Big game survey and investigation - summer of 1956-1960 Gravelly-Snowcrest rumen collection

272 Pages·1996·14.6 MB·English

J
a '
4'' JOB COMPLETIONREPORT 5 B7S .
INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT
State of Montana
Project No.: W-75-R-8 Name Wildlife Investigations - District 3
Job No.: A-l Title Big Game Survey and Investigation -
Summer of 1956-1960 Gravelly-Snowcrest
Rumen Collections.
Period Covered: May 1, 1962 to June 30, 1963.
MONTANASTATSLIBRARY
Summarization of 1956-1960 Gravelly-Snowcrest Rumen Collect^tpgg^j_yn(ja(eAvenue
Abstract Ho!wa»*Aontcna 59601
Collections ofungulate rumens from the Gravelly-Snowcrest-Centennial area were
made from 1956 through i960. The rumens, from elk, deer, cattle and sheep, were
made onan opportunistic basis generally in conjunction with other field activities.
This report serves to assemble all such data and to relate circumstances and con-
ditions concerning the collections.
Procedure
Rumens were analyzed in the wildlife laboratory at Bozemanusingmodifications
ofprocedures first describedby Martin et al (19^6). Volumes in cubic centimeters
for each item, frequencies when more than one rumen was included in the tabulation,
andpercentages of the total volume of each sample are presented.
Findings
Table I lists, by species, the numbers ofrumens collected each year. Elk
rumens were obtained in October and November from the hunter harvest. The eleven
deer rumens were obtained in March and April 1959 on the Wall Creek area. Sheep
and cattle rumens were obtained fromanimals butchered byherders or ranchers for
food in the field, or from animals which died from accidents or poison. Sheep rumens
obtained in 1957 were fromanimals bought by the Department and slaughtered primarily
for the purpose of obtaining the rumen.
Deer Collection on Wall Creek, Spring 1959
Table II presents the analysis of 11 mule deer rumens collected from Wall Creek
inMarchand April 1959. Browse and forb items constituted 37$and ^3#i respect-
ively, of the total sample. Big sage, rabbitbrush, phlox and pussytoes were iden-
tified in the sample. These items suggest, alongwith the relatively large amounts of
conifer and grass, a "starvation diet", which is verified by the browse surveys,
(which suggest heavyutilization ofkey species), and the observed winter mortality
and low fawn production in the area. (Ellig, 1963).
Elk Collections".
Hunting season rumen collections from 1956 through 1959 bear out the findings
of Rouse (1957), concerning fall elk foodhabits in this area. Grasses constituted
the major forage source (Tables III, Fig. 1), supplyingabout three fourths of the
indicated diet. Bluebunch fescue was an important food item, as determined by Rouse
MSBAPR2678
2
(op. cit.)
Some browse and forb items identified in the 59 rumens included aspen, willow,
asters, lupine, and thistle..
Cattle Collections.
Nine hereford rumens were collected, two in 1959 and seven in I960 (Table IV
and V). Grass content ih~the~rumens were from 79.5% to 97«5$« Forbs ranged from
traces to 19.5$in the sample. Incidence ofbrowse items ran from 1% to 3%a
Identifiable browse and forb items in the sample included lupine, polygonum,
andwillow.
Sheep Collections.
The sheep rumens show awide range of variation inaggregate percentages of the
three forage classes (Table VT, VTI, Fig. 2). Grasses constituted 35# to 83%of
the total percentages with an average of 60% for the sample, Forbs constituted from
8 to 63%of the aggregate percentages inthe samples withan average of 28%* It is
noted that grasses constituted the least proportion (37.7%average), and forbs the
greatest proportion (5^.8%) in I960. The 1957 and 1959 samples were similar in
forb percentages with 25$and 30%, respectively. Browse and forb items identifiable
in the samples included bastard toadflax, lupine, eriogonum, cinquefoils, sticky
geranium, wyethia, antennaria, willow and snowberry.
One can speculate that the indicated higher amounts of grass which occurred
in these rumens may reflect forage availabilitymore so than forage preference
on the sheep ranges in the area, since sheep are generally considered as beingpri-
marilyweed-feeders.
Discussion.
Food habits of a given species are generally dependent upon forage preference
and forage availability. Consequently, range studies to indicate kinds and amounts
of forage plants available, and studies ofanimal distributionbyvegetative type
and seasonare ofparamount importance in a foodhabits study. Such data were not
gathered in conjunction with these rumen collections. Generalized vegetative de-
sdectraiiplt,ionbsyEovfantkhoe aanredaPheatveersboneen(1m9a55d)e•byAKninmoawlltodnist(rii96b0u)t,ioPneesktud(i1e9s63)ar,eanadv,ailianblmeore
only for elk (Rouse, op. cit.). However, the history of the animal, where it had
moved and fed, before its rumenwas collected, is not available forany of this
collection.
The rumen collections can be evaluated ona generalized basiSo Not only are
the collections subject to the usual limitations involved inrumenanalysis, but
the lack ofknowledge concerningwhere the animals had fed before collection, further
obscuresmeaningfulness ofthe information. The informationreflects, the relative
amounts each major forage class occurred within the sample Individual items are
mentioned only to indicate their identification and should not be construed to re-
flect true proportions within the samples. One can say, as an example, that the sheep
rumens did contain willow, but to what degree this plant occurred in the diet is
only generally suggested. The best value of this datamaybe as supplemental to
further detailed studies.
Prepared by James M. Peek
Date September,1963 Approved by Wynn G. Freeman
* 1
Literature Cited.
ELlig, LeRoy. 1963* Job Completion Eeport, W-73-R-8, Big Game Investigations.
Evanko, A. B. and R. A. Peterson. 1955• Comparisons ofprotected and grazed
mountain rangelands in southwestern Montana. Ecol. 36
(71-82).
Knowlton, F. F. I960. Food habits, movements and population structure of moose
in the Gravelly Mountains, Montana. Jour. Wildlf. Mgmt.
2k (162-170).
Martin, A. C., R. H. Gensch, and C. P. Brown. 19^6. Alternative methods
in upland gamebird food analysis. Jour. Wildlfo Mgmto
10 (8-12).
Peek, J. M. I963. Appraisal of a moose range in southwestern Montana. JournD
Range Mgmt. 16 (5) 227-231 pp.
Rouse, R. A. 1957* Elk food habits, range use andmovements, Gravelly Mountains,
Montana. Dnpbl. M. S. Thesis, Montana State College,
Bozeman. 29 pp.
\

Table I. Numbers ofrumens, kinds, and dates of collection, from 1957-1960
in the Gravelly-Snowcrest-Centennial.
Species Number Rumens
1956 1957 1958 1959 I960 Totals
Dom. sheep 6 17 if 27
Cattle 2 7 9
Elk 10 10 k ko 0t
Deer 11 11
\

—
w «
r
TABLEDANALYSES OF ELEVEN MULEDEER RUMENS COLLECTED FROM WALL CREEK STUDYUNIT.MADISONCOUNTY.
6iRSCPEHCI1ME9N5S9 A!>JSRPIELCI1ME9N5S9 WVwlH(1NMSMTPCEEMC-RIAMMEU1ON9S59
ftFftCCOtSMK WERAGE RANGE OPfKHDBUHfWKICYKAVERAGE RANGE OFPtitwMit/RMfCfVwU AVERAGE fcANOC
UKjWySOMEPEUENDRTOt.TCtCStOOUHNGSIACIF0EMFPTEUEiKLRJ0I5EUSMU RBDROAtURMGETL.ATSWJ-UINFGiISlPlER 131 4m11 00 MT 111 TT"R 0fot————1ni0 43i1 TXO 000n——-——-inM|i7
ARTEMISIATOWOfl FRINGEDSAGEWORT • 0 • 9 9 1 7 10 3 o a
PSRTtM'.SiATO&EMmrn BIGSAGEBRUSH S 9 « 15 4 3 0—6 10 7 0 \9
ARTEMISIA SAGEBRUSH 1 1 0 * 1 TR o—n 3 1 O 4
VEKB&9X&ft£P£N3 OREGONGRAPE 1 1 o t 1 1 0 ft
CHRYSQTHAMNUSSPP. MMtfBMStf 6 7 1 gj 4 I 0 2. 10 S 0 KL
PO»!UISSPfc POPLAR 1 ) 5 3 1 TR 0 3
SAUXSFP, WRiOW 1 1 0 T 1 TR 0 T
UNlOtHT.BROWSE BARSTWIGS • MO 1 4* 5 II « Ml .II 16 * 4»
BROWSE 42 M T» 3 20 » M II 33 M T9
TOTALBROWSE e 46 »— S 24 K 42 II 37 14—T»
AHTENHARIAWR PUGSYTOeS s 6 0 K » B Tt » 10 6 0 K
CQMPOStTAE compositefamily 4 » 0 9 4- 1 0 3
eriooomumsp?. ERIOGOHOM 1 1 0 * * TR 0 *
HPEHULCOHXERS.PAP.3PP. PAHLLUOMXROOT e 9 1 3* 51 8R T0R K• I1I B\ n0—kft
uTnOdTenAtL,tFoOr&Rs&S STEMS,LEAVES 6 **40 rII» 4a3 rs 3049 nM—41 IIII R743 \V\T 4T3O
—
TOTALGRASS ar 14 0 45 s 17 ii K> 20 0 51