Interactions between Mule Deer and Cattle on Big Sagebrush Range in British Columbia

Abstract

Interaction between deer and cattle took various forms. The potential for direct competition was greatest in spring. Both deer and cattle selected bluebunch wheatgrass and crested wheatgrass while Sandbergs bluegrass was most often used by deer. Evidence of indirect interaction was observed. Moderate or heavy fall grazing by cattle made the spring forage more attractive to deer by removing mature forage. Light grazing did not exert any appreciable effect on deer distribution. The spring range of mule deer in south central British Columbia is relatively restricted, usually below 775 m elevation. This range is also used by cattle in both spring and fall, providing forage at a time crucial to a viable ranching operation. Common use of the range ensures that interaction between cattle and deer will occur. The type and extent of interaction was not known but was believed to be most critical in the food niche. A project was initiated in 1972 near Kamloops, British Columbia, to study interaction between the two species of ungulates for the range resource in terms of food, time and space. The study was supported by the Agriculture Canada Research Station, the British Columbia Fish and Wildlife Branch, and the British Columbia Ministry of Forests. Some of these have been reported previously (Tucker et al. 1976; Willms et al. 1976; McLean and Willms 1977; and Tucker et al. 1977). Site Description The study area was on the north side of Kamloops Lake, about 24 km west of Kamloops. This area lies within the big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentuta), ponderosa pine (Pinusponderosa), and Douglasfir (Pseudotsugu menziesii) zones. The land rises steeply from the lake, at 335 m, to a series of knolls and a relatively flat area before rising again within the open forest. Maximum elevation on this range is 760 m. Snowfall is light and the direct southern exposure promotes early growth and a warm environment. The range had been heavily grazed from 1947 until 1965, when the grazing permit was cancelled to allow rehabilitation of overgrazed areas. One hundred hectares on the flat area were seeded to crested wheatgrass (Agropyron deserforum) in 1968. Cattle normally use this range from early November to mid-December and again from early April to the end of May. The same area may be occupied by deer from early December to the end of May, although the greatest use occurs in a l-month period in March and April. Some deer may remain on this range into the summer. Methods Four habitats were recognized on the study area. The forested range I IIC author\ arc pradudte student. Plant Science. Untver\lty ot Alberta; research \c'lc'ntl\t ,rnd range tcchllician. Research Station. Agmulture Canada; and wlldlit'e hlok~gl~t. Britt\h Columht~ Fish and Wtldlit'e Branch. Camloops. B.C. Contrthutton no. ,-I) I hc' authors m pratetul for the dedicated ushlstanct' ot L. Stroe\\er and L. Haupt, tcchnlcI,In\. during the courx ot the project. .\l,rnuxmpt raxIvcd April

Multiscale models of habitat use by mule deer in winter

“…For example, in Oregon, BLM administers 33% of mule deer winter range including >50% of our study area. Land management activities, including livestock grazing (Robinette et al , Willms et al ), timber harvest (Bergman et al , Bombaci and Pejchar ), energy development (Johnson et al , Sawyer et al ), and recreational activities (Wisdom et al , Stankowich ) could affect mule deer distributions and population dynamics. Additionally, industrial and residential development on or near public lands is increasing, resulting in reduced winter range area and increased disturbance to deer (Sawyer et al , Kline et al , Duncan and Burcsu ).…”

Elk, Mule Deer, and Cattle Foraging Relationships on Foothill and Mountain Rangeland

“…In turn, grazing by elk and mule deer in spring is unlikely to compete with cattle use in summer-fall, provided that elk or mule deer grazing is not excessive (Hobbs et al 1996a(Hobbs et al , 1996bBrewer 2002). We recommend that resource managers focus their forage utilization and range trend monitoring efforts in foothill sagebrush grasslands, particularly on southerly aspects, as these are preferred sites for spring grazing by elk, mule deer, and cattle (Hudson et al 1976;Willms et al 1979;Nelson and Leege 1982).…”

“…This overlap can be beneficial to wild ungulates, for example, when elk or mule deer preferentially select feeding sites where previous cattle grazing has improved forage palatability (Willms et al 1979;Grover and Thompson 1986;Jourdonnais and Bedunah 1990;Frisina 1992;Yeo et al 1993;Crane 2002). However, elk and mule deer will avoid or not select sites previously grazed by cattle if cattle utilization is excessive and extant (Hudson et al 1976;Crane 2002).…”

Wildlife habitats in managed rangelands—the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon: mule deer.

“…Grasslandsare not usually considered cover areas, but Nellis' has found that giant wildrye stands are used as fawn-rearing cover in Idaho. Grasslands adjacent to cover may provide valuable forage, depending on the interactions of stand size, grazing management, and season (Roll et al 1979;Leckenby 1978c;Reynolds 1962Reynolds ,1964Tueller and Monroe 1975;Willms et al 1979). …”

“…Because grazing and burning affect the phenology of forage plants, appropriate management can prolong the availability of high quality forage for mule deer (Anderson and Scherzinger 1975;Leckenby 1968Leckenby , 1978cTueller and Tower 1979;Willms et al 1979Willms et al , 1980. Sheehy (1978) found that during the rearing period, fawns usually stayed within 1 kilometer (0.6 mi) of the fawning site.…”