Journal
of RANGE MANAGEMENT vozun;en,izry,
ly;i~?~~
’
Another of the Old Guard-Joe Woolfolk-Leaves Us ________________________ Merton J. Reed 1 A History of the Rangelands of Western Canada ________________________________ Alex Johnston Tundra Ranges North of the Boreal Forest ________________________________________ David R. Klein Carbohydrate Reserve Content of Mountain Range Plants
Following Defoliation and Regrowth ______ Gary B. Donart and C. Wayne
3 8
15 Response of Big Sagebrush and Three-Tip Sagebrush
to Season of Clipping ______________________________________________________________________ Henry A. Wright 20 Rotating Access to Water to Improve Semidesert Cattle Range
Near Water __________________________________________________ S. Clark Martin and Donald E. Ward 22 Changes in Crested Wheatgrass Ranges Under Different Grazing
Treatments ________ J. H. Robertson, D. L. Neal, K. R. McAdams, and P. T. Tueller 27 Curing Standing Range Forage
with Herbicides __________________________________________ Burgess L. Kay and Donald T. Tore11 34 Site Factor Relationships with Volatile Oils in Big Sagebrush ______________ Jeff Powell 42 Control of Huisache and Associated Woody Species in
South Texas ____________________________________ R. W. Bovey, J. R. Baur, and H. L. Morton 47 Trampling Losses and Travel by Cattle on
Sandhills Range _____________________..________________ James A. Quinn and Donald F. Hervey 50 Use of Equations to Predict the Nutritive Value of
Tropical GrassesRE ___________________________________. M. H. Butterworth and J. A. Diaz L. 55 Grazing Systems: Terms and Definitions ___________________________________________ Harold F. Heady 59 Technical Notes
Subterranean Vetch Seed Enhances Persistence Under
Grazing and Severe Climates ________________ Nazmi Alinoglu and Nazim Durlu 61 Effects of Temperature and Daylength on Axillary Bud and Tiller
Development in Blue Grama _________.______ J. Stubbendieck and D. F. Burzlaff 63 Ground Markers Aid in Procurement and Interpretation of
Large-Scale 70 MM Aerial Photography _______________________. Richard E. Francis 66 Longevity of Velvet Mesquite Seed in the Soil ____________________________ S. Clark Martin 69 Management Notes
Cattle Grazing Management on Pine-Wiregrass Range ________ Ralph H. Hughes 71 Partial Budgeting for a
Range Man ____ Ned W. Jeffries, M. E. Quenemoen, and Robert F. Bucher 72
Book Reviews
Ozark Range and Wildlife Plants (George E. Probasco) ________________________________________ 74 Arid Lands in Perspective (Dwight A. Brown) ________________________________________________________ 74 Public Land Study: The Forage Resource (Karl S. Landstrom) ___________________________ 75
New Publications ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 75 RE = Con Resumen en Espafiol
Cover
Photo-Cattle
Grazing on Pine-Wiregrass
Range,
Alapaha, Georgia.Another of the Old Guard - Joe Woolfolk - Leaves Us
April 10, 1907-October 5, 1969
E. Iose~h Woolfolk--Toe to his &&ds-staunch r&g+ land ecologist, charter and life member of the Society, a past president of the Cali- fornia Section, and “ast Edi- tor of the .Jo&nal ;f Range
Management, died October
5, 1969 of a heart attack. Joe retired from the U.S. Forest Service in 1963 concluding over 30 years research in rangeland use and manage- ment to our benefit.
1°C joined the Forest
Se&ice in 1930 as a forest and range survey technician in Montana. In 1933, he was as- signed to the range research staff of the North- ern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experi- ment Station at Miles City, Montana, with a starting job of hand pumping water twice a day for 60 thirsty cows until a windmill could be purchased and installed. He served here until
1946. For the next three years he was Assistant Chief of Range Research in the Washington office of the Forest Service. From 1949 t” 1955 he was in charge of range research at Forest Service Experiment Stations in Missoula, Mon- tana, and Asheville, North Carolina. He then moved t” Berkeley, California t” serve as Chief of Range Management and Wildlife Habitat Research at the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, and later as As- sistant Director.
Following Joe’s “retirement,” he took on a three and a half year task for FAO, of plan- ning, organizing, manning, and managing rangeland research projects to help ranchers in Uruguay and Argentina.
A native of northeastern Wyoming, Joe was reared by his mother on the family cattle ranch following the early death of his father. He early learned the rigors of northern Plains’ weather and ranching and the personal disci- pline required of the “head of the household.” Along with hard work came a respect and love of rangelands and livestock that lasted all his
life. Perhaps this was not unusual because his father, as a young man in his late
teens, came north from
Texas to the northern Great Plains with an early trail herd. There he homesteaded and established his family.
Joe <graduated from the IJniversity of Montana, at- tended graduate school at the [Jniversity of Minnesota, and was the author of many tech- nical and popular articles on rangeland use and manage- ment. He served as editor of the Journal from 1960 through 1963. With the suggestion of friends, he initiated the idea of the Journal’s c”ver photograph with the January 1960 issue --a newly-born calf, “A NEW FACE FOR A NEW YEAR.”
To those who knew him, Joe was sincerely, with great practicality and integrity, “Mr. Range Management.” He lived on and off “the job” with a creed of the use, stewardship, and respect by man of national and interna- tional natural grazing lands. This creed rubbed off by deed, action, and talk on many of the young men he trained on the job. Further, they learned a sincere appreciation of friend- ship and respect for honesty. Joe’s biggest contribution to a better world then is that many of “his men” dedicated their lives t” this ideal and continue to spread the concepts of better range management throughout many places in the nation and developmg countries in their responsibilities at state and federal agencies and FAO enterprises.
Joe is survived by his wife, Yvonne, who lives in Susanville, California, a son, Jim, presently in Taiwan, a daughter, Mary Jo Dufresne of Rapid City, South Dakota, and seven grandchildren.
A History of the Rangelands
of Western Canada1
ALEX JOHNSTON2
Range Ecologist, Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Lethbridge, Alberta.
Highlight
In western Canada, the grass-buffalo economy of the Indian was replaced by the wheat-cattle economy of the white man, and the Red River cart and boat brigades of the fur trade by the railways and highways of modern times. Ranching was part of the de- velopment but its heyday lasted only from about 1885 to 1905.
The first cattle came into western Canada in 1702, 267 years ago. They were brought in, with sheep and horses, pigs and poultry, through the fur trading posts then recently established on Hudson Bay. And so, before we can discuss the rangelands and domestic live- stock, we should consider the fur trade and the buffalo.
The British began fur trade op- erations on the shores of Hudson Bay in the 1670’s. In addition to trade goods, the supply ships brought out from the Orkney Is- lands, and occasionally from the Scandinavian countries, livestock and poultry, vegetable seeds and grain, which were kept at, or grown near, the posts. French explorers, notably La Verendrye and his sons, discovered the water route from Montreal to the prairies in 1732 and, by 1738, had established a number of fur trading posts in what is now southern Manitoba (Fig. 1).
For the next one hundred years the Hudson’s Bay Company was content to sit on the shores of the Bay, a period that was called by a British Member of Parliament of the time, “the long sleep by the
lPaper presented at the 22nd Annual Meeting, American Society of Range Management, Calgary, Canada. Re- ceived April 22, 1969; accepted for publication May 5, 1969.
2Drawings by Charles M. Russell courtesy of Frederick G. Renner.
frozen sea.” The French, in con- trast, moved inland, taking the trade to the natives and, by the 1780’s, were cutting seriously into the fur trade of the Hudson’s Bay Company. A result was that the Company realized its mistake of re- maining on the Arctic shore, moved inland also, and began to compete aggressively. By the 1790’s the Hud- son’s Bay Company and the newly organized North West Company of Montreal were building posts side- by-side throughout the Saskatche- wan and Athabasca countries. Ed- monton, the capital of Alberta, was founded during this period-about 1794. By 1810 the competition throughout the northern prairies was bitter.
The struggle for control of the fur trade led to the development of agriculture along the Red River of present day Manitoba and North Dakota. In 1811 the Hudson’s Bay Company granted a large tract of land to Thomas Douglas, Fifth Earl of Selkirk, who was a major shareholder in the company at the time. Selkirk wanted the land, which he called Assiniboia, for two reasons: First, he was anxious to re- settle small farmers who had been forced off their lands in northern Scotland by the ‘Clearances’ and, second, he thought that the settlers would provide agricultural supplies and hence improve the position of the Hudson’s Bay Company in its struggle with the North West Com- pany. Also, the colony promised a steady and cheap supply of labor in the more distant future. A few colonists reached the Red River in 1812 and established the first per- manent farms in western Canada.
Livestock were obtained as soon as possible. Generally, the quality was low, it was difficult to house and feed them properly, and a
3
knowledge of good livestock hus- bandry was limited to only a few of the colonists. Cattle were most nu- muerous and most important espe- cially after 320 head were driven in from the Mississippi River valley in 1822 and 1823.
But even in 1812 the settlers had cattle on their minds. On the first trip southward from York Factory on Hudson Bay to the Red River,> the settlers saw a yearling bull and a heifer at Oxford House, a trading post on the Hayes River, and pur- chased them for the colony. (Sel- kirk earlier had provided eight head of cattle at Stornoway, in the Hebrides but they had been left behind when the ship sailed.) The yearlings from Oxford House were brought along in the boats and took readily, to their new mode of travel. “We find the cattle easy to handle,” wrote a settler, “They jump out and into the boats of their own accord.” The two animals were named Adam and Eve, the settlers obviously hoping that they would multiply and thus provide the colony with ample milk and meat.
The next year-1813-a bull, a cow, and a heifer were purchased from the North West Company post near Brandon House and, with Adam and Eve and their calf, made a total of six cattle in the settlement. Buffalo calves were se- cured with a view to domesticating them and crossing them with the European bulls, but the calves died during the winter. Later in the year the North West Company bull became vicious and was slaughtered for meat. This was un- fortunate because during the win- ter, Adam went through a hole in the ice in the river and was drowned. One bull calf was left to perpetuate the herd.
4
JOHNSTON
FIG. 1. The La Vcrentlryes discover the Rocky Mountains.
lished in the Red River valley, destined to be the forerunner of waves of farming settlement, which started in 1871.
The plains were still primitive although the Indian and the fur trader had put them to use. The Plains tribes had created an econ- omy and a civilization based upon the buffalo. They had done this by means of the horse, which was at home on the plains, and the buffalo skin tipi, which was a product of the herds. The way of life that the Plains Indians created was such that few men anywhere in the world had ever known more inde- pendence or a greater security.
To the fur traders, the plains were a source of provisions. And provision posts, which were also fur trading posts, lined the northern edge of the open plains from mod- ern Winnipeg to Edmonton. To these posts were sent the dried meat and pemmican of the summer hunt, the fresh and frozen meat of the fall hunt (Fig. 2). Thus the winter col- lection of furs from throughout the northern forests depended pri- marily on the provisions afforded by the buffalo of the southern grass- lands. Gradually the buffalo were reduced in numbers and in range until, in 1879, the last of the Ca- nadian herd was driven by prairie fires into Montana and was hunted to near-extinction there.
With the passing of the buffalo,
the Indians faced starvation. And, since their traditional food supply was gone, they turned to other ani- mals. The pronghorned antelope was reduced to’ a fraction of its former numbers; the elk was killed or driven from the plains. Smaller game, and even gophers and other rodents, suffered in turn. By 1880 the Canadian prairie was virtually devoid of grazing animals and, be- cause the late seventies and early eighties were much wetter than normal, the grass grew profusely. Even though prairie fires continued to remove the topgrowth in the fall, winter and early spring months, the prairies benefited from non-use and produced a cover of grass the like of which had never been seen before and which will never be seen again. Light use continued, in fact,
until about 1919-1920 when the prairies were again fully stocked, this time with domestic livestock.
There is one other aspect of the Indian trade that should be men- tioned in a discussion of the history of domestic livestock and the rangelands.
The Hudson’s Bay Company dominated the fur trade in western Canada for ZOO years but never made any real effort to penetrate the southern plains. The penetra- tion of that area was accomplished in the late sixties and early seventies by prospectors and traders from Fort Benton, Montana. Eventually these traders-among them J. J. “Johnny” Healy, Alfred B. Hamil- tbn, J. B. “Waxey” Weatherwax, Dick Berry, and others-established about 26 trading posts in southern Alberta and southwestern Saskatch- ewan. Alcohol was their most prof- itable stock-in-trade and so the forts came to be known as “whiskey trading posts.” The most notorious of these was Fort Whoop-up, lo- cated at the junction of the St. Mary’s and Belly Rivers, near mod- ern Lethbridge.
Fort Whoop-up and depravity are still synonymous in the minds of many southern Albertans. Di- luted alcohol was traded at Whoop- up, murders did take place during drunken brawls, Indians were poi- soned by laudanum in the alcohol mixture or were frozen to death while intoxicated. At the same time the fort became a political
HISTORY OF RANGELANDS .
issue since it was operated by Amer- icans on newly-acquired Cana- dian territory. Also, the Hudson’s Bay Company, which had traded in rum with the Indians intermittently
for one hundred years, was par- ticularly incensed at the loss in trade represented by Fort Whoop-
up. Missionaries added their voices to the growing clamor for action by the Canadian government.
It might be noted in passing that there was much to consider on the positive side. Fort Whoop-up repre- sented the beginnings of commerce in southern Alberta. From the late sixties until about 1885, the busi- ness life of the area moved in a north-south direction. Early Al- berta ranch enterprises were fi- nanced by banks in Helena, goods came into the country by bull train from Fort Benton, even letters posted in the area bore a U.S. pos- tage stamp (Fig. 3).
More important, the mere pres- ence of Fort Whoop-up on Cana- dian territory had much to do with the formation of the North- West Mounted Police, now the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. A massacre of Indians by wolfers in the Cypress Hills in 1873 culmi- nated a decade of lawlessness and forced the Canadian government to create a mounted police force to bring law and order to the West. This newly created force marched westward in 1874 and had as its pri-
FIG. 4. Mounted police patrol captures American whisky runners.
mary objective the subjugation of Fort Whoop-up and the suppression of the whiskey trade (Fig. 4). Col. James F. Macleod, who led the police into southern Alberta, entered the fort on October 9, 1874, and unsuccessfully searched it for contraband whiskey. The whiskey trade, for all practical purposes, ended with that act.
The coming of the Mounted Police in 1874 meant that law and order preceded settlement in the Canadian West and thus that the region was to be spared the usual tragedies of the frontier. It meant, also, that many of the first ranchers were to be ex-members of the North-West Mounted Police, ad- venturous young men mostly from eastern Canada and the United
FIG. 3. Idaho ox teams were bringing in some 6,000,OOO pounds of freight annually.
Kingdom, a fact that was to have its impact on the range industry.
The situation, as it was in the late seventies, might be summed up in this way: The Mounted Po- lice had arrived in 1874, bringing law and order; the Indians had signed Treaty No. 7 in 1877, which shoved them off onto reservations, thus making their humiliation com- plete and creating problems of al- coholism and unemployment that plague us today; the buffalo had vanished in 1879, indirectly leading to a market for beef and making grass available for domestic live- stock; and, it was known that cattle could winter on the northern plains. Further, the take-over of the American West was complete, cattle were available, men of knowl- edge and experience were present south of the Line.
6
JOHNSTON
.
killing stock. Neither the Indian Commissioner, who refused to make good the ranchers’ losses, nor Col. Macleod, who declared the pro- tection of the ranchers’ cattle to be impossible, was very sympathetic. The police felt that the country was not ready for settlement and hence the ranchers were encouraged to take their herds back to Montana for a year at least.
The attitude of the police was understandable. As well as believ- ing that the country was not ready for settlement, they thought that those who wanted to bring cattle into the country should be willing to take their losses. The police could not risk offending the In- dians; prestige alone enabled the tiny force of about 150 men to control them, and if they were ever aroused the whole white com- munity might perish. The police policy was based on reality and further, as they pointed out, In- dians were not always responsible for the ranchers’ losses.
Markets for beef began to de- velop in the late seventies. Mounted Police detachments provided the first markets; their contractor, the 1. G. Baker Company of Fort Ben- ton, was willing to buy all the beef locally available. After the disap- pearance of the buffalo, the Cana- dian government was forced to feed the Indians, another beef contract that was won by the I. G. Baker Company. All were local markets. The construction of the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and its completion, opened up world markets and ushered in the heydey of Alberta ranching. But inherent in the construction of the railway were the forces that ulti- mately would cause a decline of the ranching industry. The railway needed settlements and the com- pany did all it could to encourage immigration. And settlement meant the end of ranching as it was un- derstood in about 1885. The in- dustry might have survived the main line alone, which merely skirted the ranching country. But branch lines opened more and more
country to settlement and to home- steading with resultant loss of pas- turage and decline of the ranching industry.
Some form of land organization early occupied the attention of administrators. Title to the range- lands-the country from about Red Deer south to the International Boundary, from the Continental Divide east into southwestern Sas- katchewan-was vested in the Gov- ernment of the Dominion of Ca- nada after 1870. (Prior to 1870 title was vested in the Hudson’s Bay Company.) The first system was one of completely open range although it only lasted for about two years in practice. In 188 1 a new system was established by order-in-council. It provided for the grant to individuals or to corp- orations of leases not to exceed one hundred thousand acres for a period of twenty-one years at an annual rental of one cent per acre. Within three years the lessee was to have placed on the lease one head of livestock for each ten acres. (As more became known about carry- ing capacity this regulation was changed to one head per twenty acres, still later to one head per thirty acres of lease.) The signifi- cant point was that the total num- ber of livestock on each range was strictly limited. When the lease was stocked there were provisions whereby the lessee could purchase up to five percent of the area at two dollars per acre. (Again there was a change in regulations during the depression of the nineties and some ranch companies were able to buy out their holding at $1.25 per acre.) The whole system de- pended upon land surveys, which were started immediately.
With the introduction of the new lease regulations, the ranch com- pany appeared on the scene. Men were attracted by the tales of profits to be made in the cattle business and by the opportunity to secure enormous amounts of land at slight cost. Local managers were gen- erally practical stockmen from the United States but owners were from
Eastern Canada or Europe, com- pletely ignorant of western condi- tions. One of the most famous of those early ranches was the Coch- rane Ranch Company, owned by Senator M. H. Cochrane of Hill- hurst Farms, Compton, Quebec. This ranch, with its history of fail- ure and tragedy, and of eventual success, was typical of many others of the period.
Senator Cochrane came west in 1881, bought a team and buckboard at Fort Benton, and headed north to the Alberta foothills. He chose an area at the Big Hill, about 20 miles west of Calgary, where the modern town of Cochrane now stands. In short order he leased 100,000 acres on the Bow River, purchased about 7,000 head of Montana cattle, and secured the release from the North-West Mounted Police of Major James Walker, whom he appointed man- ager.
The Cochrane cattle arrived in the fall in a drive that has become famous for its speed and cruelty. Howell Harris brought the cattle to the border where the herd was taken over by Frank Strong and 30 men from the I. G. Baker Com- pany. The herd was pushed un- mercifully, averaging fifteen to eighteen miles per day, and was herded so closely that animals had little opportunity to graze. One hundred and eighty miles along the trail, the cattle were herded across the Elbow River and were counted where Calgary’s Palliser Hotel now stands. The tally, dated November 30, 188 1, gives names of the Montana suppliers-J. Hick- son, I. G. Baker, Harrison and Com- pany, Mullholland and Baker, Poindexter and Orr-and the num- ber purchased. The total was 6,799 head at a cost of $124,780.05, for an average of $18.35 each. Ac- cording to the notebook in which the tally was recorded, the losses during the winter of 1881-82 were about 1,000 head. There seemed to have been about a 42 percent calf crop in the spring of 1882.
HISTORY
OF RANGELANDS
.
7
disaster also. Major Walker pur- chased 2,600 head of cattle, mostly from Poindexter and Orr of Dillon, Montana. A severe snowstorm hit just before the drive reached Fish Creek, now within Calgary’s south- ern city limits. Poindexter, an ex- perienced cowman who was in charge of the drive, wanted to leave the herd in the sheltered river- bottom until conditions improved. But Major Walker insisted that they be delivered to the Big Hill as per agreement . It was a winter of deep snow at Cochrane but orders from eastern Canada were to keep the cattle on their home range. Thus, although open range was available only a few miles down the Bow River, riders spent the winter hazing starving cattle back to the west. It was estimated that 5,000 head of Cochrane cattle died before spring.
Even this didn’t discourage the Senator. He secured another lOO,- 000 acre lease on the Waterton River in southern Alberta, moved the cattle to the new lease, and began to run sheep on the lease west of Calgary. A Virginian, W. D. Kerfoot, managed the sheep ranch, by this time reorganized and called the British American Ranch Company. The Waterton River property, which cost the Senator .$I.25 per acre when purchased out- right in the nineties, sold for $85 per acre in 1968.
The Cochrane Ranch on the Waterton River ran into trouble in the winter of 1885-86. Again heavy snow trapped cattle in the hills. Frank Strong, for $1,000, rounded up several hundred Indian ponies, drove them to the snow- blocked valleys where the cattle were crowded, and then let them go. The ponies headed for their home range on the snow-free Piegan Flats with the cattle following along behind.
In spite of these and other mis- fortunes, the Cochrane Ranches op- erated with success and profit until Senator Cochrane’s death in 1903. The company then went out of business, the property at Waterton
being sold to the Mormon Church for $3,128,000. The luckless com- pany had made one of the most profitable speculations in Alberta’s history to that time.
Other ranches were formed dur- ing the early eighties, mainly by British interests although Belgian, Swiss, Scotch, Irish, Italian, and French moneyed classes were repre- sented. The Oxley Ranch was a classic example of conflict between an absentee owner and a resident ranch manager. The Bar U, now owned by Allen Baker, was formed in 1882; the backers were Sir Hugh and Andrew Allen, of the Montreal- based Allen Steamship Lines. The Bar U cattle herd grew to 30,000 head; at one time 2,000 registered Percheron mares were run on Bar U range.
Other big ranches of the period included the Quorn, the 76, the Circle, IMaunsell Bros., the Cypress Cattle Company, and the Walrond. The Walrond was taken over by a syndicate of ranchers a few years ago and is now operated as a graz- ing cooperative. In 1886 A. E. Cross, a veterinarian from Montreal, homesteaded a quarter section on Mosquito Creek and began to run horses, losing to wolves about 10 percent of his colts each year. The Cross homestead has grown into the a7 Ranche of today.
The Matador Land and Cattle Company should be mentioned al- though they didn’t acquire their range on the South Saskatchewan River until around the turn of the century. The Matador was the only ranch company, organized in the seven ties, that lasted until the 1950’s and operated at a profit dur- ing much of its life. The home range was in Motley County, Texas; the Saskatchewan Division was used to summer steers before their sale on the Chicago market. By 1896 the heydey of the big ranches was over; by 1905 a trickle of homesteaders had become a flood; the last decisive blow to the cattle barons was struck by the bad winter of 1906-07. But although the era of the big ranches was over,
the take-over of the North Ameri- can range was not. A large block of land, located south of Bassano and called the CPR Block, had been reserved by the railway company. It had been treated as open range, apparently, and supported a large number of cattle and horses. In 1929, because of changes in the tax status of the land, it was decided to open the CPR Block to home- steading. And so the last roundup of the open range was organized. The McKinnon wagon took part and Charlie and Don McKinnon, well-known Calgarians, rode in that roundup. When it ended, an era ended-an era that had begun in Texas at the end of the Civil War. Domestic livestock had rolled in a flood from the ranges of Texas to the Bow River of Alberta and be- yond. Along its length, the ranch- ing front had encountered the farming front which in the mean- time had advanced from the east. The two groups held their relative positions for a short time only when increased pressure from homesteaders, breaking up of leases, and optimistic railway construction forced the rancher back to the posi- tion that he now occupies.
8
cent of the cattle population. Since 1931 there has been a considerable increase in the acreage of cultivated grasses and legumes, which has re- duced dependence upon native grass. The present rate of con- version of native range to pasture amounts to about 150,000 acres per year; this rate of conversion will continue and may accelerate.
Ranching no longer dominates the economy of southern Alberta and southwestern Saskatchewan, as it did in the eighties and nineties. Land increased in value, leases were fenced, the open range dis- appeared, and the ranchers who survived owned more and more of their land. Holdings were smaller although livestock rather than grain remained the focal point of pro-
KLEIN
duction on the ranches that were left. But much of the old spirit remains, I think, and the freewheel- ing way of life that the ranching era engendered still survives.
References
CAMPBELL, J. B., R. W. LODGE, A. JOHNSTON, AND S. SMOLIAK. 1962. Range management of grasslands and adjacent parklands in the prai- rie provinces. Publ. 1133, Can. Dep. Agr., Ottawa.
CRAIG, JOHN R. 1903. Ranching with Lords and Commons. William Briggs, Toronto.
JAMESON, SHEILACH C. 1968. The era of the big ranches: The romantic period of southern Alberta’s his- tory. Can. Hist. Sot., Univ. of Cal- gary, Calgary, Alberta.
JOHNSTON, A., S. SMOLIAK, AND S. B. SLEN. 1966. Trends in livestock
Tundra Ranges North of the
Boreal Forest1
DAVID R. KLEIN
Unit leader, Alaska Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Alaska, College.
Highlight
Tundra rangelands of Alaska and northern Canada occupy about 200,000 and 900,000 square miles respectively. The tundra supports far lower numbers of large grazers than other natural areas, averaging less than 100 lb per square mile. Forage quality of tundra plants is high be- cause of rapid growth and wide variation in seasonal progression of growth. The native grazers, caribou and muskoxen, have evolved rapid growth rates and selectively feed on the highest quality forage available. Wild popu- lations of caribou and muskoxen appear to offer the best potential for conversion of tundra vegetation into com- modities utilizable by man.
The recent discovery of apparently large re- serves of petroleum on the northern coast of Alaska has crystallized an already building interest in the North American arctic. A full-fledged rush of men and materials into the North is now underway and may far surpass in magnitude the rush of gold seekers to the Yukon and Alaska at the turn of
lPaper presented in Keynote Session of the 22nd Annual Meeting, American Society of Range Management, Calgary, Alberta, February 11, 1969. Received April 24, 1969; ac- cepted for publication June 30, 1969.
population of the Canadian prairies. Agr. Inst. Rev. 21: 10-12.
KELLY, L. V. 1913. The range men. Argonaut Press, Ltd., New York. KERFOOT, W. D. ca. 1883. Notebook.
Glenbow Found. Hist. Arch. and Libr., Calgary.
MORTON, W. L. 1957. Manitoba, A history. Univ. of Toronto Press, To- ronto.
MORTON, W. L. 1969. A century of plain and parkland. Alta. Hist. Rev. 17: l-10.
MURRAY, S. N. 1967. The Valley comes of age. North Dakota Inst. for Regional Studies, Fargo, N.D. RICH, E. E. 1958. The history of the
Hudson’s Bay Company, 1670-l 870. Vol. 1: 1670-1763. The Hudson’s Bay Record Society, XXI, London. THOMAS, L. G. 1935. The ranching
period in southern Alberta. M.A. thesis, Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton. 17: l-10.
the last century. The impact of this activity on the people and the economy of the Arctic has been much discussed in the news media and in the halls of government. Very little attention, however, has been given to the land and its vegetation, either from the standpoint of the possible harmful effects of uncontrolled mineral exploration and develop- ment, or the potential contribution that the tundra may make to the economy and welfare of the in- creasing human populations in the Arctic.
The arctic tundra is often referred to as the “barren-grounds” or the “arctic desert,” and in winter the bleak, windswept tundra landscape may take on the superficial appearance of a desert, barren of life. But the tundra is by no means lifeless. The artist-naturalist, Ernest Thompson Seton (191 l), shortly after the turn of the century, coined the more descriptive term “arctic prairies” in his enthusiastic narrative of a canoe voyage into the barren-grounds northeast of Great Slave Lake. In summer, the tundra literally becomes alive with insect and bird life. The insects burst forth from eggs or other dormant stages that lie quiescent during the long arctic winter, but virtually all of the bird life arrives after extended migrations from milder southern climes. While some mammals, such as the arctic ground squirrel (Citellus undulatus), like the insects, are dormant during the winter, most mammals of the tundra remain active throughout the winter and con- tinue to eke out their existence under the harsh conditions that prevail. Lemmings (Lemmus sp.
8
cent of the cattle population. Since 1931 there has been a considerable increase in the acreage of cultivated grasses and legumes, which has re- duced dependence upon native grass. The present rate of con- version of native range to pasture amounts to about 150,000 acres per year; this rate of conversion will continue and may accelerate.
Ranching no longer dominates the economy of southern Alberta and southwestern Saskatchewan, as it did in the eighties and nineties. Land increased in value, leases were fenced, the open range dis- appeared, and the ranchers who survived owned more and more of their land. Holdings were smaller although livestock rather than grain remained the focal point of pro-
KLEIN
duction on the ranches that were left. But much of the old spirit remains, I think, and the freewheel- ing way of life that the ranching era engendered still survives.
References
CAMPBELL, J. B., R. W. LODGE, A. JOHNSTON, AND S. SMOLIAK. 1962. Range management of grasslands and adjacent parklands in the prai- rie provinces. Publ. 1133, Can. Dep. Agr., Ottawa.
CRAIG, JOHN R. 1903. Ranching with Lords and Commons. William Briggs, Toronto.
JAMESON, SHEILACH C. 1968. The era of the big ranches: The romantic period of southern Alberta’s his- tory. Can. Hist. Sot., Univ. of Cal- gary, Calgary, Alberta.
JOHNSTON, A., S. SMOLIAK, AND S. B. SLEN. 1966. Trends in livestock
Tundra Ranges North of the
Boreal Forest1
DAVID R. KLEIN
Unit leader, Alaska Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Alaska, College.
Highlight
Tundra rangelands of Alaska and northern Canada occupy about 200,000 and 900,000 square miles respectively. The tundra supports far lower numbers of large grazers than other natural areas, averaging less than 100 lb per square mile. Forage quality of tundra plants is high be- cause of rapid growth and wide variation in seasonal progression of growth. The native grazers, caribou and muskoxen, have evolved rapid growth rates and selectively feed on the highest quality forage available. Wild popu- lations of caribou and muskoxen appear to offer the best potential for conversion of tundra vegetation into com- modities utilizable by man.
The recent discovery of apparently large re- serves of petroleum on the northern coast of Alaska has crystallized an already building interest in the North American arctic. A full-fledged rush of men and materials into the North is now underway and may far surpass in magnitude the rush of gold seekers to the Yukon and Alaska at the turn of
lPaper presented in Keynote Session of the 22nd Annual Meeting, American Society of Range Management, Calgary, Alberta, February 11, 1969. Received April 24, 1969; ac- cepted for publication June 30, 1969.
population of the Canadian prairies. Agr. Inst. Rev. 21: 10-12.
KELLY, L. V. 1913. The range men. Argonaut Press, Ltd., New York. KERFOOT, W. D. ca. 1883. Notebook.
Glenbow Found. Hist. Arch. and Libr., Calgary.
MORTON, W. L. 1957. Manitoba, A history. Univ. of Toronto Press, To- ronto.
MORTON, W. L. 1969. A century of plain and parkland. Alta. Hist. Rev. 17: l-10.
MURRAY, S. N. 1967. The Valley comes of age. North Dakota Inst. for Regional Studies, Fargo, N.D. RICH, E. E. 1958. The history of the
Hudson’s Bay Company, 1670-l 870. Vol. 1: 1670-1763. The Hudson’s Bay Record Society, XXI, London. THOMAS, L. G. 1935. The ranching
period in southern Alberta. M.A. thesis, Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton. 17: l-10.
the last century. The impact of this activity on the people and the economy of the Arctic has been much discussed in the news media and in the halls of government. Very little attention, however, has been given to the land and its vegetation, either from the standpoint of the possible harmful effects of uncontrolled mineral exploration and develop- ment, or the potential contribution that the tundra may make to the economy and welfare of the in- creasing human populations in the Arctic.
The arctic tundra is often referred to as the “barren-grounds” or the “arctic desert,” and in winter the bleak, windswept tundra landscape may take on the superficial appearance of a desert, barren of life. But the tundra is by no means lifeless. The artist-naturalist, Ernest Thompson Seton (191 l), shortly after the turn of the century, coined the more descriptive term “arctic prairies” in his enthusiastic narrative of a canoe voyage into the barren-grounds northeast of Great Slave Lake. In summer, the tundra literally becomes alive with insect and bird life. The insects burst forth from eggs or other dormant stages that lie quiescent during the long arctic winter, but virtually all of the bird life arrives after extended migrations from milder southern climes. While some mammals, such as the arctic ground squirrel (Citellus undulatus), like the insects, are dormant during the winter, most mammals of the tundra remain active throughout the winter and con- tinue to eke out their existence under the harsh conditions that prevail. Lemmings (Lemmus sp.
TUNDRA RANGES
the extremes of weather by living beneath the snow-cover in a windless climate several degrees warmer than the air above. The large gmrers, however, have become adapted through evolution- ary changes for survival while exposed to the corn ditions of the arctic winter.
Tundra rangelands of Alaska and northern Can- ada occupy about 200,000 and 900,000 square miles respectively. The arctic tundra has supported large numbers, but few species, of large grazing mammals from Pleistocene times to the present. There is evidence that during the Pleistocene the tundra in unglaciated areas of Alaska was more productive than at present and included the bison
(Bison ~/riscus), horse (Equus sp.) and mammoth
(Elephas pimigenius) as important fauna1 corn
ponents (Guthrie, 1968). Apparently, fire and high deposition rates of acolian soils fostered deep annual thawing, soil drainage and rapid turnover of soil nutrients which maintained vegetation types dominated by grasses. The Pleistocene tundra was far more productive than the pesent tundra
which is dominated by sedges and lichens. Perma- frost now remains close to the surface throughout the mummer and the resultant poor drainage and cold soils account for slow breakdown of organic- matter and limited availability ot minerals fol plant growtlr.
The Large Grazers
The present large grazers are characteristically social in nature and, in the case of the caribou
(Rangifrr tarandus), they are migratory as well.
Although they reach high densities locally (Fig. 1), vast expanses of the tundra are unoccupied by large herbivores at any given time. In terms of biomass of large grazers, the tundra supports far lower levels than other natural areas. Estimates from the Alaskan and Canadian tundra are gen- erally 100 lb per square mile or less, in contrast to over 100,000 lb per square mile for some African savannas where as many as nine species of large grazers jointly use the same range (Petrides and Swank, 1965).
KLFJN
may exceed two million animals. Fire has been a facror in the destruction of large expanses of cari- bou winter range in Canada and Alaska and has been associated with the alarming reductions of caribou in Canada in the 1950’s and ureviouslv in Alaska.
Domestic reindeer (also Rangijer tarandus), first introduced to North America in 1891, reached 650,000 animals by 1932 in western and northern Alaska. and dwindled to atxxoximatelv 25.000 bv 1950 I&use of range de&oration, p&r herdink practices and the confused status of ownership. Reindeer now number approximately 40,000 in Alaska with about 23,000 in private ownership, 10,000 owned by the government and another 7,000 in feral herds on islands in the Aleutians and the l3ering Sea. The only reindeer in Canada, the government-owned herd on the lower Mackenzie River, near Inuvik, numbered 1,800 according to a precalving count in the spring oC 1968. Privately managed in the past through a contract with the government, the contract xvas recently revoked because the herd was allowed to decline to below the accepted level and management has reverted to the Canadian government.
The future possibilities for a reindeer industry in the North are obscured by social and economic problems which have continually proven to be obstacles to significant development beyond the subsistence level. These include the lack of a tradition of pastoralism among the Eskimo, the absence of a profit motive in their culture and the present motivation toward education and accul- turation among the Eskimo youth. The picture is further complicated in Alaska by a federal law which restricts ownership of reindeer to persons
of native blood. Nevertheless, local and federal agencies are actively supporting expansion of rein- deer husbandry in both Alaska and Canada. In Alaska, cash income from the sale of reindeer meat and by-products in 1967 was approximately $225; 000 (U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1967). About one third of this derived from the government herd
on Nunivak Island. The sale of hides has pro- duced increased income in the past few years, and antlers now bring good prices from Korean buyers who captalize on their supposed “medicinal” value. Early this year the first 240 live reindeer of a ship- ment that may total 1,000 were flown directly from Alaska to South Korea by jet aircraft where they were sold for breeding stock.
At the University of Alaska the muskox is under- going experimental development as a domestic ani- mal, primarily for wool production. A similar project, associated with the Alaskan venture, has also been started by the government of Quebec at Old Fort Chime. Although the muskox appears adaptable to domestication as a tundra range ani- mal, the problems facing its successful exploitation in the Arctic are similar to those of reindeer and are more economic and social than biological. The muskox appears suitable for a cottage economy such as existed in northern Scotland 100 years ago, but the lack of an animal husbandry tradition in the North American Arctic and the rapid accul- turation of the native peoples that is taking place do not favor acceptance of pastoralism as a way of life in the future.
Unfortunately, in Alaska the muskox has become the subject of a controversy between those pro- moting its domestication and advocates of the spe- cies as an element of the native wild fauna. On Nunivak Island the muskox is apparently approach- ing the limitations of its range which is shared with
10,000 reindeer, and efforts to control the herd by hunting and transplantation to new habitat on the mainland have been opposed by the domestication interests. They fear competition from the develop- ment of any economy based on wild populations as well as the potential future competition for range lands between domestic and wild herds. The problem has been temporarily resolved through a compromise decision to take surplus animals this year for reintroduction to the Alaskan Arctic as well as for addition to the domestic herd at the University of Alaska. The threat ol range de- terioration from over-popalation will contmue to exist on Nunivak Island, however, and other mea- sures will have to be employed to control the popo- lation in the future.
Characteristics of the Range
TUNDRA RANGES 11
energy but are low in protein. Caribou and rein- deer are specially adapted physiologically to utilize them as a primary food source during the long arctic winters. Although many questions about caribou and reindeer nutrition remain unanswered, in Scandinavia, where lichens have been used for centuries as forage for domestic stock, studies show that reindeer make more efficient use of this forage than either cattle or sheep (Nordfeldt et al., 1961). Lichens grow notoriously slow and recovery from grazing or from range fires is, therefore, much longer than it is for sedges or other tundra plants. Since reestablishment of lichens takes place from the living parts of the plants that remain, fire can be particularly destructive to lichen range if all living parts of the lichens are burned. Studies by Pegau (1968a) of lichen growth on the Seward Peninsula of Alaska show that lichens grow, some- what more rapidly in open forest than on treeless tundra but average less than one quarter of an inch of linear growth per year. Virgin lichen range can yield as much as 3,000 lb per acre of forage if complete cropping of the lichens is allowed, but under such grazing practices 30 to 50 years is required for recovery before the areas can be regrazed. If only top cropping is permitted, approximately 45% of the living portion of the lichens can be removed and the rotation cycle can be reduced to 3 to 5 years. Proper rotational grazing of lichen range can, therefore, result in a 5550% increase in efficiency of range use over com- p ete cropping,
i
which can mean the difference between maintaining 200 or over 1000 reindeer on each 100 acres of winter range.Trampling of lichens by reindeer can often be harder on the range than the effects of their feed- ing. Pegau (196Sb) conducted experiments with a reindeer herd near Nome in 1966 and found that close herding of reindeer on their summer range resulted in dislodging and shattering of 15% of the lichens on wet or moist days and 35% when the lichens were dry. Reindeer make only limited use of lichens in the summer and do not use them at all when they are dry and brittle, but in this latter condition they can suffer the greatest damage from trampling.
Poor herding practices have resulted in ineffi- cient and destructive use of reindeer winter range in Alaska in the past, and herders today have little understanding of principles of range management and of the special characteristics of lichen range. However, the tJ.S. Bureau of Land Management, the agency involved in leasing and management of grazing lands in Alaska, has recently under- taken an intensified program to develop and put into practice a range management program that is suited to the unique conditions of tundra range.
Areas of the tundra occupied by muskoxen
differ somewhat from typical caribou and reindeer ranges and there is relatively little competition be- tween the two species for food (Tener, 1965). Lichens are not an important food item for musk- oxen and sedges, although used, assume less im- portance than they do for caribou. Low and pros- trate shrubs, such as willow (Salix spp.), blueberry (Vaccinium spp.) and crowberry (Ernf~etrurn nip-urn), are important winter foods for muskoxen and grasses are used extensively in both summer and winter. Generally, muskox ranges have more low shrubs and more grasses and fewer sedges than caribou range. Lichens are often not an important component of the vegetation on muskox ranges.
Nutrition and Growth
All northern ungulates characteristically undergo seasonal physiological changes which adapt them to the yearly variations in quality and quantity of their food supply. The result is a cycle in the annual physiological regimen with highest meta- bolic demands occurring in the spring and early summer when plant growth is most rapid and nutritive quality of the forage is highest. Growth rates of young animals are most rapid at this time and the dietary demands for antler growth, re- covery from the rigors of winter, and lactation in females are greater than at any other time of the year. Both reindeer and muskoxen are known to produce milk of extremely high butter fat and protein content (reindeer-Z% fat and 10% pro- tein; muskox-l 1% fat and 5% protein; domestic cow-3 to 5% fat and 4% protein) which accounts both for the rapid daily gains of the nursing young and the high dietary requirements of the lactating females (Tener, 1965).
Rate of gain for reindeer fawns during their first summer on high quality range averages a pound a day (Krebs and Cowan, 1962) from a birth weight of about 10 pounds. This compares with about 1h pound per day for domestic sheep with a similar birth weight, while Hereford cattle, with a birth weight seven times that of reindeer also average only a pound a day (Brody, 1945). Correspond- ingly rapid rates of growth have been observed among captive muskoxen (Tener, 1965).
12 KLEIN
carbohydrates become of paramount importance in the diet to meet the needs of basal metabolism, locomotion and maintenance of body heat. These changes in requirements coincide with the change in availability from summer vegetation of high protein content to lichens of low protein and high starch content which are consumed during the winter.
A paradox may seem to exist between the re- markable growth rates of ungulates during the arctic summer and the relatively low productivity of the tundra mentioned earlier. A teleological explanation for the rapid growth rates is that they are essential if the animals are to attain sufficient size and condition during the brief summers in order to prepare them to survive the long winters. Natural selection could therefore account for the tendency toward rapid growth in arctic species. But more than genetic potential alone is required for an animal to grow. Realization of this potential comes about through the natural high nutritive quality of tundra forage and the feeding behavior of the animals which results in selection of the highest quality forage available. T,he high nu- trrtrve quality of arctic plants results from the following factors: 1) Like the animals, arctic plants have evolved rapid growth rates which normally enables them to complete their growth and repro- ductive cycle in a single season (Bliss, 1960). This is made possible by the long day length of arctic summers. We know that rapid growth in plants yields high quality forage. 2) Arctic plants are small and low-growing, therefore, significant growth of high quality vegetation per plant can be made on a limited supply of soil nutrients. The net result can be high quality forage although overall productivity from the land may be low. 3) The tundra terrain is usually irregular; often mountainous, hilly or at least undulating, with breaks caused by stream channels and from frost action. This irregularity results in variations in exposure and snow cover which can greatly alter the seasonal growth pattern of vegetation. On south-facing slopes plants begin growth weeks ahead of plants on level areas and in depressions or other areas of excessive snow accumulation. North slopes are correspondingly delayed in the initiation of plant growth. Since highest nutritive quality of forage coincides with the beginning of plant growth, the tundra offers high quality forage throughout the summer to those grazing animals that are able to range widely over the irregular terrain to take advantage of variations in growth stages of the vegetation. 4) In summer, vegetation in arctic regions under 24-hour daylight does not undergo catabolic nighttime metabolism which, in lower latitudes where nights are warmer and dark, can result in substantial reductions in concentra-
tions of carbohydrate levels in the growing leaves. This could be an important factor for animals graz- ing during the night or early morning hours.
Under natural conditions grazing animals tend to select the highest quality forage available to them. We have observed this among caribou and feral reindeer in Alaska and it has been reported from more temperate regions among both wild and domestic herbivores. In summer this habit is of the utmost importance to tundra grazing animals by assisting them to meet the high nutritive re- quirements that their rapid growth rates require.
The ability to select forage of high quality is dependent upon a moderately low density of ani- mals so that competition between them does not occur. Competition among caribou, which being social are found in groups or bands, is overcome through their wide-ranging feeding behavior. When reindeer are closely herded, fenced or con- fined to restricted ranges on small islands, the opportunity for them to graze selectively is lost because of competition between individuals for the limited supply of high quality forage. This has been demonstrated in our studies of popu- lations of feral reindeer introduced to islands in the Aleutians and the Bering Sea (Klein, 1968). Under low population densities, soon after the in- troductions, the reindeer were free to select the highest quality forage and the resultant growth rates and body sizes were amazing. On St. Matthew Island, 13 years after their introduction body weights of feral reindeer exceeded those of rein- deer in domestic herds by 24-53% among females and 46-61% among males. By 1963, when the population had increased by a factor of four and density reached 47 per square mile, body weights had decreased from the 1957 level by 38% for females and 43% for males and were comparable to weights of reindeer in domestic herds.
Control of Population Size
TUNDRA RANGES 13
hunting in the late 1950’s. This was followed by an apparent increase in the numbers of caribou, increased incidence of parasites and disease and finally lowered productivity through decreased calf production and survival (Skoog, 1967). With partial protection, wolves have now increased to near their previous levels and the symptoms of over-population among the caribou are disappear- ing.
Man is also an important factor in the regu- lation of caribou populations either through direct harvest or through his effect on the habitat. In Alaska and Canada many Eskimos and Indians are still dependent upon the caribou as an im- portant item in their subsistence economy. The annual harvest of caribou for these purposes is currently about 25,000 in Alaska and probably a similar number are taken in Canada. The Cana- dian harvest is, however, considerably reduced from the high kills of close to 100,000 that occurred in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s at the same time that the herds were undergoing an alarming pop- ulation reduction (Kelsall, 1968).
On islands in the Bering Sea where reindeer have been allowed to increase unchecked by preda- tion or adequate harvest, food supply, through interaction with winter snow conditions, has been the primary factor limiting the populations (Klein, 1968). Reindeer introduced to St. Matthew Island in 1944, increased from 29 animals to 6,000 in the summer of 1963, nineteen years later, and under- went a crash die-off the following winter to less than 50 animals. The population had responded to the high quality and quantity of the forage on the island by increasing rapidly due to a high birth rate and low mortality. By 1963, the density of the reindeer on the island had reached 47 per square mile and ratios of fawns and yearlings to adult cows had dropped from 75 and 45% respec- tively, in 1957 to 60 and 26% in 1963. Lichens had been completely eliminated as a significant component of the winter diet. Sedges and grasses were expanding into sites previously occupied by lichens. In the late winter of 1963-64, in associ- ation with extreme snow accumulation, virtually the entire population of 6,000 reindeer died of starvation. Apparently the population had in- creased to a level far in excess of the long term carrying capacity of the range, and the heavy graz- ing pressure resulted in the elimination of the lichens in a span of only a few years. Other forage species were not adequate to carry the population through the extreme winter conditions that pre- vailed, and without the opportunity to migrate to more favorable range, wholesale starvation was the only alternative.
A similar pattern of population growth and crash of reindeer occurred on the Pribilof Islands
in the 1940’s (Scheffer, 195 1) and large population reductions from winter starvation have occurred among free-ranging, but partially managed herds, on Nunivak and St. Lawrence Islands.
Discussion and Conclusions
It is apparent from the foregoing discussion that tundra rangelands are different in many respects from more southern rangelands. Occupying vast areas of the northern fringe of the continent these lands, however, produce a small biomass of grazing animals per unit area, even though individual herds may be large. Because of the long winters, quality and quantity of the winter forage determine the population levels that can be supported on the range. Lichens form a major portion of the winter forage for caribou and reindeer and have char- acteristics quite unlike more conventional forage species. They are of high energy value and the native grazers are specially adapted physiologically to use them. But lichens are also extremely slow- growing, fragile, subject to damage from trampling and readily destroyed by fire.
The very short arctic summers have resulted in the evolution of rapidly growing plants which yield high quality summer forage for grazing animals. Topographic variation and long day length affect initiation and rate of plant growth which also in- fluence the availability of high quality forage. The native large grazers have also evolved growth patterns consistent with the seasonal variations in food quality and quantity and during summer they exhibit high rates of growth not normally en- countered among ruminants. Characteristics of their feeding behavior enable them to select the highest quality forage available on the range. Low population density and opportunity to range over a large feeding area are essential for the well-being of these northern species.
14 KLEIN
unlikely. Wild populations of caribou and musk- oxen probably offer the best potential for con- version of tundra ve,getation into commodities utilizable by man. These species are by nature well adapted to the environment and over ex- tended piiods of time both the animals and the range vegetation fare relatively well. This has often not been the case with herdin,g of semi- domestic reindeer in North America. Wild game provides meat and other subsistence commodities to indigenous people without the constant atten- tion and specialized skills required to raise do- mestic animals. Game can also bring cash into the ., economy of the North through services to, and fees from, non-resident sport hunters. Experiences in other parts of the world as well as in the North L indicate that native ruminants often make more efficient use of natural forage than introduced do- mestic breeds.
Literature Cited
BLISS, L. C. 1962. Adaptations of arctic and alpine plants to environmental conditions. Arctic. 15: 117-144.
BKODY, D. 1945. Bioenergetics and growth. Reinhold Publ. Corp. N.Y. 1023 p.
GUTHRIE, R. D. 1968. Paleoecology of the large-mammal community in interior Alaska during the late Pleistocene. Amer. Midland Nat. 79(2): 346-363.
KELSALL, J. P. 1968. The migratory barren-ground cari- bou of Canada. Can. Wildl. Ser. Monograph Ser. No. 3. 340 p.
KLEIN, D. R. 1968. The introduction, increase, and crash of reindeer on St. Matthew Island. J. Wildl. Manage. 32(2):350-367.
KREBS, C. J. AND I. McT. COWAN. 1962. Growth studies of reindeer fawns. Can. J. Zool. 40(5):863-869.
MCEWAN, E. H. AND A. J. WOOD. 1966. Growth and de- velopment of the barren-ground caribou. I. Heart girth, hind foot length, and body weight relationships. Can. J, Zool. 44:401-411.
NORDFELT, S., W. CAGELL, AND M. NORDKVIST. 1961. Smiiltbarhetsfijrsijk med renar. ijjebyn 1957-60. Statens Husdjursfiirsiik. Sartryck ock fiirhandsmeddelanden 15 1. 12 p.
PEGAU, R. E. 1968a. Growth rates of important reindeer forage lichens on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. Arctic. 2 l(4): 255-259.
PEGAU, R. E. 1968b. Reindeer range appraisal in Alaska. IJniv. of Alaska M.S. thesis. 130 p.
PETRIDES, G. A. AND W. G. SWANK. 1965. Population den- sities and the range-carrying capacity for large mammals in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda. Zoologica Africana. 1(1):209-225.
SCHEFFER, V. B. 1951. The rise and fall of a reindeer herd. Sci. Monthly. 73(6):356-362.
SETON, E. T. 1911. The arctic prairies. International Univ. Press, N.Y. 308 p.
SKOOC, R. 0. 1967. Ecology of the caribou (Rangifer tarandus grunti) in Alaska. Univ. Calif., Berkeley Ph.D. thesis. 699 p.
TENER, J. S. 1963. Q ueen Elizabeth Islands game survey, 1961. Can. Wildl. Ser. Oct. Papers No. 4. 50 p.
TENER, J. S. 1965. h/Iuskoxen in Canada. Can. Wildl. Ser. Monograph Ser. No. 2. 166 p.
THOMAS, D. C., G. R. PARKER, J. P. KELSALL, AND A. G. LAUGHREY. 1968. Population estimates of barren- ground caribou on the Canadian mainland from 1955 to
1967. Can. Wildl. Ser. Progress Notes No. 3: l-4. U.S. BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. 1967. Annual land opera-
tions report, 1967. U.S. Bur. Ind. Affairs, Juneau Area Office. 23 p. (mimeo).
VIBE, C. 1967. Arctic animals in relation to climatic fluctuations. Meddelelser om Grfinland. Bd. 170(5): l-227.
As in past years, the ASRM Employment- Interview Service will be available at the
ASRM Employment-Interview Service
Annual Meeting for submitting and arranging for interviews.
applications
Emnlovment-Interview Service forms have been ‘seit to most schools and agencies. 0 thers seeking employment or having posi- tions available, but who have not received any forms, may obtain them by writing to-
ASRM Employment-Interview Service c/o Dr. John H. Ehrenreich
Department of Watershed Management University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 8572 1
The following forms are used; please indi- cate by number the form(s) you need and the quantity wanted.
ASRM l-a Part-Time Employment Avail- able
ASRM l-b Application for Part-Time Em- ployment
ASRM 2-a Full-Time Employment Avail- able
ASRM 2-b Application for Full-Time Em- ployment
Completed forms should be returned to the above address.
