per gram of air-dried fecal material. Paired samples were used to check the reliability of the modified Baerman technique as outlined. By paired samples, I mean duplicate samples from the same source, handled in the same manner, and analysed by the same technique. The average number of larvae per pellet was 327 (337 for one set and 320 for the other set) and the average difference between the counts was 18 for all the 42 pairs. In general the numerical difference was greatest when the numbers of larvae were great, but the percentage difference was greatest when the numbers of larvae were few. This suggests that the differences are the result of sampling errors but no changes in the technique are recommended with the possible exception of suggesting more care in withdrawing alequots. Paired alequots were than drawn from the samples and there was less difference than between the paired samples but the same general differences prevailed. Next, paired samples from the same source were treated differently. One member of the pair was analysed by direct Baerman technique and the other by the modified technique. The results were sometimes close and other times far apart, but generally the counts were higher with the modified technique. With fresh moist pellets the larval recovery was consistently better with the modified technique, and air-drying of the pellets before analysis was observed to increase the larval counts obtained by the direct Baerman technique. Prepared by: Date: Richard E. Pillmore October, 1961 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �October, 1961 - 81 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~~~~------------Investigations of Diseases and Proj ect No.__ ---.:W~-..:::.9..::..5_-R=_=__-4~ _ Parasites Affecting Game Animals Job No. ~l~ ~S~t~u~d~y~o~f~t~h~e~L~un~g~N~e~ma~t~o~d~e~s~o~f~B~i~g~h~o~r~n~S _ Job No. l-c Study of the Incidence of Infection and Environmental Relationships in Snail Hosts. Period Covered: March 1, 1959 to February 28, 1960 Objectives: 1. To determine the incidence of residual or natural infection in snails. 2. To learn more of the environmental requirements of lungworm transmission. 3. To determine the effectiveness of metaldehyde-aerosol spray as a killing agent under field or similar test field conditions. 4. To use the resulting information in predicting the course of infection or in exerting some measure of control. Studies of the naturally infected snails at Glen Eyrie in El Paso County where bighorns have been coming down to feed upon the lawns for several years revealed 87 infected snails among the 549 which were collected and examined for infection. This is an incidence of about 16 per cent in contrast to an incidence of only 1 per cent in 1958 and 31 per cent in 1957. Among the 87 infected snails five were examined which contained the characteristic cuticular sheaths which normally encase the infective larvae b·ut they were empty of any larvae. Laboratory infections of snails have indicated that the infective larvae remained ensheathed and within the snails for as long as a year. Since five snails would represent about 1 per cent of the 1959 collection and the incidence of infection in 1958 was 1 per cent, this segment of the infected snails would appear to be a carry-over from 1958. If so this would indicate that the winter of 1958-1959 was a fa.vorable one with respect to the survival. of these snails. �- 82 - COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. - WEATHER 1957 NORMAL 80 70 W a:: => 60 le:! a:: 50 w o, ~ 40 W I- 20~--~--~--~--~--~ '1959 1958 80 w a:: ::::> le:! 60 a:: W o, ~ w I- 20~--~--~--~--~--~ o 2 PRECIPITATION 3 4 5 o 2 3 PRECIPITATION 4 5 �- 83 - April and May of 1959 were relatively wet months and this period of above normal moisture was initiated with a heavy snow beginning on the 7th of April. The high incidence of infected snails in 1957 was attributed to above normal moisture conditions in April and May of that year which was also characterized by a heavy April snow storm. The importance of moisture in the i.nfection of the snails is also born out in the laboratory. All the evidence indicates that the snail infections are the result of the contamination of the lawns with the droppings of the infected bighorns followed by favorable moisture conditions. For the Glen EyTiearea both 1957 and 1959 were favorable years because of the moisture conditions during April and May. Prepared by Date R~i~c_h~a_r~d_·~E~,. __P_i_l_lm __o_r_e _ Approved by ~O~c.:::..t::::.ob:::..e:::::r~, -'1:;..9"'6::.;:l=-_ Laurence E.o Riordan Assist.ant Director, Research FerdCo Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordl~'n-a-t~o-r----- ��Oct.ober, 1961 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~~~----------Investigations of Diseases and Project No. W-95-R-4 Parasites Affecting Game Animals. Job No. ~l~ ~S~t~u~d~y_o~f~t~h~e~L~un=.~g~N~e=ma=·~t~o~d=e~s_~o~f~B~. ~iggh~o~rn~~S~h~e~e~p~ Job No. ~l~-_d=_ ~c~o~mp~a~r~a~t~i~v~e~s~t~u~d=l=·e~s~o=f~i=n=f~e~c~t~i~o~n~i in wild and laboratory populations. Period Covered: March, 1959 - March, 1960 but with some notes on the bighorns transfered to Cheyenne Mt. Zoo subsequent to March 4, 1960 when project was terminated. Abstract: The objectives have been to determine the frequency of occurrence, geographic distribution, variations in intensity, duration, and the effects of lungworm infections. These objectives have been directed toward the better understanding of the role played by lungworm in disease mortality of bighorn sheep. The principal method employed has been the examination of lungs of bighorn sheep and other animals for lungworms of the genus Protostrongylus and ~or any pathology associated with, or independent, of lungworm infections. Bighorn sheep have also been observed for any symptoms of illness which might be correlated with such infections. Eleven sets of bighorn sheep lungs collected in 1959 and the remaining lungs from the 1958 collection from the Buffalo Peaks were examined. This brings the tot.al number of lungs examined by me to 121, of which all but three have been infected with lungworms. The intensity of the infections found have varied considerably. Since this is a final completion report .on this project all information incidence of lungworm infection is summarized. In July, a young bighorn ram died at the Cheyenne Mt. Zoo. Pneumonia with extensive lung hemorrhage and only a very light lungworm infection was found on necropsy. Evidence of illness among the penned bighorn sheep at the Denver Federal Center was also found in July, this ilness was characterized by a decline in physical condition, associated with coughing and nasal discharge. When this project was tiermfnatied these three sheep were transfered to the Cheyenne Mt. Zoo where they were treated by the zoo veterinarian; however, two of these sheep eventually died in spite of the efforts t.o save them. �- 86 - In September, bighorn sheep at Glen Eyrie were observed to be coughing more than ever before, and during the next three months, eight of these sheep were found dead. Mr. George Post, of the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory, isolated two 'Pathogenic types of bacteria, a Pasteurella and a Diplococcus. Lungworm infections were also present. From necropsy observations on these dead sheep there was little evidence that lungworm infections exerted any influence in the more chronic cases which were characterized by lung abcesses; however, in the more acute cases the association of hemorrhagic or congested areas of the lungs with lungworm infected portions of the lungs suggested that the pneumonia had been enhanced in its effect by the lungworm infection. Coughing, while not a .specific symptom of lungworm infection, is a symptom of respiratory infection or irritation. Therefore, it is recommended that this symptom be given consideration in the management of bighorn sheep; for instance, trapping for transplantation to new areas should be discontinued when there is much coughing. George Post, former director of the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory at Laramie, Wyoming, was studying various strains of Pasteurella from bighorn sheep and had prepared a vaccine. The use of such a vaccine· might be extremely valuable in protecting sheep trapped for transplanting to new areas in the future. �- 87 Comparative studies of infection intensities in wild:and.laboratory·popu:latioris Richard E. Pillmore Lungworms of oighornsheep were studied in Colorado from 1953 through 1959 when the study terminated following the loss of personnel to other agencies. The study was initiated in response to a severe die-off in the Pikes Peak and Tarryall Mountain herds of bighorns where the mortality was attributed to lungworm infection, and as the study closed the role of bacteria along with lungworm infection was being investigated in cooperation with Mr. George Post of the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission in Laramie. In the study of lungworm infections the determination of the importance of the infection is one of the first problems to be attacked because the importance may decide the justification for the study and the support needed to pursue it. The prevalence and distribution of the infection or its incidence has much to do with relative importance accorded a particular disease. Incidence of Lungworm Infections With the first hunting season for bighorn sheep in Colorado in 68 years came the opportunity to get some valuable information on the incidence of lungworm infection. Dr.Lynn Griner, a veterinary pathologist at the School of Veterinary Medicine, Colorado State University at Fort Collins, Colorado made determinations of the incidence based upon slices of lung tissue submitted by the hunters. Stained sections were prepared from the lung tissues for microscopic examination. In addition to the 1953 hunting season samples, the samples collected during the 1954 and 1955 hunting seasons, ~th the exception of those from the Buffalo Peaks area, were also submitted to Dr. Griner. The results of Dr. Griners' study are presented in Table 1. From the t.able it is apparent that .all of the areas sampled except the Arkansas River Canyon are infec·tedwith lungworm. The absence of the infection in this one area or an exceedingly low incidence is confirmed by the fact that 24 samples were examined from this area. Since the number of negative samples from the Arkansas Canyon area would affect the percentage figures given in the table the samples from this area were excluded and new percentages are calculated to be as follows: 87.5 percent for 1953, 75·7 percent for 1954, and 80.9 percent for 1955. Since the Buffalo Peaks area is not represented in the 1954 and 1955 figures the figure for 1953 is not comparable, so with the elimination of this area the 1953 incidence would be about 84 percent. The difference between the three years do not show any significant trend in the incidence of the infection. In bighorn sheep lungs which have been found infected all portions of the lung will not show evidence of being infected. The actual incidence of the infection is probably greater than the information indicates, since it is based upon relatively small portions of the lung submitt.ed. Excluding the samples from the un-infected area, the Arkansas River Canyon lying north of the river and between Parkdale andCotapaxi, Dr. Griners' data suggest an incidence of 81.6 percent. My data which is more limited in scope but based upon an examination of the entire lungs in most cases is sumarized in table 2 and suggests a 100 percent incidence. �TABLE INCIDENCE HUNTING OF LUNGWORM - AREA NUMBER INFECTED PEAK 2 2 POUDRE RIVER 2 2 PEAK SOUTH 2 I PLATTE RAMPART PIKES IN COLORADO - 1954 CLARKS GEORGETOWN INFECTION 1933 FOR BIGHORN SHEEP ~:,!tEERS EMPIRE - JAM ES I NUMBER SAMPLES - 1955 NUMBER INFECTED ARKANSAS R. CANYON SANGRE DE CRISTO PONCHA PASS RANGE 4 3 5 5 3 I 2 0 3 2 2 2 2 2 6 5 I 0 7 0 5 0 12 0 3 3 5 3 3 2 2 2 BUFFALO PEAKS 9 9 KENOSHA MTS. 4 3 2 2 2 2 GLENWOOD 2 2 3 GUNNISON 3 3 8 2 6 I I I I SILVERTON I SHEEP 3 I 3 COLLEGIATE PEAKS SNOWMASS POLE 4 MT. 2 MT. CIMARRON PEAK HUMBER INFECTED 2 RANGE PEAK NUMBER SAMPLES 2 I I 2 2 47 35 42 28 33 BY: DR~ GRINER 75% - ·61% DETERMINED 52% -11 (X) (X) �.. .. : n TABLE INCIDENCE OF LUNGWORM INFECTION IN COLORADO BIGHORN SHEEP SOURCE OF LUNGS EXAMINED ARKANSAS R. CANYON BUFFALO PEAKS 1953 NUMBER INFECTED 1955 1956 1957 1958 1954 1959 TOTAL o o (0) 21 81 POUDRE RIVER 6 6 SOUTH 6 6 18 7 34 PLATTE RAMPART 4 3 GEORGETOWN BEAVER CREEK MT. 9 8 I RANGE I I EVANS PIKES 7 3 2 ( I) PEAK 2 2 II -118I EXAMINED- 121 GLENWOOD -6I OURAY INCLUDING ( ) SAMPLES EXCLUDING 3 7 34 TOTAL LUNGS. NOT INFECTED THE FROM REPORTED 2 LUNGS ARKANSAS IS ALSO TOTAL R. CANYON AREA, 100 PER CENT. 38 21 NUMBER IN TABLE I INCIDENCE. OF INFECTION OJ \0 �= 90 - In exarntru.ngthe preserved lung material which was obtained in the 1954 hunting season in the Buffalo Peaks area the lungs were sliced and the gross slices examined under magnification of a. stereo~microscope. With the cut surfaces of the slice compressed by a piece of glass after being wet with wat.er it was possible during the examination to det.ect the eggs, larvae and adults of the lungworms; however, it was so disagreeable working with this material after preservation in formalin that all subsequent lung material was collected fresh and frozen until it could be examined. Theprocedure in examtrrtng rths fresh material was first an examination of the surface of the lung for lesions» followed by dissection of the Lungs, and. finally a portion from the tip of the diaphragmatic lobe was chopped or ground and placed Ln a Baerma.na.pparatus to recover larvae which were still alive and viable after having been frozen in the lungs for as long as a year . .M 8. reBul.t of examining the entire lungs differential diagnOSis of the .species of lungwormpresent were made as well as variation in the intensities of the infections noted. Protostrongylus stilesi was demonstrated in all of the infected lungs exami.ned,'BJid'in 19:r:nstances a concurrent infection was demonstrated for :P, rushi In one instance Dictyocaulus filaria was found with both species of Prot:OStr'ongylus 'I'he areas from w~P. rushi infected. lungs were obta.:r:ned. are as follows: Cashe la Poudre River herd where 6 of the six examined were infected., South Platte River herd above Waterton where 6 of the six samples examined were infected, Pikes Peak herd where only 1 of seven examined was infected., Rampar-tRange herd where 50f six were infected, and the Ouray herd where the only set of lungs examined contained the three specf.es mentioned above. : o 0 The classification of e relative intensities of the lungworm infection has been arbitrary and i.n accord nee with the three classes diagramed in Figure L, The classi.fication of light wi.ll include all infections up to that il1u.strated and is characteri.zed primarily in having all lesions restrict.ed to the posterior tip of the diaphragmati.c lobe. A moderate classification will have more of the posterior tip of the diaphragmatic lobe solidified by the lungwormlesions and in ad .:i.tion will usua.LLyexhibi.t small lesions less than one--hajr i.nch in diameter along t.he dors ,1. margin. A heavy i.nfection approximates or exceeds ini.ntensi ty that illustrated, but only one or t.wo lungs were seen which exhibited well defi.ned lesi.ons involving more of the Lung surface than indicated in the i.llustration. Most lungs have exhibited well defi.ned lesions and can be sort.ed according to these classes; however, diffuse or more general i.nfecti.ons have been encountered which compl.icat.e the separati.onbutbecau.se more lung tissue is i.nvolved the diffuse infections are cla.ssifi.ed a.s heavy. The samples cl.assified for the 1954 collections from the Buffa.lo Peaks area were based upon the distribution of the l.esions apparent in the photographs of the gross slices and were classified as follows: 10 li.ght, 15 moderate J and 3 heavy. Based upon the fresh lung ma.terial examined su:bsequent to 1954 from the Buffalo Peaks area the mat.er.ial is classIfied as follows: 19 light., 14 moderate, and 2 heavy. In contrast to this J six sets of lungs from Pikes Peak were classified as follows: 0 light, 1 moder-at.e,and. 5 heavy. From the Cache 180 Poudr-eRiver herd and the South Platte herd all were classified as moderate though some bordered on the upper li.mit. �CLASSIFICATION OF LUNGWORM INTENSITY IN BIGHORN SHEEP: , ~ I • •t MODERATE LI GHT LUNG INFECTIONS » HEAVY �DISTRIBUTION OF LUNGWORM fNFEC TION IN BI GHORN SHE EP .FoirF::;r··_·· - ••-::.~~ ~ j :0 'iB �- 93 - The use of fecal analyses for determining the incidence of infection is not so reliable as the use of lungs. For example, in the Buffalo Peaks area 178 of 234 samples examined by a direct Baerman technique were positive. While the incidence from lung examination was 100 percent, the incidence by fecal analysis was only about 76 percent. In 1954, during the hunting season the hunters were asked to submit fecal samples along with the lung samples. Fifteen of the sixteen samples analysed were positive for lungworm larvae. The negative sample corresponded to a lung sample which Dr. Griner found infected, and two of the positive fecal samples corresponded to lung samples in which no evidence of lungworm was found. Fecal samples have also indicated that lungworm infection does exist in the bighorn herd along the Green River in Dinosaur National Monument. Experiences With Captive Bighorns A. captive lamb, called "Rocky", was raised at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo with a domestic goat as a foster mother. The excellent growth of this lamb and the fact that it was infected with lungworm has been reported in the Colorado Federal Aid Quarterly for July, 1959. On July 7, 1959, I received word that "Rocky" had died and went .directly to the zoo. He had died inside a rock shelter and had been dead for at least one day before he was discovered. His position when founQ was lying down against the wall with his head back over his shoulders and nose almost vertical. An autopsy was performed and a pneumonia which involved nearly all of both lungs found. There was considerable fluid and blood in the bronchi and bronchioles. This sheep was sleek and fat at the time of death. From talking with the animal keepers it was learned that about a week before his death he had been heard to cough and that the cough became progressively more noticeable, and he was not as playful as usual. Two small nodular lesions were noted near the posterior tip of the left diaphragmatic lobe which contained numbers of first-stage Protostrongylus larvae but no adult worms. No where else in the lungs could any evf.dence of infection be demonstrated. Two bighorn ewes were caught at Glen Eyrie, one on January 23, 1958 which was called "Lucy" and the other on Fecruary 4, 1958 which was called "Alice Later a yearling ram was caught from this same area and penned with the two ewes. Coughing was never observed during 1958. The first coughing observed was on July 9, 1959 when "Lucy" was observed both coughing and sneezing. (A. slight nasal discharge and some sneezing was no~ed about a month earlier among a hybrid ewe and ram in an adjacent enclosure.) On July 14 IILucy"bad a pronounced nasal discharge and seemed to experience some difficulty in breathing, at least she would stop and bob her head up and down and shake it. These head movements were very much like those of a young ram observed in the Buffalo Peaks area which had been shot through the trachea. By July 25th both of the ewes were coughing considerably, and by August 17 all three sheep were coughing and continued to cough through August and September. During the time that the coughing was observed there was also an apparent weight loss. During October and December coughing was less but the three animals continued in rather poor conditcion. On January 26, 1960 all three bighorns were moved to the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo. ll• �Here they were examined by the zoo veterinarian Dr. Arthur Hertzberger and given shipping fever bacterin and prophylactic doses of antibiotics consisting of 4,000,000 units of penicillin and 2.5 grams of streptomycin. An examination with a .stethescope revealed some consolidation in the apical lobes of the lungs of both ewes but none in the lungs of the ram. Furthermore, tfLucytfstill possesed a thick nasal discharge and a raspy noise in the throat region which was more than a normal breathing noise was detected with the stethescope. Nasal swabs were taken of each of the three animals and sent to Mr. George Post for culture. He lat.er reported that no pathogenic bacteria were cultured. In spite of the precautions taken the ram developed pneumonia about three weeks later but was apparently cured with sulfa drugs and penicillin. A. letter from Dr. Hertzberger on the 28 of March reported that one of the ewes had died (a later check at the zoo indicated that it was Alice that had died) and that the other ewe was coughing but appeared in good shape while the ram was coughing a lot, was thin, and that his chest sounded terrible. Both of the sheep he had on antibiotics. On May 10 Dr. Hertzberger, later reported that both bighorns received an injection of "Df.c byc Lde " and that the ram was in very poor condition. Both sheep were coughing and he reported the chest of the ram to sound terrible and that rales were detected on both sides for the ewe. The ram died the follOwing day and a necropsy was performed by Dr. Hert.zberger. He reported that lungworm was present and the bronchial passages were so filled with exudate that it was remarkable that the ram had been able to breath at .a.LL, A second dose of "Df.c tyc Lde was administered t.o the ewe. Coughing subsided in the ewe, she gained weight and seemedan .errt.Lr-e Ly different animal. On visiting the zoo during the summer of 1960 I found the surviving ewe again in excellent condition and at first could not be certain vhich of the ewes had survived and it was necessary to make cOliIparisonswith photographs at .alater date before I was certain that the survivor was tfLucytf. A few fecal pellets were also obtained and these also checked in size with those which were characteristic of tfLucytf, Only six fecal pellets were obtained and only this one saliIplehas been examined since the sheep were moved to the zoo, so the fact that they yielded no larvae is not conclusive proof that the infection has subsided. II Bighorn Mortality At Glen Eyrie On November 9, 1959, Mr. Don Enright, a staff member of the Navigators at Glen Eyrie, telephoned me to report that four dead bighorns had been found in.the vicinity of Glen Eyrie. This report was investigated immediately and the four dead ones were found and also one which was near death when foUp.d and died when it fell from a cliff. The first of the dead sheep was a yearling ram. This sheep was not examined in great detail because it had been .dead for several days. There was a little fat present on the brisket and in the body cavity. The air passages of the lungs contained considerable fluids. The apical, cardiac, and the anterio .. ventral portion of the diaphragmatic lobes were adhered to the thoracic wall with both soft .and fibrinous adhesions. The lungs were enlarged and. congested and lungworm infection Was demonstrated throughout the posterior tip of the diaphragmatic lobe but with no.welL defined lesions being noted. . �- 95 - A young but mature ewe was e~amined next. She had moved a few feet from a pawed out bed by a rock nean the creek where she had apparently spent .some time before death. This eweiwas badly emaciated. On necropsy The pathology seemed confined to the thoracic cavity. The entire right apical and cardiac lobes were one large abcess~containing a pint or so of creamy pus which had little odor. All of th~anterior and ventral parts of the lung were consolidated" necrotic, and contained many abcesses. The dorsal part of the lung "Waspink and spongy. Along the dorsal margin were several lungworm lesions which were well defined and nodular though most of these lesions·were near the post.erior tip of the lungs. Both Protostrongylus rushi and P. stilesi were present. No lungworms or their larvae could "be demonstrated in the consolidated portion of the lung. Not far from this ewe a lamb was found which was also emaciated. The pathology was similar to the ewe except there was no s1>ongytissue in the lung and all the abcesses were smaller, A greateramoUI).t of solidification present near the 1>osteriortip of the diaphragmatic lobes suggested lungworm infection of the diffuse type but no further examination was made becau.Qe of the decomposition which had taken place. Two other Lambs were found, one dead and the other near death. These·were transported to the .regional office in Colorado Springs for necropsy and further study. On opening the thoracic cavity, adhesions .of the apical and cardiac lobes were encountered and there was a large hemorrhagic area in the ventral part of the thorac cavity, perhaps the result of a fall or bruise. The mediastinal lymph nodes were enlarged and hemorrhagic. A large purulent abcess involved the right apical lobe. There was a red hepatization of the leftapicalanq. the cardiac lobes, and there was considerable congestion and consolidation of the d:i,.aphragmatic lobes. The posterior tip of the diaph~ ragmatic lobes were filled with lungworm eggs and larvae. This lamb was also found along the creek. Another lamb was alive when first .seen. It.s glazed;expression and·total lack of interest caused us to suspect that some~ thing was Wrong -with it, When I approached, a mature ewe -which seemed normal ran off and the lamb was reluctant to move until I got wi.thin about 30 feet. It then got to its feet and moved off rather stiffly. I noted a nasal discharge and the difficulty with which it moved down the rocks where it finally fell. This animal was not so .emacLatied at the last .and the lungs contained no abcesses J the adhesions were soft. The lungs we"reenlarged and consolidated with red hepatization of the apical, cardiac and ventral part of the diaphragmatic lobes. There was an area of extensive and intense lungworm infection at the tip of the diphragmatic lobes which was outlined from the rest of the lobe by a dark congested or hemorrhagic zone . A purulent exudate was noted in the nasopharynx. I took the lungs of this lamb since it was so fresh to Laramie where Mr. George Pos+ made inoculations of culture media. In a letter, dat.ed the 25th of November he reported that he had gotten pure cultures of a Diplococcus and lat.erthat he had recovered .a Pasteurella from the heart. �- 96 On the 29th of November, I received word that there ~~s a sick e'vre at the mouth of Queens Canyon which allowed people to "Talk up to it and pet it. This was about 4~30 pm and when I arrived there a little after 5:00 she was dead. Necropsy findings were similar to those of the lamb above' in the absence of abcesses, soft adhesions, and red hepatization of the apical and cardiac lobes. There was marked emphysema and consolidation of parts of the lung. A heavy lungworm infection was present with 'bot.hP. rushi and P. 'stilesi present. Both an adult .male and a female of P. rushl were recovered from the mouth of this ewe. The trachea and bronchi contained a bloody and frothy exudate. The heart and lungs together weighed seven pounds. Mr. Post also cultured both a Diplococcus and a Pasteurella from this lung. On December 8 a sick ram was seen by an assistant, Mr. John Goettl, but he was not able to catch it ,and lost sight of it. The same evening I located a ram with the spotting scope to the north of Glen Eyrie. It woul.d .lie down, get up, feed for a very short time than lie down again. In searching this same area on the morning of the tenth a ram was found which appeared to have been killed by a predator, probably a coyctie. The thoracic cavity was intact and the entire ventral part of this cavity was sOlidified by adhesions. The pericardium adhered to the heart on one side and the lungs on the other, and the lungs to the thoracic wall. The ap Lca.l, cardiac, and ventral part of the diaphragmatic lobes were consolidated and contained many small abcesses. The lungs and heart together weighed nine pounds. From these lungs too, Mr. Post obtained both the Diplococcus and the Pasteurella. On December 12 a ewe was found dead next to one of the buildings at Glen Eyrie and the lungs were much the same as those of the first ewe examined on the 9th of November, including the fact that the lungworm infecti.on was confined to the most normal portion of the lungs. One of the most intriguing things about the mortality of bighorns at Glen Eyrie is the fact that the symptoms and diagnosis of conditions in the penned sheep which had been separated from their mother herd for about a year for the ram and nearly two years for theewesparalled the conditions in the Glen Eyrie areadeadsheeJl. Considerable coughing was noted in bighorns at Glen Eyrie in the early part of September. The consolidation of the apical lobes in both groups of sheep, nasal discharges in both groups, and the loss of flesh in both groups certainly suggest synchronization. If this is the case it .is certainly a long term chronic infection and one which manifests itself as a result of conditions of progressive weakening f'rom paraSitism, weather, or stress of some other nature. Certainly there was no d.irect association of the lungworm infections found and the pneumon:La. �- 97 - Coughing Coughing is certainly not a s:pecific symptom of lungworm 5_nfection, but is a symptom of res:piratory infection or irritation. Prior to the occurrence of the losses at Glen Eyrie, some coughing has been observed. each year. Coughing was noticed in the fall of 1954 and seemed more:prevalent in 1955. On February 15, 1956 there was a ewe which was observed to suffer re:peated and convulsive coughing s:pasmswhile only occassionally did other shee:p cough. I had no reference to coughing in my notes for 1957j however, coughing was observed during the fall of 1958 and thes:pring of 1959. Most of the bighorns in the LadoreCanyon of the Green River were coughing, some rather' severely during June of 1959. Coughing has also been observed in the Buffalo Peaks herd but would :probably have been heard more frequently had I been able to get closer to the shee:p. Both lungworm infection and through Mr. Post, Pasteurella organisms have been found in shee:pwhich appeared :perfectly healthy. Until the:pneumonia can be re:produced experimentally through the transmission and control of lungworm, bacteria, and I suspect viruses too, we shall have to continue to s:peculate on the causes. Pre:pared by Date Richard E. Fillmore October? 1961 Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1961 - 99 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS EROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~--~~--------------- Project No. W-95-R-4 ----~~~~~------------- Investigations of Diseases and Parasites Affecting Game Animals Job No. ~2~a~b~c~ ~S~t~u~d~y~o~f~c~y~st~i~c~e~r~c~o~s~i~s~o~f~m~u~l~e~d~ _ Period Covered: March 1, 1959 to February 28, 1960 Objectives: 1. 2. 3. 4. 50 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. To ascertain the prevalence of cysticercosis in mule deer. To ascertain the prevalence of adult tapeworm in wild and domestic carnivores. To ascertain if deer and domestic sheep are infected with the same cysticerci and to what extento To determine which, and to what extent the wild or domestic carnivores harbor the adult form of Taenia krabbei. To determine what steps should be taken in the control or management of this parasite. Through a study of infected carcasses of deer, determine areas of highest incidence of infection. Determine in-so-far as possible any relationship to domestic sheep raising. Note any possible trend in hunter reaction to infections encountered in-so-far as it might affect harvest or utilization of deer as food. Obtain information on all carcasses of deer examined relative to other parasites and condition of animals. The determination of relati.ve abundance of various carnivores and to what extent each might host To krabbei, in areas where incidence of cysticercosis is greatest among deero To obtain intestinal tracts of the various carnivores and determine which are the reservoirs for cysticercosis. To make recommendations for control of cysticercosis. The study of cysticercosis was inactive during this period, but there was a positive case noted at Glen Eyrie, El Paso County, Colorado on March 27, 1959. This was in relatively old deer found near death apparem t Ly as the result of multiple parasitism. The distribution of confirmed cases of cysticercosis in the musculature of mule deer is indicated on the following page. �- 100 - On February 3, 1961 a deer which had been raised at the Denver Federal Center died and. was found infected with cysticercosis. This deer had not been intentionally exposed to infection, but a dog was infected intentionally here during 1958 when this deer was a fawn and it was probably the source of the infection. This was in spite of the fact that when the dog pen was cleaned the contents were removed from the enclosure to prevent contamination of the deer pen. Two other deer which occupied the enclosure during this same time did not become infected. Prepared Date by __ .:.:R:.::i:.::c.::h:.::a:::.r..::d:......=E:..:.-=.P:.::i:.::l:.::l:.::m::::o.::r:.::e~_ Approved by ..,----=--,-:La_ur-:--e n'"":'c-e--E...,.-.-.,;:R..:..i..:..o _ Assistant Director, Research ~o~c~t~,a~bue~r~~,~J~9~ _ 6u1 Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �The distribution of cysticercosis Colorado mule deer. in musculature of �October, 1961 - 101 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~--~--------------- Project No. Job. No. W~-~9~5~-~R~-_4 _ Investigation of Diseases and Parasites Affecting Game Animals 3 General Investigations of Diseases and Parasites ------------~------------------- Period Covered: March 1, 1959 to February 28, 1960 Objectives: 1. To investigate any report of disease out.breaks in game animals or fur bearers, and determine cause and need of further investigation. If further investigation is merited and persormel available then a separate job should be established. 2. To assemble information on the disease and parasites of game animals and the significance to game management. 3· Encourage and assist graduate students in pursu.ing disease studies which seem most important to game management. 4. To inform department persormel of disease problems and what precautions to take, in handling of animals suspected. of disease and to prescribe procedures for submitting materials for examination. Abstract: Disease conditi.ons other than lungworm have included a heavily parasitized deer from Glen Eyrie, an apparently blind elk about three miles above Tarryall Lake, and some notes on other parasites of bighorn sheep. Cooperation of Mr. George Post, of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department was greatly appreciated for the bacterial culturing and identification. The c.ooperation of Mr. Rex W. A11en~ Parasitoligist with the Agricultural Resea.rch Service and stationed at Universi'ty Park, New Mex.l.co , was obtained for identifying some of the intestinal paras Lt.es of bighorn sheep. A deer was necropsied on March 28, 1959, which was obtained from Glen Eyrie, El Paso County, Colorado. This animal was very heavily' parasitized. The winter tick Dermacentor albipictus was exceedingly numerous and estimated to be about a thousand, biting lice Damalina infested the animal to such an extent that they formed a layer near the base of the hair over much of the animals body cysticerci were numerous in the body cavity and in the musculature, sarocystis cound be found scattered through the muscles, bot fly larvae w~re recovered from the nasal passages, nasopharynx and the bronchi, lungworms, Protostrongylus macrotsi were recovered from the lungs, but there were no intestinal parasites recovered. . The pale color of the tissues indicated a marked anemia. The bone marrow was gelatinous, the lungs congested, spleen atrophied, and more than normal fluids in the pericardial and pleural cavities. �- 102 - A. cirrhosis of the liver and an enteritis with much sand and gravel present in the intestinal tract was also noted. The teeth indicated that this was an old animal and it weighed only 88 pounds. The lack of intestinal parasites might be attributed to a condition too poor to support them. A. young bull elk about 3 miles above Tarryall Lake was reported to be blind. The eyes appeared normal, the temperature immediatley after sacrificing the animal was 1000 F., there was frequent urination, clicking of teeth, and lack of coordination of movements. No abnormal conditions were noted internally. The cause of this condition was not determined but such condition could be caused by poisoning of some kind or a disease such as encephalit.is. Heads of six bighorns were examined for spinous ear ticks, Otobi,usmegnin~.~ and all six were infested with this parasite. Two of the six were obtained from the 1958 hunting season in the Buffalo Peaks area, four were from the sheep dying at Glen Eyrie. The heaviest infestation was a two year old ewe from the Buffalo Peaks and had the external ear canals plugged completely with wax and debris from the ticks. Some material recovered from the small intestines of bighorns and containing Nematodirus was sent to Mr. Rex Allen, parasitologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal Disease and Parasite Research Branch of the Agri.cultural Research Branch of the Agricultural Research Service, College Station, New Mexico for identification. Two species of Nematodirus were reported as present by him. N. lanceolatus and N. spathiger, from the Buffalo Peaks material, and N. spathiger and one Pseudostertagia bullosa from Cache la Poudre River Canyon materia~---- Prepared bY~ __~R~i~c~h~ar~d~E~.~P~i~l~l~m~o~r~e __ Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Date Ferd Co Kleinschnitz --Federal Aid Coordi.nator ~0~c~tober,_126=1 _ �- 103 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Project No. W-95-R-4 Period Covered: March 1, 1959 to February 28, 1960 ------------------------------- Investigation of Diseases and Parasites Affecting Game Animals ------~~~-----------Job No. 4 Publication of Findings ----------------------------------------------------~-------------- Objective: To prepare a manuscript covering lungworm investigations and disease in bighorn sheep for publication. Considerable work was devoted to a review of historical literature and writing for this manuscript, but it has not been possible to bring the manuscript even to the half-way point of completing a first draft. Note: Mr. Pillmore resigned on March 1, 1960 with the result that the proposed manuscript has not been prepared and may not be for several years, if at all. This was intended to be a compilation of all of the previous work under this project. Prepared by ~R~i~c_h~a~r~d~E __ .~P~l~·l_l_m __ o~re __ Date ~0~c~t~o~b~e~r~,~1~9~6~1~ _ Approved by Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/ef4ddbeac4e0507a244c7d700b87ee1e.pdf ce65d27d34c67d7b27e092249a9b64c6 PDF Text Text January, 1962 - 1- COLORADO DEVELOPMENT COMPLETION REPORT WILDLll'E RAB ITAT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT December 1, 1960 W-59-D-ll to November 30, 1961 WORK ACCOMPLISHMENTS Planting Trees, Shrubs or Aquatic Plants: Trees and shrubs planted in 1961 included: Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), Caragana (Caragana arborescens), Russian Olive (Eleagnus angustifolia), Rocky Mountain Juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), Ponderosa Pine (Pinus ponderosa), Chinese Elm (Ulmus pumila), American Plum (Prunus americana), Sandcherry (Prunus besseyi), Green Ash(Fraxinus lanceolata), chokecherry (Prunus melanocarpa), Willow (Salix vitellina), Cottonwood (Populus sargentii), Blue Spruce (Picea pungens), Lilac (Syringa vulgaris), Tamarix (Tamarix hispida), Austrian Pine (Pinus nigra). Soil Conservation Districts were furnished 217,279 seedlings (Table 1) by this project. Project Fw-6-D was furnished 2,900 seedlings for use on state properties. Project W-79-R was furnished 500 seedlings for use in experimental plantings. A. total of 220,679 seedlings were distributed. Table 2 indicates total by species to Fw-6-D and W-79-R. Potting of 39,887 evergreens was accomplished by a contract with the Colorado State Forest Service at a unit cost of fifteen cents per live tree delivered in 1961. The suppliers were again short on potted plants due to winter loss in the potting operation. Approximately 80,000 potted evergreens had been ordered. The loss of 23,000 Pinus ponderosa forced many Soil Conservation District cooperators to leave one row unplanted until such time as this evergreen could be supplied. It appears that by 1962, most difficulties in the potting operation will have been overcome and consequently, the project will be able to supply adequate numbers to the Districts. 18,594 potted plants were held over from 1960 due to their smallness at that time. A. total of 58,481 potted plants were distributed to Soil Conservation Districts and to Fw-6-D. A. breakdown as to species is shown in Tables 1 and 2. (Ponderosa and Austrian Pine were not seperated due to similar growth and survival characteristics). In order to facilitate location, cooperator and other pertinent information, an individual file for each Soil Conservation District member receiving planting stock was started. Approximately 500 individual files have been made to date with observational data included. Special planting forms were purchased to indicate observation dates, survival, etc. Requests for survival data were made to Soil Conservation Service Work Unit men and much information was acquired. Approximately 100 plantings were visited by the project leader to ascertain planting plan accuracy. It appears that this information is perhaps unnecessary for any purpose except verifying that the planting stock given to cooperators is planted. �- 2 - The design of the plantings in windbreak form of five rows in Colorado does not appear to afford any special winter protection. The main benefits seem to be a concentration of birds, which would occur i.n any good cover, and since trees and shrubs are the most permanent, they appear to be the best means to accomplish this result. Any combination of shrubs, trees and evergreens seems to afford as much use, so it would seem more important to get the planting established than to argue about any certain design. In any case, the 100 plantings surveyed had five failures. 95 were still growing and had a chance to become beneficial to wildlife. Another eight had not followed the specified design. This was primarily due to the lack of knowledge of planting stock, change of mind on what the cooperator wanted, or putting in an extra row or two. None of these will affect the cover on the area but will not afford a good appearing windbreak in the future. However, as stated previously, our purpose is primarily wildlife habitat i.mprovement. Future survival work will consist of taking photographs of plantings to show actual ground cover, winter and summer. It is hoped that this type of "sight" observation will be of more value in showing benefits than saying fifty percent of the seedlings planted are dead. This latter statement does not i.ndi.cate the benefits that are being derived from the remaining fifty percent. Herbaceous Seedings: This phase of the project was not accomplished due to lack of interest on the part of the cooperators. No seed was purchased and no time was spent on thi.s phase. �TABLE 1 Seedlings Distributed To Soil Conservation Districts (1961) ~ U) bO q .~ H (]) Pl .~ § :>, H H (]) q P-I .~ ::q p:< P-I 50 325 250 325 225 ctl (]) !> -r-l ~ :::5 ~ ctl :::5 0' (I) S rl rx:l U (]) U S rd P-I ctl :::5 rl q (I) rd H H (]) ,.q H H (]) ,.q U) (]) rl 0 o , f-J § ,.q bO ctl H ctl 0 ~ , ctl :>, :>, ,.q U) <r; .!<l 0 ,.q 0 0 0 ~ 0 rl rl -r-i :s: ~ q 0 +' +' 0 0 +' +' :::5 o '---' ~ 0 rl rl .~ :s: +' 0 0 H Q) H ctl P I (]) U) Q) q P-I .~ U :::5 H J3' o ctl rl .~ H ~ .~ H H ~ 8 0 8 ctl 8 <I: ' AREA 1 Meeker 1525 350 I w AREA. J Alamosa La :Plata TOTAL 70 1350 30 250 70 1380 700 3000 250 990 2729 250 7919 249 1000 60 550 1270 200 3329 900 520 250 350 1420 60 500 100 1500 150 50 600 220 2250 400 200 8.30 5200 350 350 15 365 3200 635 3835 AREA 4 Agate Big Sandy - Horse Rush Custer County Divide Fountain Creek High Plains Kiowa TOTAL 100 2200 400 1005 530 200 4435 1450 4000 1030 4900 100 11480 100 25 175 300 300 85 385 125 100 25 450 450 200 500 150 100 2075 425 2075 725 3159 12125 1260 5000 14399 1635 37578 �TABLE 1 Seedlings Distri.butedTo Soil Conservation Districts (1961) (continued) .----.. +> 0 eo 0 H ~ .,-j +> OJ +> H ~ ,.0cd [J) H OJ P; .,-j ?:, H H OJ :El CJ cd iIl § I--;J cd § bD cd H cd OJ :> .,-j rl 0 u - --~ H H [J) OJ ~ ~ ,.0 P-i ~ 5< rl r£I p::j P-i 180 1500 50 1590 845 1033 5198 120 480 40 360 180 380 1560 500 150 500 2000 200 150 200 550 100 250 1800 850 3400 3850 140 530 15 600 200 100 1585 60 160 60 800 75 1500 100 200 2735 (/) ..r:1 ..r:1 El CJ El rd ~ P-i cd rd 0 0 OJ OJ .,-j ~ ?:, H H :>, ..r:1 ~ ..r:1 (/) <t; [J) CJ OJ .!<i 0 ..r:1 u .,-j ~ ~ 0 +> +> :s: u ~ 0 rl rl 0 CJ '---" ~ [J) .,-j ~ -r-l rl rl ~ I 0 OJ :s: P-i OJ CJ ~ H fj; .,-j CJ cd rl .,-j H H cd H ~ acd tj 8 8 ---- - ---- AREA. 5 Big Thompson East Adams Platte Valley S. E. Weld West Adams West Greeley TOTAL 200 50 1000 350 50 600 100 1150 300 1000 200 900 1183 3583 25 500 1000 300 345 1380 8510 690 4010 1575 5546 21711 100 50 150 360 3090 265 11000 3120 500 1833 55 30 50 60 200 50 550 1000 100 400 50 25 AREA 6 r-.,,- East Otero N. E. Prowers Pueblo Purgatoire Springfield West Otero TOTAL 75 600 675 500 600 50 1150 400 75 4000 1000 5475 100 120 50 490 100 1200 10 3000 200 50 4560 15 500 515 500 200 300 700 300 +:- �TABLE 1 Seedlings Distributed To Soil Conservation Districts (1961) (continued) -~ ..--... U) QO >=l 'rI H QJ p.. :>:, 'rI § i-;) :>:, :>:, ,.q 0 0 H +> +> QJ 0 0 0 '--" ,0 >=l :>: rd H H QJ ,.q +> ;:::l H u:l ;:::l H H QJ ,.q P-l ~u:l 0 ~ P-l 0< (f) 1550 2687 2400 1780 300 2000 2000 1660 2000 1400 1400 2250 900 1710 2412 25 250 530 3000 1700 2000 300 100 100 920 4700 2700 350 300 125 100 400 1500 1500 900 600 100 100 550 1500 1700 150 200 400 2400 1500 275 795 2000 1500 800 800 400 1500 1500 200 200 100 50 200 671 1700 750 300 1000 55 805 2000 1500 800 800 360 1600 1600 400 300 300 360 1900 1600 400 25 420 3000 2300 1400 150 100 50 160 800 200 900 75 600 1800 2400 900 200 100 100 300 100 100 970 1350 2000 100 150 150 75 10155 15407 10525 7380 7475 10895 6750 6886 10905 7710 7685 10320 3585 9610 9007 7000 1650 18000 26449 8341 30850 25050 8700 4500 200 750 500 850 400 400 355 200 100 134295 H H QJ ~ 0 u:l ::rl u:l >=l u:l QO u:l H u:l 0 QJ :> 'rI rl 0 U) QJ >=l .,-j ~ ;:::l S rl f£I ,:j rd >=l III (f) S u:l 0 QJ ,.q U) ~ ~ 0 ,.q 0 :>: 0 :>: 0 .,-j >=l .,-j ;:::l H P-< rl III (f) H +> +> rl rl :s: 0 :s: 0 QJ 0 0 rl rl .,-j :x: I U) QJ 0 u:l .,-j ·rI H H u:l S u:l tj 8 8 <t: AREA I Al<::ron Burlington Cheyenne Cope Flagler Hale Haxtun Morgan N. E. Yuma Padroni Peetz Rock Creek Sedgwick South Platte Yuma TOTAL 750 3200 300 2500 150 1550 500 400 1500 1500 1500 300 200 300 450 50 50 1500 1500 700 200 850 650 200 1150 200 450 150 100 300 400 200 800 1200 500 50 350 V1 �TABLE 1 Seed1i.ngs Distributed To Soil Conservation Districts (1961) (continued) ~ U2 eo >=l H • ..-1 OJ Pi :>, H H OJ :fa 0 ~ f-;) § eo cO H cO 0 .Q § cO OJ ? • ..-1 rl 0 OJ >=l ~ . !Xi P-i P-l ;::i ~cO ;::i 0' t1) S rl I't'1 S ;::i rl P-i OJ .Q 0 OJ OJ .Q 0 cd >=l cO co cd H H H H U2 • ..-1 :>, :>, • ..-1 ,.!>:j .Q U2 ..::t! 0 .Q 0 ~ 0 r-l r-l • ..-1 :s: +' +' ;::i 0 0 '-" >=l 0 0 ~ +' +' 0 0 0 ~ rl rl r-l cO +' 0 0 +' 0 H 8 OJ <H H cO 0 ,.0 I U2 OJ >=l ,..-1 • ..-1 :s: P-l OJ 0 ;::i H Pi t1) ~ +' >=l H cO 0 H H E-! 0 '8 • ..-1 0 cO rl • ..-1 H S cO 8 OJ OJ P-:i <t; TOTAL BY AREA Area 1 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 225 250 325 50 325 70 350 1420 250 830 5200 7919 3329 600 1150 3583 5198 1560 490 675 1150 5475 1585 7000 1650 18000 2644g- 8341 350 1380 4435 11480 385 450 500 550 1000 3400 3850 2735 45"60 515 700 30850 25050 8700 4500 200 150 400 100 50 300 750 500 850 400 2075 25 400 0·7 1.8 365 725 17·3 345 10.0 8.4 150 355 200 100 61.8 1525 3835 37578 21711 18335 134295 TOTAL 8325 5455 33928 41726 14015 41420 46670 10150 6650 700 1150 950 1000 400 2500 1940200 '100 217279 0\ �-7- TABLE 2 Species Seedlings Distributed to Fw-6-D and to W-79-R FW-6 Caragana 79-R Total 100 100 Russian Olive 600 600 Juniper 600 600 Pine 200 200 Squawbu s.h 200 Elm 100 300 50 50 PLUM 500 100 600 Sandcherry 200 50 250 100 100 Chokecherry Willow 50 50 Black Walnut 50 50 Red Oak 50 50 Pin Oak 50 50 spinos~ 200 200 Multiflora Rose 200 200 ~::~ Total 2,900 500 3,400 �- 8 - TABLE 3 Seedlings Purchased, On Hand And Total Used By Species Species Purchased Hackberry On Hand Planted Surplus and Handling Loss 10,000 8,325 1,675 Caragana 10,000 5,555 4,445 Olive 42,000 34,528 7,472 Juniper 26,407 15,919 42,326 Pine 12,240 1,975 14,215 Squawbush 43,000 41,720 1,280 Elm 47,000 46,720 280 Plum 11,000 10,750 250 Sandcherry 7,000 6,900 100 Ash 2,000 700 1,300 Chokecherry 1,500 1,250 250 Willow 1,000 1,000 Cottonwood 1,000 1)000 200 200 Lilac Tamarix 100 100 Black Walnut 50 50 Red Oak 50 50 Pin Oak 50 50 Prunus spinosa 200 200 Multiflora Rose 200 200 Bare-Root Pine 1,800 700 2,500 Spruce 1,240 700 1,940 400 400 19,794 220,679 Willow Cuttings Total 217,937 *Surplus and handling loss - 7.2% 17,052* �-9 - TABIE 4 Per Cent Of Total By Area For Each Species - Area 5 Area ti Area 7 Total 7·2 8.1 84.1 100.0 15·2 21.1 21.1 30.2 100.0 4.4 15·1 10·3 16.2 53,3 100.0 0.8 0.6 19·0 12.4 3.8 63·4 100.0 1.6 0·5 23·6 11.2 3·5 59·6 100.0 10.4 8.4 6.7 74·5 100.0 24·5 8.2 9.8 53.8 100.0 Plum 3.8 5·5 5·2 85·5 100.0 Sandcherry 6.4 15·2 10.6 67·8 100.0 Ash 71.5 28·5 100.0 65·5 100.0 52·7 100.0 85·0 100.0 100.0 100.0 16.0 100.0 18.1 100.0 Lilac 100.0 100.0 Tamarix 100.0 100.0 Species Area 1 Hackberry 0.6 Caragana 6.0 6.4 Olive 0·7 Jillliper Pine Area 3 Squawbush Elm 0.8 2·9 Area 4 Chokecherry 34·5 Willow 15·8 Cottonwood 10.0 31. 5 5·0 Willow Cuttings Bare-Root Pine Spruce 18·7 83.0 1.0 37 ·3 18.2 7·7 �- 10 - TABLE 5 Per Cent Of Total Of Each Species For Area Species Area 1 Hackberry 0·5 Area 3 Caragana Area 1+ Area 5 Area b Area 7 Total 2·9 3·7 5.4 3·8 9·0 2·3 5·4 6.5 1.2 2·5 Olive 7·4 37·0 13 ·9 16·5 29·7 13·4 15·6 Juniper 15·3 6.4 21.0 23·5 8·7 19·6 19·2 Pine 5·1 1.8 8.8 7·5 2·7 6.2 6·5 Squawbush 29·7 11.8 15·6 14.8 22.8 19·1 Elm 16·7 30.6 17·8 24·9 18·7 21.4 Plum 19·6 1.0 2·5 2.8 6.6 4.6 Sandcherry 3·0 1.2 4.6 3·8 3·3 3·1 0.1 0·3 0.6 0·5 0.4 0.4 0.6 0·5 0·3 0.2 0·3 1.2 0·3 0·9 Lilac 0.1 0.1 Tamarix 0.1 0.1 35·4 1.3 Ash Chokecherry 2.4 014 Willow 0.2 Willow Cuttings 5·5 0.3 9·4 1.9 Date: 0.1 1.6 Spruce Prepared by: 1.6 0·3 Cottonwood Bare-Root Pine 1.8 0.8 Shrubs Trees Evergreens Total 99,053 58,045 60,181 217,279 45.6 26.8 Francis A. Metsger January, 1962 100.0 Approved by: Ferd C. Kleinschni.tz Federal Aid Coordinator �January, 1962 - 11 - State of Project JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO No. W_-_8~3_-~R_-~7 _ Beaver Investigations Work Plan No. --------~--------------- 7 Title of Job: ------------------------------~----------------------------------------- Period Covered: Evaluation of overall 4 Job No. importance of beaver dams. April 1, 1960 to May 31, 1961. Objectives; To determine the overall net effect of beaver dams on the physical and. biological environment, and the resultant effects on the economy and. recreation potential. Procedure: This job involves a compilation and interpretation of information already at hand. Data collected from other phases of the project, plus information gleaned from a review of literature, provides the basis for the determi.nation. Report: This job was written to allow for the preparation of the final project report. The compilation and interpretation of all project data, the review of literature, and the rough draft of the report are completed, and editing for publication is all that remains to be done. The final project report will be completed during the winter of 1961-62, as time permits, at which time the objectives as stated above will be met. The bibliography Atwater, of literature M. M. 1940. 4(1): 100-103. cited in the final report follows: South Fork (Montana) beaver Bradt, Glenn W. 1947 Michigan beaver management. Game Div., 56 pp. survey. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt., Michigan Department Cons., Clawson, Marion. 1959. Methods of measuring the demand for and value of outdoor recreation. Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D. C., 36 pp. Clements, F. E. 1910. Life history of the lodgepole pine burn forests. Forest Service Bull. 79, 56 pp. Cook, David B. 1940. Beaver-trout relations. Jour. Mamm., U.S.D.A. 21(4):397-401. Frary, Ladd G. 1954. Waterfowl production on the White River Plateau, M.S. theSis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 93 pp. Colorado. Grasse, James E. and Euvern F. Putnam. 1955. Beaver management and ecology Wyoming. Wyoming Game and Fish Comm., Bull. 6 (2nd Ed.), 75 pp. in �- 12 - Green, R. G. 1937· The susceptibility of beaver to tularemia. Disease Invest., 3=110. Gregg, H. R. 1948. The magnificent rodent. ScL Mon., Minn. Wildl. 67(2):73-82. Hall, Joseph G. 1960. Willow and aspen in the ecology of beaver on Sagehen Creek, California. Ecology, 41(3):484-494. Hay, Keith G. 1955. Development of a beaver census method applicable to mountain terrain in Colorado. M.S. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 143 pp. Henderson, F. Robert. 1960. Beaver in Kansas. Hist., University of Kansas, Lawrence. State Biol. Surv. and Mus. Nat. Misc. Pub. No. 26, 85 pp. Hodgdon, K. W. and J. H. Hunt. 1953. Beaver management Ln Maine. Maine Department Inland Fisheries and Game, Game Div. Bull No.3, 102 pp. Hoover, Robert L. 1955. Beaver ecology in the Longs Peak area of Colorado. M.S. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 262 pp. Huey, William S. 1956. New Mexico beaver management. of Game and Fish, Bull. No.4, 49 pp. rves, R. L. 1942. The beaver meadow complex. New Mexico Department Jour. Geomorphology, 5(3):191.-203. Jellison, W. L., G. M. Kohls, W. J. Butler, and J. A. Weaver. 1942. Epizootic tularemia in the beaver, Castor canadensis, and the contamination of stream water with Pasteurella tularensis. Am. Jour. Hyg., 36(2):168-182. Landford, E. v. 1954. An outbreak of tularemia in beaver and muskrat in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, Can. Jour. Compo Med., 18(1):28-30. Lawrence, W. H. 1954. Michigan beaver populations as influenced by fire and logging. Ph.D. theSis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 200 pp. MacDonald, Dunca~. 1956. Beaver carrying capacity of certain mountain streams in North Park, Colorado. M.S. theSis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 136 pp. Neff, Don J. 1957· Ecological effects of beaver habitat abandonment in the Colorado Rockies. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt., 21(1):80-84. Packard, F. M. 1940. Beaver killed by coyotes. Jour. Mamm., 21(3):359-360. Parker, R. R., E. A. Steinhaus, G. M. Kohls, and W. L. Jellison. 1950. Contamination of natural waters and mud with P. tularensis and tularemia in beavers and muskrats of the northwestern United States. Natl. Inst. of Health Bull. No. 193, USGPO , Washington, D. C. �- 13 - Pr-e ana.l L, C. C. 1943. Wildlife conservation as affected. by American Caucasian concepts. Jour. Mamm .. , 24: 458-464. Rasmussen) D. 1. 1940, Beaver-trout N. Am. Wildl. Conf. Trans.) relations on the Rocky Mountain 5:256-263. Irid.i.an and Region. Retzer) John L., Harold M. Swope, Jack D. Rem.irig+on , and William H. Rutherford. 1955 . Suitability of physical factors for beaver management in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. Colorado Game and Fish Department) Tech. Bull. No.2) 33pp. Rutherford, William H. 1955. Wildlife and environmental relationships beavers in Colorado forests. Jour. For.) 53(11):803-806. Scott) J. W. Natural occurrence of tularemia man. Science) 91(2359):263-264. in beaver and its transmissi.on to Seton) Ernest T. 1937· Lives of game animals. New York. Vol. 4) pp. 441-501. Doubleday) Doran and Co., Inc.) Smith) A.. E. 1950. Effects of water runoff and gradient on beaver streams. M.S. thesis, University of Michigan) Ann Arbor. Stegeman, L. C. 1954. the Huntington of in mountain The product,ion of aspen and its utili.zation by beaver Forest. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt.) 18(3):348-358. Swank) Wendell G. 1949. Beaver ecology and management in West Virginia. Comm . of W. Virginia) Div. Game Management, Bull. No ..1, 63 pp. Thomas, E. M. 1954. Wyoming fur-bearers Corom.) Bull. No·7, 93-99 pp. - the beaver. Ln Cons. Wyoming Game and Fish Warren) Edward R. 1926. Notes on the beaver colonies in the Longs Peak Region of Estes Park) Colorado. Roosevelt Wildlife Annals) 1(1-2):192-234. Yeager) Lee E. and Ralph R. Hill. 1954. Beaver management problems public lands. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. Trans.) 19:462-480. on western Yeager) Lee E. and Willi.am H. Rutherford. 1957. An ecological basis for beaver management in the Rocky Mountain Region. N. Am, Wildl. Conf. Trans., 22:269-300. Prepared by: Date: ---- ~W~i~l~l~i~.a~m~H~._.~R~u~t~h~e~r~f~o~r~d~ _ Approved by: ~~~~L_~~~ January) 1962 _ Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��JanuarYJ 1962 - 15 - JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO ----------------~~----,------------ Project No. Work Plan No. Title W-90·-R,5 4 -------------------------- of Job: Peri.od Covered: Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Improvement on Wildlife Job No. Evaluation of the Pheasant Environment December 1" 1960 to November ~l~ , _ in Colorado 30., 1961 Abstract: Pheasant·-population and environmental-factor data for 42 pheasant survey routes are analysed using multiple regression methods. It is shown that analyses comparing routes on a statewide basi.s can only be partially interpreted because the Colorado pheasant range consists of at least +hr-ee, and probably more, d.Lat.Lnc t ly different, non-comparable environments. Data for two of these environments were consi.dered sufficient for further examination. For the northeastern Colorado dryland (11 routes) it was possi.ble to wr Lt.e a fourvariable multi.ple regression equation which accounts for 95.5% of the variance in pheasant populations. Variables included) in the relative order of importance, were Elevation, Pasture, Fallow and Waste+. Considering the rat.i.obetween power of influence and total land-area involved, Pasture and Waste+ were selected as the most feasi.ble for habi.tat manipulation. This leads to presentation of the world-shaking recommendation that more weed patches on the northeast dryland would improve pheasant habitat. Analyses of data from the northeast irrigated areas (14 routes) were pretty much inconclusive. The irrigated environment is infinitely more compli.cated than the dr'y.Land , and the best four habitat variables describe only 65% of phe as ant> population variance. A larger sample will be needed to delineate environmental influence patterns on irrigated land. Objectives: To compare pheasant on a statewide basis. populations and evaluate environmental conditions Procedures: The population analysis secti.ons of Project W-90 -R were originally designed to test the Colorado pheasant environment two different ways. The extensive, statewide survey was to provide a measure of factors limiti.ng longterm distri.bution; and more intensive, localized surveys were to test. fact.ors responsible for annual variations in population levels. During the first year, it became obvious that intensive surveys were beyond the immediate capacity of available personnel but that only minor increases i.n precision would be necessary to convert extensi.ve·-survey data for annual analysis. Accord.ingly, t.ermt.nat.Lon of Job No.1, at an analytic level considerably below that ori.ginally Lrrt ended, was planned for the segment 5 project year. Analyses, however, were not completed during the fifth segment because pheasant population data, and some physical data} were not available until after completion reports were due. The report presented here represents analysis of data collected during the segment 5 i.nvestigations. �- 16 Field methods: During the fall of 1959., each of the 44 pheasant crowing-count routes in Colorado was mapped to det.ermine land-use patterns. Field mapping was based on ocular estimate of 120-yard transects., on both sides of the road., at 0.2 mile intervals, over the length of the survey routes. Land utilization was classified according to the 17 definitions listed in Table 1. In addition, an empirical variable esti.mating the avai.lable edge (breaks) and two variables describi ng alti tude and topography (elevation and contours) were calculated for each r-out.e . Table 1 Variable Independent Variables Measured on Crowing-count Routes, 1959 Description Waste+ Waste, or unused, areas with good to excellent herbaceous cover over 12" in height. Waste Waste, or unused, areas with fai.rto poor herbaceous cover under 12" in hei.ght. Grain Wheat, barley, oats and other small grain crops. Fallow Fallow ground. Pasture ++ Pasture land with a woody overstory of sage brush) mesquit.e or other browse species. Pasture Pastureland consisting primarily of grasses and forbs. Sorghum Milo, kaffir, sorgho and other sorghum feed grains. Millet Millet. Corn Corn. Alfalfa Alfalfa and other hay crops. Truck All row crops except corn: Woody ++ Woody plantings - 100% shrubs and ticket cover. Woody + Woody plantings - 50% shrubs and ticket cover. Woody Windbreaks and other woody planti.ngs with less than 50% cover at ground level. Woody - Orchards and other plantings with no woody cover at ground level. Water Open water surface. Farm Bldg. Farmsteads, feedlosts and other areas with nearly continous disturbance. Breaks The total number of changes in land-use over the length of a transect. Effectively, this is a measure of edge. Contours The number of lO-foot contour intervals crossed in traversing the census route. Elevation The altitude of the No. 1 crowing-count station on each route. beets, beans, carrots, cabbage, etc. �- 17 Pheasant Populations: On all but two of the pheasant survey routes, data involvi.ng wtrrte.r sex ratios spring crowing counts and fall brood counts were available for calculation of population indices (P= C + CH + CRY where P = Population index, C = number of cock calls per two-minute per i od, H = number of hens per cock and Y number of young per hen). For many of the routes, however, winter sex ratio data were so erratic that indices were considered meaningless. Accordi.ngly, pheasant population levels were estimated using only the spring crowing count data. The mean t.err-e t at.Lonhigh counts on each route for the 1958-1960 period were averaged to obatin population indices listed in Table 2. j Analytic Methods: With only 21 variables and a maxi.mum of 42 observations (routes), it was considered unnecessary to use IBM computer analysis techniques, .Ins t.ead, all analyses were completed on a hand calculator using a three-step sequence~ 1. Linear correlation between population levels and each of the 20 independent variables was calculated for all 42 routes and within the two major groupings for the northeast region. 2. A series of multiple regression equations was ca.l.cu.Lat.ed, adding new variables in the order of linear correlation strengths, until changes in either the multiple R or in individual regression coefficients suggested a change in procedure. 3· Based on the demonstrated interrelationships among i.ndependent variables} the regression equation using the three to fi.vemost powerful variables was calculated.. Table 2 Mean Three-year Cr-owi.ngCounts Used for Population Level Variats Northeast Northeast Arkansas San Luf,s Western Dryland Irrigated Valley Slope Valley Area Count Area Count Area Count Area Count Area Count: A. 1 A 8905 2 A 4 5.8 39·4 B 3 13·7 5 A 15·9 1 B 60.4 2 B 11.5 55.8 4 C 14·9 12.6 3 B 5 B 21.0 1 C 69.1 2 C 4 D 1200 3 C 13·5 5 C 33·1 21.2 1 D 2 D 21.7 63·0 4 E 18.0 3 D 34·5 5 D 1 E 65.6 2 E 11.5 4 F 27·7 1 F 24.0 2 F 31.9 4 G 39·1 1 G 21.4 56.7 2 G 4 H 37·9 1 H 36.2 2 H 24.2 4 I 15.4 1 I 25.4 2 I 4 J 6.2 32·7 1 J 2 J 20·9 22·9 1 K 2 K 23·8 33·3 31.7 2 L 2 M 20·9 2 N 35·3 Statewide mean: 30·3 �- 18 Analyses~ Linear correlation coefficients for crowing counts vs. each of the :i.ndependentvariables) statewide (N = 42)) on the northeastdrylands (n = 11) and in the northeast irrigated areas (n = 14)) are presented in Table 3. Table 3 Independent Variable Waste + Waste Grain Fallow Pasture ++ Pasture Sorghum Corn Millet Alfalfa Truck Woody ++ Woody + Woody Woody Water Farm Bldg. Breaks Contours Elevat:i.on Linear correlation between crowing counts and various independent variables. Statewide Northeast Dryland Northeast Irrigated N = 42 n = 11 n = lL~ -·328 -.423 ·553 .644 -.276 -.160 .033 .008 ·327 -.493 -.334 .286 .474 .204 -·326 -.114 -.346 - .135 -.172 - .435 -.545 -.416 .416 .490 -.416 -.834 .156 .080 -.086 -·374 -.133 .237 .418 -.291 -.179 - ·354 .483 ·357 -.687 -.413 -.238 -.293 .039 .013 -.462 .528 ·359 .034 - .358 .084 -·322 -.304 .458 .200 -.341 .151 -.228 -.183 ·301 -·300 �- 19 - Evaluation of the Pheasant Environment in Colorado L. Jack Lyon Analysis and. discussion: Statewide: Based on the linear correlation coefficients listed in Table 3, the most important of the measured factors) in determining statewide pheasant population levels) was Fallow (r = .664). The next five important variables J in descending order of correlation strengths) were Grain (r = .553), Alfalfa (r = -.493)., Woody + (r = .4(4), Elevati.on (r = -.,435) and Waste (r = -.423), Beyond these sLx, correlation coefficients wer-e grouped so closely that numerical differences were not considered i.ndicative of real differences. Using the first six variables) then) a seri.es of regression equations J adding one variable at a time, were calculated. These equations are shown I.n Table 4 (Equations 1 through 6) 0 Examination of Table 4 provides several interesting observations regard.ing the relationships between various independent factors and their combined influence on pheasant population levels. First, it will be noted that the add.ition of any Land-use variable reduces the influence, i.e. regression coefficient, for Fallow (Note, however) that the Elevation variable causes little reduction in Fallow influence). This suggests that Fallow, in itself) i.s important to the pheasant environment only because of its relationship to agriculture in general. Fallow land is the agricultural common denominator. It occurs wher-eever any crops at all are grown, and) taken alone, Fallow is the best single descriptive variable for pheasant environment because the pheasant is dependent on agriculture. However, as data describing patterns rather than single variables becomes available) Fallow is less and less powerful as a predictor of pheasant populations. In fact, if Fallow is deleted from the six-variable equation, the reduction in multiple R occurs only in the third decimal position (Equation No.7). �- 20 Table 4 .. Equation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Multiple regression by steps. Addition of variables based on linear correlation ranks. Statewide N = 42 Regression Coefficients for Independent Variables Constant Fallow Grain Alfalfa Woody+ Elevation Waste 145.074 135.337 208.748 211.834 452.468 579·661 587·635 577·744 689·559 560.236 659·553 390.275 471.372 0426 0352 0269 0109 0101 0066 0096 0107 0181 0274 0171 0228 0268 0298 0243 0127 0332 -0211 -0238 -0039 -0210 -0181 -0201 -0383 -0191 -0387 -0078 7558 4198 3762 4820 4245 5646 5025 7876 5779 -0609 -0533 -0573 -0630 -0401 -0695 -0668 -0384 -0365 -0417 -0669 -0262 -0416 -0432 MUlt'. Farm Bldg. 0441 -0612 E .644 .651 .670 .699 .760 .781 .776 ·785 .741 .767 .763 .724 ·757 In equation number 8, the seventh ranking variable, Farm Buildings (R = -.346)J has been substituted for Fallow. The resulting multiple R is slightly greater than that for equation 6, but the difference is minor (.785 .781). It has been concluded, therefore, that the five variablesj Grain, Alfalfa, Woody+, Elevation and Wastej probably provide the best possibJ.:ecombination of predictors on a statewide basis. Within this group, equations 9 through 13 provide a measure of relative importance for individual variables and a basis for calculation of partial correlation coefficients. Equation 7 shows that 60.25% (R2) of the variability in pheasant populations is accounted for by the five variables. If Grain is left out (Equation 9)" only 54.970/; is explained. The reduction in unexplained variance (1.000 - .5497) - (1.000 - .6025)= .05281, expressed as a proportion of unexplained variance .0528/ (1.000 -.5497 = .117 is the squared partial correlation coefficient for Grain. Partial coe f'f'Lc Lent.s for all five variables are as follows: Grain Alfalfa Woody+ Elevation Waste ·343 .188 .221 .405 .261 Thus, the five variables selected in this analysis can be ranked in order of the strength of their influence as 1. Elevation, 2. Grain, 3. Waste, 4. Woody + and 5. Alfalfa. Unfortunately, interpretation of the relationships expressed here is not just a simple matter of ranking variables in the apparent order of importance. It has been shown that addition of variables in higher order regression equations does not improve multiple R in proportion to the direct correlation coeffi.cients. This demonstrates a high degree of intercorrelation among the "independent" variables. The importance of this intercorrelation can best be appreciated by rexamination of the Fallow relationship. Fallow, according to available data 9 accounts for 41.5% (r2) of the variance in pheasant popUlations. ' �,-21 - This is ture primarily because fallow land is representative of agricultural land, irrespective of other crop patterns. When other patterns are known, however, Fallow is a relatively unimportant variable in the pheasant environment. Rather obvi.ousLy J it is possible that one of the f'Lve variables eventually selected is also the common representative for a further series of variables. The complications introduced by such interrelationship patterns makes a meaningful analysis of statew·id.eenvironments nearly impossible. Of the variables used here, Elevation is the only one which actually appears in a more or less independent manner throughout the 42 environments examined. Other variables may be more, or less, impor;tant , or may even be completely misrepresented by the data presented here. Alfalfa, for example, is negatively corrlated with pheasant populations on a statewide basis. This may actually be the ture situation, but it could also be a meaningless inversion related. to the fact that alfalfa is not grown in any quanitity on the northeast table-land where pheasant populati.ons are high. The d.ecision in this case might rest among three alternatives: 1. Pheasant populations on the tableland are high because of large grain acreages. 2. Pheasant populations on the tableland are high because there is so little alfalfa grown. 3. Pheasant populations on the tableland are high for both of the above stated reasons. Returning to the li.near correlation values in Table 3, it will be seen that alfalfa" within the irrigated area where the greatest acreages occur, has a positive linear correlation m.th pheasant populati.ons very near zero. This suggests that alternative No.1 i.scorrect, but, more importantly, it demonstrates that interrelationship patterns may be such that the important environmental factors for one area are not important in another. Accordingly, examination of environmental variables wi.thin major regions is considered more significant than statewide analysis. Northeast d.ryland - analysis and discussion: From Table 3 , it 1-rillbe seen that linear correlation between pheasant populations and envi.ronmental variables was highest for Pasture (r = -.834). The next four variables, in order of correlation strengths, were Contours (r = -.687), Waste+ (r = -.545)" Fallow (r = .490) and. Farm Buildings (r = .483). The five variables following these all fell within the r = .413 - .418 range and wer-e considered about equal in influence. However, with only 11 replications) any analysis usi.ng more than four variables was considered. unaound. Table 5 presents the stepwise regression analysi.s for the first four vari.ables. Although the northeast dryland is probably the least complicated phe~sant environment in Colorado, the analysis in Table 5 demonstrates an extremely compli.cated series of i.nter,-relationshippatterns. Only four variables were used. in the series A ana Lys Ls',but more than 80% of the variance in northeastern Colorado pheasant populations is explained. Pasture, with a partial correlation coefficient of .789 was the most powerful predicting variable. Other variables had partial coefficients as follows: Pasture Contours Fallow Waste + .789 .133 .229 .506 �- 22 Table 5 Multiple regression analysis of dryland data. Order of first four variables based on linear correlation rank, n = 11 Analytic series A Regression Coefficients for Independent Variables Mult. Equation Constant Pasture Contours Waste+ Fallow R 1 994.445 -.1266 .834 1008.604 -.1065 -1.3053 ,844 3 1133.485 -.2259 .2885 ·3297 ·905 4 1316.359 -.2412 .6561 .2774 -.0156 ·910 5 1447·306 -.1806 .0375 -.0338 .877 6 1279·530 -.2226 .2637 .-.0128 ·908 7 720·597 -3·9689 -.0575 .0138 ,738 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 Analytic series B 8 9 10 1997.128 1653.135 1276.432 Pasture Waste+ Fallow -.1341 - .2373 -.2197 AddedlL .0878 .1376 .2551 .0163 - .0131 -.0148 -.2853 -.0350 .1391 ,977 ·937 ,909 Y' Elevation in Equation 8, Grain in Equation 9 and Woody+ in Equation 10. Possibly the most interesting, and confusing, parts of this analysis are the regressi.on coefficient inversions for every variable but Pasture. Fallow has a positi.ve li.near corre Lat.Lon and a negative regression coefficient while Contours andWaste+ have negative linear and positive regression coefficients (Equation 4). One way to examine these relationships is through the linear correlation patterns exclusive of pheasant popUlations. Applicable statistics are presented in Table 6. Table 6 Linear correlation coeffici!ents for the relationshi.psbetween the four most important variables in the northeast Colorado dryland pheasant environment Variables Linear Correlation Coefficients Pasture x Contours ·715 Pasture x Waste + .865 Pasture x Fallow -.789 Contours x Waste + .465 Contours x Fallow -·355 Waste + x Fallow -.861 Examination of the data in Table 6 provides considerable evidence to explain the apparent reversal of effect for all variables except Pasture, First) it wi.llbe noted that Contours, Waste + and Fallow all have a stronger correlation with Pasture than with pheasant popu.Iat.Lon levels. Taken indivi.dually, these three variables actually give a vicarious description of Pasture influence. When all are examined simultaneously, however, that part of pheasant populati.on variance belonging to Pasture is explained and the unbiased influenceslare found to be inverse to linear relationships. Y variables Only to the extent that further intercorrelation relationships with other do not exist. �- 23 In the light of this pattern, it was consi.dered possible that anyone of the i.ndependent variables except Pasture could be less powe.rf'u.L than some other variable whLch had not even been examined. A complete analysis of all possible combinations is not considered feasible until a machine analysis program can be wri.tten, but a partial analysis is presented in Table 5) analytic series B. Contours, with a partial correlation coefficient of .133 was the weakest of the four variables in Equation 4. Accordingly, Contours was deleted, and E'l.evat.Lon , Grain and Woody+ were successively substituted i.n the four-variable equat.ions 8.• 9.• and 10. In each case, multiple R was as high, and in two cases i.t was higherJ than the R produced by Equation 4. Parti.al correlation coefficients for Elevation, Grain and Woody+ were, respect.LveIy , .740. .298, and .095. Since two of these cofficients are higher than coefficients calculated for Fallow in Equation 4, a further equation using Past.ure, Waste +, Elevation and Grain was calculated: y = 20610394 -.1562 Pasture + .0503 Waste + -.2347 Elevation -.0060 Grain R for this equation is .973, which suggests that Grain and Fallow can be used equally we.ll. as predictors in a multiple regression equation with Pasture, Waste + and Elevation. It is notable) however, that in these alternative equations, Fa.ll.ow has a positive regression coefficient while the Grain coefficient is negative. No obvious reason can be f'ound for this inversion because the correlation between the two variables is posi ti ve (r .728) . However) if both are included in a f'Lve..vari.able equation: Y = 2012.014 -·.1331 Pasture + 00889 Waste + + .0165 Fallow -.2876 EleVation + .0007 Grain. it is obvious that Fallow is the more powerful of the two variables. The partial correlati.on coefficient for Grain in this equation is so low it is meaningless (.000198) . Accordingly) Equation 8 was selected as the probable best fourvariable analysis for the northeastern Colorado dryland pheasant envi.ronment. 9 In attempting to evaluate the overall meaning of the Equation 8, t.wobasi.c considerations must be understood. First, this equation explains 95. (R2) of the observed. variance in pheasant popUlations. The remaining 4.5% is hardly meaningful .•but in another region or different environment the unexplained vari.ance could be an important limitation. Second, and more Lmpor-t.arrt , there is no guarantee that another set of variables wouLdnot provide better predi.ci ton. In this case .• it seems likely that Pasture, Waste + and Elevation are descriptive) but the instability of the regression coefficient for Fallow suggests a not very dependable predictor. The fact that Fallow regression coeffici.ents maybe either positive or negative, depending on the fourth variable, suggests that Fallow is actually an agricultural commondenominator representing the combined influence of Grain and. one or more related land-use variables. 5r~ Within these limitations, then, the relative strengths of each of the var-Lab Les may be judged by comparing partial correlation coefficients: Pasture Waste + Fallow Elevation .719 .103 .165 .740 �- 24 - If these are ralated to the 9505% predicting power of the equation, the relative i.nfluences on pheasant population levels are: Pasture 39.8%, Waste + 5.7%) Fallow 9.1%, EleYation 40.9%, all other untested factors 4.5% Management recommendations: Based on the data and analyses presented here, recommendations for increasing the range carrying capacity for pheasants of the northeast dryland are relatively simple. Of the four factors which determine 95.5% of pheasant population variance, one (Elevation) is pretty much outside human control. The other three are determined by the activities of the landowner, but) of these three) one (Fallow) is not considered a very reliable predictor and, in any case) the ratio of land area involved (29.9%) to estimated influence (9.1%) is very small. The remaining two variables, Pasture and Waste +. involve 16.5% and 2. (% of the land area and have rati.os of area to influence on pheasants of 2.41 and 1.97. In both cases, it is probably wi.thin the capacity of the Game and. Fish Department to produce environmental changes sufficient to change pheasant population levels over fairly large areas. Further consideration of these relationshi.ps suggests that the use of Pasture as an envi.ronmental manipulation tool has a number of disqualifying limitations. First, purchase of land so that pasture can be eliminated would be prohibi ti.vely expensi.ve. Second, it would probably be found that most pastureland in the northeast region is unplowed because plowing is physically impossible or extremely poor conservation .practive. Finally, it must be obvious that improvement in pheasant range would be an inverse function of already existing quality. Marginal range might be converted to submarginal or fair by plowing large pasture areas, but good to excellent range already has a low percentage of pasture present and. might not be improved by removal of the remainder. This line of reasoning produces the conclusion that good weed cover (Waste +) is probably the only available management tool offering any real possibility for habitat manipulation in the northeast This can hardly be consi.dered a worldshaking iscovery, but at least it does suggest a reasonable substitute for habitat development programs with no avowed purpose or direction. If the more intensive studies planned for Jobs 2 and 3 of W-90-R support this conclusion, considerable effort i.nattempting to establish perennial vegetation duplicati.ng the cover classification Waste + is recommended for the northeast dryland areas. 0 Northeast i.rrigated land - analysis and discussion: Reference to Table 3 indicates the following vari.ables with the strongest linear relationship to pheasant pcpu Lat.Lons : Pasture (.528), Pasture ++ (-.462), Woody -i- (.458), Sorghum (.359)., Millet (-.358), Woody- (-.341), Truck (-.322), Woody ++ (-.304), Contours (.301) and Elevation (.300). The stepwise multiple regression analysis for the fi.rst four variables in this series is presented in Table ,7, analytic series A. The most noticeable difference between this analysis and the dryland analysis is the weakness of multiple R. Using all four variables, Equation 4 accounts for only 65.0% of the pheasant popUlation Variance. This is an extremely important consideration because it indicates that the irrigated pheasant environment) unlike the dr'y.Land , is a very compli.cated habi.tat. At the very best, it is doubtful that anyone variable can account for more than 25-30% of population variance) and it is probable that any variables with a potential for manipulation would have only minor influences on pheasants. �- 25 Table 7 Mu.Lt.Lp.l,e regression analysi.s for irrigated land data. Order of first four variables based on linear correlation rank. n = 14 Analytic series A Mlllt, Regression Coefficients for Independent Variable Equation Constant Pasture Pasture ++ Woody + Sorghum R .-------------------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 -1-/-6.330 -13.876 -13.254 -65.226 -65.872 -81.820 -39.094 .0233 .0208 .0195 .0142 .0168 .0136 -.1147 -.1112 -.1604 -.1663 .1177 .2232 -.1585 .6530 ·7254 Pasture ++ -.1685 -.2028 -.1776 -.1607 Sorghum .2882 .2832 .2504 .2597 .2668 .261~1 .1758 .2931 ·528 .657 .658 .806 .803 .639 .769 Analytic seri.esB 8 9 10 11 Y -89·990 - 7·998 127·911 -112.861 Pasture .0186 .0207 .0141 .Ol91 Added~ .0047 -.4653 - .0371 .0138 .807 .828· .830 .822 Truck in Equation 8, Contours in Equation 9, Elevation in Equation 10 and Alfalfa in Equation 11. Based on Equation 3) 5, 6, and 7, the partial correlation coeffici.ents for the four tested variables are: Pasture Pasture ++ Woody + Sorghum .143 .408 .013 .383 Continuing in analytic series B., t.hen, Woody + was delected from the equation and several other variables were tested. Millet, Woody- and Woody ++ were not considered "because they were represented on only 2, 4, and 1 of the 14 routes. Al.f'a.Lf'a, however, was tested (Equation 11) because alfalfa hay is often considered the most important land-use factor in the pheasant environment. All four of the variables substi.tuted for Woody+ increased the predicti.ng power of the four-variable equation. The best combination, that using Pasture, Pasture++, Sorghum and Elevation was, however, only capable of accounting for 68.8% of population variance. With a sample of 14 routes, this certainly is not a signifi.cant improvement over Equation 4. Further, the partial correlation coefficients for Truck C020)., Contours (.114), Elevation (.122) and Alfalfa (.085) do not suggest great power in influencing pheasant numbers. �- 26 - Discussi.on of the relationships expressed here must be extremely limited because so little has actually been shown. More than 30% of all variance in pheasant populations is still unexplained. One of the variables tested (Pasture++) appears on only half the routes, and another (Pasture) has a regression coefficient inverse to both the dryland and statewfLde analyses. While these patterns may have a meaning, i.tis probable that real influences of the measured factors can only be determined in combinations using a minimum of ten variables. Accordingly, the most meani.ngful recommendation which can be made is that a much larger sample of environmental patterns or irrigated land be obtained for future studies. Prepared by: Date: L.. Jack -January, Lyon :),,962 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �January, 1962 -27JOB COMPLET ION RE PORT INVEST IGAT IOtJS PROJECTS State of COLORADO Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Projec t No ._.;..;.W_-9.:;..0.:;..-....;R~-6--""_ Improvement on ~ildlife. Work Plan Ti t Le of Job: Feriod covered: 4 Job No •__ ....;:2=-_ Evaluation of natural and Aor i cuItural \'linterCover December 1, 1960 to November 30, 1961. Obiectives: To determine the influences of various agricultural and natural cover types in attracting and protecting pheasants during the winter period. Crowing-count data collected by IfJi1dlifeConservation Officers at 430 crowingcount points on 43 census routes were analysed for relationships determined by 46 land-use and physical factors. Analyses are presented describing four different groupings of the data: statewide , 43 routes; dry land , 13 routes; irrigated land, 20 routes; and V!estern Slope, 10 routes. In each case, between 40 and 50 per cent o~ the variance in pheasant populations was explained by the independent variables examined. Since no pheasant mortality of importance occurred during the winter period under examination (1960-61), it was concluded that the analyses demonstrate only the basic framework of range carrying capacity for pheasants. This framework is established by--altitude and the total size of the habitable area. Within the framework, large acreages of grain or very fertile land can increase carrying capacity to a limited degree. In the absence of specialized stress requiring specialized protection, other factors are of very minor importance. Procedures: The basic pattern of investigation for this study was determined by the already existing management system for pheasants used by the Colorado Game and Fish Department. Each spring, Conservation Officers take two-minute crowing counts at each of 10 points on 44 routes in the Colorado pheaxant range. Routes are run three times during the April 20 to June 10 period. For the purposes of this study, the single highest count recorded was considered the best measure of the pheasant population which survived the winter period. Although Conservation Officers also submit winter sex-ratio counts, these were considered too unreliable on individual routes to justify conversion of crowing data to absolute population data. Fie~d data: For each crowing-count pOint, transect maps evaluating the existing cover patterns were constructed. These consisted of four, 400-yard transects estimated diagonally from the road edges. In all, 28 land-use types were classified on the 430 crowing-count points mapped. An additional 18 variables describing a variety of non-land-use environmental factors were calculated for each crowingcount point. Descriptions of the 46 independent variable tested are presented in Table 1. �-28- Table l.--Independent variables tested for their influence on pheasant population levels , 1961. Variable Number Symbol .Desc~iption ;,'J++ Uncultivated areas with dense, high-quality herbaceous cover. 1 Cattails or other tall perennials. W+ Good herbaceous cover. Annuals or perennials, usually 12-18 2 inches tall and dense enough to provide good cover. Fair herbaceous cover. Annuals or perennials, usually under 12 W 3 inches tall and of heaVy density only under 6 inches. Very poor or no cover. Low annuals or bare ground. 4 wG+ 5 Grain stubble over 18 inches in height. . G Grain stubble over 6 but under 18 inches tall. 6 Grain stubble under 6 inches or partially plowed, grazed, etc. 7 GF Fallow ground and fall-p.lowed areas. 8 PH Pastureland with a high percentage of sagebrush or other woody 9 perennial dominant. p+ Pasture land which has been ungrazed and is unmowed, heavy grass. 10 p Normally or heavily grazed pasture or ungrazed shortgrass sod. 11 C+ Machine harvested and standing corn. 12 Corn stubble cut for silage - normally 6-8 inch stumps. C 13 Corn stubble partially plowed or used aspastureage. 14 CS+ Unharvested sorghums. 15 S Sorghum stubble. 16 M 17 Millet stubble. A Alf alfa stubble. 18 Bare ground - usually including some was~ crop products such as B 19 beetcrops,.discard potatoes, etc, H Open water surface. 20 FB Farmsteads including buildings, grounds and feedlots. 21 VJB++ Windbreaks or woody plantings - 100% shrubs and thicket cover. 22 ~'JB+ Windbreaks or woody plantings - 50-100% cover at ground level. 23 WB V!indbreaks or woody plantings - less than 50% ground cover. 24 Orchards and other tree plantings with little or no cover •. 25 WBR·:+ Rocky slopes with trees, usually junipers, and little ground cover. 26 R+ Rocky slopes with some browse species, usually sagebrush, and 27 little ground cover. R Barren rocky slopes. 28 The sum of the distances, up to 50 miles each, along the four Ra 29 primary compass points, from a crowing-count point to the edges of known pheasant range. E The altitude for each point. 30 The number of changes in crop or land-use type over the lengths Br 31 of the four transects. Simple count of the number of farmsteads within one-half mile ,. 32 FBc of ~he crowing-count point. The number of ten-foot contour intervals crossed in traversing 33 Cr a mile north and mile east from the crowing-count point. ( WB++c Simple counts of the number of windbreaks occurring within 34 ( WB+c one-half mile of the crowing-count point. Definitions of 35 i ( WBc; quality are the same as those used for variables 26 ( 37 22-25. WB-c ( �....•... •..:-.4 " ~".-:,-;:'... .' ' -29Table l.--Independent varIables tested for their influence on pheasant population .levels. 1961. Cont'd. Variable Number Symbol Description 38 Tr 39 Gr 40 41 42 Cl Wi T 43 44 Te 45 /Vii 46 Pr iJ!a An ordinal classification of the probable amount of traffic and the speed of travel past the crowing count point. Paved, 4; No.1 gravel, 3; No.2 gravel, 2; and dirt, l. An ordinal classification of the amount of grit or gravel available to birds at the crowing point. Paved, 1; No. 1 gravel, 4; No.2 gravle, 3; dirt, 2. Percentage overcast at the time of the count (WCO records). l'iindspeed and the time of the count (~'!CO records). Number of minutes before, or after, sunrise at which count was started (~CO records). Temperature at the time of the count (WCO records). Mean monthly maximum, Nov. through iVlar.,at the weather station or stations nearest the crowing count route. Mean monthly minimum, Nov. through iAar., at the weather station or stations nearest the crowing count route. Total precipitation, Nov. through IV/ar.,at the weather station or stations nearest the crowing count route. Analytic method: Analysis of these data was accomplished using a step-wise multiple regression program prepared by the Department of Preventive' iV'edicineand Public Health, School of iV!edicine,University of California at Los !Angeles. i;l3chinetime arrangements were handled by the Co Lorado State University Research Foundation through the C.S~'U. Computing Center. Ba si caLjv, the mach fne program performs - ••• a multiple linear regression upon input data cons i st Inq of m sets of data containing n independent variables and one dependent variable • ••• A subset of regression coefficients for K variables '(K ~ n ) will be obtained which are significant at a given level which may be specified." (from BlMED NO. 009 mimeo program). Further properties of the program which were of particular value in this analysis were: 1. A number of intermediate regression equations are obtained, adding one variable at a time. The variable added is that one which makes the greatest improvement in "goodness of fit." 2. Only significant variables are included in the final regression. 3. A variable which is approximately a linear combination of other independent variables is not entered into the regression Analvsis of Data: For the purposes of th{~ examination, .10 was selected as the F level at which variables anter~d the equation and .05 as the level at which variables entered the equation and .05 as the level at which variables would be �~3~ removed.V The available data were arranged for five separate problems as follows! Problem No.1: Statewide analysis - 43 routes, 11 on the northeast dryland, 14 in the northeast and northcentral irrigated land, 4 in the Arkansas drainage, 10 on the ~O!esternSlope and 4 in the San Luis Valley; 430 observations; 46 independent variables. Problem No.2: Revised statewide analysis - 43 routes; 430 observations; 45 independent variables. Problem No.3: Dryland analysis - 13 routes, 11 in the Northeast and 2 in the Arkansas Valley tablelands; 130 observations; 46 independent variables. Problem No.4: Irrigated land analysis - 20 routes, 14 in the Northeast and Northcentral, 2 in the Arkansas Valley and 4 in the San Luis Va lley; 200 observations; 46 independent variables. Problem No.5: V!estern Slope analysis - 10 routes on the Western Slope; 100 observations; 46 independent variables. In presenting the results of the analysis for each of these problems, a standard procedure has been followed. The machine print-out,~including standard errors of the estimate and of individual coefficients is tabulated and new variables are added until at least one regression coefficieni h~s ~ standard error greater than 50;6of the coefficient. At this level, assuming two standard errors equivalent.to the .05 significance level, any greater variation gives more than 1 chance in 20 that the regression coefficient could be zero. This was assumed to be the point at which no significant improvement in the regression could be expected. fftultipleR for the end-point equation is then presented and the significance of the regression and individual variates is discussed. Finally, the step-order ranking of each of the first 15 variables is compared to the ranking-order of linear correlation coefficients. While not a significant comparison, this examination provides a much broader evaluation than is possible with the strictly statistical tests. 17 These figures should not be confused with significance levels. They are actual F values and are considerably below the minimum F required for signif~~ cance. The low values, in effect, guarantee that the machine analysis will continue well beyond the point at which any significant contribution to the regression can be expected. That the selected values were much too low for the data available in this study is indicated by the fact that the machine analysis continued even after fifth-place rounding errors had obviously invalidated the reliability of calculated standard errors of estimate. This, inoitself,made little difference in interpretations, but the low rejection F practically guaranteed that the analysis would not reject a variable that was a linear combination of some other variables as it is designed to do. �-31Problem No.1: Statewide ana1vsis - 43"=routes. The step-wise ana Iys i s for all 43 40utes urveyed is presented in Table 2~ Flith the addition of the seventh variable in this analysis, the cut-off point was achieved. The seventh variable (~+) has a standard error which is 56.6% of the regression coefficient. The final usable equation, then, was considered to be the six-variable analYSis using Ra (range), El (altitude), Wi (wind), B (bare ground), Ma (maximum temp.~ and G+ (grain+). This equation has a multiple R=.671, which means that 44.99% (R ) of the variance in pheasant populations is explained by the variables used. Discussion:, The obviously limiting point in any discussion of statewide pheasant environmental patterns is the overall weakness of this final equation. Fifty-five per cent of the known variance in pheasant population levels cannot be explained and there is little possibility for substantial improvement with available data. In fact, examination of the standard error of estimate series in Table 2 suggests that little real improvement was achieved after the second equation was written. Table 2. --Step-wi se regre ssi on analysis, Statewide, 43,routes, 46 independent vClriables (Problem No. 1). ., .. '.-.' Reoression Coefficients of Variables 11 Error of Constant 29(Ra) 30 (E1) 41 (vn) 19(B) 44 (Ma 1 5{G+) 2{W+) Fstimate 9.314 .1894 15.728 (.0137 ) 38.724 .1510 -.0052 14.755 (.0138) (.OOb7 ) 45.423 .1491 -.0060 -1.6474 14.519 (.0136 ) (.0007 ) (.4250 ) 44.348 .1574 ;...1.6695 .0086 -.0061 14.396 (.0138 ) (.0007) (.4214) (.0030 ) -30.131 .1679 -.0037 -1.6682 .0106 .1268 14.227 (.0140 ) (.0010 ) (.4165 ) (.0030 ) (.0381 ) -29.598 ~1538 -.0037 -i.7615 .0116 .1266 .0081 14.107 (.0010 ) 9.0147) (.4142) (.0030) (.0377 ) (.0028 ) -34.596 .1568 -.0034 -1.7965 .0123 .1324 .0087 .0083 14.072 (.0148 ) (.0010 ) (.4137) (.0030 ) (.0378) (.0028 ) (.0047) Standard errors of regression coefficients in parentheses. 11 In the first equation, a single variable, Ra. explairi;ed30.'8~-6 of the recorded pheasant population v ar i ance-, By aidi.nq a second variable, El , the predicting power of the equation was increased to 39.3%. The addition of four more variables, however, only increased to power·to 45.0%, and beyond that point the probability of no improvement was greater than.05. This limitation on the predicting power of the equat~6n is extremely important because it reduces the overall reliability of the remaining discussion to an unknown degree. Obviously, if some variable indicated to be important .in 'this analysis only accounts for a part of less than half of total pheasant population variance, there is good probability of a more important, but unrecognized variable. This limitation is tempered, and may be obviated, by the following possibilities, but it should be recognized. It becomes less meaningful in the degree to which the following factors are important: �-321. The basic variance of crowing-counts. It has been assumed that error variance of crowing counts is fairly small in comparison with population differences, but this variance may be larger than anticipated. 2. Variance in W.C.O. hearing ability or, possibly, the care taken to obtain reliable data. 3. Differences in sex ratios. No major differences in ratios between census routes have been detected, but differences between count points could be quite extreme and it vould be impossible to detect them with current census methods. 4. Heterogeneity of pheasant environments. If the Colorado pheasant range actually consists of several, wi.de Iy differing environments, it would be impossible to write a single descriptive equation applicable to all. Within this framework, then, the most significant relationship expressed by the Problem No. 1 analysis is the power of the single variable, Ra. In effect, Ra is a description of the amount of habitable pheasant range available to a bird at any particular crowing-count point. The mathematical relationship describes a pattern in which population densities are high on large blocks of habitable range and low on small blocks even though other factors in the two ranges are essentially similar. This relationship has no direct bearing on the types of work which might be recommended for habitat development, but it carries an underlying inference which could be important to the success of any program. That is, if pheasant population densities are actually a function of range size, then ~y effective program will be more successful in areas of unlimited pheasant range and less successful where range is li~ited. In testing this possibility, it is recognized that Ra, as a mathematical variable, could be expressing either of two relationships. First, it is possible that the variable is just the best linear combination of a number of other variables. If true, a repeat analysis, deleting Ra, should produce a multiple regression equat~ ion with predicting power nearly as great as the analysis with Ra but including several more variables. On the other hand, Ra may be expressing a situation which would exist if decimating factors are usually confined to small blocks of pheasant range during anyone time period. In this case, where the pheasant range is extensive, recovery of a decimated population would be based on emmigration and would occur almost immediately. Where the range is small, however, recovery would require production and might take a year or longer. The obvious end result would be that populations on a large blocks of range would nearly always be greater than on small blocks because of a continuously higher production potential. To test these alternatives, Ra was deleted as a variable of consideration and the complete analysis was rerun using only 45 independent variables. The resulting regression analysis (Problem No.2) is presented in Table 3. Examination of these data shows that although Ra does derive some strength through multiple representation of other variables, the major regression relationship is actually based on a function of range size. The step-wise regression required addition of nine variables before any regression coefficient standard error exceeded the 50% limit, but the final eight-variable equation has a multiple R .614 and is capable of accounting for only 37.6% of the pheasant population variance. Thus, the best combination of eight other variables explains less variance than the two-variable combination including Ra and El. This provides relatively strong evidence that habitat work in extensive ranges has a basically better chance for success than the same work where existing range is limited. ':, . = �Table "3.--Stepwise regression ana1vsis. Statewide, 43 routes, 45 indeoendent variables Reqression Coefficients of Variables 1/ Constant 66.009 60.920 63.170 54.993 61.346 54.556 45.248 45.994 47.225 J/ 30 (E) -.0079 (.0007 ) -.0073 (.0007 ) -.0069 (.0007) -.0069 (.0007 ) -.0074 (.0007 ) -.0076 (.0007) -.0074 (.0007) -.0073 (.0007) -.0074 (.0007 ) 5 {G+~ .0163 (.0030 ) .0133 (.0030) .0126 (.0029 ) .0141 (.0029 ) .0138 (.0029 ) .0137 (.0029 ) .0131 (.0029 ) .0128 (.0029 ) 33{Cr} 46 (Pr) - 41{Wi} 38(Tr) 39(Gr) 9ip++) lProb1em No.2) 34 (WB~-+~-} Error of Estimate 16.678 16.147 -.2689 (.0616) -.4031 (.0656 ) -.3719 (.0661 ) -.3518 (.0663 ) -.3276 (.0668 ) -.3050 (.0674 -.3035 (.0672 15.816 .0301 (.0060 ) .0245 (.0063 ) .0242 (.0063 ) .0239 (.0062) .0231 (.0062 ) .0226 (.0062 ) Standard errors of regression coefficients 15.387 -.13071 (.4722 ) -1.2983 (.4699) -1.3212 (.4675 ) -1.3160 (.4657 ) -1.4158 (.4667 ) 15.268 2.5590 (1.1261 ) 1.7714 3.3996 (1.1746 ) (.7462) 3.2194 1.7286 (1.1733 ) (.7436) 3.2707 1.6109 (1.1694 ) (.7433) in parentheses. 15.193 15.111 I \.,J -.0065 (.0031 ) -.0068 (.0031 ) 15.052 7.8953 (3.9618) 14.999 - . , \J.I I �-34The partial influence the variable Ra receives from multiple representation can be examined by comparing the order of appearance of variables, in the tV!O regression analyses already tabulated. A listing of the first'20 variables for each equation is presented in Table 4, but it should be rem~mbered that only the first six and eight of these, respectively, can be considered to have any meaningful influence. In comparing the two analyses, major emphasi,s is placed on the changes in ranking order of variables after the removal, of \'{.?, from the analysis. Variables are discussed in order of their appearance incthe45-variable analysis: Table 4.-0rderof appearance of 20 independent variables in step-wise regression analYses, 4]routes. Variables Order of Appearance 46-variable analysis (Prob, No. 1) 45-variable analysis (Prob. No.2) El Altitude Ra Range extent 1 G+ Grain,+ El Altitude 2 Cr Contours Wi Wind at count 3 Pr Precipitation B Bare ground 4 Wi Wind at count Ma Maximum temperature 5 _G.± __ .§rl!in.+ 1./ Tr Road traffic 6 Gr Grit W+ :'iaste+ 7 _P.±+ __ grQw~e-Pl!slu£e__ T Time of count 8 WB++c Windbreak count Pr Precipitation 9 S+ Sorghum+ Cr Contours 10 P Pasture Te Count temperature 11 Flarm count; FBc WB+c, Windbreak count 12 temperature Ee Count Mi Minimum temperature 13 temperature Ivli Nlinimum R++ Forest 14 temperature Ma ivlaximum WB++c Windbreak count 15 R++ Forest S+ Sorghum + 16 \"i,aste W Tr Road traffic 17 Alfalfa A Br "Edge" 18 + C+ Corn R+ Browse 19 , count of Time T 20 Gr Grit" Point at which variables no longer make significant contribotion to the regression. 11 -" El (Altitude): Vii th the removal of Ra , the altitude of the crowtng-courit point assumed the number 1 influence position and is thus singled out a~ one of the most important reasons for pheasant population variation over the State. This is the same result obtained in comparison of whole routes in Job 1 of this study. G+ (Grain+): Heavy grain stubble appears in both analyses as an important facet of pheasant environment. The fact that G+ goes from rank 6 to rank 2 with the removal of Ra suggests that part of the Ra influence may be based on multiple representation for G-:' And, considering that very large, continuous grain acreages are concentrated in the extensive pheasant range on the northeast tableland, this is not surprising. Cr (Contours): Viith the removal of Ra, the variable Cr rises from rank 10 to rank 3. Since the extensive pheasant ranges of the Northeast are mostly flat and the limited ranges of the t'!esternSlope are in fairly rough country, interpretation is that with the removal of Ra from the analysiS, Cr becomes important because it is capable of describing some of the Ra influence. �· .;~,3-5- Pr (Precipitation): For anysin"gle year, meaningful interpretation of the ., precipitation variable is almost impossible. As {t appears in these analyses, Pr is related to Ra and removal of Ra increases the rank of Pr from 9 to 4. This change, combined with the positive regression coefficient for Pr during a mild winter, suggests that the only real relationship is based on the fact that slightly more precipitation was recorded at lower altitudes on extensive pheasant ranges. When data are available for a winter in which wildlife mortality actually occurs, the importance of precipitation can be more easily assessed. VJi (\tiHnd): The drop from rank 3 to rank 5 for the Wi variable probably has no significance. It may be extremely important, however, that this variable appears in the analysis at all. A number of prior studies have shown that pheasant crowing activity drops in response tb increase in wind velocit~. However, such influence should not have appeared in this study if all counts'had been made either randomly or on calm days. Since it is highly unlikely that wind velocity during a two-minute census period could have any influence on pheasant population levels, the only possible conclusion is that the effort expended by individual officers in making counts is in direct ratio to the size of the expected population. Where pheasants are numerous, the officer is likely to be very conscientious about selecting calm days for counts; and, conversely, where pheasants are few, the officer is unlikely to make any special effort. This is pretty much human nature, and probably should not be considered a reflection on the officers. However, if it is indicative of an overall attitude about the pheasant census system there is a good chance that reliability of counts also decreases at lower count levels (thus increasing bas Icwar i ance ), ~ Ir (Road traffic), Gr (Grit) and p.i+ (Browse pasture) were unexpected entrants in the regression analysis, and the fact that each rose a minimum of 10 ranks with the removal of na suggests a strong relationship with the Ra variable rather than a measure of individual variable influence. Further analysis, particularly within the subregions of the State, is suggested before any conclusion is presented concerning these variables. B (Bare ground): This variable appears as number 4 in the analysis using .. Ra and diops out of the first 20 when Ra is deleted. The change suggests a strong intercorrelation, but the exact meaning of the relationship was considered very obscure. Perhaps the best theory at this point is that Ra, as a predicting variable, tends to underestimate pheasant populations on irrigated lands. B appears, not because the bare ground remaining after beet and other truck crops are harvested has any real influence on pheasants, but cecause bare ground is common on irri_ gated lands and provides the best mathematical adjustment for Ra errors. Based on the data so far presented, there is apparently very little that a statewide habitat development program could do which would change already existing natural and agriculturaJ influences to favor pheasant populations. Of the factors which appeared to be m0~t important, only grain stubble is under the control of man; and if past experi~nce is any criterion, agricultural land use patterns will certainly not be modified because of any effect they might have on wildlife. A final examination of these data consists of comparison of the ranking-order of the linear correlation ,~0efficients with the order in which variables were selected in the step-wise regr~ssion. Analyses already presented have shown that only �-36a few of the changes in ranking order can be considered significant because of the high error variance associated with crowing counts. Nevertheless, this type of comparison does afford an opportunity to predict which of the variables would become significant if a larger sample or better data-gathering technique eventually allows some reduction unexplained vraiance. The major consideration in evaluating Table 5 data is the direction a variable moves in the ranking-order series. If a variable has a high linear correlation but is picked up very late in the regression it means there is little ac~al relationship between the variable and pheasant populations but a strong relationship to some other variable that is important to birds. On the other hand, a variabie which appears in the regression early, despite a low ranking in the linear correlation series, is considered important because its influence is apparently hidden by the concurrent influence of some other variable or it only affects birds in conjunction with some other variable. In Table 5, the first two columns compare the order of appearance in the regression with the ranking order of correlation coefficients; and the second two colunns compare the ranking order of linear coefficients with the order of appearance in the regression. For the first comparison, five variables were picked up more than 20 ranks sooner than the linear correlation strengths indicated. Three of these, Wi, Band Pr, were included in the Problem 1 and Problem 2 predicting equations an~ have already been discussed. The remaining two variables were: Table 5.--Comparison of step-order ranking with ranking order of linear correlation coefficients for first 15 variables, Problem No. 1, Statewide analvsis, 43 routes. Of linear Of linear Ranking In reqression correlation cor,relation reqression In order Ra 1 Ra 1 1 2 El 2 El 2 5 Ma 42 Wi 3 13 27 Mi B 4 G+ 6 Ma 3 5 Cr 10 G+ 5 6 -24 F w+ 41 7 29 P 36 T 8 Pr A nip 11 34 9 P++ 25 6 Cr 10 11 Te 11 Te 11 R++ 14 .. ("JB+c 37 12 20 Gr iVli 4 13 23 FB R++ 12 14 C nip 1J vm++c 25 15 1I This variable was not picked up in the step-wise regression analysis. - W+ (good weed cover): In general, this variable describes the quality of waste cover along roadsides. The fact that it appears in the analysis at all suggests that roadside cover may furnish a significant amount of winter protection to pheasant populations. Further study will be required to determine whether such protection is related to actual cover values, to the ditch normally associated with the roadside or to food availability. �-37~. • t T (time): The (negative regression coef f i c i errt assoo i at.sd-Viiiththis variable is a further indica'tioO'"thatthe reliability. of ph"easant"-censusdata may be in direct proportion to the size of the expected population. The variable should have been randomly distributed if all counts were made in the same way by Conservation Officers. Instead , it shows that officers in high-density areas tend to start counts earlier than those in low density areas. In the second comparison, four variables stand out as high-ranking in the linear correlation order but appearing at least ten ,steps late in the regression. No particular significance can I:?eattached to the~e relationships except to note that F (fallow) normally occurs, and P (pasture), A (alfalfa) and P++ (browse pasture) are not found in conjunction, with some variable, or variables, that are important to pheasant survival and distribution. Recommendations: If no other fact stands out in the data and discussions just presented, it is abundantly clear that there is no, single, clear-cut factor which can be used as a key to environmental manipulation for pheasants on a statewide basis. The qualities of good weed cover (W+) deserve further investigation, but the factors which appear to actually determine state-wide pheasant distribution in the spring are mostly of a type which defy control by man. Problem No.3: Dryland analysis - 13 routes. The step-wise analysis for 13 routes in dry-farmed areas is presented in Table 6. In this analysis, the sixth variable (~B-c) had a regression coefficient standard error representing 51.2% of the coef f Lcierrt , The five-variable equation, then, was selected as the most pow~tf~l forth~se data. This equation, using El (altitude), Cr (contours), WB+" (woodycover-}, G+ (grain+) and Te (count temp.) has a multiple R .728 and 'a" predicting power which accounts for 53.0% of the pheas~nt ~opulation variance. = Discussion: Again, the significance of any discussion based on these data may be limited by the fact that a large proportion of the recorded variance remains unexplained. However, the fact that no great reduction in variance was achieved in the dryland analysis suggests that most of this variance is not due to unexplained environmental patterns. In the analysis of whale routes (Job No.1), the dryland proved to have the most predictable environment of all regions examined (95.5%). The fact that variance remains high when route-points are not combined suggests that basic error variance, not unrecognized environmental factors, is involved. Of the variables which appear in the dryland analysis, only one was not also important in the statewide analysis. However, the dryland pheasant range in Colorado is recognized as the most heavily populated, and factors shown to be important i.n=t.hi s analysis achieve greater significance simply because so many more birds ar~ involved. The five factors represented in the final equation were: �-39Table 6.--Step-wise regression analysis, dryland, 13 route s, 46 independent variables2 (Problem No. 3). Reqression coefficients of variables Error of estimate 5(G+) 43(Te) 23 (WB+) 37 (VJB-cl 33 (Cr) 30 (El) Constant 17 .372 182.042 -.0359 (.0047 ) 15.706 -1.1867 190.872 -.0361 (.2182) (.0043) 15.149 1.2400 186.261 -1.2366 -.0349 (.3823 ) (.2110) (.0041 ) 14.832 1.0577 .0090 188.057 -1.1328 -.0362 (.3811 ) (.0035 ) (.2106 ) (.0041 ) 1.0791 14.597 -.4321 -1.1159 .0090 204.970 -.0352 (.1921) (.3752 (.0035 ) (.2074 ) (.0040 ) 14.434 -3.4513 -.4132 .0079 1.0449 213.772 -1.0806 -.0373 (.3714 ) (.0035 ) (1.7673) (.1902 (.2059 ) (.0041 ) 17 1/ Standard errors of regression coefficients in parentheses. El (altitude): By comparison with the statewide analysis, in which routes at 7500 feet were included, the altitude variations among dryland routes are relatively minor. The lowest point, 3473 feet, \'Jasfound in the Lamar-Holly area and the highest, 4950 feet, on the Siebert-Flagler route. Despite the narrow range involved, altitude was the single most important variable examined. Cr (contours): In the statewide analysis, and within the dryland areas, Cr has a negative regression coefficient. In both cases, the relationship is apparently descriptive of peripheral areas of the total pheasant range. Pheasants are associated with grain farming throughout their North American range, and in the dryland environment examined here the land is cultivated wherever topography will allow. At the edges of cultivation, bordering the sandhills or riverbottom breaks, pheasant populations are lower simply because habitable environment is no longer present. WB+ (windbreaks): Previous studies (1955-58) under Project .W-90-R have shown that woody windbreak cover does not provide effective winter shelter for pheasants. It is widely recognized, however, that birds do concentrate in and around woody plantings. This is particularly true when potential cover in the plantings has not been covered by drifting snow. During a winter in which weather conditions were capable of causing pheasant mortality it is extremely doubtful that t;,'B+ would appear in the regression, but 1960-61 was a relatively mild winter, and pheasant concentrations at windbreaks remained stable until the spring break-up. G+ (grain+): The number four variable in the dryland analysis was heavy grain stubble. Inasmuch as grain on the dryland is probably the mainstay for both food and cover in the pheasant environment, this is hardly surprising. It should be recognized, however, that grain, like windbreaks, may not have the same relationship to pheasant populations and survival in a hard winter as it had in the mild winter of 1960-61. This observation becomes particularly significant when it is realized that G+ was deleted from the regression at step 28. This is well beyond the point at which rounding errors were influencing the calculations, but it at least suggests that G+ may be a linear combination of a number of other variables. �-39Te (count temperature): This variable represents another of the factors measured by Conservation Officers at the time counts are taken. Since the negative regression coefficient is inverse to the expected relationship, there is some suggestion of poor, or at least non-random, technique. It should be recognized, however, that latitude was not tested as a potential variable in this regression, and if any latitude relationship exists, the temperature variable may be providing the best possible description. A cornpar i son.-of correlation and regression ranks for the first 15 variables in the dryland ana 1ysi s is 'preserltedin Table 7 • Only two of the variables in the regression were picked up more than 20 ranks sooner than their linear correlation rank, and Lrrne i ther case is a meaningful interpretation obvious: Table 7.--Comparison of step-order ranking with ranking order of linear correlation coefficients for first 15 variables, Problem No. 3, dryland analvsis. 13 routes. Ranking Of linear Of linear order In rearessi.on correlation correlation In rearession 1 El 1 El 1 2 Cr 3 Ma 17 3 WB+ 6 Cr 2 4 G+ 10 Mi 10 5 Te 8 G 18 6 WB-c. 32 WB+ 3 7 W 11 Ra 11 8 P++ 17 Te 5 9 Pr 12 WB+c nip 11 10 Mi 4 G+ 4 11 Ra 7 W 7 12 T Pr 23 9 13 FB 30 Gr nip 11 14 C 38 Cl 15 15 Cl 14 C+ nLP 1/ 11 This variable was not picked up in the step-wi se regression analysis. WB-c (orchard count): Pheasant population levels demonstrate a negative relationship to the presence of poor quality woody plantings, and the variable WB-c appears in the regression .at such an early stage (step 6) that it cannot be considered an entirely random occurrence. Nevertheless, it hardly seems reasonable that oheasants would make any particular effort to avoid this type of cover unless some associated factor was making the type undesirable as well as useless. Until further data are available, it can only be suggested that WB-c may be a linear combination of the actual influences of orchards, grazed windbreaks, farmyardd and suburban housing developments. C (Corn): In the dryland area examined here, corn is primarily grown on the sandy soils adjacent to the sandfuills and riverbreaks. For this analysis, C probably represents the peripheral decline of pheasant habitat rather than a particular influence that corn as a crop has on pheasant population levels. The comparison of linear correlation ranks to regression-step ranks shows three variables that were picked up much later that might have been expected: �-40hila(max, temp.): This variable had the second highest correlation with crowing-count levels calculated. Howeve'r, it vra s not picked up until the 17th step of regression. The fact that it was finally picked up suggests some independent influence on birds, but the delay shows that Ma is highly correlated with El and that most of the influence is due to altitude. G (grain): The function of grain stubble in the dryland pheasant environment appears to be obscured rather than clarified by this variable. However, when it is recognized that well over haHthe grain stubble on dry land ranges was classified G+, the G c~tegory simply becomes an alternative ~eparation for stubble in the areas of comparative crop failure. When G+ enters. the equation at step 4 it effectively describes all the grain stubble values and forces G out of consi- deration. WB+c (wmdbr eak count): A total count of wi ndbreaks around each crowingcount point will, obviously, include all windbreaks measured in the point ~ansects. Therefore, when WB+ entered the regression at step 3, WB+c was eliminated. Recommendations: Unfortunately, at least for the purposes of this study, the winter of 1960-61 was relatively mild. About all that can be demonstrated at this point is that during mild winters, windbreaks and heavy wheat stubble are the cover types which cOf!centrate pheasants and seem to offer some possibility for manipulation. Wheth~r the same variab~es whould appear to be important following a hard winter is a matter for copject~i~, but data available for 1960 counts, following the winter of 1959-60, suggest that they would not. Although the analyses used (see W-90-R-6, Job 1) are not directly comparable, the initial report in this series suggests that WB+ will be replaced by W+ when pheasant "" survival is involved. Problem No.4: Irriqated-land analvsi s - 20 routes. ' The step-wise regression analysis for 20 routes in irrigated areas of Colorado is presented in Table 8. In some respects, six of the twenty routes involved in this analysis may not be directly comparable to the others. The two routes in the Arkansas Valley, for example, involve a somewhat different land utilization pattern then the routes in the Platte Valley of the north, and the four routes in the San Luis Valley represent a pheasant environment that is distinctive in the United States because of its altitudinal and ecological patterns. With the addition of the seventh variable (Wi), the standard error for one of the regression coefficients became greater than 50% of the coefficient. Nultiple R for the six-variable equation involving Pr, Ra, el, S, Band Cr was .701 and 49.2% of the recorded variance was explained. Discussion: Unlike the previous analyses, the newest variable in the equation at the cut-off point was not the variable with the highest standard error. At Step Seven, the fourth-added variable (s) had a coefficient representing 52.6% of the regression coefficient while the ratio for Wi was only 40.5%. The next two steps in this regrsssion are not presented in Table 8, but with the addition of an eighth variable (iAa),the coef f i.ci.ent ratio for S dropped to 47.6% while the ratio for Ma was only 45.2% and the ratios for VIi and Ra went to 43.4% and 50.8%. ~',hena ninth variable (WB-c) was added, the Ra, S, Wi, Ma and WB-c ratios were, respectively, 66 .5%, 49.6%, 50.4%, 37.1% and 48.5%. None of the equations �-41with more than six variables will be considered significant in this discussion, but the facts that so many variables were involved and that several of them fluctuate about the cut-off level places some special limitations on the interpre~ tations and required that more than six variables be discussed. Table 8.-Step-wide regression analysis, irrigated lands, 20 routes 46 independent variables (Problem No.4). Error of Reqression coefficients of variables II Constant Estimate 46 (Pr} 29(Ra) 30 (El) 16 (S) 19(8) 33(G) 41(Wi} 4.825 .0642 12.471 (.0064 ) -3.002 .0566 .1146 11.798 (.0062 ) (.0233) 12.465 .0474 .1206 -.0024 11.476 (.0066 ) (.0227) (.0007) 17.439 .0447 .1092 -.0029 -.0183 11. 312 (.0066 ) (.0228 ) (.0007) (.0071) 16.898 .0452 .1042 -.0030 -.0181 .0075 11.183 (.0065 ) (.0227) (.0007 ) (.0070 ) (.0033 ) 13.951 .0384 .1092 -.0027 -.0162 .0093 .2237 11.088 (.0072 ) (.0226 ) (.0007) (.0070 ) (.0033) (.1073) 16.366 .0341 .1139 -.0027 -.0133 .0101 .2740 -1.6246 10.945 (.007l) (.0224 ) (.0007 } (.0070 ) (.00::32 ) (.1079} ( .6587) II Standard errors of regression coefficients in parenthe ses. Pr (precipitation): In this analysis, as in the statewide analYSis, the precipitation variable appears as a positive influence on the number of pheasants surviving the winter period. And again, it should be pointed out, that since no really important pheasant mortality occurred on COlorado pheasant ranges during the winter of 1960-61, the relationship may not be a true description of the influence of snow on pheasants. The total annual precipitation at Alamosa, in the San Luis Valley, is less than 6 inches, and since this Valley also has the lowest pheasant populations of the three major irrigated ranges examined, the relationship is considered meaningless until data describing a hard winter has been obtained. Ra (range): An interpretation for this variable has already been presented as a part of the statewide analysiS and will not be r~peated here. However, it should be' noted that Ra was one of the variables which eventually had a standard error to regression coefficient ratio greater than 50%. The particularly interesting point in this analysis is that the ratio jumped from about 20% to over 50% in one step with the addition of the variable representing temperature maximums (Ma). Altiouqh this change occurred after the steps in regression were not considered significant, it does suggest a strong ralationship ~hich should be examined much more closely when data for another year are analysed. El (altitude): The irrigated-land routes examined in this problem include both extremes of altitudinal distribution for pheasants in Colorado. On this basis alone, it is not surprising that altitude appears as an important factor in the analysis. �-42S (grghum): The exact reasons for the appearance of sorghum in this analysis are not very obvious, and at this point it is not certain that any real influence on pheasants is indicated. The relationship is actually based on comparison of northern routes where almost no sorghum is grown with Arkansas Valley routes and large sorghum acreages. Fheasant populations are lower where the most sorghum is grown, but a cause and effect relaf~onship is not necessarily indicated. " ;. B (bare ground): The appeara~~~. ~f the bare ground variable in the analysis, and particularly with a positive regr~~~iun coefficient, is somewhat of an anomaly. Obviously, the barren surfaces remainr~g after beets and other truck crops have been harvested are not going to make an important contribution to pheasant winter survival. If, however, it is recognized that survival was not a problem in 1960-61, the B variable assumes an entirely different meaning. B then becomes a measure of the population going into the fall and winter period. In this light, it is possible to speculate that B is describing range carrying capacity as a function of land fertility. ~Jhere the land is fertile, high-yield truck crops are grown and, concurrently, pheasant populations are high. Cr (contours): If the variable Cr has no other function in this analysis, it emphasizes the importance of considering varous units of the Colorado pheasant range as entirely separated, non-comparable environments. The influence of rough topography in the dry-farmed areas (Problem 3) was negative because most of the rough land in dry areas borders the cultivated and habitable range. Any land too rough to plow is barren or is pastured. In irrigated areas, on the other hand, rough topography provides greater possibilities for retarded runoff and the creation of cattail and heavy-weed areas. Lan<:itoo rough to plow actually increa ses rather than decreases, range carrying capacity for phe asarrt s, Wi (wind): As a supposedly randomized variable under the direct control of Conservation Officers using a standardized census method, :this variable should not have entered the regression at all. A discussion of th~ implicati.ons of the Wi variable has already been presented. A comparison of correlation and regression ranks for the first 15 variables in the irrigated analysis is presented in Table 9. Four variables were picked up more than 20 ranks sooner than their linear correlation rank: WB-c (orchard count) was picked up at step 9 in the regression and WBc (windbreak count) was picked up at step 13. In both cases, the regression coefficients were negative. While rieither variable made a significant contribution to the regression, it seems apparent that some relationship to pheasant populations is demonstrated. Possibly the best hypothesis at this point is that human habitation of some kind (farms, town, etc.) is nearly always associated with woody plantings on irrigated land. The disturbances in this as soci at i on are apparently great enough to force crowing cocks to select other types for territorial defense. G+ (grain+): Tall grain stubble was found to be the mainstay cover type for pheasants in the dryland analysis (problem 3). Stubble cover.inirrigated areas is usually or much poorer quality (G of G-), but where good stubble does occur it holds the same attraction for pheasants as record~d ohcth~ dryland. �-43Table 9.--Comparison of step-order ranking with ranking order of linear correlation coefficients for first 15 variables, Problem 4, irrigated-land analvsis, 20 routes. Ranking Of linear Of linear Order In reore ssi on correlation correlation In r'e ore ss i.on Fr 1 Pr 1 1 2 Ra 3 Mi 11 3 El 5 Ra 2 4 S 9 Cr 6 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 B 14 E1 Cr Wi 4 C1 10 nip 11 Ma Ma 7 WB-c G+ 29 C S 8 14 4 Wi Gr P++ 39 nip 11 Mi lNB+c WBc C -~?======== 38 2 13 41 8 W+ WB+c B 39 Br 1I-1his variable was not picked up in the step-wise regression analYSis. 3 7 12 5 18 r+ (waste+): Heavy waste cover was the 15th variable picked up in the regression analysis, and at this level it is certainly less than a significant contributor to pheasant survival. However, such cover is found on an extremely small proportion of the total land arep, and since it does represent a type which can be manipulated and reproduced it may be considered more important than its rank in this analysis indicates. The comparison of linear correlation ranks to regression-step ranks shows two variables picked up much later than might have been expected: Cl (clouds): This is another of the variables which shoUld have·appeared randomly except as related to the way Conservation Officers conduct their field work. The fact that it never appeared in the regression suggests a random linear relationship with some other variable that actually is important. Gr (grain): Grain stubble ranked number 11 in the linear correlation series, but it was not picked up until step 39 of the regression. It seems apparent that the major value of grain stubble was described, probably by G+, before G could be picked up. Recommendations: The irrigated-land analysis, like the other analyses in this report, is weakened by the fact that no pheasant mortality of importance occurred in 1960-61. The environmental factors shown to be important were mostly those determining overall range-carrying capacity rather than survival.· ·A~d, of the dozen variables which appeared to be important, only one, W+, offers much possibility for manipulation in a habitat program. Problem No.5: Western Slone analysis - 10 routes. The step-wise regression analysis for 10 routes on the Western Slope in Colorado is presented in Table 10. This problem involves the smallest number of samples used for any analysis and represents the environmental functions controlling �-44pheasant populations in a series of disconnected and nearly marginal ranges scattered from Rifle t9 Bayfield. Since the fifth variable entering the regression produc~d a standard error greater than 50% of its coeffiCient, only four variables aree.~amined··'inthe final equation. iJ.ultipleR for this combination was.590 and only 34~'8%of the pheasant population variance was explained. Table 10.~~Step-wise regression ana lys i s , FJestern Slope, 10.tbutes,,1q independ.., .end variables (Problem 5).' ..... Regression Coefficients of Variables 11 Error of ~onstant ; '19(8) 43(Te) 39 (Gr) 45(Mi) 16(S) Estimate 8.404 ';0126 8.940 (.0031) -12.778 .0104 .5290 8.495 (.0030) (.1557) -6.596 .0103 .5476 -2.3375 8.166 (.0029) (.1498) (.7798 ) -23 •.705" .0105 .4971 .1048 -2.4388 7.928 ~.-.•..<-. Q028 ) (•1467) (.7578) (.0398 ) -25.623 .0111 .4606 -2.4241 .1241 7.826 -.0358 (.7484) (.0407) (.0194 ) ---,.._--,-_~(:..:.. ~OO~2::.:::8:..L)__ '..l.(. 1462) 11 Stana~f:t'd. errors of regression coefficients in parentheses. . Discussion: The fo~r variables represented in the final equation for ~estern Slope pheasant ranges were B, Te, Gr and Mi. At face value, this is about an unlikely a combination as could have been produced. Three of the four variables have appeared at significant levels in previous analyses, but two of these feature sign reversals and the third is a variable for which interpretation is certainly less than clear. At this point, it is doubtful that a meaningful evaluation of Western Slgpe pheasant ranges can be written or that the ranges involved have enough homoij'e'iieity to allow evaluation. In any case, no attempt will be made in this report to d raw conclusions from the available data. Conclusions: The basically limiting factor for any summary of the analyses presenteq in this report is that no really important pheasant mortality was r'ecorded von Colorado pheasant ranges during the wi.nter of 1960-61. Accordingly, the factors which appeared in these analyses as important to pheasant populations may be mor~ correctly related~to overall iangecarrying capacity and production potential than to de terrninat ion of pheasant wirrte r 'survival. . -':" . .- ~ . This is an important differentiatio~ ~ec~us~ it demonstrates both the strength and inherent we aknes s of the analytic method being employed. The basic carrying capacity of~ny ~ildlife range is probably established by the combination of factors that determines survival at critical periods in a species life cycle. For pheasants, the. critical periods are generally recognized as winter, spring nesting, and possibly, fall hunting. In order to detect the influence of any particular environmental pattern on populations, some change, preferably a large one, must occur within the populations during the critical period being examined. If no chsnge occurs, as in this case with a winter period that was not critical, the analyses ca~ only detect the over-lying pattern from the last critical period as seen through a confusion'of pheasant movement since that period. Thus, the factors detected as important in these. analyses ~ important to pheasant populations ~ but, they are not necessarily important to winter survival. And, until �-45data describing populations ~ a critical winter period do become available, it will not be possible to assign a legitimate winter-survival value to any of the variables examined. About all that can be accomplished with these analyses is to outline the basic framework within which all pheasant populations must apparently exist. As a means of comparing the five analyses presented for this report, Table 11 gives a listing of the variables found to be important in the order in which they appeared in the five regression equations. Considering only ths variables which made significant contribution to their respective equations, 29 separate appearances by 15 variables are involved. Any ranking system for .these 15 variables must be somewhat arbitrary, but for purposes' of discussion they can be ranked in the following order: El , Ra, G+ B, Pr, Cr , Wi, Fe , S, WB+, Gr, iv1i,Tr , ivla,P++. Table ll.--Summary: variables analvses. Statewide Problems 1 and 2 +Ra -El -El +G+ Variables -Wi -Cr Significant +B +Pr in the +jvla -Wi regression +G+ +Tr +Gr -P++ considered significant in the step-wise regression Dryland Problem rrigated Problem 3 4 5 -El -Cr +WB+ :I:G+ -Te +Pr +Ra -El -S +B -iCr +B +Te -Gr West Slope Problem +Mi The facts that seem most important here are: (1) of the 15 variables, only five are land-use factors and only seven are subject to control by man, (2) of these seven factors, only two rank above the median variable in a series which appears to have a geometric progression of influence, (3) of these two factors, only one actually represents a useful cover type, this single cover type only occurs in quantity in the dryland farming areas of the state, and (5) the other land-use variable is probably a description of land fertility rather than cover values. The significance of this ranking is relatively obvious: the basic framework determining pheasant population levels on any pheasant range in Colorado is established by altitude and range extent. Within this framework, large acreages of grain or of very fertile land (and these may actually be equivalent variables) can increase carrying capacity to a minor degree. In the absence of a specialized stress requiring specialized protection, other factors are probably not too important. • .. . Approved ••••- by: .I~ Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director - Research Prepared Date: by: L. Jack Lyon Janua:;-y, 1962 Ferd C. K1einschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��47 JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of COLORADO --------~~~~----------- Project No. Work Plan Evaluation of the Effects of Habitat Improvement on Wildlife W-90--R-6 4 Job No. ------------~------------- Title of Job: 4 Evaluation of Individual Plant Species Objectives: To field test, in cooperation with personnel of Projects W-59-D and W-79-R, the influences of selected plant species now being grown at the Fort Collins Experimental Nursery. On April 5, 200 tamarisk and 20 willows, and June 9, 24 roses and 6 saltbush, were delivered to Dave Howe at the Gunner's Mark Game Preserve, Henderson. These plants were established, in the pattern recommended, as flight-pattern breakS for birds flushed from heavy cover areas. Except for the willows, which were very poor stock, s~ival waS nearly 100% through August. Accomplishments: For the second year in a row, it was not possible to make any field plantings of the really promising species being tested at the Fort Collins Experimental Nursery. Recommendations: Inasmuch as the plantings at Gunner's Mark will require a minimum of five years to reach an effective height, and considering that plant materials from the Fort Collins EX~erimental Nursery may never be ready for field testing, this job is being dropped from Project W-90-R. Submitted by: L. Jack Lyon Datel J~an __u_a_r~y~,~1~9~6_2 Approved byr __~L_a_ur~e7n_c_e~E~.~R_i_o~r_d_an __~ ~ __ Assistant Director, Research _ Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��JANUARY 1962 JOB COL1PLETION RE PORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS COLORADO State of Project No. W-90-R-6 '--- 4 Work Plan Evaluation of the effects of habitat imorovement on wildlife. Job No. 3 Title of job: Evaluation of Natural and Agricultural Pheasant production cover. Obiectives: To determine the cover types, or combinations of types, which are most effective in producing pheasants. Abstract: The locations of 405 broods observed by Conservation Officers during fall brood counts on 23 routes were determined. An additional 380 points, representing non-brood points, were randomly selected from the same routes. Analysis of independent variables describing each point was accomplished using a discriminant function program for the IBM 709. In each case, the objective was to determine the potential for discriminating between the brood and non-brood points and identifying the variables which made discrimination possible. Seven problems, describing three different classes of dryland range and two areas of irrigated range are presented. Based on these analyses, the most important determinant of annual pheasant production is small grains, including stubble where it is apowed to stand over winter. At a less important level, good weed cover and certain types of pastureland are important contributors to nesting success. In terms of habitat management recommendations, perennial grasses seem to offer the greatest potential for further, more intensive, study. Procedures: As a part of regular pheasant management procedures in Colorado, Wildlife Conservation Officers conduct fall brood counts on 39 permanently established routes scattered throughout the state's pheasant range. Field methods, which are standard for all routes, involve driving at an average speed of 20 m.p.h. and recording all pheasants seen on the route. Counts are taken three times during August and may be run in either the morning or the evening. Field Methods: In order to obtain research utility from these data, Officers were requested to ~rite beginning and ending speedometer readings and the readings at each pheasant observation to the nearest .1 mile. Each route was then mapped using 200-yard transects, estimated from the road shoulders at .1 mile. The transect at that point, and the transect on either side, were then considered to furnish the best descriptive estimate of land-use patterns responsible for the production of individual broods. For various reasons, it was possible to use data from only 23 routes. The number of brood-production points described on these routes ranged from 3 to 66, and total of 405 such points were described. In addition, 9, 25 or 40 nonbrood points, depending on the number of brood-points available, were selected �-)0- for ench route. Selection of these points was based on random sdmpling of the points at which no broods v-e re observerl. In total, 380 non-brood points were described. Independent variables used to d0scribe points are listed in Table 1. Table l.--Independent variables tested for influence in determining broodor orinct i on pOintsJ,""9-"'6 .•• l..:. _ Variable Number Svmbol De scriotion V/++ 1 Uncultivated areas with dense, high-quality herbaceous cover. Cattails or other tall perennials. W+ 2 Good herbaceous cover. Annuals or perennials, usually 12-18 in. tall and dense enough to provide good shelter. W 3 Fair herbaceous cover. Annuals or perennials, usually under 12 inches tall and of heavy density only under 6 inches. 4 WVery poor or no cover. Low annuals or bare ground. 5 G Small grains. r 6 Fallow land (on the dryland, stubble until May). P++ 7 Pastureland with a high percentage of sagebrush or other woody perennial dominant. P+ 8 Pastureland which has been ungrazed and is unmowed. P 9 Normally or heavily grazed pasture or ungrazed shortgrass sod. 10 C Corn. 11 S Sorghums, including milo, broomcorn, etc. /VI 12 Millet. A 13 Alfalfa. B 14 Sugar beets. 15 Be Beans. 16 Tu All other truck crops (cabbage, potatoes, tomatoes, etc.). 17 vm+ Woody cover of apparent high value - thickets and shrubs. WB 18 Woody cover of median value - windbreaks. 19 WBWoody cover of apparent low value - trees only. FE 20 Farmsteads, including building, grounds and feedlots. H2O 21 Open v.a t o:r, 22 Br The number of chan0es in crop or land-use type over the lengths of the six tronsocts. Tr 23 An ordinal. classification of the probable amount of t.ra f f i c and the speed of travel past the brood-count point. Paved, 4; NO.1 gravel, 3; No.2 gravel, 2: and dirt, 1. 24 Gr An ordinal classification of the amount of grit or gravel available to birds at t ho brood-count point. Paved, 1; No , 1 gravel, 4; No.2 gravel, 3; and dirt, 2. _____ ======= Ana lyt i c Nethods: Analysis of these data Vias accomplished using a discriminant function program written by the Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive IAedicine and Public Health, School of Medicine, U.C.L.A. The mathematical manipulations involved are quite complicated, and are certainly not well understood by this writer, but the procedures can be roughly summarized as follows: A group of observations of one type is compnred to one or more groups of observations of another type or types. On the basis of this comparison, a series of equations, Z = a + bl Xl + b2x2 •.• bix , is written. Within the i �51 limits of linear regression and least squares relationships, the equation for each group provides the best possible fit for members and the poorest fit for all other observations. According to the theory of discriminating functions, an observation of unknown class can then be successively tested in each equation. The equation producing the largest Z score classifies the observation. In these analyses, this test is run using the original observations used to calculate the functions. The final print~out in the machine analysis is a contingency table comparing actual classification to the classification provided by the discriminating functions. If, at this point, it can be shown that the equations actually can discriminate between groups, the final act in interpreting the analyses is to select the variables with the greatest contribution to discriminating power. Unfortunately, such selection is not a straightforward mathematical operation, and at the time this report was written, consultation with the statisticians of the C.S.U. Computing Center was still in progress. 1M method involving the product of discriminant-coefficient and mean differences has been used in this presentation, but better means of ranking variables are anticipated for future analyses. In analysing the 1961 brood-count data, it was necessary to submit a series of problems, rather than a single statewide problem, because the computer will handle only 150 observations per group. This was considered no particular disadvantage because previous analyses have suggested that statewide analyses may be meaningless because of wide differences among the several environments capable of supporting pheasants in Colorado. The first problem in this series of seven is presented fairly completely so that analytic methods can be explained. For the remaining six problems, only a brief summary of results is given. Problem No.1; Northeast dryland, class A range, 148 brood-production and 114 non-brood points. points This analysis compares 148 points at which broods were observed to 114 points at which no broods were observed on four routes of the dryland pheasant range in the northeastern corner of Colorado. Means of the independent variables and calculated discriminant functions are presented in Table 2. Using these functions on the 262 original observations, 133 were classed as brood pOints and 129 were classed as non-brood points. Of the 148 actual brood points, 101 were classified correctly, and of the 114 non-brood points, 82 were classified correctly. The 2 x 2 contingency table evaluating the discrimin0ting ability of these equations, and the corresponding table of expected values are: Expected Observed 101 32 133 47 82 129 148 114 262 75.1 57.9 133 72.9 56.1 129 148 114 262 The Chi2 resulting from comparison of these tVJO tables is 41.7 with 1 degree of freedom. The probability of such a value, or a greater one, is considerably less than .001. �52 Table 2.-lvJeans and discriminant coefficients for independent variables on brood Clnd non-brood [2oints on the northeast tablelands. Independent 1'I~ansof variable s Discriminant coefficients Brood Non-brood Brood Non-brood W++ O. O. O. O. W+ 1.426 .053 .379 .353 VI 27.358 22.053 .483 .460 \'1.459 .675 .020 .024 G 493.845 387.316 .285 .282 F 469.649 578.553 .280 .279 Pv+ O. O. O. O. P+ 18.561 14.465 .307 .304 P 94.466 82.526 .282 .281 C 16.277 55.333 .267 .268 S 43.459 28.649 .282 ,279 M 13.297 10.053 .265 .262 A 0.000 5.158 .281 .284 B o. o. O. O. Be O. O. O~ O. Tu O. O. O. O. vm+ 1.959 0.000 .416 .402 WB 8.811 3.500 .001 -.010 WB.203 0.000 .423 .325 FB 15.426 9.175 .201 .190 H2O O. O. O. O. Br 14.088 13.158 3.296 3.087 Tr 8.953 8.939 5.913 5.900 Gr 9.953 10.114 1.758 1.829 Constants -229.790 -224.570 At this point, some discussion of the Chi2 test seems necessary because it is extremely doubtful that the significance associated with these data could be as great as suggested by Chi2• If the discriminating function had classifield only 86 brood roints correctly, instead of 101, the Chi2 probability would still be less than .01. However, 86 out of 148 is only 58.1% - a figure which could certainly be surpassed by any wi Idl i f e enthusiast using gross sight-classification methbds. On the-other hand, the machine analysis has several limitations which might not influence sight-classification methods. For example~ while it is true that all the brood points are actually known to belong to one group, there is no guaran~ tee that the non-brood points constitute a legitimate group. There is every possibility, in fact, that a pro~ortion of the points selected for the non-brood group are actually identical to known brood points except in the fact that no brood was observed. Further, and assuming that the abstract idea of a non-brood point actually has identity, the probability of a true selection is in direct proportion to the number of points already eliminated from consider~tion by virtue of brood presence. And, finally, there is an obvious question concerning the limits of reliability for brood-point observations. The question is not so much a probability of mistatement as it is of understatement. Since a brood was actually observed at each brood point, it can be assumed that the cover respons- �53 ible for production was somewhere nearby. However, if a brood is to be observed, it must be possible for that brood to reach an open road, an open field or a poor-cover area where it can be seen by a man driving by at 20 m.p.h. If such a cover pattern does not exist, some extremely good brood points could conceivably be thrown in the non-brood group and randomly selected to represent a lack, rather than an abundance, of the factors responsible for pheasant production. The purpose in making this Chi2 test, then, is not so much to determine significance levels as it is to test whether the equations can discriminate at all. Under the error possibilities described above, it is significant that discrimination is possible at any level, but the Chi2 probabilities are not considered an accurate measure of discriminatirig power. Classification of the 24 independent variables tested for discriminating power is based on the absolute value of difference cross products from Table 2. The variable G, for example, shows a mean difference of 106.529 between groups and a co~fficient difference of .003. The cross product is .320 - which is the greatest value produced by any similar comparison 1/. The first 10 variables, in order of cross products strengths, were G, Br , W, F, FB, :,/B,S, P+, W+ and INB+. Discussion of this ranking will be deferred until a second set of data, evaluating a lower quality dryland pheasant range, has been presented. Problem No.2; Northeast dryland, class B range, 64 brood-production and 59 non-brood points • points .In the second problem, data from three routes in the a rea south of U. S. 6 and west of the Sandhi lIs are analyzed. This pheasant range is grossly similar to the one already tested, but the pheasant populations are generally considered to be at a slightly lower level than in the range bordering the Sandhills and the state line. The discriminant function classified 54 of the 64 brood-points, and 48 of the 59 non-brood points, correctly. The associated Chi2 was 43.7 and the probability of such a value was less than .001. The first ten variables, in the ranking order already described, were F, S, P, WB+, M, G, C, FB, BR, and P+. Discussion: Discussion for the first tvo problems is combined here because the environment involved is considered to be essentially homogenous. The fact that seven variables appeared among the top ten in both analyses suggests that the combination is valid even though the order of variable strength is not the same for both problems. The order in which variables are presented here is considered the overall ranking order. It was conditioned by (1) the ranking within problems, and (2) the probability that a variable represents the open ~pace required to make the brood observable rather than the cover which produced the brood. 11 This comparison method is sound only insofar as the variances of all ::24 variables are comparable. Consultation with C.S.U. statisticians is expected to produce a ranking method which accounts for variances. �54 G (grain) and F (fallow) can both be considered first-ranking as broodproduction types on the dryland although there may be some contribution associated with the fact that broods are more easily seen in fallow fields. The type most important in any particular year or area is determined by localized conditions related to farming practices. Grain, on the dryland, usually attains the proper height for nesting a little late in the season, but once that height has been reached there is very little chance of nesting failure. Fallow, on the other hand, starts the nesting season as stubble - with an apparent high nesting desirability. This stubble may be disced in early May, in which case the nests are destroyed; or it may not be plowed until late May and June, in which case nesting success is high. The degree of discretion involved in this relationship may be demonstrated by the fact that G ranks first in Problem 1 while F is fourth; but F is first in Problem 2 and G is fifth. Weather records for May, 1961, suggest a very important reason for this inverted relationship. The stations at Holyoke and Leroy showed that through May 7, the Problem 1 area had received 1.27 inches of rain while the Problem 2 area had received only .16. Stubble fields in the 2 area may have been dry enough to disc from about the 8th-12th although there was probably little urgency to do so. On the 13th and 14th, both areas received 1.25 inches of rain and, during the following week1 area 1 received .78 and area 2 received 1.57 inches. By this time, weed growth was such that landowners could see a real need to begin field work. In area 1 this was possible after the 25th because no more rain fell in May except for .08 inches on the 31st. Area 2, which was pr6bably not as dry by the 25th, received .47 inches more moisture on the 31st. In all, area 2 received only .05 more rainfall than area 1. The distribution was such, however, that stubble fields could be worked in area 1 and were too wet to be disced in area 2. Thus, F became an important production cover for 1961 in area 2. S (sorghum),: Sorghums and millet (M), in the area examined here, are rarely planted until June 10 and, thus, could hardly have functioned as production cover in the sense G and F did. Nevertheless, S appeared as the third most important cover type in these analyses and M ranked, fifth in the Fleming area. Two possibilities are suggested. First, it will be seen that both Sand M ranked higher in the Fleming area than in the Holyoke area. It is possible that the above normal rainfall in May induced landowners to plant sorghums after discing their stubble fields. Since more late ~ay rain was recorded at the Leroy station (near Fleming), the sorghum-on-fallow acreage was probably greater in that area. Second, there is a good possibility that sorghums attract pheasant broods during late July and August. The high plains wheat harve st is usually complete by July 31, and the only standing covers capable of producing shade for young birds are the sorghums and windbreaks. Br (breaks): This is the first analysis in which "edge effect" has been noted. It is, however, the one in which detection of such an influence would be most likely for several reasons: (1) It is generally accepted, although unproved for this environment, that pheasant hens tend to establish nests at or near edges. Pending proof of some association between edge and success, this is considered the least important reason for the appearance of Br in the analysis. (2) Young birds require a high protein diet, and insects usually occur in greater numbers at field edges. (3) The escape potential at an edge is usually considered to be superior, and (4) the probability of a bird or birds being sighted by the ~.C.O. is potentially greater when the bird appears at an edge. �55 FB (farmsteads and \NB+ and WB (windbreaks) are combined in this discussion because the types usually appear together. In this analysis, there is almost no possibility that actual production is involved. Rather, it appears that pheasants in late July and August are attracted to shade, to the weed cover of uncultivated areas and, concurrently, to the insect populations associated with these weeds. P+ an P (pastureland): Un grazed pasture (p+) was the lowest ranking of the seven variables appearing in the top ten of both analyses. Nesting cover in this type is fairly good, so there is some probability that true production was involved. In addition, it is suspected that insect populations on pastureland may attract young birds and that birds in pastures are more easily seen by Conservation Officers. This second pair of assumptions is strengthened by the fact that grazed pasture land (p) also ranked fairly high in both analyses (n th and 3rd). ~+ and W (waste cover): Both the good and fair waste-cover types ranked among. the first~n variables in the Holyoke area, and W+ ranked 13th in the Fleming area. No reason for the differences between areas is known, but, in any case, it is considered significant that the ~eedy cover areas do appear fairly important in these analyses. There is a considerable possibility that the relationship is due to an attraction weeds have for insects and, thus, for small pheasants. However, there is also a potential in actual nesting cover which can eventually be tested by stratifying samples. Data for at least one more year will be needed before such a test can be conducted. Recommendations: In this discussion, a dozen variables have been shown to have a significant influence on pheasant production in the northeastern Colorado drylands. Part of these were considered to be important only in that broods were exposed for observation, but others were considered important for contributions to total production. Of the variables which appeared to make a contribution, grain (G) and grain stubble (F) were the most important, but neither offers much potential for habitat manipulation. Edge (Br), ungrazed pasture (Pt ) and weed cover (W+, Ill) are considerably less important, but in each case there is some possibility for manipulation. If the same variables appear in future analyses, it is recommended that intensive evaluations be attempted. Problem No.3; Eastern drvland , classC southern dryland, Class C range. range and Problem No.4; Eastern and For this report, at least, the two analyses representing data collected on dryland brood routes south of U.S. 36 and into the southeast corner of Colorado will be presented vrithou t discussion. Problem 3 was based on 72 brood and 74 non-brood point.s near Bonny Dam, Burlington and Strosburg; and Problem 4 \NaS the same analysis using an additional 19 brood and 18 non-brood points from dryland routes bordering the Arkansas Valley. Before the ana ly ses v.e re run, there was some question concerning the reliabilit.y of data collected on two of the routes. In total, 49 observations of each class were involved, most of them, 42 and 40, frorn a single route. The analytic results leave little doubt that the data, even if reliable, are in no way comparable to data from ot.her areas and other routes. Discriminant coefficients, which should have been of approximately the magnitude of those list.cd in Table 2, were all 251.xx �on Problem 3 and 299.xx on Problem 4. The contingency tests yielded Chi2 values of 20.0 and 12.0, both with p( .001; and the ranking for the ten most important variables in each analysis was: Problem 3: Problem 4: S, Ptt, VJ+, F, A, P, Jv1, C, Band W. S, C, P-:-+,FB, Wt, WB-, ivl, A, P and W. Problem NO.5; Statewide irrigated, 126 brood-production and 140 non-brood points; Problem No.6; Platte Valley irrigated, 66 brood-production and 68 non-brood points; Problem No.7; Poudre Valley irrigated; 46 brood-production and 54 non-brood points. The data involving pheasant broods sighted on irrigated lands in Colorado have been treated as a single problem (No.5) and divided into two sub-problems No.6 and No.7) evaluating environmental units of the Platte and Poudre Valleys. For purposes of these analyses, all routes from Ft. Morgan east were considered Platte Valley and all routes north of Denver and west of Wiggins were considered Poudre Valley. The statewide analysis also includes 14 brood and 18 non-brood observations equally distributed between the Arkansas Valley and the Cedaredge area. In the three analyses described here, the respective discriminant functions correctly classified the following proportion of observations correctly: Statewide Platte Valley Poudre Valley 89/126 brood points 52/66 brood points 38/46 brood points 94/140 non-brood points 50/68 non-brood points 45/54 non-brood points The respective Chi2 values were 38.0, 36.6 and 43.5 - all with probability far less than .001. And, based on the evaluation system already described, the ten most important variables in each series were: Statewide: Platte: Poudre: G, W-:, P, C, B, Be, F, Pt, W-, S F, Be, P, P+, 1"1, C, A, FB, H20, G G, C, Wt, B, Be, Volt+, F, H20, P1, w- The first conclusion suggested by these data is that the two valley environments described are not nece ssar i Ly comparable. Six variables are common to the first ten of both analyses, but there is no relationship between ranking orders for these variables. It will be seen however that the ranking order in the statewide analysis is much closer to that of the Poudre Valley than the Platte' Valley. With 34% more observations in the Platte, the normal expectation would be for a closer State-Platte relationship. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume a underlying pattern in the Platte Valley very similar to the Poudre pattern but overshadowed by localized special conditions. These irrigated-environment analyses provide a fine example of the variation pattern inherent to the sampling methods used in obtaining the brood data. On most of the irrigated-land routes, there were only 10-12 brood observations available. Between 85 and 90 per cent of each route, them, was available for selection in the non-brood ~roup. No attempt can be made to estimate probabilities, but it seems highly likely that the majority of non-brood points on any of these routes could just as ~ell have been brood points. The discriminant functions were able to produce a significant classification of the original �57 data, but it should be recognized that the independent variables in these analyses rank much more closely than in the dryland analyses. It is possible that dryland brood points could have been discriminated with as few as five variables while, in these irrigated problems, it virtually requires all 24. The essential point here is that ranking-order for these analyses may not be a particularly effective method of evaluation because there is so little actual difference between any of the first ten ranked variables. The order in which variables are discussed is the ranking order in the statewide analysis, but it should be remembered that the power of any one of these variables is probably not much different than that of any other. The irrigated environment, since it is infinitely more complicated than the dryland environment, is simply not dominated by any small group of variables. G (grain): Nesting studies conducted in the Timanth area more than 10 years ago by the Colorado Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit (Sandfort and Lyon) suggested that grain, in many years, may be the only crop producing a significant number of successful nests. Apparently this was true in 1961 for both irrigated areas although small grains were considerably more important in the Poudre Valley. Tt'10reasons for the greater production from small grains in the Poudre can b~ advanced. First, there was more of it. Comparison of non-brood means suggests nearly twice as much small grain acreage in the Poudre sample. Second, the Poudre is not really a valley area in the same sense as the Platte. Rather, it has a rolling topography wi, th intermixed dryfarming areas. These are used for winter-wheat production and, since winter wheat reaches any specified height somewhat earlier than spring-planted grain, probably contribute more to production than the spring grain areas. w+ (waste): The function of good weedy cover in this analysiS is particularly interesting because it demonstrates the extreme care future field work and final i nterpr etat i on is going to require. WI+ ranked third on the Poudre and did not appear in the first 15 Platte variables - but, it ranked second in the statewide analysis. The reasons for this ranking patt ern are partially due to sampling methods and partially due to cover distribution patterns. W+ is very evenly distributed on the Platte. The W+ means for brood and non-brood samples were nearly the same. Cover of this quality is confined, in large degree, to the roadside ditches because the Platte Valley is mostly level. Cn the Platte, FJ+appeared with nearly every brood, but it was a poor discriminating variable because it also appeared almost equally in the non-brood random samples. Apparently, not enough brood points were eliminated to allow a meaningful selection of non-brood points. On the Poudre, however, mean W+ for brood points was nearly six times as large as the non-brood rne an ; \'1+ was a good discriminating function for Poudre broods because more W+ was recorded at brood points. In this area, W+ was also evenly distributed along roadsides, but, in addition, there is a considerable amount of F!+cover not associated with the roadside because of the rolling topography and resulting drainage problems. P and p-t- (grazed and ungrazed pasture): Irrigated pastureland is usually somewhat better than native shor~rass for nesting cover, but it seems highly likely that the~pearance of P in these analyses is mostly related to the Conservation Officers' ability to see broods rather than production. It is interesting, however, that both P and P+ ranked higher in the Platte sample. �58 This can only be interpreted in terms of the types of irrigated pasture found in the two areas - and it suggests that future analyses may require species compo si tion separation for irrigated pastureland. The Platte has many areas of saltgrass pasture bordering the river. This pasture is only palatable during the early spring and even when grazed may provide cover suitable for nesting. Poudre pastures, on the other hand, may contain orchard grasses, bluegrass and clovers - all of which are utilized heavily. The ranking patterns within the two areas suggest that pastureland in the Platte Valley may make an important contribution to total pheasant production. C (corn), B (beets) and Be (beans) are all crops with little or no ground cover and very low potential as pheasant nesting cover. They do not, however, qualify as cover types in which broods would be easily seen by officers during roadside counts. Accordingly, it must be assumed that the attraction for broods is related either to the shade provided or, more probably, to moist conditions and insect populations. ~ (fallow) and ~- (waste-): Bare ground may have some attraction for birds based on ~ilization for dusting, but it is assumed that these two variables appeared in the analysis simply because the Conservation Officers were able to see birds more easily where no vegetation was present. S (sorghum): Until more dataare available, sorghum is simply considered to be a random variable that happened to appear in a number of brood observations. It was not ranked in either of the sub-analyses and, in fact, was not even recorded in the Poudre data. The remaining variables in this discussion appeared in one or the other, but not both, irrigated analyses. Because of the limited effect which may be involved, these variables are only mentioned briefly: VJ and W++ (waste and waste++): The appearance of Vi in the Platte analysis is probably just a result of the poor non-brood samples available, but W++ on the Poudre is considered significant because the heavy waste areas described by W++ could very easily be important production cover. A (alfalfa): Alfalfa, appeared in t.he Platte analysis, but not the Poudr'e, - suggesting that nest destruction in alfalfa WAS much greater in the Poudre area or that fewer nests were established in alfalfa on the Poudre. In the light of weather records for the two areas, the first hypothesis seems more likely. The Platte Valley received an inch and one-quarter more rain during the last week of May god the first week of June than the Poudre. This moisture undoubtedly delayed alfalfa mowing in the Platte - ~ith the result that more nests established in alfalfa we re brought off successfully. FB (farmsteads): For reasons which are not at all understood, farm buildings have appeared not only in this analysis, but in others, as a factor of the pheasant environment with positive contributions. Possibly, the uncultivated areas found around buildings and feedlots are more important than generally realized. H20 (open water): Free wat er , although it appeared in both sub-analyses, was not one of the first ten variables in the statewide problem. Apparently, �59 free water is attractive to ~heasants, but there seems to be little reason for considering it an essential part of the environment. Recommendations: At this point, it is :possible to ma.ke only one really significant recommendation for irrigated lands. That is, revise the data collection method so that a larger number of broods can be observed on each route arid,consequently, so that non-brood selections will have a greater probability of being meaningful. This is the only method for building up differences between brood and non-brood groups to a significant level. Of the cover types mentioned in the preceding discussion, two groups seem to offer possibilities in habitat work. First, it is significant that all four grades of waste cover appeared in one or more of the analyses. Duplication of these types might not be acceptable to landowners, but substitute cover of the same quality could be ~lanted and maintained in many areas. Such cover is particularly valuable if the basic value of the W types is related to the fact that all are undisturbed t roughout the nesting seaSon. Second, the appearance of P and P+in the analyses suggests a potential substitute for the W cover types. Not only would perennial grasses be more desirable from the stand~oint of the landowner, but such ocver, once established, could be expected to remain, without further treatment, for an indefinite period. Submitted 'by r Date: L. Jack .-=:!O-. Lyon _ Approved bYl January,1962 --------------~~~~~~---------- Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director,Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz . ,--=----Federal Aid Coordinator � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/0eff28fa9a610c258b87c15f922b92e7.pdf ea00c89d7ac3f10104afb1fed50b4339 PDF Text Text APril, 1962 -1JOB COMPLErION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of ------~~~~~-----------COLORADO Project No • Work Plan No. W_-_10 __1_-..;.R;...-..;..4 _ Game Range Investigations 1 ----~~--------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: t Job No. 2 ------------------- A Detailed study of Range Forage by Use of Fenced Exclosures. April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT Indicated rates of stocking were determined by pellet group counting in total on treatments in partially protected exclosure parts for big game animals and for big game and livestock on adjacent open range. Cattle stocking rates were high in 1961 at the Irish Canyon and Saguache Park Exclosures. The upprotected range study treatment at the Bar D Exclosure received light stocking by cattle in the fall of 1960 and spring of 1961. Stocking was moderate on the Same area, however, when the rates were combined for the two seasons. Cattle were absent from the open range at the Sagua~he Park Cattle Exclosure in the summer of 1961. Indicated rates of stocking by deer were high for the winter of 1960-61 at the Bar D, Calloway, Dry Baafn , and Irish Canyon Exc1osures. Conditional recommendations are made to effect herd reductions in areas where the latter exclosures are located. It was found that use by sheep continued to be heavy at the Calloway and Dry Basin Exclosures from indicated rates of stocking found for the winter season of 1960-61. Deer stocking was negligible at the Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure for the winter of 1960-61. A repeat photo study was done at the Kannah Creek Deer Exc10sure duplicating one that had been accomplished in 1955. Comparisons of photographs of shrubs for 1955 and· 1961 resulted in the conclusion that deer utilization of the big sagebrush had been excessive during the six years. Base year line interception and browse age~form class study data were obtained on three treatments at the new five-acre, two-part Laramie River Deer Livestock Exclosure in Larimer County. Big sagebrush is the dominant species on all treatments. Mountain mahogany, big and little rabbitbrush, phlox, and b1uegrasses are a few of the lesser abundant plants on the treatments. Condition of the big sagebrush stand is only fair; mountain mahogany rates as poor. Permanently located line interception transects on the two treatments at the Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure were again read in July, 1961, after a three-year lapse in time. A Forest Service weed control program in 1960 prompted this repeat work in order to evaluate effects of the chemical on the vegetation. Fringed sage, the principal weed, decreased about 98 per cent and appeared to be highly susceptible to 2,4-D applied at a rate of three pounds per acre. The weeds decreased about 95 per cent. Sandwort was the most resistant to chemical control. The grass and grass-like plants showed little change between the years. Individual species did, however, increase or decrease due probably to site factors and competition rather than grazing by elk and cattle. The latter were either absent for much of the period or were very erratic in their rates of stocking. ��-3- A DErAILED STUDY OF RANGE FORAGE BY USE OF FENCED EXCLOSURES Bertran D. Baker INTRODUCTION The report of study accomplishments in following paragraphs for the 1961~2 segment will be by exe.Iosure in alphabetical order. All scheduled activities were carried out as they had been planned. In addition, at the request of personnel of the Region Two Office, U. S. Forest Service, a photo study of browse plants va" repeated at the Kannah Creek Deer Exclosure. This photography was a repeat of an earlier study that waS done in 1955 and 'Was requested f.or use as supplemental information in a Forest Service allotment management training school held in July at Grand Junction. BAR D DEER...cATTLE EXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts for Indicated Rates of stocking Objectives: 1. To determine the indicated rates of stocking by deer on the treatments accessible to them for the fall-winter-spring season of 1960~1. 2. To determine the indicated rates of stocking by cattle for the fall .season of 1960 and the spring season of 1961 on the one-acre open range treatment • . Procedures: The one-acre study treatments were examined in total by the method of systematic strip counting of pellet groups. On April 24, 1961, deer pellet groups were tallied on the treatments inside of the livestock part and on the outside open range. Cattle fecal groups were tallied in April on the open range study area and then again on August 25, 1961. Paint 'Was applied to cattle fecal groups from commercial pressure cans in order to eliminate them from future counts. Findings 1 Cattle were found to have occupied the outside one-acre study treatment at indicated rates of stocking of 90.9 acres per AUM in the fall of 1960 and 40.0 acres per ADM in the spring of 1961. The rate of stocking for the two seasons combined was 27.8 acres per ADM. Deer were on the one-acre study treatment of the livestock part of the exclosure at the rate of 3.5 acres per deer-month for the fall-winter-spring season of 1960~1. For the same season on the outside one-acre treatment the rate of stocking was found to be 1.66 acres per deer-month. Discuss10nand Recommendationsl The indicated rates of stocking by. cattle on the open range treatment were the lightest that have been observed during the three �years since construction of the exclosure. It is too soon to tell whether or not this respite has helped the range vegetation, but in line with previous recommendations, no heavier stocking is advocated. Even less use on the allotment is recommended if at all possible and consistent with economical operations by the lessee. Deer use was the lowest of the three winters on the open range. Nevert'heless, an indicated rate of 1.66 acres per deer-month is perhaps too high for the nearly 100 per cent big sagebrush type. It will be interesting to see what effect the reportedly high local hunter take in 1961 will have on stocking in 1961-62. Differential use of the treatments by deer continues with the animals preferring the unprotected area over the partially protected area enclosed by barbed Wire fencing. The ratio was 2 to 1 in 1958-59, 3 to 1 in 1959-60, and about 3 to 1 in 1960-61. CALLOWAY DEER-LIVESTOCK EXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts For Indicated Rates of Stocking Objectives: (1) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by deer and sheep combined upon the one-acre stuqy treatment outside of the exclosUre south of the drift fence for the fall-winter-spring season of 1960-61. (2) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by deer on the one-acre stuqy treatment outside of the exclosure north of the drift fence for the fall-winter-spring season of 1960-61. Procedures: The total count technique was employed to tal~ all pellet groups on the one-acre stuqy treatments outside and adjacent to the exclosure. The treatments were covered on April 2$, 1961. No attempt was made to differentiate between deer and sheep pellet groups south of the drift fence. However, it was gues~ed that pellet groups were present in the approximate proportion of two deer to one sheep. Findings: The open range one-acre stuqy treatment north of the drift fence received an indicated rate of stocking of 0.71 acre per deer-month for the fallwinter-spring season of 1960-61. Light use by horses was also noted on this treatment. Deer and sheep combined to stock the open range treatment south of the drift fence at the rate of 2.2 acres per deer-sheep-month. Observations on current utilization by deer of the browse on the treatment north of the drift fence revealed what was considered to be severe use of spiny hopsage (Grayia spinosa), big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), and little rabbitbru~sothamnus viscidiflorus). Recommendations: For the third straight winter, deer, use of the area north of the drift fence was found to be excessively high. In fact, the 0.71 acre per �deer-month rate was more intense than 0.16 acre per deer-month which was found for the winters of 1958-59 and 1959-60. A review of big game regulations for the 1959, 1960, and 1961 seasons in this Management Unit 2 shows that there have been no special nor noticeably liberal seasons on deer. The site where the Calloway ,Exclosure is located is a key area and probably is fairly indicative of conditions along the south edge of Cold Springs Mountain. Therefore, it is recommended again that more liberal seasons be established for the legal harvest of deer from this game unit. Reduced stocking of sheep on the winter range south of the drift fence is just as imperative from the results of the stocking rate determinations. Also of importance in the management of both deer and sheep would be reserving areas of use by constructing more woven wire drift fences. Since deer have shown a disliking for association with sheep, the fences appear to be effective means for separating them on winter ranges, at least in this locale. DRY BASIN DEER-LIVESTOCK EXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts for Indicated Rates of Stocking Objectives: (1) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by deer for the fall-w1nterspring season of 1960-61 on the one-acre stuqy plot inside of the livestock part of the exclosure. (2) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by deer and sheep combined for the same season on the one-acre open range stuqy area. Procedures: l'linterdeposited deer pellet groups were counted in total on the oneacre stUdY plots inside of the livestock exclosure part. Both deer and sheep pellet groups were tallied on the open range treatment with both counts accomplished April 19, 1961. Similar to previous counting, no attempt was made to differentiate deer and sheep droppings on the open range treatment. Considerable difficulty was experienced in determining groups on the open range due to excessive "trampling by both deer and sheep when the ground had been wet. Findings: Deer were found to have occupied the livestock part treatment at an 1ndicated rate of stocking of 1.2 acres per deer-month for the fall-winter-spring season of 1960-61. Sheep and deer use combined on the open range stuqy treatment for the same season was determined to be 1.03 acres per deer-sheep-month. Although ten horses were seen west of Pony Draw which is about one mile west of the exclosure, no pellet groups were observed on the open range stuqy area. Utilization of the sagebrush was judged to be severe to destructive. Approximately 100 deer were counted in the vicinity of the exclosure on April 19, 1961, and recent heavy trailing by sheep was in evidence then. Reconwendations: Animal stocking rates for the winter of 1960-61 were slightly below those 10r 1959-60, although they were still excessively high. Liberal deer seasons were again effected in 1960, and a check of the hunter take for 1960 in �...6Game Unit 70 revealed an increase over 1959 (3,631 total kill, 1959; 4,046 in 1960). Preliminary reports on the 1961 kill indicate another increase in take, so some progress is apparent in the reduction of the deer herd here. Unfortunately, a like situation has not occurred relative to the wintering sheep. At least I have not received word of any reductions as of preparation of this report. It certainly would be desirable if the BLH could remove sheep from this critical game range. IRISH CANYON DEER-LIVESTOCK EXCLOS URE Pellet Group Count for Indicated Rates of Stocking Objectives: (1) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by deer on the one-acre study treatments inside of the livestock part of the exclosure and on open range for the fa11-winter-spring season of 1960-61. (2) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by cattle on the one-acre open range treatment for the period of May, 1960, to l~y, 1961. Procedures: A total count of all winter deposited deer pellet groups was made on the one-acre study treatments April 25, 1961. Cattle fecal groups were tallied and cancelled from future counts with paint on the open range treatment simultaneously with the deer pellet group count. Some few horse fecal groups were observed and included in the tal~ for cattle stocking. Findings: Indicated rates of stocking by deer for the winter of 1960-61 season were 1.45 and 1.23 acres per deer-month respectively on the inside and outside treatments. Cattle and horses stocked the outside range treatment for the12-month period at a rate of 12.5 acres per A~l. No sheep use of the open range treatment was in evidence, although this area is a BLM winter sheep allotment catching heavy use elsewhere in the vicinity. Recommendations: Use of the exclosure treatments by deer decreased in intensity in the winter of 1960-61 compared with the previous winter. Despite this finding, the indicated rates of stocking and the heavily utilized appearance of the sagebrush and other browse suggest that deer herd numbers should be reduced. The Irish Canyon Exclosure is at the southeastern end of the Browns Park winter concentration area in the same management unit as is the Calloway Exclosure. Findings at the two exclosures have been comparable for the three winters of observations. Livestock use dropped slightly but is yet too high. The findings might tend to place all of the blame for poor range conditions on deer and cattle. However, this is not the entire story since it is thought that the sheep permittee has been making a conscious effort to keep the animals away from the study area since construction of the exclosure. The stripped and broken appearance of the browse in the spring on nearby flats strongly indicates that the aforementioned assumption is cor-recb , �3' l •• +----t f Figure 1.--Kannah Creek Deer Exclosure. Big sagebrush plant showing effects of six years of severe use by deer. By comparing the two photos, note that several branches have died in the interval. �I' 3' 2'~- _Li 2' Figure 2.--Kannah creek Deer Exclosnre. Big sagebrush plant showing a mixed response to browsing and other environmental factors. Main portion on the left has improved in vigor and increased in volume whereas the branch on the right has died. �Figure 3.--Kannah Creek Deer Exclosure. Big sagebrush plants under protection that are in good health except for portions at the left (lower photo) that have unexplainably died back. �Figure 4.--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exclosure. (Upper) General view from west side of gully showing portion of area inside of deer part on left and inside livestock part on right. Steel posts used for livestock fence are not readily visible. (Lower) General view of area outside of exclosure. Tall treated posts are southwest and southeast corners of livestock part. �•.. 7KANNAH CREEK DEER EXCLOSURE Range Vegetation Stuqy Introduction: This repeat photo stuqy was done in accordance with the main Job C/bjective that provides for follow-up studies at exclosures by special demand from cooperating Federal land managing agencies and/or Department personnel. The Kannah Creek Exclosure is on the Grand :Hesa National Forest and is readily accessible from Grand Junction. The request for a repeat stuqy then not only helped fill the need for up-to-date information, but also was appropriate to a Forest Service allotment management training school in Grand Junction in July, 1961. Objecti ves: (1) To determine the status of the shrubs on the two exclosure treatments by means of repeat photography. (2) To supply the U.S.F.S. Rocky Mountain Region Two staff with photographs in fulfillment of a request from them. Procedures: Photographs of individuals or groups of shrubs were taken at six permanently located points inside of the exclosure and six points outside and adjacent to the exclosure. The original photos were taken on August 3, 1955, employing the portable calibrated backdrop. The backdrop was again used on the repeat work July 14, 1961, and was placed behind the browse plant(s) in the same position as it was in the original photos through aid of steel guide stakes set into the ground. Findings! Figures 1, 2 and 3 present a few of the photographs from the present stuqy with comparable photos from the 1955 study. In reality, there is not a great amount of information that can be gained by comparing the photographs of the plants. Nevertheless, one important item can be concluded, and that is deer made fairly heavy use of the big sagebrush in the intervening years between 1955 and 1961. Figures 1 and 2 support the foregoing conclusion, despite the plant in Figure 2 which shows a good production of current growth on the ~~in portion that is alive. The plants in Figure 3 are not entirely representative of plants inside of the exclosure in that portions of one (or more) have died from cause(s) other than excessive browsing. However, as can be seen, the general condition of the plants is excellent. Photos were included to show that plants or parts of plants frequently die from other factors which in this case could not be explained. It was reported earlier (Baker, 1956) that shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia) seemed to be replacing big sagebrush in the composition outside near the exclo- sure. This still appears to be happening in spite of the tenacity shown by the sagebrush to stay. Discussion and Recommendations: Deer seasons designed to effect herd reductions have been tried consistently in rec~nt years, so recommendations aimed in that direction would be superfluous. �-8Sagebrush is an important part of the local browse types, although its demise probably is not as imminent as this stuqy might infer. The Atriplexes also furnish forage for deer, but of a lower quality. Therefore, should big sagebrush be sacrificed eventually, which is a questionable prediction, deer would still be able to subsist on this Winter range, in considerably fewer numbers, however. LARAMIE RIVER DEER-LIVESTOCK EXCLOSURE Introduction The Laramie River Exclosure was built in August, 1960, on lands administered by the BLM. Game Manager Harold Swope of the Northeast Region cooperated with ELM District Range Manager John Clark in the program by furnishing wi're and posts, and the latter provided the construction crew. The exclosure is in Larimer County in the Ni St;\, Section 8, Township 11 North, Range 76 West, Sixth Principal Meridian. The site is on what is considered to be a. key area for deer and receives consistently heavy use every late fall to early spring plus light use i~summer and early fall. Horses use the open range year around. Cattle are also permitted on the area in spring and fall. As had been recommended, the exclosure is of two parts, each part enclosing 2.5 acres. The total or deer-proof part is fenced with eight-foot high woven wire supported by l2-foot treated posts. The adJoining livestock part is of fourstrand barbed wire and steel post construction. Slopes are steep and average about 40 per cent on the site. Soils are rocky with bedrock near the surface on the ridges (Figure 4). The approximate elevation at the site is 8,200 feet. In keeping with a Job Objective, a base year plant inventory was accomplished in August, 1961. Gratitude is extended Game Hanager Swope and W.C.O. Harvey Bray of the Department, Dick Clark and John Clark of the B~I, and Range Staffmen Ben Rice and Bill Hardman of the Roosevelt National Forest for assistance in ~ing-in the exclosure, surveying and staking stuqy areas, reading the line intercept transects, and other aids in doing the field work. Range Vegetati~~ Stuqy Objecti~: (1) To determine the plant cover and composition by species and categories on the three one-acre stuqy treatments at the exclosure. (2) To determine the age-form class composition of the dominant browse species on the treatments. Procedures: The one-acre treatment and sub-plot corners were surveyed and marked 1nS1de or-the deer part, inside of the livestock part, and outside south of the exclosure. The locations of 16 line interception transects in each treatment were determined in accordance with procedures used previously and reported (Baker, �-91959). Techniques in measuring plants and age and form classifying shrubs also followed those cited in the preceding reference. August 16-18, 31 and September 1, 1961. Field work was accomplished Figure 5 shows the location of the exclosure in Larimer County, and Figure 6 presents a detail map containing locations of transects and plot and sub-plot corner stakes. All transects were orientated perpendicular to the slope. Hea~ trails parallel with the contour made the latter imperative. Findings: The results of the plant inventory on the three stud,rtreatments are presented in Table 1. Big sagebrush is the dominant species on all treatments. Mountain mahogany and big rabbitbrush, though not abundant, are important subordinate components of the shrub cover. Of the perennial grass and grass-like plants, the bluegrasses (Poa spp.) are consistently the most abundant on all treatments. Several other-grass species are represented in the understory compOSition, although none are very abundant. A low total amount of ground is occupied by the grass category on all treatments. There is a good variety of weeds and half-shrubs present on all treatments with little rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) and phloxes (Phlox spp.) being the most common low plants. The only annual present, lambsquarter tb~cpodrum album), was not found to be very common and was included in the compositlon with ~erennial understory plants. From Tables 2 and 3, it can be noted that the relative health of the big sagebrush stand is only fair. Most plants fall in the closely hedged classification. Seedling and young sagebrush plants are common, however. The young and seedling age classes of mountain mahogany are noticeably lacking, and that coupled with the finding that most plants are closely hedged and decadent would cause the stand to be rated in poor condition. Recommendations: No recommendations relative to animal stocking can be made as yet from the work which has been done. Deer probably have been utilizing the mountain mahogany at too great a rate. Domestic animals evidentally are providing excessive grazing pressure, also; So until changes occur in the vegetation with" separation of use and protection as provided by the two-part exclosure any speculation would be valueless. SAGUACHE PARK EXCLOSURE Pellet Group Counts for Indicated Rates of Stocking Objectives: (1) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by elk on the outside ~-acre stuqy area for the fall-winter-spring season of 1960-61. (2) To determine the indicated rate of stocking by cattle on the outside treatment for the summer grazing season of 1961. Procedures: A total count of elk pellet groups was made on the outside stuqy area pn May 22; 1961. The procedtn'e was repeated for cattle use by covering the entire �Figure 5 •. VICINITY ~J1AP'"LARAMIE RIVER DEER-LIVES TOCK EXCLOSURE' SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIOrAN w o y A L M N G B N .. --'" ' ..';.~::l: v /1-'-'I T.IIN. II SCALE IN MILES , i From Colo. Highway Dept. county map. 2' B. D. Baker 1961. �LARAMIE RIVER DEER-LIVESTOCK EXCLOSURE SECTION 8 T.II N. R.76 W. 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN SCALE 100 FEET 4) 4) ------ -----_ .... _---_ .. :=::==:":. e , .0 C!I e e e ., e -- ;...--- .,.-----..,,------"$ •• II It------e . """ """ 4) • e· ------+----- " I," II 1/ II " 1/" ,f I, (II figure 6. ----* -+-I., LEGEND Standard Barbed Wire Stock Fence. Deer (and livestock) Proof Fence. 50-Foot Line Interception Transect. I-Acre Study Unit And Sub-Unit Corners. B.o.Baker 1961. �Table L--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exc10sure - Line Interception Transect Summary of Ground,-COc'tlpation and Percentage Composition, By Species and/or Major Plant Category - August 1961 - Heasuremeats', in feet to hundredths. -------- - -- PLANT SPECIES OR CLASS Big Sagebrush (Artemisia triden- TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF GROuNDOCGUPIED INTERCEPT • liiSl.Cle 16 - 50' Livestock Inside TREATl1ENT TRANSECTS Part Deer Part Outside Ins. Lives: 111.47 13.93 Ins. Deer 137.80 17.23 tat~) Outside Mountain Mahogany Ins. Lives. (Cercocarpus montanus) Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. Big Rabbi tbrush ~hrysothamnus nauIns. Deer -'scdSus) --Outside Snowberry (SyropnoriIns. Lives. carpos sp.) Ins. Deer Outside Serviceberry Ins. Lives. (Ame1anchier sp.) Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. 97.86 23.09 15.99 18.07 14.77 9.31 ~ . -2.09 4.26 6.26 . .00 .00 5.81 151.~ SHRUBS(BROWSE) (GVERSTORY) Totals 167.36 136.21 fuegrasses (~ spp.) Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside Bearded B1uebunch Ins. Lives. Wheatgrass (Agropyron Ins. Deer spicatum Outside r--- -- -------~ ------~------Junegrass \Koe1eria Ins. Lives. cristata) -Ins. Deer Outside 4.04 7.12 7.95 3.65 _ 2.05 3.88 2.36 2-:78 2.79 PERCENTAGE COMPOsITICi&--c.---V Ins~de Livestock Inside Part Deer Part Outside 73.62 82.34 12.23 2.89 71.84 15.25 2.00 9.55 2.26 1.]1 13.27 9-.75 5.56 1.1 .26 _ - 6.63 l~Jg .53 I b, 2.55 .78 4.60 .00 .00 .00 .00 -- . .73 18.93 4.26 20.92 .51 .89 _.. .46 .26 .30 .35 �Table l.--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Line Interception Transect Summar,r of Ground Occupation and Percentage Composition - (continued). PLANT SPECIES OR CLASS ~vestern \'lbeatgrass (Agropyron !mi thii) TREATNENT Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. Indian Ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) Ins. Deer - ~ Outside Needle and Thread Ins. Lives (Stipa comata) Ins. Deer Outside Sedges (~ spp.)Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside Spike Fescue (~Ins. Lives. perochloa kingi~) Ins. Deer Outside Blue Grama (B-outeloua Ins. Lives. gracilis) Ins. Deer Outside Idaho Fescue (Fest~ Ins. Lives. idahoensis) Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. GRASSES & GRASS-LIKES Ins. Deer Subtotals Outside Little Rabbitbrush Ins. Lives. (C~sothamnus viscidi- Ins. Deer f1orus) (2 var. ?) Outside TOTAL INTERCEPT 16 - 50' TRANSECTS 2.95 4.03 1.49 1.24 1.07 1.42 .73 .80 .00 --:00.07 .13 .52 .06 .87 .00 .16 .14 .00 .00 1.25 15.57 18.14 19~92 - PERCENTAGE OF GROUND OCCUPIED PERCENTAGE COMPOSITION ~7 lnSlde . ---Ins~ae Livestock Inside Livestock Inside Outside Part Deer Part Part Deer Part Outside .37 5.92 .50 5.33 .19 2.09 .15 2.49 1.41 .13 .1B -1.99 1.47 .09 1.06 .10 .00 .00 .01 .lb .01 .09 .02 .18 .06 1.04 .01 .08 1.22 .11 .00 .00 .02 .21 .02 .19 .00 .00 .00 .00 .15 1.75 1.95 31.23 2.27 23.97 2.49 27.91 1.20 19.18 2.79 29.48 2.42 27.10 - - ~.- - - - - 9.56 22.31 19.34 - I I-' I-' I �Table l.--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exclosure Percentage Composition - (continued). &~ PLANT SPECIESOR CLASS '~hlox (Phlox spp.) (2 ?) C1ubmoss {Se1agine11a sp.) - Outside Ins. Lives. - --- 6.53 2.25 ----- ---- --.------.-~- - .28-- (2?) Ins. Deer 1.87 Outside 1.17 Stonecrop$edum sp. Ins. Ll-ve-s-.-------.lO Ins. Deer .71 Outside 3.54 Fringed Sage Ins. Lives. .27 (Artemisia frigida) Ins. Deer .55 Outside 2.89 Aster (Aster spp.) 2? Inside Live. .71 Ins. Deer .45 Outside .54 Penstemon {PenStemonlns.r..ives. .41 spp.) 2 or more Ins. Deer 1.32 Outside .61 Double Bladderpod Ins. Lives. .64 Ins. Deer .21 (Physaria sp.) Outside .72 1.72 Prickly Pear Ins. Lives. (Opuntia sp ,) Ins. Deer .00 Outside .00 r Summary of Ground Occupation and PERCENTAGE COMPCDITION' 1/ Inside Inside Livestock Outside Deer Part Part 27.94 lsJi8 13.93 1.16 21.45 ----~ ~ sp.) Ins. Deer 1.09 ~Outside 4.28 Buckwheat (Erio-gonum--Ins--:-:-Lrves--=--------T.-8:r--~---__:2-2-~ spp.) Transect TOTAL PERCEl'JTAGE OF GROUND OCCUPIED INTERCEPT Inside 16 - 50' Livestock Inside . TREATMENTTRANSECTS Part Deer Part Outside Ins. Lives. 13.93 1. 74 Ins. Deer 11. 71 l.1iO Outside 9.94 1. 24 Ins. Lives. .58.68 Ins---=-IJeer·~~---lo.-2-3---:----~ - - --2-:-cr; --- Pussy toes {Antennar- - Line Interception .82 --~---~-----~----~-4.51 9.15 .14 1.44 .51__ ~ 6~00 3.b3 .23 2.47 1.04---- .15 .02 J .9 .44 .03 4.96 .54 .07 .73 .30 .09 ~ 1. 3 .06 .59 .07 .05 . .75 .82 .17 1.74 .08 .08 .-85 1.28 - -- - --~---.28 -.03 1.01 .09 .21 3.45 .00 .00 .00 I ~ .32 .09 . .00 �Table l.--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exclosure Percentage Composition - (continued). PLANT SPECIESOR CLASS Wlnterfat (Eurotia lanata) - Line Interception TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF GROUND OCCUPIED INTERCEPT --"'"'Tnslcle16 - 50' Livestock, Inside' TREATMENTTRANSECTS Part Deer Part Outside Ins. Lives. 1.37 .17 --Ins. Deer .00 .00 Outside .00 .02 Ins. Lives. .15 Pincushion Cactus Ins. Deer .00 (Hammilaria sp.) Outside .00 Ins. Lives. .08 .01 Snakeweed (GutierIns. Deer .00 riezia sp.) Outside .00 Vetch (Astragalus sp.)Ins. Lives. .07 .01_ Ins. Deer .00 Olitsiae --~----~4~----~--~ Bastard Toadflax ( Comandra sp.) Transect Summary of Ground Occupation and Ins. Ins. Lives. Deer Outside Smooth Horsebrush Ins. Lives. (Tetradymia canescens)Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. A1umroot ~Heuchera sp.)Ins. Deer - 5ut'siae Lambsquarter Ins. Lives. (Chenopodium album) !-ns •..Eeer Outside Fleabane "(ErIge-r-o-n----:I=-n-s-.-:LiVes. spp.) Ins. Deer Outside .02 .03 PERCENTAGE COHPOSITION17 lnside Livestock Inside Part Deer Part Outside 2.75 .00 .00 .00 .30 .00 .00 - .00 - .00 .16 .00 .00 .00 .00 .14' .00 .00 .00 .00 .0 --:59 .04 -----~'------.0-:"'4-------- t .04 .00 .05 ------.---------~--------~---------------------------~~------.----------~~---.00.00 .00 u .38 .00 .19 .00 .06 .00 .<?I .00 .00 .11- .-2S""" .05 .50 .00 .02 .00 .38 .00 .00 .OT __ •Uti .ITO .00 .00 .07 . .00 .0_ .01 .00 . __ .1 .03 6 .35 .- �Table l.--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Line Interception Transect Summary of Ground <x:cu~foh· and Percentage Composition - (continued). TOTAL INTERCEPT 16 - 50' PLANT SPECIES OR CLASS Cinquefoil (Potentilla sp,) TREATHEN T Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside Dandelion {Ta-raxacum Ins. Lives. sp .) Ins. Deer TRANSECTS Outside Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer .07 .00 .00 Death Camus (Zygadenus sp.) Hoss (Unknown) Onion (Allium sp.) Unknowns - PERCENTAGE Q01'fPOSJTJ:QtL __u... ~." __ Inside Livestock Inside Part Deer Part Outside PERCENTAGE OF GROUND OCCUPIED Inside Livestock Inside Part Deer Part Outside ,00 .00 ,00 .00 .00 ,00 .20 ,02 .14 .00 •00 .00 ~-~ ___ .00 -.-.-. ------.-00----- .00 .09 .01 .00 .00 .00 ----~..-;--.-------------- .00 .00 -.00 - ---.------.....;..---------------.00 --~----~--------------~--------------------------.00 .00 Outside Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside Ins. Lives. Ins. Deer Outside .02 .00 .00 .39 .00 .00 .01 .37 ~5l .49 .05 .00 - .00 .00 __ - __ -..;.._o_o .00 - =- .OJ I .55 ------- ._~--.02 .74 .0)--------- :06 f ----- .67 .06 -·-..------....;..----.6'l-~9~-- - _.- -'=-='== Ins. Lives. 34.29 4.28 68.77 \<lEEDS & HALF-SHRUBS Ins. Deer :sf.'5).-7.19 -------"7o;rJJSubtotals Outside 51.45 6.43" 72.09 Iris. Lives, 49.86 ::'--b.23 ----=: 100.00 100.00 100.00 GRASSES & HEEDS Ins. Deer 75.67 --~. 9.46 8.92 71.37 (UNDERSTORY) Totals Outside 1/ For Browse this is based upon the total crown intercept by treatment of a species divided by the total browse crown intercept for each treatment. Grasses and graSS-like plants, weedS, and half-shrubs are grouped together for computing composition because of similarities of stature in the stand or because their measurements are taken as the basal intercept. Percentage composition for these classes and species is the total basal intercept (crown intercept if half-shrub) of the species or class by treatment divided by the total intercept of all the herbaceous plants in the treatment. ~ +:I �Table 2.--Lararnie River Deer-Livestock Exc10sure - Summary of Big Sagebrush Age-Form Class Composition by Treatment - Sixteen 50 x 1 Foot Belt Transects per Treatment - August, 1961. FORNCLASS 1 (Subtotals) 2 (Subtotals) 3 AGECLASS Seedling 1/ Young Mature ~l D~ Young Hature Decadent Young Hature (S ubtotals) AGECLASS (Totals) 1/ ]/ 10 13 3 7 66 ---.--~.---- Mature Decadent Totals Dead '2/ ----rnside Deer Part No. of Plants % of Tot. 34 18.3 1 0 .5 0 0.0 0 0.0 v 79 55 1~6 ~_17 _.. --TRKfTmfT Inside Livestock . Part No. of Plants % of Tot. 7 5.9 10 •8 0 0.0 0 -0.0 5.4 7.0 1.6 3.7 35.5 28.0 1 0 0 13 52 46 -l/j. j- or 9.6 42.5 29.6 100.0 15 52 46 120 0.8 0.0 0.0 10.9 43.3 38.3 -- ~. ~ 12.5 43.3 38.3 100.0 11 All Seedlings were placed in Form Class 1. Height of 12" was used as a guide to separate Young and Hature plants. Totally dead and intact (stem and root parts not separated). Outside No. of Plants % of Tot. 30 18.70 15 9.40 2 1.25 1 0.60 - 16 2 0 12 48 34 10.00 1.25 0.00 7.50 30.Q'() 21.30- 30 Id.1U 43 5232.50 26.90 35 21.90 100.00 160 26 I J-I V1 I �Table 3.--Laramie River Deer-Livestock Exclosure - Summary of l'lountain Nahogany Age-Form ,Class Composition by Treatment'Sixteen 50 x 1 Foot Belt Transects per Treatment - August, 1961. _ TREATMENT ----------------------------~------------~------=~~~~--------------------------FORi-!CLASS_ .!GE..2~ (Subtotals) Seedling ~ng Hature Decadent Young Mature Decadent Young Nature Decadent AGECLASS (Totals) Seedling Young 11ature 1 (S ubtotals) 2 (S ubtotals) 3 --------~-=------------------~~ 2 3.7 Decadent Totals Dead Y 1/ Inside Livestock Part Inside Deer Part No. of Plants % of-T-o-T-. No. of Plants % of Tot. 1.3 l' 1/ a 0.0 0 o 3 1 1 5 11 31 0 10 12 32 54 o 0.0 0.0 5.5 1.8 1.9 9.3 20.4 57.4 0.0 18.5 22.2 59.3 100.0 All Seedlings were placed in Form Class 1. dead and intact (stem and root parts !! Totally 3 o o 5 0 1 15 17 35 1 23 17 36 77 o not separated). 3.9 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 1.3 19.5 22.1 ~ Outside of Plants % of Tot. 1 1 a o 4 o o 6 3 D '-45-:-4 1.3 29.9 11 22.1 3 46.7 100.0 13 28 1 1 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 21.4 10.7 - 40:4 3.6 39.3 10.7 46.4 100.0 I ~ I �•.17treatment again on October 11, 1961. Cattle fecal groups were eliminated from future counts by spraying them with paint as the tally was made. Findings: Use by elk on the }-acre treatment outside of the exclosure for the w~nter of 1960-61 was found to be 100 acres per elk-month indicated rate of stocking. The fall count of cattle fecal groups yielded an indicated rate of stocking of 7.9 acres per AUM for the summer season of 1961. Recommendations: Elk made light use of the stuqy area outside and west of this one-acre exclosure. The current finding concurs with those for previous years which might be of some significance. The exclosure is so situated that snow probably accumulates inside and around the fence in the winter. If such is the case, perhaps snow cover has been preventing animals from using the area to any great extent. It might be desirable to observe the exclosure from the air or ground in mid-winter in order to refute or verify the foregoing idea. Cattle occupied the outside treatment at a rate exceeding that which has been set (10 acres per AUM) by the Forest Service for the allotment. Position of the exclosure at the edge of aspens that are less than ~ mile from water undoubtedly is a factor in the conSistently high rates of stocking by cattle. SAGUACHE PARK CATTLE EXCLOSURE Introduction The Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure was established in June, 1958, in cooperation with the Saguache District, Rio Grande National Forest. A four-strand barbed Wire fence, so constructed that it can be dropped or restrung with ease, encloses an area of two acres. In practice, the fence has been lowered in the .fall prior to the.winter period of use by elk in order to allow the animals free access to the vegetation inside. Following spring dispersal of the elk and prior to cattle stocking, the fence has been put up to protect the vegetation from cattle utilization. Thus, an area under dual use (Winter by elk; summer by cattle) and one under use only by elk in winter were set up. Post-use pellet group counts were begun in 1958 as a means to obtain indices to rates of stocking by game and livestock. Also, plant inventories of the two treatments were made in July, 1958. It was planned by the Forest Service to divide and fence the Park into three pastures of varying size but equal carrying capacity for cattle. Furthermore, preliminary tests by that agency in the Park showed that the grasses improved in productivity considerably after weeds were destroyed by chemicals. Consequently, an aerial spraying program was conducted in July, 1960, on the first pasture with that area receiving non-use by cattle in 1960 and 1961. The two-acre exclosure happened to be located within the treated pasture. Therefore, as a check on the effectiveness of the spraying and possible influence by elk in Winter, the exclosure stuqy treatment plant covers were re-inventoried in 1961. �-18Assistance of Project Leader R. N. Denney in performance of this repeat study is gratefully acknowledged. District Ranger Joe Zylinski of the Saguache District cooperated by allowing use of the Stone Cellar Guard Station as field headquarters as well as in providing personnel to help on pellet group counts and seasonal manipulation of the drop-fence. Department Statistician Jack Grieb handled statistical analyses for which I am indebted. Pellet Group Counts - Current and Summary for Indicated Rates of Stocking Cbjectives: (1) To determine the indicated rates of stocking by elk on the one-acre treatments outside and inside of the enclosure for the fall-winterspring season of 1960-61. (2) To summarize the results of stocking rate studles for both elk and cattle for the years from 1958 through 1961. Procedures: Total counts of winter deposited elk (and deer) pellet groups were made on the two treatments May 22, 1961. The date of the counts was later than usual due mainly to the inaccessibility of the Park by vehicle. Frequent late spring snowstorms 'had made roads impassable. However, the time differential probably did not influence the results. Elk and deer dispersal is ordinarily early with few animals remaining after April 1. Findings: Indicated rates of stocking by elk were found to be 16.7 and 5.5 acres per elk-month, respectively, on the one-acre treatments outside and inside of the fence. Deer used the area inside of the exclosure at the indicated rate of 50 acres per deer-month. No deer pellet groups were recorded as being on the outside treatment. The foregoing rates are all applicable to the fall-winter-spring season of 1960-61. In summary, elk rates of stocking on the outside treatment were 1.5 and 50 acres per elk-month for the winters of 1958-59 and 1959-60, respectively. en the inside treatment for the same season, the indicated rates of stocking were 1.1 and 25 acres per elk-month. ,-----" Cattle were present on the outside treatment the summer of 1958 at an indicated rate of 10 acres per AUN. In the summer of 1959, cattle stocking was found to be at the rate of 33.3 acres per ADM. As has been mentioned, no cattle ~ere on the outside treatment in the summers of 1960 and 1961. Also, no deer use was recorded for any other Winter than 1960-61 and that only on the inside treatment. Discussion: The exclosure is located on the north rim of the Park on what had appeared to be a consistently used portion of winter elk range. Rather than the consistent heavy use expected, elk have been erratic in the intensities at which they have occupied, the treatments. The highest stocking rates were for the first ~inter of observations (1958-59) with rates considered to be indicative of high utilization. Rates for 1959-60 were very light. Then there was what might be considered moderate use for the winter of 1960-61. �Figure 7.--Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure, July 1961. (Upper) General view of area inside of exclosure with 1-acre study plot corner flagged in foreground. (Lower) Line intercept transect #9 inside of exclosure, looking from zero end to 50foot end. �-19•.. This writer has reservations about putting much confidence in using stocking rate indices as direct indicators of amounts of forage utilized, at least until such a time as more facts are obtained. In the first year of the stuqy, it was difficult to see where utilization had occurred on plants after elk had been on the inside treatment in heavy stocking. Clipping studies on the Blue Ridge (Job 3) also have indicated a weak direct correlation between pellet group stocking indices and winter utilization of forage by elk. 11ention is made of this apparent paradox since conclusions to be drawn from studies of vegetation changes might be entirely erroneous solely because elk stocking of an area and the amount of forage consumed are not closely related. Cattle and deer probably have not been appreciable influences on the vegetation since either or both classes of animals were found to be absent from or in light stocking on the study treatments much of the time from 1958 to 1961. Range Vegetation Study .s!>jectives: (1) To determine the plant cover and composition on the two treatments at the exclosure. (2) To compare by statistical procedures and gross examinations findings of the plant inventory in 1961 with the findings in 1958. (3) To evaluate changes that occurred in the plant cover in order to assess effects of the chemical weed control agent and grazing by elk and cattle in dual use on the vegetation. Procedures: Plant measurements were recorded on the 16 50-foot line interception transects on each treatment. Field work was done on July 18-19,1961. All transect-end marker stakes were found in place, none having been disturbed. Techniques employed in the 1958 study were followed without exception. Although exact replacement of transect rods and wire was not posstbt.e, it is felt that variations were minor and a negligible factor in results of the measurements. Plant measurements from the 1958 and present inventories were subjected to "t" tests in order to determine the precision of the changes. Analyses of variance tests on principal grass species were done also. Findings and Discussion: Results of the post-treatment plant inventory are presented in Table 4. From the table it can be noted that after a year's lapse in time, the chemical control agent was very effective reducing the weed cover by approximately 95 per cent (96.3 per cent Inside; 94.2 per cent Outside). Fringed sage (Artemisia frigida), which had provided the bulk of the weeqy component, was particularly susceptible to the action of the 2,4-D (applied by aerial spray at the rate of three pounds per acre in No.2 diesel oil). Though not particularly abundant, sandwort (Arenaria fendleri) appeared to have the most resistance to the chemical. Onion (Allium sp.) and pincushion cactus (Mammilaria sp.) also seemed able to withstand complete destruction, at least on the stuqy~reatment transects. The other weeds all but disappeared on the treatments. �Table 4.--Saguache Park Cattle Exclosure - Summary and Comparison of Line Interception Transect Inventories of Vegetation - By Species and/or Major Category - July, 1958, and July, 1961 - Measurements in Feet to Hundredths. Idaho Fescue (Festuca idahoensis) TOTAL INTERCEPT 16 - 50t TRANSECTS TREATI1ENT 1958 1961 Inside 44.19 44.08 Outside 38.73 44.83 Inside 4.91 4.22 Outside 10.36 6.79 Inside 5.76 5.98 Outside 2.73 1.38 Inside .63 .76 Outside .58 .87 Inside .10 .05 Outside .06 .09 Inside .00 .31 Outside .00 .02 Inside .00 .08 Outside .00 .00 GRASSES AND GRASS-LIKES SUBTOTALS Inside Outside Fringed Sage (Artemi~ fdP.'ida) Cinquefoil (Potenti11a Qenns;zlvanica) Loco (Oxytropis sericea) Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside PLANT SPECIES OR CLASS Slimstem Huhly (~]p.nhp.-rr:ri~ filic1l1milJ) Sedge (~ sp.) J unegrass (Koeleria cristata) Nat ~1uhly (I1uhlenbergia richardsonis) Squirreltail (Sitanion hystrix) Bluegrass (~ sp.) Onion (Allium ap.) 55.59 55.48 52.49 53.95 69.61 1.61 40.05 .78 •01 .68 .00 .20 .00 3.67 .03 2.31 .08 .48 .18 .50 PERCENTAGE OF PERCENT GROUND OCCUPIED CHANGE 1961 1961 1958 1958 0.3 5.52 -5.51 -to- 13.6 4.84 5.60 .62 - 14.1 .53 1.30 - 34.5-1H~ .85 + 3.7 .72 .75 .17 .34 - 49.5 =2/ .08 + 17.1 .09 .07 .11 + 33.3 .01 Tr. - 50.0 1/ .01 .01 - 22.2 1/ .co .04 11 .00 Tr. 1/ .01 .00 1/ .00 .00 - - 0.2 + 6.95 6.56 - 97. 7~!-~ 8.70 - 98.1H'- 9B.5lHi.09 -100.0 -100.o,'!-y-- .46 - 98.7",..'.06 - 83.3~H~ - 64.0* .59 .08 .00 .00 1.54 , .09 .09 .10 .00 .03 .00 •. 00 .53 .14 52.96 95.25 52.86 5.01 Y .48 1.30 6.74 .20 Tr • -~2~~-r44 42.22 95.21 6.93 2.7 PERCENTAGE COrWOSITION 1961 1961 1958 1958 33.56 75.65 39.08 79.15 3.73 7.24 10.45 11.99 4.37 10.26 .03 .10 .52 ,00 .00 2.74 .29 .36 .02 40.41 1.38 .20 ,00 2.33 .05 .51 .32 .02 - .00 .01 .01 .06 2.76 .14 . J\) 0 l �Table 4.--SaguachePark Cattle Exclosure - Summary and Comparison of Line InterceptionTransect Inventories of Vegetation - (continued). 'TOTAL INTERCEPT 16 - 50' PERCENTAGEOF TRANSECTS PERCENT GROUND OCCUPIED PLANT SPECIES OR CLASS TREATI1ENT 1958 1961 CHANGE 1958 1961 1958 1961 Sandwort (Arenaria Inside 1.21 1.06 - 12.4 .15 .14 fendleri) Outside 1.20 .45 - 62.5 Y .15 .06 Paintbrush (Castilleja Inside .09 .00 -100.0 11 .01 .00 sp.) . Outside .11 .00 -100.0 .01 .00 Bladderpod (Lesquerel- Inside .20 .00 -100.0 1/ .02 .00 la montana)-*~ Outside .61 .00 -100.0 .08 .00 Fleabane Daisy (Erige- Inside .02 .00 -100.0 1/ Tr. .00 .r.cm sp.). Outside .02 .00 -100.0 1/ Tr. .00 Pincushion Cactus Inside .13 .02 - 84.6 .02 Tr. (Hammilaria sp.) Outside 1.61 1.23 - 23.6 .20 .15 Unknown \veeds Inside .00 .01 11 .00 Tr. Outside.OO ,02 .00 Tr. PERCENTAGE CO~WOSITION 1958 1961 1958 1961 .92 1.82 1.21 .80 .07 .00 .11 .00 .15 .00 .62 .00 .01 .00 .02 .00 .10 .03 1.63 2.17 .00 .02 .00 .03 lVEEDS 57.78 4.79 L 11 u SUBTOTALS GRASSES AND HEEDS TOTAL COVER Inside Outside . 76.09 2.79 - 96.3~~ 9.51 46.61 2.69 - 94.2~r~ .35 Inside 131.68 58.27 - 55.7~~*'16.46 Outside 99.10 56.64 - 42.~~ 7.28 1/ Not tested for significance. ~/ Significant differenceat .20 level. Significant differenceat .05 level. ** Significant differenceat .01 level. * {~) 5.83 .34 12.39 7.08 47.04 4.75 100.00lOO.OO 100.00108. 00 ~ l-' J �... 22- Results of measurements of four of the grass and grass-like plants were subjected to analyses of variance tests in an effort to determine whether grazing by either or both elk and cattle were factors acting in the changes that occurred between years. The grass catego~ as a whole showed such minor differences between 1958 and 1961 readings that an analysis was not requested for the category. For slimstem muhly (Muhlenbergia filiculmis), the interaction of years times treatment was significant~tihe 80 pe~~el (F = 1.91~ F.20 = 1.83 with I and 60 a.r.) , Essentially then, the increase of this species on the outside treatment was significantly greater than the inside treatment where it actually decreased very slightly. Hat muhly (Muhlenbergia richardsonis) showed no significant change between treatments and years~. """Fiomthe analysis 'Of variance test on sedge (Carex sp.) s it was· found that the plant decreased significantly more on the outside than inside (F = 368.36, FoOOS = 8.49 with I and 60 a.r.). Junegrass (Koeleria cristata) decreased significantly more on the outside than inside where it actually increased (F = 46.54, F.OOS = 6 49 with I and 60 d.f.). 0 By the results of the analyses$ changes between 1958 and 1961 on the treatments in the amounts of the four principal grass and grass-like plants appear to have been compensating, \1Ihereone species decreased, another Lncr-ea sed, so that the net effect was almost static conditions for the category. This type of reaction is believed to be more typical of 8i te related changes than to alterations by grazing of animals. It seems unlikely that dual use would allow an increase in grass cover (however slight, and elk use only in winter would cause almost· no change)o Also, both elk and cattle use of the area was too erratic to label the animals definitely as influencing factors. Furthermore, nothing can be obtained from the findings to indicate Whether or not the decrease in weeds was a benefit or detriment to the elk. Perhaps the study design is not comprehensive enough to permit gaining the aforementioned information, although it is hoped that future evaluations will give some clues along those lines. Apparently about the only sound conclusion that can be drawn from the stuqy is that the grasses had not yet had an opportunHy to exploit the lack of competition caused through a decrease of weeds. ~ven that process might be exceedingly slow on the treatment sites because of extremely dry conro.tions from exposure both to wind and insolation. Recommendations: No recommendations relative to elk or cattle management can be made from resuits of vegetation or stocking rate studies accomplished so far. The rate of application of the control agent seemed to have been satisfactoIy, at least at the exc l.oeur-e , Certainly, 2,h-D applied in greater quantities could not be expected to be more effective on the particular plants under observation. �REFERENCES CITED Baker, B. D. 1956. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept., Colo. Game and Fish Dept., July, pp. 46-47, Figs. 1 and 2. Baker, B. D. 1959. Fed. Aid Quart. Rept., Colo. Game and Fish Dept., April, pp. 201-203· Prepared by: Bertram D. Baker Senior Game Biologist Date: April, 1962 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Ooordinator ��.April, 1962 -25JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECTS State of Colorado ------------------------Project No. W-lOl-R-4 ------------------------Work Plan No. 1 ----------------------Title of Job: Period Covered: Game Range Investigations Job No. 3 Forage Plant Utilization by Elk on Controversial Ranges. April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT Studies were completed within the period on Blue Ridge in Summit County to determine utilization of forage plants by elk for the winter-spring season of 1960-61, in Cat Creek Park of southern Rio Grande County to obtain amounts and percentages of forage utilized by cattle in the summer of 1961, and on Cold Springs Hountain and nearby Beaver Basin to determine forage utilization by livestock plus big game during the summer of 1961 on open range lands and by big game on Department managed lands of the Browns Park Unit. Procedures were also effected initiating investigation into forage utilization by elk for the winter season of 1961-62 in Cat Creek Park. The method of clipping and weighing plant forage from paired protected and unprotected plots was employed to determine production and, subsequently, utilization. The utilization by elk on Blue Ridge grasslands averaged 36.8% of all plants and 38.3% of grasses from six sets of paired plots. Pellet group count transects yielded a high average 49 elk-days use per acre for six 0.1 acre transects. The elk-days use per acre and the per cents of utilization determined at each of the six sets showed a weak direct correlation due probably to the pattern of elk activity between cover and the grassland openings. Grass utilization by cattle on more level areas in Cat Creek Park ranged from 35.1% to 88.&.t and averaged 60.8% at the five sites. Utilization of grasses ranged from 0.0% to 66.9% and averaged a light 17.2% at the five perimeter slope sites. Reductions in cattle stocking are recommended for the Park. Forage utilization of open range key sites on Cold Springs Mountain and Beaver Basin meadows averaged 81.4% from five sets of plots. This figure is high and shows the existing excessive stocking by cattle and sheep. Results coincide closely with those obtained in the 1960 segment of this work. As determined by pellet group transects, the stocking by elk on Department lands seems to be high, also. An average of 43 elk-days use per acre was found from counts at 3 k~ sites. Utilization was moderate being an average 50.9% with heavy rabbit use on at least one and probab~ more of the 3 sets of paired plots. Caution is expressed regarding a possible excessive build-up in elk numbers on Department lands particularly in relation to disease transmissions and retardation of range recovery. ��-27- FORAGE PLANT UTILIZATION BY ELK ON CONTROVERSIAL RANGES Bertram D. Baker INTRO DUCTION Forage plant utilization studies that were conducted in this segment included clipping of forage and pellet group counts for animal stocking rates on Blue Ridge grassland areas, in Cat Creek Park, and on Cold Springs Mountain and nearby perimeter meadows of Beaver Basin. The stuqy on Blue Ridge was begun in September 1960 when paired plot locations were selected, cages were set, and plant composition lists were made of the plots. The Blue Ridge stuqy was conducted primari~ to determine how much forage elk consumed through the winter and also to test procedures which were proposed for use in Cat Creek Park. The Cat Creek Park investigation was initiated. Results of the first part of the stuqy regarding forage utilization by cattle will be presented in subsequent paragraphs. The forage utilization study on Cold Springs Mountain and in Beaver Basin was done on and near the Department.'s Calloway and Wiggins properties which are part of the Browns Park Management Area. This Cold Springs MouptainBeaver Basin study is an extension of work done in 1960 on Cold Springs Mountain and reported in 1961 (Baker, 1961). . BLUE RIDGE Objectives: 1. To determine the per cent utilization of forage plants by elk in the winter-spring season of 1960-61 on selected grassland sites of National Forest lands on Blue Ridge, Summit County. 2. To obtain indicated rates of stocking by elk and deer for the above same season through pellet group counts on the areas where plots for clipping were established. Procedures: Blue Ridge is the extreme northwestern-most part of the \filliams ForI{ Nountains spur range. The Ridge portion accessible by vehicle was chosen for investigation west of the crest in the grassland type. Located by rough apprOximation, the paired plot sites are in Sections 3 and B, Township 2 South, Range 79 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Summit Coun~. The land is under the juriSdiction of the Arapahoe National Forest. Forage Production-Utilizat~ The clipped weight method was employed to determine the production or yield of forage on protected and unprotected plots in pairs. Differences of yields .from the plots subsequently gave the amounts and percentages of forage utilized. On September 29, 1960, Project Leader Dick Denney and I selected six sites for the locations of paired plots. The sites were either above or below and near the ridge road with the last one being two miles southeast of the road fork where one branch of the road leads to the airways beacon. All of the sites were on south, southwest, or west exposures. Plant composition lists were made by plot as plot locations were picked and cages were set. �..-28- Either a 4 x 4 x 2 foot welded wire cage or a 4-foot diameter base welded wire cone was placed over the centers of the 9.6 square foot circular plot of the pair Which was to receive protection. The cages were secured to the ground by long hooked rods driven at the corners and short hooked stakes at the bases between corners. Cones were secured by four hooked stakes spaced around their bases. Steel stakes were used to mark the centers of the unprotected plots. Although care was exercised in choosing the plots with equal initial amounts and kinds of forage, the bunchgrasses made it difficult to accomplish this with a high degree of confidence. Late spring snowstorms in 1961 prevented attempts to reach the plots for clipping until June 6. On that date, Biologist Denney and I revisited the area, clipped forage from the paired plots, and counted winter and spring deposited elk and deer pellet groups on ten 0.01 acre circular plots at each site of the six. Forage clippings of grasses, forbs, and browse from each plot were kept separate and placed in paper sacks. Net green weights were determined and recorded upon ~ return to headquarters the following day. Growth had started on some plants, and the plants were quite green at that time. The paper sacks were left open and stored until air-~ weights were determined on September 6, 1961. Animal Stocking Rates In June as the clipping of plants from the plots was done, random ten plot transects were checked for winter and spring deposited elk and deer pellet groups. A transect was located near each set of paired plots. They generally paralleled the contour. The individual plots were circular and 0.01 acre in size. Findings: Table 1 presents the results of both the utilization and stocking rate phases of the Blue Ridge investigation. Green weights of plant clippings were obtained but were found to be of little value because of extreme variations in stages of growth at the time of clipping. Some plants were still dormant on June 6 while others were quite succulent. Clippings of browse, grasses, and forbs were kept separate in an attempt to find out if the elk showed preferences by those gener-ail, plant classes. However, results must be considered to be highly inconclusive due to inherent variabilities in plant distribution. As can be noted on Table 1, in several cases weights of browse and/or forbs were greater on the unprotected plot of the pair than on the protected plot. Grasses yielded a more consistent pattern of results despite the wide range in utilization of from 8.3 to 58.2 per cent (average about 38%). Standards are not available for aSSigning Winter utilization of plant species or classes by elk or other animals to general categories of, for example, .light through severe. Regardless of this lack of guides, the average utilization of about 36% that was found should not be considered perhaps greater than moderate. The vegktation certainly did not present an appearance of having been used excessively. . The average indicated rate of stocking by elk from pellet group transect counts was high (49 elk-days use per acre). A relatively weak correlation coefficient of 0.48 was found when the utilization of total forage from each �Table l.--Summary of results of clipping paired plots for production and utilization and pellet group counts for animal stocking rate indices, Blue Ridge, Summit County - June 1961 - Utilization plot size of 9.6 sq. ft., circular; Ten 0.01 acre plot transects for pellet groups. (lveights are net air-dry in grams) Production - Unprotected Plot Orasses F'orl5s Browse Plot Set Production - Protected Plot Browse urasses F'or6s 'l'otaIs Wt. Wt. Ute % Ute Wt. tn. Ute % Ute ~vt. Wt •. 0.9 38.9 8.8 48.6 0.0 #2 3.7 58.3 15.1 77 .1 0.7 3.0 81.0 37.3 21.0 36.0 19.5 #3 1.3 77.9 6.0 85.2 1.0 0.3 23.1 37.1 40.8 52.4 9.3 #4 0.0 32.5 26.4 58.9 0.0 #5 0.0 74.9 2.2 #6 0.0 67.7 6.5 350.2 Wt. Wt. Ute No. of Days Use/A. Ute Elk Deer % 30 0 57.5 19.6 25.4 39 0 47.4 37.8 44.4 86 4 26.4 6.1 18.8 5.2 21.2 80.3 31.6 27.3 46.3 46 2 77.1 0.0 68.7 6.2 2.9 3.8 29 2 74.2 0.0 28.3 39.4 58.2· 7.3 35.6 38.6 52.0 62 1 421.1 214.9 135.3 38.6 :ll 271.1 150.0 35.6 ~/ 49* 1* 1/ Average of items on 6 plots = 38.3.% Average of items on 6 plots = 36.8;G Average of 6 transects. '* '-I Ute 'r u1:aIs 17.1 21.8 56.0 7.7 1.1 49.0 24.8 23.8 49.0 #1 Totals Ute % 8.3 5.5 74.2 I I'\) \0 I �set of paired plots was tested with the elk-days use per acre determined near each set. A possible explanation for this apparent discrepancy might be that the elk made use of the relatively snow-free south and west facing slopes more for rest and daytime warmth than they did for obtaining food. The slopes are adjacent to cover of heavy coniferous timber which is highly preferred by elk for escape and use for nighttime bedding. .. The bulk of the forage on all of the plots was furnished by bearded bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum). In addition, the following species and genera were found oo'Set #i plots; rose (Rosa spp.), vetch (Astragalus spp.), fringed sage (Artemisia frigida), pussytoe8:1Antennaria spp.), stonecrop (Sedum spp.), Junegrass \1ro~ia cristata), bluegrass"(Poa spp.), phlox (Phlox spp.), loco (Oxytropis spp.), fleabane aaisy (Erigeron sPP:) (?), snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.), cinquefoil (Potentilla sPP.), rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.), lupine (Lupinus spp.), big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), currant (Ribes spp.), and yarrow (Achillea spp.). Set #2 plant composition on the plots was loco, pussy toes, rabbitbrush, rose, Junegrass, sedge (Carex spp.), fringed sage, penstemon (Penstemon spp.), yarrow, vetch, phlox, harebell (Campanula spp.), pasque flower (Pulsatilla ludoviciana), cinquefoil, lupine, and buckwheat (Eriogonum spp.). The plots of Set #3 contained phlox, cinquefoil, bluegrass, fringed sage, Junegrass, rose, yarrow, aspen reproduction (Populus tremuloides), buckwheat, vetch (Vicia spp.), pasque flower, thistle (Cirsium spp.), Thurber fescue (Festuca thurberi), loco, peavine (Lathyrus sPp.), stonecrop, fleabane daisy, sedge, snowberrJ; strawberry (Fragar1a spp.), needlegrass (Stipa spp.) and currant. Buckwheat, Junegrass, fringed sage, stonecrop, pussy toes, phlox, loco, lupine, yarrow, vetch (Astragalus spp.), pasque flower, penstemon, cinquefoil, and bluegrass were founCfon either or both plots of Set #4. Set #S plots contained loco, fleabane daisy, penstemon, pussytoes, phlox, bluegrass, Junegrass, fringed sage, yarrow, vetch (Astragalus spp.), harebell, and cinquefoil. The plant composition of Set #6 plots consisted of penstemon, Junegrass, fleabane daisy, pussy toes, loco, vetch (Astragalus sPP.), bluegrass, fringed sage, buckwheat, harebell, yarrow, cinquefoil, and phlox. Recommendations: It was found that the techniques empl~ed were generally in8idequate to handle browse species where they occurred in the plant composition. This restriction was follcwed where possible when the Cat Creek Park plots were located. Also, there does not seem to be a correlation between indicated use by elk from numbers of pellet groups when compared with the post-winter-use appearance of the forage plants. This observation is in need of further investigation. The cone-type of cage (4-foot diameter base) did not stand up well under the heavy concentration of elk. Most damage seemed to have been caused by trampling. No cages were pulled out such as might happen by bulls hooking them �-31- with their antlers. The 5-foot diameter base cones will be watched closely in the Cat Creek Park stuqy to see how they will withstand wintering elk in perhaps lighter concentrations. CAT CREEK PARK Obj ective s: 1. To obtain an indication of the amount of utilization by cattle of all plants, grasses, and browse and forbs combined on a pounds per acre and percentage basis in Cat Creek Park for the summer season of 1961. 2. To establish plots from which forage will be clipped in 1962 to obtain an indication of the amount of utilization by elk of the forage on a pounds per acre and percentage basis for the winterspring season·of 1961-62. 3. To determine indices to the rates of stocking by all classes of animals present in the summer season of 1961. Procedures: The stuqy area is located approximately between the 9,300 and 10,000 foot elevation levels on Rio Grande National Forest lands in all or portions of Sections 21 through 28, Township 37 North, Range 6 East, New Mexico Principal Meridian. The Park is near the southern edge of Rio Grande County on the Deer Creek drainage, an upper main tributary of Cat Creek. Forage Production-Utilization On May 24 and 25, 1961, Alamosa District Ranger Bob Tice, Range Staff Assistant Howard Chadwick, Department li.C.O. Dick McDonald, and I selected ten sites and the locations of four plots at each site. Five sites were chosen on the lower more level portions of the Park. The first site (Set #1) was on the Deer Creek bottoms having bluegrass (Poa spp.) cover. Another site (Set #2) was in a tributary draw of Deer Creek-COntaining a cover of almost a pure stand of western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii). The number 3 and 4 Sets were on the central level portion of the Park anarEad mixtures of several kinds of drysite grasses. The fifth site was in an aspen draw at the east edge of the Park. The open aspen stand had bluegrasses predominating the understory. The remaining five sites were chosen on west-facing (No.6) and south-facing (Nos. 7-10) perimeter slopes which contained mainly bunchgrasses in various mixtures (see Table 3). At each of the ten sites the centers were chosen of four 9.6 square foot plots containing as nearly equal amounts by weight of browse, forbs, and grasses and grass-like plants as was possible to judge. The plots were grouped, but they Were kept a minimum of 20 feet apart. The treatment of each plot had four possibilities Which were: (1) left unprotected through the summer season of 1961 to determine production under utilization by cattle, (2) protected from cattle utilization through the summer season of 1961 to obtain production under non-use, (3) protected from cattle utilization through the summer season of 1961 but uncovered to allow use by elk and deer in �...32- the winter-spring season of 1961-62, and (4) protected the entire year to obtain production under no utilization by stock and game. The treatment of each plot was determined by random selection of numbered coins. Plot centers were marked with flanged steel stakes painted the color that had been designated to represent the treatment. Conical cages made from 5-foot wide Welded wire were placed over the three plots requiring protection and secured to the ground with hooked steel stakes. Plant lists were made for each plot. Site and plot locations were described and put on an aerial photograph. Ranger Tice and I returned to the area on October 3, 4, 16, and IB, 1961 and clipped and sacked forage from the plots previously designated to determine production under grazing and non-grazing by cattle. W.C. O. HcDonald also assisted one day. Difficulties in co-ordinating work schedules necessitated clipping forage from plots at Sets 6-10 before cattle had left the area (On October 3 and 4, 1961).· However, it is thought that the results were not influenced appreciably because the sites were on slopes which were not receiving much use by the cattle. The cage was removed from the plot in each set that had been chosen for protection from cattle but available to elk over the winter-spring season of 1961-62. Those cages and the ones removed from plots employed to determine production under non-use by cattle were transferred to the Alamosa River Guard Station for storage until spring of 1962 when the procedures will be repeated for the second year of observation~. The percentage utilization by cattle was computed by subtracting the production of the unprotected plot at each of the ten sets from the production of the corresponding cage-protected plot and dividing the result by the latter. The forage weights are air-dry condition and were determined on January B, 1962. By using the plot size of 9.6 square feet (circular) and weighing in grams, all weights are readily convertible to pounds per acre by multiplying the grams by 10. Animal Stocking Rates --.--~.-.. A transect of ten 0.01 acre circular plots was examined for summer deposited fecal groups in the vicini~ of each of the ten sets of plots. This was done in order to obtain indices to the rates of stocking by all classes of animals. Some difficulty was experienced in determining age of cattle fecal groups, however, if errors occurred, th~ are thought to have been on the conservative side. Findings: The results of the study of utilization of forage by cattle for the s:ummer-season of 1961 are summarized in Table 2. The first five sets of paired plots were located by choice where cattle use had been presumed to be the greatest. That assumption was proven correct both by the degree of utilization found 05.1% to BB.8%)and by the stocking rate indices obtained (3 to 66 cow-days use per acre). The second five sets yielded results also consistent with the prior assumption that the cattle do not frequent the perimeter slopes of the Park, at least under conditions present in 1961. The average rate of grass utilization of 60.8% for the portion of the Park under persistent use by cattle must be considered to be heavy. This is especially true under the generally present poor condition of the range. The perimeter �Figure 1.--Cat Creek Park, October 1961. (Upper) Cage set aside from the cattle protected plot, Set #1, Deer Creek Bottoms. (Lower) Plot opened to elk utilization after protection from cattle use, Set #4. Note aspen reproduction that has appeared in the latter. �Figure 2.--(Upper) Sacked forage clippings from ungrazed (Foreground) and grazed (Background) plots, Set #6, below Wiggins Camp, Beaver Basin (Lower) Elk wallow in meadow on Wiggins Tract. September 19610 o �Table 2. --SUITllTl8ry of results of clipping paired plots for production and utilization and pellet group counts for animal stocking rate indices, Cat Creek Park, Rio Grande County - October 1961 - Utilization plot size of 9.6 sq. ft., circular; Ten 0.01 acre plot transects for pellet groups. (Wts. net air-dry in grams). - Production Protected Plot Browse & Forbs Grasses Total Ute #1 17 .9 104.9 122.8 2.3 15.6 #2 0.3 122.9 123.2 #3 3.9 50.8 #4 10.6 #5 #6 Plot Set 1/ Production - Unprotected Plot 'lldcaJ. Grasses lift. % Ht. % Ute lit. Ute Ute Ht. Ute Ute Br'OWS'e & r'orbs Ut. % Ute Number Days Use Per Acre 2J Cattle Elk Deer 87.2 11.5 93.4 89.0 13.8 109.0 88.8 15 0 0 0.0 0.3 100.0 80.0 42.9 34.9 80.0 43.2 35.1 16 0 0 54.7 0.0 3.9 100.0 33.3 17.5 34.4 33.3 21.4 39.1 5 0 0 113.7 124.3 2.7 7.9 74.5 16.5 97.2 85.5 19.2 105.1 84.6 66 0 0 21.1 85.5 106.6 2.2 18.9 89.6 34.0 51.5 60.2 36.2 70.4 66.0 3 0 0 13.8 64.4 78.2 7.0 9.6 14.9 61.8 16.4 21.0 2 0 1 6.8 49.3 54.8 I W #7 6.8 68.1 74.9 23.5 0.0 0.0 88.4 0.0 o . 0 111.9 . 0 .0 0.0 0 0 0 #8 12.9 82.8 95.7 24.0 0.0 0.0 92.7 0.0 0.0 116.7 0.0 0.0 0 1 0 #9 1.7 107.4 109.1 14.0 0.0 0.0 102.8 4.6 4.3 116.8 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 #10 42.2 75.5 117.7 37.1 5.1 12.1 25.0 50.5 66.9 62.1 55.6 47.2 0 1 0 -- --------- -- ---- Ave. - All Plots 87.6 100.7 11.3 5.9 42.3 53.9 36.7 39.0 65.2 42.1 38.2 10.7 0.2 0.1 1CJ.8 95.5 106.3 1.4 9.3 90.3 35.1 60.5 60.8 36.5 69.8 62.7 21.0 0.0 0.0 - 10 15.5 79.6 95.1 21.1 2.4 12.3 72.7 12.9 17.2· 93.8 14.4 13.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 13.1 Ave. - Nos. 1 : Ave. - Nos. i~et Nos. 1 - 5, level portions of Park used more heavily by cattle. Nos. 6 - 10, Park perimeter slopes used pre- dOminantly by game animals. 2/ For summer season 1961. Summer deposited pellet groups in best judgment of observers. - w I �-34- Table 3.--Checklist of plants present on cattle forage utilization plots, Cat Creek Park, Rio Grande County (U = Ungrazed Plot; G = Grazed Plot; X = Plant is present). SET NillIDER- PAIRED PLOTS PLANT ~ HI Symbol U G Common Name ehna Big Rabbi tbrush tr ttle Habbi t6'rushUIiVl GUT Snakeweed Fringed Sage Arfr Bluegrasses POA X X Sedges CAR X' x. Mat Huhly Muri X X Western Wheatgrass Agsm Junegrass Kocr Stco . Needle & Thread Needlegrass STI Idaho Fescue Peid Squirreltail Sihy Mountain Muhly Humo Pine i5'ropseed Bltr Par!,Z c.atgrass Dapa Gentian GEN X Beardtongue PEN ---X-CH X Yarrow llerbaceous Sage;-~RT TIandelion TAR X Lupines LUP X Cingue I'OlIs POT X Lambsguarter Chal Violet VIO Loco OXY Mountain Dandelion AGO SalsJ.fy TRA Borage POG~Knotweeds ]ls;;er AS'R . ffiij f3 uckwnea t Pingue HYI1 Pus~toes ANT Unknown Forbs X 1f2 u--G #3 'UG X X X X X X X X U"'"G X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Z X X X X X X X xX X X X x: X X X X X X X X X X X v X X J\. X X .X X X X X X X X X X X - X X-- X X X X X X X X X X X X X x- ~t- #8 #9 #10#7 U'G 'tTG UG u--a Ifb G X X ...!!.L #4 UG U X X X X X X X X X X X X X X r"~ X X X-- Forest Service deSignations for species and genera. X X X X X X X X X X - �-35- slope sets of plots averaged light utilization for all plant categories, but this does not offset the high utilization elsewhere since the slopes are steep enough that severe cuts would be normal for them anyway. The resUlts of the clipping of plots at Sets 7, 8, and 9 (see Table 2) pOint up the one important weakness of the methodology where the bunch grass cover type is concerned. At each set of the aforementioned paired plots, the forage production of the grazed plot was greater than production of the ungrazed counterpart. It had been expected that such might happen but the size of the errors will introduce doubts into computations of forage utilization by the elk. Occupation of the area by deer and elk in the summer of 1961 was negligible as is shown by results of pellet group counts. This finding substantiates what had been suspected at the start and eliminates need for considering the factor of appreciable overlap of seasons of use by elk (and deer) and the livestock. Recommendations: It is recommended on the basis of results of this first of two summers of stuqy that cattle stocking be reduced by at least one half. There can be no doubt that utilization is and has been excessive and detrimental to the Cat Creek ranges. Flood and erosion control structures Which were put in by the CCCprogram on lower tributary drainages to Cat Creek clearly established early recognition of the erosion problem there. Unfortunately, the higher tributaries of Cat Creek have not received similar attention until recently. The role that elk play in the problem remains to be determined. However, plans are being formulated to continue the stuqy through the spring of 1963 to seek answers covering two winters of use by the elk. COLD SPRINGS MOUNTAIN-BEAVER BASIN £.bjectives: 1. To determine the per cent of utilization of plants by big game animals on selected key sites of Department owned lands on Cold Springs Mountain and perimeter meadows of nearby Beaver Basin, Hoffat County, in the summer season of 1961. 2. To determine the per cent of utilization of plants by big game and livestock in combined use on selected key sites of open range adjacent to the Department properties on Cold Springs Mountain and Beaver Basin for the summer season of 1961. 3. To obtain an indication of the rates of stocking by elk, deer, domestic sheep, cattle, and horses by pellet group counting on transects near the key sites selected under 1 and 2 above. Procedures: The present report covers the second summer of investigation into plant utiiization by wild and domestic ruminants on Cold Springs Mountain and Beaver Basin ranges. The 1960 stuQy was restricted mainly to areas on the upper Calloway property of the Browns Park Management Area and outside ranges to the �east and south of the Calloway tract. In 1961 the key sites selected were located on and west and north of the Calloway tract as well as on and adjacent to the Wiggins tract at the west edge of Beaver Basin. Forage Production-Utilization The methods employed in the stuqy were essentially the same as those that have been described herein previously for the Blue Ridge and Cat Creek Park investigations. A minor deviation was that forage clippings from each plot were weighed in total, there being no attempt to determine utilization by classes such as forbs, grasses, etc. Also, growth was started, and utilization by all classes of animals was in progress when the plots were located·and cages were set. The latter circumstance would have tended to lower the resulting utilization, however, results were so positive, for the most part, that conclusions probably Were not affected. Project Leader Dick Denney and I selected paired plot locations on June 20, 1961, at the following key sites ("Plot Set"-Table 4): Plot Set #1 was north of the upper Calloway tract boundary in the wet meadow at the southeast corner of the tract (S~ S~ S.13); Plot Set #2 was across the fence from Set #1 in the same wet meadow but inside of the state property boundary; Plot Set #3 was about 3/4 mile west of the westernmost fence towards Beaver Creek Canyon on Cold Springs Mountain (open range-dry meadow); Number 4 was about 700 feet west of cattle guard south of the Calloway cow camp cabin on a dry meadow; Number 5 was a wet ~eadow site on open range west of the stock pond on the east side of Beaver Basin; Plot Set #6 was southeast of the Wiggins cabin about mile in the wet meadow; Plot Set #7 was on Department land, Wiggins tract, in the first stringer meadow crossed by the road west of the cabin; and Plot Set #8 was in the dry meadow opening outside of the Wiggins tract near the west gate and cattle guard. * Cages were secured over the plots of the pairs requ1rlng protection from utilization. Lists of plants on the plots were noted at the time of plot location selections. The forage from the paired plots was clipped and sacked by Mr. Denney and me on the September 28 revisit to the sites. The sacks were stored open upon return to my office and weighed after the forage reached air-dry condition January 8, 1962. Weights were obtained by an Ohaus triple beam balance for this and the Blue Ridge and Cat Creek Park studies. Animal Stock~ng Rates In September as the clipping of forage was carried out, a transect of ten 0.01 acre circular plots at each site was scanned for pellet groups of all classes of grazing animals. Groups were tallied regardless of age. This differed from the 1960 procedure when attempts were made to determine current depositions only. Findings: The results of the clipping of forage for production-utilization on Cold Springs Hountain and Beaver Basin key sites are presented in Table 4. The high average 81.6% utilization on the open range sites was remarkably close to the 77.4% found on areas outside of Department lands in the summer season of 1961. �Table 4.--Summary of results of clipping paired plots for production and utilization and pellet group counts for animal stocking rate indices, Beaver Bastn and Cold Springs Mountain, Moffat County - September 1961 - Utilization plot ·size of 9.6 sq. ft., circular; Weights net air-dry in grams. Plot Set Production Protected Plot Production Unprotected Plot ~veight Utilized Percent Utilized Cattle #1 30.2 8.9 21.3 70.5 129 0 7 7 3 #2 20.8 17.6 3.2 15.4 0 0 0 76 6 #3 64.3 16.6 41.1 14.2 36 1 12 5 2 #4 29.7 7.2 22.5 75.8 3.1 0 0 0 26 6 #5 142.6 18.5 124.1 87.0 95 2 47 5 2 #6 193.1 10.6 183.1 94.5 42 3.5 55 7 4 #1 103.3 39.7 63.6 61.6 15 0 0 21 2 #8 39.4 7.6 31.8 80.7 26 0 0 4 0 12.4 81.6 81.4 66 1.3 24.2 5.6 2.2 21.5 29.8 50.9 5 0 0 43 4.7 Number of Days Use per Acre JJ Horses Sheep Elk Deer Average - Nos. 1,3,5,6,8. i 94.0 - 51.3 Average - Nos. 2,7,4. J:./ 11 All pellet groups with no age differentiation. "'2.1 Rabbit pellets very common, - utilization apparently due to these animals. jl 111 Outside Department property. Inside Department property boundaries. I l.V -..;J I �-38- Table 5.--Checklist of plants present on forage Cold Springs Nountain, Noffat County. Plot; X Plant is present). = Plant CommonName Hat MuhIy B.smtgrass Bluegrasses tvestern Wheatgrass SquirreltanBromegrass f~eedle and Tnread SheeE Fescue J ~ges Hheatgrass Rush .Q§.lli!e li on Yarrow Clover Sandwort Asters Loco Cinguefoils {Herb.2 Fleabane Dai§Y ;6eardtongue s ~ian Vetch Puss:y:toes Big Sagebrush Seedlings Shq.otinK.,Star Onion Knotweed t? ~~Forest Service syffibol-~ Hurl AGT POA Agsm utilization plots, Beaver Basin _ (U = Ungrazed Plot; G Grazed = Set Number - Paired #1 112 X X X X X X X X X X #6 UG X X X X X X X XX x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X iC X X X X TR! X X X X ASR X X X X POT ER! PEN GEN AST X X X X X X X X X ARE X X X X X -X X X X X ANT Artr DOD X X X ALL FOG designation X X X X X X JUN TAR ACH on #'0 'UG X X X X 7/7 ti'(} X X X X X X X X X X X X Sih;y: BRa Stco Feov CAR AGR #5 114 #3 trG trG UG U'G "UG X X X X -- Plots for a species X X X X X or genus. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X �-39Further evidence of the abusive use to which the ranges are being subjected also can be noted in Table 4 from results of pellet group counts. Cattle and sheep stocking rate indices were excessive, to put it mildly. Results show the striking preference by the elk for the areas under fence and protection from competition by domestic stock. Three pellet group transects on Department lands yie1ded.an average of 43 elk-days use per acre in contrast to an average of 5.6 elk-days use per acre from 5 transects On outside open range sites. Apparently rabbits contributed in the comparatively high forage utilization found for Department ranges, although elk stocking rates bear future watching. It provides a feeling of accomplishment to be able to say that all elk are welcome and should gravitate to the Department lands. However, unnatural concentrations that might invite easier transmission of disease and retardation of range recovery certainly w~uld be undesirable. Table 5 is the checklist of plants found on the plots. The dominants are not so deSignated, although grasses and grass~likes generally composed the bulk of the forage. Recommendationsf Results of this 1961 study corroborate the findings from the 1960 work in respect to the excessively high rate which domestic animals are utilizing the forage. Without being repetitious, it is recommended that livestock numbers and the long grazing Beason both be reduced. Despite the comparatively lower degrees of utilization found by the game animals (predominantly elk), words of caution are still in effect in regard to allowing either too great a general herd increase or continuation of the apparent present trend in the increase of numbers USing Department managed lands. Manage.ment here is mainly prevently or controlling trespass by domestic stock after fencing. The acquisition of more lands might mean expenditure or monies out of proportion to benefits received, primarily to the land, - secondarily to the wildlife. Particularly this is true should many islands eventually result over which the Department would lack control. References Cited: Prepared byr Date: Baker, B. D. 1961. Federal Aid Quarterly Report, Colorado Game and Fish Department, April, pp. 27-35. Approved by: Bo:::-er_to:-'r_a_m--::-D_. _B.."a~k~e.."r,.--.r::--:-Senior Game Biologist April, 1962 -----------~~~~~----------- Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��April, 1962 -41JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of Colorado --------~~~--~--------------- Project No. W-IOI-R-4 ------------------------------ Work Plan No. 1 --------------------------- Game Range Investigations Job No. Title of Job: Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study. Period Covered: December 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. 1 Objectives: For sound winter game range management it is necessary to know the percentage of current annual growth game may be permitted to remove yearly from key browse plants without injury to the plants. Also, it is important to know the effect of different intensities of use on the amount of forage produced. Mesa Verde Clip Plot Study is a long term clipping experiment simulating different intensities of game use on five key species of browse plants: big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, serviceberry, and gambel oak. The purpose of the study is to attempt to learn how the yearly removal of certain percentages of the current annual growth stems and of old stems affect the plants and their forage production. Procedure: Field work, with the exception of the separation of stems and leaves from old clippings, was completed during the summer and fall of 1960. The following work was scheduled for the project year, 1961-62: 1. The separation of leaves and stems from old clippings and determination of their separate weights. 2. Compilation, organization, and statistical analysis of data collected during the study. 3. The completion of literature reviews relative to the study. 4. Conferences with plant physiologists and other to interpretation of study results. authorities relative 5. Preparation of a final report for publication is a scientific journal and/or as a separate publication of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. �-42Findings: 1. 1. The separation of stems and leaves from old clippings and the determination of their separate weights was completed. 2. The compilation, organization, and statistical analysis of data was completed as planned. However, in preparation of the report the desirability of some further statistical tests and data organization not previously planned has become evident. 3· Literature reviews relative to the study have been completed. 4. Much has been done toward the preparation of a final report for publication. This includes, in addition to the work stated above, the first draft of the Introduction, Description of Study Area, Methods, and a portion of Results. Photographs of plots have been prepared, and some of the required graphs and charts have been made. Recommendations: Additional data comparisons and, possibly, statistical analyses should be made to better interpret the results of the study. Preparation of the final report should be completed and submitted for publication. Prepared by: Approved by: Laurence E. Riord.an %~r~o.:..l::.d::.....;R~ ....,;:S::h::.:e:=p:.:h:;:e:;::r...,;:d::..,-...,...-_ Senior Game Biologist Assistant Director, Research Date: __________ ~~ __ L_~1962 April, _ Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �April, 1962 -43- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO --------~~~~~---------- Project NO. Work Plan No. ~W~-~1~O~1~-~R~-~4 _ Game Range Investigations 2 Job NO. -------=----------- Title of Job: Rodent Effects on Deer Winter Range. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to January 31, 1962. ~3 _ ABSTRACT A.study is being made in southwestern Colorado by the Colorado Game and Fish Department to learn how rodents affect deer winter range in a pinon-juniper type. The study, located in Mesa Verde National Park, is in its sixth year. This sixth Job Completion Report presents the data collected and the results observed to date. Two three-acre plots have been established: one a rodent exclosure, the other, a control with a dummy fence. Deer have free access to both. The original rodent population in the exclosure was virtually eliminated by trapping. Those few which since have gotten in have been killed by trapping and poison stations. Statistical analyses of transect data show that rodent control has had no measurable effect on the intercept of vegetation during the first three years of study. Rodents are being live-trapped and released for recapture to obtain an estimate of population density. A.food habits study of rodents is being made. ��RODENT EFFECTS ON DEER WINTER RANGE Harold R. Shepherd INTRODUCTION Many winter deer ranges in Colorado are deteriorating. They are often marked by the die-off of woody shrubs and by a scarcity of seeding shrubs. Game biologists have become accustomed to blaming over-use by big game and livestock. However, there is reason to suspect rodents may be partially responsible, for rodent damaged browse pladshave been found in Colorado. It is suspected that in some areas rodents may be largely responsible for the scarcity of bitterbrush and mountain mahogany seedlings. In any sound program of game-range management all of the factors contributing to range use and deterioration should be taken into consideration, including the effects of rodents. A. study is needed to learn how rodents affect deer winter range. Such a study was begun in August of 1956 in Mesa Verde National Park. It is expected that several years will be required to complete the study and accomplish its stated objectives. This is the sixth Job Completion Report on the continuing study. It reports the progress made during the period April 1, 1961 to January 31, 1962 toward accomplishment of the long-term objectives of the study. Previous reports were published in the July issues of the Quarterly Report of the Federal Aid Division of the Colorado Game and Fish Department for the years 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960, and 1961. Objectives-- The long-term, over-all objective is to study how rodents affect the composition, ground cover, and reproduction of vegetation in an pinon-juniper type deer range, with particular emphasis on browse plants. The objectives for the period covered by this report are as follows: 1. Collect plant composition and density data from established line transects. 2. Make photographic records from permanent photo stations. 3· Collect deer pellet-group data from established pellet-group plots. Make total pellet count of exclosure and control plots. 4. Continue rodent control inside rodent exclosure. 5. Obtain home-range data by live trapping and toe-marking rodents according to methods of Calhoun and Casby. 6. Make a collection of plants from the vicinity of the study and press, identify, and mount them to provide an herbarium for positive identification of plants within the study area. 7· Begin an investigation of the food habits of rodents common to the study area by analysis of stomach and check pouch contents. (a) During each season of spring, summer, fall and winter collect from the vicinity of the study 20 individuals of each species of rodent common to the area. �-4$- 8. (b) Preserve stomachs of animals in F.A.A. solution or by freezing. (c) Analyze stomach and/or check pouch contents by miscroscope slide method. Investigate the feasibility of determining the yearly volume consumption of plants by rodents. Experiment with caged live-trapped animals. Procedure: Line Transects--Plant composition and density data were collected from 70 permanent line transects, using the Parker-Savage method described in the July,1958 report. Pellet-group Data-- Deer pellet-group data were collected from 70 permanent 1/100 acre plots as in previous years. Since a total pellet count was made in 1960 as a check against the accuracy of the test plots it was thought unnecessary to repeat the count in 1961. Rodent Control-- To capture any rodents which may have gotten into the exclosure during the winter, snap traps were set spaced about 15 feet apart over the entire 3~acre area. They were baited with a mixture of equal parts of suet, oatmeal, peanut butter, and paraffin. Trapping was begun June 13 and continued through June 20. In addition to trapping, poison stations baited with Warfarin poisoned grain were maintained. Poison stations constructed of quart motor oil cans are spaced at approximately 30-foot intervals. Poison will be kept in the stations to kill any animals which may get into the exclosure. Plant Collecting-- Additional plants from Mesa Verde and vicinity were collected and prepared for the study herbarium. Collecting Home-range Data-- In order to collect home-range data by means of which census data may be converted to an estimate of rodents per unit area, in 1960 a grid was surveyed and staked north of the Control Area. After trial it was found that the grid was too small and of the wrong shape. During the summer of 1961 it was enlarged and its shape altered. The present grid is an area approximately 1000 feet square comprised of 448 numbered trap stations spaced at 50-foot intervals. The stations are arranged and numbered in groups of four. Seven of these groups make up a unit. And there are 16 units in the grid. One sixteenth of the trap stations are activated on anyone trap day. By systematically movipg traps from one group to another the grid can be covered in seven days. Two Sherman live traps were placed at an activated station and baited with apples and oatmeal. Animals caught were numbered by a system of toe, ear, and tail clipping and then released for recapture. A.record was kept of the capture and recapture locations. These data together with those from the yearly census will be used to estimate animals per acre, using the method of Calhoun and Casby. Rodent Census-- A.s in previous years, a rodent census was made within the permanent census area. It was made in the manner described in the 1959 report. The standard procedures of the Advisory Committee of the North American Census of Small Mammals was followed. Census data were reported to the committee. �-40.. Food Habits Investigation --A. collection of stomachs was made from rodents trapped in the vicinity of the study. They were preserved in F.A.A. solution. Contents were later washed and dried, and microscope slide mounts were prepared for each stomach collected. These comprised 24 Peromyscus maniculatus stomachs taken in June, July, and August: 9 Peromyscustruei stomachs taken in June and July, and 12 in September; 4 Eutamias spp. stomachs taken in June, and 1 in September. A. collection of plant parts and of insects was made within the study area. These were preserved in F.A.A. solution. Microscope slide mounts will be prepared from these materials as an aid in the identification of rodent stomach contents. Equipment for the making of feeding tests was obtained forcuse in the future. RESULTS, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS Line Transects .... - There has been no appreciable difference in yearly precipitation during the study (Table 4); as a consequence, total vegetation density has varied only slightly (Table 3). There were more annuals in both the Control and Exclosure in 1961 than in any other year of the study. An analysis of variance has been made of the line transect data for all years ex·cept 1961. The analysis shows that rodent control did not significantly affect the amount of total browse, grass and forb intercept over the first three years of study. Data analyses for other categories of vegetation measurements have not been made. Visible Effects of Rodent Control --Photographs do not show any visible effects of rodent control. Deer-use of Control and Exclosure -- During the year 1960-61, there was more deer use in the control than in the exclosure. Pellet counts indicate 25.3 deer-days use in the control and 5.9 deer-days use in the exclosure (Table 5). The reason for this is not apparent, since the dummy fence built around the control in 1960 provides essentially the same obstacle as does;the real fence of the Exclosure. Previous to 1961, no real difference in use could be shown. Rodent Control -- Apparently the poison stations killed any rodents that got into the exclosure during the winter of 1960-61, for none were caught during the intensive trapping done the latter part of June, 1961. Rodent Census -- In 1961, the census was taken September 6, 7, and 8. A. total of 50 rodents were taken comprised of 37 Peromyscus maniculatus, 12 Peromyscus truei, and 1 Eutamias spp. (Table 6 and 7). The population in 1961 was the lowest of any year since the census was first taken in 1958. The totals for the four years are as follows: 83 in 1958, 112 in 1959, 228 in 1960, and 51 in 1961. The catch in 1961 was about a fifth of the 1960 catch. Of the 37Peromyscus maniculatus caught, 14 were adult males and 9 adult females. The adults comprised 62 per cent of tbe population. Seventy-seven per cent of the adult females were pregnant. Two sub-adults were pregnant. Pregnant females contained an average of 5.1 foetuses. �-4'8Home-range Data-- In 1961, rodents were live-trapped and toe-numbered period August 24 through October 13. The rodents marked and released 142 Peromyscus maniculatus,29 Peromyscus truei, 2 Microtus mexicanus, 17 Eutamias spp. For reliable home-range figures it will be necessary additional animals in 1962. during the included and to mark Botfly Larvae-- As in 1960, many of the deer and white-footed mice in 1961 were afflicted with warbles. Usually the warbles were confined to the backs and rumps. However, one animal had a warble in the chest cavity, and another had a warble in the scrotum. The great, gapping holes left in the skin after the emergence of the warbles gave off a very bad odor, and the surrounding flesh appeared to be infected. Food Habits Investigation--Lack of time prevented the content analysis of the rodent stomachs collected and their inclusion in this report. However, gross examination indicated that most of the summer Peromyscus stomachs contained mostly insect materials. Summer meadow mouse stomachs contained mostly plant materials. SUMMARY Additional data were collected during the summer of 1961 to learn how small rodents affect a pinon-juniper deer range. The study is located in Mesa Verde National Park. Two three-acre plots have been established. One, the Exclosure, is fenced against rodents but not deer. The other, the Control, is unfenced against rodents but is surrounded with a dummy fence similar in appearance to the fence around the exclosure. Intensive trapping in June of 1961 failed to catch any rodents inside the exclosure. Consequently, it appears that either rodents are not getting into the exclosure or the permanent poison stations are killing them when they do get in. As in previous years, a rodent census following the standard procedures of the North American Census of Small Mammals was run on three consecutive days in September. Fifty rodents were taken. These were comprised of 37 Peromyscus maniculatus, 12 Peromyscus truei, and 1 Eutamias spp. The population in 1961 was the lowest since 1958, being about a fifth that of the year previous. Adults comprised the bulk of the population. Seventy-seven per cent of the adult females were pregnant. Statistical analyses of transect data show that rodent control did not significantly affect the amount of total browse, grass, and forb intercept over the first three years of the study. Photographs do not show any visible effects of rodent control. Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Prepared by: __H_a_r_Q_l_Q._R_._S_h ..... e.-p_h..".e_r_d...,.-..,.Senior Game Biologist Assistant Director, Resear;ch Date: April, 1962 --------------------- Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �April, 1962 -49- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO Project No. ~W~-~1~O~1~-~R~-_4 Work Plan No. 3 --------~-------------- Title of Job: Game Range Investigations Job No. 2 --------------------------- The Value of Internode Counts in Determining Browse Utilization. Period Covered: Objectives: _ October 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962 Explore the possibility of determining an index-of-utilization for browse annual stem growth by a comparison of the number of internodes left uneaten with a number of typical for the species. Procedures: Current annual growth stems were collected from browse plants growing in different sites. These will supplement collections of previous years and other sites for examination of number of internodes. Findings: Laboratory examinations must be made of the materials collected before any results can be stated with respect to the objectives of the study. Prepared by: Harold R. Shepherd Senior Game Biologist Date: April, 1962 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��April, 1962 -51JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO ---------------------------------- Project No. W-10l-R-4 Game Range Investigations ----~~~~-------------- Work Plan No. 3 ------------------------- Job No. Title of Job: Browse Transect Analysis and Application. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 through March 31, 1962. Personnel: 3 Bertram D. Baker and Richard N. Denney, biologists. Gerald Gill Bruce Gill, student assistants. Cooperating agencies: U. S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. ABSTRACT A. total of eight browse transects were run in five Conservation Officers! districts in five game management units, primarily in the San Luis Valley, by Biologist Baker. A cooperative range crew of four men (two from the Forest Service, one from the B. L. M.~ and one from the Department) spent approximately 220 man days running 58 new condition transects in 13 key areas on 165,000 acres of brushland game winter range in Game Management Unit 61 on the west side of the Uncompahgre Plateau. Most of these were in pinyon-juniper or sagebrush types, and generally were rated low in composition, denSity, vigor and soil conditions. The complete big game range analysis procedure, involving the measured, extensive and condition transects, was finished by the inter-agency committee of which the project leader is a member. Recommendations: It is recommended that this work be continued on a cooperative basis with the land-use agencies wherever possible on big game winter range to gain, at last, a basic inventory of our all-important winter ranges according to type, area, condition, trend, and possible range improvement procedures. It is also strongly urged that the Department maintain existing measured browse transects in Conservation Officer districts, conduct extensive utilization transects in areas where the game actually winters, and initiate new transects on tagged branch measurements in key areas not yet sampled. Perhaps more emphasis should be made on interpretation of the transect data, and using the techniques adopted. On the basis of past years of use and experience, a revision of the inter-agency big game range analysis procedure will be made during 1962 to simplify, shorten and clarify theoriginal as presented herein. �-52Objectives: Coincidentally with browse transect application, to instruct field employees in the proper and uniform use of available range analysis methods and techniques, and to assist field personnel in the determination of herd size, range carrying capacity, annual forage production} utilization and density. The net result is to provide methods whereby big game season recommendations can be made by field personnel based in part of range data which has uniform application and acceptance. Techniques Used: Range Investigation personnel will meet with regional and district field personnel, and cooperating agency personnel, and review maps of their respective big game range areas. According to the Inter-agency Big Game Range Analysis procedure worked up in cooperation with the U. S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, the ranges will be typed, mapped and rated as to condition classification, by the aid of existing type maps, aerial photos and the browse transect procedure. �-53- FORWORD Fo.lLowl.ng are standard instructions for big game range analysis. They are the product .of an extended period of inter-agency meetings, field trials, and discussions, Basic agreements reached on procedures and standards have been incorporated in the instructions. The instructions as now issued will be used in the field for a sufficient time to provide a thorough trial. Future changes and additions will 'be only those shown to be necessary. They will, for the most part , be confined to corrections and.clarifications, and should involve little if any change in basic procedures. The management of deer and elk is now of primary importance to most agencies, so these instructions apply specifically to the analysis of deer and elk ranges. Supplemental material, such as special scorecards for use on ante~ lope and 'bighorn sheep ranges, will be provided as analysis work is extended to include them. ��-55BIG GAME RANGE ANALYSIS The objective of big game range analysis is to determine the condition and trend, and ultimately the carrying capacity of the range on a herd or management unit basis. Condition is the relative state of health of the range; trend is any change in condition. Information on conditionJ trend, and on forage production and utilization may be correlated with facts about the game herd itself to form a basis for intelligent management decisions. In the final analysis, any attempt to maintain a game herd larger than the range will support will be self-defeating, and must result ultimately in a decreased herd. Generally; studies will be made first on winter ranges. These usually are the areas which limit the size of herds which can be maintained. Occasionally it will be necessary first to study summer ranges where they are the key to the management of game herds, or where there are problems of direct game-livestock competition. Ultimately, all parts of the big game range will be analyzed. Cooperation between state game and fish departments and land management agencies is essential in the big game range analysis program. It is desirable to obtain sportsman and stockman participation whenever possible. The district corser-va't Lon officers, wardens, and regional game managers usually will initiate the studies. D~strict rangers or district managers should assume the initiative in analyzing game rangesan national forest or BLM lands, but should always enlist the aid of state game department personnel. Forest officers should cooperate with BLM and state people in checking key ranges outsLde the national forests, and BLM managers should participate in the work on the forests when possible. The true carrying capacity of a range is determined by total forage production less needed reserves to: (1) assure plant health and vigor; (2) provide for years of low production; and (3) allow for years of very heavy utilization. Production will vary over long periods with site quality and with the age and vigor of the forage plants; over short periods, or from year to year, it will vary with weather (particularly precipitation), with insect .and rodent activity, and to some extent with current utilization. Of all these factors, utilization is the only one over which managers have effective direct control. At present, the determination of carrying capacity needs not be specific in terms of numbers of animals or animal days. It is sufficient that a reliable estimate be obtained of capacity as it compares to the game population currently using the range. Regardless of condition, a range showing a consistently downward trend is probably stocked beyon d capacity, while one whose trend is steadily up may be considered to be properly or even lightly stocked. When the fact-finding part of a range analysis has been completed, the data must be accurately interpreted. The value of the entire procedure depends wholly on the ability of managers properly to evaluate the data and to put it to use as an aid to management. �-56- Five main items are considered in judging condition, trend, and possible future trend of big ,game ranges: 1. Soil condition. Soil is the basic r-esource, Over a long per-Lod, satisfactory range conditions can be maintained only on .stiab Le soils Soil condition ratings will be a part of the analysis job on all big game ranges. 0 2~ Composition~ This factor refers to the species of plants present on the range, their relative value as game food, and their place in ecological succession. Also to be considered is the fact that the better ranges will provide more than one of the preferred food species. Nutritional requirements of big game species apparently are much better satisfied by a mixture of species than by any single species. 3. Density. The word "density" refers properly to the number of plants per unit of area. In these instructions it is used, however improperly, to express the per cent of total ground area covered by the live crown of browse plants. In making estimates of browse "density" only live shrubs with part or all of the crown within reach of animals are considered. The "density" factor, as here used, involves both plant ,abundance and the size of each plant, and thus reflects to some extent the amount of forage which can be produced ..•. 4. Vigor",The vigor, orr:elative state of health, of a plant indicates its probable produc Hvt.ty, In shrubs, vigor is appraised by classifyingthe plants as t,oage and as to past use or "hedgfng ,n 5" utilization. Utilization, on shrubs, is expressed as a percentage of the current year's twig growth browsed by big game or livestock. Current utilization is an Lmpor-tarrtindicator of the relative number of animals using a given range area. It also provides a guide as to probable future range trend~ Following are accepted procedures for the big game range analysis job, outlined in steps as listed: Step 1.. Map management units and seasonal ranges .• Step 2.. Select and map key areas for big game. Step 3. Map vegetative types. Step 40 Select key browse apec Les, Step 5. Determine forage production and utilizationj make pellet group counts" Step 6. Determine range condition. �-57Step 7. Determine range trend in key areas. Step 8. Estimate relative carrying capacity. Step 9. File data. STEP I - MAP MANAGEMENT UN:ITS AND SEASONAL RANGES Big game range analysis will be done on the basis of herd or management units as defin ed by state game and fish departments. Small-scale (preferably one-fourth inch to one mile) maps will be maintained showing unit boundaries and names or numbers. On the same maps the general outlines of seasonal ranges will be delineated. On the national forests, if the winter range area is delineated the remaining forest area generally may be considered to be summer range. If appreciable areas are not used by big game at any season, they should be shown on the map. Within the over-all winter range there may be "critical" areas, to which game is confined during deep-snow periods. These also should be shown. Usually, the general winter range will be outlined and cross-hatched in red. The critical areas are colored solid red. It should be recognized that on such small-scale maps the areas shown can be only approximate. Both spots which are unuseable and of concentration may occur within either the general or critical areas. The purpose of the small-scale map of seasonal ranges is to indicate and compare roughly the areas available to game animals during the different seasons of the year. STEP 2- SELECT AND MAP KEY AREAS FOR BIG GAME The fact that any particular range unit is limited does not mean that the entire area will be considered a key area for game. Rather, the key area is a .selected site where proper use generally will assure the maintenance of satisfactory conditions on the range as a whole. Key areas are the "pulse" of the range; conditionJ production-utilizationJ and pellet-group studies will be made on them. Key areas should meet the following qualifications: a. b. c. do e. Should be representative of the range being studied. Should normally be used each year. Should be capable of showing trend. Need to be preserved as being necessary to sustain the herd. May be used by both big game and livestock if responsibility for utilization of forage can be assigned with reasonable accuracy. �Locations of key areas should be indicated on the small-scale map. They ~ll also be shown on the 2 inch, or large-scale map of the unit, although actual boundaries need not be outlined. The fact that transects and other study areas are placed on specific sit!=sis usually sufficient identification. If desired, boundaries of key areas may be delineated, using standard Legend , Even though key areas are not outlined, their general location will be indicated by the symbol "K" followed by a dash, and the key area .name. Example: K--South Fork. STEP 3 - MAP VEGETATION TYPES llJ DETAIL General a. b., I. c. d" e.. Map by management unit. Use base maps of two inch toone mile sca.Le, As rapidly as township base-maps become available, they will be used. Map key areas or the study areas within them first, the remainder of big game range as rapidly as time permits. Usually} types should he mapped separately if larger than 40 acres. Smaller types, down to a few acres, may be delineated separately if of particular significance, for example a small patch of important timber cover within an extensive browse area. Use standard legends and type descriptions as included in the appendix, Pages 4 and 13-17. Type Designations Designate types by using type numbers J followed by standard symbols, to indicate both the general aspect and the mO$t abundant species. Usually, not more than two plant symbols need be used. Example: A shrub type, with oakbrush and serviceberry the most common species, would be designated 5 QUE-AME"" The number 5 indicates the general shrub aspect; the QUE and AMEsymbols indicate the most abundant specLes, If a similar type had an occasional ponderosa pine as an over=story, the pine symbol should be inserted. The designation, 5PP-QTJE-AME, would describe the area adequately. A figure showing the acreage within each type should De entered on the type map" (plant .symbo.Ls ; App. Pg , 5~12)o The standard "Waste (7)" type designation will not be used" Conifer timber will be designat.edbythe u6u aspect number. If sufficient shrub forage is found on the type to justify} browse transects will be run to provide a condition rating. Otherwise, it may be regarded sinwly as a game cover area. Similarly, other types classed as unuseable for livestock range may have herbaceous or semi-shruD species which are available for game use. Such species should be shown in the type description, and range condition should be rated by applicable method. �-59Type Identification As mapping is done and as condition classifications are made on Form 26004, each area classified should be identified. The identification symbol usually will be a serial number, made up of the examiner's last initial and consecutive numbers for his write-ups on each herd or management unito Corresponding numbers should be ~laced within the type on the map and on the Form 2600-4 or write-up sheet. Add year (as '62) to ident.ification symboL Winter Range Availability step 1 calls for outlining on the small-scale maps the seasonal ranges, including both general winter range -and "critical" areas within them~ The smallscale maps thus will provide a rough indication of areas available at different seasons , A much more detailed delineation of winter ranges should be made on the 2 inch, or large-scale, maps. First, the whole winter range should be outlined using standard symbol. This area will correspond roughly to the general winter range as shown on the small-scale map, with the boundary more accurately drawn to fit drainages and terrain •. Second, within the general wint.er range a smaller area will be outlined. This smaller area is the primary winter range. It.sb.oundaries should be drawn to include the area useable by animals during the entire winter most years (socalled "normal" or "average" winters) The primary range should be delineated as accurately as possible, excluding such sites as steep north slopes and gullies where deep snow usually prevents use, The area between the two lines may be classed as secondary range~ It typically would 'be rused in early and late winter, or all winter on occasional years of mild weather and little snow~ <> Third, within the primary range there may be relatively small areas to which animals are confined by extremes of snow or weather. These might properly be called "critical" areas, as they must be able in some cases to sustain the herd if it is to survive. Where it is indicated that .such conditions exist the critical areas may be outlined to call attention to them. Not always will there be clearly defined primary, secondary, or critical areas. In some cases the whole winter range is almost always available to animals. The mapper should use his knowledge of local conditions in determining the need for delineation of the separate classes of winter range. The terms "primary, l. "secondary," and "critical, U while commonly used, are inexact. All three classes are of value to game herds, and the fact that range is classed as secondary does not mean that it is of minor importance. As used here the terms may be defined as follows: Primary - That portion of the range which furnishes the larger ~rt of the forage during most winters and usually can be used all all winter. �-60<Secondary - That portion of the winter range which can be used during the early and late winter most years, and occasionally during the whole of the milder winters. Critical ~ The small areas to which animals are confined during periods of extremely deep snow or the worst winters. The mapping of the winter range areas may be done on the range type map itself or on an overlay. Correlation with Livestock Range Analysis Maps. Maps made for livestock range surveyor analysis will be available for many places. Except on key areas on big game ranges such maps, with some revisions and additions, are acceptable for 'big game purposes. Basic additions include re-designation of types called "Unuseab Le " on grazing allotment maps, and entering forage condition classifications on them if necessary. On range survey maps, information on forage areas, etcp can be deleted, and range condition,? as determined by transects, substituted. On key winter game areas, browse condition transect locations and ratings should be entered" (See "condition"). On grass-type winter ranges, the condition ratings derived from livestock range analysis may be used. When livestock range condition classification based on permanent transect clusters is used for big game range classification, the cluster locations and numbers should be shown on the game map, along with the grazing allotment or unit name. If desired, copies of cluster summary forms may be placed in the wildlife management unit folder. Summary of Items to Appear on Type Maps. 1. 2. Type lines and type designations. Acreage in each type. 3. Key area names, or numbers. (Usually, it is not possible to outline exact boundaries for key areaso It will be sufficient to place the key area name and symbol in the appropriate place on the mall, as "South Fork K." Other evidence of key area location will be provided by the fact that transects and other studies will be placed in them~) 4. Browse transect symbols and condition symbolso Include livestock range condition symbols and cluster numbers and symbols, if used for game range purposes. 5. "Useable t. winter range boundaries. 60 Management unit boun.daries and names or numbers. 7. Production-utilization transect symbols. 8. Land status. Indicate National Forest, BLM, State, or private. 9. Type identification symbol (to cross-reference individual types on map and write-up sheet.) 10. Study plots (exclosures.) 11. Additional items may be added at the discretion of mappers. �Giunbel Oak: 5% o to (£) 15% It) Pinyon-Juniper .0 5% r .o ;.~ ;I:J .; 15% .- o y- j-. •• IE"·"O· .:' .: l..'; ~'~~'11 ~',. rXl'·~-,,.py.');.I..:.; '., ..•• : •• • ~~'!~:: :... x{.i;J"! .' ~ 25% . f;;'O:'~ s: .~! __ '.t..~~-.,;::" ,'i.~~: .;;...•. ~:.~ .•. <::. I 25% .';;."'".f"'#"'" litf ~~~.' i<~''Pf.,"'.{~ :'&...k.-~ .f~ ..•.,. ~~:""' ~-~ fl§i.~~4'1 r.:.... ~ -;\-" ~ ...,: .•. i~"''''··,. \v.; ..•• !.•. ~ •.. ~4···;, :.... ~..,~-."'~ ~ ~•. :.f•..• '.-r""' ...::"", 35% :~i r~~;~ ... ft~..r ., 35% :;~~~f;~:~' . p.. !--7;.:·f;,· .•.. '\f!;-[.t; ""~~ ;:¢1tF¥ 45% ~'~~::r~ 55% 65% 75'10 46% 55% .; 65% 75% Pinyon-Juniper 85% STEREOSCOPIC CROWN DENSITY GUIDE (For use in analysis of deer and elk ranges) 95% Gambel Oak Photo Interpretation Aid - R2-5600-50 6-61 �-61- Special Note: When timber areas contain so little f'eed that no f'orage condition classif'ication is made.t the type designation on the map should be f'ollowedby the letter "Cft;as 6LP""VAC(C)<> This will show that the area is valuable as cover and that it was not considered necessary to make a condition rating" STEP 4 - SELECT KEY BROWSE SPECIES Key browse species are those most import.ant to the maintenance of'the game herd on any given range ..They are the species on which production-utilizationchecks should be made. Key species should be selected f'romthe list of' "Desirable" plants if'such are in ·the stand" IT not, "Intermediates" should be chosen. In selecting key species the f'ollowing f'actors should be considered: Representation in the compos LtLon., Availability to browsing animals during normal season co Value in supplying the bulk of' f'eed", doc The need f'orpreservation of'the species. eO' Ease of'measuremerrt, f'd Value as an ecological indicator. a, 'b., STEP 5- DETERMINE FORAGE PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION; 01' use. MAKE PELLET GROUP COUNTS Forage 'Production and utilization are estimated by a combination of'two steps: (1) Installing :measured transects to develop a "growth Lndexj' t.o measure utilization on selected shrubs, and to :train the eye to estimate utilization on an extensive basis; and (2) making extensive-estimates of'utilization over the parts of'key areas actually used during each winter season .. Pellet group counts are made to provide :an index of'use on key areas by the various species of' animals. Measured Transects Permanent, measured production-utilization transects will be placed in key areas of' each unit having winter r-ange., The number to be established in each unit, their distribution, and the key species to be measured all will be determined 'by the examiners on the gr-ound, As a guide, there should be at least one transect .in each key area, and at .least one on each key species f'ound on the management unit. (Sample Form 2600-2; App. Page 18.) The procedure to be used in establishing transects is as f'ollows: ao Layout, along a chosen compass bearing, a transect either nine chains or 900 f'eet long. At each one chain length, or each 100 f'eet, place arock monument or other }lermanent hub such as an iron stake • The line should be located in as nearly a representative part of'the key area as possible. : , �b. Mark and describe the beginning point of the transect for ease in relocating. Tie to a recognizable landmark or map point, Make a sketch-map of each transect showing direction and distance from landmark, transect bearing, and distance between monuments. (See sample sketch map in appendix.)* If monuments or markers are splashed with paint, they are easier to relocate for subsequent readings. Also, show location on large-scale map, and pin-point on aerial photo if available, c. Select the key browse species which is to be measured on the transect, and select one live plant of that .species as near as practicable to each monument or marker. Record on the sketch-map for the transect the distance and direction from each monument to the chosen shrub. Use ttclock" location system, if desired. On each selected shrub, tag one branch which is available to browsing animals. Place the tag so that 10 to 20 measurable twigs are above it. Show on the sketch-map the relative position of the tag on the bush, and its height above the ~ound. Metal tags of 1" to 2" diameter wired to the branches or "twist-on" tags may be used. Only one browse species should be measured on any transect. If additional species are to be sampled, separate transects should be established for each" If more than one transect is placed in a key area, consecutive numbers should be assigned to them. Measurements and pellet group counts should be made as follows: d. Fall ----- .Spring (1) Af'ter seasonal growth is complete, preferably after leaves have dropped, measure to the nearest one-half inch the current year growth on each twig above the tag...Enter measurements on Form 2600-2.. Also record the number of spur shoots (i-u_) above the tag, which are counted but not measured, As twigs are measured it is advantageous to put a dab of bright nail polish on each at the point where measurement was started (base of current browth). This enables observer to b~ sure each twig is measured, and in the spring assures that remeasuring duplicates that of previous fall. (1) At about time game leaves the area in the spring, or earlier if necessary because of management meeting schedules: Measure remaining current growth above tags, record in appropriate place on Form 2600-2. Count and record the number of spur shoots remaining 0 *App. Page 3 �(2) When all measurements are completed, compute total current growth in inches for each tagged branchJ then for each ten shrubs, If the twigs have been browsed before fall measurements are made, estiIlRte the inches of twig growth takenj e.g, if 4 inches remain and it is estimated that 2 inches have been removed, enter measurements on Form as 4(2). Examination of the length and diameter of current growth on twigs not browsed will be of assistance in estimating length removed from those browsed. (4) Obtain average annual growth \ . by dividing the total of measured twig length on all ten shrubs by the total number of twigs measured and counted (including spur Shoots), This is called the "growth index," and is used to compare annual growth from year to year, If twigs have been browsed prior to fall measurement, compute summer use: (a) Add total estimated length used (figures in parens on fall measurement record). (b) Add all measured lengths including that estimated to have been used. Divide amount used by total growth (b)], and multiply answer by 100. 'I'he result is per cent of total annual growth useddu.ring the summer. (6) On range receiving occasional extremely heavy use (more than current growth used) and on years when annual growth is very short, It is often desirable to measure total twig length above the tag, including both old and current growth, When old growth is measured it is sometimes of advantage to move the tag higher on Oll. the branch in order not to have to measure an excessive number of twigs. (2 ) compute total remalnlng length of current growth for each branch, and .for all ten together, Livestock or game summer use, as estimated by fall measurements, is added up and computed separately prior to determining winter use of browse by game and/or livestock. (See item 5, below. ) (4 ) No spring determination is required, SPEC IAL NOTE: If a tagged branch, or shrub, dies or is destroyed a new one should be chosen and tagged, and a note to that .effect put on the form. Winter use is determined thus: Divide total annual growth as determined by fall measurements into total amount usedj multiply result by 100. This figure will represent the per cent of current growth utilized, (Total amount used is found by subtractingthe amount of measured growth remaining in the spring from total growth as measured in the falL) r» - (6 ) Compute percentage of growth removed as in step 5, above. In each case that old growth is measured, that ·fact should be noted in space provided on Form 2600-2" Also, if only current growth is measured, but some old.growth is taken from the tagged 'br-anch , a check mark should be placed on right hand margin of form, and the number of oranches so checked should be noted on bottom of form, �-64- Pellet Group Counts Pellet-group counts will be made in conjunction with all production-utilization transectmeasurements~ If summer use has been made of browse plants, pelletgroups will be counted when production is measured. Whether counted or not pellet groups should be cleared from plots or painted to assure that old groups are not counted in the spring. Groups will alvffiYsbe counted at the time the spring utilization measurements are made. Following counting, the plots should again be cleared, or pellet-groups painted. Utilization data for key areas will become more significant over a period of years when it is correlated with data on days of use by animals as indicated by pellet-group counts. The counts also will show yearly fluctuations in use on key areas, and shifts of use between areas. Ordinarily, pellet-group counts will be made on 10, l/lOOth acre circular plots (111 9" radius) centered on the monuments or markers on the transect line. Do not use shrubs as plot centers. Count the groups, and record separately for each species of animal~ As each plot is 1/100 acre, the ten plots total 1/10 acre. The total days of use by each species of animal is determined thus: (a) Multiply by 10 the total number of pellet groups, separately by animal species. 'I'h Ls figure shows pellet-groups per acre. (b) Divide the total number of pellet groups per acre by: ~* for deer, elk, or sheepj 12 for cattle. The result represents days of use per acre by the given animal. * Recent studies in Colorado indicate that on good ranges with a variety of browse species, the conversion factor of 15 should be used for deer. On ranges meeting the above qualifications, 15 may be used rather than 130 Once either factor is placed in use on a given area, it should continue to be used on each succeeding year. Occasionally, because of terrain or the nature of the vegetation, linear strip plots may be more suitable to use than circular plots. A strip 6.6 feet by 66 feet (1 chain) contains 1/100 acre so a 6.6 ft .•x 6601 (10 chain) strip is equivalent to ten circular plots of 11'9" radius. Once either type of plot is used, succeeding yearly counts should be made on the same basis. Note: A deer pellet group usually contains about 150 individual pellets. Count as a group only if more than half of pellets are within plot boundary. Extensive Utilization Check Regardless of the care with which production-utilization transects are located, and measured, they alone cannot reflect the changes of use which occur as conditions vary from year to year. Supplemental to them, and even more important as an indicator or current utilization on a whole key area, are extensiveutilization checks. They will be made each spring, after permanent transects have been measured, and should cover the part of the key area actually used by wintering animals. (Sample Form 2600-3 j App , Page 19) 0 �-65- Procedure for making estimates is as follows: ao Select a route of travel which seems typical of that portion of the key area used during the winter season. 'b~ Pace along the selected route, and at pre-determined intervals, such as each 3 or 5 paces, choose the shrub, regardless of species, which is nearest your toe. c. Estimate utilization as falling within one of the classes indicated below; and dot tally in appropriate column, by species, on Form 2600-3. o Ranges of Utilization No Use 10 30 50 70 90 1 - 20 21 - 40 41 - 60 61 80 81 -100 Recorded Estimates do eo % When 100 shrubs have been examined, multiply the number of shrubs tallied in each block on the form by the number in the column heading (0,10,30,50,70, or 90) and enter the resulting number in block. Add acro.ss to get total by species, and divide by the t.otal number of shrubs of the species to get average utilization. When estimating utilization on each shrub., criteria which may be used as guides are: (1) Comparison of a])pearance with that of measured branches on permanent transects where utilization has been computed; and (2) Comparison with protected or otherwise unbrowsed shrubs of the same species in the same vicinity. As each lOth shrub is exami.ned, make a pellet group count on a 1/100 acre plot. Record data on Form 2600-3. Compute animal days of use per acre by same method used on measured transect.s 0 Interpretation of utilization check results will be based on both measured and extensive transect data. The measured transects furnish a "growth index, which makes possible direct comparisons of production between years Alsoj it provides measured utilization data on identical branches of shrubs of key species year after year.. The great weaknesses of measured transects are that they provide a very small sample; they may be either excessively or extremely lightly browsed on succeeding years if the pattern of use on a key area changes only slightly; and each transect samples use on only one shrub species. Extensive transects supplement measured ones by providing a larger sample, by sampling more than a single species, and by being placed each year in parts of the key area actually used during a-particular winter season. The data provided by the two types of transects and the pellet counts, when correlated, can present a picture of use of the key area in animal days and of the utilization of forage resulting from that use. It also can show yearly variations in use patterns within key areas. U 0 Time will seldom be available to permit installing sufficient measured or paced transects to assure statist.ically sound estimates. Enough transects should be read that the examiner is satisfied that he has obtained a good cross section of conditions on the key area. �-66utilization Measurements on Grass Winter Ranges Some winter ranges, most particularly those used by elk, and many summer ranges are largely grass rather than shrub types <> The determination of degree of utilization of forage plants by game animals is complicated by the fact that frequently summer use is made by domestic livestock on game winter ranges. Both game and livestock also may use some summer ranges. Several.metbods have been used. to measure utilization an grass types, but as yet none has been so generally accepted as to justify adoption as a standard. Among methods currently in use are: 1. Percentage of plants grazed 2. Clipped weight (and associated occularestimate 3<> Stubble height of weight used) Methods currently in use should be continued until such time as studies definitely indicate the superiority of one method over others, or until by inter,...agency agreement one method is selected as being usually most accurate and practical. STEP 6- DErERMINE RANGE CONDITON Soil condition, on browse ranges, will be rated by the use of the scorecard included in these instructions. Data for application to scorecards will be obtained from paced condition transects as described below. The rating (High, Medium, Low) of soil condition will be entered on Form 26oo~4. Condition of grass, weed, aspen, and timber types will be rated by the "bhreestepltmethod as described in Forest Service Region 2 Range Analysis Handbook. On BLM lands, ratings (including soil stability) made by Iltwo-phaseII or otner system in current use are acceptable. Where shrubs occur on such other types, the condition of browse plants will be determined by the installation of browse transects; but existing soil ratings may be accepted •. On shrub types composition, density, and vigor will be rated separately using the following procedure: a. Within the area to be studied, select a route of travel for a lOO-point paced transect. The chosen route should provide the best possible cross-section of the type being sampled. b.. Select a sampling interval, such as each two, three or i'ivepaces. c. Pace along tbeselected route, heading always toward some chosen landmark. Walk only in openings between shrubs. d" As each selected sample point is reached, dot tally in appropriate s]?ace on Form 26oo~4 whatever ground cover is found within a 3/4-inch loop immediately in front of a notch or mark on the boot toe. Count as a Ifhitlfon grasses or forbs only if all or part of the live root crown falls inside the loop. Record as litter only if more than ~ of the area of the circle is covered by dead plant material older than current growth. Record hits on "rock" only for rock in place and effectively protecting the surface~ Loose or moving rock on the surface of the ground should be tallied as e~osion pavement.. If desired, grasses and forbs may be identified and tallied by species. �-67- e. At each sample point tally, by species, the age class and hedging class of the shrub whose outer perimeter is nearest the boot toe. The following descriptions will aid in classification: Age Classes Established seedlings and young ::plants. Elongate growth form, simple oranching; usually less than six years old, and basal stem diameter not over t-inch. y- ~ - Mature plants. Distinguished by heavier, often gnarled stems, complex branching, rounded growth form. Crown made up of more than three-fourths living wood. D - Decandentplants dead wood. 0 Crowns made up of more than one-fourth Degrees of Hedging Little or no hedging, indicating light use in the past three or or four years. Growth tends to be linear. Moderately hedged. Use past three or four years causing much development of lateral oranching and more complex growth form. Heavily or c:;Loselyhedged. Heavy use in past three or four years causing a very much "br'oomed" or "c.Iubbed " appearance 0 Density f. g. At each tenth sample point make a shrubdensi ty estimate using the angle gauge" Count and record total density, including all shrub species. The use of the angle gauge may not oepractical in some cases; such as very dense and Ifclumpyl!stands of oakbrush, in extremely dense stands of other species (particularly if shrubs are tall), or in the case of such decumbent, patchy, species as kinnikinnick. When the use of the angle gauge is not practical, density may 'be estimated by step-point procedure, by dot-grid, or by comparison with crown density guides (crown coverage scale) using aerial photos, or ocular estimate. When 100 ground cover and shr-ub condition samples (and 10 browse density estimates) have been taken and recorded, make computations as follows: 1. Total and compute average of browse density estimates. 2,. Substract the average shrub density per cent, as determined in "1" above, from 100. The remainder, called the "other area factor,1! represents the per cent of the total area not under shrub cover. �-683" 4" 5. h, Convert dot tally for each category of ground cover (as bare ground, rock, litter, ebc ,) to a number, then multiply each number of the "other area factor." The result representsthe per cent of the total ground area occupied by each class of cover~ The sample Form 2600-4 (in appendix)* illustrates the procedurec Enter, in space provided on the f'OTIn,.observations on current erosion, plant pedestaling, etc. for use in making soil condition classification. Af'ter all computations are complete, apply resulting data to scorecard to rate the soil and browse composition, density, and vigor. After all condition ratings have been made, place check mark in applicable "r-at.Lng" block for soil condition and shrub composition. In the density columnJ enter the average density per cent in appropriate block. (Le .•: D.ensity figures from 1-15 would be placed in "Low" block, 16-35 in "Medium," etc .•) In vigor column enter the plant symbol of the key species in the proper block. (i.,e.: ITbitterbrush was present, and of' "medf um''vigor, enter "Putrr" in that block. If serviceberry rated "Hf.gh , It enter "AMEli in "Hf.gh " block.) NOTE: Shrub density is one indicator of the amount of forage available to browsing animals" In some cases, however, density can be so great that animals can penetrate thickets and clumps only with great dif'f'icul ty. As a result, only the perimet.ers of such thickets contribute available forage. As an example, densities well in excess of 90 per cent may be found in some stands. In such cases the observer should decide whether or not the density is excessive. IT, in the opinion of the observer, denSity is so great that the amount of forage available to animals is def'initely limited, it may be advisable to classify density as IfMedium" rather than JJHigh". A contributing factor is that frequently these extremely dense stands are self-pruning, and produce little available forage. Observers should consider the effects of excessive densities when density is greater than 65 per cent, although down-grading may not be desirable unless densities considerably exceed that figure. As a transect .Ls installed and browse condition classified, the transect should be shown on tletype map" The transect is represented by the symbol JJX ,II the "X" being the starting point. Classification symbols (H,M,orL), of shrub composition, density, and vigor will be placed (in alphabetical order, composition~ density, vigor) above the transect line. Symbol for soil rating should be placed below the line. HLM for a type rating high in composition, Example: X.--"...,...-low in denSity, medium in vigor, and M medium in soil stability. (See AFP. Page 1 for Shrub Desirability Classification; scorecard. ) *App. Page 20. Page 2 for �STEP 7 - DEI'ERMINE TREND IN KEY AREAS 'ITend.in condition of big game ranges will be determined best by comparing successive condition ratings, Usually changes occur slowly, so condition ratings will be made each fifth year. They may be made more often if definite condition change is evident. Trend on browse types will be determined by comparing successive ratings of shrub composition, density, and vigor, and of soil as established in Step 6. Trend on other than browse types will be determined by comparing successive vegetation and soil ratings made for livestock range. If such ratings have not been made, accepted methods (such as tlthree-step" or "two-phase") for the range type should be used to rate condition. Trend may be determined most .accurately by comparing consecutive ratings of identical sanrpLes, Much of the advantage of using identi~al samples is lost in our browse range ratings because data frequently is based on estimate rather than on accurate measurements. It seems sufficient that we sample the same area each time a condition rating is made. The beginning point of each condition transect will be permanently marked and the transect so described that successive readings will be made over essentially the .same route. Should more nearly identical samples be deSired, the following technique may be used: a. Use the measured pr-oduc't.Lon-cutrl Lf.za.td on transect.s as sampling units. b~. At each of the 10 monuments on the transect, make an angle~gauge density estimate. c. Record by species, and as each qualifying shrub is counted judge its age ahd hedging class. Keep a cumulative 'dot tally for the 10 samples. d. Compute density by speciesj total age and hedging classes, also by species. eo Apply data on density, composition and vigor to browse scorecard to get ratings. This procedure was the standard method for condition classification of shrubs in earlier instructions. Its use is no longer mandatory but it may be used if deSired, particularly in those cases where one such rating has already been made. When succeeding observations are made on these transects, they should be made on dates which correspond quite closely to the original ones, Wholly comparable results may b.edifficult to obtain if densf.ty estimates are made in one case when shrubs are bare of leaves and in another case when in full leaf or after current twig growth is complete. In addition to trend ratings made by comparing successive condition classifi= cations, there are some indicators of trend which may be observed at any time. The following paired criteria are examples of such indicators which should be looked for each time range areas are examined. If a rather definite up or down trend is indicated for any rated item (as "vigor"), the fact .may be noted "byplacing the trend symbol in the appropriate box in the condition table on Form 2600-4. �-70Indicaters ef "Dewnlt Trend Indicaters of "Up" Trend Well-established yeung plants ef key species present in number sufficient to'replace decadent er dying plants. Yeung plants ef key species scarce Clr lacking, er young plants mestly ef least desirable species. Apparent recevery frem past heavy hedging ef key species. Heavy use maintaining "clubbed" appearance ef key species. Few plants of desirable and intermediate species receiving exce?sive current use. Very lit~le use ef least desirables. Many plants ef desirable and intermediate species currently heavily brewse, censiderable use ef least desirables. Vegetatien and J,itter apparently increasing and cevering bare soil areas. Rills and gullies being stabilized by perennial vegetatien. Seilmevement ebvieus, litter piling up against rocks er plants. Erosien pavement and bare greund increasing in area. Rills ferming, gullies with raw edges , extending, witheut perennial vegetatien. Good "bef'or-e=and-eat't.er-" pictures or an identical range area previde an excellent comparisen of cenditions at different times, as well as ene ef the best and mest easily understeod selling points en the value ef geod management. If pessible,pictlires sheuld be taken each time cenditions ratings are made. Use the menuments at the beginning ef transects as phete hubs. Orient the picture alengthe transect line. Recerd lecatien ef pheto hub, date, and time ef day each picture is taken. A cenvenient reference methed is to'print identification data en a chalk-beard and then to' include it in the picture. If this methed is used, prin~ infermatien always in the fellewing erder: Unit name er number, as U34; Key area name KSO.FK. ; Transect number T3; Date 5/30/62. STEP 8- DETERMINE RELATIVE CARRYING CAPACITY The true carrying capacity of big game range is the number of game animals it will suppert, censistent with protectien of the site and with allewance fer ether legitimate uses ,. Until mere exact knewledge is acquired of game nutri tien and of'forage preductien, capacity will be bes t determined in relative terms. That is, the capacity is determined to'be mere, less, or about the same as the number ef animals using the range ata particular time. �-71Relative capacity is determined by judging the condition and trend of the range, the utilization of forage, and as well as ~ossible the site potential. Competition for forage between different game species and between livestock and game also must be considered. 'I'he place of several factors in the determination of capacity is outlined below: 1. Soil Good range cannot long be maintained on depleted or deteriorating soils. Soil is judged as to evidence of past and present ,erosion, as to its relativeerodability, as to amount of plant cover which is present to pr.otectit, and as to the presence or absence of litter As knowLedge of sites, soil types, and soil capabilities increases, more emphasis must and will be placed on that knowledge in long-range habitat management planning. 0 In general, soil condition ml1.stbe classed as good and holding that classification, or as fair and improving, to justify maintaining or increasing animal numbers. 2. Vegetation The factors considered are density, composition, and vigor. All are to some degree inter-dependent. In planning for herd management, however, each should be considered separately.,.as anyone of them may limit the ability of a given range to support big game. The condition of ranges is important,trend in condition may be even more so. When any range, regardless of current condition, exhibits a II down IItrend, it clearly indicates that trouble lies ahead. Conversely, ranges showing steady lIUplltrends indicate that use probably is safely within capacity limfts . Condition and trend cannot be judged wholly on the basis of vegetation best suited for big game. For example, browse ranges of fair density, composition, and vigor might not support ,sufficient total vegetation to protect the soil. Or, a winter range could be in very good condition from the standpoint of soil protection and t,otal plant density, but be virtually useless as deer range because of a lack of browse plants Condition and trend data must be carefully evaluated; wholly satisfactory ranges will be those which adequately protect the soil and at the same time provide suitable forage for the class, or classes, of animals which use them. c 3. Production and Utilization Year~to-year production of forage, and the utilization of that forage, affect recommendations for management. As a rule, the objective should beta have current growth of key forage species on key areas moderately utilized. Moderate or "properll use may mean different things on different range areas and on different years. A range in good condition might successfully support repeated removals of �-7250 per cent of annua.l,growth, while a range withshrubs in poor condition miglltshow a down trend under the same intensity of use. Also, if on a given year growth was exceptionally good and 50 per cent of it was removed, it might be indicated that the game population was too high. To obtain an equivalent amount of forage on a poor production year, the utilization of key species might well have reached a destructive level. 4. Competition Competition exists to some degree whenever more than one grazing or browsing species occupies the same range area. The full effect of this competition~ direct or indirect, is difficult to determine because of incomplete knowledge of feeding habits of the various animals and because of poor understanding of the ecology of shrub ranges in particular. To ~ake the most of existing knowledge, and to allow some safety factor, the objectives of management should be to allow: a. b 0 c. d. Moderate use of 'preferred plant species. Accumulation of sufficient reserve to care :ftr occasional excessive use on plants during years of low production. Forage losses caused by rodents, insects, disease, and weather. Legitimate use by livestock. Studies indicate that browsing of two-year or older stems may damage a plant more than even very heavy use of current growth. If extensive use of old wood is found the condition should be regarded as serious. How serious it is may be judged according to the relative number of shrubs affected. Elk in particular often will remove some older wood along with current growth, so if utilization or current growth is moderate it is probable that the removal of old wood will not be of seri~s proportions. If general use of old growth is coupled with heavy browsing on new wood, all indications are that .shrubs will be severely damaged. The following paired listing gives some general guidelines for management as indicated by certain conditions. 1. 2. Conditions Indicating Need for Herd Reductions Conditions Indicating Herd May Be Maintained Or Increased Moderate utilization of key plants on years of average, or slightly below average, production. Excessive utilization on few (less than 15%) of plants of key species. Little or no use on "least desirable 11 plants. 2. Excessive utilization of key species on years of average, or better, production. Excessive use on many plants of key species. Moderate or heavy use of tlleastdesirablesotl �-73- 40 Conditions Indicating Herd May Be Maintained Or Increased Little use of two-year or older wood. General vegetation conditions holding "good,1I or "fair" and improving. Soil condition "fair" or better. If fair improving. II II Gondi tions :rn,aicating Need for Herd Reductions 4. 5. 6. Much browsing on old growth. Vegetation condition , "poor,1I or in any class with down trend. Soi.l cond.I tion "poor, or any class with down trend. II Form 26oo~5 will provide a place on wht.ch records for several productionutilization transects, pellet group counts, and condition ratings may be compiled. The form may be used for five consecutive years. Having all such infarmation for a key area on a single sheet ,should make the evaluation and comparison of ratIngs much easier. The use of this form is not mandatory, but is encouraged. If desired, forms developed locally to serve the same PllrIlosemay be used. (Sample Form 2600-5; App , Page 21.) STEP 9- FILING DATA In general, the objective will be to maintain complete sets of all analysis forms in the fIles of each officer (of all agenci.es) directly concerned wIth making management recommendations. Duplicates may be kept in other of'f'Lce.s at the discretion of each agency~ Records should be kept by herd or management units. They should include records, filed chronologically by years, or production-utilization and associated 'pellet group studies, condition and trend studies, unit ,maps and photos. In addition to analysis data unit folders should include data on the game herds, such as population trend figures, kill records, and season and baglimi tinformat,ion. No standard order or method of filing is mandatory Records should be kept in such a manner as to permit ease of examination and ready comparison of figures between various years. Information should be kept in current ar "open" files for five years, then may 'be transferred to "closed" file marked "permanent record ~- do not destroy." c �BROWSE CONDITION CLASS SCORECARD To use scorecard: Apply basic data (on composition, density and vigor) from condition transect record to scorecard. Start at highest class in each category and work down until data fits a condition class description. Example (for composition only): A shrub stand has 31% bitterbrush (D), 48% sage (I), 13% .skunkbush (LD), 8% snowberry (LD). It fails to fit "Hi.gh (too few D 1 s.) Itfi ts "Med.Lum" (well over 50% D 1 s , and I "s , well over 15% D 1 S. ) j " COMPOS ITION pesirable and intermediate species (must be two or more) making up 75% or more of the composition, with desirables at least 45% of the composition. H (high) sirable and intermediate species making up 500 or more f the composition, with desirables at least 15% of the omposition. M(medium) esirable and intermediate species making up less than 0% of the composition, or desJrables less than 15%. L(low) DENSITY /56% plus V(very dense) H (high) [6% to 35% M(medium) ~5% minus L(low) VIGOR ~edging on key species mostly light or moderate with less p:;han16% of plants heavily hedged, and decadent minus lfoung*less than 16% of total number of plants. H(high) Hedging on key species mostly moderate, not more than 35% heavily hedged; M(medium) ore than 350 of plants of ey species heavily hedged Feca~ent minus young and hot more than 35% or ecadent minus yo~g ore than 35% L(low) *Subtract the number of If young If plants from the number of "decadents. 11 The principle is that if young plants are replacing decadent plants, the condition is satisfactory. If there is an excess of decadents, condition is unsatisfactory. Compute separately for each key species. App , 1. �SOIL STABILITY CONDITION CLASS Rat.ing Soil movement slight or none, Soil movement may be difficult to recognize, There may be evidence of past accelerated erosion, but is now stablized; plant and litter cover appear effective in protecting the soil; plant pedestals are few or sloping sided. Rills, alluvial deposits, and gullies are absent or completely healed., On sloping lands some litter may 'be dammed against vegetation, forming miniature alluvial fans; trampling displacement is slight; rodent activity is normal or below. Usually 65 or more hits on g;round cover and rocks • (Deming "two~phase" soil condition score over 70) S;oilmovement moderate. Plant and litter cover only partially protecting the soil. Some bunchgrass in openings pedestaled; some pedes ta.Ls have steep sides ; erosion pavement is forming in openings. On sloping land, occasional rills and alluvial deposits are present. Gu.llies, if present, are not .steep sided and raw; trampling displacement and compaction are noticeable, but not excessive; runoff is murky. Usually 35-65 hits on ground cover and rocks ••.• 0 ., •• Soil movement advanced. Herbaceous plant cover and litter are ineffective in preventing soil movement. Openings between plants are almost completely 'bare with well-formed erosion pavement; pedestals beneath sagebrush, and plant pedestals in openings are 4+ inches higher than the surrounding bare soil. Rills are common sloping land; gullies, if present, have steep, raw sides; trampling displacement and compaction are common; rodent activity may be excessive; runoff is muddy. Usually less than 35 hits on ground cover. . • (Deming "two-phase" soil condition score 0-30) o •• 0 e • • • • • 0 App. la • • • • H(high) M(medium) L(low) �SHRUB DESIRABILITY CLASSIFICATION (Winter Game Range) DESIRABLE Scientific , Common Name ~ Name , ServiceAmelanchier I berry I Atriplex , Saltbush ,1 I I I Ceanothus 1I I INTERMEDIATE Scientific Common Name Name Arctostaphylos Kinnikinnick (Bearberry) Artemisia Sagebrush Rabbit brush Ceanothus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Ephedra Mountain Fendlera Fendlerbush Grayia Juniperus communis Pachistima Hopsage Common juniper Boxleaf .myrtle Squaw apple Morman tea 1 Cercocarpus Cornus I I I mahogany I Redosier dogwood Cowania Cliffrose Mahonia Oregon Peraphyllum grape Aspen Quercus Oak Chokecherry Sambucus Elderberry pin cherry tr'oxicodendron Poison ivy Bitterbrush Smooth sumac Willow Populus (elk) Prunus (exc.Plum) Purshia Rhus glabra Salix (elk & moose) LEAST DES IRABLE Scientific Common Name Name p:,eadplant Amorpha Arctostaphylos ~anzanita Chrysothamnus Rabbit brush (all other s~ Corylus Hazel Crataegus Hawthorn Eurotia Winterfat Holodiscus Rockspirea Jamesia Philadelpus Cliffbush Mockorange Physocarpus Populus (deer) Potent ilIa Ninebark Aspen Prunus Phus trilobata Ribes Shrubby cinquefoil Plum Skumkbush II Currant, gooseberry Rosa (exc. Rose fruit) Salix (deer) Willow Sarcobatus Greasewood Shepherdia Buffaloberry SymphoriSnowberry carpus (exc •fruit) Tetradymia Horsebrush NOTE: There wi I alwa y s be some disa gr eement as to p rop er classification of some shrubs. Also) no single classification of this type can fit in all localities. This list represents the ideas of most of those who have worked on these instructions and should be used as here presented. If other shrub species are encountered, they should be classified as agreed upon by representatives of all agencies concerned, and entered in ink on local copies of the instructions. I App , 2 �-77SAMPLE SKETCH MAP The sample on this page is the standard form of sketch map for . production-utilization transects. See Step 5. Additional details may be added, if desired. Herd or Mgt. unit~ Key Area Ala cM Transect NO.__~~=Species Cern 0 Date 91/d 6-;::> . _ 1. Tie beginning marker by bearing and direction to prominent landmark or reference point. 2. Locate shrubs from monuments or markers by clock system (orient clock along transect - 6 o'clock at beginning, 12 0' clock at end of transect) or by compass bearings.~ 3. Indicate distance from marker to shrub. 4. Cross (+), on circle which denotes shrub, will indicate location of tag. Height above ground will be entered near oross. 5. If monuments are on straight line, the general bearing and standard interval only need be given. If directions and distances are different from monument to monument, show both distance and compass bearings between them. QvV S,rP o'e, A5) 0 Note: No special form will be provided for transect maps. Headings should be typed, or printed in ink. Pencil sketch should be made in field on plain paper, and inked later to insure permanence. 6. Place numbers (1 to 10) at dots Which indicate markers. If tags are numbered, corresponding numbers may be placed in parentheses near circles denoting shrubs (see shrubs 4 and 5 in sketch). " App. 3 �-78SYMBOLS FOR GAME RANGE MAPPING Management Unit Boundaries (heavy Line) (If herd unit boundary, for apec Lf'Lc animal, appropriate letters may be added, as:) Mule Deer ___ ..:D _ Whitetail ____ w _ ___ ...:E _ ___ ...:M _ Antelope ___ ...:A _ Bighorn Sheep ___ .....;S _ Mountain Goat ____ G _ (Enter unit name) (or number in ) (block letters ) Elk Moose Season Range Boundary s c s c or j p orj (thin red line) exterior boundary of secondary winter range critical p = primarYj Migration Routes Key Area Boundary .....;K_~ (Fine line) Key Area (If boundary is not delineated) K - Name Production - utilization Transect P-U,........ 2 (number consecutively within each key area) Extensive (paced) Condition Transect HIM X- M 3 ) (x at beginningpointj number consecutd.ve.Iy in key area transect) (Place condition ratings, H(igh), M(edium), L(ow), above (line for browse composition, density, and vigor, always in that ) ) (orderj place soil stability rating below the line. Trend - - - - ,t , J. or~ (indicator arrows may be placed "behind any 0 condition rating symbol.) Enclosure (study plot) Vegetative Type Line (thin solid line) Photo Point Phl (number consecutively within key area) Acreage in Type - - - 165 Type and Sub-type Designation 5-QUE-AME or l-FEOV-AGSP Type Identification - - - B-6-60 App. 4 �-79PLANT SYMBOLS The plant symbol list includes generic (three-letter) and some ,specific (fourletter) symboLs , The three-letter symbols may usually be used insu'o-typing. The. four-letter symbols should be used whenever there is a definite difference in desirability between species and specific identification is made. TREES AND MISCELLANEOUS A Alpine Fir P Pinon A Aspen PP Ponderosa Pine BS Blue Spruce POP Poplar or Cottonwood BP Bristlecone Pine WF White Fir CF Corkbark Fir WS White Spruce (Black Hills) DF Douglas Brn Burn ES Englemann Spruce C,lt Cultivated J Juniper I Inaccessible LbP Limber Pine Rep Reproduction LP Lodgepole Pine R Rock Fir App. 5 �-80BROWSE, SHRUBS, AND WOODY PLANTS Scientific Name Symbol Acer ACE II glabrum Common Name Maple Rocky Mountain M. Alder Thinleaf Ao Serviceberry Saskatoon S. Mountain S. Utah S. Amorpha Manzanita Greenleaf M. Bearberry (Kinnikinnick) Sagebrusr;Wormwood Silver S. Falsetarragon S. Fringed S. Big So Saltbush Fourwing S. Shadscale S. Gardner S. Barberry Colorado B. Birch Water B. Acg;L Alnus " tenuifolia Amelanchier " alnifolia II oreophila •• utahensis Amorpha Arctostaphylos " patula uva-ursi ALN Alte AME Amal Amor Amut AMO ARC Arpt Aruv Artemisia II cana •• dracunculoides II frigida II tridentata Atriplex II canescens " confertifolia II gardneri Berberis II fendleri Betula II fontinalis " papyrifera Ceanothus •• fendleri II ovatus " veluntinus Celtis •• douglasi Cercocarpus II ledifolius II montanus Chrysothamnus •• nauseosus •• viscidiflorus Clematis Coleogyne " ramosissima Cornus II stolonifera ART Arca Ardr Arfr Artr ATR Atca Atco Atga BER Befe BET Befo Corylus " cornuta Cowania " stansbrui:ana Crataegus COD Coco COW Cosb CRA. Bepa Ceanothus Fendler C. Inland Co Snowbrush C Hackberry Douglas H. Mountain mahogany Curlleaf' M. True M. Rabbitbrush Rubber R. Douglas Ro Clematis Blackbrush CEA Cefe Ceov Ceve CEL Cedo CEC Cele Cemo CRY Chna Chvd 0 eLM COY Cora COR Cost App , Dogwood Redosier Do (Squawbush) Filbert (Hazel) Beaked F. Cliffrose Stansbury Co Hawthorn 6 �-81Browse, Shrubs and Woody Plants (cont.inued) Scientific Name Symbol Common Name Elaeagnus angustifol.is " communtata Ephedra Eurotia lanata ELA. Elan Elco EPH EUR Eula Fen Ferp FED Feut FOR Fone FOS Fosp FRX Fran Frye GRA Grsp Gill Gusa HOL Hodu Elaeagnus Russian olive S.ilverberry Ephedra (Joint fir) Winterfat Gommon W. Fendlerbush Cliff F~ II Pend.Ler-a fI rupicola Fendlerella fI utahensis Forestiera neo-mexicana Forsellesia spinescens Fraxinus anomala " pennsylvanica Grayia " spinosa Gutierrezia n sarothrae Holodiscus dumosus Jame.sia " americana Juniperus communis Yare saxatilis n osteosperma " scopulorum Lonicera J1 involucrata Mahonia fremonti " repens Ostrya .n virginiana qpuntia Pachistima myrsinit.es Peraphyllum fI ramosissimum Phi lade lphus microphyllus Physocarpus Populas II II II II II II II angustifolia Greasebush Spiny G. Ash Green Ash Hopsage Sp.iny H. .Snakeweed Broom SpRoc ksp irea Bush Rp Jamesia Cliff J" Juniper Common J. Mountain Common J. Utah J. Rocky Mountain J. Honeysuckle Bearberry H. Mahonia JAM Jaam J Juco Juos Jusc LON Loin MAR Mafr Mare OST Osvi OPU PAR Pamy PER Pera Phi Phmi creeping M. Pricklypear;Cholla Pachistima J;trrtleP. Squawapple s. PRY POP Poag App 7 Mockorange Little .leaf M. Ninebark Polar;~spen; ) ~Cottonwood Narrow leaf P. (Narrowleaf C.) �-82Browse, Shrubs and Woody Plant.s (continued) Scientific Name POllulas 11 tremuloides Potentilla 11 fruticosa Prunus americana besseyi llensylvanica virginiana Purshia tridentata Quercus gambeli macrocar:pa Rhamnus smithi Rhus glabra " trilobata " Ribes cereum " Robina RQsa Rubus II II II II II 1I " 11 dE\liciQSUS idaeus llarviflorus Salix Sambucus Sarcobatus vermiculatus Shellherdia II It argentiea II canadens Ls Sorbus Scollulina Slliraea II lucida Symphoricar:pQs Tamarix " galica Tetradymia JI canescens " sllinosa Toxicodendron radicans Ulmus americana Vaccinium Viburnum Vitis vulllina Yucca II 1I 1I Symbol Common Name A or Potr POT Pofr PRU Pram Prbe Quaking A. Prpe Prvi PUR Putr QUE Quga Quma RHA Rhsm RHU Rhgl Rhtr RIB Rice ROB ROS RUB Rude Ruid Rulla SLX SAM SAR Save SHE Shar Shea SOR Sosc SPI Slllu SYM TAM Taga TET Teca Tesll TOX Tora ULM Ulam VAC VIB Vit Vivu YUC Allll8 Bush C.inquefoil Peach; Plum; Cherries American Plum Bessey Cherry Pin Cherry Common Chokecherry Bitterbrush Angelolle B. Oak Gambel O. Burr O. Buckthorn Smith B. Sumac Smooth S. Skunkbush S. (Bkunkbush ) Currant; Gooseberry Wax C. Locust Rose Blackberry; Dewberry; Rasllberry Boulder R~ Red a. Western Thimbleberry Willow Elder Greasewood Black G. Buffaloberry Silver B" Russet B. Mountain ash Greenes M. Sllirea Shinyleaf S. Snowberry Tamarisk French T. Horsebrush Gray H. Common Poison ivy Elm American E. Blueberry, Whortleberry Gralle Frost G. Yucca �-83PERENNIAL PLANTS 1 Scientific Name Symbol Common Name Grasses Agropyron spp. AGR Wheatgrass inerme Agin Beardless bluebunch wheatgrass latiglume Agla Alpine wheatgrass "It scribneri Agsc Scribner or spreading wheatgrass smithi Agsm Western wheat or Co.Lor-adobluestem spicatum " Agsp Bluebunch wheatgrass subsecundum Agsu Bearded wheatgrass trachycaulum Ag;tr Slender wheatgrass Agrostis spp. AGT 'Bentgrass II alba Agab Redtop n scabra Agsc Ticklegrass Alopecurus spp. ALO Meadow or alpine foxtail Andropogon spp •. AND Broomsedgej Bluestemj Turkeyfoat Aristida spp. Three-awn grass ARI Blepharoneuron tricholepis BLE .orBltr Pinedropseed Boutelouaspp. BOU Grama grass gracilis Bogr Blue grama " curtipendula S.ideoats grama Bocu Bromus spp. Bromegrass BRO anomalus No.dding brome Bran carinatus Brca Mountain brome (B. pc Iyarrthus , B. marginatus, etc.) ciliatus ::F1:'ingedbrome Brci Pumpe Ll.y fbr-ome " purrwellianus Brpu Calamgrostis spp. Reedgrass CAL " canadensis Bluejoint reedgra,Ss Caca It purpurascens Capu Purple pinegrass Calamovilfalongifolia Calo Prairie sandgrass Dantonia californica Daca Californiadanthonia II parryi Dapa Parry danthonia intermedia Dain Timber dantonia D~schampsia caespitosa DES or Deca Tufted hairgrass Elymus spp , Wildrye ELY " ambigua Elam Colorado wildrye " canadensis Canada wildrye Elca cinereus (condensatus) Giant wildrye Elci glaucus Elgl Blue wildrye Festucaspp. FES Fescue arizonica Fear Arixona fescue " idahoensis Idaho fescue Feid ovinia Feov Sheep fescue ovina brachphylla Feov-b Alpine fescue II thurberi Feth Thurber fescue Generic symbols are first three letter of genUSJ except for some conflicts such as Agropyron (AGR) and Agrostis (AGT).. Species symbols are first two letters of genus and first two letters of species, except for some conflicts such as Agropyronscribneri (AgSc) and Agrostis scabra (Agsb )• Species symbols are written in lower case leti{ers II \I II II II II II II II II II II \I 11 e App , 9 �-84Perennial Plants (continued) Common Name Symbo L Scientific Name Grasses Spike fescue FlESor Heki HespeTochloa Kingi Galleta grass HIL or Hija Hilaria jamesi Barley $R Hordeumspp. n Meadow barley Hobr brachyantherum Junegrass KOE or Kocr Koelaria cristata Oniongrass MEL :Melica spp ~ Muhly MUH :Muhlenberg?-a,spp. Slimstem muhly Mufi filiculmis " Mountain muhly Mumo montana " Matmuhly Muri richardsonis 11 Ring muhly Muto t.orreyi Ricegrass ORY Oryzopsis spp . Timothy PHL Phleum :spp. Bluegrass POA Poa ispp , ( except 3 below) 11 Canada bluegrass Poco corrrpressa n Kentucky bluegrass Pop.r pratensis 11 Sandberg bluegrass Pose secunda Sihy Squirreltail or SIT Sitanion hystrix DroIlseed SPO spp , Sporobolus Needlegrass STI Stipa spp (except below) Needle and thread stco comata Sleepy grass Stro robusta Trisetum TRP Trisetumspp. Grass-like CAR Sedges Carex spp. (Carex aquatalis, C. nebraskensis, C. rostrata) Wet meadow sedges (Tall, robust, wideleaved.) Alpine sedges (Co drummondia, atrata, angustior, elynoides, illota, pysocarpa, etc. ) Rush JUN Juncus spp . Kobresia KOB or Kobe Kobresia bellardi (Elyna) Woodrush LUZ LuzulaSPIl • Forbs Yarrow; Milfoil ACH Achilleaspp. Actinea ACT Actinea spp. (hymenoxys) Agoseris; Mountain dandelion AGO Agoseris spp. Gianthyssop; Horsemint AGA Agastache spp. Wild onion ALM Allium .spp, Rockjasmine ANS Androsacae spp. Angelica or wild parsnip ANG Angelicaspp. Pussytoes ANT Antennaria spp. Goldenweed APL AploIlappus sppo(Haplopappus) Columbine AQU Aquilega spp. Rockcress AM Arabis spp. Sandwort ARE Arenaria sppo Arnica ARN Arnica spp. Aster ASR Aster spp . Milkvetch; Loco AST Astragalus spp. II 0 II II App , 10 �Perermial Plants (continued) Scientific Name Symbol Co.mmon Name Balsamorhiza SPPD Calochortus spp. Caltha spp. Campanu.La spp. Castilleja spp" Cerastium spp. Cbaenactis spp Chrysopsis spp. Circium spp. Cogswellia (Lomatium) D,elphiniumspp. Dryas octopetala BAL CAC CAR CAM CAS CIR CHA CRR CIR LOM DEL DRY or Droc Epilobium (Chamaenerion) E;rigeronspp o. Eriogonum .spp. Fragariaspp. Galium bore ale Gentianaspp. Ger-an.Lum ispp , Geum (Sieversia) spp .• Giliaaggregata Hedysarumspp. Helenium hoopesi Helianthella spp" Heracleum lanatum Iris missouriensis Lathyrus s:pp. Ligusticellaeastwoodae Ligusticumspp" Linum :spp. Lupinus spp , Mertensiaspp. Osmorhiza spp" Oxytropis spp. (Aragalluq) Pedicularis spp. Penstemon sppo Phacelia spp. Phloxspp. Polemonium spp. EPI ERI ERO FRG GAL or Gabo GEN GER GEU GIL or Giag RED HEN or Helo HET HER or Hela IRI or Irmi LAT LII or Liea LIG LIM Balsamroot Mariposa lily Marshmarigold Harebell Paintbrush Chickweed Chaenactis; False yarrow Goldaster Thistle Biscuit root Larkspur Alpine avens; Mt. Washington dryad Willowweed; Fireweed Fleabane or wild daisy Buckweat Strawberry Northern bedstraw Gentian Qeranium Avens Skyrocket gilia Sweetvetch Sneezewood Litt.le sunflower Cowparsnip Rocky Mtn. Iris or Blue fla.g Forbs 0 LUP MER OSM OXY PED PEN PHA PBX PON Polygonumspp. Potentilla .spp , (Herbaceous) Pseudocymopteris spp. Pterid:iumspp. Ranunculus spp . Rudbeckiaspp . Saxifraga spp. Sedumspp. Senecio spp. POG por PSE PrE RAN RUD SAX SED SEN App. 11 Peavf.ne Ligusticella Ligusticum Flax ' Lupine Bluebell Sweetanise; Sweetroot Crazyweed Lousewort l' Pens temon ; Beardstongue Phacelia Phlox Polemonium, JacobJs ladder; Skypilot Knotweed Cinquefoils False carrot Bracken fern Buttercup CQReflower or niggerhead Mat,saxifrage (Alpine) Stonecrop Groundsel �.•. 86- Perennial Plants (Cont.inued) Scientific Name Symbol Common Name Hibbaldiaprocumbens Silene spp .• Solidago ,spp~ Sphaeralcea (Malvastrum) Stellaria .spp,(Alsine) Taraxacum officinale Thalasp i spp '"' Thalictrum spp. Thermops is sp.p.o Townsendia spp. Trifoliumspp. Valeriana spp., Veratrumcalifornicum SIB or Sipr SIL SOL SPH STL Taof THL THA TEE TOW TRI VAL VEr or Veca Vicia spp. Viguierra multiflora VIC VIG or Vimu Violaspp. Wyethia .spp, Zygadenus spp. VIO Sibbaldia or False strawbeTry Moss silene Golden rod Globemallow Starwort 'Common dandelion Pennycress Meadowrue Goldenbanner Townsendia; Easter daisy Clover Valerian False-hellebore OT skunk cabbage Vetch Showy goldeneye; or ma;ny flowered sunflower Violet Mulesear wyethia Deathcamas Forbs WE ZTI} App, 12 �-87TYPE DESCRIPTIONS FolloWing is list of type descriptions as adopted from 1948 Instruction for Range Inventories. The n7 or tlWaste" type has been omitted, as it has little application in mapping on wildlife ranges • The list as it appears will be the standard for game range mapping. 11 Type No" Standard Golor. Grassland Grassland Dark yellow Mongol 817 or 917 Dixon- 35~ IricLudea graas Land other than meadows Perennial grasses predominate and deter ... mine the aspect, although weeds and browse .may be present. o Examples of suotypes are ~ grama-buffalo grass, bunch grasses, wheatgrass-sedge, alpine grassland, bluestem wheatgrass. Meadow Cadmi urn Orange Mongol - 862 or 962 Dixon •.324 Iric Ludes areas where sedges, rushes, and mOisture-loving grasses predominate. Two classes of meadows arerecognizedj wet meadows and dry meadows. Wet meadows are characterized principally by sedges and rushes and remain wet or moist throughout the summer. These shall be designated as 2 (W)• Dry meadows are dominated by grasses rather than sedges and occur as moist .meadow-like areas in open timber or along intermittent streams, both of which become moderately dry by mid-summer. These shall be designated simply by the numeral 2, followed by appropriate species or genus symbols. Perennial Forbs(Weeds) (not desert weeds) Lake Red Mongol - 866 or 966 Dixon ..• 321 Includes all untimbered areas whereperennial weeds predominate over other classes of vegetation. If there is not great predominance of weeds over grass or shrubby vegetation, and if weed predominance is due to .some temporary factor, disregard them in designating the type and use the more stable vegetation as an index. Weeds will then be cared for in the subtype. App. 13 �-88- Type Descriptions Type No. 4~ (continued) Standard Color: Stone Brown Mongol - 893 or 993 Dixon - 343 Sagebrush This type includes all untimbered lands where sagebrush predominates. The dominant shrubby species of sagebrush, shall determine the subtype. A type may have a sagebrush aspect even though sagebrush makes up a small part of the composition. Browse (shrubs) 5· Olive Green Mongol - 888 or 988 Dixon - 325 This type includes all lands where browse species predominate, except those for which special types have been designated. It commonly occupies the transition zone of the lower mountain slopes, foothills, and plateau areas. Examples of subtypes are mountain mahogany, bitterbrush, willows, oakbrush, etc. Conifer 6. Dark Green Mongol - 858 or 958 Dixon - 354 This type includes all range in con~ferous timber supporting grasses, weeds, browse, either singly or in combination, except as provided under Type 9. The forage may vary from a pure stand of pinegrass, or some other grass, to a pure stand of weeds or browse. These variations can best be represented by subtypes. Barren 8. (Uncolored) This type includes all areas on which there is naturally little or no vegetation, including lake beds, saline flats, sand dunes, shale, rockslides, lava flows, etc. Areas which have been denuded by use or disturbance should not be, confused with areas naturally barren, nor should areas containing only annuals be shown as Type 8, although they may be without vegetation for a part of the year. App , 14 �-89Type Descriptions(continiled) Type No. -.,.-- Standard Color Light Green Mongol - 848 or 948 Dixon - 354 Pinon-Juniper This type includes pinon and juniper singlyor in combination. The character of the range in this type with respect to location, grazing capacity, and management is sufficiently distinct from the conifer type to justify a separat.e classification. The forage may vary from a pure st.and of grasses, weeds, or browse to any combination of the three. These variations can best be shown by subtyping. Broad-leaf Trees lO~ Pink Mongol - 846 or 946 Dixon - 322 This type includes all ranges in deciduous timber. The combinat.ion of grasses, weeds, and browse, and the proportion of individual species, will vary as in other types~ Principal subtypes will include; aspen, cottonwood, burr oak, birch, alder, askelm, etc &, when they occur in tree form. CJ:'eosotebush 11. Bottle Green Mongol - 855 or 955 Dixon - 350 This type includes areas where creosotebush (Larrea) gives the characteristic aspect. Mesquite 12. Yellow Earth Mongol - 853 or 953 Dixon - 324~ This type includes areas where various species of mesquite (Prosopis) give the characteristic aspect. Saltbush 13· Slate Mongol - 819 or 919 Dixon - 352~ This type includes areas where the various salt desert shrubs of the Atriplex genus give the characteristic aspect. App, 15 �-90Type Descriptions (continued) Type No .• standard Color 14. Royal Purple Mongol - 854 or 964 Dixon - 323~ Greasewood This type includes areas where greasewood (Sarcobatus) gives the characteristic aspect. Normally this type occupies valley floors subject to overflow during flood periods or areas underlain with groundwater at shallow depths in more or less saline soils. Winterfat 15· Light Tan Mongol - 813 or 913 Dixon - 33~ This type includes areas where winterfat (Eurotia) gives the characteristic aspect. Desert Shrub 16. Dark Tan Mongol - 863 or 963 Dixon - 335 This is a general type where desert shrubs other than those for wh:ich separate types have been designated, give the\charasteristic aspect. It is characterized by several genera which are quite distinctive in type habit including black brush (Coleogyne), jojoba (Simmodsia), hopsage (Grayiaspinosa), and cottonthorn horsebrush (Tetradymia spinosa). Pure types of these genera are so infrequent that separate typing is not justified. The plant symbols used will be sufficient to indicate predominant species. Half Shrub 17· Wisteria Mongol - 844 or 944 Dixon - 323 This type includes areas where half shrubs of a largely transitory nature give the characteristic aspect. Halfshruo.s are low semi-woody perennials, such as Aplopappus, Gutierrezia, Artemisia frigida, Eriogonum wrightii, etc. They commonly consist of a woody caudex from which herbaceous stems are produced only to die back annually. . App. 16 �-91- Type Descriptions (continued) Type No. 18. Standard Color Annuals (weeds or grasses) Red Terra Cotta Mongol - 876 or 976 Dixon 321~ This type includes areas in which annual weeds or annual grasses constitute the dominant vegetation. Transitorystages are included in this type, as for example: Russian thistle, cheatgrass brome (Bromus tectorum) and desert weeds. The plant symbols used will be sufficient to indicate predominant species. Abandoned Lands (Hachured) Plowed cultivated lands which have been abandoned should be designated according to aspect" In mapping, the boundaries should be hachured. Cultivated Lands (Outlined) Where cultivated areas are to be mapped, annual crop, hay and other lands should be outlined and designated with appro~ priate symbols such as C or CLT. for annual crops, H or Hay for HayLand , etc. Reseeded Lands The boundary of successfully reseeded area,swill be outlined and typed according to aspect. Where recent seeding is not yet established, species sown should be used in the type designation where there appears to be reasonable chance of success. Reseeded land deSignations will be followed by a capital IIRu and the year in which sowing was done, as for example: l-Acr Bin (R--48). App. 17 �-92- In cooperation with Wayne Cloward, Range and Wildlife State Officer of the Grand Mesa-Uncompahgre National Forest, Delta, Colorado, a four man big game range analysis crew was formed with Merle Prince (crew chief and Gary Oliverson of the Forest Service, Carl Lind of the B.L.M. and Gerald Gill(later replaced by Bruce Gill) of the Colorado Game and Fish Department. These men were trained as a cooperative crew by Wayne Cloward and Morely F. Brandborg of the Forest Service, and Richard Denney of the Department, in the Kannah Creek area (Game Management Unit 41). The men were quartered in.a Forest Service house trailer part of the time, and guard stations when avaf.Lab Le , Transportation was by Forest Service vehicle, and the crew furnished their own sleeping bags, food and cookingq Two-inch base maps, quarter-inch maps, and aerial photos were furnished by the Forest Service. Some type maps were available from Forest Service allotments and from the Soil Conservation Service. After the training period, the crew worked in Game Management Unit 61 on the west .side of the Uncompahgre Plateau. They ran a total of 58 condition-transects, as per the inter-agency procedure, and which is Chapter 8 of the U.S. Forest Service Region II Range Analysis Handbook. In addition to the above procedure, the project leader had them fill out an additional form, which was printed on the back of the R2-2600-4 (Paced Condition Transect Form). This form was essentially as follows: Pellet Group Counts (By Season of Use) Plot 1 2 j 4 5 b 7 Slope Aspect Elk Fall, Spring, Winter Summer Deer Fall, Spring, Winter Summer Other (Specify) Fall, Spring, Winter Summer . 8 9 10 Total Inasmuch as the form of the individual pellets is determined largely by the type of feed that an animal is on, as well as its relative succulence, it was felt that a differentiation could be made between the softer, less~compact and group-adhering qualities of the succulent-feed period in the spring and summer from the harder, more-compact and distinct pellet of the fall and winter period when forage is drier. �-93This would yield an index as to the relative use by season by one species, the seasonal use and possible competition between species, the use by slope and aspect by season by species, and the relative degree of use between areas during the same season. The idea was also that this procedure would help pin-point new key areas, and substantiate known ones. The pellet group count was to be made at each tenth pace or point on the transect, using either one hundredth acre or hundred square foot circular plots, dependingon the vegetation and ground cover. Another aspect of the browse range analysis work involved getting with the field men of the Department by Range Investigation personnel and instructing them in the proper application of procedures and interpretation of data so that results of measured and extensive transects will be more uniform for evaluation as to reUabili ty, etc. Work with the district personnel on measured browse transects and extensive utilization transect.s during this segment was virtually all performed by Bertram D. Baker, Senior Game Biologist at Salida. Table 1 is a summary of Baker's work, primarily in the San Luis Valley, but including two .on the Southern Ute Reservation near Ignacio that Baker and I helped them initiate in the fall of 1960, Table 10 --Summary of Browse Transect Work in 1961, Baker. Game Unit Date Examined 4/20/61 WCO Dist.* (Bassett) Vega Redondo Turquoise Gulch 4/21/61 1\ (Vavak) (Hawker) 5/25/61 (McDonald) 82 Lower Cat Crk. or S",Greenie Mountain Sand Dunes 9/14/61 (Hobbs) 68 Hodding Creek 10/5/61 (Hawker) 68 68 Ward Gulch Muddy Spring Ut.e Res. 11 68 80 Transect Name Mesa Mountain \I * Name parenthe.sized means Officer not present. Remarks Pellet group count of .01 A. plots and post-use twig measurements on established trans. \I Same as above plus extensive util. transect. Paced browse condition transect and delineation of key areas and winterran~s. Pre-use twig measurements on newly· established transect with Dunes Rangers Haugen and Norton. Pre-use twig measurements on established transect. \I �It is evident from the number of parenthesized names that the Conservation Officers are not taking much of an active part in this important, supposedlycooperative work in their districts This has been a f'or-e--gone conclusion since the inception of the Area Supervisor set-up in the Game and Fish Department, and the dropping of the Regional Game Manager positions. Generally speaking, the Forest Service has been carrying the load on maintaining existing transects, and if it were not for their interest and cooperationJ many transects would have been abandoned through neglect. 0 Thu.s fact-gathering step is a vital one on which to base sound management recommendations, and must be tempered with other known factors concerning the herd and its harvest. Findings: The Grand Mesa - Uncompahgre cooperative crew ran a total of 58 condition trransec'tis in Game Management Unit 61, primarily on the west .sLde of the Uncompahgre Plateau. Work began in early July, 1961, and continued until Gary Oliverson and Gerald Gill, replaced later by Bruce Gill, had to return t.ocollege in September, 196L A tiot.a.L of approximately 165, 000 acres of game winter range was rated as to condition and trend with these 58 transects in,approximately 220 man days. Of the 58 transects, 29 were run in the pinyon-juniper type (9), 20 were run in the sagebrush type (4), four were run in the mixed browse type(5), and thtree were run in miscellaneous types, such as reseeded areas, a p.inyonjuniper eradication area, etc. As evident in Table 2, the pinyon-juniper transects were mostly in browse of medium composition (41 percent), with more of high composition (35 percent) than tho.se of low composition (24 per cent). Density data showed that 79 per cent of the transects were of low density, or less than 15 per cent of the ground covered 'by browse species} other than over-stioryof pinyonjuniper. Similarly} 76 per cent showed that a low vigor of browse species was prevalent, and 74 per cent of the transects the soil condition was rated as low, due to lack of vegetative cover and litter, and due to erosion and soil movement. Woody plants found most commonly in this type were Quercus gambeli, Cercocarpus montanus, Ephedra sp., Artemisia ~, Atriplex confertif'olia, Artemisia tridentata and Gutierrezia .sp. In the sagebrush type, 90 p,er cent of the 20 transects were of low composition, while 75 per cent were of medium denSity, 70 per cent were of low vigor, and the soil rating was practically even petween the low and medium ratings. Species of woody plants associated with the sagebrush type, primarily Artemisia tridentata, were Gutierrezia .sp.and Artemisia nova. The grass, Hilaria jamesii , was also commonly associated. �-95- Of the faur transect run in the mixed brawse type (5)J three were af medium compcs Ltd on , half were af medium and half af high density, three were af medium vigar and sail condition. The main species concerned were oakbrush, with serviceberry (Amela;nchier utahensis) and sagebrush. If this sampling is representative of the deer winter range in the area worked, it appears that the pinyan~juniper and sagebrush types canstitute the bulk of the winter range. Also, according to the browse condition_class scarecard, these all~important types are largely in critical condition, being low in campositian, density, vigar and soil ratings. Table 2o~=Summary af 58 Condit.ian Transects, Uncompahgre Plateau, Unit 61, Summer, 1961. Type Rating C;ampasition Density No No •. % % c.. Pinyon Juniper (9) Total Sagebrush (4) Total Mixed 'Browse I5) Total others ~ed (4) Saltbush (13) Pinyan~Juniper Eradicatian Area (9) Vi gar No. % Sail No. % Law 7 24 23 79 22 76 23 74 Medium 12 41 5 17 4 14 8 26 High 10 29 le 35 1 29 5 4 3 29 10 0 25 1~ 70 0 31 11 15 0 20 0 75 0 20 10 0 4 2 20 1 25 2 2 4 50 150 3 0 75 0 Low Medium High Low Medium High!' , .L 1 20 1 3 0 4 90 5 5 25 75 0 4- L M L L M L L L M 9 0 20 1 3 0 4 H H M 55 45 0 25 75 0 Assaciated Species QUE, Cemo, EPH, Arno Atca Artr.GUT. Arna Hija GUT QUE Amut Artr Arna ~ Atco,Saka <- Three other transects were run in miscellaneaus types. One was in a reseeded sagebrush area, which rated law in campositian and density, med.ium in vigor, and high in soil condition. A. second was in the saltbrush type, comprised mainly of shadscale and greasewoad was rated medium on compositian, law on density and vigor, and hig;h on sail conditian. In a pinyon-juniper eradication area which had 'been chained, compos Ltd.on and density were in the low ratings, and soil.and vigor were in the medium ratings. �-96Each agency involved in this cooperative crew received a copy of the quarterinch winter range and key ar~adesignation map, the two-inch base map with vegetative types, each transect data sheet, a general aspect and direction photograph taken from the beginning point of each transect, and a summary of data sheets compiled by Merle Prince of the Forest Service. This folder is on file in the project office at the Fort Collins Research Center. It was found that where the understory is heavy, that the hundred square foot circular plots are-more practical than the hundredth acre plots. Also, where one man crews are used, they ar-emore f'easfbLe . The compilation and analysis of the pellet group data has not been completed, so will appear in the next completion report. It does appear, however, that in relatively dry country such as the Uncompahgre Plateau, the expected characteristic formation of the summer pellets did not hold up, but tended to be more like the fall pellet shape. This was attributed to early curing of forbs due to dryness and heat. It is anticipated that the season characteristics will hold up more to pattern on elk than on deer due to the more -extreme elevational differences between winter and summer ranges, and the accompanying higher precipitation and resultant succulent feed through the summer. The analysis will reveal whether, or where, slopes and aspect influence deer winter usej and the relati\Ce use between classes or corribinationsof factors. The relative use of one area to another by deer, and by other classes of animals, will be evaluated. The total number of pellet groups by seasonal characteristics is used rather than current season droppings because a broad index of use is desired, rather than so many days use per acre by deer. Therefore, it is not necessary to separate past winterg droppings from current, etco Assuming that the longevity of groups is somewhat similar in the various conditions, the count of all recognizable groups within the plots yields a total which can be used solely as an index of useability of a specified area. The remainder of Unit 61 will be completed, as will the east side of the Uncompahgre Plateau, during the 1962 field season. Prepared by: Richard N. Denney Project Leader Date: April, 1962 Approved by: Laurence Eo Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd Co Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �~I\W\PLE.. - COPy ..... ,_ .....-.--...----Q.--.~~ . .,.-.. ..... PRODUCTION-UTILIZATION TRANSECT RECO~ 2600 ---""""iT-----~--"~'-------.~"'--_._"'Tr------ ___. _ After Browsin - 55 Total, §4l- .. -----.-...!J.---=--...L---~~~ ft) ~'Qt~l bf(!.fo'l'~~ inches T.tol Olfter inches ~ Util:1\5i1ttiolll.~:Jn_= Lnchee ~t'"~~: w:J17+1()'~-:::: -5.0 G/Il"04AJIi, _ %_ Utilization.~Q.. ~ Total befO;e __ "" % Ut1l1zatl.on_~ EHcI~~ ~~ __ inches inches ~ (Current growth) (Old growth) (1) In WlNoo of Twio;Sl1 colUJiU1p dot tally number of spur shoots, above tag1 present but not Wt®i\luredo Convert dot t1Ll1y to fi~urej), and circle; as @ The circled f'Lgur e will b~ ~"dcled to ,total !i'!.'l1.XEbiClK' of M()~sur®d twigs in computing "gr-owth index". (2) It browsed braf.'orerneasurcm';J\'1t~ enter remaining twig l~ngth, followed by length estito have bei;'iT.( used in par-ens ~ as g . 6( 2) U~;~ <'?:'d11l~'J""'I}~_'o~".§..:~ ..fOIt" ·,n<.h - ~ but dv ml'x U2•.2600-2 On a. r.,4 S i (;~111(,'. -Fo Y'm, App. 18 10/60 .J ml'ated * 0 h·J;>.'1 not �Period of Use .. ..._. --:--...,.--,- __ .J•••••••• ~_ PELLET-GROLT COUNTS Plot II and l,onaticn of Deer F'al.L Center Spr , Pellet Groups Cattle • I Elk Fall Sore " Fall S" • Snr, Sheep Fall Sora I Ot.her=SpecfCy Fall Sor I _._--- :l 7 'I ~- '; , -1-- 3 .. 2 "', L '1 :; '+ . ,.. I II ~,' " ~--- I . i-.-- ___~~II , ~ ~------_=~1_----------+_----------~---------~ n7 +-------t----:-:, :-i~.~:-3=------t-------+-------- U ... -tL. ~_-:-. •. ~t_--------_+------__:_, ~,-+--------+-----------+--.-------- ---1 ----1_---------=-+----------+---------+--------1--------- 1# tB~M.1 Grouns h;r-...\Q"'~ (y 10) :.Jc'LVft.rt.!og F:~?B~t~__ .__ ~ ?fJ ~ 0 ~0 ~.-----4_----- (3) ~-~1:.L.-3--t_-....:!:1:..l.1--_+-.-.-'1....,2=------,r--- .• l.~1-,----I------ t!n~r!--U.u.LA,~c!Dl-rft--L------..J-~-=.::I=-"'J-~-.--L--/-------'---(2) 1/100 acre circular plot c 111 9" radius; 10 plots • 1/10 acre 1./100 acre strip transect· 6..6 feet (79.2 inches) X 66 feet Total strip - 660 feet X 6c6 feet • 1/10 acre ()) Se~ instructions O.} App. l8a 1- .__ .. - �SAMPLE- _..•..• 2600 - •..... RECORD OF EXTENSIVr.; f)ROWSE UTII,IZATION ~'-''''----'''''~ CHECK u'nLIZATION EstimafecIl.ltIITz-ation-percent ~- 0 10 no use .: 71)--r - ')0 jo (1-20) (21-40) (41::-~L~ 1-0 Gl - 600+';'1 -..100 ---+_tl:L_~_ ~_______ kC-~--+h--~- __ ----- Total No. 90 of ut 11 . __ (_61_-.§2lJ_(81_-1_00_)t---=-%~=I::::~='h=ru=-b=S::t===rf,===+ __ 7·:) f ___ I /0/:' ---J-------:'""'--!---+---=:=----f--_ al 3.3-~ 19 .A ./ '60 /8 37 I?o ,,5'"' 13 ~ II 200 " • o 2¢f:J r-I ..ESt.>:'f 2t~()tft ML~--+-_____::-+---=------------; : ..f.a n 21t} .: zro - ~rJA ------f---------++-_~_'__( .~~D()·: ~f... .,. "::l 70;: ;i!O -.--- o· 10' .3e t- A •.fr- .• tl .. 20' '. z.i.rz_ _l_Z'Jf2 51) ~WV PRU Average ut U. ISo 30 ': ~ 33. ~.~,~--~.~~~~~~-----~------~-----~--------~-------~----~~--~~~~~ ~,~.. -=_~-- =----~--~--L------L------~ -L ~ REMARKS (\Iffli\tner •ft:}'(}ij, PELLET dur Ing season 01' use, av~Uf,l,ble to animals, t+.Q"f etQ,) ~~tir ger'\ero.\I~ snow cover, browse produc- No. I 119b~Clrl 1b,v'r'.< o:u::rJ;Je , .3.6". row1d,ta» v'S' _ 2 1 4 ~ .- '7 less 1!w.a either: 5& , .. .'1(£-::':!1-2~~. --Jl .:.,..~ml.A.l.1e.--I.lfili 4('0.50; D ~ 6 I - E C S Other f i , I ,I in 9 .10 ~ Tot.als 3! .2. , ~B-P- -, z: ?'" ~- Per acre ~.9. So Fact.or13* f--:!:.L 12 13 f--~ Da~Ts/ac. 2'See instructIons; may be 15. A dot tally 01' bushes on which "old" growth may be kept f.n right -hano mar'g In . .App , 19 _ GROUP COUNTS 2- 2:9-- JttH ~ I 8 ....(.W{m \Jse....,Jime ,10~-;'()~ .I. c; JJ:liI:Tg~pe.c"a:; CCemo ,AMi:-, Putr.) ;::-t4-f~-:.J~JI I _L Plot -UC"~' A rn Oy""t Qf ro.YI~e o.v J:h~~r..tl Q n be..l 0 u.J a.'Ie '_'" Cjcn 'Mrh ~dnJ.! a."". o,bout ..!>. Ii. ;:5011;' fed \cg"fJIe. ~ was used -~ �SAMPLE ..""--1---- _ 2600 PACEDTRANSECTm;COIm - BROWSERANGECONDITION J.nagement unit-li Forest, So v th S've...C... Key area~eYld - ~v~tu:t__ or BLMDistrict Examiners ~S~';% Aerial -;----Lr./-!..---"-\ILJ/.t')w'-L.t7u.e~>'"'9'__ __ photo no. A LT - . b-·81 Date_---!o6~~'-~4~j..:::=S~7-- . 59 n~. (from map)s.~- Type identification Transect _ lo~atio~ hom hcdlL.eruLJ~;I(\ Bevzd bCL_...e ~ ;rQ.fL5ect dll/ecuoo (Describe ~ck... starting I'nterva..l paint, di bpfuleen 5 - Ce. Wle -8t~E" Type designation ction of travel, interval ,~OO' N ':]00vJ and descr. iption fu;~~: -Y(')U'):>:fd VltCIy]h between 'samples. SQ..tYlfl~ _ GROUND COVERDATA Item Bare- ground =nd e ros .pave. Rock Mess LUter Grasses '''orbs Gr.& Fa. s12ecies tally Dot tally transect hits No. Times of "area hits factor" Ground cover /Lq(.Bl.P31Bl IXJ .- 50 7ef S9 " 2 00" /224- ..? / L8t~:~ {8'J' % 2 3 - 1/ " " // Browse density estimates No. Density 1 2-3 1/ 100% minus browse density ,,2/ /9 9 5 6 7 2.9 // 22 8 2S ,29 /(, 9 10 Tot. 2. 2.=3 Ave. /?:z area -22 = oj, Remarks on current /06 7"? ,.z 7' 2fJ ZZ Ground cover indew (Items 2-6 incl.) etc. 'I'ot a.l.s factor." Ground Cover and eros. pave. 37 2. Rock 3· Litter 4. Moss 5· Grasses 4- f<'t"·bs 6. Browse density 17 4 "other 100% - 1- Bare ground ,..:;'0 9 equals 0/ erOSion, 78 BROWSECONDITION Species .. D'sCemt ~''K' I's p,:fy- ;If A'rty- Age ClasG M y lZll ; .--, ~ I: . ;, . !SIB ID's(>t-IV Hedging .., D P-<lJ21 t.: 1 I; lL<J \)'-j" L: M ~ -*. rotals .. D Class 2 No. 3 IL\f • • !ZJ 0 L..: n 12:<1 ~. (% comp.) Z"? ) /b r 5()* // '" I; ??, r: /9 -\/:. p.()~ CONDITIONRATINGSFROMSCORECARDS -~!-~ Med. Low ._-_ .._- H2-2600-h 1/61 Soil Browse Composition ----_.- V ~-,) 1)'<" ....'("J ., .I~'S:LC - '(fa ._- V J Browse DenSity Browse Vigor J v '-. - I\pp. 20 22--'---. ~.o --<'~eoV'(1 de / �2600 KEY :J.fm"'·~~~~ent unit AREA No.' 7·- -.So(,.fIfi~>L__ e ('__ SUMl'-tARy Key a.rea--.BiS Dee r:- C,o.tt(e.... ~JS~1rlby Bend (kinds of big game and livestock) Condition. Ratingn ~------.-------------1--- Year rated 1~59_ - Compositi.on. Herbaceous F .C) Condition H M L Trend* ~ ~ ~ *1f ratin g s have been made on different . otherwise estimate y ears (,) Utilization Key Species Transect No. Growth Index Ce~o uen . ~ ,, "* 1"'ro.l\ sC<.f wett 19'0 • K , It 3] 3a 70 :b5 42 Sf> 78 g" 2.8 16 ~ Deer -+ in rat in gs, 19_ '''' STI Iga 38 +3 o..bo,,~ VSU 0.1 ""*-";",r~,. r'o, "~Q..' ., f'.s t1d I'n 1/,' ",.. ~ I••• \'~l .- 19~O 19~1 X- - X J X- I Z'- 2.3 Z8 31- • ,s4' ri ,S 7 c 1 X F F= 19_ - )C. ~; 19~ , -c() ~f'tp rr:d"'~'j• 19~t Days Use Per Acre (from pellet group counts) Animal ,a ~ 132 33 '- A ,-rr' X Soil 1[J_ rend from d :J.fferences 3 - l3s 130 AME. Pur,... 1959 ------- I -7 determIlli! trend. . '-- Ve~~ation Browse Dens it Vi80r l-r--' I 19_ 19_ ~ - .. I Elk Other c 3 14 Other R2-26oo-5 1/61 table- Note: Sp ace 1s Provided in each for r'at In g s on I transects. If t rsnsects are numbered, enter the number at top of b1~K; condit.ion sym.bol, per-cen+age figures, et c . , a.t bottOOl of block. If tran{,ect is extensive (not n -:ibe red ] , enter "X'I in place of number , AV? 21 � https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/a252f4def927e08263bc7be5b8227305.pdf f4ce3c8b67d97857b1ff0c108cd8f2a6 PDF Text Text -1- October, 1962 JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO ---------------------------------- Project No. Work Plan W-88-R-7 ------------~----------------1 --------------------------------- Title of Job. Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 1 ------------------------------------ Waterfowl Production Surveys. Per Lod Covered : May, 1961. Personnel: Mitchell G. Sheldon and Jack R. Grieb. The 1961 breeding-pair surveys were conducted within the period May 5 to May 29. During this time, ground counts were made in the Yampa Valley and Brown's Park; and aerial counts were conducted in the South Platte, Cache la Poudre, and San Luis Valleys, and North Park. As for the past several years, intensive brood surveys were not conducted this year due to a lack of time. Thus, this final breeding ground report considered only the breeding-pair surveys with last minute notes on weather and water conditions, accompanied by gross observations of early nesting success in the breeding areas. Methods.-- All survey methods and sample areas remained the same as in the past years, with the exception of aerial transects in the San Luis Valley and the type of airplane used. In 1961 one observer was again in the San Luis Valley, while the North Park transects were flown with two observers. A. De Haviland Beaver airplane was used for all flights. Weather and Water Conditions.-- Weather and water conditions in Colorado during the spring and early summer were considered to be good for waterfowl nesting and production. In general, water levels in eastern Colorado were well above average while in the rest of the State conditions were about the same as last year and below average. This was due to above normal precipitation on the eastern slope and a "dry" winter in North Park and the west slope. The snow pack in the high country appears to be near or below normal indicating short water supply for mid-summer. Personnel cooperating on the 1961 counts were: Charles Hayes, Jack Frost, and Ray Buller, U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife; Don Smith, Utah Game and Fish Department; Sam Clifford, Jack Grieb and Mitchell Sheldon, Colorado Game and Fish Department. �-2- The writers believe, however, that the overall weather and water conditions in Colorado were and are favorable for waterfowl production and brood rearing this year. Results.~ Examination of the duck breeding-pair estimates by area reveal the 1961 counts were up 15·1 per cent from 1960, and 64.4 per, cent above the sevenyear average, (Table 1). This, possibly, was due to past and present drought conditions in the northern breeding grounds. Table 1. - Summary of Colorado Duck Breeding Ground Conditions, 1961 with 1960 and the Seven-year Average for Comparison. Total Estimated Breeding Pairs 7-year A.rea average San Luis Valley North Park South Platte Valley Cache la Poudre Valley Yampa Valley Brown1s Park Total 7,508 3,872 2,141 1,543 2,706 121 1960* 196i*-- == 15.,567 10,759 4,856 5,101 1,762 2,999 96 25 573 3y722 4,849 2,,295 2,875 117 29.425 * Includes gadwall and shoveller found on South Platte and Cache la Poudre areasj not known to nest here but migrate so late that they are not counted in other areas. Comparison of individual breeding ground estimates between 1961 and 1960, showed the San Luis Valley, Cache la Poudre Valley and Brown s Park above last year, while Brown1s Park and North Park were the only areas below the seven~year average. This was believed to be caused by drought and drainage in Brown1s Park and a late, dry spring following an open winter in North Park. The Yampa and South Platte River Valleys probably decreased because of the additional water areas created by' spring storms and an abundance of wetland areas spreading the breeding-pairs into unsampled areas. Both areas were well above the seven-year average indicating good breeding popUlations. All reservoirs in eastern Colorado were filled to near capacity even at this late date. I Goose breeding conditions showed a slight decrease in 1961 over 1960 and a sati.sfactory increase over the five-year average, (Table 2). However, the Green River population was down from 1960 and the five-year average because all lakes and sloughs were completely dry in that area. The upward trend was encouraging as it reflected the success of the hunting restriction and protection program initiat,ed for the Great Basin Canada Goose in parts of the Central and Pacific flyways. The closed season and reduced bag have reduced the kill of breeding and maturing subadult birds of this flock. However, populations are still critical and there appears to be a need for continued hunting restrictions. �-3Table 2.--Comparison of Colorado Goose Breeding Ground Surveys - 1961; 1960 and Five-year Average. Total Observed Breeding-pairs Nesting Total Nesting Total Nestings Total Area pairs Young birds pairs Young birds pairs Young birds Yampa R. 14 18 208 87 24 94 33 74 201 Green R. 26 2 8 44 7 47 59 7 7 TOTAL 21 146 20 101 82 245 59 31 255 * Data gathered from one float trip in 1960 and 1961 instead of several float trips made in past years. Species composition of the breeding duck population was similar to past years, (Table 3). Mallards made up the bulk of the breeding birds (55.3) but decreased to below 1960 and the seven-year average. Any changes may in part have been due to the late spring and varying water conditions around the State, and a dispersal into new wetland areas as indicated by the South Platte, Cache la Poudre and Yampa Valley study areas. Table 3.--Species Composition of the Colorado Breeding Population 1961; 1960 and Seven-year average. Number of Ducks Species Composition - Per cent 7 7 Year 1960* 1961* Year 1960 1961 Mallard 11136 16213 16186 62.1 63.4 55·3 Blue-w. teal 1084 6.1 1564 5.4 987 3·7 Pintail 2291 1332 2237 7·2 9·0 7·6 Gadwall 2288 1494 4187 8.9 8·3 14·3 1.1 1.7 Baldpate 289 236 321 0·9 Shoveller 620 4.6 1360 3.8 965 3·4 1.6 Cinnamon teal 621 666 2.6 471 3·7 1.8 Green-w teal 4.4 1296 451 398 2·3 Redhead 2.1 576 549 943 3·2 3·2 1.6 Scaup 282 210 0.8 2.8 835 Ruddy duck 44 220 0.2 0.8 45 0·3 Bufflehead 2 T Canvasback 0.1 0.2 19 75 American merganser 120 111 0.4 0.4 96 0·7 100.0 TOTAL 100.0 100.0 17942 25573 29326 *Includes gadwall and shoveller observed in South Platte and Cache la Poudre areas, not known to nest here but migrate so late would not be counted in other areas. Species �-4Fall Flight Prediction.- - Considering the varying water and weather conditions and the increased breeding population it is believed the fall duck flights from Colorado's production will be well above average. Geese still present a critical, although improving picture and indicate a definite need for continued hunting restrictions for the breeding flock in northwest Colorado. Prepared by: Mitchell G. Sheldon Pate: oc tober , 1962 ------~---------------------- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant pirector, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �-5- October, 1962 JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO --------~~~~-------------- Project No. Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations w-88-R-7 ----------~~~---------------- Work Plan No. 1 ------------------------------ Job No. 2 ----------~----------------- Title of Job: Trapping and Banding Ducks and Geese. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. Personnel: Ken Baer, Bob Ballou, Harry Crandall, Charles Hayes, Roe Meyer, Jack Frost, and Mitchell Sheldon, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife; Elvy Wagner, Pat Zimmermann, Art Gresh, John Pogorelz, Lloyd Hazzard, Dick Hopper, Eugene Green, Howard Funk, Bob Kitzmiller, William Rutherford, and Jack Grieb, Colorado Game and Fish Department. Introduction: This report summarizes the banding activities of Project w-88-R-7 for the segment year April 1, 1961 to April 1, 1962. Since the analysis of band recoveries will be done under another job (Work Plan 1, Job 3), little interpretation will be made of these data. The report will be limited to a factual description of number and location of birds banded, with comments on goose weight data collected at Two Buttes and Nee Noshe Reservoirs. Objectives: (1) To trap and band ducks and geese for the purpose of obtaining migration and life history information. (2) To trap the Great Basin Canada Goose as a means of securing brood stock for transplanting suitable nesting areas throughout the State for the purpose of enlarging the breeding range of this species in Colorado. Scope: North Park (Jackson County); the Cache la Poudre-South Platte Valley (Larimer, Weld and other counties); Two Buttes Reservoir(Baca County; and Nee Noshe Reservoir (Kiowa County). Techniques Used: Banding activities have been roughly divided into two phases-summer and winter banding. Summer banding was done on the breeding grounds and emphasized the banding of young ducks, and adults which bred and nested in the vicinity of the banding sites. Winter banding was confined to the Arkansas Valley wintering goose flock in southeastern Colorado, and was carried out specifically at Two Buttes and Nee Noshe Reservoirs. Ducks caught along with catches of Canada Geese at these sites were also banded. Three methods were used to trap and band ducks and geese during 1961-196·2 Drive trapping with (1) the Hawkins type trap and (2) the corral type trap was used during summer duck banding; and (3) the canon net trap was used for winter trapping of geese. ��-7- TRAPPING AND BANDING DUCKS AND GEESE William H. Rutherford Table 1 list.sthe number of ducks banded by species and location. A total of 2,437 ducks were banded during Segment 7. Summer banding in North Park and the South Platte Valley accounted for 2,182 ducks, and an additional 255 were banded incidental to the winter goose banding program in the Arkansas Valley. Table 1 -- Number of Ducks Banded by Species and Location, 1961-1962. Species Mallard Gadwall Baldpate Green-winged t.eal Cinnamon or Blue-winged teal Shoveller Pintail Redhead Canvasback Les ser Scaup Ring-necked Duck Merganser American Coot Ruddy Duck TOTALS Total by Species South Platte Valley Two Buttes 121 17 176 305 19 244 5 384 22 189 308 202 148 350 4 1 5 703 284 987 8 3 4 1 North Park 5 2 11 9 3 4 6 6 14 153 14 154 1 2 2 1,715 464 255 2,437 Table 2 pre,sents information on the number of Canada geese banded by location. A total of 944 geese were banded during 1961-62. This total includes 94 Great Basin Canada geese banded in the Poudre Valley which were raised by captive flocks or artificially hatched from wild eggs. These were released as goslings to supplement previous releases made to investigate the re-establishmentof wild bre:eding flocks. �-8Table 2--Number of Canada Geese Banded by Location, 1961-1962. Location Poudre Valley (goslings from captive flock and incubated eggs) Number banded Two Buttes Reservoir (cannon net trap) 732 Nee Noshe Reservoir (cannon net trap) 118 TOTAL 9 Remarks Experimental plant at Terry Lake, Larimer County, Colorado July, 1961. Released immediately after banding. November, December, and January, 1961-1962. Released immediately after banding. January and February, 1962. All geese captured at Two Buttes and Nee Noshe Reservoirs were again weighed, aged, sexed, and fluoroscoped. The purpose of this four-fold operation has been repeatedly reported in past years, and only this year's results will be presented here. During the 1961-62 winter banding program, weather conditions forced a drastic departure from the schedule which had been set up, with the result that many more trapping operations, each netting fewer geese, were conducted than was the case the preceding year. A total of 732 geese were banded at Two Buttes after capture with the cannon net set baited with milo maize. These were to investigate the age-sex ratio, the weight-condition ratio, and the body shot incidence periodically throughout the hunting season, and following the hunting season. A total of 118 geese were banded at Nee Noshe Reservoir after capture with the cannon net set unbaited but with live decoys, following the hunting season. This phase of the investigation was conducted to determine whether any difference in body shot incidence occurred between geese attracted to the net by bait and geese attracted by live decoys. The results will be reported under Work Plan 1, Job 10, rather than in this report. The Arkansas Valley goose flock appeared to again consist of about 90 per cent Lesser Canada geese, with the remaining 10 per cent composed of the large and little Canada geese, plus a few snow geese, in aggregate. Results of the 1961-62 weighing study at Two Buttes and Nee Noshe Reservoirs are presented in Table 3, and compared with past years' data: �-9Table 3 -- Average Weight of Geese from Arkansas Valley Flock, 1957-1962. Year Number of Birds Weighed Average Weight, Pounds 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 527 521 516 440 1,895 5.88 5.45 5.54 5·32 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE . • . • • • • . • • • . • 1962 974 5.62 The 1962 average weight was higher than any of the averages for the preceding three years, and the same as the over-all average for the preceding five years. The reasons for the variations are not fully understood, but are believed to be caused by factors other than available food, weather conditions, or hunter harassment affecting the birds' opportunity t.ofeed. The following factors have been considered in the past, and are repeated here: 1. Change in sub-species composition of the flock could greatly influence the weight comparisons. For example, if a greater number of little geese are present in the trapped sample, the average weight will be loweredj and the converse is true if there is an influx of the large geese. Age and .sex ratio changes may affect average weights between years. An increase of birds-of-the-year and an increase of the smaller females could cause considerable difference in the weight comparisons. 2. 3. An increase of wounded geese in the trapped sample could also lower the yearly average weight comparisons. However, it is known that the geese handled during trapping operations have been mostly in fair to good body condition. 4. It was indicat.ed that a trapped sample might not be a good indication of the age-sex composition of the wintering flock in the Arkansas Valley. A skewed sample could have been obtained by capturing a large number of sub-adult (yearling, two year old, or three year old) geese. These non-breeders are known to be gregarious and tend to congregate in large gaggles. This could also affect the annual average weight comparisons. Considering all these factors, it remains impossible to explain the varying, and.for the most part, declining, weight trend at the present time. It is believed to be a combination of all of these factors plus some still unknown, rather than anyone factor. Prepared by: William H. Rutherford Senior Game Biologist Date Approved by: October, 1962 --------~~----~~~---------------- Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director ,Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��-11- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO Project No. ~W_-~88_-~R~-~7 Work Plan No. _ Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations ~3~ Job No. 1 _ ------------~------------------- Title of Job: Analysis of Waterfowl Banding Data. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. To analyze the large quantity of data obtained from banding ducks Objectives: and geese in Colorado, and to make this information available for use in Management. Techniques Used: As given in previous quarterly reports. Findings: This is a negative report. this job during this segment. No work has been accomplished under Nothing can be done until the banding office of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife supplies us( with a duplicate deck of IBM cards of waterfowl recoveries for analysis purposes. A re- quest for such a deck has been submitted but no results have accrued. It is anticipated that further correspondence will take place between the Bureau and this Department in the immediate future which may result in some action on this matter. Prepared by: Date: Jack R. Grieb Leader, Waterfowl Project Approved by: October, 1962 --------~~~~~~~--------------- Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director,Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��-13- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO --------~~~~~---------------- Project No. ~w~-~8_8~-R~-_7~ Work Plan No. Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations _ 4 Job No.--------------------------------1 ------~~--------------- Title of Job: Waterfowl Migration Studies. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. Objectives: To determine the movement of waterfowl species into and through various portions of Colorado during fall migration as an aid to: (1) Gather information for use in determining the best hunting season dates to choose for each area. (2) Gain data for use in regulating future kill by species if this should be necessary. (3) Better interpret the results of waterfowl kill surveys, and thus the effect of the regulations on the kill for each area. Techniques Used: Findings: segment. As given in previous quarterly reports. This is a negative report. This job was inactive in this work Some information relating to Canada goose migration was obtained in the Arkansas Valley goose study, and will be reported as a part of that study. Approved by: Prepared by:__~J~a~c~k~R~.~G~r~i~e~b~~~~----~ Leader, Waterfowl Project Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director,Research Date: __________ Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator October,L-~1962 ~~ _ ��October, 1962 -15- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO ---------~~~~------------------Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Project No. w-88-R-7 ------~--~~--------------Work Plan No. 1 -----~~--------------------- Title of Job: Waterfowl Kill Survey. Period Covered: Job No. ~5 _ November and December, 1961. ABSTRACT Results of the 1961 random survey of waterfowl hunters reveals that of the 24,854 Colorado duck stamp buyers, 22, 920 hunted ducks bagging an estimated 86,408, and crippling an additional 23,608 for a total hunting loss of 110,016 ducks. The average season duck bag per hunter was 3.8 birds, and mallards accounted for more than 79 per cent of the harvest. Duck kill estimates by county reveal that the eastern slope accounted for about 87 per cent of the total state harvest as in the past. Weld was the high duck kill county. Combination of fewer hunters, shorter season, and small bag limit resulted in the smallest waterfowl harvest since the beginning of the survey in 1954. For geese, an estimated 11,245 hunters bagged an average of 1.25 geese during the season for a total estimated harvest of 14,056 birds. In addition, another 4,568 birds were reported wounded for a loss of 24.5 per cent, and a total hunting mortality of 18,624 geese. The Southeast again accounted for about 90 per cent of the total harvest with Kiowa, Baca, Prowers, and Bent having the high harvest in that order. Fewer hunters and a small increase in average bag resulted in a harvest comparable to last year. ��.... 17- WATERFOWL KILL SURVEY Jack R. Grieb Techniques were the same as those used in the past, with randomly selected hunters notified immediately preceding the season, and a sample questionnaire included t.o show the questions that would be asked. Af'ter the season, the hunters were contacted a second time and requested to fill out and return the .questionnaire. One follow-up letter was sent to all non-reporting hunters after an interval of about two weeks, and the sample was concluded when the response to this follow-up had dropped off. Questionnaires were sent to 10,000 randomly selected license buyers in 1961, and a total of 7,162 responded for a return of 71.6 per cent. Of the 7,162 returns, 1,703 reported that they had not purchased a license, 3,525 reported hunting, and 1,934 bought a license but did not hunt. Most .of the hunters in this last category were found to have purchased a combination hunting and fishing license which was used for fishing only. Thus, of tbe total license sales of 179,303 during 1961, it .is estimated that 117,735 hunters, hunted one or more species of small game. Waterfowl Harvest Colorado duck stamp sales are plotted in Table 1 revealing that the 1961 sales of 24,854 were the lowest in the last seven years. This decrease is attributed to adverse advance publicity which stressed the low supply of ducks and forecasted a poor hunt.ing season; and, the short duck hunting season (30 days). Table l.--Duck Stamp Sales for Colorado Year Number of Stamps Sold Per cent change from previous year 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 24,854 30,592 31,431 41,897 41,794 36,303 39,107 32,450 -18.8 - 2·7 -24.9 + .02 +15·1 - 7·2 +20.5 Table 2 classifies Duck Stamp buyers by the type of hunting in which they engaged for the past eight years. Thus, it appears that number of duck and goose hunters were down significantly (20+%) from 1960. This is also true of mean days hunted which is undoubtedly a direct reflection of the drastic reduction in season length. �•.. 18- Table 2.--Estimated Number of Duck and Goose Hunters, Average Number of Days Hunted and Season Lengthz by Year. Number of Number of Average number Beaaon length Bag and Year duck hunters goose hunters days hunted for possession (days) ducks and geese ducks and geese limit ducks and geese 1961 4.40 2~2 22,920 11,245 60 30 3-6 1960 29,480 14,107 60 6.05 2-2 3-6 75 29,060 13,647 4-8 1959 5.670 50 2-2 75 2•.• 2 1958 60 14,705 4-8 5.78 90 38,773 60 37,166 12,057 6.52 2-2 1957 5-10 75 60 1956 12,477 2-2 34,793 5-10 75 7 ·37 5,-10 60 37,816 17,634 8.87 2-2 1955 75 31,834 12,136 7.64 60 60 1954 2-2 5-10 Duck Harvest Hunting statistics of the 1961 season are tabulated and compared with past years in Table 3. This reveals that t.otal estimated retrieved kill of 86,408 was the lowest recorded during the eight years of this survey . In addition, it was estimated that 23,608 birds were crippled for a wounding loss of 21.4. per cent permitting an estimated total hunting mortality of 110,016 ducks for 1961 in Colorado. Table 3.--Duck Harvest Statistics, 1954-1961. Year Number of Hunters Average seasonal bag Total Estimated harvest 1961 1960 1959 195?3 1957 1956 1955 1954 22,920 29,480 29,060 38,773 37,166 34,793 37,816 31,834 3.8 5.0 4.2 6.1 6.8 5·9 6~7 5.6 86,408 147,400 122,924 236,515 254~587 185,737 253,367 179,856 Wounding loss Per cent number 21.4 13·1 15·5 12·3 14.1 16.3 13·1 14.5 23,608 22,257 22,417 33,088 41,679 36,195 38,182 30,396 Total estimated hunting mortality 110,016 169,657 145,341 269,603 296,266 221,932 291" 549 210,252 Specie.s compos i,tion of the 1961 bag is listed in Table 4 and compared with the average .of the sev:enprevious years. These data indicate that total duck harvest was 56.4 per cent less thantbe seven-year average b:ecause of the short .season, reduced number of hunters, and lower average seasonal bag than the past. �-19Composition of the species in the bag definitely reflect the lateness of the season (November 22-December 21). Thus, the per cent of mallards increased in the bag while other early migrant species were drastically reduced. Note further that a considerable number of canvasback and redheads were reported taken despite a closed season on these species. It is 'beLf.eved that this represents a mistaken identity of species rather than violation of the law. Duck kill and hunting pressure by 10-day intervals of the season are tabulated in table 5. These indicate that the number of hunters was greatest during the first interval, falling off slightly during the next two intervals. Harvest followed a corresponding pathj however, average bag per interval was the same indicating the quality of hunting was similar between the three 10-day intervals. ConSidering all available information, it is obvious that there was a drastic reduction in duck harvest during the past hunting season. Reasons for this reduction have been adequately discussed previously and will not be repeated here. Species Mallard Pintail Green-winged teal Blue-winged teal Cinnamon teal Baldpate Gadwall Shoveller Canvasback Redhead Scaup Goldeneye Bufflehead Ruddy duck Ring-necked Wood duck Black duck Merganser Unknown and otter kinds Coot TOTAL Y Table 4--Species Composition of the Bag. 7-Year average 1961 1954-60 Number Per cent Per cent Number killed of total killed of total 68,436 2,074 5,876 3,888 t 605 346 259 259 173 259 259 79.2 2.4 6.8 4~5 t ·7 .4 ·3 ·3 •• 2 .3 .3 86 .1 3,888 4.5 86,408 100.0 Season closed 1960-61. Per cent change 1961 from 7-year average harvest 129,937 6,502 17,785 7,405 t 2,174 6,325 2,469 1,670 1,991 1,493 440 324 767 t t t t 65.7 3·3 9·0 3~7 1.1 3·2 1.2 .8 LO .8 •2 .2 .4 t t t t -72.2 -94.5 -89.5 18,652 t 198,119 9.4 t 100.0 -79·2 -4703 -68.1 -6700 -47.5 t Y 1/ -82.'7 -41.1. �-20Table 5.--Ducks Bagged and Hunting Pressure by 10-day Intervals of the 1961 Season. Estimated Estimated hunting Birds bagged pressure Average Dates Number of Per cent of Number of Per cent of bag by ducks total kill hunters total hunters periods Nov. 22•.. Dec. 1 36,984 42.8 44.8 3.6 Dec.. 2~Dec. 11 25,836 29.9 3.4 33·0 Dec. 12-Dec.21 23,588 27;3 29·7 3.5 Goose Harvest Hunting statistics of the goose season presented in Table 6 .est Lmat.es 11,245 (9,991 resident and 1,254 non-resident) bagged an average of 1.25 geese during the season for a total estirrated harvest of 14,056 birds. In addition, another 4,568 birds were reported wounded but not retrieved for a wounding loss of 24.5 per cent. This permits a total hunting mortality estimate for Colorado during 1961 of 18,624 geese. Table 6--Goose Harvest Statistics, 1954-1961. Number Average Total of seasonal estimated Wounding loss hunters Year bag harvest per cent number 1.25 1961 11,245 14,056 24.5 4,568 1.11 1960 14,107 15,659 4,087 20·7 1.61 13,647 17.8 21,972 1959 4,730 1.34 1958 14,705 19,704 22·3 5,655 1.21 12,057 14,589 1957 4,473 23·5 21.6 ll,541 11,310 1956 3,116 ·98 1.02 17,364 17,711 3,884 1955 18·3 12,136 8,168 22.8 .67 1954 2,410 Seven-year average goose harvest is 15,587 1954-1960 Total Estimated hunting mortality 18,624 19,746 26,702 25,359 19,062 14,426 21,248 10,578 Species composition of geese killed was similar between all eight years of the survey being 90 per cent or above Canada geese. The remaining percentages were \lotherand unknown" species of geese, and were probably Canada geese which the hunters were not able to correctly identify. The 1961 goose hunting season was characterized by excellent water and food conditions in the Arkansas Valley during the fall and winter periods. Census figures taken at weekly intervals in the Arkansas Valley Lnd.Lca bed a normal number of'geese present in Colorado during the season. However, the birds seemed to he distributed on all water bodies rather than concentrating in the Two Buttes as in the past. This was particularly true of the Eads Lakes which carried the bulk of the birds during the latter part of the hunting season, and the remainder of the winter. Comparison of the 1961 season with past years shows a small decTease in number of hunters and total harvest. Average seasonal bag increased slightly from the previous year, indicating that while numbers of hunters and harvest declined, there was not a decline in the quality of hunting. �... 21 ... Table 7.--Duck Kill bl Region and Countl' Estimated 1961 .1:2.61Duck Kill hlIDting 2ressure Waterfowl Number Per cent Number Per cent Region hunters of total killed of total and Count;y: NORTHEAST .08 Cheyenne 32 .14 69 128 .06 Kit Carson .56 52 Lincoln 6.82 Logan 1,067 4.65 5,894 Morgan 6.76 6.04 5,219 1,550 Phillips Sedgwick 227 285 .33 .99 1.66 1.55 i'fashington 1,434 355 1. 55 1.l~~ Yuma 355 12244 16.20 NORTHEAST TOTAL 14,197 16.43 3,714 SOUTHEAST Baca Bent Crowley Huerfano Kiowa Las Animas Otero Prower-s Pueblo SOUTHEAST TOTAL CENTRAL Adams Arapahoe Boulder Douglas Elbert El Paso Jefferson Larimer Weld CENTRAL TOTAL - .70 2.68 1.83 .14 .70 .56 2.54 2.82 2.68 14.65 2,2)0 4,370 4,663 1,039 2,715 1,761 2,271 6,375 4,640 30,064 1.13 2.22 2.36 .53 1.38 .89 1.15 3.23 2.35 15.24 .03 .86 1.25 6.82 26.70 51.15 1,713 484 1,809 64 32 225 355 1,291 5,360 11,333 7.47 2.11 7.89 .28 .14 .98 1. 55 5.63 23.38 49.43 10,324 1,771 10,156 107 499 1,432 1,989 15,751 35l6~0 77,669 5.23 .90 5.15 .05 .25 .73 1.01 7.99 18.07 39.38 1.58 2.80 .50 . 6.46 .82 12.23 419 387 128 744 227 1,905 1.83 1.69 .56 3.24 .99 8.31 4,716 3,039 716 5,047 5,409 18,927 2.39 1.54 .36 2.56 2.74 9.59 .78 .14 291 32 64 64 1.27 .14 2,109 694 978 1,345 5.126 1.07 .35 .50 .68 2.60 .05 1.25 1.27 69 147 1,555 1,296 1,149 6,436 .08 .17 1.80 1.50 1.33 7.45 5,124 622 7,639 5.93 .72 8.84 26 743 1,080 5,894 23,072 SAN LUIS VALLEY Alamosa 1,365 Conejos 2,419 Costilla 432 Rio Grande 5,583 Saguache 769 SAN LUIS VALLEY 10,568 TOTAL NORTHWEST Garfield 674 121 Moffat Rio Blanco 432 216 Routt NORTHWEST TOTAL 1,443 l!-1,485 .42 1.23 .98 5.04 6.74 .19 3.15 1.31 1.97 21.03 838 2,424 1,935 9,947 13,297 370 6,209 2,582 3,883 160 614 419 32 160 128 582 646 614 3,355 43 1,080 1,097 hh,200 Seven-year average 1954-1960 Number Per cent of total killed .50 .25 1.67 lr.51 .28 .28 1.97 �-22- Table 7.-- Duck Kill bX Region and CountX. Cont'd. Estimated 1961 1261 Duck Kill hunting Eressur~ Waterfowl Number Per cent Number Per cent Region hunters of total killed of total !lPd County WEST CENTRAL 1.89 1.55 Delta 1,633 355 2,229 2.82 Mesa 2.58 646 1.19 l1ontrose 1,028 .85 195 Ouray WEST CENTRAL 5.22 4,890 5.66 1,196 TOTAL SOUTHWEST Archuleta Dolores Hinsdale LaPlata .53 227 458 .99 Mineral Montezuma 227 648 .75 .99 San Juan San Miguel 1.28 1.98 SOUTHWEST TOTAL lz106 454 HIGH COUNTRY Chaffee Clear Creek Custer Eagle .58 128 50i .56 Fremont 160 458 .53 .70 Gilpin Grand Gunnison 2,298 2.66 .42 96 Jackson Lake . Park .28 .17 147 64 Pitkin .05 32 .14 43 SUItlJIl1t 121 .14 32 .14 Teller HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 3,568 4.13 512 2.24 - ------ Seven-year average 125!±-1260 Number killed Per cent of total 3,518 6,148 3,757 326 13,749 1.78 3.12 1.91 .17 6.98 226 26 26 ·2,145 188 1,129 .11 .01 .01 1.09 ~10 .57 ,201 4z041 .16 2.05 834 3 508 1,173 1,297 .42 t .26 .59 .66 290 510 301 313 445 328 80 7.4 6,156 .15 .26 .15 .16 .23 .17 .04 .04 3.13 Summary by Region NORTHEAST 14,197 SOUTHEAST 6,436 CENTRAL 44,200 SAN LUIS VALLEY 10,568 NORTrlWEST 1,443 WEST CENTRAL 4,890 SOUTHWEST 1,106 HIGH COUNTRY 32568 16.43 7.45 51.15 12.23 1.67 5.66 1.28 4.13 3,714 3,355 11,333 1,905 451 1,196 454 512 16.20 14.65 49.43 8.31 1.97 5.22 1.98 2.2!± 41,485 30,064 77,669 18,927 5,126 13,749 4,041 6z156 -----21.03 15.24 39.38 9.59 2.60 6.98 2.05 3.13 TOTAL OF REGIONS 100.00 22z220 100.00 197,217 100.00 862408 �-23Table 8.-- Goose Kill b! Region and Count!. Estimated 1961 hunting 2ressure 1961 Goose Kill Waterfowl Number Number Per cent Per cent Region hunters of total killed of total and Count;y: NORTHEAST Cheyenne Kit Carson .31 35 Lincoln Logan 66 2.13 239 .47 l10rgan 4.88 134 .95 549 Phillips Bent, Per cent of total .12 .28 .05 .78 3.11 .02 .48 .16 .96 5.96 171 102 1,096 1.52 .91 9.75 2,160 1,200 686 35 1,166 171 308 1,680 171 72577 19.21 10.67 6.10 .31 10.37 1.52 2.74 14.94 1.52 67.38 6,706 1,350 563 108 2,034 ::84 246 2,127 82 13,300 43.01 8.66 3.61 .69 13.05 .54 1.58 13.64.53 85.31 549 274 69 4.88 2.44 .61 277 46 25 1.78 .30 .16 2.60 4.73 35 69 239 686 12921 .31 .61 2.13 6.10 17.08 13 15 95 81 586 1,138 .08 .09 .61 .52 3.76 7.30 .24 .47 102 239 137 .91 2.13 1.22 23 68 3 .15 .43 .02 .71 478 4.26 94 .60 .24 .24 35 34 .31 .30 3 45 .02 .29 .48 69 .61 48 .31 232 1.65 432 3.07 2,524 1,827 1,096 17.96 13.00 7.80 Crowley Huerfano K" lWa 4,553 L~.. 3 Animas 299 Otero 66 Prowers 2,293 Pueblo 66 SOUTHEAST TOTAL 122724 CENTRAL Adams 229 Arapahoe Boulder Douglas Elbert El Paso Jefferson Larimer Weld 365 CENTRAL TOTAL 664 SAN LUIS VALLEY Alamosa Conejos 34 Costilla 66 Rio Grande Saguache SAN LUIS V. TOTAL 100 NORTHWEST Garfield 34 Moffat 34 Rio Blanco Routt NORTHWEST TOTAL 68 1954-1960 Number killed 19 44 8 122 483 3 75 25 150 929 Sedgwi.ck Washington Yuma NORTHEAST TOTAL SOUTHEAST Baca Seven-year average 32.39 2.13 .47 16.31 .47 90.53 2.13 �-24Cont'd. Table 8.-- Goose Kill bl Region and Countl' Estimated 1961 Seven-year average hunting Eressure 1261 Goose Kill Waterfowl 122!x-1260 Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Region of total of total of total hunters killed killed and Count;y: WEST CENTRAL Delta 11 .07 Mesa .06 9 Montrose 28 .31 .18 35 Ouray WEST CENTRAL TOTAL.31 !±8 .31 35 SOUTHWEST Archuleta Dolores Hinsdale La Plata .02 3 Mineral Montezuma San Juan San Miguel SOUTffirJEST TOTAL .02 HIGH COUNTRY Chaffee Clear Creek Custer 2 .01 Eagle Fremont .24 .31 .16 34 25 35 Gilpin Grand Gunnison .24 .30 34 34 Jackson Lake Park .02 3 Pitkin Summit Teller HIGH COUNTRY TOTAL 68 .48 .61 69 30 .19 I NORTHEAST 432 SOUTHEAST 12,724 CENTRAL 664 SAN LUIS VALLEY 100 NORTHWEST 68 WEST CENTRAL SOUTHWEST HIGH COUNTRY 68 TOTAL OF 12!:J:056 REGIONS Summary h;y:Region 3.07 1,096 9.75 90.53 67.38 7,577 1,921 4.73 17.08 .71 4.26 478 .48 .61 69 .31 35 .!i8 62 .61 100.0 11J2!±2 100.0 929 1,300 1,138 94 48 48 3 30 152590 5.96 85.31 7.30 .(J.) .31 .31 .02 .19 100.0 �-25- Waterfowl Rarvest by Cpunty The reader is cautioned that information presented in this section of the report i.ssubject to a great deal more error in accuracy than estimates in previous sections _,since the original sample has been broken d.ownto a county basis, thus decreasing the size of samples on which to base estimates. Thi.s i.sprobably even more true of geese than ducks, because there were many more duck hunters • Consequently, it is realized that in some counties, both duck and goose kill have been over-estimated, and in others, under-estimated. However, despite this error, these data represent the most accurate information on this subject possible at the present time. It is hop:ed to increase the accuracy of county data in the future. Tables 7 and 8 compare the 1961 duck and goose kill respectively with the average of the previous seasons, by county_,within each waterfowl region. These r-eg.i.onaI d.LvI.s Lons of the State were located on the basis of waterfowl migration, Locat.Lon, and t.opographyj and permit a closer evaluation of kill, yearly changes in killJ and.the effect of different types of hunting seasons on various portions of Colorado4 Regional recap of the 1961 duck season as summarized at the conclusion of Table '7 shows that the harvest decreased in all regions of the State compared to the seven~year average. Thus was undoubtedly a result of the short seasons and small bag limits plus the difficulty in establishing a season for any particular portion of the State which could take advantage of peak migrating duck numbers. The ea .. tern slope again contributed to the bulk of the duck harvest being about 87 per cent in 1961 which is similar to previous years. Weld was again the high harvest county. The 1961 goose harvest compared to the Seven-year average in Table 8 shows that total harvest was only slightly below the average. Also, that the Southeast Region again accounted for more than 90 per cent of the total goose bag, with Kiowa, Baca, Prowers and Bent the top harvest Counties in that ord.er.. Other regions showed similar harvest to past years with the exception of t.heCentral which decreased for reasons not clear at this time. Prepared by: Jack R. Grieb Leader, Waterfowl Date: October, 1962 Approved by: Laurence E ..Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��-27- JOB COMPLETION RESEARCH State of Project ~C~O~L~O~RAD~O~ No. Title of Job: W_a_t_e_r_f_o_w_l __S_u_r_v_e~y_s __an __d__I_n_v_e_s_t_i~g~a_t_,i_o_ __ 1 --------~------------------- Job No. 10 ----------~---------------------- Evaluation of the Reliability of the Baited Cannm Net Trapping Technique in Determining Age and Sex Ratios, and the Per Cent of Canada Geese with Embedded Shot. Covered: Personnel: SEGMENT _ W_-_8_8_-~R~-~7 Work Plan No. Period PROJECT REPORT November 15, 1961 to March 31, 1962. Those assisting in various manners were: Jack Grieb, William Rutherford, Robert Kitzmiller, Lloyd Hazzard, Mitchell Sheldon, Jack Putnam, G. N. Hunter, and Harry Maxwell. ABSTRACT Attempts were made to trap Canada geese on non-baited canon net sites near Two Buttes Reservior in Baca County, in order to compare age and sex ratios and the per cent of geese by age class carrying embedded shot with those trapped by the baited method. It was intended to trap birds on shore loafing areas away from baited areas, but foul weather restricted this method. Sets were made on nearby fields using shell and silhouette decoys with no success, as the birds would not land with the decoys in sufficient numbers to make a shot. In early February, most of the goose population left Two Buttes, probably going to the Eads Lake, 12 miles south of Eads in Kiowa County. This necessitated moving the trapping operation to the Eads area. Live geese, taken by bait trapping, were harnessed and staked out as decoys on trap sites. This proved to be a better method than using artificial decoys. A. total of 104 geese were trapped in the Eads area on live decoy sets, and 28 were captured on a baited shore set. When birds trapped with live decoys were compared to the 402 geese caught after the hunting season by the baited method at Two Buttes, age ratios showed a highly significant difference. The total post-season catch at Two Buttes consisted of 20.4 per cent young-of-the-year, while 57.7 per cent of the 104 caught by the non-baited method at Eads were young birds. Sex ratios and the percentages of geese by age class carrying embedded shot showed no significant differences between the two methods and areas. �-28Introduction: For many years, southeastern Colorado, particularly Two Buttes Reservoir in Baca County, has been a part of the prime wintering area for the Lesser Canada Goose. From 1951 through the spring of 1961, approximately 7,500 geese have been trapped, banded and released at Two Buttes Reservoir. The baited cannon net method has been employed to capture the birds during the latter years. It has been assumed that birds caught by this method have been representative of the goose population occupying the area. Thus, ratios of adult to young-of-the-year geese, sex ratios, and percentages of geese by age class (adult or young-of-the-year) carrying embedded shot as determined by fluoroscopy were used to estimate condition of the Arkansas Valley flock. Individual goose catches during each banding season and also between years, and age ratios of geese brought through checking stations at the reservoir, have varied sufficiently to cause concern for the reliability of this method. It is considered highly possible that baited trapping areas on the reservoir shore may attract crippled or wounded birds or, in general, groups of birds of age or sex classes which are nonrepresentative of the total population present in the area at the time each shot is made. This would definitely bias estimates of flock condition. During the 1961-62 trapping season, an attempt was made to trap geese without the aid of bait grain to compare with bait-trapping and check station data collected during the same period. Recommendations: It is recommended that the project be continued into the next segment. The baited and non-baited trapping programs should be started at Two Buttes Reservoir early in November and extend sufficiently into the post-hunting season period to collect continuous data on wintering birds. 2. Live decoys should be used for field sets supplemented cases by shell decoys. possible in some 3· Attempts should be made, when possible, to trap loafing geese on the shore of the reservoir. 4. A~ter the hunting season, if time and conditions allow, attempts to capture more geese in the Eads Lakes area should be made on both baited and non-baited sites. Objectives: The main objectives to be obtained from the study are as follows: (1) To determine reliability of the baited cannon net trapping technique in estimating ?ge and sex ratios of the population and per cent of geese with embedded shot. (2) To determine whether age and sex ratios of the population hunting season progresses. change as the �-29- (3) '1'0determine change in per cent of birds with shot between hunting and post-season trapping periods. (4) To determine the differences in age, sex, and number of birds with shot between catches made on baited and non -baited areas. Techniques Used: Trapping Season The original plan was to being non-baited trapping along with the baited program in early November as soon as wintering birds were present in the Two Buttes Reservoir area. Both methods were to have been continued throughout the hunting season, to obtain pre-season, hunting season, and post-hunt.ing season data comparisons. The non-baited trapping program was not started until December 16 due to inability of the writer to get away from his studies at Colorado State University during the fall quarter. The program was continued until early March. Equipment One 75 by 40 foot cotton, and one 75 by 50 foot nylon net were used in the trapping effort. Three Dill type cannons were used on each net. At first, about 25 home-made shell decoys were used, which proved to be shiny and unsatisfactory. Other artificial lures used on various sets were three dozen G and H shell decoys, a dozen over-size Carry-lite shell decoys and about 150 homemade plywood silhouetts. When these also proved to be unsuccessful, live geese taken from the bait trapping program were staked on short, light chains at the trap sites and used as decoys. A. 20 power spotting scope was used to observe the trap sites from a firing point. Trapped geese were transported by pickup truck with a tarpaulin-covered bed from trap sites to holding pens at the field headquarters. Fluoroscopy was employed for inspection of birds for embedded shot. Description of Trapping Areas Topography in the Two Buttes Reservoir area is quite flat. Many large winter wheat fields are present with some interspersed milo and corn fields. Wheat fields were used to the greatest extent by geese; however, considerable use was made of milo, especially during cold weather. During much of the hunting season, trapping attempts were made in a wheat fi.eld adjacent to Tw·oButtes Reservoir and closed to hunting. Also enclosed in this area was a field of milo left standing for feed. Post-hunting season trapping was conducted south and each of the reservoir in a corn stubble-field, a winter wheat field, and a bare listed field. �-30Trapping was also carried on in the Eads lakes area in Kiowa County. land in this grea is fairly rolling with winter wheat again the major crop grown. Most sets were made in wheat fields located between Nee Noshe Reservoir and Queen's Reservoir, and one set was placed in the middle of a corn stubble-field. Trapping Methods Attempts were made by waterfowl project personnel to trap geese on loafing areas away from the baited site on the shore of Two Buttes Reservoir during the early season. These were unsuccessful, due mainly to inclement weather and the freezing of the major portion of the lake. Thus, it was decided to try using field sets with decoys. Nets were set in fields in which geese were known to have been feeding for several days. In winter wheat fields, the nets were sometimes covered with waxed paper and a light layer of dirt, or dirt alone. Nets, set in stubblefields or at the edges of wheat fields, were concealed with available litter. Cannons were dug into the ground and covered with a sack and dirt, leaving only the muzzle exposed. Stakes were driven into the ground at the corners of the area the net would cover when firedJ to hold the net in place as it covered the birds. A thist.lewas usually hung on these stakes to aid in determining from tre firing point whether lured geese were within the area of net cast . Artificial decoys were arranged in various manners. At .times they were set around the net .site, thus forming a pocket in the area the net would cover when fired. Sometimes they were set behind the net orin front to try to determine whether the geese would land in front of or behind the decoys. In all cases, decoys were set facing .into the wind to simulate a feeding flock. A.sthe program continued, it was found that artificial decoys would not attract geese into the area which would be covered by the extended net. The birds would decoy to the trap area, set their wings, and begin to alight but would not land with the decoys in sufficient numbers to make a shot. It was noted that once a nucleus of wild birds had landed in a field, the flocks that followed would readily land with them, paying little or not attention to the decoy set. Attempts to move these geese toward the net area were futile. Activity, such as cars stopping on the road near a feeding flock, especially during hunting season, would often cause the birds to leave a field or at least move away from the disturbance. The best alternative to improve the attraction of geese to the trap site seemed to be live decoys selected from birds captured in bait trapping activities. These birds were harnessed and staked out at field headquart.ers for not less than two days to accustom them to their confinement before being used at the trap sites. When in use, the decoys birds were staked close to the concealed net in the area the net would cover and spaced sufficiently. �"'31- apart so the chain on each bird would not tangle with another. Eight to twelve live decoys were usually used on a set. New birds were substituted for t.hose in use when there was evidence of worn feathers, especially primaries, or excessive loss of weight. Trapping attempts were continued in most types of weather, excluding rainy days which made conditions sloppy; also, most windy days, .especially in relatively unprotected trapping areas where the extension of the net would be seriously affected. Cold, stormy days, however, seemed to he the best for live decoy trapping. One baited set was made on the shore of Nee Noshe Reservoir in February. The set was concealed by interweaving dry grass into the folded netJ and over the partially buried cannons. Much of the shore area was not suited for bait trapping. One baited area was maintained during the winter at Two Buttes, the net being set whenever geese used the bait in sufficient numbers to make a shot. Collection of Data When a shot was made on a baited or non-baited set, the birds were quickly removed from the net, taken to headquarters, and released into covered pens. AJ3 soon as possible, the geese were banded and weighed. Sex was d.etermined by cloacal examination and birds were aged by the notched tail-feather method, supplemented by cloacal examination. Birds were fluoroscoped to determine number of shot, if any, embedded in the body tissue. Relati.ve condition of the birds was also noted. The birds were released as a group immediately after all pertinent data were collected. Analysis Methods Sex and age ratios and the per cent of geese by age class carrying embedded shot were the primary characteristics for which the Two Buttes and Eads Lakes samples were analyzed. Sample sizes needed for the two trapping methods to be within 5 per cent of the true values of the above categories with 95 per cent confidence were computed by a method described by Cochran (1953). This method was also used to determine the per cent of the true values these characteristics were for the existing sample sizes. Chi-square contingency tables, similar to those described by Snedecor (1956), were employed to determine relationships of geese trapped on baited and non-baited areas with respect to age, sex, and the per cent of adults and young carrying shot. ��-33- EVALUATION OF THE RELIABILITY OF THE BAITED CANNON NET TRAPPING TECHNIQUE IN DETERMINING AGE AND SEX RATIOS, AND THE PER CENT OF CANADA. GEESE WITH EMBEDDED SHOT. Howard D. Funk A. fairly large population of geese was present in the Two Buttes area from early winter until late January. Baited trapping efforts on the shore of the reservoir proved successful during this period. By early February, most of the birds left the area, many probably relocated at the Eads Lakes with geese which had been present there most of the winter. This necessitated moving the trapping program to that area near Nee Noshe and Queen's Reservoirs. The use of live decoys at this time proved to be a better method than using artificial lures on nonbaited sites. A total of 104 geese were trapped by the non-baited method and 28 were captured on a baited set in the Eads Lakes area. At Two Buttes, 402 geese were trapped on a baited shore site after the close of the hunting season. Comparison of age and sex compositions of the sample captured by the baited and non -baited methods in the two areas are tabulated in Table 1. It can be readily seen that the greatest difference is in age ratios between the two trapping methods, 20.4 per cent being youngof-the-year birds at Two Buttes and 57.7 per cent young birds in the Eads Lakes sample. The age ratio of repeats trapped on the Two Buttes baited sit.eduring the 1961-1962 season was also highly in favor of adults, only one out of eleven being a young bird. �Table l.--Age and Sex Composition of Post-hunting Season Baited and Non-baited Trapping Samples of Canada Geese at Two Buttes and Eads Lakes Area. Two Buttes Reservoir Baited Number Total Per Captured Captured Cent By Sex By Age Adult Males 176 320 79·9 Females Young of Year Males 82 Females Total Males Eads Lakes Area Baited Per Cent Y Per Cent 5500 18 144 45.0 42 51.2 10 2004 40 48.8 218 54.. 2 Number Captured By Sex Per Cent 10 55.6 44 64.3 35·7 8 44.0 6 60.0 60 4 40.0 16 57·1 28 402 Females Total Captured By Age 184 45.8 Sex of one young bird was not determined. Total Captured By Age 12 42·9 Non-Baited Number Per Captured Cent By Sex Per Cent 24 5405 20 4505 34 Y 57.6 42.3 57·7 I VJ 25 4204 58 56.3 45 43·7 104 -F" 1 �-35- Comparison of age classes of geese captured on baited and non-baited areas at Two Buttes and Eads is shown in Table 2. A standard statistical method (see Analysis Methods) showed that the sample size of 402 birds at Two Buttes was ample, only 260 being needed, and within four per cent of the true value with 95 per cent confidence. However, the sample of 104 birds caught on non-baited areas was calculated to be within only about 10 per cent of the true value with 95 per cent confidence, about 390 birds needed to be within 5 per cent. A highly significant differencE in age ratios of birds trapped by the two methods was calculated for the sample sizes obtained (chi-square equals 57·27, 2 a.r .). Table 2. --Comparison of Age Classes in Baited and Non-baited Samples of Canada Geese at Two Buttes Reservoir and the Eads Lakes During the Post-hunting Season. Location Method Two Buttes Eads Lakes Eads Lakes Baited Baited Non-baited Total Geese Captured 402 28 104 Chi-square Probability ** Denotes a highly significant difference. Young-of-the-year Number Per cent 82 10 60 20.4 35·7 57·7 less than 57·27** 0.005 Looking back at Table 1, it can be seen that sex ratios between samples obtained by the two trapping methods were very similar and in all cases were slightly in favor of males. The zone of greatest variation was in the young-of-the-year class which is tabulated in Table 3. At two Buttes, 48.8 per cent were females, wh.LLe 40 per cent were females in the small baited sample at the Eads Lakes, and 42.2 per cent were females in the Eads Lakes non-baited sample. However, analysis of these data show no s.ignificant difference (chi-square equals 0.77, 2 d.f .). This indicates that there is probably no difference in sex ratios of young or adult birds in the samples. �-36- Table 3.--Comp/3.risonof Sex Classes of Young-of-the-year Baited and Non-baited Samples of Canada Geese at the Two Buttes Reservoir and Eads Lakes Area During the Post-hunting Season. Location Two Buttes Eads Lakes Eads Lakes Method Baited Baited Non-baited Young-of-the,...yearNumber of Captured Females Captured 82 40 10 4 59 25 y Chi-square Probability Y Per Cent 48.8 4000 42.4 0077 0.69 One more wascaptlired but sex was not determined. The next category analyzed was the percentage of adult and young geese carrying embedded shot in their bodies. Table 4 shows the relationship between samples of adult geese taken on the two areas by baited and nonbaited methods. Calculations made for the baited Two Buttes samples and the non-baited Eads Lakes sample show that approximat.ely 390 birds are needed in each area to be within 5 per cent of the true number of adults carrying shot with 95 per cent confidence. The former sample of 319 adults is calculated to be close to the true number, the actual value being within 5.5 per cent of the true number. The Eads sample is within only about 15 per cent of the true number with 95 per cent confidence. Variation between percentages of adults carrying shot in the two areas by each trapping method is small and not Significant (chi-square equals 0.01, 2d.f.). Table 4.--Comparison of Adult Canada Geese Carrying Embedded Shot on Baited and Non-baited Areas at Two Buttes and Eads Lakes During Post-hunting Season" Location Two Buttes Eads Lakes Eads Lakes Chi-square Probability Method Baited Baited Non-baited Total Adults Captured 319 18 44 Adults Carrying Shot Number Per Cent 185 12 27 0.01 0·99 Similar calculations were made for young-of-the-year birds captured on baited and non-baited methods in the two areas (Table 5). Analysis shows that 360 and 325 young birds were needed in the Two Buttes and Eads areas, respectively, instead of 82 and 60 birds, in order to be �-37- 95 per cent confident that the percentages of young in the sample carrying shot can be assumed w·ithin 5 per cent of the true number. The Tw·oButtes sample of young carrying shot was calculated to be within 10.5 per cent of the true number with 95 per cent confidence, while the Eads sample is within approximately 12 per cent of the true number with 95 per cent confidence. Percentages of young carrying shot between areas and methods, like the adults ,show no significant difference (chi-square equals 0.74, 2 d.f.). Table.--Comparison of Young - of - the - year Canada Geese Carrying Embedded Shot on Baited and NonBaited Areas at Two Buttes and Eads Lakes During Post-hunting Season. Location Two Buttes Eads Lakes Eads Lakes Method Baited Baited Non-baited Total Young Captured Young Carrying Shot Per cent Number 82 28 34.1 10 60 4 40.0 17 28.3 Chi-square Probability Conclusions: It has been shown that cannon net sets in fields using live decoys can be successful in trapping geese. Artificial decoys work well to lure a flock to a field but do not present a natural enough appearance to lure the birds onto the trapsite proper. It seems that wild geese will decoy to, and alight with, live decoys most readily on stormy, cold days which may also be windy; thus presenting a problem concerning the extension of the net when fired. Samples of geese on baited and non-baited sites in the Two Buttes and Eads Lakes area after the close of hunting season seem to show no significant difference in regard to sex classes and percentages of adult and young-of-the-year geese carrying embedded shot. However, a large difference in age ratios of geese trapped by the two methods is apparent. The sample size on non-baited areas was smaller than desired and the birds were trapped at Eads while the majority of birds caught on baited sets were trapped at Two Buttes. These factors probably have some effect on the ratios obtained. Consideration of all data presented indicates that information regarding flock status may be valid for all categories except estimates of age composition. �-38- Literiture Cited: Cochran, W.G. 1953. Sampling techniques .• John Wiley and Spns,New York pp. 50-59· Snedecor, Statistical pp. 227-231. Prepared Date: G. W~ 1956. by: methods. Iowa State Howard Dc.Funk Approved by: ----------~----------- October, 1962 ----------------~--~-------- College Press ,Ames, Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Feder-a.I Aid Coordinator Iowa, �-39- October, 1962 JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO ------~~~~-------------- Proj ect No. .-.-:W.:...--=8-=8_-:..:.R_-7.!-- -=- Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 2 2 ----------~-------------------------~------------~ of Job: -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-Experimental Studies on Improving Status of Canada Goose Work Plan No. Title Populations. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. Objectives: (1) Development and evaluation of techniques for initial establishment and/or increase of goose population on all major drainages in the State. (2) Permanent establishment of resident goose flocks on all large water impoundments and major river systems as determined by the preliminary survey of goose nesting areas in the State. (3) Retention of resident and migrant Great Basin goose flocks within the State for longer periods of time during the migration season. (4) Increase the size of the Great Basin goose flocks wintering in the State. Procedures: As given in past reports. Personnel: W.C.O. G.I. Crawford, W.C.O. Sigfrid Palm, Mitchell Sheldon, and Jack R. Grieb. ��-41Experimental Studies on Improving Status of Canada Goose Populations. Jack R. Grieb All work was again confined to the establishment of a resident Canada goose breeding flock in the Fort Collins area. The following is a resume of these activities. Status of Geese Released During Previous Years. About 120 geese used College Lake during late winter and spring of 1961. This represented almost a hundred per cent carry-over during the winter with only several birds lost from the flock. These birds used College Lake almost exclusively during the winter with only brief forays out to other nearby lakes. A.continuous feeding program using milo and baled alfalfa was maintained on the lakej and in addition, the aerator kept ,a sizeable portion of the lake open at all times. Flock Production: - A total of seven known, and two probable nests were started by geese in the Fort Collins area during the past breeding season. Of the seven known nests, 29 eggs were laid, 26 were hatched, and 15 goslings raised to flight stage. The following gives an account of production by areas. 1. Five nests were established at College Lake, of which two were old nesting pairs Which had nested there previously, and three were new pairs. It is strongly suspected that at least two of the new pairs were two-year old birds which is quite unusual for the large Canada goose. These birds laid 20 eggs of which 17 hatched and 10 birds were raised to flight. The three eggs failing to hatch were in one nest which was never incubated. This pair built too close to one of the old nesting pairs, and the old gander kept up such a continual harassment that the nest was finally abandoned. Four of the five nests were built on nesting structures, and the one ground nest was placed on a high mound of dirt (third year pair has nested there). It is suspected that large northern pike were responsible for some of the gosling mortality. 2. For the second year, a pair established a nest on an island at Dean's Lake. This pair laid four eggs and all hatchedj however, no birds were raised to flight stage. At the time of this brood's disappearance shortly after hatching, it was thought that some predator was responsible. Later, through diligent effort by Officer Crawford it was learned that a boy living in that vicinity had captured the entire brood and penned them up in his back yard. All bird were lost when dogs broke into the pen and destroyed them. Crawford carried his investigation to successful completion and issued three penalty assessments for a total of $75.00. 3. One pair nested for the second year on the island at Watson Lake, one mile north of Bellvue. Five eggs were l$.id,five were hatched, and five birds raised to flight. 4. Two pair possibly nested at Terry Lake according to information received by Crawford. It was reported that these nests wer-e destroyed by boys walking around the lake. This could be true, however, I suspect that these were novice nesters that built dummy nests as they often do. �•.. 42Gosling Release Program.--A total of 94 goslings were released on Terry Lake, one mile north of Fort Collins, on ..July19, 1961. These birds were obtained from the following sources: 1. Forty-three goslings were hatched and raised by Crawford. These birds were hatched from 50 eggs obtained at Bowles Lake under :permit, five 'eggs from the old peoples' home at Littleton (complaint), and four from Wards Lake, Denver (complaint). All eggs were gathered on April 20, 1961. 2. Dr. Fraser of the D~nver City Zoo permitted us to take 43 goslings from the flock at City Park Lake to, keep this flock from growing too ,large. 3. Six goslings were taken from Wards Lake on a depredation complaint. 4. The captive flock at Wray Hatchery contributed eight birds, while that at Bonny Reservoir contributed none because of 100 per cent loss to predators. These birds were kept in the conditioning and holding pen at the Fort Collins Nurserytmtil July 19, at which time they were banded and released. Actually, there were 96 birds held at thr;:: holding pen, but two gained the power of flight and could not be ca:ptured and released on Terry Lake with the other 94 birds. These birds were banded with the following bands: 508-46216 through 508-46309. Flock Status From Release to January 1, 1962.-- Birds released at Terry remained there during the fall and early winter, while those originally released at College Lake began congregating there during late summer and early fall. Eventually, the birds from Terry Lake began using College Lake and numbers of wintering birds there rose to almost eoo This situation existed as of January 1, 1962. It teemed that the birds released through this:program would not mix with the migrant birds which began to use Terry Lake in ~bvember. This is a very good situation and vshou'Ldlessen the chance that loc~l b Lrds will be decoyed north with the migrant flock in the s:pring. 0 Habitat Im:provemerit.--As :pointed out in the :pr~v:ioussegment re:port, lack of nesting sites seemed to be a potential limi-ping'fl;3,ctor for the goose flock in the Fort Collins tll'ea. During this segment'and through coo:peration with Lands. Manager Dick Takes money was set u:p on his federal Aid :project to build 100 nesting structures. The following are the J-oca:pionofthese: C.ollege Lake, 33; Terry Lake, 29; Watson Lake, 6; Lindemeir Lake,! 9; and Herring's Lake, 7. The remaining 16 are being held until the s:pring of 1962 and will be :placed on lake or marsh areas which the geese seem to frequent most. Protective Measures.-- That :portion of Larimer County west of U. S. 87 and north of U. s. 34 was closed t.ogoose hurrt.Lngby Federal and State regulation. In addition, no hunting, trapping, or fishing was permt+ted in the immediate vicinity of College Lake. This closure was very effective and no birds were lost t.ohunters during the :past hunting season. As a .resu.l. t of the closed area in Larimer County, the wintering flock of migrant Canada geese increased again this :past,season, Table 1. Goose hunting is fast becoming a major s:port in the Fort Collins area, and the harvest .of geese is definitely on the increase. �-43Table 1.- Number of Geese cOillltedduring the January Inventory in the Fort collins area, by year. Year Number of Geese 19 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 o o o o o o o o 70 o o 22 660 1385 1945 Conclusions.- The continuing success of this program as evidenced by: (1) the increasing number of breeding pairs; (2) an increasing number of nests and production; (3) the acceptance of College and Terry Lakes, and other surroillldinglakes as breeding areas; and (4) the return of scattered pairs and yearlings to College Lake during late summer and early fall for wintering supports the worthiness of this effort. Success has not come of itself, however, and much credit is especially due Gurney Crawford for long and regular hours in taking care of the geese throughout the entire year. Recommendations: (1) Goose eggs should again be taken from Bowles Lake and hatched with white rock hens by Gurney Crawford. (2) All goslings obtained for the 1962 program should be released free-flying at College Lake. (3) Effort should be continued to hold the geese on College Lake through feeding and maintaining open water during the fall and winter months. (4) College Lake should continue to be closed to all hilllting,fishing, and trapping. (5) That portion of Larimer COillltynorth of U. S. 34 and west of U. s. 87 should continue to be closed to all goose hillltingfor the 1962 hilllt.ing season. (6) Intensive plans should be initiated for a Canada goose release program at Valmont Reservoir, near Boulder, Boulder COilllty,Colorado. These should include planting schedules and proposed habitat improvements. (7) If all goes well during the 1962 season, and if flock production becomes at least 30 birds raised to flight stage, then it should be seriously considered to plant all goslings on the Valmont area beginning in 1963· Prepared by: Jack R. Grieb Leader, Waterfowl Date. October, 1962 Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan A.ssistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal A.idCoordinator ��-45- October, JOB COMPLETION 1962 REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO Project No. w-88-R-7 Work Pl~ No. Waterfowl 2 of Ark~sas Surveys ~d Investigations Job No. 4a Valley Wintering Goose Flock. Title of Job: Investigations Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. Objectives: (1) To determine the fall movement of geese into the Ark~sas Valley, and the size of the wintering flock. (2) To investigate the wounding loss of geese at Two Buttes Reservoir. (3) To determine the relationship between weather conditions ~d harvest of geese at Two Buttes Reservoir. (4) To determine age and sex composition, mortality, and per cent of birds carrying shot. (5) To investigate the dispersal of birds from Two Buttes during the hunting season. Need: The wintering goose population in the Arkansas Valley is probably the most important single waterfowl flock in Colorado in relation to hunter use and enjoyment. Before closer m~agement of a specific waterfoWl flock c~ be attained, the basic knowledge of its numbers, local movements, ~d habits must be gained. The increase in hunting pressure ~d the corresponding increased harvest of this flock indicates the need for future recommendations which will permit the correct harvest of this resource upon a sustained yield basis. Procedure: (1) Periodic aerial counts on major reservoirs in the Ark~sas Valley. Ground counts on Two Buttes Reservoir and vicinity. (2) Search for dead geese on selected plots including the shoreline of Two Buttes Reservoir. Operation of check stations to determine wounding loss, age ratio, ~d harvest. (3) Operation of weather station ~d correlation of harvest data. (4) Trap, band, and fluroscope geese at periodic intervals. (5) Analyze b~d returns. Accomplishments desired: Periodic aerial and ground counts to determine size of wintering population. Systematic search of selected plots to determine wounding loss. Operate check stations to gather hunter data. Trap, b~d) and fluroscope geese at intervals throughout the hunting season. Analyze b~d returns. ��-47Investigations of Arkansas Valley Wintering Goose Flock Jack R. Grieb With the completion of three years activity in this investigation, it is time to evaluate its effectiveness, and its potential for producing a management plan along with suitable techniques for this specific goose flock. It seems, to some extent at least, that last year we failed to capitalize on our gains of the previous year. Despite this, there appears to be several techniques emerging from this work which have great promise of fulfilling a part of our original objectives. Again, I respectfully point out that the writer is only a compiler of information contained in this report. Individual credit should go to those persons collecting the data as indicated within each section of the report. Canada Staging Area Census-- This survey was conducted by Canadian personnel as indicated in Table 1. Results show a significant drop in number of geese from 1960. This was especially true on the Kindersley route and in eastcentral Alberta, undoubtedly a result .of drouth conditions in these two areas. As a result, comparison of the ratio of Canada staging areas to U.S. wintering area counts between 1960 and 1961 have little resemblance being .7:1 for the former, and .5:1 for the latter year. Recommendations for 1962-- It is highly desirable to have a technique which would alert U.S. Canada Goose harvest areas to the possibility of a severe reduction in flock size. Even if the technique was not completely accurate number-wise, it would still serve to put U.S. Agencies on their guard so that appropriate action could be taken to ascertain numbers in the flock and age ratios as early in the hunting season as possible. Considering this, I strongly feel that the organized effort to inventory eastcentral Alberta and west-central Saskatchewan during the second or third week of October be continued in 1962. If this cannot be accomplished by Canadian agencies as last year, then eastern Alberta will be covered by an aerial crew composed of E. L. Boeker, pilot, and J.R. Grieb, and R. Webb, observer, with suitable aircraft to be furnished by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Table l.--Canada Staging Area Census of Canada Geese, October, 1961. Number of 1960 Comparable Canada Geese Inventory Date Observers Province Area 1,108 Athabaska Delta Alberta and Hay Lakes R Webb and R Mackay 19,490 30,955 East-Gentral Saskatchewan Total Wilkie-Unity N. Saskatchewan River S Saskatchewan River and Maple Creek Kindersley 2,665 Andres and J Nelson 5,255 535 Taylor and J.Nelson A Dzubin 10/18 10/18 8,060 8,272 8,400 24,925 71,17$ �Figure l.--Known Migration and Wintering Areas of the Arkansas Vall~ Canada Goose Flock ~ Staging Area ~ Migration Area ~ Wintering Area �-49Migration and Wintering Counts in the United States. - The following persons and agencies cooperated in the migration and wintering census of this goose flock in the United States: Bureau Agency of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Texas Game and Fish Commission New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Nebraska Game, Forestation and Parks Commission Colorado Department of Game and Fish Personnel R. L Darnell M. H. Boone E. G Wellein B. J VanTries N V Stover C. L. Boynton Goodwin G. Schildman J. Sweet J R. Grieb W. B. Rutherford The fi.rstlarge flights of geese arrived in the Waggoner Ranch area, south of Vernon, Texas, on November 4 (one day earlier than last year) and continued to come in through November 6, 1961. After this large influx, Boynton estimated from 25,000 to 40.,000geese on the area (mainly Santa Rose Lake). These birds were not allowed to remai.nhere long and were soon dispersed by continuous aerial harassment to surrounding lakes. This made aerial census difficult and it was necessary to fly the Gilliland area, Lake Kemp and Lake Diversion in addition to the Waggoner Ranch property including Sanda Rosa Lake and adjacent tanks. The result of all this was a significant reducti.on in the number of geese using the Waggoner Ranch area after November as reflected.by the low counts listed in Table 2. The first geese arrived at Buffalo Lake National Wildlife Refuge on November 1; however, these were not substantial flights numbering only 150 with 150 more coming in during the next several days. This number increased to about 3,000 on the 16th of November, and continued.to increase thereafter. Agent Krieble felt that there were more geese using the Buffalo Lake area than for some years and this is borne out by inventory figures (table 2). The MULeshoe area had a heavy influx of geese on November 15 after which numbers held steady at about 1,900 for the rest of the season. Again this represents a large increase in wintering birds over the previous year (Table 2). First large flights of geese arrived at Two Buttes November 5, and continued to build up through November 8th. This movement occurred about a day after arrival of birds at Waggoner Ranch. As last year, it appears that the Waggoner Ranch birds by-passed southeast Colorad.oentirely and consequently may represent a separate segment of this Canada goose flock which mayor may not mix with other segments depending upon various factors not yet understood. Counting cond.i tions in southeast Colorado were the worst ever encountered in the past 12 years. Not only were there considerable periods of stormy weather, but most important} the geese were extremely erratic in their behavior. Thus, birds would fly out to feed early in the morning and stay out all day not coming back to their roost areas unti.levening . Although attempts were made to fly both roost and feeding areas no satisfactory count of the Arkansas Valley was made until February 7 after several weeks of extremely warm and.dry weather. This count is substituted for the �-50Table 2. ",Migration and Wintering Canada Goose Census of the Ark.ansas Va.Lley-Texas Panhandle Flock, 1961~1962. Number of Canada Geese Count I Count II Count III Dec., ,19,-.2.0 Jan. 3-11 Nov. 16 High Count High Count "" '1962 1952.,~6~__ Area 1961 1961 1960-61 1 Co Lor'ado Texas Canceled Buffalo Lake Waggoner Ranch Muleshoe Refuge because Nebraska of New Mexieo Totals weather 30.'1350 45,250 5,843 10,500 1,900 10:;154 16,900 1,800 10,000 55,000 660 1,952 3.'1879 4,590 280 2,119 '2,150 1,745 22642, 1032355 95.'1492 31.0360 g) 55,:664:' .:;80,:133 54J320 21 5,:>000 33,000 250 Y No satisfactory count could be made during regular January Inventory because of weather. This count made February 7, 1962 when geese had settled down. chance of being inflated by geese beginning their northward migration. It has the ?J Includes small ponds in Buffalo Lake vicinity: 21 Includes 4,000 geese counted at Rita Blanca and Texline Lakes. January Inventory which was completely erroneous. It should be pointed out that there :Lsa chance that ;:lomegeese had moved back into the Arkansas Valley area from Texas by the time of the February count. It is the feeling of the writer however, that this represents the most accurate census of Canada geese wintering in the Valley possible at this time, and should be included as part of the count. Considering all of this., it appears that the wintering population of the Arkansas Valley was normal and probably slightly above the previous year (Table 2). Three inventories had been planned for this flock during the current season. The first one was canceled because of weather leaving two counts on which to base flock s:Lze estimates. On the basis of these counts, and observation of personnel in each area.'):Lt is obvious that despite a reduction in inventory numbers, there are probably as many geese as the previous year, and flock status remains in excellent shape (Table 2):; (Figure 2). Depredation Potential. - In the second progress report, it was pointed out that the de~. predation potential was most acute in the Waggoner Ranch area. This problem consisted of about 50.,000 geese feeding on winter wheat on the Waggoner property in competition with winter grazing of cattle. Last year the Ranch employed at least one person to herd, the geese down to a corner of their large (about 10,000 acre) wheat field ..• and also hired some time wi ththe local aviation company for aerial harassment. Until J'anuary of 1961, at least., these effort had little effect on the number of geese wintering on the ranch property. Apparently this year it was decided to make an all~out effort to reduce �the number of wintering geese~ Thus:; aerial harassment began soon after the geese arrived and continued on an all day, every day basis .sometdmes with two planes being used. This technique was highly successful in moving the geese away from the Waggoner Ranch and scattering them about ,the country" Recommendations for the 1962-1963 Migration and Wintering ,Census It is strongly recommended that the same operational procedures established during the last several years, be continued during the coming year as follows: 0- 1. Nebraska Game and Fish personnel will cover western Nebraska goose concentration areas on designated, days. 20 New' Mexico personnel will cover northeastern New Mexico areas. 30 Muleshoe National Wildlife goose concentration Refuge personnel will cover all goose concentration in the Muleshoe area. 40 All other Texas areas including the Waggoner Ranch vicinity, and Buffalo Lake ar.ea, and all Colorado areas will be covered on designated days by an aerial crew composed of a plane and pilot from the Denver Wildlife Research Center, and an observer from the Colorado Game and Fish Department. 5. Dates of the three inventories shall be: a, 'b 0 c. 6. November 14" 1962 December 12, 1962 January 3, 1963 Information from all cooperating personnel and agencies will be forward,ed to Jack R. Grieb, for compilation and, distribution to all interested persons. CanadaJ3anding. - No banding was attempted in Canada as part of thiscooperati ve investigation during the past year. This was caused mainly by a lack of manpower- to conduct the operation. Mitchell Sheldon accepted a job with the Denver Wild.life Re search, Center, and I planned to do the same; consequently, the original plans were called offo Recommendations for 1962. ~ It is strongly urged that banding again be attempted in east.-cenbr-a'l A.lbertathis coming fall. Actual details of this attempt mustawai t discussions at the coming Central Flyway Technical Committee meeting in Denver, March .15, and 16} 1962. His anticipated that .a .mobile fluoroscope unit will be avat.L» able for use in Canada in conjunction with the banding programo The success of this program will depend upon the following things: L The as semblage of a crew from the United States (three to four men will be needed plus traps and other equipment) 0 2. The furnishing of banding permits, bands, and bait by the Canadian Wildlife r< • ,:Je:rvlce. 3. The cooperative efforts of the A.lberta Game branch through R. We'bb and local game officers in pre=baiting and selection of baiting si.tes 0 �Figure 2.-January Inventory Results in Colorado and Texas Wintering Areas of the Arkansas Valley - Texas Panhandle Goose Flock, by years. 90 80 70 I /\ ,1 \/ '\Total ,/ \ 60 \ I 50 Number Geese (Thousands) . ! 40 ___ 30 20 - / /' , / /.... "...,'/ /' /~/.~..... "'"'"-.. .... ---.---- _..,' /,' '-/---~- /_-= _,_ // / _,_', /-' .•.....•.. \ ' ' "-,' /exas ,---,,- / \!' j' Colorado \' ~ ',/ ; 10- / <, '. / I,---.----.---.r---.----.---.r---.----r---.r---.----.----.---~--~-- 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 Year r 'iG r �-53All of this will be d.iscussed at the Teclmical Committee meeting and plans formulatsifor approval by the Council at their summermeetingo United States Banding.-- Bandings of Canada geese with returns received through 1959-·1960a.re reviewed in Table 3. Banding was far more difficult in the Two Buttes area this year because of the erratic behavior of the geese. Catches were made at two different times during the hunting season t.otaling 461 birds. After hunting season efforts resulted in 397 birds banded to date with effort to continue until the geese leave for the north country 'I'hf.s increased. banding effort over previous years is caused by our attempt to make an unbai ted cat.ch of geese to compare with baited catches and thus determine the effect of these practices on the number of geese with embedded shot. SecondlY$ we ~ attempting to catch geese in the Eads area and compare age and sex ratio findings with TwoButtes to determine the reliability of TwoButtes bandings in estimating these ratios for the flock of geese wintering in the entire Arkansas Valley of southeast Coloradoo 0 A good trapping and "banding effort was made at Buffalo Lake this year resulting in more than 200 geese caught by this date. No birds were taken at Waggoner Ranch because of the harassment activities which gcared most birds away. One shot was made at La Queva in NewMexico result.ing in a catch of 190 geese. No information is available at this time from Nebraska. No attempt will be madeto analyze band returns from any area in this report mai.nly because the duplicate IBMdeck expected from Patuxent Hefuge has not been received. Tabulation of returns from birds banded on the wintering areas wi.ll not be repeated this year since there is nothing new to add. Banding CrewsT:exas: R. Ballou, R. Darnell, No stover, all of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife working at Buffalo Lake. Co StuzenbakerJ C. BoyntonJ Texas Gameand Fi.sh Commission and K. Baer J Ho Boone, D. Krieble of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildli.fe working in the WaggonerRanch vicinity. NewMexico: G. Merrill and W. Huey working at La Queva Nebraska: J. Sweet and G. Schildman worki.ng at the Platte Hiver in western Nebraska. Colorado~ WoRutherford, J. Grieb, H. Funk, R. Kitzmiller, M. Sheldonp F. Metsger and other assisting, working at 'I'woButtes J and Eads Lakes area. e �-54Table 3·--Number Canada Geese Banded and Returns by Areas and Years. No. Band No. Birds Banded State Year Area Number Two Buttes Colorado 644 240 1951 1,278 1952 395 1,478 435 1953 41 10 1954 182 1956 50 516 90 1957 1958 94 529 46 526 1959. 1960 417 1961 1,940 858 1962 Returns Percent 37·3 30·9 29.4 24.4 27·5 17.4 17·8 8.7 - Waggoner Ranch 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 50 140 316 165 721 0 0 0 Buffalo Lake 1961 1962 32 224 New Mexico La Queva 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 90 149 355 54 190 Nebraska North Platte River Texas D 1952 1953 1959 1961 tabulation. Returns not available for 3 18 26 33 32 6.0 l2·9 8.2 20.0 4.4 17 25 18·9 16.8 y 55 31 51 2 Recommedations for 1962-1963 banding season. - It is again recommended that every effort be made at a coordinated banding attempt on all wintering areas during the next season. Ii we ~oUlddig in now the field work could be accomplished within-the next several ye.ars and data could be analyzed soon after. Targets for each area should again be 500 to 1,000 geese banded with all birds aged by the notched-tail feather technique , and sexed by cloacal examination. United States Age Composition Information.- Age composition estimates from banding results are listed in Table 4. These range from a low estimate of 22.3 per cent young in the population at Two Buttes to 42.5 per cent at Buffalo Lake. Perhaps the Buffalo Lake and La Queva estimates are right, but it is strongly suspected that the �-55Two Buttes estimates are biased to some degree. This is evidenced by comparison with check station results which show no agreement. It is not possible at this time to predict the reasons for differences between these two types of per cent young estimates. Perhaps, it has to do with composition of the flock during the time samples were being drawn. Thus, in Table 5 we observe banding and check station est5..matesof young composition divided into t.ime intervals of the season. This shows that over half the check station samples were taken during the first .interval when considerable numbers of birds were present on the reservoir. Conversely about half the banding results were taken after January 1, when populations using the reservoir were small and probably consisted of a populat.ion unit which was not the same as that sampled by check stations. Table 4. ,--, Age Composition of the Arkansas Valley Canada Goose Flock. Check Station Banding Young Adult Young Adult Per cent No. Per cent No. Per cent No. Per cent No. Year State 46.8' ~.2 46.7 356 300 Colorado 1951 343 53·3 New Mexico 1952 649 1958 346 1959 214 1960 269 1961 1171 1962 671 50·9 66.4 42.2 60.0 62·3 77·7 627 175 293 17:9 71U 192 49·1 33·6 57·8 40.0 37·7 22·3 65 197 27 118 111 43·6 61.9 69·2 62.1 57·5 84 79 12 72 82 62.6 38.1 30 .• 8 37·9 42·5 1959 1960 1961 1962 1962 Texas (Buffalo Lake) 929 377 612 527 1010 655 732 419 47·9 36·5 45·5 55·7 52.1 63.5 54·5 44.3 Table 5. --Comparison of Age Composition Estimates Between Trapping and Check Station Samples by Periods, Two Buttes Reservoir, 1960-61 and 1961-62. Date y 11,-8to 11-25-60 11-26 to 12-4-60 12-5 to 12-14-60 12-15 to 12-24-60 12-25 to 1-8,-61 1-11 to 1,-15-61 Totals Trapping Per cent Per cent Young Adult 79·9 73·3 70.6 57·5 51.2 56·5 62.3 Total Birds 19 0 - 1 20.1 278 240 26·7 163 29·4 214 42·5 418 48.8 568 43·5 18th 37·7 1961 - 62 161 27·3 22.0 300 402 20.4 863 22·3 Check Station Per cent Young Adult ---percent Total Birds 44.1 38.0 56.5 40.2 64·5 5 5~9 62.0 43·5 59·8 35 ·5 535 295 239 199 76 45.5 54.5 1344 50.1 535 49·9 ll-,lo-to 12-6,-61 72·7 41.5 265 58·5 78.0 12-7 to 12.~28-61 146 71.2 28.8 12-29 to 1-8-62 79·6 == = 946 44·3 55·7 Totals 77·7 ·each interval. of the middle Trapping and banding generally took place in 1 �In the Second Progress Report it was noted that there was discrepancy between check station and banding estimates, and that check station results probably were more accurate in this particular instance. After the current year's study there is no reason to change this statement; therefore, it is estimated that per cent of young in the flock of geese wintering in the Arkansas Valley, in northeast New Mexico, and the Texas panhandle is between 40 and 45 per cent. Two Buttes Area Group Count Information.- Group counts were attempted both on resting and feeding areas. Best results were obtained on the rest areas particularly where the geese were flying from one spot to another. These usually occurred in small groups and furnished a good opportunity to make counts. A. total of 300 groups were counted with 1065 individuals for an average size of 3.55 per group. There is no information with which to compare these data. Fluoroscopy.- It was hoped that geese trapped in Texas could be fluoroscoped during the current job segment; however, it was not possible to obtain a trailer for the equipment until after the first of the year. Our fluoroscope is not completely mobile and should be available for next year, in areas other than Colorado. Per cent of birds with shot are listed and compared to past years in Table 6. This tabulation for the past two years is limited to those birds trapped after the end of the hunting season so that the information will be comparable with previous years. Results show close conformity between per cent of young with shot for the past four years with .a small decrease evident this past year, which may reflect the decrease in hunting pressure that occurred in the Two Buttes area this year. Table 1959 1960 1961 1962 6.- Summary of Fluoroscopy Results, Two Buttes ReserVOir, Colorado, 1959-196~. Total Sample Size Per cent total with shot 500 417# 568 402 2 49.4 42·7 51.9 53·0 1.../Young-of-the-year birds. Per cent-Adults with shot Per cent Young with shot y 37.6 37·1 36.8 34.1 This sample represents only those birds trapped after conclusion of the hunting season. DISCUSSION AND CONCLlJSIONS At the conclusion of the third year of operation, it is time for this cooperative investigation to examine itself critically to see what it has accomplished, and what it needs to accomplish so that we may evaluate the effectiveness of this operation. Thus, on the credit side we find that: 1. We have established a wintering area census technique which will keep us informed of the flock status from November through January. It is this census which has greatest management effect in establishment of hunting regUlations for this flock in the Central Flyway. 2. Our banding activity has been increased, and most major wintering areas are now included in annual banding efforts. 3· Through our census work we are compiling information on migration habits and the influence of various factors on goose numbers at each of the major wintering areas. 4. Estimates of flock productivity are obtained from banding and check station information. �,', -57- 5. Information has been compiled on methods for alleviation of crop depredation. Analysis of band returns delineates migration routes, time of migration, staging and wintering areas, allocation of flock harves t between various areas, and:permits estimates of annual mortality. 7. Analysis of fluoroscopy results indicate the relationship between huntingpressure and harvest by years and between various hunting areas. 8. Perhaps most important is tne growing recognition that management must be based on results from all wintering areas rather than on current conditions existing within anyone area of this flock. 6. On the other side we find that: L We need breeding ground information on which to establish hunting regulations. 2. Information from staging area counts must be further evaluated for use as an early warning ofa severe decline in goose numbers. 3,- More complete banding information is needed for Canada geese using the Canadian staging areas so thatb;i.rds counted in these areas can be attributed to a specific flock. 4. It would be desirable to fluoroscope geese from Canada staging areas to the major wintering areas in the United states to evaluate different hunting pressures associated with each area, and the effectiveness of the fluoroscopy technique. 5. The trapped sample must be evaluated to determine the extent to which it represents the population in terms of age and sex ratiOS, and per cent of birds with shot. 6. Greater trapping and banding effort must be made on all winteri,ng areas so that a sample of banded birds may be obtained from each area for the same years to facilitate analysis. Cons Lde'rat.Lon of both sides leads to the conclusion that we are progressing in an orderly manner toward the solution of our problems. Even though we would wish some things would go along at a faster pace, given sufficient time, we will be able to come up with a management plan for this flock. In fact , we are well on the way to toward one~ Prepared by: Date: Jack R. Grieb Approved by: ------------~-----------Leader ,Waterfowl O~c~t~0~b~e~r~,~1~9~6_2 _ Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �-6l~ October, 1962 FINAL JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT COLORADO --------~~~~~------------------ State of Project No. Work Plan No. Title: ~w~-~8~8_-~R_-7~ _ Waterfowl Surveys and Investigations Job No. 5 2 ----------~-----------------------~~------------------ An evaluation of Methods for Improving Goose Nesting Sites on Colorado Breeding Grounds. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT Shortages of natural goose nesting sites on East Slope lakes, and commonly occurring nest destruction by flood-waters on rivers of the West Slope, led to experiments in goose nesting habitat manipulation by project personnel. Clearing brush from river islands, and construction of artificial nesting sites were done. These techniques are descriued in detail, and locations and numbers of nesting structures which were built are listed. Evaluation of these nesting habitat manipulations shows that brush removal from islands has such temporary effect that it can be discounted as a management techniquej and that, artificial nesting sites offer a very real and valuable addition to the nesti.ng habitat 'ofGreat Basin Canada geese in Colorado. The net result appears to be a significant increase in goose production on East Slope lakes, and a smaller but still positive value for West Slope breeding grounds. It is apparent that greater consideration should be given to the location of structures on the West Slope than has heretofore been done. Geese will most readily accept those structures placed on small, low, temporary islands, but some degree of permanence is necessary if the structure itself is to survive floodwaters. It is recommended that Regional Land Managers give considerable emphasis to repair and maintenance of existing structures and construction of new ones as the need arises. Recommendations: (1) Maintenance and construction of goose nesting platforms have been turned over to Regional Land Managers, and it is recommended that they continue to give considerable emphasis to this phase of management. (2) w-88-R Project personnel will continue to observe the condition and use of each structure during field work connected with other jobs. It is recommended that Regional Land Managers supplement these observations to permit a full evaluation of West Slope nesting structures under all conditions of climate and water availability. �-62Objectives: (1) To determine the effect of nesting structures and the clearing of islands, where practical, on the nesting success of geese. (2) To determine the best type of nesting structure, most desirable location for a structure, and the best method for clearing islands of brush and willow growth. (3) To determine whether geese will use the nesting structures and cleared island areas. Techniques Used: The lakes and ponds of the eastern slope of Colorado which hold semi-wild populations of resident Great Basin Canada geese have long been known to have a shortage of natural goose nesting sites. Competition for existing sites is keen, and it has become increasingly obvious that this is one major factor responsible for a generally low rate of production. In northwestern Colorado on the Green and Yampa Rivers, the disastrous goose nesting year of 1957, when extreme high water destroyed a large number of incubating clutches, brought into sharp focus the problem existing here. It thus became apparent that goose nesting habitat manipulation on an experimental basis might offer possibilities for alleviating the conditions just described. Accordingly, Project w-88~R personnel undertook two different manipulation techniques to accomplish this: (1) Willow and brush growth was cut from points and other desirable places on permanent islands of the Yampa Riverj and (2) Platform type nesting structures were built in various places on the East Slope, and on the Yampa and Green Rivers of the West Slope of Colorado. The artificial goose nesting site as developed and constructed by project personnel is a raised platform consisting of the following materials: 4 - 6t' fenceposts 2 - 211 X 4" x 6' rough native lumber 7 - 111 X 6" X 6' rough native lumber 4 - t X 3t" carriage bolts, plus nuts and flat washers 30 - 16d box nails 4t - straw bales, wire tied #12 galvanized wire. Actual construction begins by driving the four steel posts into the ground, five feet apart, forming a square. The 2 x 4's are bolted horizontally to the steel posts at the top, on opposite sides of the square. The 1 x 6's are then nailed across the top to the 2 x 4's, thus forming the platform. The steel posts are cross-braced with galvanized wire, baled straw is placed on the platform, and the bales are tied down with galvanized wire, completing the structure. By the end of 1957, 60 of these structures had been completed, 35 oeing located on the East Slope and 25 on the Yampa River in northwestern Colorado. Of the 35 East Slope structures, 20 were built at Bowles Lake, 5 at Lake Bonfils on the Bel-Mar Estate, 5 at College Lake near Fort Collins, and five on the Johnson Ranch near Ovid. Originally, plans called for building 25 structures in Brown's Park on the Green River, but permission to build was withdrawn by the landowner involved. Ten of the Bowles Lake structures were built from materials originally intended for Brown's Park. �AN EVALUATION OF METHODS FOR IMPROVING GOOSE NESTING SITES OF COLORADO BREEDING GROUNDS William H. Rutherford In 1957, the only evaluation made was fO,rthe 10 original structures at Bowles Lake near Littleton) Colorado. These were 'the only ones completed before the 1957 nesting season began. Nesting geese used 8 of the 10 structures, producing 9 nestso One structure produced two broods. Of 21 ground nests observed at the same time, 10 we-redestroyed by rising water due in part t.o an exceptionally wet spring Geese on the nesting platforms incubated 41 eggs of which 35 hatched, for a hatching success of 8504 percent. Ground nesting geese incubated 69 eggs and hatched 34, for a hatching success of 49.3 percent. Over-all nesting success at Bowles Lake was 110 eggs, 69 goslings, and a success ratio of 6207 percent. 0 For the 1958 nesting seasonJ evaluations were made on 60 nesting structures and 13 cleared islands. The success of this effort is as follows, separated according to East Slope or West Slope location: East Slope: Nesting platforms were considered quite successful in 1958. Broods were produced ol"l19of the 20 platforms at Bowles Lake. The remaining one was not useable because the straw platform was removed, probably by vandals. Nes binggeese used three of the five platforms at Lake Bonfils t,o successfully produce broodso The five College Lake structures near Fort Collins were rendered useless because the irrigat,ion company overfilled the lake basin and inundated the platforms. Use of the five structures at the Johnson Ranch near Ovid was not checked. West Slope: Ofth= 25 structures built on the Yampa River before the 1958 nesting season started) five were lost before they had a chance to be used. Spring floodwaters piled debris against them until they collapsed and were washed away. Livestock destroyed the straw platforms on4 additional structures, and one collapsed on a .sLop'lrig sand bank. This left 15 useable structures, of which one was used by a nesting goose. This nest produced 6 goslings. Ground nesters had a successful year , with no known nests being lost. In past years the flood crest had caught the nesting g~ese st,ill incubating, while in 1958 the high water came just after the peak of hatching had passed. Oi'the 13 islands which were cleared of vegetation during the summer and i'all of 1957, one was used by a nesting goose in 1958. This nest was successful, and produced five goslings. ,'\0 For the 1959 nesting season, the remalnlng useable structures of the original 60 plus 25 new ones builtin Brownts Park are evaluated as follows, again according to East Slope or West S,lope location: �~ast Slope ~ Bowles Lake nesting platforms continued to be utilized, 100 percent by nesting geese in 1959, witb each of the 19 useable sfrructur-esproducing at least one brood of geese, Groundnesting geese at Bowles Lake were also hf.gh.Iy successful, All 5 structures at Lake Bonfils produced broods, and ground, nests were highly succes sfuL The five .nes+Lng platforms at the Jobnson Ranch produced the only known broods, as all ground nests were believed destroyed by terrestrial predators, The five structures at College Lake, after being destroyed by inundation and iceJ weresal.ITaged and,enough materials gathered to rebuild and relocate four stiructur-es, These four platforms were not used by nesting geese in 1959 o West Slope: 1~o mor-evs tr-uc+ur-eson the Yampa River were eliminated by fLoodwaters, and livestock destroyed an additional straw platform, Brace wires which had been broken by ice or debris on several platforms were repaired prior to the nesti.ng seasonp thus leaving 12 useable nes'td.ngstructures of the 25 origi.na11y constructed, Of these , 3 produced, broods of geese during 1959, An add.itional 3 had "dummy nests" or forms made on the straw platform, but no eggs were found, These forms are believed to be the results of newly paired geese going through some of the motions of nesting, 'I'hestructures in Brown IS Park on the Green River were built on flood plain lakes and sloughs ,)and not on the river proper, These lakes and, sloughs depend upon spring flood waters filling them from the ri.ver, and in 1959 they were left high and dry, The structures were probably undesirable to nesting geese because they were far from water, No use of nesting structures by geese occurred in BrowngsPark, and very few ground nests were successful, probably due to drought cond.LbLons which existed during the 1959 nesting season, Observations were again made in 1959 of the 13 selected islands in the Yampa River upon which vegetation removal had "been performed, The wi,llows had root sprouted since be tng cut, and had,grown to such heights they rendered the "improvedJ! islands unsuitable for goose nesting, During 1960, the only field work performed on this job was in conJunction with the West SJ.ope waterfowl breeding pair inventory, Observations ontbis trip indicated that use .of the st.ructures on the Yampa River was light, and, t.hatagain no use was made of Brown! s Park structures due to drought conditions, The evaluation of nest.ing structures during the 1961 nest.Lng season f'o l.Lows , again separated according to East Slope or West Slope locationg East Slope~ In 1961, all 19 structures at Bowles Lake were utilized by nesting geese, with each one producing at ,least one brood, of geese, Success of ground nesters were not checked, because of commitments elsewhere which prevented fo11ow~up trips, but reports indicated a good hatch from ground nests In the spring of 1961, Project FW·-6-Dbui1t 10 additional structures at Bowles Lake and,replaced the straw bales on six of the old structures, The five structures at Lake Bonfils on the Bel-Mar Estate were not checked during 1961, but have 'been used consistently, and with good,nesting success, in the past, 0 �During 1961, 10 addi.tional nesting structures were built at the J'ohnson Ranch near OVid, under Project FW-6-D. With the original 5, thi.s gives a total of 15 structures now in operation. The original structtires are located in the choicer spots J and all had successful nests in 19610 Three of the 10 new ones had nests, but all three were destroyed) probably by magpies,? due to their proximity to trees where magpies roost. The only repairs which were made on any nesting structures during 1961 were done on College Lake) where a raising of the water level made it necessary to add about one foot t,Othe height of several platformso Project FW-6-D has built additional structures here, but maintaining them in good enough repair for use has been such a problem that the g~ese have made very little use of them. West Slope: Seventeen of the original 25 nesting structures on t,he Yampa River weTestill standing in the spring of 1961, when the float trip down the river was made to conduct waterfowl 'breeding pair inventories. Of these 17, five were not useable because 'the straw platform had been destroyed No .data ont he use or production from these structure;s werecollected.o All 25 nesting structures in Brown's Park were unused in 1961 becauseoi' dr-ought; conditions. All flood plain lakes and sloughs were dried up J and the only water was that which was in the river The nesting structures were all up to one mile from water, and accordingly J were undesirable t.onestiLng geese 0 0 Conclusions and Over-all Evaluation: In general, the nesting platforms vhich have been constructed ,On the East Slope have been highly successful in supplementing natural nesting sites They offer an increase number of high quality sit.es for nesting geese which otherwise would. be forced to make nests in locations not conducivet.o the successful production of broods The net .result appears to be a Significant increase in gOQse production. 0 0 It is more di.fficult to arrive ata definite conclusi.on concerning nesting platforms on the West Slopeo Natural climatic conditions have combined to work against the realization of the full potential of these platforms, during the time they have been in operation. Some have been used, and it can be considered that use of any of them constitutes a bonus which otherwise would not exist, since l.tis known that the success of ground nests is rather precarious Nest destruct:i.onby floodwaters and t.errestrial predators Ls common 0 0 Much has been learned regarding the types of areas where nesting structures can be most .effectively placedo In areas of hi.gh goose population density such as the East Slope lakes and ponds wher-e structures have 'been built, a platform erected in the shallows just offshore will almost invariably be used, since competition for nesting sites is severe. On the Green and Yampa Rivers, goose population density is low, and the entire objective in building structures is different Here, the aim is t,O lure or attract geese to use the structures in preference to nesting elsewhere, and it thus follows that such structures must have certa:i.ncharacteristics to make them attractiveo It has become evident that geese will accept only those structures placed on islands, especLa.l.Lythe small temporary LsLand.s The only possibility for success with structures located. on river banks is to locat.e such structures on broad. flat areas away from topographic high spots and having very low vegetat:i.ono 0 0 0 �-66 •. If nesting structures on western Colorado rivers are to function in reducing nest destruction by floodwaters, they must meet two different criteria: (1) They must be acceptable to geesej and (2) They must be placed so that they are not themselves subj.ectto floodwater destruction. With respect to this latter condition, it is evident that geese prefer small islands with sparse vegetation, and these islands are, by their very nature, t.emporary. In selecting sites for structures, some compromise is necessary, but there should be evidence of some degree of permanency before a structure is built. Improvement of West Slope goose nesting habitat by clearing willows from islands is not successful when done asa one-shot treatment. If this procedure is to be useful as a management technique, it must be done annually or at least every two years, and done intensively. It .is doubtful whether such techniques can be justified. As an over-all evaluation, it can be stated that platform type nesting structures contribute significantly to goose nesting success and pr oductd.on. Exist.ing structures should be maintained and kept in repair, and additional ones built as the need arises. Submitted by: William H. Rutherford Senior Game Biologist Date: October, 1962 ----------------------------------- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �October, 1962 -67JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO ----------~~~~~-------------- Project No. ~W_-~3~8_-~R~-~1~5 :Name Work Plan No.1: ----------------------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Experimental Trapping Deer-Elk Investigations Job No. 5 and Marking Techniques. April 1, 1961 through March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT A. total of 112 elk and 108 deer were caught in the four group traps during the past segment. Not all of these animals were tagged and neck banded, however, as many of them were caught several times. One deer and one elk were killed during the trapping operations. There were 45 separate observations, both aerial and ground, of banded elk on the White River area. No banded elk were observed in the Gunnison area, but three elk and one deer, that had been tagged, were shot during the 1961 big game season in the Gunnison. Recommendations: 1. A. regular, systematic schedule of aerial flights should be set up in the trapping areas in order to determine movements of banded animals and to determine areas of concentration at different times of year. 2. Keep a map of each trapping area with a cumulative record of all sightings and returns from hunter-killed animals. These mapped locations to be used in helping set big game seasons within local areas. 3. Design and construct into the trap. a ''bull eliminator" so that large bulls cannot get 4. Design and make up a new type of colored neck band so that the problem rolling and fraying of the lighter colored material can be eliminated. 5. Tear down and relocate the Ellgen trap in the Gunnison new highway passes too close to the existing trap. area because of the 6. Rebuild the Miller Creek trap by raising the panels to the top of the poles, making a fence 10 feet high. This should stop the elk from jumping over the fence and escaping. ~) �-687· Set creosote posts and hang the panels from them at the Hill Creek site in order to stop elk from jumping out of this trap. Also, relocate the jump gate so that less time will be spent in trying to get the animals to jump into the net. 8. Concentrate a trapping crew in an area for a week or 10 days, then move to another site for a period. This may help reduce the number of recatches by allowing new bunches of elk to move into the trapping areas while there is no disturbance. Objectives: 1. To obtain as much information as is possible from a review of literature regarding different methods of trapping big game animals. 2. To continue work on the experimental deer and elk traps at the Sapinero Game Management Area, with the idea of developing new types of gates that will allow any number of animals to enter the trap and at the same time effectively seal them in. 3· To continue development of the net catching device which will make handling of the animals easier and safer for both the animals and the personnel working on them. 4. To mark and tag all animals caught with specially designed tags, ribbons in their ears, and plastic collars for their necks. Bells will also be tried if they are available. 5. To follow up on any reports of marked animals in order to determine the distance traveled, and summer range compared with winter range area. 6. To run several snowshoe, Sno-Cat or airplane surveys in the trapping areas to observe movements of the marked animals. 7· To test the drug dosages recommended by veterinarians through use of the CapChur gun as an incidental part of this study_The animals can be more easily handled when tranquilized and dosages can be recorded incidentally. Techniques Used: 1. The review of literature will be a continuing program of reading in the Journal of Wildlife Management and other pUblications regarding trapping and marking of big game animals that might fit our situation there in Colorado. 2. Bait deer and elk into the experimental group traps near Gunnison and on the White River Elk Study area with alfalfa hay, salt and other types of bait. Tag and mark all animals caught with ear tags, neck bands, ear ribbons in some cases and bells or radios if they become available. Deer and elk will be induced to jump into the next holding device for easier handling. �-69- 3. Any reports of marked animals will be checked out to get the following information. a. b. c. d. Distance traveled from trap site. Ease of identification. Summer range vs. winter range area. Map recoveries and sightings, such information to be used for management purposes. 4. Most of the information on sightings will come from sheep herders and pool riders in the various trapping areas who have been supplied with booklets to record sightings. These books (Figure 6) are to be sent to the biologist in charge of the study for compilation. There are several aerial flights scheduled to supplement the ground sightings. Records of neck band sightings will also be kept incidental to the aerial sex-ratio counts in the same areas. 5. Enlist the aid of a veterinarian to help work out the dosages for the drugs used. ��-71EXPERIMENTAL TRAPPING AND MARKING TECHNIQUES Raymond J. Boyd No articles were reviewed during the past segment that seemed to add any new information on big game trapping methods that would help us here in Colorado. The experimental gates that were constructed for the Miller Creek trap and the Ellgen trap were smaller than similar gates used in the past. The width of the gate has been cut from four feet to three feet (Figure 1) in the hope that the narrow opening would discourage bull elk larger than spikes from entering the traps. This was not the case as 17 large bulls (Figure 2) got into the Corral Gulch trap during the past trapping season. Some tentative plans have been drawn up for a "Bull-Eliminator" in front of all of the trap gates now in use. This device will be used first at the Corral Gulch trap near Gunnison until it can be perfected. The winter of 1961-62 was very severe one in both of the trapping areas. This was evidenced by the fact that between January 1, 1962 and March 20, 1962 there was a total of 87 elk and 108 deer caught in the two traps at the Sapinero Game Management Area. This total includes recatches. A total of 46 elk were actually tagged and neck banded, while 38 deer wer-etagged and neck banded. The snow was so deep that the animals could not move from one canyon to another as they might normally do, so that is the reason there were so many recatches. One deer was destroyed during the trapping operations, but it could not be determined if the injury to its back was a result of being trapped and jumped into the net, or if it had been previously injured. One spike elk was killed in the Corral Gulch trapped with a 6 point bull. The large bull had killed the smaller elk by the time we got to the trap to work the animals into the net. Injuries to the animals after they are in the trap and in the net have been negligible considering the number of animals that have been put through the traps since this program started. Losses from all causes since the experimental trapping program was started have been less than one per cent. Most of the animals that were caught were jumped into the net even if they were already banded. Some of the deer had been caught a dozen or more times, but they still jumped into the net when the panel in the side of the trap was opened. This is another piece of evidence that indicates that the net is safe, and does not harm the animals after they are entangled in it. The new trap on East Miller Creek in the White River National Forest was completed during the past segment, but was not in operation in time to do much good as far as numbers caught. There was a total of seven elk caught in this trap, and five of them were actually banded. The other two jumped OVer the fence and escaped. Tentative plans are already made to increase the height of the fences and eliminate this problem. The elk that were neck banded at this trap were marked with green plastic collars, so that marked elk could be identified by trap site because of the color of neck band they were wearing. The purpose of this was to identify elk on the summer range compared with the area that they wintered in. �Table 1 - Elk Trapped and Marked at the Corral Gulch Trap, East Elk Creek, Gmmison County, Winter, 1961-1962. Remarks Date 8ex Age Tag No. 1/20 1/20 1/21 1/21 1/21 1/14 1/21 1/22 1/24 2/5 2/5 2/14 Female Female Female Female Female Male Female Male Male Female Male Female Calf Mature Mature Yearling Mature Calf Mature Mature Yearling Mature Mature Mature 8-9 8-10 8-11 8-12 8-13 8-14 8-15 8-16 8-17 8-18 8-19 8-20 8-9 8-10 8-11 8-12 8-13 8-14 8-15 8-16 8-17 8-18 8-19 8-20 2/14 2/25 2/25 Male Male Female Mature Mature Yearling 8-21 8-23 8-24 8-22 8-23 8-24 3/5 3/5 3/5 3/9 3/9 3/11 3/13 3/14 3/19 Female Female Male Female Male Male Female Male Male Calf Calf Mature Calf Mature Mature Mature Yearling Mature 8-25 8-26 8-27 8-28 8-29 8-30 8-31 8-32 8-33 8-25 8-26 8-27 8-28 8-29 8-30 8-31 8-32 8-33 White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, 5 point bull White plastic collar, spike bull White plastic collar White plastic collar, 4-point bull White plastic collar, blind in left eye, lost red tag White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, two small ant.lersin velvet White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, 5-point bull Orange plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, 5-point bull White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar �~-j I I -73- Table 2- Elk Trapped and Marked at the Ellgen Trap, East Elk Creek, Gunnison County, Winter 1961-62. Remarks Date 8ex Age Tag No. 1/29 Female Calf 8-101 8-101 2/1 2/1 2/1 2/1 2/1 2/1 2/22 2/24 2/24 2/24 2/24 2/24 3/4 3/4 3/14 3/14 3/14 3/14 3/14 3/20 3/20 ) Female Male Male Female Male Male Female Female Female Female Female 8-104 Mature Calf 8-105 8-106 Calf Mature 8-107 8-108 Calf 8-109 Calf 8-121 Mature Mature 8-125 8-126 Mature Yearling 8-127 8-128 Mature 8-129 Calf Mature 8-139 8-141 Calf 8-149 Mature Yearling 8-150 Mature 8-151 8-152 Mature Calf 8-153 Yearling 8-159 8-160 Calf 8-104 8-105 8-106 8-107 8-108 8-109 8-121 8-125 8-126 8-121' 8-128 8-129 8-139 8-141 8-149 8-150 8-151 8-152 8-153 8-159 8-160 Female Female Female Female Female Female Male Female Female White plastic collar, right hind leg missing below hock White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar, wet cow White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar Orange plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar White plastic collar No collar White Collar, wet cow White collar White collar White collar White collar �-74- Table 3 - Deer Trapped and Marked at the Ellgen Trap, East Elk Creek, Gunnison County, Winter 1961-62. Remarks Tag No. 8ex Age Date 1/30 Male Mature 8-102 8-102 1/30 2/5 2/10 2/10 2/12 2/12 2/12 2/18 Male Male Male Male Male Male Male Fawn Mature Mature Yearling Yearling Mature Mature Yearling 8-103 8-110 8-111 8-112 8-113 8-114 8-115 8-116 8-103 8-110 8-111 8-112 8-113 8-114 8-115 8-116 Mature Mature Fawn Mature Mature Mature Fawn Fawn Old Yearling Fawn Fawn Yearling Mature Fawn Old Mature Yearling Fawn Fawn Mature Mature Mature Yearling Yearling Fawn Mature Mature Mature 8-117 8-117 8-118 8-118 8-119 8-119 8-120 8-120 8-122 8-122 8-123 8-123 8-124 8-124 8-130 8-130 8-131 8-131 8,...1328-132 8-133 8-133 8,-134 8-134 8-135 8-135 8-136 8-136 8-137 S-137 8-138 8-138 8-140 8-140 8-142 8-142 8-143 8-143 8-144 8-144 8-145 8-145 8-146 8-146 8-147 8-147 8-148 8-148 8-154 8-154 8-155 8-155 8-156 8-156 8-157 8-157 8-158 8-158 2/20 2/20 2/20 2/21 2/23 2/23 2/23 2/25 2/25 2/26 2/26 2/26 2/26 3/2 3/2 3/3 3/4 3/6 3/7 3/7 3/7 3/7 3/7 3/7 3/14 3/18 3/18 3,118 3/18 Male Male Male Female Female Female Female Female Male Male Female Female Male Male Male Male Male Female Male Male Male Male Male Male Male Male Male Orange plastic collar and ear streamers, 4 - point buck Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar, 3-point buck Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar, spike buck Orange plastic collar, 2-point buck Orange plastic collar, 4-point buck White plastic collar, 4-point buck Orange plastic collar, growth in left eye, blind in it Orange plastic collar, 4-point buck Orange plastic collar, 4-point buck Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plast.ic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar Orange plastic collar �-75Table 4 - Elk Trapped and Marked at the Hill Creek Trap, White River National Forest, Rio Blanco COlIDty,Winter 1961-62. Remarks Tag No. Age Date Sex White plastic collar Mature W-2tl w-28 Female 1/18 White plastic collar Calf W-29 W-29 Female 1/18 White plastic collar Calf W-30 W-30 Female 1/20 White plastic collar Mature W-31 W-31 Female 1/20 White plastic collar Mature W-32 W-32 Female 1/23 White plastic collar Mature Female W-33 W-33 1/23 White plastic collar Mature W-34 W-34 Female 2/1 White plastic collar Mature W-35 Female W-35 3/9 White plastic collar Mature W-36 W-36 Female 3/9 irable 5 - Elk Trapp ed and Marked at the East Miller Creek Trap, White River National Forest, Rio Blanco COlIDty,Winter 1961-62. Remarks Tag No. Age Date Sex Green plastic collar Mature W-201 W-201 Female 3(3 Gre.enplastic collar W-202 W-202 Mature Female 3/3 Green plastic collar, Male Mature W-203 W-203 3/4 2-point bull Mature w-204 w-204 Green plastic collar Female 3/10 W-205 W-205 Green plastic collar Mature Female 3/10 Table 6 - Elk Caught During Winter 1961-62 that Were Tagged in Previous Years, White River National Forest. Where Where Date Date Caught Tagged Tagged Tag- No. Remarks 3/9/62 Hill C.reek Hill Creek 2/6/61 W-7 Had lost original collar; white plastic collar put back on. Table 7- Tag Returns from Elk Killed during 1961 HlIDtingSeason, White River National Forest, Colorado. Where Where Date Date Tagged Killed Remarks Tagged Killed 10/23/51 2/15/61 Hill Cr. Burro Mourrba.l.n ~1/5/61 2/19/61 Hill Cr. Hill Creek Had moved 8 miles west of trapping site; had lost collar; 2-point bull when killed. Tag No. W-ll. Had moved 1 mile east of trapping site; had lost collar; cow. Tag No. W-13. �-76- Table 8 - Tag Returns from Deer and Elk Killed during 1961 Hunting Season, Gunnison National Forest, Colorado Date Date Where Where Killed Tagged Tagged Killed Remarks 10/21/61 3/5/60 Corral Gulch Soap Creek Cow had moved 12 miles west of the trap 81t,e. had lost collar .. 10/22/61 3/18/60 Corral Gulch Cliff Creek Cow had moved 23 miles north of the trap sitej had lost collar. 10/26/61 3/7/61 Corral Gulch West Beckwith Buck deer had moved Mountain 25 miles no~thwest of trap sitej collar still intact. �Figure 1 - Entrance gate on the Miller Creek trap. Type developed in 1961 segment. Narrow Figure 2 - Antlers removed from Mature Bulls Corral Gulch trap, Gunnison,1962. �-77- N • STUDY Figure 3 ....Uhite AREA LEGEND nivc;r Elk Study ,'\rea - l.ocat ion of GAME MANAG[MEHT BOUNDARY Elk Tr ap s and Si£;!htings of Banded Elk ttQHWAy -=-::9 SECONDARY During 1961. UNIT IIMII- )( Trap Sile Clll!EK~ • ~]cck 3and Si:"hHn[l" , ..J ••.• '"J LAKE _ ROAD ---- �-78- N Fieure 4 - Whit e River Elk Study Area - Location of LEGEND -__ Tagged Elk Killed During 1961 Big Game Soason • Trap Site IIENT 80UNDARY UNIT ---- ~y==S£COIIDAIIY 1t1YDCIII!!IC ROAD - --- .----..-c::: " I<i11 Location LAg _ �Fipure 5 - Map showing +he location of tagged deer and elk killed in the Gunnison area, 1961 big game season. (Opposite page) z> o Trap Location x Locat ion of hunter ki 11 Figure 6 - Page from neck band sighting booklets that are handed out to sheep herders, pool riders, Forest Rangers and Conservation Officers. These sheets are to be sent in as they are filled out. alG GAMe NICK SAND O'$I~VATIONIAICOAD Date "anaea TotSI Animal in No. Sex Herd NeCk Band Color OBSERVER: Si gnature SpecIfIc Loeatfon of Banded Animal �\C~"" , r: ,Figure 7. . .l ", ,\" ~I > ~ {~ Miller Creek trap showing crowding pen and net frame. Extrance gate at extreme right. wnite River National Forest, February, 1962. �Figure 8 - Banded cow elk near Gunnison, Colorado, February, 1962. Photo by Jesse Williams Colorado Game and Fish Department �-79- The Hill Creek trap caught a total of 18 elk, and none of them were actually tagged and banded. The other escaped over the sides of the trap, which would indicate that the type and height of the trap walls need to be changed if this problem. is to be solved in this area. All information received to date indicates that the collars that are being used to mark the elk are easily visible from both the air and the ground. There were a total of 45 separate observations of marked elk in the White River Elk Study'Area, this was from a total of 27 marked elk. Figure 3 shows the locations of all of the sightings during' the past segment, while Figure 4 shows the location of tagged elk that were killed during the 1961 big game season in the study area. There were no reported sightings of banded elk in the Gunnison area during the past segmentj however, there were three elk and one deer shot during the hunting season that had been tagged at the Corral Gulch trap. Figure 5 shows the location of these kills. No opportunities arose during the past segment to use the Cap-Chur gun or to test new drugs on trapped animals. The trapping program at the Sapinero Game Management Area used about 200 bales of alfalfa and grass hay during the trapping season, while the White River trapping program used about 60 bales of grass and alfalfa hay. Prepared by: Date: Raymond J. Boyd Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan ------~--------~~------Assistant Director, Research October, 1962 ------------------~--~----------- Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��October, 1962 -81JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO --------------~------------------ Project No. Work Plan No. ~W_-~3_8_-_R_-_l~5 D_e_e_r_-_E_l_k __I~n_v_e_s_t_i~g~a_t_i_o_n_s _ 10 :Job No. 1 --------~---------------------------------------------------- Title of Job: Range and Game Management Workbook. Period Covered: April 1, 1961 to March 30, 1962. ABSTRACT Insufficient time prevented further work on this job, due to moving to the new Fort Collins Research Center, and the press of other project affairs. Recommendations: This job should be carried over for one more year to allow time to sufficiently finish the lay-out and general content, as well as a model book, from which they can be made for each specific district by the Area Supervisors and the Conservation Officers. Objectives: To develop a model range and game management workbook so that all Conservation Officers in the state will have a uniform manner of obtaining, recording, and maintaining pertinent data on which to base sound hunting season recommendations, with maps, suggested procedures, and the manner of analyzing and interpreting the data. Techniques Used: Obtain all the past information available in a selected W. C. O. district on range and game data, weather information, etc., and design a district range and game management workbook for the use of the Conservation Officer in his district to provide a permanent record of game ranges, counts, studies, harvests, management procedures, hunting seasons, weather, access and management public relations. Game winter ranges and concentrations areas in the district will be mapped. Procedures based on research findings or use will be described and suggested for various activities such as sex ratio counts, trend counts, and winter mortality counts, with designations of study or trend areas on district maps. The information will be indexed and arranged in such a manner as to make the pertinent data readily available for use in basing hunting season recommendations each year by the district W. C. O. �-82Findings: Other project affairs needing more immediate attention, and the moving of headquarters to the New Fort Collins Research Center, prevented completion of this job as originally intended. It wjll be completed during the next segment. Prepared by: R_i_c_h_a_r_d~N __._D_e_n_n __eL_y Project Leader Date: October, 1962 Approved by: --------------~~~~~~~-------- ~L-a~u~r-e~n-c_e~E~.~R~l-·o-r~d~an--~-Assistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �-83- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT state of COLORADO --------~~~~~---------------- Project No.: Deer-Elk Investigations W-38-R-15 ------~~--~~------------- Job No. Work Plan No. 2 ------~~------------------ Title of Job: Check Station Surveys. Period Covered: October and November, 1961. 3 --------~~--------------------- ABSTRACT This job was written in this segment to allow the Department to hire check station labor to be assigned to the permanent big game check stations during the hunting season in place of the game biologists who normally work at these stations. These biologists were assigned to the seven temporary check stations set up the first ten days of season, in addition to the regular Rifle Check station, to get an almost total check from within the eight game management units comprising the White River elk study area. The details of the sex and aging data obtained by these men at these stations appears in the write-up for Work Plan 2, Job No.7, White River Elk Study. The check stations tallied a total of 54,178 deer and 4,195 elk during the regular 1961 hunting season. Recommendations: This job, as such, should be dropped, as the data required nowadays in specific studies takes care of these provisions. Objectives: To obtain biological data on deer and elk at the permanently established check stations throughout the state. Techniques Used: Laborers were hired to work at the five permenent check stations throughout the state to compensate for the use of the biologists on the research stations. Findings:. See the completion report for Work Plan 2, Job No.7, River Elk Study, for the data, details and interpretation. Prepared by: Date: Richard N. Denney Project Leader Approved by: October, 1962 ----------------~--~-------------- the White Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director,Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��Cc-coDer, 1962 -85- JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH SEGMENT PROJECT State of COLORADO ----------~~~~~--------------- Project Noo Work Plan No. ~W_-~3_8_-~R~-~1~5 4 ----------------------------- Title of Job: Period ~D~e~e~r_-~E~l~k~In~v~e~s~t~i~g~a~t~i~o~n~s _ Covered: Study of Diseases Job No. 3A --------~~-------------------- and Parasites. April 1, 1961 through March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT Necropsies on an elk heifer calf and a bighorn ram revealed that they apparently died from acute kidney degeneration and heart failure, respectively 0 During check station work on the White River elk study, 196 deer and l2 elk blood samples were taken, and agglutination test results were all negative for Brucellosis and Leptospirosis. A. deer die-off reported significant was found. on the Uncompahgre Plateau was investigated and nothing Recommendations: It is recommended that further attempts be made to determine the cause of die-offs reported from certain specific areas every few years by getting in there with a crew of men and the Conservation Officer, possibly by helicopter, and obtain adequate specimens for analysis. It is important to be able to clear wildlife, at least big game species, of any accusations regarding transmission, carrying or being reservoirs for livestock diseases. Therefore, studies on viral bovine rhinotracheitis should be completed, and more data on the South Dakota deer agent should be obtained. There are apparently some sunilarities in these viral diseases. Blood samples should be collected whenever possible during hunting seasons, trapping, etc. to get broader coverage on the start we already have. live- ��STUDY OF DISEASES AND PARASITES RichardN. Denney Objec~ives: To assist in the collection of necessary blood, organ, tissue and ~lgestlve tract content samples as required for specific cooperative studles and analyses of diseases, parasites and associated ailments with the Veterinary School at Colorado State University and the State Vet.erinarian. Techn~ques Used: During the performance of routine work or special livetrap~n.ng oper-atd.ons on big game animals obtain blood samples wherever pos~lblej and whenever sick or dead animals from possible epidemics or serlOUS parasitic infections are encountered obtain the necessary organs Blood Samples During the first ten days of the 1961 big game hunting season, seven small check stations were set up in addition to the permanent Rifle Station in and around the White River elk study area. This area is comprised of Game Management Units 12, 13, 23, 24, 25, 26, 33, and 34, and lies roughly between the Colorado River and the Yarrrpaor Bear River, and east of Colorado Highway 13· These check stations were manned by biologists from several research projects who have had some check station experience. They were~ Wayne Sandfort, George W. Jones, Ray Boyd, Harold Shepherd, Bertram D. Baker, Wesley C. Nelson, L. Jack Lyon, Don Hoffman, Warren Snyder, Francis Metsger, Glenn Rogers, John Harris, Roger Evans, and the project leader, Richard N. Denney. In addition several student .assistants were used, namely, Charles Hurd, Ken Nicol and Harold Lanning. Conservation Officers Art Gresh, Lou Vidakovich, Dwight Owens, Leo Broux, John Stevenson, Lloyd Hazard and Jack Hogue were assigned to the stations for law enforcement purposes. The primary objective of these stations, which operated approximately 12 hours per day for the first 10 days, was to obtain age data through dentition on all elk from the study area, and to determine if collared elk had been observed, and where, by hunters. Incidentally with thiS, then, came the opportunity t.oobtain blood samples from relatively fresh carcasses of both deer and elk, primarily during the first few days of the season. This was done by collecting blood which had not yet plasmolized in the thorac~ cavity or in the jugular vein. Samples were collected in rubber stoppered test tubes, and mailed in special boxes with franked postage to the 'Cooperative Brucellosis Laboratory in Denver. �-88The project leader sent a letter of instructions to each biologist on the stations explaining the instructions received. from Dr. William C 'I'ob Ln , State Veterinarian. Briefly, they were to obtain approximately 5 cc of unplasmolized blood in each test tube. These were to be refrigerated if possible, but at any rate prevented from freezing or becoming too warm. It was desired that the samples be mailed. every 48 hours if possible" c Several blood samples were sent in from the Li.ttle Hills Game Experiment Station by Bill McKean also. The laboratory ran the tests on Brucellosis a report to us. and Leptospirosis, and. submitted Necropsy During hunting season a party of hunters in the Divide Creek area found a heifer calf elk which was apparently partially blind and in a weakened condl tion. They caught it and turned it in to the Rifle Check Station. Inasmuch as Dr" Robert W. Davis of the Colorado State University Veterinary College has been studying blindness in two elk from Arizona, he was contacted regarding this calf. As a result, a Department airplane flew the elk to Fort Collins and was met by Dr. Davis. He put the animal in one of his study pens, and it soon died. Members of the staff and laboratories at the College of Veterinary Medicine ran various tests and conducted. a necrospy on her. Also .•in February a mature bighorn ram was picked up by George W" Jones back of the golf course in Glenwood Springs, and he subsequently died. He was brought to the Veterinary College for post-mortem to determine the cause of death, as no exterior wounds or injuries were apparent. Die-Offs In early October several reports of deer dying in the Uncompahgre P'l.at.eau area were received, primarily in the Southwest Regional office in Montrose. Ray Boyd, Senior Game Biologist, investigated the area and couldn't find any fresh carcasses. A yearling doe was collected by him and a necropsy run by Dr. Wm. W. Brown, Extension Veterinarian and specimens collected by analysis" This occurred just prior to hunting amongst the local public. season and caused considerable alarm Findings: Blood Samples A total of 196 deer and 12 elk blood samples were submitted to the Cooperative Brucellosis Laboratory in Denver by mail. All of these were run on the blood agglutination test for Brucellosis and were found to be negative. In addition, 26 deer and one elk blood samples were run for Leptospi.rosis pomona and none were reactors or suspects. �-89- A. letter of appreciation was received from William C. Tobin, D.V.M., State Veterinarian and E. S. Cox, Veterinarian-in-charge-of-Colorado, stating that "this is not a great number of samples, but does give rather conclusive evidence that Colorado wildlife is not infected with either Brucellosis or Lepto.1I It hasn't been uncommon for stockmen to attribute the occurrence of Bang's Disease and Lepto in their herds to wildlife. Other diseases, such as Listeriosis, have been blamed on deer in some areas. This has been the first attempt by the Department to either substantiate or refute these accusations by the stockmen, and to date the big game species have a clean bill of health. Necropsy The elk heifer calf which was flown to the C.S.U~ Veterinary School last October was necropsied by them. Their clinical diagnosis, performed by Dr. Charles E. Whiteman, showed marked submandibular edema; no visible lesions in the cardiovascular system; the spleen was pale and contracted, lymph nodes dark and very soft. Histopathology of the spleen showed sero-hemorrhagic lymphadenitis with marked reduction of the cellular elements in the spleen. The reticuloendothelial system was prominent throughout the sections. In the digestive system there was marked post-mortem autolysis with possibly some catarrhal enteritis. There were numerous tapeworms present. Histopathology of the liver revealed moderately extensive centrolobular fatty alteration. In the respiratory system the lungs showed marked hypostatic congestion. In the locomotor system there were no visible lesions, and no fracture of the cervical vertebrae. Examination of the urinary syst.emrevealed blood-stained kidneys, with a light-colored cortex, as if having fatty infiltration. Histopathology of the showed marked fatty alteration of the collecting tubule epithelium with necrosis present in many areas. Numerous cystic proximal tubles, and a considerable amount of protein in both the Bowman's capsules and the tubules was present. No visible lesions were evident in the genital system. The nervous system showed some congestion of the meninges of the brain and spinal cord. No marked alteration of the brain was observed in histopathology. �-90One eye is being processed in celloidin, and the brain was saved for Dr. Davis. As yet they have not been sectioned and examined microscopically for any significant alterations, but will be reported upon in the next completion report when done. The fi.nal diagnosis was fatty nephrosis and hepatosis. Apparently the animal died. from degeneration of the kidneys, and had a certain amount of meningitis. Until the eyes are sectioned, and the brain examined more closely, the apparent blindness is unexplained. The Rocky Mountain bighorn ram which was brought in, Figure 1, died soon after capture and was frozen in the attitude picture. He had eartag number A 1203 on his left ear. A check of my records revealed that he is a ram that I helped Clifford. Ao Moser trap and tag in January, 1956, at Grizzly Creek in Glenwood Canyon on the Colorado River. He was five years old at the time we tagged him, and was trapped using alfalfa bait in a modified clover trapo Thi.s makes him almost 12 years old at the time of his death 0 Necropsy was performed by Dr. Charles E. Whiteman at the Colorado State University Veterinary Hospital in February, 1962. As apparent in the photo, his horns were asymetrical, the right one being 42 inches long, but thirm.er at the base than the left one, which was more typical. There was an old scar near the base of the right horn, which could have conceivably been a bullet wound, and exudation matted the pelage at the base of the horn, from the scar ti.ssue on the horn. Because of this, I requested that they examine the head closely for injuries, as there were none apparent elsewhere This was done in my presence, and there was no evidence of any injury to the head. or skull that would have caused any damage. His teeth (Molars) were worn considerably, except that the incisors were in good. shape. 0 The cause of death was apparently right heart failure, resulting from a thinwalled right heart. Water and edema in the thoracic and peritoneal cavities substantiated this heart-failure diagnosis. Otherwise} the ram was in fair shape from the parasitological and disease standpoint, there being absolutely no evidence of lung-worm or parasitism generally There wasn't any fat on his musculature, nor around his kidneys, heart or mesent.ar-y, We didn't look at the bone marrow Ln his femur, however. 0 In summary, this ram di.ed of general old age and heart failure" Die-Offs As stated earlier, Ray Boyd and Dro William Brown weren't able to locate any freshly-dead deer carcasses in the area of the Uncompahgre Plateau that was reported to have a severe deer d.Le=of'f".Cowboys in the area had reported seei.ng a large number of dead deer while rounding-up their cattle in early October" Accordi.ng to their reports the animals appeared fat and in good condition, with no visible cause of death. �Figure 1. Twelve year old bighorn sheep ram from the GlenwoodCanyon area. Photo by WayneWillis Sanfort. �-91Ray Boyd shot a yearling doe deer in this area, and he and Dr. Brown examined it in the field, Tissue and organ specimens taken and later examined in the laboratory revealed no thing that might have caused death or sickness. This is similar to reports received in the past concerning late summer and fall deer die-offs in the Blue Mountain area, but for which we couldn1t obtain any animals or speciments for analysis, This has occurred two or three years in this general area, one time being reported in the Evacuation Creek country. The Veterinary School at Colorado State University, as well as the State Veterinarian, has assured us of their cooperation and help in the future when such an occasion arises again and we can get a field crew right in the area immediately. Prepared by: Richard N. Denn~y Date: October, 1962 -------------------------- Approved by: Laurence E. Riordan A.ssistant Director, Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Aid C:oordinator ��October, -93- REPORT RESEARCH SEGMENT PROJECT COLORADO State of Project JOB COMPLETION 1962 No. Work Plan No. ~W_-~3~8_-R~-=1~5 ~ __ ~~~D~e~e7r~-=E=1=k~In~v~e~s~t~i~g~a~t=i70~n~s--~---Mortality Factors Affecting Deer and Elk Herds. 4 --------~---------------- Job No. ~3~B~ Period Covered: ~ __~S~t~u=d~y~~0=f_=D~e~e=r~L~0~s~s~e~s~o~n~C~o=l~o=r=a April 1, 1961 through March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT To determine the various factors that affect the loss of deer by automobiles on Colorado highways, a standard field form was designed and distributed to all field men in the Department. Each time a highway-killed deer was seen, the form was to be filled out as completely as possible and the animals removed from the highway right-of-way. The animal was also to have one ear cut off so that another man would not duplicate the report on the location of the kill. Forms were to be filled out even if the sex, age and the location were the only information available. of the kill One of the locations in the state was chosen for special study as we had received many reports of highway-killed deer in this area. All highway signs were counted, distances measured, and indications of the number of deer hit but not seen from the right-of-way were determined by strip counts along a five and one-half mile portion of the study area. There were 1,077 deer reported killed by automobiles during the project year, also there were 11 elk, 5 antelope, 1 bighorn sheep, and 1 whitetail deer reported killed by cars. Most of the accidents occurred between 4:00 P. M. and 4:00 A. M., the average accident cost the driver $141.31, and 71 per cent of the accidents occurred on known deer crossings. The strip count of dead deer indicated that 45 per cent of the deer that are hit by automobiles get far enough away from the highway so that they are not seen and reported. Garfield County led the state with 227 reported Recommendations: Continue in from the field men. the compiling deer kills. of the deer-auto reports as they come �Meet with the Highway Department as often as they request, and furnish them with any information that they might require, and also keep a map up-to-date for them showing the location of highway kills. Help design new types of highway crossing signs and make recommendations plans to reduce the number of accidents of this type. for Determine if it is at all possible to reduce the number of highway signs in some areas, so that the game crossing signs will be more evident. Also, determine if the si.gns could be taken down during seasons of the year when they are not actually needed on the highway. Objectives: automobiles To determine the various on Colorado highways. factors that affect the loss of deer by Techn~ques~se,!: A standard field form was designed (Boyd, 1961) and distributed to all field men in the department. Each time a highway-killed deer was seen, the form was to be filled out as completely as possible and the animal removed from the highway right·-of-way. The animal was also to have one ear cut off so that anot,her man would not duplicate the report on the location of the kill. Forms were to be filled out even if the sex, age and the location were the only information available. of the kill One of t.he locations in the state was chosen for special study as we had received many reports of highway-killed deer in this area. All highway signs were counted, distances measured, and indications of the number of deer hit but not seen from the right-of-way were determined by strip counts along a five and one-half mile portion of t,his area. �-95- STUDY OF DEER LOSSES ON COLORADO HIGHWAYS RaymondJ. Boyd As was mentioned in the last report on this job (Boyd, 1961), many areas in the state have large numbers of deer killed by automobiles, but very few reports are received from these areas. Attempts have been made to interest the local field men in these areas, but in most cases we have not had much success. All figures listed below, then, are an absolute minimum. It is not compulsory that drivers who hit big game animals in Colorado report the accident to the Game and Fish Department or to the State PatroL The only report that is required is when more than $50.00 damage is done to an automobile by any type of accident. Much information cannot, therefore, be collected on the amount and kind of damage and whether injuries occurred to the people involved. Class of Animal Killed 1,077 reported deer kills (see Figure 1) 11 reported elk kills 5 reported antelope kills 1 reported bighorn sheep kill 1 reported white-tail deer kill All of the data listed below will be concerned only with deer for the balance of the report. Age-Sample Size - 1,077 deer Adult 742 - 68.9% Fawn 309,,. 28.7% Unknown-- 26 - 2.4% Sex-Sample Size - 972 deer Male --- 352 - 36.2% Female - 620 - 63.8% Amount of Damage to the Automobile Sample S.ize -139 reports listed damage to the vehicle Average cost per accident - $14L31 (0-$1,000) Time of Accident Sample Size - 292 reports listed time of accident Midnight to 2:00 a.m ..-- 22 2:00 a.m. to 4;00 a.m.-- 26 4:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. -- 16 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. -- 19 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.-- 9 10 10:00 a.m. to 12 noon 6 12 noon to 2:00 p.m. 8 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. -- 25 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.-- 73 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.-- 51 10:00 p.m. to Midnight-- 24 8.7% 25.3% 17.710 8.3% �=96-· Location of Acci.dent - 1,071 Sample Size reports listed t.he location of the acc Lderrt On a KnownCrossing - 762 - 71.010 Not, on a KnownCrossing - 30929.0% Area - 764 reports .On a Kno~ Crossing Crossing listed kills of th is type Marked .- 435 - 5609% Not Marked - 329 - 43.110' Count.y of Accident and Highway (by regional boundaries) Southwest. Region _. 288 deer Alamosa Archuleta Costilla Delta Dolores Gunni.son Hi.nsdale La Pl.at.a Mesa Mi.neral Montezuma Montrose Ouray Rio Grand.e Saguache San Mi.guel 1 deer 36 deer 9 elk, 5 deer 4 deer 4 deer 1 antelope 79 deer 1 deer 67 deer 11 deer 9 deer 15 deer 11 d.eer 20 deer 18 deer 6 deer 1 deer Eagle Garfi.eld 57 deer 227 deer Grand Mesa Moffat 25 deer 11 deer 41 deer Pitkin 9 deer R.i,oBlanco 167 deer Routt Summit 2 deer 9 deer 1 deer Adams 4 deer Boulder Clear Creek 17 deer 16 deer Dougla Highway 160 J Chi.mneyRock and vicinit.y 1 elk, Highway 50, Sapinero to Iola 1 elk Highway 160 east of Bayfield) .550 north of Durango 1 Mountain Sheep J Highway 5.50 Ouray to Colona Highway 160., South Fork to Del Norte 1 antelope Highway 24, Avon t.o Dotsero Highway 24 west of Rifle to DeBeque, Highway 82 south of Glenwood Springs 2 antelope Highway 40 east north of Craig j of Cr-ai.g, Hi.ghway 13 Highway 13 Rio Blanco to Meeker, west of Meeker., Hi.ghway 64 �'(~~ r> / <-~I ,.1fIII't ., ) cC ". 4../ I \.0 t"t 1 --.... { "Vw'" .,J .• ~,} ••• ••••• 7 Figui'e 2 - Special Study Section, 26 miles long , Location of Hepor t ed Highway-Losses Sho\'II1 by Dots. One-hundred and Eleven Kills are Shown. The special area where the strip samples were run is also shown • �Northeast region-Continued. Elbert Jefferson Larimer 3 deer 16 deer 32 deer Logan Morgan Park Sedgwick Weld Yuma 2 deer 2 deer 36 deer 2 deer 6 deer 1 deer Highway 285, Bailey to Kenosha Pass 104 deer Southeast Region Bent Chaffee Custer Cheyenne El Paso Fremont Lake Lincoln Prowers Teller Highway 66 Estes Park area, Highway 287 Virginia Dale area 1 deer 38 deer 1 deer 1 deer 40 deer 16 deer 3 deer 2 deer 1 deer 1 deer Highway 24 north and east of Buena Vista Highway 87 north of Colorado Springs 1 elk, Highway 50 east of Salida Month of Accident Sample S.ize- 1,077 reports list.edthe month of tn e accident January, 1962 February, 1962 March, 1962 April, 1961 May, 1961 June, 1961 124 Accidents 108 Accidents 209 Accidents 106 Accidents 72 Accidents 50 Accidents July, 1961 August, 1961 September, 1961 October, 1961 November, 1961 December, 1961 78 Accidents 31 Accidents 36 Accidents 88 Accidents 89 Accidents 86 Accidents A section of U. S. Highway 6 and 24 between DeBeque and Rifle, Colorado was chosen as a special study area, because there were many deer-auto accidents in this area, and we were getting excellent information on these accidents from the local W.C.O. and the Colorado Highway Department maintenance crews. The study section is 26 miles long, with about 3/4 mile of highway within the city limits of Grand Valley not included in the study section (Figure 2). Located on the 26 miles of the study section are 68 highway signs comprising 12 different types (see Figures 3 through 8). Of the total miles on the study section, 25.6 miles are posted 65 M.P.H. or faster. It would appear, then, that speed is a major factor in the deer-auto losses in this area, which included 111 report.ed highway kills during the project year. This section of highway is sparsely vegetated, and most plants or bushes that are near the highway rightof-way are not high enough to hide a deer until a car was upon it. The rightof-way in this area is about 120 feet wide and is devoid of vegetation, so visibility is not too much of a factor in this area. �, \,,\ , •• ," ••• f- ~'" •• "'-,.. 'II ..•..- !c , ..... • i " it' "" ~ •• l! " "~ " , ",,'.!-•. • ~ ,,1... • .. ~ •• •• • .... fit •• t • •• ~'~ .. ." I Figure 1 - (Opposite Page) 1~p showing all reported highway kills for the calendar year 1961. The heaviest areas of deer-auto kills are in Rio Blanco and Garfield counties. other problem areas are in Gunnison, La Plata, Archuleta, EI Paso, Park and Chaffee counties. There are 845 kill locations on this map. �Figure 3 - Large trucks traveling at high speeds are unable to stop or swerve. if deer cross the highway in front of them. Figure 4 - Hitting a deer at 35 M.P.H. caused $129 00 in damages to the front end and right quarter panel of this automobile. 0 �~ SPEED LIMIT Figure 5 - There are 19 speed limit signs of this large type in the study section west of Rifle, Colorado. The length of this study area is 26 miles. Figure 6 - There are only four of these signs on the entire stretch of road between Rifle and DeBeque. There were III deer reported killed in this area last year. There are no signs west of Grand Valley where 29 deer were reported killed. �COLORADO 789 Figure 7 - There are 12 signs of this tyoe on the study section. This is an average of one sign every four miles each direction. There is no other highway that a motorist could get mixed uo on in this area. It would seem that the area is over-signed at least in the above type. Figure 8 - There are 14 signs of this type on the study section. ~bst of this highway is in flat country where the curve can be seen for some distance. Again, this might be an area where the highway is over-signed. �-99One area only five and one-half miles long showed a reported kill of 70 deer. This area was chosen for special work to try and determine how many deer are hit by an automobile, and then travel a short distance before they drop. This information is necessary since all reported kills are usually deer that are on the highway or just off the roadway in the borrow pit. Accordingly, a modified strip sample (Kelker, 1945) was run north of the highway to the base of the bluffs, an average distance of one-half mile. With the assistance of Colorado state University students a total of 21 transects were counted. All dead deer were to be tallied as they were seen, and the average sight distance to the dead animal was to be estimated in yards. From this data we could compute the average effective strip width, and by projection get the total number of dead deer on the study area. These figures wou.Ld give us a good idea of the number of deer hit by automobiles that would travel a short distance before they would lie down and die. Number of Dead Deer Actually seen Size of Study Area Average Strip Width Average Strip Length Number of Acres in 21 strips We found area. 9 deer in 367.5 acreSj therefore, there should be 9 2,292 acres 70 yards 404 yards 367.5 acres 56 dead deer on the study It follows, then that 55 per cent of the deer hit by cars in the study area are killed outright, and are reported. The other 45 per cent get far enougb from the road before they die so that they are not seen or reported. On the above basis there were 126 deer actually killed on the study area, and if we choose to expand these figures to a statewide basis, 1,958 deer were killed by automobile during the project year. It is felt that the above figures are valid, if only for the area under study because there is no history of winter-loss in the area and all hunting season loss was eliminated so far as possible from the count of dead deer. Discussion: The greatest mortality suffered by one class of animal was in the mature female classification which is consistent with the information gained in the previous year's work. The average cost per accident is about $17.00 higher than that reported in last year's segment. No apparent reason can be given for this higher figure, unless it would be the fact that more serious accidents occurred which came to the attention of the field men of the department. The time that the accidents occurred showed more variation during the last segment than any of the previous reports that the present Biologist had submitted. This can be easily explained by the fact that the western slope of Colorado experienced a more severe winter in 1961-62 than they have had since the winter of 1951-52. Deer were out almost 24 hours a day foraging near the highways. Since deer were on or around the roadways during the daylight hours �-100- it tended to spread out the number killed throughout the day" and thus some that cloud the normal pattern that would be expected,based upon normal deer act.i.vf.t.y , The number of deer that were killed on known crossings that were marked was considerable, 435 reported. Thi.s might indicate that the crossing signs are not large enough to be seen easi.ly J or that local people are so used to seeing these sLgris that they ei.ther ignore them or do not see them at all because they are so fami.liar with their own local stretches of road. 0 One other factor that was measured this past year was whether known deer crossings were marked. or not. It developed that 43.1 per cent of the accidents that occurred on known crossing areas were on ones that were not marked. at alL Kither the Colorado Gameand Fish Department or the Colorado Department of Highways is to blame for not having signs on these crossing areas. The information available on the study section of highway west of RifleJ Colorado showi.ng 68 highway signs on 26 mi.les of road might indicate that there are too many signs on the highways, which might tend. to make people less aware of the meaning of signs because there are just too many to look at. Also) there are many "Deer Crossing" signs that are left up the entire year even though the danger period. might be only four or five months. If no deer are seen for many months a regular traveler on the highway might tend to forget to look out for any animals that might be on the roadway. Several meetings have been held with personnel of the Planning Comml.s si.on of the Colorado Department of Highways concerning the problem of d.ee.r=airt.oaccidents on our highways. They are very much conce.rned, as i.s the Colorado State Patrol" We have discussed different types of game crossing signs and. other measures that might be taken to reduce this loss. They are alreadyplanni.ng a series of tests on new types of signs within the study area west of Ri.fle. WIth the information that is now available, we will be in a position to evaluate how effective these new signs wi.ll be. Continued cooperati.on with that agency will be a very important part of this jOb during the next segment. Li.terature Cited: Boyd, RaymondJ. 1961. Study of Deer Losses on Colorado Hi.ghways. Federal Aid. Quarterly Report, Colorado Gameand. Fish Department Apri.l: 75-82. (Mimeo) c Kelker, G. H. 1945. Measurement and Interpretation of Forces that Determine Populations of ManagedDeer Herds" Doctorate Thesis., University of Mighican, Ann Arbor, 422 pp. Prepared by: RaymondJ. Boyd Date: October, 1962 Approved.by: Laurence E. Ri.ordan '--.,---Assistant Directory Research Ferd C. Kleinschnitz Federal Ai.d Coordi.nator �-101- October, 1962 JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH PROJECT SEGMENT State of COLORADO ----------~~~~--------------- Project No. Work Plan No. w~-_4_1~-~R~-_1~3~ ~ _~B~l~·g~h~o~r~n~S~h~e~e~p~S~u~rv __e~y~s _ Job No. 4 1 -------------------------------------------~--------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: Census and Distribution Studies. April 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962. ABSTRACT During this segment, 511 bighorn sheep were observed in 20 of Colorado's major sheep ranges. The sex ratio of 272 mature sheep was 74 rams per 100 ewes and the ewe-lamb ratio ratio was 100:61. Reproductive success appeared to be normal and lamb survival satisfactory. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be continued to obtain annual information on bighorn sheep herds. Objectives: 1. To determine the increase or decrease and sex ratio of individual herds considered the most important for management. 2. To determine the number of lambs born in relation to the number of ewes in the more important herds. 3. To determine the survival of the yearly lamb crop. To show annual trends of lambing success, to learn survival of lambs to yearling age and general herd trends for management. Techniques Used: The major sheep ranges observed were visited either on foot, horseback, or by use of a mountain type scooter. Sheep seen were classified by sex and age when possible. As in the past, ranges at higher elevations were visited in summer while those at lower elevations were observed during the winter months. The part-time assignment of the project leader to non-project activities during the latter part of the segment severely hampered winter observations. ��-103- CENSUS AND DISTRIBUTION STUDIES George W. Jones This is the second year of statewide bighorn sheep census and distribution investigations since the job was reactivated in 1960" Sheep Counted; Twenty major sheep ranges were visited during t.hepast segment and 511 animals were observed. Of these, 419 were classified according to sex and age" As in the past, few intensive surveys were conducted and comparisons with previous years do not necessarily indicate a change in total herd numbers. Presented in table 1 are the counts made by area. Sex Ratio~ A total of 272 mature sheep were classified as to sex.. Of these, 116 were rams and 156 were ewes for an observed sex ratio of 74 rams per 100 ewes. This compares with a sex ratio of 63 rams per 100 ewes observed in 1960-61. As pointed out in the report for segment 12, these sex ratios may be in error due to more intensive observations in areas inhabited by rams for the purpose of locating huntable herds. At any rate, it would appear that the annual hunter take has not had any adverse effect on the ram population. Lamb Crop: During the period from July 1961 through January 1962, 103 ewes were observed with 63 lambs for a lamb to ewe ratio of 61:100. This compares to a ratio of 63 lambs per 100 ewes observed in the same period in segment 12. These ratios compare favorably with previous studies conducted in the Tarryall ar-eaduring the late 1940 IS. A. total of 156 ewes and 83 yearling sheep were observed this segment. Some idea of lamb survival may be indicated by comparing the 1960 lamb-ewe ratio of 63 :100 with the present yearling to ewe ratio of 53:100" The reliability of this information is unknown and would unquestionably be more 'accurate if obtained by an intensive study in one locality. Hunting Recommendations: Based on this past years observations, as well as previous surveys and knowledge, recommendations for 1962 hunting permits are presented at the spring game management meetings. Presented in table 2 are the numberof sheep observed, by area, with the tentative number of permits recommended. �Area 'GORE RANGE Gore Creek Gore Creek Booth Creek TOTAL OURAY AREA Wetter horn Handies Pk Engineer Mtn. Engineer Mtn. Cow Creek Ouray (town) TOTAL SANGRE DE CRISTO Sand Creek SNOWMASS AREA Ashcroft Maroon Lake 'I'OTAL Table l.--Roeky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Countsy By Area, 1961-62. Month Surveyed Rams Ewes Lambs Yrlgs Sept. '61 Nov. 161 Jan ..'62 June '61 Aug '61 Aug. 161 Sept. '61 Dee. '61 Feb. '62 Jan. '62 4 '7 2 2 2 ,5 5 4 4 19 '7 7 4 20 12 3 ~3 '7 16 3 2 2 3 4 5 - 3 5 8 May '61 Dec. '61 BATTLEMENT MESA Mam Peak Sunnyside TOTAL 4 Oct. 161 PIKES PEAK Rampart Range Garden of Gods TOTAL - 4 5 .June '61 April. '61 July '61 July 161 Sept. '61 Sept. '61 Sept. '61 Dec. '61 Jan. '62 Feb. '62 TARRYALL Sugarloaf 4 7 11 10 GLENWOOD AREA Elk Cr-Cli.netop Glenwood Canyon Canyon Creek Canyon Creek Hogback Elk Cr. -C1inetop Elk Cr <~Clinetop Rifle Hogback NoName Creek TOTAL 0 1 4 5 2 4 6 8 Total 1 11 20 32 3 9 2 2 19 20 12 b4 11 34 3 8 4 13 7 21 5 18 15 10 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 23 6 4 2 5 4 3 2 3 2 2 22 12 3 1 3 '7 3 3 70 13 2 8 14 Ib April '61 July '61 Feb. '62 '7 2 6 4 8 12 12 5 3 3 5 5 ~- 9 19 �-105- Table L,~-Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Counts, By Area, 1961~62-Continued" Month Survey AREA Rams Ewes Lambs 5 3 Yrlgs CR. ARKANSAS-TEXo Bridgeport Aug. 161 Total 8 GEORGETOWN Georgetown-Empire 4 April '61 4 EAGLE AREA Brush Creek June 161 1 2 1 4 TAYLOR RIVER Above Elmer's Nov. 161 2 7 4 13 GUNNISON RIVER CimarronSapinero Texas Creek TOTAL June ::~61 July 161 2 3 5 4 4 2 2 SHEEP MOUNTAIN Sheep Mtn Sheep Mtn TOTAL May 161 Aug '61 1 4 CARLTON TUNNEL Carlton Tunnel July '61 CRESTED BUTTE Purple Mtn" ROCKWOOD Rockwood 7 (Plus 56 uncl) 3 3 2 12 14 2 7 63 2(56 Uncl)70 8 4 2 7 5 4 18 Aug. 161 3 2 1 6 Aug" 161 3 2 SAGUACHE AREA Sheep Creek Nov. 161 36 unclassified Ml'~ EVANS Grant Area Mar" '62 5 4 TOTAL ALL AREAS *Includes 92 unclassified 116 sheep. 156 5 '" 64 36 3 12 83 511* �'I'abl,e 20 -··SheepObserved and Tentative Permits To Be Recommended, BY'Area J 1961=1962. Permits Area Rams Ewes Lambs Yrlgso Total Recommended Remarks Gore------------~1~.0~----7l~1----'4,-----~7~10 32 OuraY' 19 20 Sangre de Cristo 7 16 Snowmass 13 64 10 11 34 14 Partial count Rams missed. 8 6 7 21 10 12 13 70 10 16 6 5 12 4 Glenwood 23 22 Pikes Peak 8 8 TarrY'all 12 7 Rams missed Battlement Mesa 8 12 3 5 28 6 ColJ..egiateArea 9 13 8 9 39 30 Partial count Buffalo Peaks 5 5 10 .Partial count 8 o Herd. decreasi.ng 4 8 Par-tLa.I. count Building herd Arkansas-Tex. Cr. 5 3 Georgetown 4 Eagle 1 2 1 4 o Taylor River 2 7 4 13 4 Gun.nison River 5 4 2 14 o Nat21 Mon:ument i.npart Sheep Mountain 8 4 2 70 15 56unclassi.fied Carlton Tunnel 2 7 5 4 18 o Small herd Crested Butte 3 2 1 6 o Small herd. Rockwood 3 2 5 o Small herd Saguache Area 36 unclassified Mt. Evans 5 4 --:T:"::a=T...:,-AL:::-.----=-l-=-lr: 156 64 Prepared by: Date: George Wo Jones Game Biologist 8 12 5 511 150 Approved by: October, 1962 ~--------------~~----------- Laurence Eo Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd Co Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator �-107JOB COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH SEGMENT PROJECT State of COLORADO -----------------------------------Project No. w_-_4_1_-_R_-_l~3~· B~ig~h~o~r~n~S~h~e~e~p~S~u~rv~e~y Work Plan No. Job No. 2 ----------------------------- Title of Job: Mountain Period Covered: 1 ------~~----------------- Goat Census and Distribution May 15, 1961 to November Studies. 31, 1961. ABSTRACT During this segment, 3 adult Rocky Mountain goats were observed on the southwest side of Mt. Harvard. The goats were found feeding in a willow bog near timberline at the head of Texas Creek. Recommendations: It is recommended that this job be continued and expanded to include the recent transplant of South Dakota goats in the Mt. Evans area. Objectives: To determine the increase or decrease of 13 head of goats, released in 1949 at Mt. Shavano and Cottonwood Creek,for possible future management. Techniques Used: Two special trips were made into the Collegiate area in an attempt to locate goats. In addition, 3 other trips were made incidental to the making of bighorn sheep counts. Travel in the area was by foot or scooter and possible goat range was Scanned with a spotting scope. Findings: All attempts to locate goats, with the exception of one, were unsuccessful. In August, 3 adult Rocky Mountain goats were observed at the head of Texas Creek on the southwest side of Mt. Harvard. The goats were observed for several hours as they fed in a willow bog near timberline. No other goats were seen in this locality although a considerable area could be observed with the spotting scope. Prepared Date by: George W. Jones Game Biologist Approved ~O~c~t~o~b~e~r~,~1~9_6_2 _ by: _ Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, Research Ferd Co Kleinschnitz Federal Aid Coordinator ��october, -109- JOB COMPLETION REPORT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT state of COLORADO ----------------------------------- Project Noo Work Plan: W~-~7~9_-R~-~9 N_a_m_e __:_W_l_·l_d_l_l_·f_e __H_a_b_l_·t_a_t Imp~r_o_v_e_m_e_n_t __ S_t_u_d __ie__s ----------------~-------------- Title of Job: Period Covered: 1962 Job No. 1 ------------~--------------------- Study of New and Rare Woody Species. Calendar Year 1961. ABSTRACT Seeds of three out of six species received from Canada germinated fairly well in shaded seedbeds to produce seedlings for 1962 potting. Three others from the same source were left for possible germination next year. Three Colorado natives showed good germination. Damping off and heavy rains in the early seedling stage greatly reduced the stands in the field plantings. Seedlings of four species were transplanted in the nursery for further observation and future seed supplies. Testplots were limited to ten and two fill-in jobs. Several new testplot designs were prepared to provide more accurate results for the future. Recommendations: With so many new and better, yet less-known species of trees and shrubs available for wildlife plantings, there is little excuse for management not to use at least part of them in future habitat developments . and there are yet many more and complete tests where they can be watched for 10, 20 or more years. 0 • • Who knows what the demands of the future may be7 Why not establish plots now of varying sizes and composition, in several soil types and at different elevations, so that Mother Nature may make her report in the not-too-distant future 7 Biologists and horticulturists--men and design tests within development and some not yet on the docket. with vision--should be commissioned areas which will help solve today1s to plan problems The upland game bird and animal hunter of the future (25 or 50 years hence) may have to find his sport on State or sportsmen-owned lands very limited in size and distribution. What and how and where to plant for habitat then will be allimportant questions for game managers. Let1s start the solutions to those questions now! The cost in time and dollars will be insignificant compared with potential results. It1s sportsmanlike to leave good sport for the next fellow. �-110- Objectives: To devise propagation methods and study the adaptability to Eastern Colorado g~owing conditions of tree and shrub species which offer possibilities of improving wildlife habitat. �-111:- STUDY OF NEW AND RARE WOODY SPECIES Glenn Kinghorn Germination Studies: The seed of nine species of trees and shrubs, which were planted in the fall of 1960 in seedbeds under city water, did fairly well. Three of the six species from Canada germinated fair to excellent, and two of the Colorado natives showed very good germination. The Korean barberry (Berberis koreana) from Canada, which showed excellent germination, grew to an average of six inches during the season. Most of the seedlings will be large enough to pot next spring, and be ready for field test the following spring. The Mongolian basswood (Tilia mongolica)showed spotty germination. It is fair to assume that it was caused by squirrels which burrowed under the wire frame either during the fall or early spring after planting. These seedlings reached an average of four to six inches in height, but were so slender that it is doubtful they will be ready for transplanting next spring. The Mongolian oaks (Quercus mongolica) seemed to be most popular with the squi.rrels which burrowed under the seedframes and helped themselves to the acorns. Those that were left showed good germination, but there will only be perhaps 40 to 50 for spring potting. The two cotoneasters--one from Canada (Cotoneaster melanocarpa) and the one gathered from two bushes in Fort Collins (C.multiflora)--showed practically no germination. Three tiny seedlings emerged-from the C. melanocarpa, but damped off before the season was half over. The two Colorado natives--squawapple (Peraphyllum ramosissium) and Fremont's -showed very good germination with fair growth the first two weeks. However, damping off in spite of two treatments with Captan, took the squawapples completely in one night. Half of the mahonia should be large enough for spring potting. Plantings in the open field in the fall of 1960 were more successful than in the seedbeds. Of the eight species planted, all were fair to excellent in germination, except one--Cotoneaster acutifolia-- which normally requires two years or a lengthly period of stratification. A wet spring with a couple of driving ~ains ruined the stand of pinon pine (Pinus edulis.), cutting it down to perhaps 20 to 25 per cent. It was the only seed treated with rodent repellent. The autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata) germinated quite early and the stand was excellent. However, when the seedlings got quite dry and were sprinkled with the alkali water at the nursery, the leaves shriveled and dried as soon as the sun hit them, completely ruining the crop. This is one species which has shown definitely that it will not stand up when germinated in the open field, but requires shade for several weeks while young. It also requires soft water, although in a minimum amount while getting established. �-112.Iust to check our previous experiences, one row of squawbush (Rhus canadensis) was planted in the open field without stratification. As in the past, only one or two per cent germination was secured th