Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands : Little Smoky River

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Introduction One of the core business responsibilities of Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development is the effective management of public rangelands. Rangelands are lands that support either naturally occurring or introduced vegetation, are grazed or have the potential to be grazed and are managed as a natural ecosystem. Grasslands, forests, riparian areas and tame pastures are all rangelands.

On northern Alberta grazing leases, it is a common practice to clear some forested areas and develop those areas into tame pastures. The higher forage production of the tame forages provides additional grazing opportunities but the attractiveness of these areas to livestock can also result in other areas of the disposition receiving very little use.

Objectives In 2008, a GPS collar project was conducted on a grazing lease northeast of Valleyview, Alberta to document: 1. Cattle use of rangeland plant communities, as well as 2. The influence that tame pasture has on overall livestock distribution throughout the grazing disposition

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Site Description This grazing lease is approx 2629 acres (1064 ha) in size. The Little Smoky River forms the east boundary of the disposition. (Figure 1). Approximately 78 acres (31 ha) of private land are fenced and used together with the grazing lease.

The grazing lease is located almost entirely within the Little Smoky River valley. Approximately 71% of the area (1871 acres) is made up of forested plant communities (Table 1). 90% of the forested area (64% of the lease) has an overstory dominated by deciduous trees, primarily aspen (Figure 2). Water covers about 5.5% (144 ac) of the lease area while sedge, marsh reedgrass or willow dominated wetlands make up about 6.5% (171 ac). Most of the waterbodies and wetlands are located in oxbows that formed when old river meanders were cut off from the active river channel (Figure 3). Shrublands and small grassland areas contribute approx 72 acres to the total lease area. Scattered throughout the grazing lease are 12 tame pastures, totalling about 363 acres (pasture size ranges from 9.5 to 67 acres with an average size of 30 acres). Tame forages have also been seeded on 4 small areas, mainly along the north crossfence, totalling 7 acres (ranging in size from 0.5 to 3.5 acres)

Table 1: Vegetative composition of Grazing Lease Plant Community Category Acreage (acres) Percentage of total lease area Deciduous forest 1680.0 63.9 Tame pasture 363.4 13.8 Coniferous forest 191.3 7.3 Graminoid or willow dominated wetlands 171.0 6.5 Open water 144.4 5.5 Shrubland / native grassland 72.4 2.8 Small tame forage areas 6.7 0.3 Total 2629.2 100

The 78 acres of private land fenced and used with the grazing lease consists of 30 acres of tame pasture, 39 acres of deciduous forest and 9 acres of willow/sedge.

The Little Smoky River channel covers an area of approximately 313 acres (water and gravel bars)

The grazing lease is cross-fenced into 3 pasture units allowing the use of a rotational grazing system. The private land provides a fourth pasture unit (Figure 4). The grazing period is from early June to mid October in most years.

Cattle water primarily from the oxbow lakes and from beaverponds. There are only a few locations where cattle water directly from the Little Smoky River.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 1: Grazing Lease boundary

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 2: Aspen-Rose-Tall Forb plant community type. This is the most common plant community type on light to moderately grazed forested sites on this grazing disposition

Figure 3: Sedge and Marsh Reed Grass dominated wetlands occur in old river channels throughout the grazing disposition

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 4: Overview of Project Area. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow, fences are shown as orange lines, trails as pink dashed lines.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Methods Vegetation polygons were mapped using Arcview 3.3, ArcMap and Valtus satellite imagery (Figure 4). Plant community types (PCTs) were identified through field inspections and use of the Guide to Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Dry and Central Mixedwood Subregions in Alberta (Willoughby, et al. 2006).

In 2008, the lease area was grazed from June 1 to October 11 by 144 cows and 6 bulls. The average weight of the cows was approx. 1200 lbs. Most of the animals were moved onto the lease at the beginning of the grazing period. A few smaller groups were added after the main herd. Pasture rotation dates for 2008 are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Pasture Rotation Dates On Date Off Date Days Pasture Unit June 1 June 30 30 Private - North July 1 July 28 28 Middle July 29 August 13 16 South August 14 August 26 13 Middle - South August 27 September 14 19 Middle September 15 October 1 17 All October 2 October 11 10 Middle – North - Private 133 Total

Nine cows were collared with Lotek 3300 GPS collars on July 7, 2008, prior to being moved onto the lease. The collared cows were part of one of the last groups of cows to be moved onto the lease. The cows that were collared were representative of the animals in the herd in regards to size and age and were cows that the lessee felt would be good indicators of herd behaviour. Analysis of the results is based on the assumption that these nine collared cows represent the behaviour of the entire herd.

Figure 5: GPS collared cows

The GPS collars were programmed to attempt a location fix every ten minutes during the daylight hours (when the cattle were expected to be most active) and hourly during the period when they would typically be less active. The assumption was made that the cattle would be least active

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project during the period from one hour after sunset to one hour before sunrise. Recording schedule therefore varied through the season to reflect the changing daylength (Table 3). Ambient temperature and animal activity (head up / head down as an indicator of resting / feeding) was recorded by the collars every five minutes.

Table 3: Recording interval schedule for GPS collars

Date of Schedule Change Sunrise Sunset Recording Interval 10 minute 1 hour July 8 05:28 22:33 0400 - 2400 2400 - 0400 August 17 06:34 21:25 0500 – 2300 2300 - 0500 September 14 07:26 20:34 0600 – 2200 2200 – 0600

A new type of belting was used on the collars deployed on this project. A problem with the buckle system resulted in one of the collars dropping off on September 10. This collar was recovered on September 15. The other eight collars successfully recorded GPS locations until their removal at the end of the grazing period.

The cattle were removed from the lease on October 11 at which time the GPS collars were retrieved. Recorded data was downloaded from the collars, differentially corrected and imported into an ArcView 3.3 project for analysis.

Cattle use of the different plant community types, represented by the locations recorded by the GPS collared cows, was compared to the availability, or amount, of each plant community type in each pasture unit. Preference or avoidance of each PCT was calculated using Ivlev’s electivity index (Ei = (ri – pi)/ (ri + pi) where Ei is the electivity, ri is the percentage of the total locations of the collared cowsi that were recorded in a given PCT and pi is the percentage of the pasture unit that is comprised of that PCT). If PCT use is equal to availability, the electivity index will be zero. Positive values indicate that the PCT is used more than expected (preference) while negative values indicate that the PCT is used less than expected (avoidance).

The electivity index is a mathematical model, used to gauge livestock preference or avoidance of different PCTs relative to others. It should be noted that some PCTs are capable of supporting more livestock use than others and would be expected to be used more. The tame pastures, for example, produce more forage per acre than forested areas, so recorded locations on a given area would be expected to be higher, all other things being equal. Other PCTs may be used more for shade and shelter than for forage. Factors that may have influenced cattle use of the different PCTs are examined in the Results and Discussion sections.

AUMs utilized were estimated based on the percentage of locations that were recorded in each plant community type or buffer area. Utilization numbers were then compared to the recommended carrying capacity for each area to illustrate the implications for range health and lease management.

Further analysis was conducted using ArcMap buffer intersects to document how primary range areas influence livestock use of the secondary range areas.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Results

Cattle grazed the private land and North pasture from June 1 – 30. GPS collar locations were not recorded for this first grazing period since the collared cows were not moved onto the lease until July 7.

Middle Pasture Unit: July 8 - 28 The Middle pasture unit was grazed from July 1 to July 28. As noted previously, the collared cows were placed on the lease on July 7, with the collars programmed to start recording locations on July 8.

Fence, trail, salt and GPS collar locations are shown in Figure 6 . PCTs are mapped in Figure 6 and described in Table 4.

Figure 6: Middle Pasture Unit, July 8 – 28. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow, fences are shown as orange lines and trails as pink dashed lines. GPS locations are shown as red dots, salt locations are shown as light blue squares.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 4: Middle Pasture Unit Plant Community Type Descriptions Polygon Plant Community Description Type 42, 43 Water / DMA1 (80/20) Old oxbow; 80% open water, 20% Sedge 45, 50, 53 DMC2 Aspen / Rose /Tall Forb 46, 49 DMB13 Tame pasture: Creeping Red Fescue, Brome, Timothy 47 DMA9 / DMC8 (80/20) 80% Kentucky Bluegrass – Dandelion; 20% Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 48 DMC8 Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 51 DMB13 Tame pasture: Creeping Red Fescue, Brome 52, 110 DMC7 Aspen / Saskatoon 54 DMC8a Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Willow 55 DMB12 Tame pasture: Brome, Creeping Red Fescue 56 DMC2 / DMD5 (80/20) 80% Aspen / Rose /Tall Forb; 20% Aspen – White Spruce / Rose / Marsh Reed Grass 57 DMB13 Tame pasture: Kentucky Blue Grass, Creeping Red Fescue, Brome 58 CMA10 Willow – River Alder / Marsh Reed Grass 59 DMB20 Reverting tame pasture: Rose / Creeping Red Fescue- Sedge 111 Non-vegetated River and gravel bars 108, 109 DMD7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower

The Middle pasture unit is 465 ac (188 ha) in size, bordered by 35.30 acres of river & gravel bars. There are 4 main tame pastures developed in this unit along with 2 small areas seeded to tame forages along the north fenceline (Figure 6). The main watering site is at the north end of the old oxbow (vegetation polygons 43 & 42). Cattle access water from this oxbow to a lesser extent from various places along the west side of polygon 42 and the east side of polygon 43. Cattle also use the Little Smoky River as a water source in the northeast part of this pasture unit.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

To determine which areas and PCTs were preferred by cattle, electivity indexes were calculated for each PCT in this pasture unit (Table 5; Chart 1).

Table 5: Middle Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes Plant Community Type Area % of GPS % of Total Electivity (polygon #) (acres) Total Locations Locations Index area (#) Tame Pasture DMB12 (55) 67.09 13.41 8002 41.79 0.51 Tame Pasture DMB13 (46) 20.10 4.02 1938 10.12 0.43 Modified grassland DMA9/DMC8 (47) 10.63 2.12 977 5.10 0.41 Tame Pasture DMB13 (49) 9.49 1.90 762 3.98 0.35 DMC7 (110) 28.52 5.70 1429 7.46 0.13 DMC8 (48) 23.78 4.75 858 4.48 -0.03 DMC2 (50) 42.38 8.47 1204 6.29 -0.15 DMC2 (53) 24.12 4.82 666 3.48 -0.16 Tame Pasture DMB13 (51) 38.91 7.78 1022 5.34 -0.19 DMC8a (54) 20.38 4.07 481 2.51 -0.24 DMC2/DMD5 (56) 59.01 11.79 1248 6.52 -0.29 DMD7 (108) 9.15 1.83 145 0.76 -0.41 DMC7 (52) 8.09 1.62 54 0.28 -0.70 DMD7 (109) 9.64 1.93 40 0.21 -0.80 DMC2 45) 56.95 11.38 165 0.86 -0.86 Water/DMA1 (43) 11.67 2.33 30 0.16 -0.87 River & gravel bars (111) 35.29 7.05 90 0.47 -0.88 Tame Pasture DMB13 (57) 3.55 0.71 8 0.04 -0.89 CMA10 (58) 5.62 1.12 9 0.05 -0.92 Reverted tame pasture DMB20 (59) 2.25 0.45 3 0.02 -0.93 Water/DMA1 (42) 13.75 2.75 15 0.08 -0.94 500.40 100.00 19146 100.00

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle Pasture Electivity Index (July 8-28)

0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 Electivity Index -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00

(111) ture (55)ture (46) ture (49) ture (51) ture (57) ture (59) t (48, 110) el bars land/DMC8 (47) tame pastame pas tame pas tame pas tame pas er & grav edge meadowwillow-alder/MRG (42,43) (58) t (45, 50, 52, 53,riv 54, 56) deciduous fores reverted tame pas mixedwood forest (108,109) water/s modified grass

deciduous fores Plant Community Type

Chart 1: Middle Pasture Electivity Indexes. Numbers in brackets following PCT names refer to the corresponding vegetation polygon numbers. Deciduous forest polygons are split into 2 groups based on their electivity indexes (preference or near neutral in one group, avoidance in the other).

3 of the 4 main tame pastures (polygons 55, 46 & 49) had positive electivity indexes. Approx 56% of all GPS locations recorded in this pasture unit occurred in these 3 tame pastures. Although they only made up about 19% of the area, these tame pastures produce much of the forage in this pasture unit (nearly 50% of the carrying capacity). The 4th tame pasture (polygon 51) and the 2 small tame forage areas along the north fenceline are located further from the primary watering areas and therefore used less by the cattle (negative electivity indexes). A steep bank in polygon 52 made it difficult for cattle to access water from the west side of polygon 42 The modified grassland area (polygon 47) is located between the main water sources in this pasture unit and is also located between the high use tame pastures (55 and 49 / 46). Major access trails run through the area. These factors, along with the availability of forage and shade in this PCT and its forage quality (lush, sub-irrigated growth) all combine to make this area attractive to cattle, resulting in a positive electivity index.

All the other vegetation polygons had negative electivity indexes, with the exception of one of the deciduous forest PCTs adjoining a tame pasture area (polygon 110). One other deciduous forest polygon had an electivity index near zero, indicating that it was neither preferred nor avoided. This area is located between the preferred tame pastures / modified grassland area and the main watering location

Areas that livestock prefer to graze if given free choice are called primary ranges. Secondary ranges are areas that have useable forage but are unused or only lightly grazed when livestock distribution is not controlled. Primary and secondary ranges are not static – livestock distribution is

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project influenced by changes in management (location of salt & water sources, trails, fences, etc), seasonal changes in forage, utilization levels on primary ranges and other factors. If livestock are allowed to choose where they can graze, secondary ranges normally receive little use unless the primary ranges are overutilized. In this pasture unit, the main tame pasture areas and the modified grassland area are primary range types while the other PCTs would be considered secondary range types.

A closer examination of the GPS collar records shows that cattle use of the secondary range types decreased as distance from the primary range plant community types increased (Table 6, Chart 2). Over 25% of the locations recorded in the secondary range areas were within 10m of the primary range areas, nearly 60% were within 30m and approx 74% were within 50m of these areas. Electivity indexes are negative for distances greater than 30m from primary range areas. Areas further than 100m from the primary range plant community types accounted for only about 12% of the secondary range use, despite making up approximately 50% of the secondary range area (35% of total area of the pasture unit).

Table 6: Middle Pasture Unit, July 8-28: Cattle Distribution Relative to Primary Range % of secondary % of total Electivity Distance (m) % of total locations locations area Index <10 25.51 8.59 3.93 0.37 20 20.03 6.74 4.00 0.26 30 13.98 4.71 3.91 0.09 40 9.17 3.09 3.76 -0.10 50 5.48 1.84 3.51 -0.31 60 3.62 1.22 3.40 -0.47 70 3.23 1.09 3.27 -0.50 80 2.47 0.83 3.26 -0.59 90 2.37 0.80 3.24 -0.60 100 2.36 0.79 3.14 -0.60 >100 11.79 3.97 35.36 -0.80 Total 100.00 33.66 70.78 -0.36

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle Pasture: July 8-28 Secondary Range Use

40 35 30

25 % of secondary locations

% 20 % of total locations 15 % of total area 10 5 0 <10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100 Distance from Primary Range

Chart 2: Middle Pasture Unit, July 8-28: Cattle Distribution Relative to Primary Range

Of all the locations recorded in the Middle Pasture Unit during the July 8 – 28 grazing period, 86% were recorded on the 4 tame pasture areas and the modified grassland or within 30m of these areas.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

South Pasture Unit: July 29 – August 13

Cattle were moved to the South Pasture Unit on July 29 where they remained until August 13.

Locations of fences and trails and points recorded by the GPS collars are shown in Figure 7. PCTs are mapped in Figure 7 and described in Table 7.

Figure 7: South Pasture Unit, July 29 – August 13. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow, fences are shown as orange lines, trails as pink dashed lines and salt locations as light blue squares. GPS locations are shown as red dots.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 7: South Pasture Unit Plant Community Type Descriptions Polygon Plant Community Description Type 1, 24, 105 DMB20 Reverting tame pasture: Aspen/Rose/Creeping Red Fescue/Brome 2, 21, 30 DMA7 Saskatoon-Snowberry / Hairy Wild Rye 3 DMA1 / DMA10 / Old oxbow; Sedge, Willow/Marsh Reed Grass, water water 4,11,16,17,1 DMC2 Aspen / Rose / Tall Forb 9,23,27,29,3 1,102 5, 12, 32, DMA15 River flat; willow dominated 104 6, 22, 34, 44 DMC8a Balsam Poplar-Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 7 DMD7 White Spruce-Balsam Poplar-Aspen/Rose/Twinflower 8, 13, 40 DMC8 Balsam Poplar-Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 9, 35 DMD11 White Spruce / Moss 10 Water / DMA1 Old oxbow; 90% open water, 10% sedge (90/10) 14 shrubland Old beaver pond; beaver logged aspen & balsam poplar 15 DMC2 / CMA4 80% Aspen/Rose/Tall Forb; 20% Snowberry/Kentucky (80/20) Bluegrass 18, 38 DMB13 Tame pasture: Creeping Red Fescue, Brome, Timothy 20 DMA10 / DMA9 80% Willow/Sedge, 20% Kentucky Bluegrass/Dandelion (80/20) 25, 37, 101 DMC7 Aspen / Saskatoon 26, 41 DMB14 Tame pasture: Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass / Dandelion 28 DMA1 / water Old oxbow; 50% sedge, 50% open water (50/50) 33, 106 DMC4 Aspen-Balsam Poplar / Hazelnut 36 DMA10a Willow / Marsh Reed Grass 39 DMA17 Red Osier Dogwood / Marsh Reed Grass 115, 116 Water / DMA1 Old oxbow; 80% open water, 20% sedge (80/20) 93 Non-vegetated River and gravel bars 103 Water / DMA1 Old oxbow; 70% open water, 30% sedge (70/30) 107 DMC2 / DMD5 60% Aspen/Rose/Tall Forb, 40% Aspen-White (60/40) Spruce/Rose/Marsh Reed Grass

Total area of the south pasture unit (including the area of the river & gravel bars) is approximately 1573 ac (636 ha). Five tame pastures have been developed in this pasture unit. (Figure 7 – note that one of these tame pastures is comprised of two different plant community types; vegetation polygons 26 & 105). Three of these tame pastures have very significant amounts of aspen regeneration (15 – 25 ft high). There are several old river oxbows that provide access to water

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project throughout this pasture unit. A limited amount of watering occurred at two areas of the Little Smoky River.

Electivity indexes were calculated for each vegetation polygon to determine which were preferred by the cattle. Some of the vegetation polygons were grouped by PCT or vegetation category for presentation in the following table & chart (Table 8; Chart 3).

Table 8: South Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes. Numbers in brackets following plant community or vegetation type refer to the vegetation polygons included.

Plant Community or Area % of Locations % of Total Electivity Vegetation Type (polygon #) (acres) Total (#) Locations Index Area Tame Pasture DMB13 (38) 13.53 0.86 1182 8.00 0.81 Tame Pasture DMB14 (26) 12.62 0.80 965 6.53 0.78 Tame Pasture DMB13 (18) 29.58 1.88 2000 13.53 0.76 Reverting Tame Pasture DMB20 (1) 38.54 2.45 2412 16.32 0.74 Reverting Tame Pasture DMB20 (24) 18.44 1.17 841 5.69 0.66 Reverting Tame Pasture DMB20 (105) 23.90 1.52 741 5.01 0.53 RO dogwood MRG (39) 6.31 0.40 101 0.68 0.26 shrubby grassland (2,14,21,30) 7.48 0.48 106 0.72 0.20 sedge / willow sedge or MRG (3,20,28,36) 158.17 10.05 1866 12.63 0.11 Tame pasture (fenceline) DMB14 (41) 0.52 0.03 5 0.03 0.01 aspen dominated forest DMC2, DMC7 (4,11,15-17,19,23,25,27,29,31,37,101, 102,107) 659.30 41.91 3277 22.17 -0.31 balsam poplar dominated forest DMC8, DMC8a (6,8,13,22,34,40,44) 156.39 9.94 736 4.98 -0.33 Aspen-balsam poplar / hazelnut DMC4 (33,106) 152.29 9.68 317 2.14 -0.64 willow river flats DMA15 (5,12,32,104) 22.91 1.46 43 0.29 -0.67 water/DMA1(10,115,116,103) 99.17 6.30 142 0.96 -0.74 river & gravel bars (93) 158.55 10.08 44 0.30 -0.94 coniferous & mixedwood forest DMD7, DMD11 (7,9,35) 15.37 0.98 2 0.01 -0.97 TOTAL 1573.07 100.00 14780 100.00

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

South Pasture Electivity Index (July 29 - Aug 13)

1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Electivity 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00

water/sedge balsam poplar willow river flats tame pasturetame pasture tame(38) pasture (26) (18) RO dogwoodshrubby MRG grassland river & gravel bars

aspen dominated forest tame pasture (fenceline) reverting tame pasture (1) reverting tame pasture (24)sedge/willow sedge or MRG reverting tame pasture (105) coniferous/mixedwood forest aspen-balsam poplar / hazelnut Plant Community or Vegetation Type

Chart 3: South Pasture Electivity Indexes (July 29 – Aug 13)

Cattle showed a very strong preference for all five tame pastures. The tame pastures accounted for 55% of all GPS locations recorded in this pasture unit, despite making up less than 9% of the total area. The tame pastures provide 23% of the carrying capacity of the unit. Shrubby grasslands located in small natural openings also had positive electivity indexes, confirming that cattle preferred these areas as well.

Positive electivity indexes were recorded for the sedge and willow/sedge or marsh reed grass areas. Cattle were attracted to these areas for both forage and water. Several major travel corridors between tame pastures were noted near some of these plant community types as well.

Cattle distribution relative to the 5 tame pastures was analyzed for this pasture unit as well. The shrubby grassland areas were not included in this analysis of primary range. Although cattle are attracted to these areas, they were either too small to strongly influence overall cattle distribution in the pasture unit or they were located in close proximity to a tame pasture or salt location, making it difficult to determine how much influence each of these factors and the plant community type had on distribution.

Positive electivity indexes were obtained for distances up to 50m from the tame pasture, although this preference was only very slight for areas between 30 and 50m (Table 9 and Chart 4). Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands March 2013 Page 16 of 59 Little Smoky River Project © 2013 Government of Alberta

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Electivity indexes for distances from 40 to 70m are very close to zero, which would indicate that cattle did not demonstrate any clear preference or avoidance of these areas. Cattle use of the secondary range areas was not concentrated as closely to the primary range as it was in the Middle Pasture during July (16% of locations recorded in South Pasture secondary ranges were within 30m of a tame pasture; 22% were within 50m). Possible explanations for this include:

1. The pasture unit was larger with the primary range areas located further apart 2. Seasonal changes in forage quality, and possibly temperature, resulted in cattle seeking out better forage and shade in other areas, particularly the wetter sedge and marsh reed grass areas. 3. Topography near most of the primary range areas consisted of steeper slopes, which limited cattle use of the secondary ranges closest to the primary range. 4. Main water sources were located further from the primary range areas.

Overall, though, 62% of all locations in this pasture unit were recorded on or within 30m of a tame pasture (12% of total area).

Table 9: South Pasture Unit, July 29-Aug 13. Cattle Distribution Relative to Tame Pasture Distance (m) % of secondary % of total locations % of total area Electivity locations Index <10 6.62 2.97 1.11 0.46 20 5.16 2.31 1.15 0.34 30 4.27 1.92 1.19 0.23 40 3.14 1.41 1.23 0.07 50 3.01 1.35 1.27 0.03 60 2.62 1.18 1.21 -0.01 70 2.40 1.08 1.20 -0.05 80 2.14 0.96 1.22 -0.12 90 1.61 0.72 1.25 -0.27 100 1.52 0.68 1.23 -0.29 >100 67.54 30.34 79.25 -0.45 Total 100.00 44.92 91.32 -0.34

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Chart 4: South Pasture Unit, July 29 – August 13: Cattle Distribution relative to tame pasture

South Pasture: July 29-Aug 13 Secondary Range Use

60 % of secondary 50 locations

% % of total locations 40

30 % of total area

0 <10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100 Distance from Primary Range

Middle & South Pasture Units: August 14 – 26

On August 14, cattle gained access back onto the Middle Pasture Unit through a broken gate. They spent the next 12 days grazing both the Middle & South Pastures. Approximately 62% of the locations during this period were recorded in the South Pasture, 38% in the Middle Pasture.

Figure 8 shows the PCT polygons and the fence, trail, salt and GPS collar locations recorded during this time period. PCT polygons were previously described in Tables 4 and 7. The Middle and South pasture unit were also described previously in the text.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 8: Middle-South Pasture, August 14-26. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow, fences are shown as orange lines, trails as pink dashed lines. Light blue squares are salt locations; GPS locations are shown as red dots.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Electivity indexes were calculated for each vegetation polygon (Table 10 and Chart 5). Some polygons were grouped together by vegetation type in this table. Polygons were excluded from the grouping and listed separately if they showed an electivity index that was markedly different from the others of that vegetation type (for example, shrubby grassland polygon 39 had an electivity index of +0.81 whereas the other 4 shrubby grassland polygons had electivity indexes ranging from -0.10 to -1.0).

Table 10: Middle - South Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes, August 14-26. Numbers in brackets following the plant community or vegetation type refer to the vegetation polygons included.

Plant Community or Vegetation Type Area % of % of Electivity (polygon #) (acres) area Locations Locations Index Small tame forage area 1 (41) 0.52 0.03 46 0.46 0.90 RO dogwood MRG (39) 6.31 0.30 297 2.94 0.81 Tame pasture (38,55,26,49,18,46,51) 191.32 9.23 4629 45.80 0.66 Balsam poplar dominated forest 1 (40) 32.24 1.55 688 6.81 0.63 Modified grasslands (47) 10.63 0.51 215 2.13 0.61 Reverting tame pasture 1 (1,105) 62.44 3.01 1022 10.11 0.54 Aspen dominated forest 1 (37,11,107) 69.36 3.35 579 5.73 0.26 Sedge or willow & sedge or MRG 1 (20,36) 61.10 2.95 485 4.80 0.24 Coniferous & mixedwood forest (7,9,108,109) 34.16 1.65 89 0.88 -0.30 Shrubby grasslands (2,14,21,30) 7.48 0.36 16 0.16 -0.39 Balsam poplar dominated forest 2 (6,8,13,22,34,44,48,54) 168.32 8.12 354 3.50 -0.40 Reverting tame pasture 2 (24) 18.44 0.89 37 0.37 -0.42 Aspen dominated forest 2 (4,15-17,19,23, 25,27,29,31,45,50,52,53,56,101,102,110) 808.99 39.02 1355 13.41 -0.49 Small tame forage areas 2 (57,59) 5.80 0.28 8 0.08 -0.56 Water/sedge meadow (10,42,43,103,115,116) 124.60 6.01 171 1.69 -0.56 Sedge or willow & sedge or MRG 2 (3,28,58) 102.69 4.95 81 0.80 -0.72 River & gravel bars (93,111) 193.84 9.35 21 0.21 -0.96 Willow river flats (5,12,32,104) 22.91 1.10 2 0.02 -0.96 Aspen-Balsam poplar/hazelnut (33,106) 152.29 7.34 12 0.12 -0.97 Total 2073.44 100.00 10107 100.00

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle-South Pasture Electivity Index (Aug 14 - 26)

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

Electivity Index 0.00

-0.20

-0.40

-0.60

-0.80

-1.00

1 2

Tame pasture dogwood MRG Willow river flats RO River & gravel bars Modified grasslands Shrubby grasslands Water/sedge meadow

Small tame forage area 1 RevertingAspen tame dominated pasture 1 forest 1 RevertingAspen tame dominatedSmall pasture tame 2 forest forage 2 area 2

Aspen-Balsam poplar/hazelnut Coniferous & mixedwood forest Balsam poplar dominated forest 1 Balsam poplar dominated forest 2 Sedge or willow & sedge or MRG Sedge or willow & sedge or MRG

Plant Community or Vegetation Type

Chart 5: Middle-South Pasture Electivity Indexes (Aug 14-26)

Cattle showed a strong preference for all the tame forage areas with the exception of one reverting tame pasture (polygon 24, which received considerable use in the previous grazing period) and the two small isolated tame forage areas (polygons 57 & 59) along the north side of the Middle Pasture. The red osier dogwood – marsh reed grass shrubby grassland (polygon 39) adjoining one of the tame pastures contains a major watering site and was strongly preferred by cattle as was the Middle Pasture modified grassland area (polygon 47). Together, the tame forage areas, modified grassland and shrubby grassland (39) accounted for over 61% of the total locations recorded during this grazing period but made up only 14% of the area. The carrying capacity of these areas was about 40% of the total for the pasture unit.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 9: Collared cow on tame pasture Figure 10: Collared cow, polygon 51 (PCT polygon 51), August 22 August 22

Other areas that received considerable use by cattle were some of the forested areas located in close proximity to tame pastures, water sources and salting locations, particularly those in the main travel corridor through the north end of the South pasture to the Middle pasture (polygons 40, 37 &107). Positive electivity indexes were again recorded in 2 of the willow / sedge or marsh reed grass areas (polygons 20 & 36) used for both forage and as water sources.

Figure 11: Secondary range (polygon 27) Figure 12: Secondary range (polygon 40) near tame pasture (polygon 105) in main travel corridor

During this grazing period, positive electivity indexes were obtained for areas within 20m of the primary range areas (tame pastures and modified grassland). The preference for areas between 20 and 30m was less pronounced than it was in the previous grazing period, being near neutral (EI = 0.04). (Table 11 and Chart 6). Overall, 68% of the total locations recorded were on primary ranges or within 30m of those areas (20% of total area)

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 11: Middle-South Pasture Unit, Aug 14-26: Cattle Distribution Relative to Primary Range Distance (m) % of Secondary % of Total % of Total Area Electivity Index Locations Locations 10 9.37 3.90 1.81 0.37 20 7.35 3.06 2.14 0.18 30 5.64 2.34 2.17 0.04 40 4.04 1.68 1.90 -0.06 50 4.14 1.72 1.88 -0.04 60 3.38 1.40 1.81 -0.13 70 3.88 1.61 1.89 -0.08 80 3.57 1.48 1.90 -0.12 90 2.90 1.21 1.83 -0.20 100 2.14 0.89 1.79 -0.34 >100 53.59 22.29 67.22 -0.50 Total 100.00 41.59 86.36 -0.35

Middle-South Pastures: August 14-26 Secondary Range Use

50 % of secondary

% 40 locations

30 % of total locations 20 % of total area 10

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100 Distance from Primary Range

Chart 6: Middle-South Pasture Unit, Aug 14-26: Cattle Distribution relative to Primary Range

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle Pasture Unit: August 27 – September 14

The cattle were moved out of the South pasture on August 26. They grazed the Middle pasture from August 27 to September 14.

Figure 13 shows the GPS collar locations recorded during this time period, along with the locations of the fences, trails and salt. PCTs were described previously in Table 4.

Figure 13: Middle Pasture, August 27 – September 14. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow (described in Table 4), fences are shown as orange lines, trails as pink dashed lines. Light blue squares are salt locations; GPS locations are shown as red dots.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 12: Middle Pasture Electivity Indexes, August 27 – September 14 Plant Community or Vegetation Type Area % of Locations % of Electivity (polygon numbers) (acres) area Locations Index Tame pasture DMB12 (55) 67.09 13.41 9173 55.62 0.61 Tame pasture DMB13 (51) 38.91 7.78 2859 17.34 0.38 Tame pasture DMB13 (49) 9.49 1.90 480 2.91 0.21 Tame pasture DMB13 (46) 20.1 4.02 536 3.25 -0.11 Modified grassland (47) 10.63 2.12 249 1.51 -0.17 Deciduous forest (45,48,50,52-54,56,110) 263.24 52.61 2823 17.12 -0.51 Small tame pasture areas (57, 59) 5.80 1.16 54 0.33 -0.56 Coniferous & mixedwood forest (108, 109) 18.79 3.76 123 0.75 -0.67 Willow alder/MRG (58) 5.62 1.12 30 0.18 -0.72 Water/sedge meadows (42, 43) 25.43 5.08 76 0.46 -0.83 River & gravel bars (111) 35.30 7.05 89 0.54 -0.86 500.40 100.00 16492 100.00

Middle Pasture Electivity Index (Aug 27 - Sept 14)

0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 Electivity Index -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00 s 55) 51) 49) 46) RG 57, 59) /M

eas ( deciduous forest willow alderriver & gravel bar

odified grassland (47) water/sedge meadows m e pasture ar tame pasturetame pasturetame DMB12 pasturetame DMB12 ( pasture DMB13 ( DMB13 ( (

coniferous & mixedwood forest small tam Plant Community Type

Chart 7: Middle Pasture Electivity Indexes, August 27 – September 14

Most of the tame pastures again were preferred by the cattle during this grazing period (Table 12). Preference was highest for the most productive tame pasture (55), with positive electivity indexes being recorded for 2 of the other tame pastures (51 & 49) as well. Preferences for some of the tame pastures (especially polygon 46, but also 49) and the modified grassland area (47) were considerably lower than they were in the previous grazing periods, indicating that forage quality and availability had declined, reducing the attractiveness of these areas to cattle. Overall, more

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project than 80% of the locations were recorded on the tame pastures and modified grassland (29% of the total area). Less than 20% of all locations recorded in this pasture unit during this time period occurred on secondary range areas. While the use of these areas was not high enough to create positive electivity indexes, nearly 37% of the locations recorded on secondary range areas occurred within 30m of the primary range areas. (Table 13 and Chart 8). In total, nearly 88% of all locations recorded during this grazing period occurred on or within 30m of a primary range area.

Table 13: Middle Pasture Unit, Aug 27-Sept 14: Cattle Distribution Relative to Primary Range Distance % of Secondary % of Total % of Total Electivity (m) Locations Locations Area Index 10 19.47 3.77 3.93 -0.02 20 9.58 1.86 4.00 -0.37 30 7.70 1.49 3.91 -0.45 40 6.17 1.19 3.76 -0.52 50 5.85 1.13 3.51 -0.51 60 6.07 1.18 3.40 -0.49 70 5.04 0.98 3.27 -0.54 80 5.20 1.01 3.26 -0.53 90 4.98 0.96 3.24 -0.54 100 5.38 1.04 3.14 -0.50 >100 24.57 4.76 35.37 -0.76 Total 100.00 19.37 70.78 -0.57

Middle Pasture: Aug 27 - Sept 14 Secondary Range Use

25 % of secondary locations

% of total locations % 20 % of total area 15

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100 Distance from Primary Range

Chart 8: Middle Pasture Unit, Aug 27–Sept 14: Cattle Distribution Relative to Primary Range

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

All Pasture Units: September 15 – October 1

Cattle had access to all 4 pasture units from September 15 to October 1.

Figure 14 shows the GPS collar locations recorded during this time period, along with the locations of the PCTs, fences, trails and salt.

The North pasture unit is approx 749 acres (303 ha) in size, not including the area of the river and gravel bars (119 acres). The majority of this unit is forested, with 450 acres (182 ha) or 60% of the unit being deciduous forest and another 156 acres (63 ha) being coniferous & mixedwood forest (21% of the unit). Tame forages have been seeded on 3 areas totalling 91 acres (37 ha) or 12 % of the unit. Cattle water from beaverponds located mainly near the north end of an intermittent creek running diagonally NW-SE through the middle of this unit. The Little Smoky River forms the east boundary of this unit but is accessible to cattle at only a few locations due to topography. Cattle did not use it as a water source during this grazing period. PCTs in the North pasture unit are described in Table 14.

The Private pasture unit is approx 78 acres (31 ha) in size. Deciduous forest covers 50% of the unit. The remainder of the area consists of a 30 acre (12 ha) tame pasture with a willow / marsh reed grass meadow located in the NE corner of the unit. Cattle water from a borrow pit in the SW corner of this unit. Private pasture unit PCTs are described in Table 15.

The South and Middle pasture units were previously described.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 14: All Pasture Units, September 15 - October 1. GPS collar locations are shown as red dots, salt locations as light blue squares, trails as pink dashed lines and fences as orange lines. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow and described in Tables 4, 7, 14 & 15.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 14: North Pasture Unit Plant Community Type Descriptions Polygon Plant Community Description Type 60 DMB20 Reverting tame pasture: Rose / Kentucky Blue Grass 61 CMA10 Willow – River Alder / Marsh Reed Grass 62 DMC4 Aspen – Balsam Poplar / Hazelnut (slumping slopes) 63 DMC4 Aspen – Balsam Poplar / Hazelnut 64 DMB12 Tame pasture: Brome, Creeping Red Fescue 65 DMB12/DMB20 90% Tame pasture; 10% Reverting tame pasture (90/10) 66 DMC8 Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 67 DMC2 Aspen / Rose / Tall forb 68 DMD7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower 69 DMC2 Aspen / Rose / Tall forb 70 DMA10a/water (90/10) 90% Willow / Marsh Reed Grass; 10% water 71 DMD5 Aspen – White Spruce / Rose / Marsh Reed Grass 72 DMD5 Aspen – White Spruce / Rose / Marsh Reed Grass 73 DMD7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower 74 DMC2 Aspen / Rose / Tall forb 75 DMA2/water (60/40) 60% Marsh Reed Grass meadow; 40% water 76 DMD7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower 77 DMD5 Aspen – White Spruce / Rose / Marsh Reed Grass 79 DMA7/DMC7 (60/40) 60% Saskatoon–Snowberry / Hairy Wild Rye; 40% Aspen / Saskatoon 80 DMD8/water (90/10) 90% Black Spruce / Willow / Moss; 10% water 81 DMC2/DMD5 (70/30) 70% Aspen / Rose / Tall forb; 30% Aspen – White Spruce / Rose / Marsh Reed Grass 82 DMD8/DMC8a (80/20) 80% Black Spruce / Willow / Moss; 20% Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Willow 83 DMD8/DMC8a (60/40) 60% Black Spruce / Willow / Moss; 40% Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Willow 84 DMB14 Tame pasture: Creeping Red Fescue – Kentucky Blue Grass / Dandelion 85 DMD8/DMC8a (40/60) 40% Black Spruce / Willow / Moss; 60% Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Willow 86 RB/DMC8 (40/60) 40% River breaks; 60% Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 87 DMA7 Saskatoon – Snowberry / Hairy Wild Rye 88 DMC8/DMA9 (80/20) 80% Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood; 20% Kentucky Blue Grass / Dandelion 89 DMD7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower 90 DMC8 Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Red Osier Dogwood 91 DMC2/DMC7 (60/40) 60% Aspen / Rose / Tall forb; 40% Aspen / Saskatoon 92 DMD7/DMC7 (60/40) 60% White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower; 40% Aspen / Saskatoon

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

112 Non-vegetated River & gravel bars 113 DMD7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower 114 DMC7 White Spruce – Balsam Poplar – Aspen / Rose / Twinflower

Table 15: Private Pasture Unit Community Type Descriptions Polygon Plant Community Type Description 94 DMC3 Aspen / Rose / Low forb 95 DMB12/DMB20 (90/10) 90% tame pasture: Brome, Creeping Red Fescue; 10% Reverting tame pasture 96 DMC3 Aspen / Rose / Low forb 97 DMC3 Aspen / Rose / Low forb 98 DMC3 Aspen / Rose / Low forb 99 DMC2 Aspen / Rose / Tall forb 100 DMC10a Willow / Marsh Reed Grass

When the gates on the Middle Pasture were opened on September 15, allowing cattle access to all pasture units, the herd dispersed throughout the area. Some of the herd (including 4 of the collared cows) moved to the North Pasture and Private Pastures while others (including 3 collared cows) moved into the South Pasture for about a week before most of them moved north to join the rest of the herd (Chart 9).

Locations by Pasture Unit

600

500

400 Middle North 300 Private South Locations (#) Locations 200

100

9/15/20119/16/20119/17/20119/18/20119/19/20119/20/20119/21/20119/22/20119/23/20119/24/20119/25/20119/26/20119/27/20119/28/20119/29/20119/30/201110/1/2011 Date

Chart 9: Locations Recorded in each Pasture Unit, September 15 – October 1

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

PCTs were grouped into vegetation types. Electivity indexes were calculated for each vegetation type to determine cattle preferences throughout the entire grazing disposition and adjoining private land. (Table 16, Chart 10).

Table 16: All Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes, September 15 - October 1 Plant Community or Vegetation Type Area % of Locations % of Electivity (Polygon #) (acres) area locations Index tame pasture 312.30 10.34 8713 69.55 0.74 (18,26,38,46,49,51,55,64,65,84,95) small tame forage areas (41,57,59,60) 6.73 0.22 125 1.00 0.63 reverting tame pasture (1,24,105) 80.87 2.68 638 5.09 0.31 sedge or MRG meadows 199.62 6.61 576 4.60 -0.18 (3,20,28,36,58,61,70,75,100) aspen dominated forest (4,11,15-17,19, 23,25,27,29,31,37,45,50, 1232.88 40.83 1925 15.37 -0.45 52,53,56,67,69,74,81,91,94,96-99,101, 102,107,110,111,114) RO dogwood MRG (39) 6.31 0.21 9 0.07 -0.49 shrubby grasslands (2,14,21,30,79,87) 32.49 1.08 39 0.31 -0.55 water / sedge meadow 124.60 4.13 107 0.85 -0.66 (10,42,43,103,115,116) modified grasslands (47) 10.63 0.35 9 0.07 -0.66 balsam poplar dominated forest 259.75 8.60 147 1.17 -0.76 (6,8,13,22,34,40,44,48,54,66,85,86,88,90) aspen-balsam poplar / hazelnut 227.51 7.53 111 0.89 -0.79 (33,62,63,106) river, flats & gravel bars 335.91 11.13 95 0.76 -0.87 (5,12,32,93,104,111,112) coniferous & mixedwood forest (7,9,35,68, 71-73,76,77,80,82,83,89,92, 189.82 6.29 34 0.27 -0.92 108,109,113) 3019.41 100.00 12528 100.00

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

All Pasture Units (Sept 15 - Oct 1) Electivity Index

0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Electivity 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00 s s re ws d w ds ut rs o do n rest stu areaasture forest MRG a forestzeln l ba fo a ad d d p me ted ted rasslaa rage me p ge woo gwoo d d g lar / ha d tame fo ta o by grasslan min p g omina ifie ts & grave r MRG me d rtin rub r do n d RO dsh la ll tame e o e ter / semo p r, fla g sp lsam vepo reve d a wa ri sma se rous & mixe n-ba ife e n alsamsp po b a co Vegetation Type

Chart 10: All Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes, September 15 – October 1 Cattle again showed a very strong preference for the tame forage areas, with over 75% of all the locations recorded during the September 15 to October 1 grazing period occurring on tame forage plant community types (13.24% of the total area).

In the individual pasture units, tame pasture preference was most pronounced in the private (83% of the locations in this unit; EI = 0.94) and north (85% of unit locations; EI = 0.69) pasture units and to a lesser extent in the middle (79% of unit locations; EI = 0.50) and south (52 % of unit locations; EI = 0.45) pasture units. (Charts 11& 12).

GPS Locations Recorded (Sept 15 - Oct 1)

40.00

35.00

30.00

25.00 % of total 20.00 locations other PCTs 15.00 tame forages

10.00

5.00

0.00 Private North Middle South Pasture Unit

Chart 11: Tame forage use relative to other vegetation types, Sept 15 – Oct 1

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Tame Forage Electivity by Pasture Unit

1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60

0.50 0.40

Electivity Index Electivity 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Private North Middle South Pasture Unit

Chart 12: Tame Forage Electivity Indexes by Pasture Unit, Sept 15 – Oct 1 Cattle that grazed the South Pasture spent more time in the secondary range areas, most likely due to decreased forage availability in the lower producing tame pastures in that unit.

The tame pastures in the North and Private pasture units, however, having not been grazed since June, provided abundant forage (Figures 15 & 16). This was reflected in the higher use of these areas, particularly the Private pasture unit, in which the tame pasture is located not only near a water source (borrow pit) but it is also the point where the cattle were brought in to the lease (and the point where they expect to leave). Approximately 40% of all locations recorded during this time period were in the Private Pasture unit (2.56% of total area).

Figure 15: North Pasture polygon 65, Figure 16: North Pasture polygon 65, September 15 September 15

Because of the strong preference for the Private Pasture, the PCTs in that pasture unit were analyzed separately from those of the rest of the grazing area and electivity indexes were recalculated (Table 17, Chart 13).

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 17: All Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes, September 15 - October 1 Plant Community or Vegetation Type Area % of Locations % of Electivity (acres) area locations Index private tame pasture (95) 29.83 0.99 4110 32.81 0.94 private pasture willow / MRG (100) 9.03 0.30 283 2.26 0.77 small tame forage areas 6.73 0.22 125 1.00 0.63 all other tame pasture 282.47 9.36 4603 36.74 0.59 private pasture aspen forest (94,96-99) 38.70 1.28 562 4.49 0.56 reverting tame pasture 80.87 2.68 638 5.09 0.31 all other sedge or MRG meadows 190.59 6.31 293 2.34 -0.46 RO dogwood MRG 6.31 0.21 9 0.07 -0.49 shrubby grasslands 32.49 1.08 39 0.31 -0.55 all other aspen dominated forest 1194.18 39.55 1363 10.88 -0.57 water / sedge meadow 124.60 4.13 107 0.85 -0.66 modified grasslands 10.63 0.35 9 0.07 -0.66 balsam poplar dominated forest 259.75 8.60 147 1.17 -0.76 aspen-balsam poplar / hazelnut 227.51 7.53 111 0.89 -0.79 river, flats & gravel bars 335.91 11.12 95 0.76 -0.87 coniferous & mixedwood forest 189.82 6.29 34 0.27 -0.92 3019.42 100.00 12528 100.00 0.00

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Electivity Indexes: All Pastures (September 15 - October 1)

1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Electivity Index 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00 e ure est est est est pastur ed for asslands asslands / hazelnutavel bars inat inated for e forage areas RG meadows ixwood for e willow / MRG e aspen for M ting tame / sedge meadow poplar ivate tame past RO dogwood MRG odified gr flats & gr pr all tam shrubby gr m all other tamerever pasture ous & m sm water balsamriver, ivate pastur ivate pastur pr pr conifer balsamaspen- poplar dom all other sedge or all other aspen dom Vegetation Type

Chart 13: Electivity indexes (all pastures), September 15 – October 1

Positive electivity indexes were obtained for all PCTs in the Private pasture unit. As previously noted, this is likely due to the fact that this pasture unit had not been grazed since June, as well as the tendency of cattle to congregate in the entry / exit area of a grazing disposition late in the season when forage quality has declined.

During this grazing period, cattle use of the secondary range areas in the Private and North pasture units was very strongly influenced by how close those areas were located to the tame pastures. In the Middle and South pasture units, however, most of the secondary range locations occurred further than 100m from the primary range types (Table 18 and Chart 14). As discussed previously, this is likely is a reflection of the reduced forage availability in close proximity to the primary ranges in the pasture units that were grazed prior to this grazing period (Figures 17 – 20). A much smaller amount of the Private pasture unit area is located further than 100m from primary range area, which likely contributed to the small number locations recorded there.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 18: Secondary Range locations relative to primary range in each pasture unit (September 15 – October 1) % of Secondary Locations

Distance from Primary South Pasture Middle Pasture North Pasture Private Pasture Range Unit Unit Unit Unit <10 2.19 6.51 27.91 43.71 20 1.90 2.89 14.91 22.45 30 0.95 2.59 10.03 9.62 40 0.95 2.59 5.15 3.44 50 0.80 1.39 4.61 1.66 60 1.31 1.20 4.88 2.14 70 1.82 0.72 2.44 1.43 80 1.68 0.90 2.17 3.33 90 1.68 0.90 1.63 1.19 100 1.46 0.72 0.27 1.07 >100 85.27 79.58 26.02 9.98

Secondary Range Locations Relative to Primary Range

60 South 50 Middle 40 North Private 30

10 % of pasture unit secondary range locations range %unit secondary of pasture 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100 Distance from Primary Range

Chart 14: Secondary Range locations relative to primary range in each pasture unit (September 15 – October 1)

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Figure 17: Middle pasture polygon 55, Figure 18: Middle pasture polygon 51, September 15 September 15

Figure 19: Middle pasture polygon 50, Figure 20: Middle pasture polygon 46, September 15 September 15

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle, North and Private Pasture Units: October 2 – 11

Any cattle that were still in the South pasture unit were moved north out of that unit on October 1. Cattle had access to the Middle, North and Private pasture units from October 2 until October 11, when they were removed from the grazing lease and private land.

PCT polygons, fences, trails, salt locations and GPS collar locations recorded during this time period are shown in Figure 21. All pasture units have been described previously.

Figure 21: Middle, North and Private Pasture Units, October 2 -11. GPS collar locations are shown as red dots, salt locations as light blue squares, trails as pink dashed lines and fences as orange lines. Plant Community Type polygons are outlined in yellow and described in Tables 4, 7, 14 & 15.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Although the cattle were pushed out of the Private pasture unit into the Middle and North pastures on October 2, they began returning the next day (Chart 15). During this grazing period, the collared cows spent 53% of their time in the Private pasture unit, 27% of their time in the Middle pasture and 20% of their time in the North pasture unit.

Locations by Pasture Unit (Oct 2 - 11)

800

700

600

500 Middle 400 North

300 Private Locations (#) Locations 200

100

10/2/201110/3/201110/4/201110/5/201110/6/2011 10/7/201110/8/201110/9/2011 10/10/201110/11/2011 Date

Chart 15: Locations Recorded in each Pasture Unit, October 2 -11.

Electivity indexes were again calculated for each vegetation type to determine cattle preferences throughout these 3 pasture units. (Table 19, Chart 16).

Table 19: Middle, North and Private Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes, October 2 -11 Vegetation Type Area % of Locations % of Electivity (polygon numbers) (acres) area Locations Index small tame forage areas (57,59,60) 6.21 0.43 131 1.92 0.63 tame forages (46,49,51,55,64,65,84,95) 256.57 17.76 5346 78.38 0.63 modified grassland (47) 10.63 0.74 50 0.73 0.00 sedge or MRG meadows (58,61,70,75,100) 41.45 2.87 87 1.28 -0.38 aspen dominated forest (45,50,52,53,56,67,69,74,81,91, 94,96- 99,110,114) 573.67 39.71 1058 15.51 -0.44 aspen – balsam poplar / hazelnut (62,63) 75.25 5.21 58 0.85 -0.72 shrubby grasslands (79,87) 25.01 1.73 18 0.26 -0.74 coniferous & mixedwood forest (68,71-73,76,77,80,82,83,89,92, 108,109) 172.75 11.96 43 0.63 -0.90 balsam poplar dominated forest (48,54,66,85,86,88,90) 103.36 7.15 18 0.26 -0.93 water/ sedge meadows (42,43) 25.43 1.76 3 0.04 -0.95 river & gravel bars (111,112) 154.45 10.69 9 0.13 -0.98 1444.78 100.00 6821 100.00

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle-North-Private Pasture Units Electivity Indexes (October 2 -11)

0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 Electivity Index -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00 t s s s d d st st rs e n ws ws n re rea o rest re o zelnu d rag fo a ssla ad fo a fo a e d ssla d vel ba g fo ra o te ra ted ra ra r / h a me d g wo e me la y g g fo ta b ifie mina op min o b o me d r MRG me d n r d r/ sed river & g mo o shru ll ta e la g s & mixed p spe alsam p u o wate sma a sed ro - b n ife lsam p spe con a a b Plant Community or Vegetation Type

Chart 16: Middle, North and Private Pasture Unit Electivity Indexes, October 2 – 11

As was documented during the previous grazing period, cattle showed a very strong preference for the tame pastures and small tame forage areas. Over 80% of all locations recorded during this grazing period occurred on areas where tame forages have been seeded (18.19% of the total area). This was quite consistent between the individual pasture units (Table 20).

Table 20: Tame forage use by pasture unit Tame Forages Tame Forages Tame Forage Pasture Unit (% of unit locations) (% of unit area) Electivity Index Middle Pasture Unit 77.96 28.26 0.47 North Pasture Unit 81.00 10.54 0.77 Private Pasture Unit 81.36 38.46 0.36 Combined Middle-North-Private 80.30 18.19 0.63

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

GPS Locations Recorded (October 2 -11)

% of total 30 locations Other PCTs Tame forages 20

0 Middle North Private Pasture Unit

Chart 17: Tame forage use relative to other vegetation types, Oct 2 -11.

The Private pasture unit again received the highest use during this grazing period with approx 53% of the total GPS locations being recorded in that unit (5.36% of total area accessible to cattle during this grazing period) (Chart 17). The reasons for the higher use of this pasture unit again likely relate to forage quantity and quality as well as location as discussed previously.

Since the use of the Private pasture was considerably higher than the Middle and North pasture units, electivity indexes were calculated with the Private pasture plant polygons separated from the similar plant community types in the other pasture units (Table 21 and Chart 18).

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Table 21: Middle-North-Private Pasture Electivity Indexes (October 2 – 11) Area % of % of Electivity Vegetation Type Locations (acres) area Locations Index private tame pasture (95) 29.83 2.06 2958 43.37 0.91 small tame forage areas 6.21 0.43 131 1.92 0.63 private pasture aspen forest (94, 96-99) 38.72 2.68 601 8.81 0.53 all other tame pastures 226.74 15.68 2388 35.01 0.38 private pasture willow / MRG (100) 9.03 0.62 77 1.13 0.29 modified grassland 10.63 0.74 50 0.73 0.00 all other aspen dominated forest 534.95 36.98 457 6.70 -0.69 aspen - balsam poplar / hazelnut 75.25 5.20 58 0.85 -0.72 shrubby grasslands 25.01 1.73 18 0.26 -0.74 all other sedge or MRG meadows 32.41 2.24 10 0.15 -0.88 coniferous & mixedwood forest 174.46 12.06 43 0.63 -0.90 balsam poplar dominated forest 103.36 7.15 18 0.26 -0.93 water/ sedge meadows 25.43 1.76 3 0.04 -0.95 river & gravel bars 154.45 10.68 9 0.13 -0.98 1446.47 100.00 6821 100.00

Middle-North-Private Pasture Units: Electivity Indexes (October 2 - 11)

1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Electivity Index 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00

river & gravel bars modified grassland shrubby grasslands

all other tame pastures water/ sedge meadows private tamesmall pasture tame forage (95) areas

coniferous & mixedwood forest balsam poplar dominated forest all otheraspen aspen - dominatedbalsam poplar forest / hazelnut private pasture willow / MRG (100) all other sedge or MRG meadows

private pasture aspen forest (94, 96-99) Plant Community or Vegetation Type

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Chart 18: Middle-North-Private Electivity Indexes; October 2 – 11 As was noted in the September 15 to October 1 grazing period, cattle showed a very strong preference for the tame pasture in the Private pasture unit. Over 43% of all GPS collar locations recorded between October 2 and 11 occurred on this tame pasture. Positive electivity indexes were also obtained for the other PCTs in the Private pasture unit, as well as the small tame forage areas and tame pastures in the Middle and North pasture units. In total, over 90% of all locations were recorded in these PCTs, with very little use of the other PCTs in these pasture units.

Consistent with what occurred during the other grazing periods, cattle use of the secondary range areas was highest close to the primary range areas (Table 22 and Chart 19). This was again most pronounced in the Private pasture unit, although in all three pasture units, cattle use of areas within 30m of primary range areas was noticeably higher than it was in areas further away. In the Private pasture unit, over 85% of the locations recorded in the secondary range areas were within 30m of the primary range (approx 50% in the North pasture; approx 38% in the Middle pasture). In the North pasture unit, there was a similar proportion of the secondary locations recorded at distances greater than 100m from the primary range areas that was noted in the previous grazing period (25 – 26%), whereas the use of those areas decreased in the Middle pasture unit (from over 80% to 40%). Much of the secondary range use further than 100m from primary range areas in these 2 pasture units was concentrated on or around the small tame forage areas.

Table 22: Secondary Range locations relative to primary range (October 2 – 11)

Distance from Primary % of Secondary Locations Range (m) Middle Pasture Unit North Pasture Unit Private Pasture Unit <10 16.49 23.22 44.61 20 11.96 17.60 27.77 30 9.90 8.99 13.15 40 6.60 4.87 6.50 50 5.57 3.00 2.36 60 5.15 3.75 1.18 70 0.62 3.00 1.03 80 1.44 4.12 0.44 90 1.65 3.00 0.74 100 0.62 3.37 0.44 >100 40.00 25.09 1.77

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Secondary Range Locations Relative to Primary Range 50

30 Middle 25 North 20 Private

5 % of pasture unit secondary range locations range %unit secondary of pasture

0 <10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100 Distance to Primary Range

Chart 19: Secondary Range Locations Relative to Primary Range in Each Pasture Unit (October 2 – 11)

Discussion

As indicated in the Results section, cattle had a very strong preference for the primary range areas (tame forages, modified grasslands) in all pasture units throughout the grazing season. Secondary range use varied between pasture units, but in general, areas within 30 – 50m of the primary range areas were heavily used by cattle for shade, shelter and forage.

In the Results section, discussion focused primarily on the percentages of locations recorded on the primary and secondary ranges as well as on the Electivity Indexes or preference / avoidance of different plant community and vegetation types. Comparing the estimated utilization of each plant community type to its recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rate (ESSR) and the carrying capacity (CC) of each area can provide us with an indication of how the different levels of use may be impacting the preferred and non-preferred areas.

The ESSR of a plant community type is the maximum level of grazing that it can sustain without undergoing a decline in health and function. The ESSR is expressed as AUMs/acre or hectares/AUM. ESSRs are determined using information on total forage production, usable forage production and safe use factors. The ESSRs used for this grazing lease are based on the ‘Guide to Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Dry and Central Mixedwood Subregions in Alberta, 6th Approximation’ (Willoughby, et al, 2006).

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

The carrying capacity of a plant community type is calculated by multiplying the ESSR of that plant community type by its area. The carrying capacities of all the plant community types in a pasture unit can then be added together to determine the carrying capacity of that pasture unit. Totalling the carrying capacities of all the pasture units provides an overall carrying capacity for the grazing disposition. The carrying capacity is expressed in AUMs and represents the maximum amount of grazing that can be supported by that unit of rangeland (plant community type, pasture unit or grazing disposition) without undergoing a decline in range health. Carrying capacity is a theoretical maximum – it assumes that the entire area is accessible and evenly utilized by livestock. In reality, this is rarely the case. Adjustments must be made to take into account access factors (areas that are inaccessible to livestock due to natural barriers) and management factors (livestock distribution under current management). The estimated number of AUMs available after these adjustments have been made is known as the grazing capacity. For more detail on calculating carrying and grazing capacities, refer to the ASRD publication ‘Methodology For Calculating Carrying and Grazing Capacity on Public Rangelands’.

For each pasture unit, the number of AUMs utilized during each grazing period were calculated by multiplying the number of Animal Units in the herd ((144 cows x 1.2 AUE) + (6 bulls x 1.5 AUE ) = (172.80 + 9) = 181.80 AU) by the time spent in that pasture unit. For example, during the grazing period from August 27 to September 14 (19 days), the number of AUMs utilized in the Middle Pasture = 181.80 AU x (19 days / 30 days/month) = 115.14 AUMs. If more than one pasture unit was used by the cattle during a grazing period, the utilization attributed to each pasture unit was based on the percentage of locations recorded in each pasture unit. For example, cattle had access to both the Middle and South pasture units from August 14 to 26. 62% of the GPS collar locations were recorded in the South pasture, 38% in the Middle pasture, therefore 62% of the utilization for that grazing period was assumed to have occurred in the South pasture, 38% in the Middle pasture. The assumption is made that the collared cows represent the behaviour of the entire herd. For more information on AUEs and calculating AUMs, refer to the ASRD publication ‘Grazing Management Adjustments for Healthy Rangelands’.

In each pasture unit, the AUMs utilized during each grazing period were attributed to the individual plant community types based on the assumption that the percentage of the total pasture unit locations that were recorded in each plant community type was equal to the percentage of the total pasture unit AUMs utilized in that plant community type. For example, in the Middle pasture during the July 8 – 28 grazing period, 41.79% of all locations were recorded in the tame pasture polygon #55. Therefore, 41.79% or 53.19 AUMs of the 127.26 AUMs utilized in the Middle pasture during this grazing period were assumed to have been obtained from this tame pasture. While the assumption that ‘locations = utilization’ does not account for differing uses of different plant community types (forage, shade & shelter, water, travel corridors, etc), it does show where cattle are spending their time and therefore is a good indication of the relative impact and disturbance occurring in each plant community type.

A summary of the primary range, secondary range and total utilization relative to the carrying capacity of each pasture unit follows:

South Pasture Unit Cattle had access to the South pasture unit for a total of 46 days. This pasture was grazed from July 29 to August 13, at which time a broken gate allowed cattle to access the Middle pasture as

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project well. The 2 pasture units were grazed together until August 26 when the cattle were moved out of the South pasture. On September 15, all gates were opened, which allowed cattle access to the South pasture again until October 1.

Table 23 and Chart 20 compare the estimated utilization of the primary and secondary ranges, as well as the total utilization (primary + secondary) to the carrying capacity of each range use category. Utilization numbers are cumulative; utilization numbers for each grazing period are added to the totals for the previous grazing periods. In Table 23, where the estimated utilization exceeded the carrying capacity, the numbers are red.

Table 23: South Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization Cumulative Utilization Totals (AUMs) At end of July At end of August At end of Sept 29 to Aug 13 14 to 26 grazing 15 to Oct 1 grazing period period grazing period Primary Range Carrying Capacity 82.70 82.70 82.70 Primary Range Utilization 53.41 75.72 87.97 Secondary Range Carrying Capacity 273.84 273.84 273.84 Secondary Range Utilization 43.55 70.31 81.58 Total Carrying Capacity 356.54 356.54 356.54 Total Utilization 96.96 146.03 169.55

South Pasture Utilization Compared to Carrying Capacity

400

350

300 Primary Range CC 250 Primary Range Utilization Secondary Range CC 200

AUMs Secondary Range Utilization 150 Total Carrying Capacity Total Utilization 100

0 13-Aug 26-Aug 1-Oct Date

Chart 20: South Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization

In the South pasture, the number of AUMs obtained from the secondary range areas were very similar to the number obtained from the primary range areas. In fact, from August 14 to 26, more

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

AUMs were obtained from the secondary range than from the primary range. As previously discussed in the Results section, this is likely due to a decline in forage quantity and quality of the tame pasture areas, with distances between tame pastures and water sources being contributing factors as well.

Overall, utilization of the South pasture was only about 48% of the estimated carrying capacity. Approximately 52% of the AUMs were obtained from the primary range areas. By the end of the September 15 to October 1 grazing period, utilization of the primary range was slightly over its estimated carrying capacity. The secondary range area, however, comprising over 91% of the South pasture unit, was utilized to at a level well below its estimated carrying capacity. (< 30% of the rated carrying capacity). A closer examination of the secondary range utilization shows that areas within 10m of the primary range areas were used at levels that exceeded their rated carrying capacity by about 25% by the end of the grazing period. Secondary ranges located between 10 and 20m from a primary range area were utilized to near their carrying capacity by the end of the grazing period. Utilization of secondary ranges further than 20m from the primary range areas were used at levels less than their rated carrying capacities, with use decreasing as distance from primary range increased (Chart 21).

South Pasture: Secondary Range Utilization

6.00

5.00

4.00 Carrying Capacity AUMs July 29 - Aug 13 3.00

AUMs AUMs Aug 14 - 26 AUMs Sept 15 - Oct 1 2.00

1.00

0.00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Distance from primary range

Chart 21: South Pasture secondary range utilization relative to primary range. Totals for each grazing period are cumulative (utilization for each grazing period is added to the total of the previous grazing periods).

Utilization numbers from the South pasture clearly illustrate the need to make adjustments to the rated carrying capacity of an area to determine the appropriate grazing capacity. Although the estimated overall utilization of the South pasture was well below (48% of) the rated carrying capacity (356 AUMs), the primary ranges and areas within 20m of those areas were utilized to their rated carrying capacity. The remainder of the secondary ranges, however were underutilized (less than 28% of secondary range carrying capacity). The grazing capacity of the South pasture under current management would be very close to the number of AUMs utilized during the project (approx 170 AUMs). Increasing the number of animals or the length of the grazing period to try to increase the number of AUMs obtained from this pasture unit, without making any changes in management, would result in overutilization of the primary range areas (and

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project secondary range areas in close proximity) before much change in the use of the outlying secondary range areas would occur.

Middle Pasture Unit Cattle were moved onto the Middle pasture on July 1. This pasture had been grazed for 7 days (approx 39 AUMs utilized) before the collared cows were moved onto it. The Middle pasture unit was grazed for a total of 80 days between July 8 and October 11. Cattle were moved out of the Middle pasture into the South pasture on July 28, until August 14 when they gained access back into the Middle pasture. For the remainder of the grazing season, cattle always had access to the Middle pasture. For the period from August 27 to September 14, cattle use was restricted to the Middle pasture only; for the remainder of the time, they had access to other pastures as well (Middle-South Aug 14 – 26; all pasture units September 15 – Oct 1; Middle-North-Private Oct 2 – 11).

Cumulative utilization numbers and carrying capacities for the total area and primary and secondary ranges are shown in Table 24 and Chart 22. In Table 24, red numbers indicate that utilization exceeded the carrying capacity.

Table 24: Middle Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization Cumulative Utilization Totals (AUMs) At end of At end of At end of At end of At end of Jul 8 to Aug 14 Aug 27 to Sept 15 Oct 2 to 28 to 26 Sept 14 to Oct 1 11 grazing grazing grazing grazing grazing period period period period period Primary Range Carrying Capacity 126.57 126.57 126.57 126.57 126.57 Primary Range Utilization 84.41 108.12 200.95 214.60 226.61 Secondary Range Carrying Capacity 59.55 59.55 59.55 59.55 59.55 Secondary Range Utilization 42.85 48.85 71.16 75.99 80.30 Total Carrying Capacity 186.12 186.12 186.12 186.12 186.12 Total Utilization 127.26 156.97 272.11 290.59 306.91

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Middle Pasture Utilization Compared to Carrying Capacity

350

300

250 Primary Range CC Primary Range Utilization 200 Secondary Range CC

AUMs Secondary Range Utilization 150 Total Carrying Capacity 100 Total Utilization

0 28-Jul 26-Aug 14-Sep 1-Oct 11-Oct Date

Chart 22: Middle Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization

In the Middle pasture, cattle preference for the primary range areas was much stronger than it was in the South pasture. This is likely a reflection of the generally higher quality, more productive tame pastures in this unit as well as the higher ratio of primary to secondary range. In all grazing periods, between 74 & 80% of the AUMs grazed in the Middle pasture were obtained from the primary range areas. Primary range accounts for 68% of the carrying capacity of this pasture unit..

Utilization levels in the Middle pasture were very high. Table 24 and Chart 22 show that the carrying capacities of both the primary and secondary range areas were estimated to have been exceeded before the end of the Aug 27 to Sept 14 grazing period. Adding the estimated 39 AUMs that were utilized prior to the collared cows being placed on the lease (the majority of which would have been obtained from the primary range areas) suggests that utilization probably was nearing the carrying capacity of both the primary and secondary ranges by the beginning of that grazing period, and probably by the end of the previous grazing period for the primary range areas. The ESSRs for tame pastures are set conservatively, with the goal of maintaining healthy rangelands and maximizing stand longevity. ESSRs are based on a single grazing; under good growing conditions and with an adequate rest period between grazings, more AUMs could be obtained from the tame pastures under a rotational grazing system. This was the intended management for this grazing lease, however the broken gate allowed cattle back into the Middle pasture before an adequate rest period had occurred. The levels of use that occurred in the Middle pasture during the project are not sustainable. Continued grazing at these levels will

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project quickly lead to a decline in the health and productivity of the primary ranges and surrounding secondary range areas.

Secondary range areas within 40m of the primary range areas were estimated to have received levels of use exceeding their rated carrying capacities by the end of the first grazing period (Chart 23). As expected, utilization levels of the secondary range areas increased as the time that the cattle were on the Middle pasture increased. By the end of the grazing season, utilization levels of the secondary ranges out to about 60m from the primary range areas had exceeded their carrying capacities, with areas within 30m receiving between 2 and nearly 5 times the amount of use that would be considered sustainable for those plant community types. The location of the primary range areas relative to each other and to water sources and trails suggests that many of the locations in the secondary range areas were likely recorded while cattle were traveling to water or different tame pasture areas, however, the large number of locations recorded still indicates high use of these areas.

Middle Pasture: Secondary Range Utilization

20.00

18.00

16.00

14.00 Carrying Capacity 12.00 AUMs July 8 - 28 AUMs Aug 14 - 26 10.00 AUMs Aug 27 - Sept 14 AUMs 8.00 AUMs Sept 15 - Oct 1 AUMs Oct 2 - 11 6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Distance from primary range

Chart 23: Middle Pasture secondary range utilization relative to primary range. Totals for each grazing period are cumulative (utilization for each grazing period is added to the total of the previous grazing periods).

North pasture unit Cattle grazed the North pasture together with the adjacent Private pasture from June 1 to 30, prior to the collared cows being placed on the lease. The use of these two pastures during the late season was split approximately 70% Private / 30 % North, however cattle also had access to other pastures at this time as well. As the Private tame pasture became more heavily used, grazing pressure appeared to shift to the North pasture. Earlier in the season (June 1 – 30), cattle only had access to the Private and North pastures and presumably would have made more use of

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project the North pasture as the Private pasture became depleted during this grazing period as well. It is estimated that approximately 66 AUMs were utilized from the North pasture during June (estimated usage 60% Private, 40% North). Cattle were then excluded from the North and Private pastures until September 15 when all gates were opened, allowing cattle access to all pasture units. Any cattle remaining in the South pasture were moved out of that pasture on October 2, leaving cattle free access to the other 3 pasture units. In total, cattle had access to the North pasture for 30 days prior to the collared cows being put on the lease and an additional 27 days during the project study period.

Table 25 and Chart 24 compare the estimated utilization of the primary and secondary ranges, and the total of both, to the total, primary and secondary range carrying capacities. The utilization numbers for Oct 2 to11 are cumulative (utilization for the period from Sept 15 to Oct 11).

Table 25: North Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization Cumulative Utilization Totals (AUMs) At end of September 15 to At end of October 2 to 11 October 1 grazing period grazing period Primary Range Carrying Capacity 72.93 72.93 Primary Range Utilization 17.27 26.91 Secondary Range Carrying Capacity 112.14 112.14 Secondary Range Utilization 3.03 5.38 Total Carrying Capacity 185.07 185.07 Total Utilization 20.30 32.29

North Pasture Utilization Compared to Carrying Capacity

200 180 160

140 Primary Range CC 120 Primary Range Utilization Secondary Range CC 100

AUMs Secondary Range Utilization 80 Total Carrying Capacity 60 Total Utilization 40 20 0 1-Oct 11-Oct Date

Chart 24: North Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

After the North pasture was grazed in June, it was rested until September 15. This provided a rest period of 11 weeks (77 days). The estimated 66 AUMs utilized in June were near the rated carrying capacity of the primary range (73 AUMs). With the long rest period following the grazing in June, the forage regrowth on the North pasture unit tame pastures was essentially equal to that of an ungrazed pasture. Table 25 and Chart 24 show that utilization of both the primary and secondary ranges was very light during the September 15 to October 11 grazing period. A more detailed look at the secondary range utilization levels (Chart 25) indicates that even the areas within 10m of the primary range areas were lightly utilized.

North Pasture: Secondary Range Utilization

3.50

3.00

2.50

2.00 Carrying Capacity AUMs Sept 15 - Oct 1

AUMs 1.50 AUMs Oct 2 - 11

1.00

0.50

0.00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Distance from primary range

Chart 25: North Pasture secondary range utilization relative to primary range. Totals are cumulative (utilization during the October 2 – 11 grazing period is added to the total for the Sept 15 to Oct 1 grazing period).

The light utilization of the primary and secondary ranges in the North pasture is most likely a result of the cattle having access to other pasture units during both the September 15 to October 1 (all pasture units) and October 2 to 11 (Middle-North-Private) grazing periods. During both grazing periods, cattle spent slightly less than 20% of their time in the North pasture unit. Water sources are somewhat limited in this pasture unit, being mainly located in the north part of the unit. However, cattle grazing the south part of the North pasture unit were also able to readily access the water source in the Private pasture unit since the two units were grazed together. Although the North pasture tame forage areas had abundant forage, it was quite mature at the time of grazing, making it less palatable. Having access to other pasture units allowed cattle to choose where they would graze. Late in the season when forage quality declines, cattle are likely to travel more in search of better forage.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Private Pasture Unit Cattle grazed the Private and North pastures from June 1 to 30, before the collared cows were brought onto the lease. The estimated utilization of the Private pasture during that time, based on the assumptions indicated above for the North pasture, was approximately 99 AUMs. Cattle were then excluded from the Private and North pasture units until September 15 when they were provided access to all pasture units. Cattle had access to all but the South pasture unit from October 2 to 11. In total, cattle had access to the Private pasture for 30 days in June (prior to the collared cows being put on the lease) and 27 days from September 15 to October 11.

Estimated cumulative utilization numbers and carrying capacities for the total area and primary and secondary ranges in the Private pasture unit are shown in Table 26 and Chart 26. In Table 26, red numbers indicate that utilization exceeded the carrying capacity.

Table 26: Private Pasture Carrying Capacity and Utilization Cumulative Utilization Totals (AUMs) At end of Sept 15 – October At end of October 2 -11 1 grazing period grazing period Primary Range Carrying Capacity 28.34 28.34 Primary Range Utilization 33.79 60.07 Secondary Range Carrying Capacity 10.5 10.5 Secondary Range Utilization 6.92 12.95 Total Carrying Capacity 38.84 38.84 Total Utilization 40.71 73.02

Private Pasture Utilization Compared to Carrying Capacity

60 Primary Range CC 50 Primary Range Utilization Secondary Range CC 40

AUMs Secondary Range Utilization 30 Total Carrying Capacity Total Utilization 20

0 1-Oct 11-Oct Date

Chart 26: Private Pasture secondary range utilization relative to primary range. Totals are cumulative (utilization during the October 2 – 11 grazing period is added to the total for the Sept 15 to Oct 1 grazing period).

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Together with the previously described North pasture, the Private pasture unit was grazed for the month of June, then rested for 11 weeks until September 15. The pattern of use of these two pasture units later in the season indicates that the Private pasture unit receives higher use than the North pasture. The heavier grazing during June likely slowed the regrowth of the tame pasture areas, however by the end of the 11 week rest period, recovery was sufficient to allow for another grazing of the Private pasture unit.

The Private pasture unit was strongly preferred by cattle during both grazing periods (approx. 40% of all locations recorded from Sept 15 to Oct 1; 53% of those recorded from October 2 - 11). Although the forage at the time of grazing was mature and quality had declined, this tame pasture is quite productive and the heavy use of the area indicates that it was probably the best source of forage available. As discussed previously, the fact that the Private pasture unit has a good water source and is the entry / exit point of the lease are also factors influencing the amount of use that the pasture unit receives. The Private pasture unit tame pasture utilization was estimated to have exceeded the rated carrying capacity by the end of the Sept 15 to Oct 1 grazing period. This continued to be a preferred grazing area for the cattle until they were removed from the area on October 11.

Discussion Summary

In all pasture units the tame pasture areas (primary range) were preferred and often heavily used by cattle. The degree of use varied between pasture units and between individual tame pastures within a pasture unit, as previously discussed. Secondary range use was closely tied to its proximity to primary range areas, with other factors such as location of water sources and travel corridors having an influence as well. Comparing the estimated utilization and carrying capacity numbers for each of the pasture units highlights some of the problems that arise when tame pastures are scattered throughout an otherwise mainly forested landscape.

Application of Results to Boreal Grazing Operations

To properly manage and ensure the health and sustainability of rangelands, we need to follow the Four Key Principles and Practices of Range Management. These principles and practices apply to all rangelands. They are:

1. Balance Animal Numbers with Available Forage Supply 2. Allow for Effective Rest Periods During the Growing Season 3. Control Livestock Distribution 4. Graze at the Right Time

Looking at each of these core principles in the context of the results obtained from this project can provide us with insights into how existing management practices on this particular grazing disposition could be modified to help ensure that the rangelands remain healthy.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

1. Balance Animal Numbers with Available Forage Supply

Balancing animal numbers with the available forage supply means grazing some of the plant growth produced each year while leaving some to help maintain healthy, functioning rangelands and provide for other resource needs. Multiplying the suggested Ecologically Sustainable Stocking Rate (ESSR) of each plant community type by its area provides us with an estimated carrying capacity. The estimated combined carrying capacity for this grazing lease and the private land fenced with it is 767 AUMs. The total utilization for the grazing period (June 1 to October 11) was estimated to be 786 AUMs. While these two numbers seem to indicate that animal numbers and available forage supply are quite balanced (approx 2% over), this is in fact not the case. Two of the pasture units (Middle & Private) had total estimated utilization numbers that far exceeded their carrying capacity (Tables 24 & 26) while the North and South pasture units had total estimated utilization levels well below their rated carrying capacity (Tables 23 & 25). In addition to this, the carrying capacity for each of these pasture units represents a theoretical maximum that assumes the entire area is accessible and evenly used by livestock. Adjustments must be made to the carrying capacity to take into account access factors (areas that are inaccessible to livestock due to natural barriers) and management factors (livestock distribution under current management). As was indicated in the results section and previous discussion, livestock grazing in all units was concentrated on the primary range areas and the secondary range areas within 30 to 50 m of a primary range area. Making the necessary adjustments to reflect livestock distribution under current management (essentially the primary range areas, secondary range areas within 30 m of primary range and some secondary range areas between primary range areas, especially in the south pasture) would result in an estimated grazing capacity of only 450 AUMs. Under current management practices, stocking rates higher than this will lead to overutilization and the decline in health of the primary ranges areas and the secondary range areas located in close proximity to those areas.

For more information on calculating carrying and grazing capacities, refer to the ASRD publication ‘Methodology For Calculating Carrying and Grazing Capacity on Public Rangelands’.

2. Allow for Effective Rest Periods During the Growing Season

Plants need effective rest periods, during the growing season, to maintain their health, regrow, replenish their root reserves and survive the winter. The length of this rest period depends on a number of factors, including the plant community type and its health, utilization levels, stocking rate, moisture and nutrient conditions and time of year. Tame forages have been developed to withstand grazing better than native plants and can be grazed more than once in a season if growing conditions are favourable and an adequate rest period is provided between grazings. Native boreal plant community types, on the other hand, are only suited to one grazing each year.

1 The Private and North pastures were grazed for the month of June, then rested for 2 /2 months before being grazed again in the fall (mid September). This provided a long rest period between grazings. The utilization level of the Private tame pasture in June was quite high. This slows the regrowth of the plants and makes it even more important to have a long rest period to try to maintain the health of the pasture.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Grazing of the South pasture was delayed until the end of July. It was grazed for about a month, before cattle were moved out of the pasture. This pasture only received a 19 day rest period before cattle grazed it again in mid September, however utilization levels after that date were quite low. The Middle pasture was first grazed on July 1 but, except for a 2 week period in early August, it received no rest for the remainder of the grazing season. The utilization levels in the Middle pasture were quite high, which, together with the lack of effective rest periods, will quickly lead to a decline in range health. Ideally, when the cattle were moved out of this pasture on July 28, it should have then been rested until sometime in mid September, if not for the remainder of the season, depending on how quickly the plant regrowth occurred.

3. Control Livestock Distribution

Many factors affect livestock distribution, including the kind of plant community types present, season of use, topography, the location of water, salt and other attractants, the kind of livestock grazing the area, learned grazing behaviour, insects and weather conditions.

As discussed previously, given free choice, cattle tend to overutilize the primary range areas before they shift their grazing to the secondary range areas. Good livestock distribution results in a more even use of the landbase, leading to improved plant vigour, health and productivity of the primary range areas and increased grazing opportunities in the secondary range areas.

The main focus of this project was to document how livestock distribution is influenced by the presence of tame pastures scattered throughout the grazing area. The results clearly show how strongly cattle prefer the tame pastures and the secondary range areas immediately surrounding them. The results also show how little some of the secondary range areas are used, even after the primary range areas have received considerable use. Ideally, tame pasture areas should be fenced separately from forested areas, however this is not always feasible. On this grazing disposition, topography and natural features such as wetlands and old river meanders and oxbows largely determined the locations where tame pastures could be developed. As a result of their scattered locations, fencing these tame forage pastures separately from the surrounding forested plant communities is not practical in most cases. However, in the Middle pasture, additional crossfencing could be constructed to better control the amount of use that the largest and most heavily used pasture (polygon 55) receives, either by itself with a limited amount of the surrounding forested area, or possibly also including the tame pasture to the south (polygon 51). Constructing this crossfence would also require the creation of an additional water source.

An additional water source in the east part of the North pasture would help improve livestock distribution in that pasture unit. A dugout located east of tame pasture polygon 84 would encourage greater livestock use of the north and east part of this pasture unit.

Developing additional trails would help improve cattle use of some of the secondary range areas, particularly in the North and South pastures.

Moving salt from locations that are close to tame pasture areas onto trails in the secondary range areas is a very effective, low cost, way to improve livestock distribution. In particular, remote secondary range areas like those in the eastern portions of the South and North pastures need an

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project attractant like salt to draw livestock into the area. Since this project was conducted, the lessee has adopted the practice of salting in these areas and has reported increased livestock use of those areas.

4. Graze at the Right Time

Timing of grazing to avoid sensitive growth periods is important for maintaining healthy rangelands. Grazing too early in the spring is particularly damaging to rangelands. As a general rule of thumb, in northern Alberta, tame pastures should not be grazed before June 1, although some tame forage species will begin growth early in the spring and will be ready to graze earlier. This will also vary somewhat from year to year depending on growing conditions. Forested plant community types generally should not be grazed until after June 15. In most years they can provide grazing opportunities until around the end of September. Plant community types were grazed at the appropriate time during this project.

Conclusion

This project highlights the importance of considering livestock preferences for different plant community types when developing a range management plan for a grazing operation, especially when this includes creating tame pastures. Any range management plan needs to be tailored to the specific ranching operation that it is being developed for, giving consideration to the unique characteristics of the landbase, plant community types present, other resource values and the available resources, goals, time and commitment of the manager.

For More Information:

For more information on the Little Smoky River GPS collar project, contact Colin Stone, Area Range Management Specialist, Peace River or Dale Smith, Rangeland Agrologist, Valleyview

This report is available on-line at srd.alberta.ca along with additional resources and information on rangelands.

References:

Grazing Management Adjustments for Healthy Rangelands. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Rangeland Management Branch. April 2008. Pub No. I/295. ISBN: 978-0-7785-7010-3

Ivlev, S.V. 1961. Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale University Press.

Evaluating Livestock Use of Boreal Grazing Lands Little Smoky River Project

Rangeland Management Branch, Range Resource Management Program. 2004. Methodology for Calculating Carrying and Grazing Capacity on Public Rangelands. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Public Lands and Forests Division. Pub No. I/197. ISBN: 0-7785-3644-0 (printed edition) ISBN: 0-7785-3645-9 (on-line edition)

Willoughby, M.G., C. Stone, C. Hincz, D. Moisey, G. Ehlert and D. Lawrence. 2006. Guide to Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Dry and Central Mixedwood Subregions of Alberta. 6th Approximation. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Public Lands and Forests Division. Pub No. T/103. ISBN: 0-7785-4538-5 (printed edition) ISBN: 0-7785-4539-3 (on-line edition)