Whitetail and mule deer relationships in the Snowy Mountains of central Montana by George Frank Kamps A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management Montana State University © Copyright by George Frank Kamps (1969) Abstract: A study was conducted during the summers of 1967 and 1968 as well as the winter of 1969 in the foothill region on the north slopes of the Snowy Mountains in Central Montana to obtain quantitative data on the food habits, range use, and interspecific relationships of whitetail and mule deer. The vegetation of the study area was classified into five zones: agriculture, ponderosa pine, hawthorn-aspen, grassland, and Douglas-fir. All types and subtypes except the willow type within the zones were quantitatively described. Range use was determined largely from 3,274 whitetail and 3,777 mule deer observations along systematically traveled routes. Ninety-seven and 94 percent of the summer and winter whitetail observations, respectively, were in the agriculture and hawthorn-aspen zones. During late summer, 80 percent of all white-tail observations were in the agriculture types. The ponderosa pine type was an important type for rest and escape during winter. The grassland and Douglas-fir zones accounted for 63 and 83 percent of the summer and winter mule deer observations, respectively. During winter, 91 percent of the mule deer observations were in grassland types. Food habits of whitetail and mule deer were determined from the results of examinations of 190 feeding sites taken during summer and winter and from the results of analyses of 48 rumen samples' obtained throughout, the year. For whitetail deer, browse averaged 54, 41, 51, and 49 percent of the contents of rumen samples for summer, fall, winter, and spring, respectively. It was the most important forage class during all seasons except fall, when forbs constituted 46 percent of the,diet. Grass use, mostly wheat, was greatest in winter when it averaged 27 percent of the total volume of rumen samples. Alfalfa was the most important single food item averaging 20 percent of the yearly diet. Browse averaged 57, 55, 63, and 24 percent of the total volume of rumen samples for mule deer during summer, fall, winter, and spring, respectively. Forbs constituted the most important forage class in spring averaging 62 percent of the contents of rumens. Grass use was unimportant during all seasons except spring. Results of examination of feeding sites agreed closely with results of rumen analyses for both species of deer. For the summers of 1967 and 1968, fawn:doe ratios of whitetail deer were 101 and 93 per 100, respectively. For mule deer for the same years the figures were 76 and 62. Overlap in range use by the two species was hot considered important during winter. During summer common use of range and food items occurred on some areas, but because food items used in common did not appear to be limited in supply or deteriorating in production, competition probably did not occur. Differences in areas preferred by the two species apparently enabled this range to support a larger number of deer than would have been possible in the absence of one or the other. WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER RELATIONSHIPS IN THE SNOWY MOUNTAINS OF CENTRAL MONTANA by GEORGE FRANK KAMPS

A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial = fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE

in Fish and Wildlife Management

Approved:

HeAc^Major Department

ovt_ Chairman, Examining Committed

MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana June, 1969 ill ACKNOWLEDGMENT

To the following, among others, the author wishes to express apprec­

iation for their contributions to this study: Dr. Don C. Quimby, Montana

State University, who directed the study and aided in the preparation of

the manuscript; Mr. Thomas Mussehl, Montana Fish and Game Department, for project planning; Mr. Jim Mitchell and Mr. Neil Martin, Montana Fish and

Game Department, for project guidance and field assistance; Mr. Kenneth

Greer, Montana Fish and Game Department, for assistance and use of facili­

ties in analyses of rumen contents $ Mr. Ed Furnish, Montana Fish and Game

Department, for use of the facilities at the Fish Hatchery, Lewistown;

Dr. W. E. Booth, Montana State University, for aid in identification of plant specimens; Dr. Robert L. Eng and Dra Richard J. Graham, Montana,

State University, for critical reading of the manuscript; to the many ranchers in the area for cooperation during the study; his wife, Gayle,

for assistance and encouragement. The writer was employed by the Montana

Fish and Game Department under Federal Aid Projects No..W-98-R-8, No. W-98-

R-9, No. W-74-R-13, and No. W-74-R-14. vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page

I. PERCENT CANOPY COVERAGE AND FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PLANTS IN VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 20 X 50 CENTIMETER PLOTS ...... 10

II = PERCENT OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER OBSERVED ON EACH VEGETATION TYPE DURING ROUTE OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969 ...... 22

IIIo COVER TYPES LOCATED NEAREST TO OBSERVED DEER DURING THE SUMMER OF 1968 AND THE WINTER OF 1969 ...... 24

H > YEARLY FOOD HABITS OF WHITETAIL DEER AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 94 FEEDING SITES AND ANALYSES OF 27

RUMEN SAMPLES .co.==...... =.....==..*..==..=...... =..= 27

V. YEARLY FOOD HABITS OF MULE DEER AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 96 FEEDING SITES AND ANALYSES OF

21 RUMEN SAMPLES o===...=.....o.==..=...==.==. .#.=..m...... 33

VI. AVERAGE WEIGHTS RECORDED BY SEX AND AGE CLASS FOR 37 DEER FROM THE STUDY AREA ...... 41

' VIIo SEX AND AGE CLASSES OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER POPULATIONS AS DETERMINED BY OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969 ...... 42

VIII = MONTHLY CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA FROM UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WEATHER STATIONS 47

IX= TAXA WITH LESS THAN 15 PERCENT FREQUENCY AND 2 PERCENT CANOPY COVERAGE IN AT LEAST ONE TYPE OR SUBTYPE AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 20 X 50 CENTIMETER PLOTS ..... 48

PERCENT OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER OBSERVED ON EACH VEGE­ TATION TYPE DURING MISCELLANEOUS OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969... 52

XI = SPECIES UTILIZED AT LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.5 PERCENT BY

WHITETAIL DEER, 1967— 1969 ...... o...... = . 54

XIIo SPECIES UTILIZED AT LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.5 PERCENT BY MULE DEER, 1967—1969 ...... o...... * 56 V TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page

DOUGLAS-FIR'ZONE .... 19 Douglas-fir Type 19 Distribution and Range Use

WHITETAIL DEER 21 Summer „.„.. 21 Winter ..... 24 MULE DEER ...... 25 Simmer ..... 25 Winter ..... 25 Food Habits ......

WHITE!AIL DEER 26 Summer .. 26 FaZZ... 30 Winter .. 30 Spring . 32 MULE DEER 32 Summer . 32 FaZZ ... 36 Winter . 36 Spring .... 38 . SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION 38 Whitetail Deer . 38 Mule Deer ...... 39 Weights, Productivity and Population Characteristics

WEIGHTS ...... 40 PRODUCTIVITY AND POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS 40

Interspecifie Relationships 43

LITERATURE CITED ...... oeo*Qooeooec 58 i s

vi

LIST OF TABLES Table Page

I. PERCENT CANOPY COVERAGE AND FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PLANTS IN VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 20 X .50 CENTIMETER PLOTS ...... 10

Ho PERCENT OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER OBSERVED ON EACH VEGETATION TYPE DURING ROUTE OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969 ...... 22

IIIo COVER TYPES LOCATED NEAREST TO OBSERVED DEER DURING THE SUMMER OF 1968 AND THE WINTER OF 1969 24 H > YEARLY FOOD HABITS OF WHITETAIL DEER AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 94 FEEDING SITES AND ANALYSES OF 27 RUMEN SAMPLES ooooooooo@o»@oo*oeooooo@o«oocooeo@oo#eooeooo. o 27

V. YEARLY FOOD HABITS OF MULE DEER AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 96 FEEDING SITES AND ANALYSES OF 21 RUMEN SAMPLES oooooceoooeooooeo.oooooooeooooee'oe. oo’eoeoooo 33

AVERAGE WEIGHTS RECORDED BY SEX AND AGE CLASS FOR 37 DEER FROM THE STUDY AREA 41

vii. SEX AND AGE CLASSES OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER POPULATIONS AS DETERMINED BY OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969 ...... 42

VIII. MONTHLY CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA FROM UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WEATHER STATIONS 47

IXo TAXA WITH LESS THAN 15 PERCENT FREQUENCY AND 2 PERCENT CANOPY COVERAGE IN AT LEAST ONE TYPE OR SUBTYPE AS DETERMINED BY.EXAMINATION OF 20 X 50 CENTIMETER PLOTS ..... 48

Xo PERCENT OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER OBSERVED ON EACH VEGE­ TATION TYPE DURING MISCELLANEOUS OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969... 52

XIo SPECIES UTILIZED AT LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.5 PERCENT BY WHITETAIL DEER, 19 67—19 6 9 ...... o...... ■.... 54

XIIoXII SPECIES UTILIZED AT LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.5 PERCENT BY MULE DEER, 19^)7—1969 ...... ■...... e...... 56 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure ' Page

1. Study area showing vegetation types, observations routes and distribution of deer...... ■...... 4

2. Agriculture zone showing willow type along.Beaver Creek in winter ...... -...... -15

3. Benchland area showing the grassland type of the agriculture zone with the ponderosa pine zone in the background ...... 15

4. Hawthorn-aspen zone on Cottonwood Creek showing the cotton­ wood type in the foreground with the Agriculture type in the center and the hawthorn-aspen. type in the background...... 18

5. Common juniper subtype located in the grassland zone...... 18

6. Grassland type of the grassland zone in the foreground and the Douglas-fir zone in the background ...... 20 viii ABSTRACT

A study was conducted during the summers of 1967 and 1968 as well as the winter of 1969 in the foothill region on the north slopes of the Snowy Mountains in Central Montana to obtain quantitative data on the food habits, range use, and interspecific relationships of whitetail and mule deer. The vegetation of the study area was classified into five zones: agriculture, ponderosa pine, hawthorn-aspen, grassland, and Douglas-fir. All types and subtypes except the willow type within the zones were quantitatively described. Range use was determined largely from 3,274 whitetail and 3,777 mule deer observations along systemati­ cally traveled routes. Ninety-seven and 94 percent of the summer and winter whitetail observations, respectively, were in the agriculture and hawthorn-aspen zones. During late summer, 80 percent of all white- tail observations were in the agriculture types. The ponderosa.pine type was an important type for rest and escape during winter. The grassland and Douglas-fir zones accounted for 63 and 83 percent of the summer and winter mule deer observations, respectively. During winter, 91 percent of the mule deer observations were in grassland types. Food habits of whitetail and mule deer were determined from the results of examinations of 190 feeding sites taken during summer and winter and from the results of analyses of 48 rumen samples' obtained throughout, the year. For whitetail deer, browse averaged 54, 41, 51, and 49■ percent of the contents of rumen samples for summer, fall, winter, and spring, respectively. It was the most important forage class during all seasons except fall, when forbs constituted 46 percent of the,diet. Grass use, mostly wheat, was greatest in winter when it averaged 27 per­ cent .of the total volume of rumen:samples. . Alfalfa was the most im­ portant single food item averaging 20 percent of the.yearly diet. Browse averaged 57, 55, 63, and 24 percent of the total volume of rumen samples for mule deer during summer, fall, winter, and spring, respec­ tively. Forbs constituted the most important forage class in spring averaging 62 percent of the contents of rumens. Grass use was unim­ portant during all seasons except spring. ■ Results of examination of feeding sites agreed closely with results of rumen analyses for both species of deer. For the summers of 1967 and 1968, fawn:doe ratios of* whitetail deer were 101 and 93 per 100, respectively. For mule deer for the same years the figures were 76 and 62. Overlap in range use by the two species was hot considered important,during winter. During summer common use of range and food items occurred on some areas, but because food items used in common did not appear to be limited in sup­ ply or deteriorating in production, competition probably did not occur. Differences in areas preferred by the 'two species apparently enabled this range to support.a larger number of deer than would have been possible in the absence of one or the other. INTRODUCTION

The Snowy Mountains of central Montana are one of several loca­

tions in the state where whitetail deer (.Odoooilsus vivginianus) now

commonly occur in areas previously inhabited mainly by mule deer (Odo- ooileus hemionus) . This range extension by whitetail deer appears to have had a deteriorating effect on some mule deer populations with a

corresponding increase in whitetail numbers. In many areas the two species now occupy the same ranges during all or part of the year.

Intensive studies on range use and food habits of mule deer have been carried out in several areas of Montana. Included are those of

Wilkins (1957) in. the Bridger Mountains, Lovaas (1958) in the Little

Belt Mountains, and Mackie (1965) in the Missouri River Breaks. Simi­

lar studies on whitetail deer are few. Allen (1968) studied whitetail deer on the Missouri River bottoms in central Montana. Schallenberger

(1966) considered whitetail deer during an investigation of several big game species in the Sun River area, west-central Montana. Management

in areas where whitetail and mule deer ranges overlap has been hindered primarily because of lack of data on interrelationships existing be­

tween the two. Martinka (1968) studied habitat relationships of white-

tail and mule deer in northern Montana. Since no intensive work has been done in the Snowy Mountains, information for management of either

species is generally lacking.

This study's main objectives were to determine food habits, range

use and interspecific relationships of the whitetail and mule deer pop­

ulations inhabiting the north slopes of the Snowy Mountains. Full time -2- field studies were conducted during the summers of 1967 and 1968 as well as the winter of 1969. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

The Snowy Mountains, located 10 miles south of Lewistown, form a south-eastward extending range approximately 30 miles long and 15 miles wide. Elevations range from about 4,300 feet in the foothill area up to 8,533 feet. Many deep canyons extend from the edge into the central part of the mountains. Reeves (1931) described the area as consisting entirely of sedimentary rocks that have been arched upward in a huge elliptical dome. The rocks range in age from pre-Cambrium to Recent.

Madison limestone is the main surface rock.

The study area (Figure I), consisting of approximately 120 square miles on the north slopes of the Snowy Mountains, was mainly in the foothill region between 4,300 and 6,100 feet elevation. Rise in ele­ vation was gradual in all but the uppermost part. Cottonwood Creek,

Beaver Creek, and Rock Creek were the principle drainages. These streams were characterized by wide drainage basins separated by grassy or timbered ridges in the upper part and flat broad benches a t .lower elevations. Most.of the study area was accessible by vehicle. Only about six square miles was publicly owned; this was mainly administered by the U. S. Forest Service,

Climatological data (Appendix, Table VIII) were obtained from each of two weather stations; temperatures from the Lewistown Airport weather station and precipitation from a station 10 miles south of Lewistown located on the study area at an elevation of 4,900 feet. The average temperatures of 62.5°F and 57.9°F for June-September, 1967 and 1968 were — 4—

LEGEND

DOUGLAS FIR ZONE GRASSLAND ZONE c m HAWTHORN-ASPEN ZONE

PONDEROSA PINE ZONE Scale in Miles AGRICULTURE ZONE

RO U TE I

R O U TE 2

Figure I. Study area showing vegetation types, observation routes and distribution of deer. Each symbol for distribution repre­ sents I percent of the total deer observed for one season. Observations constituting less than I percent of the total deer within one square mile were not included. -5-

1.7°F above and 2.8°F below normal, respectively. Precipitation of 16.87

and 13.50 inches for these same.periods was 6.23 and 2.86 inches above

normal. During the winter of 1969, the average temperatures of 2.3°F,

17.8°F, and 24.I0F for January, February, and March were 17.9°F, 4.7°F,

and 4.6°F below normal, respectively. Monthly precipitation totals of

2.20, .59,- and .21 inches for the same 3 months were. 1.12 inches above

and .67 and .85 inches below normal; respectively. Although precipita-.

tion for. the 3-month period was only .4 inches below normal, reports

from local people were that snow accumulations were considerably below

normal; especially at higher elevations. Following strong southwest winds, which began at the end of January, most.ridges were partially

or completely bare during the remainder of the winter period. METHODS Vegetation

To aid in determining range use relationships between whitetail and mule deer, the vegetation of the study area was classified into five

zones with types and subtypes within the zones = All types and subtypes were quantitatively or qualitatively studied to determine their vege­

tation composition. A method described by Daubenmiye (1959) was used on all but the agriculture and willow types. Species composition and

canopy coverage of vegetation shorter than 3 feet were recorded for

each of ten, twenty, or forty 20 x 50 centimeter plots.placed at 10-

foot intervals along each of 37 transects in representative stands.

Transects were evaluated at various times so that both early and late- maturing plants would be included. . Plants were collected and identi­

fied to aid in recognition of plants in the field. Identification of all specimens was verified by Dr. W. E. Booth of Montana State Univer­ sity. The average diameter breast high (d. b. h.) and density of trees in the aspen, cottonwood, pine, and fir types were determined by the point-centered quarter method (Cottam and Curtis 1956). For each type,

160 trees were measured. . Intercept of shrubs over 3 feet high was measured along 800 feet of line transect to determine occurrence.in

the cottonwood type. Nomenclature of plants followed Booth (1950) and

Booth and Wright (1966). — 7— Distribution of Deer

Four.observation routes, extending through all vegetation zones, types, and subtypes, were selected on the study area (Figure I). Ob­ servations of deer, with the aid of a.pair of 7 x 35 binoculars and a spotting scope, were made weekly during early morning and late evening along each of the observation routes from a four-wheel drive vehicle or snowmobile. These observations were referred to as route observations while those made at other times were termed miscellaneous observations.

For each deer observation, the following were recorded: locatibn by vegetation zone, type, and subtype; species; sex and age class; time; and geographic location. Vegetation types, which had shrubs or trees over 4 feet in height; wefe considered secure cover.for deer and were designated cover types. During, the, summer of 1968 and the winter of

1969j the cover type nearest each observed deer was recorded.

Food Habits

Food habits were determined from feeding site examinations and rumen analyses. Feeding sites were examined immediately after being vacated by the feeding animal. Use of a twig or leaf of a browse plant, a stem or leaf of a forb, or one "bite" of a grass or grasslike plant constituted one instance of use. During the summer, the vege­ tation within each of ten 20 x 50 centimeter plots spaced at 5-foot intervals was evaluated according to species composition and canopy coverage at each feeding site. To evaluate food preferences, the — 8— .

relative abundance of each plant as determined by percent canopy cover­

age.was compared with its relative importance in the diet as determined

by percent frequency of use in relation to other plants.at feeding

sites. .A quart rumen sample from each of 48 deer was analyzed using a

technique similar to that of Cole■(1956) and others. The distribution

of the samples was two for each specids per month except for October with one and December with none for mule deer as well as February,

April, and November for whitetail deer when the samples were three,

five, and one, respectively. Twenty-two of the samples were collected by the area biologist from December-April of 1966 and 1967. The re­ mainder were taken during my study. The aggregate percentage method

(Martin et al. 1946) was used in tabulation of data for feeding sites

and rumen samples by season. .

Weights, Productivity and Population Characteristics

Sex, age, and whole and hog-dressed weights were determined from

37 deer taken from the study area. The number of embryos in females

taken during pregnancy was recorded. Productivity and population char­ acteristics were determined from classification of observed deer. RESULTS Vegetation

AGRICULTURE ZONE

The agriculture zone, occurring between 4,300 and 4,600 feet, occu­ pied approximately 22,000 acres and included five vegetation types

(Figure I).

AgvioultuTe Type. This was an extensive type occupying most of the bottomland areas adjacent to the creeks as well as the broad flat benches between drainage basins. Grain, mainly barley (Hovdeum spp.) and wheat

(Tvitloum aest-ivim) was grown on the drier bench lands while hay crops, usually alfalfa (Medloago sativa) mixed with brome (Bromus -spp.) or timothy (Phleum pvatense), were most important on the more mesic bottomlands.

Cottonwood Type. This type which occurred only along the bottom­ lands of Cottonwood Creek, was dominated by narrowleaf cottonwood

(Populus angustifolia). Most.trees were mature or old, averaging 12.5 inches d. b. h. The sparse density of ,186 trees per acre allowed a tall understory of shrubs to persist. Percent line intercept for shrubs over 3 feet tall was as follows: red dogwood (Covnus stolonifera), 20; western serviceberry (Amelanohiev alnifolia), 9; and chokecherry (Prunus vivginiana), 8. Although not included in sampled stands, willow (Salix spp.) commonly occurred in very sparse cottonwood stands. Character­ istic short shrubs were red dogwood, rose (Rosa spp.) and snowberry

(SymphorioaTpos spp.) (Table I). Cutleaf coneflower (Rudbeokia laoiniata) TABLE I. PERCENT CANOPY COVERAGE AND FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PLANTS IN VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 20 X 50 CENTIMETER PLOTS.

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland- Grassland- Ponderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Pine Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Willow Juniper Juniper Plants!^ 4(40)2/ 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20) SHRUBS: . Amelanahier alnifolia 3/17 tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr Berberis repens 3/19-3/ 5/48 tr/tr - - 5/27 tr/tr - tr/tr - Comus stolonifera - - - - - 8/33 - - Juniperus cormunis - - - - - 8/30 — Juniperus horizontalis - - - - - ~ 29/51 Potentilla frutioosa A / - - 4/19 3/14 - - 12/47 10/49 Prunus virginiana tr/tr— tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr - tr/tr 2/tr - tr/tr - R o s a spp. tr/tr 3/23 2/tr 5/39 3/23 tr/tr 5/40 3/26 tr/tr S a l i x spp. ------Spiraea betulifolia 5/43 tr/15 tr/tr — - 13/62 - - - Symphoriaarpos spp. tr/tr 7/47 2/tr 6/44 tr/tr tr/tr 3/17 X 2/38 tr/tr FORES: Achillea millefolium tr/tr tr/tr 8/71 2/31 tr/tr 3/58 3/50 Agoseris glauca - - - tr/tr tr/15 - - - Agrimonia striata - 2/tr tr/tr tr/tr — - - - - Alyssun alyssoides - - - - tr/46 - - - tr/tr Anemone multifida - - - tr/tr tr/17 - - tr/tr 3/24 Antennaria parvifolia - - - tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr - - 2/16 tr/tr Arenaria congesta - - - tr/tr 2/tr - ~ tr/tr 3/30 Arnica cordifolia 3/30 - - - - tr/tr - - - - Artemisia frigida - - - tr/tr 2/27 - - - - - Artemisia ludoviaiana - - - 2/tr tr/tr - - - - - Aster falaatus - - - 3/28 3/35 - - tr/tr tr/tr Aster foliaceus tr/tr 7/30 3/24 3/19 - tr/tr 4/34 X 6/38 - A s t e r spp. - - - tr/tr 4/32 tr/tr tr/tr X tr/tr tr/tr Cerastium arvense - - - tr/tr 4/54 - - - tr/tr 5/51 TABLE I. (CONTINUED)

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland" Grassland- Ponderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Pine Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Willow Juniper Juniper Plants 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20)

Cirsium arvense ------X - - C i r s i t m spp. tr/tr 2/tr tr/tr tr/tr - tr/tr tr/tr - - Clematis pseudoalpina - - - ~ tr/tr - - tr/tr 5/24 Collomia linearis tr/tr - - tr/17 - tr/tr - - - tr/tr Comandra umbellata - - - tr/tr tr/21 - - - - tr/tr Cynoglosstm officinale 2/19 12/57 - tr/tr - tr/tr tr/tr X tr/tr - Erigeron caespitosus - - - - 4/21 - - tr/tr Erigeron speciosus - tr/tr - 4/21 tr/tr tr/tr - - tr/tr - Fragaria virginiana tr/tr 3/47 tr/tr tr/tr - 2/24 tr/tr - tr/40 tr/tr Gaillardia aristata - - - - 6/16 - - - tr/tr tr/tr Galium aparine - 2/16 7/51 tr/tr - - tr/tr - - - Galium boreale tr/tr 2/25 tr/19 5/40 tr/15 tr/19 - - 4/74 tr/31 Geranitm viscossissimum - tr/tr - 9/42 tr/tr - - - 3/22 - Hedysarum sulphuresaens - - - - tr/tr - - - - 6/29 Helianthus nuttallii - - - tr/tr - - - X tr/tr - Heracleum lanatm - tr/tr - - - - - X - - Linum perenne - - - tr/tr tr/17 - - - tr/tr tr/21 Lithosperrmm ruder ale - - - tr/tr 2/19 - - - tr/tr - Monarda fistulosa _ tr/tr 2/16 5/29 tr/tr tr/tr - - 3/20 tr/tr Osmorhiza longistylis 5/43 11/69 9/55 - - 4/23 tr/tr - - - Phlox albomarginata - - - tr/tr 3/41 - - - tr/tr tr/29 Phlox hoodii - - - - 3/21 - - - - - Potentilla gracilis - - tr/tr 4/32 - - - - 2/28 - Ranunculus aariformis tr/tr 4/27 3/22 - - tr/tr ' ./tr - - - Rudbeckia laainiata ------22/57 X - - Sanicula marilandica - 4/36 2/15 - - - 3/19 - - - Taraxacm officinale tr/tr 6/54 6/37 tr/tr tr/tr 2/20 3/32 X tr/tr tr/tr Thaliatrm oeeidentale tr/tr 2/28 tr/19 - - tr/tr tr/tr - tr/tr -

Themopsis rhombifolia - - - 4/19 3/27 - - - - tr/tr TABLE I. (CONTINUED).

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland- Grassland- Ponderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Pine Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Willow Juniper Juniper P lants 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20)

•Typha latifolia ------X - - Viaia americana - - - tr/19 tr/tr - - - tr/tr tr/tr Viola canadensis tr/tr 16/74 20/87 - - 2/15 tr/tr - - - Unidentified Forbs tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr 3/20 4/39 tr/tr tr/tr 4/30 tr/tr GRASS AND GRASSLIKE: ^ Agropyron smithii - - - tr/tr 4/42 - - - tr/tr - y Agropyron spiaatm - - - 3/17 - - tr/tr */ Agropyron spp. - - - 4/39 7/49 - - tr/tr 10/82 Agrostis diegoensis - - tr/tr - - - 4/32 - - - Bromus marginatus - tr/tr tr/tr tr/15 - - - tr/tr - Carex nebraskensis tr/tr ------X - - C a r e x spp. - 3/20 - tr/tr 5/55 tr/17 tr/tr X tr/tr 3/40 Danthonia oalifomiaa - - - - 3/21 - - - - - Festuaa idahoensis - - - - 4/33 - - - 4/34 8/59 Festuaa soabrella - - - tr/tr — - - - 3/20 - Koeleria cristata - - - — 12/91 - - - tr/tr 4/51 ^ Phleum pretense tr/tr tr/22 tr/16 12/82 tr/tr tr/tr 2/33 X 6/52 tr/tr VyP o a spp. tr/tr 12/52 7/34 51/99 4/47 tr/tr 6/44 X 7/42 2/tr Stipa oomata - - - - 2/18 - - - - - Unidentified Grasses tr/tr 2/28 tr/16 tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr 3/42 tr/tr OTHER: Bare Ground tr/tr tr/tr 3/20 tr/tr 2/39 tr/tr 12/42 - tr/16 tr/16 Lichens and Mosses tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr tr/tr 4/30 tr/tr — - 8/28 8/61 Litter 92/100 26/72 31/86 10/47 14/89 83/100 34/99 12/47 3/69

I/ Includes only taxa with more than 2 percent canopy coverage or 15 percent frequency in at least one type or subtype. Other are included in Appendix Table IX. 27 Nunber of stands with ntmber of plots per stand in parenthesis. 3/ Canopy coverage (percent of area covered by vegetation)/average frequency (percent occurrence among plots). ZV "tr" indicates a value of less than 2 percent canopy coverage or 15 percent frequency. 5/ Species present but no quantitative data available. -13- was the most frequently occurring forb. Dominant grasses were blue-

grasses (,Poa spp„} and thingrass (Agvostis diegoensis) .

Willow Type. Dense stands of willow ranging in width from 50 to

200 feet occurred commonly along Beaver Creek and occasionally along

Rock Creek (Figure 2). Heights of plants did not exceed 15 feet. Al­

though several species of willow occurred, Bebb willow (Salix bebbiana) was the most.common. Two forbs, cow-parsnip (Hevaoleim lanatvm) and

cutleaf coneflower, frequently occurred in sparse stands of willow.

Bluegrasses and Nebraska sedge (Cavex nebvaskensis) were also present.

Hawthorn Type. Dense stands of hawthorn commonly occurred along the bottoms and other.mesic sites of secondary drainages. Hawthorn, also occurred on the slopes adjacent to willow and cottonwood types on the main streams. Yellow hawthorn (Crataegus ohrysophyta) and black hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii) were present, but the former had the greatest occurrence. Characteristic forbs were Canada violet (Viola canadensis), longstyle sweetroot (Osmorhiza longistylis), bedstraw

(Galium aparine) , and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) .

Bluegrasses were the only common grasses.

Grassland Type. ■ This type occurred quite extensively throughout the agriculture zone (Figure 2). Mesic sites, which tended to occur on the bottomlands, differed considerably in their vegetation composi­

tion from xeric sites, which dominated the ridges. Rose, snowberry and shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa) were the characteristic shrubs -14-

occurrlng on meslc sites. A wide variety of forbs was present includ­ ing sticky geranium {Geranium viscossissimvm), yarrow (Aahillea mills- ■ folium), northern bedstraw {Galium boreale), and horsemint {Monarch, fistulosd) . Bluegrasses were extremely abundant with timothy occurring less commonlyo Dominant shrubs on xeric sites were rose and shrubby cinquefoil. Gaillardia {Gaillardia aristata), asters {Aster spp.) and tufted fleabane {Erigeron caespitosus) were the characteristic forbs.

Important grasses were junegrass {Koeleria cristata) and wheatgrasses

{Agropyron spp.).

PONDEEOSA PINE ZONE

This zone, occupying about 9,000 acres, formed a discontinuous belt of timber between the agriculture and hawthorn-aspen zones (Figure I).

Because of its continuous.canopy, ponderosa.pine was considered the only type within this zone.

Ponderosa Pine Type, This type occurred mainly on ridges, benches, and south and west slopes of small drainage basins (Figure 3). Al­ though ponderosa pine {Pinus- ponderosa) was the dominant tree; some areas at higher elevations were interspersed with Douglas-fIr {Pseudo- tsuga taxi folia), Average d. b. h. of ponderosa pine trees was 8.2 inches. Dense stands, averaging 857 trees per acre, resulted in sparse understory vegetation. White spiraea {Spiraea betulifolia) and Oregon grape {Berberis repens) were the characteristic shrubs. Frequently oc­ curring forbs were longstyle sweetroot and arnica {Arnica cordifolia)c . -15-

Figure 2. Agriculture zone showing willow type along Beaver Creek in winter.

Figure 3. Benchland area showing the grassland type of the agriculture zone with the ponderosa pine zone in the background. -16-

Grasses were relatively unimportant ^

HAWTHORN-ASPEN ZONE

This zone, the largest in the study area comprising about 26,000 acres, occurred between 4,800 and.5,400 feet. Four types were de­ scribed within this zone,

HaWthoTn-Aspen Type. The hawthorn-aspen type, usually consisting of quaking aspen (Populus tvemuloides) with a tall understory of haw­ thorn, occurred on almost all sites except dry ridge tops (Figure 4).

Frequently pure stands of aspen or hawthorn occurred. Aspen stands were very dense consisting of 1,148 trees per acre. Trees were small averaging 3.9 inches d. b. h. Understory vegetation in this type con­ sisted of a combination of those species which occurred in pure stands of hawthorn or aspen. Rose, snowberry and Oregon grape were the most frequently occurring short shrubs. Common forbs included Canada violet, longstyle sweetroot; common dandelion and houndstongue (.CynogZossun officinale). Bluegrasses were the only abundant grasses.

Cottonwood Type. This type was an extension of the cottonwood type from the agriculture zone and was similar to that type (Figure 4).

Agnioulticpe Type. Agricultural crops were grown mainly along the creek bottoms and adjacent slopes (Figure 4). Crops were similar to those of the agriculture zone, however proportionately more hay and less grain were grown.

GnassZand Type. Vegetation in this type was comparable to that -17- of the same type in the agriculture zone, although shrubby cinquefoil occurred more frequently. More mesic sites were also present.

GRASSLAND ZONE

Extensive areas of grassland occurred in the southwestern part of the study area with smaller areas in the south-central part■(Figure I).

The grassland zone occurred at approximately the same elevations as the hawthorn-aspen zone to the east and north and appeared to replace it.

The absence of major streams probably explains the occurrence of grass­ land vegetation rather than hawthorn.and aspen. The zone covered about,

13,000 acres and was bordered by the Douglas-fir zone at higher elevations. Types and subtypes were described.

Grassland Type. Open rolling grassland occupied the greater part of the grassland zone. Except for the addition of the subtypes de­ scribed below, vegetation in this type was similar to that of the grass­ land types mentioned earlier. Areas located adjacent to the Douglas-fir zone differed somewhat with bluebunch fescue (.Festuca Idahoensis) and rough fescue (Festuea seabrella) commonly occurring. The grassland- creeping juniper subtype occurred in the southwestern part of the study area where ridges were dominated by scattered mats of creeping juniper

(Juniperus horizontalis). Shrubby cinquefoil was the only other fre­ quently occurring shrub on this subtype. Associated forbs were white sweetvetch (Hedysarum sulphureseens) , clematis (Clematis pseudoalpina) , and field chickweed (CeraStium arvense). Wheatgrasses and Idaho fescue — 18—

I

Figure 4. Hawthorn-aspen zone on Cottonwood Creek showing the cottonwood type in the foreground with the agriculture type in the center and the hawthorn-aspen type in the background. -19- were the characteristic grasses. A grassland-common juniper subtype

(Figure 5), usually associated with shallow soil and rocky areas, oc­ curred mainly on south and west facing slopes. The only abundant shrub other than common juniper (,Juniperus eormunis) was shrubby cinquefoil.

Leafybract aster (Aster fotiaeeus) and northern bedstraw were important forbs, with common grasses being bluegrasses and timothy.

Hawthorn-Aspen Type* This type had very limited distribution oc­ curring only in a few mesic drainage basins. Its vegetation was similar to that of the hawthorn-aspen type described earlier.

DOUGLAS-FIR ZONE

This zone formed an almost complete belt of timber across the southern boundary of the study area above 5,800 feet elevation. It comprised about 5,000 acres. Only the Bouglas-fir type was included within this zone (Figure 6) .

Douglas-fir Type. The dense overstory of Douglas-fir occasionally included scattered trees of limber pine (Pinus flexilis), lodgepole pine

(Pinus oontorta) and Engelmann spruce (Pioea engelmanni). At lower ele­ vations of the Douglas-fir type, an ecotone existed where ponderosa pine was commonly found with Douglas-fir. Average d. b. h. of Douglas-fir trees was 7.7 inches. Density was 480 trees per acre. White spiraea and Oregon grape were the most common understory shrubs. Longstyle sweetrobt and Virginiana strawberry (Fragaria virginiana) were frequently occurring forbs. Grasses were relatively unimportant. -20-

Figure 6. Grassland type of the grassland zone in the foreground and the Douglas-fir zone in the background. -21- Distribution and Range Use

A total of 6,608 whitetail and 5,452 mule deer observations were

recorded during 134 route and 137 miscellaneous observation trips. Dis­

tribution and range use were determined primarily from route observa­

tions. Observations of deer indicated their distribution during feeding

periods, while recording of the cover type nearest the observed deer

tended to show their distribution during rest periods. Observations for

the two summers were combined, since no major differences in distribution were noted.

WHITETAIL DEER

Summer?' Ninety-seven percent of the whitetail deer observed during route observations were in the agriculture and hawthorn-aspen zones

(Table II). Bottomland types with deciduous vegetation appeared to be preferred, probably because their mesic conditions resulted in abundant vegetation. Heavy use of the agriculture type and hay subtype within

each of the zones was noted. Observations in the agriculture types in­

creased to a high of 80 percent of all deer seen in late summer. This

coincided with- a decrease in use of the hawthorn-aspen type. Miscel­

laneous observations (Appendix, Table X) showed similar results to

route observations. Allen (1968) reported heavy use of alfalfa and meadow types during the summer on Missouri River bottoms. Cover types most frequently recorded during 1968 were hawthorn-aspen and hawthorn-

(Table III). TABLE II. PERCENT OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER OBSERVED ON EACH VEGETATION TYPE DURING ROUTE OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969

SUMMER 1967-1968 WINTER 1969 6/21-7/20 7/21-8/20 8/21-9/15 6/21-9/15 January February March Jan.-Mar. Vegetation Types W T /MD WT/MD W T /MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD

A griculture Zone: 14/91/ 27/5 31/13 25/9 55/- 89/1 89/- 85/tr Agriculture Type 22/1 22/9 19/4 21/- 32/- 35/- 32/- Hay Subtype %/tr2/ 24/2 22/10 20/5 7/- 5/- 4/- 5/- Grain Subtype tr/tr -/tr -/- tr/tr 14/- 27/- 31/- 27/- Cottonwood Type tr/- tr/- tr/- tr/- -/- -/“ -/“ -/- Willow Type tr/- tr/- tr/- tr/- -/“ -/“ -/- -/- Hawthorn Type 2/5 1/3 2/3 1/3 -/- I/- 2/- I/- Grassland Type tr/2 3/tr 6/tr 4/1 34/- 55/1 52/- 52/tr Ponderosa Pine Zone: 2/tr tr/- tr/tr 1/tr 14/- 5/2 4/- 6/tr Ponderosa Pine Type 2/tr tr/- tr/tr 1/tr 14/- 5/2 4/- 6/tr Hawthorn-Aspen Zone: 78/36 71/28 69/23 72/27 31/7 6/19 7/15 9/16 Hawthorn-Aspen Type 36/25 33/18 8/10 22/17 10/4 -/tr -/tr 1/1 Cottonwood Type 3/- 2/tr tr/- 2/tr 2/- -/- -/- tr/- Agriculture Type 27/3 31/4 58/7 43/5 -/” -/- -/- -/- Hay Subtype 18/1 24/4 49/4 37/3 -/” -/- -/- -/- Grain Subtype 10/- 3/- 5/- 6/- -/“ -/- -/- -/- Grassland Type 12/7 5/6 2/6 5/6 20/3 6/18 7/15 8/15 Grassland Zone: 5/46 1/57 tr/59 2/55 -/61 -/76 -/83 -/76 Grassland Type 1/40 -/46 tr/49 tr/46 -/61 -/76 -/83 -/76 Grassland-Common „ . Juniper Subtype *2/ * * * -/19 -/5 -/14 -/11 GrassIand-Creeping Juniper Subtype * * * * -/9 -/51 -/47 -/43 Hawthorn-Aspen Type 4/6 tr/11 -/10 1/9 -/- -/“ -/“ -/“ TABLE II. (CONTINUED).

SUMMER 1967-1968 WINTER 1969 6/21-7/20 7/21-8/20 8/21-9/15 6/21-9/15 January February March Jan.-Mar. Vegetation Types WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD Douglas-fir Zone: -/9 -/10 -/5 -/8 -/31 -/3 -/2 -/7 Douglas-fir Type -/9 -/10 -/5 -/8 -/31 -/3 -/2 -/7 Total Deer Observations 1967 - 1969 4 1 4 /4 0 3 4 9 3 /5 6 7 7 9 9 /5 7 6 I ,705/1,546 1 8 4 /3 5 0 9 1 0 /1 ,0 3 3 4 7 5 /8 4 8 1,569/2,231 1968 2 2 5 /2 4 0 1 7 6 /3 1 8 5 0 1 /3 8 5 9 0 2 /9 4 3

I/ Percent of totals 1967-1969 for whitetail deer/percent of totals 1967-1969 for mule deer except for hay and grain subtypes in summer when percentages were based on totals for 1968 only. 2/ "tr" indicates less than 1.0 percent. 3/ Not considered as a subtype. I K> Yj -24-

TABLE III. COVER TYPES LOCATED NEAREST TO OBSERVED DEER DURING THE SUMMER OF 1968 AND THE WINTER OF 1969,

SUMMER 1968 WINTER 1969 Route Misc. Route Misc. Obs. Obs. Obs. 0b s, Cover Types WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD Hawthorn 16/16 I/ .11/18 2/2 2/8 Ponderosa pine 11/2 10/4 91/10 95/19 Douglas-fir -/29 tr/22 2/ -/34 -/8 Cottonwood 10/tr 10/2 4/- tr/- Willow 6/tr 12/tr tr/- tr/- Hawthorn-aspen 57/53 56/53 2/54 1/65 Total Deer Observations 902/943 953/658 I ,569/2,231 1,657/551

I/ Sixteen percent of 902 whitetail deer observations/16 percent of 943 mule deer observations,. 2/ "tr" indicates less than 1,0 percent.

WrLnteT. Eighty-five percent.of the deer .were observed in the agri­ culture zone, indicating a movement from the hawthorn^aspen zone, which was the zone of greatest use in summer. Some.of this movement occurred

as late as January. During early January when snow accumulations were

light, considerable numbers of whitetail deer were observed in the haw­

thorn-aspen zone. As snow became deeper and crusted, several areas of

concentration became evident in the agriculture zone (Figure I), partic­

ularly in the agriculture type and on wind-blown ridges and south and west exposures of the grassland type. Heavy use was made of the grain

subtype during February and March. These findings are in contrast to -25-

those of Martinka (1968) in the Bear Paw Mountains of northern Montana

where whitetail deer utilized mainly aspen and shrub types during a

winter when snow depths were comparable to those of my study. Although

only 6 percent of the deer were observed in the ponderosa pine type,

over 90 percent appeared to use this type for rest and escape as indi­

cated by observations of cover types. Apparently this heavy use was

related to two factors; its evergreen vegetative character which pro­

vided secure cover, and light snow accumulation because of its

distribution on ridges and south and west slopes.

MULE DEER

SvmmeT. Mule deer were located throughout the study area, but most observations were in the grassland zone (Table II). The grass­

land type within this zone accounted for 46 percent of the observed

deer during this season. This area was probably preferred because of

an abundance of forbs and short shrubs, especially rose. Use of the

hawthorn-aspen zone was greatest in early summer and decreased there­

after. Only slight use was made of the agriculture types. Hawthorn-

aspen and Douglas-fir were the most commonly recorded cover types.

WinteT. Most of the deer were also observed in the grassland

zone during this season. Use of this zone increased during the winter

to a high of 83 percent in March, a period when 98 percent of all deer

were observed in grassland types. Large concentrations of mule deer

were observed in the grassland-creeping juniper subtype during February and March. These concentrations coincided with the distribution of creeping juniper, which was the most important food item during winter

(Table V). Considerable use was made of the Douglas-fir type during

January, before snow accumulations forced movement onto the lower, wind-blown ridges. Although some mule deer apparently moved onto the study area from higher elevations, I believe that a large proportion of the deer which wintered on the study area also summered there. My data on use of cover types may not be entirely applicable during this season, since grassland areas appeared to be used for both feeding and resting.

Food Habits

MITETAIL DEER

Simmer. Results of feeding site examinations for the summers of

1967 and 1968 were combined. Browse, forbs, and grasses averaged 29,

65, and 5 percent, respectively of.the diet at 50 feeding sites (Table

IV). Browse plants receiving greatest use were rose and western ser- viceberry. Alfalfa was the most important food item averaging 37 per­ cent of the diet. It was used most extensively during late summer.

The short growing season resulted in the second crop of alfalfa not maturing but reaching a height of 6 to 12 inches, a stage of growth which appeared to be preferred by whitetail deer. Barley was the main grass utilized. The seed heads were taken in late summer when ripe.

Results of rumen sample analyses generally agreed with results at TABLE IV. YEARLY FOOD HABITS OF WHITETAIL DEER AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 94 FEEDING SITES AND ANALYSES OF 27 RUMEN SAMPLES.

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING January February March Jan.-Mar. Jan.-Mar. 50 sites 16 sites 15 sites 13 sites 44 sites .6 rumens (3.815)1/ 5 r miens (2,308) (1,780) (1,437) (5,525) 7 r unens 9 r unens Plants?/ FR/% diet/commd/ FR/% % diet % diet % diet % diet FR/% FR/%

Amelcmohier alnifolia 17/12$/ 9/*1/ - 9 4 18 10 14/10 - ArotoataphyIos uva-urei - - — - “ - 14/tr$' 11/1 Berberis repens 17/tr -/I 60/27 11 I I 5 57/2 56/6 Comua stolonifera - 2/1 - - - - - Crataegus ohrysophyta 4/* tr - - tr - Crataegus douglasii - 2/* - - - tr - C r a t a e g u s spp. 50/4 40/tr - - 43/16 22/4 Juniperus oamunis - -/tr - i tr 2 i 11/1 Juniperus horizontalis ------14/tr 44/2 Pinus ponderoea - -/* — 25 7 12 15 71/18 44/20 Populus tremuloides 17/3 tr/* 40/6 tr - - tr - 33/5 Prunus virginiana 50/2 3/* 20/tr ii 5 4 7 30/2 22/2 Pseudotsuga taxifolia — - i - tr - - R o s a spp. 83/22 9/5 - - - - - 30/1 22/2 Shepherdia canadensis 17/tr tr/tr - i - i - 11/tr Spiraea betulifolia - -/I - i - tr - - Symphorioarpos spp. 67/2 1/7 20/5 10 7 9 9 14/tr 22/tr Unidentified Browse 83/9 - 100/2 - - - - 71/2 100/7 Total Browse 100/54 29/* 100/41 70 25 47 48 100/51 100/49

Achillea millefolium - -/2 - 2 I I I - - Antennaria parvifolia - -/tr 40/1 - tr 4 I 14/tr 22/tr Arenaria congesta - - - - - 2 I - - Artemisia frigida - - - - 18 10 9 - - Artemisia ludovioiana - -/I - 5 3 - 3 - - Aster faloatus - -/tr - tr 2 - I - - Aster foliaoeus - 7/8 - i - I I - - Aster integrifolius - 1/tr tr - - tr - - A s t e r spp. - “ 20/1 2 2 “ i - - TABLE IV (CONTINUED)

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING January Februaay March Jan.-Mar. Jan.-Mar. 50 sites 16 sites 15 sites 13 sites 44 sites 6 runens (3,815) 5 rumens (2,308) (1,780) (1,437) (5,525) 7 rumens 9 rumens Plants FR/% diet/comm FR/% % diet % diet % diet % diet FR/% FR/%

Bateamorrhiza eagittata - tr/1 - I - - tr - _ Ceraetium arvenee - -/tr - - I I i - - Claytonia lanoeolata - 2/1 ------Clematie linguetioifolia - - I “ - tr - - Geranium riohardeonii - 1/1 ------Geraniwi vieooeeieeimum 50/2 3/3 - - - - - 29/1 22/2 Helianthue nuttallii - 2/4 ------Laotuca pulohella 1/tr - “ - - - - - Medioago lupulina - 1/2 — - 6 I 2 - - Medioago eativa 67/15 37/* 60/37 - - - 43/10 44/19 Monarda fietuloea -/4 - I - - tr - - Phlox albomarginata - -/tr - - 18 13 10 - - Sanicula marilandioa 17/3 2/5 ------Smilaoina etellata - 1/tr ------Solidago canadensis - 1/1 - 2 tr - I - - Solidago gig antea - 1/tr “ tr - - tr - Taraxacum officinale 17/tr 3/* ------33/3 Thermopeie rhombifolia - -/tr - i - tr - Tragopogon dubiue -/tr - 5 2 I 2 - - Viola canadensis — 1/3 — ~ ~ - - - - Unidentified Forbs 100/22 I/* 100/6 7 3 2 4 86/8 100/16 Total Forbs 100/43 65/* 100/46 26 57 37 40 100/20 100/42 TABLE IV. (CONTINUED).

SUMMER______FALL ______WINTER______SPRING January Fdiruary March Jan.-Mar Jan.-Mar 50 sites 16 sites 15 sites 13 sites 44 sites 6 rumens (3,815) 5 rumens (2,308) (1,780) (1,437) (5,525) 7 runens 9 runens Plants FR/2 diet/coeam FR/X Z diet Z diet Z diet Z diet FR/% FR/% 1 1 1 C a r e x spp. -/I 7 2 Hordeien spp. 17/1 4/* 20/1 Phleun pratense I/* 2 2 1 P o a spp. tr/* 7 8 5 29/25 Tritioien aeetivun 20/6 I 5 2 86/2 89/9 Unidentified Grasses 83/2 -/tr 80/5 3 15 12 100/27 89/9 Total Grasses and Grasslike 100/3 5/* 100/12 3 17 43/2 Mushrooms 17/tr

XJ Instances of use. 2/ Includes only those plants which constituted at least 0.5 percent of the diet in at least one season or month. Others are included in Appendix, Table XI. XJ Mean aggregate percentage of total instances of use on all sites/percent of community on all sites as determined by canopy coverage. 4/ Percent frequency of use by r me n s /mean aggregate percentage of total volumes of all rumens. 5/ Percent canopy coverage not determined. 6/ "tr" is less than 0.5 percent. -30-

feeding sites9 but use of browse was indicated to be greater by the

former. This difference possibly was related to the difficulty of ob-.

taining feeding site data in predominantly browse types. Browse con­ stituted 54 percent of all rumen samples and comprised from 19 to 88 percent of individual samples. Rose and western serviceberry were most important averaging 22 and 12 percent of the rumen contents, re­ spectively. Although only one sample was taken from a deer on the hay subtype, alfalfa occurred in four of six rumens and averaged 15 percent of all samples.

Fall. Browse averaged 41, forbs 46, and grasses 12 percent of five rumen samples. Oregon grape was the most,utilized browse plant. It oc­ curred in 60 percent of the samples and comprised 96 percent of the volume of one sample. Quaking aspen and snowberry were the only other browse plants receiving important use. Alfalfa constituted 37 percent of the volume of rumen contents. Two samples taken from the hay sub- types averaged 86 and 90 percent alfalfa. Because of the small sample size for fall, this probably caused forage class percentages to be abnormally high for forbs and low for browse. The three samples taken from types other than the hay subtype averaged 67 percent browse. About one-half of the grass utilized consisted of seed heads of wheat.

W-inter* Forage class percentages determined from the examination of 44 feeding sites were 48, 40, and 12 for browse, forbs, and grasses, respectively, indicating little change from summer or fall. Ponderosa -31- pine was the most utilized browse plant comprising 15 percent of the total instances of use. Western Serviceberryj snowberry and choke- cherry were other commonly used browse plants. Two forbs, phlox (,Phtox albomccrg-tnata) and fringed sagewort (Artemisia frigida), each received considerable use during this season. Wheat, which constituted 5 per­ cent of the diet, was the most important grass. Green leaves and stems were the parts used. Monthly food habits varied considerably during the winter. This variation was mainly due to availability and weather conditions. During January, a month with very adverse weather condi­ tions and continuous snow cover of 12 to 18 inches, browse averaged 70 percent of the diet. Considerable feeding was done in the ponderosa pine type, and ponderosa pine made up 25 percent of the January diet.

During February, strong southwest winds and mild weather resulted in most ridges and south and west exposures being free of snow. Heavy use of these exposed areas, which were characterized by grasses and forbs, resulted in browse averaging only 25 percent of the total in­ stances of use. On these areas snowberry and chokecherry were most commonly used. Fringed sagewort and phlox, which remained semi-succu­ lent during winter, together constituted 36 percent of the diet and appeared to be preferred. Frequent light snows during March restricted the availability of forbs and resulted in an increase in use of browse, especially western serviceberry.

Results of rumen analyses generally agreed with results of feeding site examinations, but some important differences were noted. Ponderosa -32-

pine and hawthorn were the most utilized browse plants by rumen analy­

ses <= Most utilization of hawthorn was of dried leaves which were

probably picked up from the ground. This could explain why it was not

encountered in feeding site examinations. No detected use was made of

fringed sagewort or phlox, the two most important forbs as revealed by

feeding site examinations. Wheat comprised IOU and 75 percent of

two samples and made up one-fourth of the volume of all samples. Rumen

samples were collected 2 years prior to my study and differences noted

in food habits between feeding site examinations and rumen analyses

could have been due to differences in availability and weather conditions

Spring, Browse, forbs, and grasses averaged 49, 42, and 9 percent,

respectively of nine rumen samples. Ponderosa pine constituted 20 per­

cent of the diet, mainly because of two samples in which it comprised 84

and 87 percent of their respective total volumes. Alfalfa, averaging 19 percent, was the most important forb. Grasses constituted 32 percent

of two samples collected in May.

MULE DEER

Sumer, Browse averaged 60, forbs'40,. and grasses less than I; per-,

cent of the instances of use at 53 feeding sites examined during- 1967 and

1968. Rose averaged 38 percent. It comprised only 12.percent of the plant community (Table V) , indicating that it was a' preferred summer browse plant in this area. Yellow hawthorn and western serviceberry con-r stituted 9 and 8 percent, respectively of the total instances of use..

• > TABLE V. YEARLY FOOD HABITS OF MULE DEER AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 96 FEEDING SITES AND ANALYSES OF 21 RUMEN SAMPLES.

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING January February March Jan.-Mar. Jan.-Mar 53 sites 16 sites 13 sites 14 sites 43 sites 6 rumens (4,535)1' 3 rumens (3,430) (1,565) (1,685) (6,680) 6 rumens 2/ 6 rumens Plants- FR/% diet/comiriA' FR/% % diet % diet % diet % diet FR/% FR/% BROWSE: _ _ Aoev glabvum Iiz1A' tr/*!/ Amelanohiev alnifolia 17/1 8/* - 5 “ 5 3 33/1 - Avotostaphylos uva-uvsi - -/tr 33/1 2 tr I I - 33/1 Avtemisia tvidentata - - - 10 - - 4 33/6 Bevbevis vepens - -/i 67/19 6 10 tr 5 - 33/4 Ceanothus velutinus - - 33/5 - 2 tr I - - Cvataegus ohvysophyta - 9/* - - - - - “ - Cvataegus douglasii - tr/* ------C v a t a e g u s spp. 50/2 ------Juniperus communis - -/tr 67/3 41 5 19 23 17/11 33/4 Junipevus hovizontalis - - - 5 42 47 30 67/40 - Populus tvemuloid.es 1 7 /2 -/* - - - I tr - - Pvunus vivginiana 5 0 /8 3 /* - 4 I tr 2 - 17/tr Pseudotsuga taxifolia — -/* - I - - tr 33/6 50/5 R o s a spp. 100/31 38/12 - tr tr tr - 3 3 /3 Shephevdia canadensis 17/1 2/1 ------Spiraea betulifolia - -/tr — 2 I - i - - Symphoviaavpos spp. 3 3 /2 -/ii 33/25 3 - 5 3 - - Unidentified Browse 100/10 - 100/5 - - - - 67/5 67/1 Total Browse 1 0 0 /5 7 6 0 /* 1 0 0 /5 5 79 62 80 74 1 0 0 /6 3 1 0 0 /2 4 FORBS: Achillea millefolium - - / 3 - - tr I tr - Alyssum alyssoides - -/tr - I - - tr - Antennaria pavvifolia - -/i - tr i - tr - 50/3 A n t e n n a r i a spp. 67/tr -/tr ------33/5 Avenaria oongesta - -/tr i i I i - TABLE V. (CONTINUED)

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING January February March Jan.-Mar. Jan.-Mar. 53 sites 16 sites 13 sites 14 sites 43 sites 6 rumens (4,535) 3 rumens (3,430) (1,565) (1,685) (6,680) 6 r utens 6 rumens Plants FR/% diet/comm FR/% % diet % diet % diet % diet FR/% FR/%

Artemisia fmgida - - - - - I tr - _ Artemisia ludovieiana - -/tr - 2 I I i 17/2 - Aster fatoatus - -/i - I I tr i - - Aster foliaaeus 17/1 7/6 - tr tr tr tr - - Balsamorrhiza sagittata - tr/2 - 2 tr 4 2 17/12 - Besseya wyomingensis - -/tr ------33/5 Caloahortus gunnisoni - l/tr ------Cerastiwn arvense - -/tr - - i tr tr - - Claytonia lanoeolata - -/tr ------33/3 Clematis Columbiana - i/i ------Clematis hirsutissima - l/tr ------C l e m a t i s spp. 17/2 ------17/tr Cynoglossum officinale - -/I - I - - tr - - Delphinium bicolor - -/tr ------17/2 Erigeron caespitosus -/tr - - 3 - i - - Erigeron speciosus - i / i ------Calium boreale - -12 - tr I - tr - _ Geranium viscossissimwn 83/14 5/3 ------50/11 Gewn triflorum - -/tr - - - i tr - 50/1 Helianthus nuttallii - 2/1 ------Heuchera aylindrica - l/tr - - tr - tr - 83/6 Hymenoxys aaaulis - - - i - tr - - Lactuca pulchella - 2/1 ------Lupinus sericeus - l/tr ------_ Medicago lupulina -/I - - 5 i 2 - - Medieago saliva 3 3 /3 4/* 33/7 ------Monarda fistulosa - -/5 - i tr - tr 33/1 _ Phlox albomarginata - -/tr - - 9 5 4 17/1 50/3 TABLE V. (CONTINUED).

SUMMER •FALL WINTER SPRING January February March Jan.-Mar. Jan.-Mar. •53 sites 16 sites 13 sites 14 sites 43 sites 6 rumens (4,535) '3 rumens (3,430) (1,565) (1,685) (6,680) 6 rumens 6 rumens Plants FR/% diet/comm FR/% X diet % diet % diet % diet FR/% FR/%

P o t e n t i l l a spp. ------33/2 Rammaulus glaberrimus ------17/1 Sedum stenopetalum - -/tr - - 4 I I - 50/2 Senecio oanus - - - - I tr tr - - S o l i d a g o spp. 17/2 - - 2 - - i 17/1 - Tragopogon dubius 17/tr 2/1 33/14 tr I tr tr - - T r i f o l i u m spp. - -/I 33/4 - ~ - - - - Umbelliferae ------33/2 Viola canadensis - 1/1 — ------Unidentified Forbs 100/20 2/2 100/16 4 3 2 3 100/17 100/16 Total Forbs 100/42 40/* 100/40 20 35 17 23 1 0 0 /3 5 1 0 0 /6 2 GRASSES: P o a spp. - tr/* — tr - - tr - - Unidentified Grasses 83/2 - 100/6 2 2 2 2 100/2 100/14 Total Grasses 8 3 /2 tr/* 1 0 0 /6 2 2 2 2 100/2 100/14

I/ Instances of use. 2/ Includes only those plants which constituted at least 0.5 percent of the diet in at least one season or month. Others are included in Appendix, Table XII. 3/ Mean aggregate percentage of total instances of use on all sites/percent of community on all sites as determined by canopy coverage. 4/ Percent frequency of use by rumens/mean aggregate percentage of total volumes of all rumens. 5/ "tr" is less than 0.5 percent/* indicates percent canopy coverage was not determined. — 36—

A wide variety of forbs was utilized with leafybract aster and sticky geranium being the most important. Alfalfa received only slight use, mostly during late summer.

Forage class percentages determined from rumen samples agreed closely with those from feeding sites. Browse constituted 41 to 73 percent of individual samples averaging 57 percent of all rumen samples.

Rose occurred in all samples and comprised 31 percent of their contents.

Examination of rumens corroborated the data from feeding sites that sticky geranium was an important summer forb. .

Fall. Three rumen' samples provided limited information on fall food habits. Forage class usage was similar to summer with browse, forbs, and grasses averaging 55, 40, and 6 percent, respectively.

Snowberry- and Oregon grape were important browse plants while rose did not occur in any sample. Common salsify (.Tragopogon dubius) and alfalfa were commonly used forbs. Grasses occurred in small amounts in all samples.

Winter. An increased use of browse was noted during this season as compared to fall. Browse, forbs, and grasses averaged 74, 23, and

2 percent, respectively of the instances of use at.43 feeding sites.

Creeping and common juniper were the most utilized browse plants com­ prising 30 and 23 percent, respectively of the total instances of plant use. A wide variety of forbs was used, none of which individually con-, stituted more than 4 percent of the diet. Although monthly forage class -37- percentages were quite similar, use of individual plants varied con­ siderably. Common juniper constituted 41 percent of the diet during

January. During February and March, creeping juniper averaged 45 percent .of the instances of use. This change in use of browse plants was the result of a.shift in distribution from the higher Douglas-fir type and common juniper subtype in January to the wind-blown ridges of the creeping juniper subtype during the remainder of the winter.

This discussion of monthly variation in food habits applies only to deer inhabiting the southwestern part of the study area. Most of.the deer were observed here during the winter. For the mule deer occur­ ring on the rest of the study area, food habits appeared to change only slightly during the winter.

Results of analyses of rumen samples agreed closely with results of feeding site examinations. Browse was the most important forage class averaging 63 percent of the total volume of all samples. As with feeding site examinations, creeping and common juniper were the most utilized browse plants. Arrowleaf balsamroot {Balsamovvh'iza sagtt- tata) constituted 12 percent of the diet, but occurred in only one sample. Lovaas (1958) working in the Little Belt Mountains of Montana found that creeping juniper was the most important browse plant on the prairie-type winter range while common juniper was most important on the forested winter range. -38- •

Spring. During this season, browse decreased to its lowest season­ al use averaging 24 percent of six rumen samples while grasses averaged

14 percent and forbs 62 percent. Big sagebrush (,Artemisia tridentata) and Douglas-fir were the most utilized browse species. Several forbs receiving substantial use were sticky geranium, pussytoes (Antennaria spp.) and roundleaf allumroot (Heuohera oylindrioa).

SUMMARY AUD DISCUSSION

Whitetail Deer. Analyses of rumen contents indicated seasonal for-. age class percentages fluctuated only slightly throughout the year.

Alfalfa was the most important plant comprising 20 percent of the yearly diet. Agricultural crops accounted for 29 percent of the year-long food.

The occurrence of agricultural crops in whitetail deer diets appears to be quite common. Korschgen (1962) reported that the statewide average utilization of farm crops by whitetail deer in Missouri over an 8-year period amounted to 22.5 percent of the total food. Browse species re­ ceiving important use during my study were ponderosa pine and Oregon grape, Allen (1968) found snowberry to be the most important browse plant for whitetail deer on Missouri River bottoms. Although snow-. berry was readily available on my study area during all seasons, it received only slight use, probably because of an abundance of more desirable browse species. Despite this difference, forage class percentages were similar to those reported by Allen. -39-

Mule Beev. Certain changes were noted in seasonal forage class

use. Browse use was greatest during winter, but decreased to its

lowest seasonal use in spring when both forbs and grass received

their greatest use. Grass was unimportant during all other seasons.

Browse use increased in summer and was the most important forage

class during both summer and fall as well as in winter. High use of browse in summer is in contrast to findings of Lovaas (1958) in the

Little Belt Mountains, Wilkins (1957) in the Bridger Mountains, and

others where forbs were the most utilized forage class during summer.

Forage class percentages for the other three seasons agreed closely with the studies mentioned. High use of browse during my study ap­ peared to be.related to an abundance of a wide variety of browse plants. Nellis and Ross (1969) working on the National Bison Range in western Montana found that following a reduction in mule deer numbers, which made more browse available per deer, use of browse

increased. Browse became the most important forage class during all seasons except spring.

Although no quantitative data were obtained^ observations revealed

that creeping and common juniper received moderate to heavy use during

the winter. Occurrence of many decadent juniper plants indicated that both species apparently have been severely overbrowsed by deer in the past. — 40— Weights, Productivity and Population Characteristics

WEIGHTS

Whole and hog-dressed weights were obtained from 37 deer taken from

the study area (Table VI). Hog-dressed weights of 19 whitetail deer and

18 mule deer averaged 71 and 73 percent, respectively of their whole weights. This relationship can be used as a condition index (Hamerstrom

and Camburn 1950) but no quantitative data for Montana are available for

comparison. Mackie (1964) recorded hog-dressed weights of -1,500 white-

tail deer and 2,500 mule deer from various locations of Montana from

1948-1963. My hog-dressed weights for all sex and age classes averaged.

30 and 23 percent lower than Mackie's for whitetail and mule deer, re­

spectively. Most of Mackie's weights were taken in the fall while my weights were taken from January through September.

PRODUCTIVITI AND POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS

Sex and age ratios for whitetail.and mule deer are given in Table

VII. Fawn:doe ratios obtained from August 21 to September 15 probably best reflect productivity. For whitetail deer, these were 101 and 93

fawns:100 females for 1967 and 1968, respectively. For mule deer for

the same years, the figures were 76 and 62. These ratios for mule deer

are somewhat lower than those reported by Robinette (1944) in Utah and

Nellis (1968) in Montana. A fawn:adult ratio of 86 fawns:100 adults

for whitetail deer during the winter of 1969 appeared to be above

average when compared with the data of Gunvalson et at. (1952), who TABLE VI. AVERAGE WEIGHTS RECORDED BY SEX AND AGE CLASS FOR 37 DEER FROM THE STUDY AREA.

AGE CLASS h 1% 2*5 3^-5^ 6% + M F M F M F M F M F Whitetail Deer: January-June Whole Weight 70 60 85 102 120 125 100 - HO Hog-dressed Weight 45 40 65 72 80 95 72 - 75 Sample Size 2 I I 2 2 I 3 - I July-September Whole Weight - - 107 95 125 - - - -

Hog-dressed Weight - - 80 70 85 - - - - Sample Size - - 2 3 I - - - - I Mule Deer: -P- H January-June I Whole Weight 115 - - - 145 162 120 174 115 Hog-dressed Weight 85 - - - 105 117 85 130 82 Sample Size I - - - I 2 I 5 2 July-September Whole Weight - - 113 - — — 175 125 210 - Hog-dressed Weight - - 82 - — — 125 90 155 - Sample Size 3 I I I TABLE VII. SEX AND AGE CLASSES OF WHITETAIL AND MULE DEER POPULATIONS AS DETERMINED BY OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969.

ADULTS Total Males: Fawns: Fawns: Females Males Adults Fawns Unclassified 100 Females 100 Females 100 Adults Time Period WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD August 21-September 15 _ , 1967 208/127— 91/104 299/231 210/96 109/42 44/82 101/76 70/42 1968 334/258 90/135 424/393 311/159 115/60 27/52 93/62 73/42 June 21-September 15 1967 584/424 234/348 818/772 450/188 259/115 40/82 72/44 55/24 1968 859/693 216/421 1,075/1,114 482/294 298/193 25/61 56/42 45/26 1967-1968 1,443/1,117 450/769 1,893/1,886 932/482 557/308 31/69 65/43 49/25 January-March, 19 69 - 398/723 334/515 2,503/1,644 “ 86/71

Route I - Sumner 2/ 1967-1968 233/102- 72/25 305/127 162/42 74/39 31/25 70/41 53/33 Route 2 - Summer 1967-1968 71/386 55/345 126/731 54/143 41/94 77/89 76/37 43/20 Route 3 - Simmer .'.967-1968 226/44 86/29 312/73 163/24 183/19 38/66 61/55 52/33 Route 4 - Sumner 1967-1968 83/126 66/82 149/208 48/46 25/16 79/65 57/37 32/22

I/ Based on route and miscellaneous observations. 7J Based on route observations only. -43- found a fall statewide ratio of 70 fawns:100 females in Minnesota based on hunting season statistics. The fawn:adult ratios for both species obtained during the winter are higher than those for the previous sum­ mer. Hunting mortality may have been proportionally greater for adults than for fawns. Fawns as compared to adults were probably more difficult to observe in summer than in winter.

All of six whitetail females taken from January-April were carry­ ing twins. Examination of four mule deer females during the same period revealed three with singles and one with triplets.

Xr Of 37 deer collected from the study area 14 of the 19 whitetail deer were. 2%g years old or younger while only 5 of the 18 mule deer were 2^ or younger suggesting the whitetail population was composed of younger animals.

The ratios,, of males to females obtained during the two summers were 31 and 69 males:100 females for whitetail and mule deer, respec­ tively. Route observations in summer revealed that a larger percentage of males are found at higher elevations.than at lower elevations for / both species. Mule deer at lower elevations were more productive than those at higher elevations.

Interspecific Relationships

During the winter, 91 percent of the whitetail deer observations. were in the agriculture and ponderosa pine zones while 83 percent of the mule deer observations were in the grassland and Douglas-fir zones -44-

(Table II). The grassland type of the hawthorn-aspen zone was the only area of apparent range overlap. Mule deer were normally located at higher elevations than whitetail deer within the grassland type (Figure

I), thus eliminating any substantial range overlap in winter.

During the summer, zones of greatest overlap in range use were the hawthorn-aspen and agriculture zones. Common use by the two sp,eCies was most , evident in the hawthorn-raspen type of the hawthorn-aspen zone, where 22 and 17 percent, respectively of.the total whitetail and mule deer observations were made. As in winter, overlap in range use w a s . probably not as pronounced as was indicated by the recording of ob-■ servations by vegetative types because of differences in areal use within the types.

Food habit's were reviewed to determine if common use was made of any plants by both species occupying the same general areas. Since overlap in range use was not important in winter, competitive aspects of food habits were not considered. During summer several plants were used by both whitetail and mule deer on the same areas. Most important among.these were rose, alfalfa, and western serviceberry. Concerning game-livestock competition relationships, Cole (1958) has stated four conditions necessary for competition. Besides common.use of range and food items, he stated that the food items used in common must form an important part of the diet of at least one of the animals and that as a result of this combined use, the plants must be limited in supply or deteriorating in production. Relating these conditions to my study. -45- •

rose.and alfalfa meet the first three conditions during summer; however neither of the species appeared to be limited in supply nor deteriorat­ ing in production as a result of combined use. Competition probably did not occur during summer.

Spring and fall food habits showed no important overlap in use of species during spring, but Oregon grape and alfalfa formed an important part of the diet of both species during fall. This is a season of possible competition, but lack of range use data for this season excludes any further conclusions.

The differences in areas preferred by the two species apparently enabled this range to support a larger number of deer than would have been possible in the absence of one or the other. Whitetail deer pre­ ferred low elevations and agricultural areas while mule deer more commonly occurred in the higher grassland and Douglas-fir types. Dual use of this range appeared to be a more efficient use under the condi­ tions , afforded by populations levels during my study. APPENDIX TABLE VIII. MONTHLY CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA FROM UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WEATHER STATIONS.

Period January February March April May June July August September October November December Year 1967 Average Temperature I/ 23.3 29.0 24.0 35.1 47.6 55.4 66.4 68.1 59.9 47.5 32.1 19.7 42.2 Departure from Normal 2/ 3.1 6.5 -4.7 —6.1 -3.4 -2.1 .1 3.9 5.0 1.6 -.5 -6.4 -.5

1967 Precipitation Totals 3/ 1.86 .73 1.94 1.86 2.37 7.93 2.06 .87 6.01 1.99 1.12 2.55 31.39 Departure from Normal 4/ .80 -.33 .58 -.16 -1.55 3.60 .12 -1.35 3.86 .74 -.19 1.43 7.73

1968 Average Temperature 21.1 31.7 36.9 37.5 45.9 54.7 63.3 60.8 52.8 44.7 32.2 15.3 41.4 Departure from Normal .9 9.2 8.2 -3.7 -5.1 -2.8 -3.0 -3.4 — 2.1 -1.2 -.4 -10.8 -1.3

1968 Precipitation Totals 1.38 .34 .94 2.13 4.32 4.85 1.95 3.90 2.80 .50 1.54 .71 25.36 Departure from Normal .30 -.72 -.32 .11 .40 .52 .01 1.68 .65 -.75 .23 -.41 1.70

1969 Average Temperature 2.3 17.8 24.1 Departure from Normal -17.9 -4.7 -4.6

1969 Precipitation Totals 2.20 .59 .21 Departure from Normal 1.12 -.67 -.85

I/ Temperatures in degrees Fahrenheit based on records from the United States Department of Commerce weather station at the Lewistown Airport, Lewistown, Montana. 2/ Based on data from 1931-1960. 3V Precipitation in inches based on records from the United States Department of Commerce weather station 10 miles south of Lewistown, Montana. 4/ Based on data from 1950-1968. TABLE IX. TAXA WITH LESS THAN 15 PERCENT FREQUENCY AND 2 PERCENT CANOPY COVERAGE IN AT LEAST ONE TYPE OR SUBTYPE AS DETERMINED BY EXAMINATION OF 20 X 50 CENTIMETER PLOTS.

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland- Grassland- Ponderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Juniper Juniper Plnei/ Taxa 4(40)— ' 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20) SHRUBS AND TREES: Aratostaphyloe uva-ursi ~ ------X - Crataegus chrysophyta X - X - - X - - Crataegus doug lasii X - X - - X - - Pinus ponderosa X ------Peeudotsuga taxifolia - - - - - X - - - Rites setosum - X X - - X - - - Shepherdia canadensis ------X - I FORBS: -P- Allium brevistylum - - - X X - - - _ r Allium textile - - - X X - - - X Anaphalis margaritaaeae - - - X - - - X X Apooynwi androsaemifolium X - - - - X - - - Arnica sororia - - - - X X - X _ Artemisia aampestris - - - - X - - - _ Astragalus missouriensis - - - - X - - - - A s t r a g a l u s spp. - - - X - - - - - Baisamorrhiza sagittata - - - X X - - X - Besseya wyomingensis - - - X X X - X X Bupleurwi amerioanum - - - - X - - X X Caloohortus gunnisoni - - - X X - - X X Campanula rotundifolia - - - X X X - - - Castilleja ousiokii - - - X - - - - C e r a s t i m spp. X X X - - X - - _ Chrysopsis villosa - - - X X - - - X Cirsium undulatum - - X X - - - - Claytonia lanoeolata ------X Claytonia perfoliata X ------TABLE IX. (CONTINUED).

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland- Grassland- Ponderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Pine Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Juniper Juniper Taxa 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20)

Clematis columbiana X X X - - X X - - Clematis hirsutissima - - - X X - - X - Collinsia parviflora X - - X - X - - - Conimitella williamsii - X - X - - X Delphinium bicolor - - X - X - - X - D i sponm trachy carp im X X X - - X - - - D r d b a spp. ■- - - X - - - - - Erigeron oohroleuous - - - X - - - - X E r i g e r o n spp. - - - - X - - - - Fritillaria pudioa - - - X - - - - - Geranium richardsonii - X X - - X X - Geitn t r i f l o r u m - - - X X - - X X Helianthella uniflorus - - - X - - - - - Heuohera oylindrioa - - - X - - - X - Hieraoiitn albiflonm X ------Hymenoxys aoaulis - - X - - - - - Laotuoa pulohella - - X - - - - - Lactuca serriola - X ------Liatris punctata - - X - - - - - Lithophragma parviflora - - - - - X - - - Lomatiitn dissection - - - - X - Lomatium simplex - - - X - - - - Lupinus serioeus - X X X X - - - X Medioago lupulina - X X X X - X X - Medioago sativa ------X - _ Mertensia oblongifolia X X X - - X - X _ Musineon divarication - - - - X - - X _ Myosotis syIvatioa - - - X - - - - - Oxytropis serioea - - - - X - - - - Penstemon nitidus - - - X - - - - _ Periderida gairdneri - - - X - - - - X TABLE IX. (CONTINUED) .

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland- Grassland- Ponderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Pine Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Juniper Juniper Taxa 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20)

Plantago major - - X - - - X - - Polygonum biatortoidea X - - - X - X - Potentilla arguta - X ------Potentilla hippianu - - X X - - - X Prunella vulgaris - X ------Rubus idaeus - X X ------Rumex salicifolius ------X - - Sedum stenopetalum - - - X X - - X X Seneoio aanus - - - - X - - - X Smilaoina stellata - X X - X X X X - Solidago canadensis - - - X - - - X - Solidago gigantea - - X - - - X - - Solidago missouriensis ------X X Solidago rigida - - X X X X X X X Suertia perennis ------X X Thlaspi glauoum - - - X - - - - - Tragopogon dubius - - - X X - - - X Trifoliun longipes - X - X X - - - X Trifolium pratensis X ------T r i f o l i u n spp. - X X - - X X - - Viola adunoa X X X X X X - X X Viola praemorsa - - - - X - - Zygadenus elegans - - - X - - - X X TABLE IX. (CONTINUED) .

VEGETATION TYPES AND SUBTYPES Grassland- Grassland- fonderosa Mesic Xeric Douglas- Common Creeping Pine Aspen Hawthorn Grassland Grassland fir Cottonwood Juniper Juniper Taxa 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 4(40) 5(10) 4(20) GRASSES: Bromue inermie - X ------Elymue glauoue - - - - - X X - Heliototriohon hookeri - X - - X - - X Melioa epeotabilie - - - - - X - - - M e l i o a spp. ------X - - Oryzopeie aeperifolia - - - - X - - Sohizaohne purpuraeoene X - - - ~ X X - - Stipa oolunbiana X X X

JL/ Number of stands with number of plots per stand in parenthesis. TABLE X. PERCENT OF WHITETAlL AND MULE DEER OBSERVED ON EACH VEGETATION TYPE DURING MISCELLANEOUS OBSERVATIONS, 1967-1969.

SUMMER 1967-1968 WINTER 1969 6/21-7/20 7/21-8/20 8/21-9/15 6/21-9/15 January February March dan.-Mar. Vegetation Types WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD A griculture Zone: 14/51/ 18/4 18/8 17/6 46/16 82/4 97/- 80/5 Agriculture Type 9/2 17/1 16/5 15/3 24/- 14/- 27/- 20/- Hay Subtype 8/1 2/ 24/- 20/8 18/3 14/- 2/- 2/- 4/- Grain Subtype tr/tr— -/2 -/- tr/tr 10/- 12/- 25/- 15/- Cottonwood Type -/- tr/- tr/tr tr/tr -/- -/- -/- -/- Willow Type i/- tr/- -/- tr/- -/- -/- -/- -/- Hawthorn Type tr/l -/- 1/tr tr/l 3/3 -/- V- tr/tr Grassland Type 4/2 -/i -/2 tr/2 20/13 69/4 68/- 59/4 Ponderosa Pine Zone: 4/1 l/tr tr/l 2/1 31/4 12/- tr/3 12/2 Ponderosa Pine Type 4/1 1/tr tr/l 2/1 31/4 12/- tr/3 12/2 Hawthom-Aspen Zone: 79/48 81/60 81/49 81/53 23/25 6/14 3/22 8/19 Hawthorn-Aspen Type 42/31 40/41 28/28 36/34 17/25 -/- 3/5 Cottonwood Type 3/- 1/tr 3/- 2/tr -/- -/- -/- -/- Agriculture Type 30/4 33/6 46/10 38/7 V- tr/- -/- tr/- Hay Subtype 21/4 23/3 41/5 29/4 V- tr/- -/- tr/- Grain Subtype 6/- V- V- V- -/- -/- -/“ -/- Grassland Type 4/11 6/12 4/11 5/12 5/- 5/14 3/22 4/13 Grassland Zone: 1/26 -/29 tr/28 tr/27 -/51 -/82 -/76 -/75 Grassland Type 1/11 -/26 -/22 tr/21 -/51 -/82 -/76 -/75 GrassIand-Coramon - , Juniper Subtype *1! * * * -/- -/- -/- -/- Grassland-creeping Juniper SiiDtype * * * * -/- -/30 -/36 -/26 Hawthorn-Aspen Type -/15 -/3 tr/5 tr/7 -/- -/- -/- -/- TABLE X. (CONTINUED)

SUMMER 1967-1968 WINTER 1969 6/21-7/20 7/21-8/20 8/21-9/15 6/21-9/15 January February March Jan.-Mar. Vegetation Types HT/MD WI/MD W T /MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD WT/MD Douglas-fir Zone: tr/20 -/6 -/13 tr/13 - / 4 -/- -/tr Douglas-fir Type tr/20 -/6 -/13 tr/13 - / 4 -/- -/tr Total Deer Observations 1 9 6 7 -1 9 6 9 3 1 2 /3 6 5 6 3 8 /4 0 3 6 7 4 /4 0 9 1 ,677/1,124 3 2 0 /9 9 8 2 6 /3 1 3 5 1 1 /1 3 9 I ,6 5 7 /5 5 1 1968 2 8 9 /1 9 8 3 1 9 /2 2 7 3 4 5 /2 3 3 9 5 3 /6 5 8

I/ Percent of totals 1967-1969 for whitetail deer/percent of totals 1967-1969 for mule deer except for hay and grain subtypes in simmer when percentages were based on totals for 1968 only. 2/ "tr" indicates less than 1.0 percent. V Not considered as a subtype. Vn V TABLE XI. SPECIES UTILIZED AT LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.5 PERCENT BY WHITETAIL DEER, 1967-1969.

SUMMER FALL _ WINTER SPRING 50 6 5 44 7 9 Plants sites rumens rumens sites rumens rumens SHRUBS: Acer g Labmm X - Eibes setosum X — FORBS: Antennaria spp. - X Apooymim androsaemifolium X - Artemisia campestris - - X — — Astragalus spp. - - X - - Besseya wyomingensis - - --X X - Cirsiun spp. Vl Compositae - X Cynoglossum officinale X - Erigeron speoiosus X - Galium boreale - - Geum triflorum - - Grindelia squarrosa - - Heuohera oylindrioa X - Hymenoxys aoaulis - - X Laotuca serriola X - Lomatium dissectum X - Lupinus serioeus X - X Phlox spp. - - X Plantago major X - Rubus idaeus X - Rudbeokia laoiniata - - X - - Solidago rigida X X X Solidago spp. - X Steironema oiliatum X - TABLE XI. (CONTINUED).

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING 50 6 5 44 7 9 Plants sites rumens rumens sites rumens rumens

Thaliatmm ocoidentale - - - - - X Trifoliun spp. - - X - - - Viaia amerioana X - - - - - Viola praemorsa X - - - - - GRASSES: Bromus inemris X - - - - - Bromus marginatus X —

I Ul U l I TABLE XII. SPECIES UTILIZED AT LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.5 PERCENT BY MULE DEER, 1967-1969.

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING 53 6 3 43 6 6 Plants sites rumens rumens sites rumens rumens SHRUBS AND TREES: Pinus spp. - - X - - - PotentilZa frutioosa X - - X X - FORBS: Agoseris glauoa X - - - - - Apooynun androsaemifolium - - - X - - Aster spp. - - - X X - Clematis pseudoalpina X - - - - - Collomia linearis X - - - - - Compositae - X - - - X GaillartCLia aristata X - - - - - Geranium riohardsonii X - - X - - Hedysarum sulphuresoens X - - - - - Helianthella uniflorus - - - X - - Laotuoa serriola X - - X - - Lepidium ocarrpestre X - - - - - Linum perenne X - - — - - Lomatium simplex X - - - - - Mertensia oblongifolia X - - - - - Perideridia gairdneri - - - X - - Polygonum bistortoides X - - - - Potentilla gracilis X - - - - - Rubus idaeus X - - - - - Smilaoina stellata X - - - - - Solidago canadensis X - - - - - Solidago gigantea X - - - - - Swertia perennis X - - - - - TABLE XII. (CONTINUED)

SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING 53 6 3 43 6 6 Plants sites rumens rumens sites rumens rumens

Taraxacum officinale X - - - - X Thalictrum occidentale X X - - X Thermopsis rhombifolia X - - - - - Trifolium longipes X — — - - - Vicia americana X — — — — - GRASSES AND GRASSLIKE: Carex spp. X - - - - - Phleum pratense X - - - - - Mushrooms - X - - - Selaginella dens a " LITERATURE CITED

Allen, E. 0. 1968. Range use, foods, condition,.and■productivity of white-tailed deer in Montana. J. -Wildl. -Mgmt. 32(1):130-141.

Booth, W. E. 1950.. Flora of Montana. Part I, Conifers and monocots. Research Foundation at Montana State Univ., Bozeman, Mont.• 232 pp.

_____ , and J. C. Wright. 1966. Flora of Montana. Part II^ Dicotyledons. Montana State Univ., Bozeman, Mont. 305 pp.

Cole, G. F. 1956. The pronghorn antelope — its range use and food habits in central Montana with special-Teference to .alfalfa. Montana State Coll. Exp. Sta. Bull. 516. 63 pp.

_____ . 1958. Big game-livestock competition on Montana's mountain rangelands. Mont. Wildl. April:24-30.

Cottam, G., and J. T. Curtis. 1956. The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology. 37:451-460,

Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis. Northwest Sci. 33:43-64.

Gunvalson, V. E. , A. B. Erickson., and D. W. Burcalow. 1952. Hunting season statistics as an index to range conditions.and deer popula­ tion fluctuations in Minnesota. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 16(2):121-131.

Hamerstrom, F. N., and F. L. Camburn. 1950. Weight relationships in the George Reserve deer herd. Jour. Mamm. 31(1):5-17. ■

Korschgen, L. J. 1962. Foods of/Missouri deer, with some management implications. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 26(2):164-172.

Lovaas, A. L, 1958. Mule deer food habits and range use, Little Belt- Mountains, Montana. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 22(3):275-283. .

Mackie, R. J. 1964. Montana deer weights. Mont. Wildl. Winter:9-14.

Martinj' A. C., R. H. Gensch, and C. P. Brown, ■ 1946. Alternative methods in upland game bird' food analysis. . J. Wildl. Mgmt. 10(1):8-12.

Martinka, C. J. 1968. Habitat relationships of white-tailed and mule deer in Northern Montana, J. Wildl, Mgmt. 32(3):558-565.

Nellis, C. H. 1968, Productivity of mule deer on the National Bison Range, Montana. J. Wildl. Mgmt, 32(2):344-349. -59-

_____ , and R. L. Ross. 1969. Changes in mule deer food habits associated with herd reduction. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 33(1):191-195.

Reeves, F . 1931. Geology of the Big Snowy Mountains, Montana. U. S. GeoI. Surv., Prof. Paper 165:135-149.

Robinette, W. L . , and 0. A. Olsen. 1944. Studies of the productivity of mule deer in central Utah. Trans. N, Amer. Wildl. Conf. 9: 156-161, . v

Schallenberger, A. D. 15)66. Food habits, range use and interspecific relationships of bighorn sheep in the Sun River, area, West-central Montana. UnpxibI. thesis (M. S.) Montana State University, Bozeman. 44 pp.

U. S . Dept, of Commerce, Weather Bureau. 1950-1969. Climatological data, Montana.

Wilkins, B. T. 1957. Range use, food habits, and agricultural rela­ tionships of the mule deer, Bridger Mountains, Montana. J. Wild!. Mgmt. 21(2):159-169. MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

t , i ^

W378 K l28 Kamps, George Frank pop.2 Whitetail and mule deer relationships in the Snowy Mountains of Mont.

NAMK AND AODAKS* Y-Z= /v - 7,3 ' pporourn T T 7 / H E S E R V r '

(a J >-2_ i J L y jL r R i ^

) ib , u s e .

r % w J z f * I ^ *-i O r N a 7 & KlA$ IStJir Ir C O I?- 5 — •