Slope Use by Cattle, Feral Horses, Deer, And Bighorn Sheep

8/12/2019 Slope Use by Cattle, Feral Horses, Deer, And Bighorn Sheep

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/slope-use-by-cattle-feral-horses-deer-and-bighorn-sheep 1/8

David Ganskopp, tlnted StatesDepartrnent i Agricu ure-Agricuura ResearchServiceEasternOregon AgriculluralResearchCenteaStarFt. 1 4.51 Hwy.205, Burns,Otegot\97720

an o

Martin Vavra, Oregon Slate Universily,EasternOregon AgriculluralResearchCenter

SfarRt. 1 4 51 Hwy.205,Burns,Aregon97720

Slope Use by Cattle,FeralHorses,Deer,and BighornSheep'

Abstract

Parfernsofslope urilizarionby cattl€ Bosspp.), eral horses tqaus calallrr), RockyMountain nule deer Odocoileus emionus

hemionus),and California bighorn sheep Oaiscanadensis aLifuntdnd)were monitored ro compare heir distributions ro rhe

topographiccompositionsof iheir respectivehabitals.The hypothesis hal each species tilized slopeciassesn proportion ro

rhe ropographiccornpositions f thei. respective abitats {as rejected P < 0.01).Bighorn sheepaciivilies {€re nol impair€d

by slopesof up to 80%. Cattle, horses,and deer demonstratednegativ€cur linear responses o increasingslopewirh initial

sire avoidanceexhibired on 20, 30, and 40% slopes, €spectively.Vhere large expanses f level topographywere available,

carde and horsesmade essuse ofsteep slopes han th€ir counterparts nhabiting more rugged €rrain.Th€sedaia demonslrat€

that cattl€, horses,and d€er should not b€ €xpect€d o nake randon us€ of fotrge r€sources n rugged terrain.

lntroductionAn awarenessf the distribution ndmovementpatterns of large herbivores is particularly

valuable to managerschargedwith allocating

resourcesr assessinghe mpacts f uti l izationby large herbivores.The arrangementof food,water, ndshelter, nd heir concuirentnterac-

tions ryith topographic features obviously in-

fluences he distribution of animals and their

simultaneousse of an area's esources. lopegradientmay alsobe a major determinantof her-

bivoredistribution n rugged errain.With the

exception of cattle (Bos spp.), few data are

available escribing he upper imitsof slopeuse

by largeherbivores.

Cattle favor the relatively level ground

associateddth drainages,asins, nd idgetops(Glendening 944,Blood 1961,Demarchi1965,

Julander and Jeffery 1964, Mueggler 1965,

Phill ips1965,Cook 1966,Mackie 9?0, Patton

1971,Gillen1982,Barrett1982).n general at -

rle limit their use of hillsideswhen gradesap-proach30% (Blood 1961,Patton1971,Cillen

rThe Eastemoregon AgriculluralRes€arch enter, ncludins

the Squaw Buue and Union Stations, s joinlly operatedby

oregon Agricultural Experin€nt Sradon and U.S. Depart-

mento f Agr i ru l tu r ". {gr iculruralRpscar.hServi.e.

'lThis

researchwasa cooperatireeffortjointly funded by theBureau oi Land Managenent, conlract number

YA-s12-CT8-137,and tbe Easrern oregon Agricultural

Research enter.Technicalpaper nunber 7793.Oreson

Agricultural Experinent Station.

74 NorthwestScience, ol. 61, No. 2, l9B7

1982, Yan Vuren 1982).Upslopepresence

ofpalatable forage (Gonzalez1964, Cook 1966,Bryant l9B2),salt (Champlineand Talbot 1926,

Skovlin1965), r water Skovlin1965), owever,

may encourage dditionalutilization of hillsides.

Feral horses Egaascoballas)havean affin-ity for ridgetops or elevated errain (Pellegrini

1971, Welsh l9?5, Miller 1980,Keiper and

Berger1982); owever, o one has attempted oquantify heir useof hil lsides. eJlegriniI971)

notedhorses voided teep il ls,and that they

rapidly traveledover unavoidableough terrain.

Most workers eportmule d.eetOdocoiLeus

hemionushemionus) hov lit t le response o

topographic ariation Demarchi 965,Mackie

1970, Barrett 19B2).Some observers eport,however,hat slope ndirecdyaffectsdistributionof deer hrough ts impact on snorv ccumulation

and persistenceWilkins 195?,Loveless 967,

Gilbenet al.1970,Dusek1975) r microclimate

and vegetation atterns Julander1966,Loveless1967,Mackie 9?0).

Although bighorn sheep(Oois canadensis)habitat is synonymouswith rugged cliffs and

highly dissectederain (McCann1953,Harris

1956,Russo1956,McCullough nd Schneegas1966, odd 9?2,Jones 9B0), ewworkers ave

addressed heir use of rugged topography.Demarchi 1965)eported posit ive orrelation

between he frequency of sightingsof bighorn

and ncreas ing egree f slope, utprovided o



information n the topographic omposition fthe study area. Shannon et al. (1975) fovrd

bighornwereneutralor mayhavediscriminatedagainst lope. hey suggestedhe useof slopeswas elated o associated bioticor biotic eatures

rather han to slopeper se .

In this project we monitored the frequencyof use of slopes y cattle, er al horses,RockyMountain mule deer, and Californiabighornsheep Ooiscanadensis aliforniana) iorr' Apil

1979 through March 1981. Our goal was toestablish hresholds f slopeuse or horses, eer,andbighornsheep, nd o supplementhe nfor-mation available or cattle. We first tested hehypothesis hat each herbivoreutil ized slopeclassesn proportion o their availabil ity.Whenthishypothesis as ejected,we urther examinedthe data o deteminewhichslopes ere avoredor avoided.

StudyAreaThe study was conductedapproxirnately65 kmsouthof Vale, Oregon, n a 375 km'] areaad -ministered y the Bureau f LandManagement.

The area ncluded hreedesignatedastures,froughly62,31, and 219 km'?, nd an adjoining

63 km'?unit o the southwhichcontained por-

tion of the bighornsheep ange.Pasture oun-dariesconsisted f 4-wirestock encing, he eastshoreline f the OwyheeReservoir, nd somenaturalbarriers.Approximately 3% of the studyarea was within 1600 rn of permanentwater

sources.

Topography anged rom well-eroded, ently-rolling hills to mountainous idges,cliff rock, andcanyons, levations anged rom 809 m, poollevel of OwyheeReservoir,o 1687m. Majorp l a n t c o m m u n i t ie s u p o t e d o v e r s t o r i c sdominated y Wyomingbig sagebrushlrtemisia

trid,entata uyomingensis) or low sagebrush(Ar temis ia arbuscu la) . Herbaceous ayerdominants included bluebunch wheatgrass(Agropyron picatum),Sandberg's luegrassPoa

sand,bergi), nd cheatgrassBromus ectorum\.Historic overgrazing y large numbersof

horses up to 2500 in the 1940's), ong-termseasonal seby livestock, nd occasional ildfires

have affected the distribution of plant com-munitieson the area.Bluebunchwheatgrass,large and palatable erennial unchgrass, asmost prevalenton slopes n excess f 2 0%,

Cheatgrassand Sandberg's bluegrass, wospec ies t yp ica l l y character i z ing abusedrangelands, ere dominants n drainages ndlargebasinswhereslopesweregenerallyess han207o,Wyomingbig sagebrush nd ow sagebrushdid not exhibit any systematicpatterrs ofdistribution. etailedmapsand descriptionsf

majorplantcommunities reprovided y Gans-kopp(1984).

Feral horses nd bighorn sheepwereyear-round esidents. he total numberof horsesnthe hree asturesncreasedrom 133 o l68 dur-ing our study.Bighornsheep ccupied smallportion of the largestpastureand the adjoining63 km' area o the south.The herdconsisted fabout 100 animals,

Deerand cattlewereseasonal ccupants fthe area.Approximately 00 o 300 deerwinteredon the area rom 0ctober hroughApril. Cattlegrazed he threepasturesrom April throughOc-

tober on a deferred otationbasisduring bothyearsof study. Their use otaled 1600AUMs in1979and 3900AUMs n 1980.Mean ivestockdensity or the threepastureswas0.75 cows/km'in 1979and l.B cows/km']in 98 0.

Methods

The last two weeksof eachmonth weredevotedto suryeying he study area n an attempt oplotthe locationof as many animalsas possible.

Binocularsand a 20 to 40X spottingscopefacil itatedong-rangeearchingor largeherbi-vores.Movement bout he areawas accomp-lishedwith four-wheel rive vehicles nd by foot.

Incidentalsightingswerealso ecordedand onlyanimals nit iallyunaware f our presence er eutil izedas data sources.We did not knowinglyrecord duplicateobservations f a reco gnizedgroupor individualwithin a 24-hour eriod.

Percents lope o f ob le rva t ion i l es nasmeasured ith a clinometer.f more han oneanimalwas nvolved, he measurement asmadeon an areadeemedepresentativef the group.Eachsightingwas reatedas a singleobserva-tion, regardless f the number of animals n-volved.A coordinate rid, superimposedn al:63360mapof the studyarea,alloved documen-

tation of s ighting ocations.Because orsesand bighorn sheepwereyear-

round esidents f the area, heir data eflectarelatively niform distributionof obsenations

SlopeUse by Cat tle,Feral Horses,Deer,and BighornSheep 75



over he wo-year eriod.The onlyexception c-curred n January,98 , when hree veeks f con-

tinuous og hinderedour searchesor bighornsheep.Our data or cattleand deerare strictly

seasonal. att lewereherded o the area n April

and removed n late Octobereachyear.A fewdeer were continuously n the area,but their

presence asmostpronounced etween ctoberand Apil. Eighty-nine ercentof our observa-

tions of deerweremade during this period.

Visual examination of maps depicting

sighting ocationsof the four herbivores evealed

that cattle,horses, nd bighorn sheepwereeitherconfinedo, or choseo occupy nlycertainpor-

tions of the studyarea,Sightings f mule deerwerewell dispersed ver he entirestudyarea.Based n these istribution atterns, e definedthe geographic oundaries f eachherbivore'shabitat.Consequently,ur data depictonly he

habitat characteristicsf areas requented yeachspecies.

Becausecatt le respected he fences and

naturalboundaries f thepastures, e assumedthey occupied hreedistinct habitatson the area.Datawere a l l i ed ypasture i t h heassumpt ionthat an entirepasturewasavailable or therr use.

Horses n the areawereeasily dentif iedbyreferencing ketches f distinguishing haracter-

istics.Meanhome angesize minimum onvexpolygon)was 12 km'with no seasonal hifts n

home rangesoccurring Ganskopp nd Vavra1986). ix distinctherdsof horseswere dentified

du ng the study.Because andsand bachelorscomposing achherd appearedo restrict heir

movementsvoluntarily, we outlined the outer-most oord ina tesf each erdwi lha m in imumconvex olygon Southwood 966), n d assumed

the circumscribedrea onstitutedhe availablehabitatof eachherd.Threesmallherds each up-porting < l5 anir nals) erenot ncluded n thisanalysrs.

Deer were observed hroughout he studyarea.Total numberof deersightedwas146? ,rithI157 animals lassif iedo sexand age.Buck o

doe ratiosaveraged 3.5/100,nd fawn to doeratiosaveraged 1.4/100. ecausendividualdeercould not be dentifiedor linked o a specificunitof land, we assumedhe entire areawasavailablefor their use.

Bighornsheep ccupied relatively estricted

area n themore ugged outhern ortionof the

study area. A minimurn convexpolygon,cir-cumscribing 3 km'z,was used o define heirhabitat.Bighorn ouldbe oundat any ocation

or elevationwithin their range hroughout hedurationof the study,Total numberof bighornsightedwasBll with 691 animals lassif iedo

sex and age.The lamb to ewe atio averaged

54.1/100, nd the ram t o ewe ratio averaged59/100.

Outlinesof the study areaand the varioushabitats were transferred o U.S. CeologicalSurvey opographicmaps,Map scalewas :24000

with 12.19m belween ontour nteivals. sam-pJe of 1545 randomly sele,"led oinls were

descr ibedoder ivehe opograph icompos i t ion

of thehab i ta ts . i s tanceet$ppn d jacenton-

tour l inesbracketing achpoint ras measuredand convertedo horizontal istance. he ver-t ical distancebetveen contour ntervalswasdivided y rhehorizontal istance etween on-

tour inesandmultiplied y 100 oyieldpercent

slope.Data ere compiled or eachherbivore nd

habitat in l0% intervals ranging from 0 to80 + % slope.Chi square nalysis f homogeneity(P < 0.05)wasused o test the null hypothesis(Ho) hat the proportion f useof slope lasseswasequivalent o the occurrenceof the classesin the polygon, asture, r d esignated abitat.If Ho was ejected, imultaneousonfidencen-tervals for differences between percentages(Snedecor nd Cochran196?,Marcumand Lofts-gaarden9B0)werederived o determine hichclasses ereoccupied t signif icantlyP < 0,02)g r e a l e r h a n e r p e c t e d e v e l s a p o . i t i r epreferenceating),wereutil ized oughly n pro-portion o their occurrencea zeropreferencerating),or wereutil izedat less han expectedleve lsa nega l i ve re ferencea l ing) .

When simultaneo us omparisons re con-ductedwithin several ategories,he probability

that all comparisonsave eached correct on-

clusions a function fthe totalnumberof com-parisonsmade nd heprobabilityevelselectedfor each ndividual omparison.he probabilitythat all comparisons ave eacheda correctcon-

clusion= I - N P where:N is the numberofcategoriesndP is theprobabilityevel elected

for the individual comparisons.f the numberofcategoriess lar ge and a conventional ignif i-canceevelof P = 0.05 s employed,he proba-

bility that all comparisonsave eached correct

76 Ganskopp nd Vavra



conclusion ecomes uite small.This problemmay be ovcrcome o somedegree y usinga more

conservativeignif icanceevel i.e.,P = 0.01).0ne doesnot wish o besoconservative,owever,

that real differences etween ercentages aygo undetected, nd unconventionalrobabil ityle r . l . a reocca. iona l l l ' edasa compromisen

this procedure. ecause omeof our data con-tainedasmanyas ninecategories, probabil ity

levelof P ( 0.02wasselectedor detecting if-ferences between percentages.With ninecategorieshere s a 0.88probability hat all of

our tests ave eached correct onclusion. euet al (1974) nd Marcum and Loftsgaarden1980)

provide a more detailed discussionof thestatistical rocesses.

Data werealsopooled or eachspecies ndequations redicting he proportion f observa-

tions expected n sites with increasing lo pederived hrough egression nalysisNeterand

Wasserman9?4),F test s or comparison f tworegressionines P ( 0.05)were onduc ted ithallpossib)enterspecif icombinationso examinethe hypothesishat patterns f slopeuse wereidenticalamongany of the four speciesNeter

and Wasserman 974).

Results

Respective eanslopes f sitesutil izedby cat-t le,horses,eer, ndbighornwere .8, 1.2,15.7,and42.5%.Data or cattle,horses, nd deerwere

skewedn favorof relatively entle opography,

50means hou ld e r ieupdwi thsome aut ion .

The hypothesis hat each herbivoreutil ized

classesfslopesn propo.tiono the opographiccompositionsftheir respectiveabitatswas e-jected n all casesP < 0.01).

Two hundred wenty-trvo bservations f cat-t le were ecorded, ith an average roupsizeof

14.6 nimals. hegreatest lope n whichcattlewereobservednvolvedonesightingon a 70%grade.All otherobse.vations ereon slopes fless han 40%. Patterns f slopeuse by cattlegenerally reflected those reported in theliterature Table ). Cattle avored lopesn the0-9% categoryn all pastures nd appearedn-

d i f fe ren t o s lopesn the l0- l9aoca lcgorynpastures

andC.They

avoidedlopes xceeding

20% in all three pastures.

Catt ledemonstratedome ar iation n theirpatterns f useamong he threepastures. his

is bestevidenced y comparing astures an dC which depict the extremesof topographyarailablpo these nimals. opographynpastureB was elativelygentlewith a meanslopeof 19%.

The mean lopeof pastureC was3?%, and cartle in thispastureweremoreoftenobserved nthe steeper lopes. his suggestshat cattle n-

habit ing ugged errain wil l makemore useofsteep lopes han cattleconfined n more evel

topography. onversely,att lehavingaccessolarge expanses f gentle opography re lesslikely o venture pslopehan heircounterpartsoccupyingmore ruggedareas.

Feralhorserwere bserred n 394occarionr,with a meannumber f 4.7animals erobserva-tion. Onegroup of horseswas observed n a100%slopewith all otherobservationsn slopesof 50% or less.Horses enerally emonstratedan affinity for high benchesand gentlyslopingridgetops. Typically they rapidly traversed

rugged or steep opography to gain access o

elevated ut relatively evel errain.

The 0-19%classesn eachherd ecerveoor 0 preferenceatings, ndicating hat slopeswithin this range were avoredor utilized indif-ferentlyby horsesTable ). The 20-29%categorywasavoided y herds and 2 but used oughlyin proportion o its occurrencey herd3. Meanslopes f thehabitats ccupied y herds , 2, and3 were 20, 24, artl 34%, respectively. ikecat-t le, horses nhabiting ugged er rainappearedwill ing to uti l ize steeper slopes han the ircounterparts n more evel opography. orsesin all three herds avoided lopes n excess f30%.

One hundred seventy-t wo bservations fdeerwere ecordedon the area,with the averagegroupnumbering8.5 animals. he steepestradeon whichdeer vere etected as75%. Like cat-tle and horses, deer favored relatively leveltopography Table l). They were most oftenobseNed n slopesn the 0-9% category hichreceived (+ ) preferenceating. Crades etrveenl0 and39% appearedo haveno effecton theirmovements,scategoriesn this range eceived(0) preferenceatings.Categoriesn exces s f40% were uti l ized at signif icantlyP < 0.02)lower frequencies han their availability would

suggest nd received ) preferenceatings.Bighornsheepwereobserved n l2l occa-

sionswith a meangroup size of 6.? animals.Bighorn requented rades pproaching 50%,

SlopeUse by Catde,Feral Horses,Deer,and BighornSheep 77



TABLE l . Hab i ta t ava i lab i l i ty (%) and use (%) by ca t t le , horses, deer , and b ighorn sheep. Cetegor ies i t h a (+) pre ference

rating lrere utilized at greater than expecled lelels (P < 0.02). Categories having a (0) preferen.e rating sere uti'

lized in proportion to their occurr ence. Categories with a (-) preference r ating were utilized at less than expected

levels (P < 0.02).

l0-19 70.790.29 30-39 80+

CdttlePaslure A aYailabilitl

Use

Preference ating

Pasture B availability

Use

Preference ating

Pasrure C availability

Us e

Herd area I a'ailability

Us e

Herd area 2 availability

Us e

Herd area 3 availability

Us e

Deer

Availab it y

Use

Preference ating

A ailability

Use

I I

79

23

a2

l6

70

+

l3

30

27

43

t 5

+

t2

l 7

0

t7

20

0

3 t

58

+

30

4 t

0

16

20

0

l8

l8

0

t 0

8

0

t9

3

24

l 3

5

t 1

l9

23

0

l4

l3

0

I

5

0

1 I

l 4

5

l+

l0

4

20

5

t4

t0

0

l3

8

0

t2

0

t6 t 4

l 5

5

14 7

0

20

t8

0

36

1 5

29

12

? 5 3 5

4

4

I

0

t2

5

l 1 9 9 3 7

4 3 2 3

but mostweresitedon slopes f l l0% or less.Themean lope or allpoints ampled ithin hebighorn heep abitatwas44%, while he slopeof the areasactually utilized by the sheepaver-aged, 2-5%.

The hypothesishat bighorn sheep ti l izedslopes in proportions equivalent to thetopographic omposition f their habitat wasmarginally ejectedP ( 0.01). xamination f

thepreferenceatings or each f thenineslope

categories Table 1) revealed the bighorn

deviated significantly(P < 0,02) rom our ex-

pectedpatternof use n only one nstancethe

70-79%categoryl. ecausehis category eceived

a (+) preferenceating,andall othercategorieswere requented t expectedevels,we concluded

thats lopes e lween and80% d id no l mpa i r

lhe movemenlsnd ac t i v i l i es f b ighorn .




Second-orderquations rovidedbest it ofdata elatingpercentslope independentariable)to percent f observationsf herbivoresn eachcategory dependent ariable).Signif icant e-sponseunctionsP( 0.05)wereobtained or cartle (Y = -6.0X + 0.09X?+ 96.4, = 0.95),horses Y = -1.9X + 0.02X ' + 54.4,12 =

0.96), nddeer(Y - -1.5X + 0.01X2+ 45.9,r' = 0.89) but no significant relationshipwasderived or bighornsheepFigure ). Our attemptto f it a second-orderolynomialo t he bighornsheep ataproducedan r' of 0.22andan F valueof0,9B.This againsuggestshat slopes etween0 and B0%hadno effecton the habitsof bighornsheep.

Our F t ests or all possible nterspecific om-parisonsof two regressionines rejected hehypothesishat patterns f slope sewere den-tical among att le, orses, nd deer P < 0.01).Although ach quation rovedo be unique,wedo not intend to infer thata clear spatialsepara-

l ion e \ i s ted e tweenhp var ious per ies .

Discussion

Slopes etween and l9% received ither +)or (0)preferenceatings n our analysis f all fourherbivores, hesesame lopes upported 4%of our observationsl catt le,79% f thehorses,66% of thedeer, nd257oof the bighorn heep.I t isobvioushatcattle, orses,nddeerexerted

the majorityof their demands n the resourcesoccurringwithin these ounds.Bighornsheep,with their greater tolerance or preference orsteep lopes, eremuch essdependent n theresources f relatively entle errain.

Thesedata clearly l lustr atehat in ruggedte ain cattle,horses, nd deerwill limit their useof steep idehills.Consequently,angemanagersand researchers eed o consider he effects ofvarying opographyon the distribution patternsof these animals.

Due o severalactors, owevcr,aulionmustbe exercised henapplying hese esults o otherareas.Our first concern s that much of our data

were of a seasonal ature.We recognize hat

60

7 a

\nZO ^r .- J v

ft:L ^l 0

t0

o ? nl l

- -

oF ,l,-.

z . vtr l

CLu l l n

CATTLE

HORSES

DEt rR

BLGHORN

1 0

. \\ " - \

2a 60 70 BO-

Figure t. Re)ationshipo{ slope gradient to the p€rcenlofobse aiions of cattle, feral horses,deer, and bighorn sheep.Rawdala are pres€nted or bighorn sbeepbecsusea significant (P<0.05) relationshipcould not be oblained sith linea.or quadrat icmodels.

30 4a 50PERCFNTSLOPE

SlopeUse by Cat tle,Feral Horses,Deer,and BighornSheep 79



patterns f usearesubjecto changehroughour

the year. n t his study,cattle n particularap -pearedmorewill ing o uti l izeslopesn theearly

spring and ate all, than during thewarmersum-

mer months.0ur samplenumbers, owever, ete

too small o address his hypothesis ith anystatistical onfidence.

A second onsiderations that our observa-tions elate o populations avingaccesso a corn-monenvironment.We sa no aggressiveehavior

during nterspecif icncounters,ut competit iveprocessesr interspecificntolerancesmay have

altereddispersionatterns o somedegreeBerger

l9B5). f suchcompetitivenfluences erepresent,

our datamay eflectan up-slopemovement f one

or more of the herbivores n question.

LiteratureCited

Barrelt, R. H. 1982.Habitat preferences i fetal hogs,deer,

and cattleon a Sierra oolhill range. . RangeManage.

35:342-316.

Berger, J. 1985. nterspecific interactions and doninance

among "ild sreat basiD ungulates. J. Mammal.

66:51r-573.

Blood, D. A. 1961.An ecological tudy of California bighotn

6heep D soulhernBrit ish Colunbia.L ln ivers ity i

Br ir ishColumbia, an.ouver. hp ' i" .

Bnant. L. D. lq82 Rp-por ipoi l iv .-ro.\ ro r ,parianu ne

e:c lusion. . RangeManage. 5:780-785.

Champline, . R., and M. W. Talbot.1926. he useof salt

in rangemanageoent,U.S-Dept.Agr. Dept. Circ.379.

Cool, C. W. 1966.Facrorsaffecting ulilization ol rnounlain

slopes y catt le. . RangeManage. 9:200-204.

Demarchi,R. A. 1965.An ecological tudyof the Ashnola

bighorn {inter ranges.University of Brirish Colun-

bia, Vancou er. Thesis.

Dusel, C. L. l9?5. Rangerelations o{ mule deer and cattle

in prai. ie habnal.J. Wild l. Manage.39:605-616.

Ganskopp, . C. 1984.Habitatusennd spatia l nteracl ions

of canle, wild horees, nule de€., and California

bighorn sheep n the owr hee Breaksof southeast

Oregon. 0regon State Un;yersitr , Corval l is .

Dksertat ion.

Ganskopp, . C ., and M. Vavra.1986.Habitatusebt fera l

horsesn the.ortbern sagebrush leppe. . Range

Manage.39:20?.21l.

Gi lber t ,P. E.,0. C. Wallmo,and R. B. G il l . 1970.Ef fec tof

snosdepthon muledeer n Middle Park,Colorado.

J. Vi ld l . Manage. 4:15 3.

Gillen, R. L. 1982.Grazing beharior and distribution o{ car-

tle on mountain angelands.OregonSlale Uni'ersity,

Co.rallis. Dissertation.

Clendening,G. E. 1944.Sone factors affecring cattle use of

northern ,Lrizona ine.bunchgrassanges.U.S.Dept.

Agr. i For Ser . ,SW For. and RangeExp. Sra.Re .

R e p . 6 .

Our third concern focuseson the dif ferent

patterns of use exhibited by catt le and horses

when comparing relat ively gentle and more

rugged habitats.This suggests hat quantitat ive

expectat ionsderived n one area may not neces-

sarily apply in another. We recognize hat each

m anagcm pn tun i t p ro r i de . a un ique env i r on -

ment, and that patternsof animal movementar e

ult imately a product of several nteract ing en-

vironmental and animal factors.Although much

more data must be acquired before thesevaria-

tions in utilization patterns can be described with

any confidence, ve should remain avare that

topographicattr ibutes may imit resource se by

catt le, deer, and feral horses.

Conzalez, . H. 1964.Paterns o i l i vestock ehalior an d

forageutilization as nlluencedby environmentalac-

tors on a summermountain ange.Ukh S kte Univer-

sity, Logan. Dissertation.

Harris.J. T. 1956.Su.vel ofthe PoudreRiver bighorn herd.

Colorado Coop.Wildl. Res.Unit, QuarterlyReport.

10r25-33.

Jones,F. L. 1980.Conpetilion.l' G. Monson, ndL. Sumner

(eds.) he desenbighorn: ts ife hisrory,ecology, nd

managemenr. nirersit) Arizona Press,Tucson.Pp.

197-2t6.

Julander, . 1966.How nule deerusemountain anseland

in Urah.Utah Academ) f Sciences, rb, and Let

rets. 43:22-24.

Julander, . , and D. E. Jeffery. 964.Deer,e lk, and cat e

range relations on sunmer range n Ulah. T rans. N.

Am. Vildl. and Nar. Res. Conf. 29:404-414.

Keiper,R. R. ,andJ. Berger. 982. efuse'seekingnd peslaroidance by feral homes n deserr and island en-

vironnents.AppliedAnimal Etholog}9: l l l -120.

Loveless, . M. 196?.Ecological haracteristicsfa nule deer

r inter range.Colorado ane,Fishand Parls Dept.

Tech.Bull . 20.

Maclie, R. J. 1970.Rangeecolog-r nd relationsofmule deer,

elk, and caltle n l he MissouriRiver Breaks,Monlana.

Sild l. Monogr.20 .

Marcum,C. L., and D.0. Loftsgaarden.980.A non nap-

ping lechnique or studringhabitatpref€rence..

trildl. Manage. 44:963-968.

McCann, . J. 1953. cologlofthe mounrain heep. n iver-

sity of Utah, Salt Lake Ciry. Disserlalion.

McCullough,D. R., and E. R. Schne€gas.966. Winter obseF

vations n he SierraNevada ighofn heep. a l i for.

n ia Fish and Came.52:68-84.

Miller, R. 1980.The ecologyof feral horees n Wyoming's

Red Desert. University of W)oming, Laramie.

Dissertat ion.




Mueggler,W. F. 1965.Calde distr ibut ion n s leep lopes.

J . RangeMaDase.8:2ss257.

Neter, . ,andW. Wasserman.9?,1. ppl ied inear tat is t ical

rnodels. . D. I r * in , Inc . Honewood, l l inois.

Neu,C. S. , C. R. Byers, nd J . M. Peek. 97,1. rechnique

for analysisof utilization availability data. J. Wildl.

Manage.38:541-545.

P d r r o n . .

q

l q l l . A n a n " 1 . . . . l. d l l l F

e r a r i r gn - F p D

slopes.Brighah Young University,Provo, Utah.

Thesis.

Pe l l ig r in i , .W. 1971.Home ange, er. i tor ia l irv nd nove

m€nt patterns of wild horees n the Wassuk Range

of westernNeyada.Universityof Nevada,Reno.

Thesis.

Phillips,T. A. 1965. he nfluences fslopegradient,distance

fron water, and other facrors on livestock distribu-

tion on national forest cattle allotnents of the Inter

mountain region. U.S. Depl. Agr.-For. Serv. Inler-

rnount. For. and Range Exp. Sta., Range nprove-

nenr Nores 0(3):9-19.

Russo, . P. 1956.The desertb ighorn sheep n Arizona.

Arizona Game and Fish Dept. Vi ld l. Bul l . No. I

w-53,R.

Receiuecl June 1986

Accepterlor publication23 October1986

Shannon, . H. , R.J. Hudson, . C. Brink,andV. D. K i t ts .

1975.Deterninants of spatial distribution of Rocky

mountain b ighorn sheep. J. Wild l. Manage.

39:387-,101.

Skovlin, . \{. 1965. mproving catlle dislribulion on weslern

nountain grasslands. .S-Dept. Agr. farm Bull. No.

2212.

Snedecor, . W., and V. C. Cochran.1967.Stat is t ical

methods. osa State University Press.Ames, Iowa.Sourhwood, . R. E. 1966.Ecologicalmelhods ith parlicular

reference o the studyofinsect populations.Methuen

& Co. ,London.

Todd,J. W. 1972. oodhabits l RockyMountain ighorn

sheep.ColoradoStateUniversitv,Fort Collins.Thesis.

Van Vuren, D. 1982.Conparative ecologyof bson ano cat-

tle in rh€ Henr) Mountains,Utah. h J. M. Peel, and

P. D. Dalke (eds.)Proc. Wildli{e-LivesrockRelation-

shipsSynp., Dept. of Wildlife Resources, ollegeof

Forestry,ViJd)ife and RangeSciences, niversity of

Idaho, Moscow.Pp. 449-457.

Welsh, D. A. 1975.Populat ion, ehavioral, nd grazing

ecologyof the horsesof Ssble kland, Nova Scotia.

Dalhousie,University. Dissertation.

Wilkins, B. T. 195?.Rangeuse, ood habits,and agricuJtural

relationshipsof rhe nule deer, Bridger Mountains,

Montana. . Wild l. Manage. 2r159-169.

SlopeU"e by Cat t le . e ra lHor"es . eer . ndBighornSheep BI

Documents

Slope Use by Cattle, Feral Horses, Deer, And Bighorn Sheep