FALL FERTILIZATION 21

termediate wheatgrass. J. Range MILLAR, C. E., L. M. TURK, AND H. D. wheatgrass, bromegrass, and Rus- Manage. 18: 7-11. FOTH. 1958. Fundamentals of soil sian wildrye as influenced by fer- KAY, B. L., J. E. STREET,AND C. W. science. Ed. 3. John Wiley and tilization. J. Range Manage. 13: RIMBEY. 1957. Nitrogen carryover Sons, Inc., New York. 526 p. 243-246. on sagebrush range. Calif. Agr. 11 NELSON,WERNER L. 1965. Beat a wet SNEVA, FORRESTA., D. N. HYDER,AND (10) : 5,lO. spring . . . fertilize this fall. Better C. S. COOPER. 1958. The influence KRESGE, C. B. 1965. Response of Crops with Food XLIX (4) : of ammonium nitrate on the orchardgrass to fall and spring ap- 24-29. growthand yield of crested wheat- plied nitrogen. Agron. J. 57: 390- ROGLER,G. A., ANDR. J. LORENZ.1957. grass on the Oregon High Desert. 393. Nitrogen fertilization of Northern Agron. J. 50: 40-44. LEVEN,A. A., ANDH. E. DREGNE.1963. Great Plains rangelands. J. Range THOMAS, JAMES R. 1964. Interrela- Productivity of Zuni Mountain Manage. 10: 156-160. tionships of nitrogen, phosphorus forest soils. New Mexico Agr. Exp. RUSSELL, E. J., AND E. W. RUSSELL. and seasonal precipitation in the Sta. Bull. 469. 1950. Soil conditions and plant production of bromegrass-crested LORENZ,RUSSELL J., ANDG. A. ROGLER. growth. Ed. 2. Longmans, Green, wheatgrass hay. U.S.D.A., A.R.S. 1962. A comparison of methods of and Co., New York. 635 p. Prod. Rep. 82. renovating old stands of crested SMIKA, D. E., H. J. HAAS, AND G. A. THOMPSON,LOUIS M. 1957. Soils and wheatgrass. J. Range Manage. 15: ROGLER. 1960. Yield, quality, and soil fertility. Ed. 2. McGraw-Hill, 215-219. fertilizer recovery of crested New York. 451 p.

Food Preferences of Antelope and ever, stated that “. . . . because their annual diet consists of a high pro- Domestic in Wyomin& Red Dese& portion of browse and forbs, ante- lope are in direct competition with K. E. SEVERSON’ AND M. MAY sheep, whose diet comprises the Graduate Student and Associate Professor, Plant Science same type of forage.” Buechner Division, University of Wyoming, Laramie. (1950) maintained that competition is severe on overgrazed sheep ranges because the forbs and weedy spe- Highlight ’ lope and sheep, will assist land cies preferred by antelope were elim- managers in making more pre- A food habits study, in a big sage- inated, but that it may be almost brush-grass type in Wyoming’s Red cise evaluations of management absent on properly grazed ranges. Desert, revealed very little overlap practices such as sagebrush in use of native range forage by During World War II, Wyoming antelope and domestic spraying and game-or-stock-only went as far as to hold special hunt- sheep. Generally, sheep preferred programs. ing seasons to reduce the antelope grasses whereas antelope utilized herds in an attempt to “. . . . re- shrubs. The information used in this discussion was obtained in a co- duce competition between domestic stock and antelope . . . to cope with The Red Desert region is the operative study initiated by the Bureau of Land Management, the the feed shortage for domestic stock” most important winter sheep (Allred, 1943). range in Wyoming. It is also a Wyoming Game and Fish De- Study Area and Procedures major pronghorn antelope range. partment, and the Plant Science The study area was located in the Although these two animal spe- Division of the University of Red Desert region in the south cen- cies have apparently been com- Wyoming. The primary objec- tives of the study were to deter- tral part of Wyoming north of Wam- patible in this area for several sutter. The greater portion of the mine the degree of overlap in decades, new livestock manage- observations were taken from a pas- ment practices have tended. to use of native vegetation and to ture system designed and con- focus additional attention on this determine grazing capacities of structed by the Bureau of Land Man- multiple-use region. Future man- pronghorn antelope and do- agement which consisted of six pas- agement plans include using this mestic range sheep. tures; 2 of 120 acres, stocked with area as a year-long, sheep and The degree of forage competition antelope; 2 of 120 acres, stocked with range. This study, designed between these two herbivores varies sheep; and 2 of 240 acres, stocked greatly and appears to depend on to yield data on competition for with both antelope and sheep. The the geographic area, season, and the pastures were located in a uniform forage between pronghorn ante- vegetative types being used. big sagebrush community. The major Einarsen (1948) did not put too species in the study area were: big much emphasis on forage competi- 1Published with the approval of the sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata; Director, Wyoming AgricuZturaZ Ex- tion between antelope and sheep. He Douglas rabbitbrush, Chrysothamnus periment Station, as Journal Article stated that antelope preference is viscidijlorus var. pumilis; we s tern No. 289. for a wide variety of foods including wheatgrass, Agrop yron smithii; 2PresentZy Instmxtor of Range Man- most range weeds and browse , needleandthread, Stipa comata; In- agement, South Dakota State Uni- while sheep are more restricted in dian ricegrass, Oryzops-is hymenoides; versity, Brookings, South Dakota. their diet. Hoover et al. (1959), how- bottlebrush squirreltail, Sitanion 22 SEVERSON AND MAY

h ystrix; winterfat, Eurotia lanata; Table 1. Average annual forage pro- collected over the same period in Sandberg bluegrass, Poa secunda and duction on fhe study area for 1964 1965. The excellent replication obtuse sedge, Carex obtusata. and 1965, determined by clipping demonstrated by western wheat- The methods and procedures used of 2 x 4 ff plofs. (Lb/acre, oven grass is, at best, unusual. It does, were all based on standard range dried). however, demonstrate the trend analysis methods. Percent com- Species 1964 1965 pressed crown cover and precent that will become obvious after utilization by weight of the plant Big sagebrush 147.0 266.7 examining the entire table-and species were estimated from plots Douglas rabbitbrush 89.4 88.7 that is the preference for grasses 1 x 10 ft in size. Ninety of the plots Western wheatgrass 51.6 57.2 by sheep as compared to an- were analyzed during each sample Needleandthread 19.3 21.1 telope. The trend in shrub util- period. Production was determined Indian ricegrass 14.5 19.2 ization is indicated by Douglas Bottlebrush squirrel for all species except sagebrush by rabbitbrush which was preferred tail 13.0 14.9 clipping 96 caged plots, 2 x 4 ft in more by antelope than by sheep. size. Sagebrush production was ob- Winterfat 10.0 6.7 Indian ricegrass and needleand- tained by clipping 15 plots, 4 in wide Sandberg bluegrass 3.6 7.7 thread were taken infrequently x 50 ft long, in an exclosure adjacent Obtuse sedge 3.1 8.1 Forbs T 2.6 by antelope, but were the two to the pastures. Sagebrush utiliza- -_ most important species in the tion was estimated by examining 150 Total 351.5 492.9 plants in each pasture. All sample sheep diet. Needleandthread ap- numbers were obtained by statistical peared to be more preferable analysis and all weights given are etation is fairly characteristic of than Indian ricegrass. There was oven dried weights. the entire desert, except in dis- some difference in sheep use of Under the direction of the Wyo- turbed areas where russian- these two species from 1964 to ming Game and Fish Commission, thistle ( kali) and halo- 1965, notably a decrease in the two antelope and two sheep were get on (Halogeton glomeratus) use of needleandthread and in- collected for rumen samples each are found. This is the reason that month. Other data obtained from creased use of Indian ricegrass. the information obtained in Wyo- the collected animals included body, The possible reasons for these viscera and organ weights, jaws for ming doesn’t even remotely re- differences will be discussed age determinations and information semble that collected in Texas later. Sandberg bluegrass fol- on internal parasites. by Buechner (1950) or Russell’s lowed the same trend-that is, Forage Production (1964) studies in New Mexico. use to a greater extent by sheep. Forage production varied sig- In both of these areas forbs were However, both animal species nificantly between 1964 and 1965 predominant in the antelope diet used this plant heavily in the (Table 1). The most significant and in Texas, the floral composi- spring because it was the first increase was noted in the annual tion. species to exhibit green growth, production of big sagebrush, UMizafion but sheep utilized it later into from 147 lb/acre to 266.7 lb/acre. Utilization figures are given the summer. Winterfat, in the All species except Douglas rab- in pounds consumed per acre summer, was used infrequently bitbrush and winterfat demon- over a particular season and re- by sheep and not at all by an- strated some increase. The dif- lated to animal days of use. telope. ference in annual production be- Table 2 compares data gathered Big sagebrush, another impor- tween 1964 and 1965 can be ex- in the summer of 1964 with that tant species in the antelope diet, plained by variations in climate. Annual precipitation increased Table 2. Summer forage consumpfion by anielope and sheep defected by every year since 1962 when 4.5 in agronomic methods. were recorded. Five inches fell in Summer, 1964 Summer, 1965 1963, 5.5 inches in 1964 and in Antelope Sheep Antelope Sheep 1965, 6.5 in were recorded. The ___ long-term average for the Wam- Western wheatgrass .l 1.8 .l 1.8 Douglas rabbitbrush 9.5 .2 10.1 .3 sutter station is 5.47 in. Particu- Indian ricegrass .l 1.0 .l 2.7 lar attention should also be given Needleandthread T 6.6 - 3.7 to the forb production for this Sandberg bluegrass T .3 T .9 area. The forb category as shown Winterfat - T - .l in Table 1 includes one species Big sagebrush 1.2 2.4 1.5 - each of Arabis, Penstemon, Bottlebrush squirreltail .l 1.3 - .4 Obtuse sedge T T T - Astiagalus, Allium, Cryptantha -~ ~ ~ ___ and Gayophytum. Of these only Lb used/acre 11.1 13.6 11.8 9.9 Arabis was utilized. The minor Animal days use/pasture 833 750 1041 864 contribution by forbs to the veg- Lb used/animal/day 1.6 2.1 1.4 1.4 FOOD PREFERENCES 23 was utilized to a rather small Table 3. Winter and year-long for- same grass trend in the antelope extent in the summer, but was age consumption by antelope’ in foods and was only important still the second most important 1964. defected by agronomic mefh- early in the spring. Winterfat use species. Sagebrush use by sheep ods. demonstrated a notable increase was quite variable. This differ- Species F&W2 YLs in late summer and fall, but like ence, as well as all other major Western wheatgrass - .2 rabbitbrush, its use was limited variations between 1964 and 1965 Douglas rabbitbrush 10.4 20.1 to fall, as it was covered by snow may be explained through dis- Indian ricegrass - .l by November. Big sagebrush was similarities in the growing sea- Needleandthread - T the most important species in the sons. Big sagebrush also pre- Sandberg bluegrass - T antelope diet in the winter and sented a problem when it came Winterfat .8 .9 often the only species available. Big sagebrush 11.6 13.2 to determining use. The growth The snow depths ran from 6 Bottlebrush form of this plant was very low, inches to 4 ft in drifts during the squirreltail - .l scrubby, and had tight, knotty Obtuse sedge - .l winter of 1964-65, and sagebrush leader groups. Quantitative ______was the only visible species on Lb used/acre 22.8 34.7 measurement, tagging twigs and some areas. Most of the use indi- Animal days use 1544 2377 cated in the winter column of weighing browsed and un- Lb used/animal/day 1.7 1.8 browsed leader groups were tried this table was after mid-Novem- but the time involved and the 1 No information available for sheep ber. Squirreltail grass was rela- because of missing data from the sample numbers required made tively little used. No use was winter of 1964-65. found on needleleaf sedge during these methods infeasible, so ocu- 2 F & W Fall and winter. lar estimates were used. How- 3 YL Summary, 1964. the winter and this plant also ever, big sagebrush utilization contributed little to the final was well replicated between Table 4. Forage consumed on feed- total. In 1965, the fall data were years. Also, the number of sage- ing trials and in pastures (oven- separated from the winter data brush plants examined in each dried lb/day/animal). and although not presented in the utilization chart, the 1965 pasture was increased for the Animal Feeding second year, which would in- and item Trials Pastures data were used to interpret when crease the precision for the de- the hsted species were utilized. Antelope termination of use in the pas- The data from the combination No. observ. 18 10 pastures were not included here tures. Another reason for varia- Range, lb/day O-5-2.6 1.3-1.8 tions in utilization could be the Average lb/day 1.5 1.7 but utilization on these pastures length of growing seasons. Green Sheep does show intermediate results growth was available from the No. observ. 12 10 when compared to the single use end of April to mid-July in 1964 Range, lb/day 1.7-4.4 1.0-2.5 pastures. and from the end of April to Average lb/day 2.9 1.6 Closely controlled feeding mid-August in 1965, or about one trials were also conducted with month longer. Sagebrush use was der the data invalid and weather penned animals (Table 4). Sev- detected on the pastures in the conditions made restocking com- eral animals were given various November transects in 1965 so it pletely infeasible. As for ante- combinations of different forage appears that it was not used by lope, western wheatgrass use types in excess of what they sheep until the grasses had was absent in winter and con- would need and the following cured. Bottlebrush squirreltail tributed very little to the yearly day that remaining forage was was also more important to sheep total. Douglas rabbitbrush use weighed, subtracted from that than to antelope and again there decreased from summer to win- given, and converted to pounds was a substantial difference from ter but was still very important. consumed/animal/day. Again, all 1964 to 1965 in the sheep diet. Most of the utilization shown in weights were based on oven Obtuse sedge was fairly common the fall-winter column was from dried samples. Eighteen days of in all pastures but utilization of September to mid-November, data were collected in this man- this species was minimal by both after which it was pretty well ner for antelope and compared to animals. covered by snow. In the yearly data collected from the pastures. Sheep data in Table 3 are ab- total this was the most important Each of the 10 observations from sent from the fall and winter species. Indian ricegrass and the pastures was an average de- column and also from the sum- needleandthread use was not rived from one season’s use on mary of all-seasons column be- found in winter and both were one pasture. For example, an- cause of the severity of the 1964- unimportant as to their contribu- telope averaged 1.7 lb/day dur- 65 winter. Enough sheep were tion to the animal’s diet. Sand- ing the fall and winter in one lost from these pastures to ren- berg bluegrass followed this pasture. This explains the smaller 24 SEVERSON AND MAY

range noted in the pasture data. When the two means were com- SPRING SUMMER pared, using a simple t-test, no significant difference was noted. There was, however, a signifi- cant difference in daily consump- tion by sheep. Sheep consump- tion in feeding trials averaged WIN -RFAT -)- almost twice as much as was found by the range analysis methods. This can be partially explained by observing the feed- ing habits of sheep. They ap- peared to use as much forage as possible when it was offered to SHEEP them in such a manner that they didn’t have to work to obtain it. RFAT 4-f The time spent in seeking pre- ferred plants on pastures was FIG. 1. Summary of seasonal preferences by sheep and antelope. used in eating when feeding from a trough. Palatability may also peak in winter. One of the rea- Buechner, 1950; Gregg, 1955). have been an influence. Some sons far this was availability Antelope move about much more alfalfa was used in the feeding governed by snow depth. The than sheep while feeding, cover- trials along with native forage- slight use of rabbitbrush in win- ing about 1.5 times the linear dis- however, the largest daily con- ter represents limited availabil- tance in an equal period of time. sumption found (4.4 lb/day) was ity rather than a decrease in Antelope were much less gre- on native hay. Because the sheep palatability. Winterfat was not garious than sheep. From early in the pastures were feeding used by either antelope or sheep spring to late August they re- primarily on grasses, some util- until late fall and its use again, mained well distributed over the ization may have been obscured as with rabbitbrush, was termi- pastures as singles or in groups by regrowth, which could help nated by decreased availability. of two to three. As individuals account for the lower figure Grass use by antelope, with the they had no apparent pattern to reached through range analysis exception of bluegrass, was very their daily movements. Antelope methods. minor for the entire year. acted independently even when Observations and measure- Sheep went to Indian ricegrass in groups. The pronghorn was ments taken throughout the graz- and needleandthread as soon as also a very delicate feeder, they ing season provided information these species started to grow and took less of each plant grazed that enabled utilization of plant they were utilized quite heavily than a sheep. This is so common, species to be broken down even until availability was limited by especially on sagebrush, that it further (Fig. 1). Sandberg blue- snow depth. Use was less on became very difficult to deter- grass, as mentioned before, was these species in the early spring mine utilization. Sheep on the taken readily in early spring by when they were seeking the other hand, tend to be much both antelope and sheep because green bluegrass. Some sagebrush more gregarious. Generally it was the first species to initiate use was noted when the grasses speaking, when one was feeding spring growth and for a period of dried up and this use increased all were feeding. Sheep also fed, lo-14 days it was the only green through the winter as the avail- primarily, early and late in the plant in the pastures. As soon as ability of grasses decreased due day, especially in the summer. Douglas rabbitbrush started to to increasing snow depth. Doug- Antelope, apparently less af- grow, antelope began to use it, las rabbitbrush, western wheat- fected by heat, fed on and off all and it remained the species most grass and bottlebrush squirreltail day. used by antelope from late spring utilization by sheep was minimal Conclusions to mid-summer. As late summer- over the entire year. It can be concluded from the early fall approached, rabbit- preceding information that there brush, although still available, Feeding Habits is little competition between either decreased in palatability The results on feeding habits pronghorn antelope and domestic or sagebrush increased. There from this study paralleled those sheep for range forage on the was a notable trend in increased noted by other investigators northern desert sagebrush-grass sagebrush use that reached a (Cory, 1927; Einarsen, 1948; type in Wyoming. The two major FOOD PREFERENCES 25 species in the antelope diet were cause the basic definition of com- BUECHNER,H. K. 1950. Life history, big sagebrush and Douglas rab- petition states that the resource ecology and range use of the pronghorn antelope in Trans- bitbrush as compared to needle- for which two organisms are Pecos, Texas. Amer. Mid. Nat. andthread and Indian ricegrass competing must be in limited 43 (3) : 256-354. in the sheep diet. There was supply. It is difficult to visualize CORY, V. L. 1927. Activities of Live- some overlap in use of Sandberg big sagebrush as being in short stock on the range. Texas Agr. bluegrass and winterfat. How- or limited supply in Wyoming’s Exp. Sta. Bull. 367. EINARSEN,A. S. 1948. The pronghorn ever, these two species contrib- Red Desert. This species is the antelope and its management. uted so little to the annual pro- dominant plant on from 50 to Wildl. Manage. Inst. Wash. D.C. duction of the area that they SOY, of the area and the sub- 238 p. could be designated as sacrifice dominant on another 10% (Vass GREGG,P. A. 1955. Summer habits of species if need be. Past records and Lang, 1938). Under severe Wyoming antelope. Ph.D. disser- tation, Cornell, Univ. Microfilm give no evidence that winterfat winter conditions, with deep copy (Coe Library, Univ. of Wyo.) is ever abundant in this vegeta- snows, it would be conceivable 139 p. tive type. Furthermore, Sand- that big sagebrush could become HOOVER, R. L., C. E. TILL, AND berg bluegrass and big sagebrush limiting, especially on key an- S. OGILVIE. 1959. The antelope of have wide ecological tolerances, telope winter ranges. These areas Colorado. Colorado Dept. of Game and Fish Tech. Bull. No. 4. 110 p. both are common increasers in are, however, limited in extent RUSSELL, T. P. 1964. Antelope of this area and would not be elimi- and winters this severe occur in- New Mexico. New Mexico Dep. of nated from the composition un- frequently. Game and Fish Bull. No. 12. 108 p. less extreme intensity of use VASS, A. F., AND R. L. LANG. 1938. occurred. LITERATURE CITED Vegetative composition, density , ALLRED,WARREN J. 1943. Wyoming grazing capacity and grazing land The only notable overlap was antelope-history and wartime values in the Red Desert area. with big sagebrush, but again, management. Trans. Amer. Wildl. Univ. Wyoming. Agr. Exp. Sta. this probably isn’t critical be- Conf. 8: 117-122. Bull. 229. 79 p.

The General Environment of A potential that is exciting South Carolina, Arkansas, North The South1 enough to quicken the pulse of Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and any far-sighted individual is Virginia. There is the South of GENE GRIESSMAN present in the southern United tradition, a pleasant land of Department of Sociology, Louisiana States. Some of the potential moonlight and magnolias, end- State University, Baton Rouge.2 takes the form of large tracts of less fields of cotton, gentle sweet land no longer utilized for inten- womanhood, courageous men Highlight sive agriculture and now avail- and loyal slaves. There is the The best laid plans often fail if hu- able for other use. The potential South of tobacco road; the South man (socio-cultural) factors are not takes the form of expanding of the television and Hollywood taken info account. Certain socio- mass markets. The potential also stereotype. cultural factors, particularly those which are significant in the emerg- takes the form of manpower re- There is the South as seen by ing mass society, are indicaied in sources-people who each year outsiders-a dangerously violent the following sketch of the general migrate to other regions, reluc- region of moral ruin, of wayward environment of the South. Changes are occurring in the region fhaf aie tantly, because of limited em- women and degenerate men, of certain fo have direct bearing upon ployment opportunities within smoldering racial hatreds, and the social and economic situation in the South. inescapable poverty. There is the which the sfockman will carry on his activities. Furthermore, a new kind Generally, it is still a potential South as seen by Southerners- of agricultural operation is emerg- -not yet a reality. And, as with a misunderstood region, the ing and with if a new type of agri- cultural man-the farm business- all potentials, foresight, plan- whipping boy of the nation. Poli- ning, and effort are required be- ticians see it in one light, his- fore goals are realized. torians in another, sociologists in What is the South like? That yet another. 1Presented at the Nineteenth Annual question can best be answered by To see either of these pictures Meeting, American Society of Range replying that there are many alone is wholly misleading. The Management, New Orleans, Louisi- ana, February 1 to 4,1966. Souths. There is the South of his- region is too complex for any tory - the Confederate South naively simple interpretation. In 2Present address: Department of Sociology and Anthropology, North that included Alabama, Florida, the South there are sharp con- Carolina State University, Raleigh. Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, trasts of wealth and poverty,