Campbell Creek timber - grazing demonstration : cattle use of regenerating deciduous cutblocks /

Abstract

This project involved the use of ten Global Positioning System (GPS) collars to monitor cattle grazing behaviour and habitat use across a diverse mosaic of forested and non-forested range plant community types including regenerating aspen forest. Cattle use of all native plant community types was secondary to tame forages, including aspen cutblocks. If there are other community types available that are preferred above regenerating deciduous communities cattle are unlikely to use cutblock areas until forage is depleted in the preferred community types, unless cutblocks are in close proximity to preferred communities and/or unless prompted to do so with livestock distribution tools. When planning the integration of livestock grazing and timber harvest it is important to have information on livestock range use preferences (e.g. as indicated by range health scores) prior to determining cutblock location, access, and harvest design. Do cattle avoid regenerating deciduous cutblocks when alternative plant communities (mature deciduous forest, tame pasture, wetlands, etc.) are available within the same management unit? 2. Is there a density (stems/ha) of regenerating deciduous trees that acts as a barrier to livestock distribution? 3. Is forage production a limiting factor for livestock use of deciduous cutblocks?

Integrating production functions of timber, forage, and cattle to achieve sustainable resource management.

“…Livestock were attracted to tame pasture areas. In the absence of proper management, they may have tended to graze these areas to the exclusion of all other native plant areas until the tame forage resource was consumed (Pitt et al 1998, Hincz 2007. The data showed that the greatest change in the time spent was between the tame pasture zone and the 25 m buffer zone.…”

“…GB was very diverse in its community types, the forage species and availability of the forage species also varied. When the cattle moved through an area, they grazed their preferred species first and then move on to their secondary choices (Hincz 2007). This would cause cattle in GB to have to move through areas of less preference to get to primary forage species, thus resulting in cattle spending more time in areas further from the tame pastures.…”

“…Review literature states that cattle graze their preferred areas first and then move on to their secondary choices (Hincz 2007). The larger landbase, Elliot's Creek, offered more opportunity for cattle to graze easily accessible areas along roads, small open areas, and mature aspen stands.…”

“…This behaviour was replicated over the four years demonstrating high grazing fidelity. Some of the possible reasons for the observed fidelity were that livestock are attracted to tame pasture, and in many natural regions, will in the absence of active management, graze these areas to the exclusion of all other plant communities until the tame forage resource was depleted (Hincz 2007, Pitt et al 1998). There were some significant differences in usage between pastures to increase dry matter productivity of that land or cause a shift towards higher yielding and more nutritious forage species (Kirychuk et al 2002).…”

“…Cattle usage of the three blocks suggested that the cattle were selecting where to graze and that they may 'discover' new preferred grazing areas. Although, if there were other community types available that were preferred above regenerating deciduous communities cattle would be unlikely to use cutblock areas (Hincz 2007).…”