Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ The study site area is~heavily used by elk during <br />'~ winter (Hector, 1976). However, it is hot considered to <br />, be critical winter range (Colorado Division of Wildlife, <br /> <br />- 1916). Evidence of elk usage on the study site is <br />i <br />' abundant. Aspen are heavily scarred by browsing elk and <br />•~-~ el}: pellets are abundant. In addition, a high percentage <br /> of browse plants in the oa:: and sagebrush co~~.munities show <br />- signs or crazing activity. The proximity of County Road 54 <br /> to the study site increases the elk utilization of the sit_. <br /> The road is lightly traveled but is kept open to serve as <br /> a schcol bus route. During heavy snows, elk use the plowed <br />read for traveling and even as a bedding ground (Hector, 1976). <br /> Because of the gentle topography of the site, elk move <br /> easily from the road into the shrub cover for grazing and <br /> protec*_ion. <br /> Figure 2.5 illustrates the- elk utilization of the land <br />~ in the study region. E•figratiou routes, critical winter range <br />' an3 calving areas are st:own. <br />' Tcuo species of deer, white-tailed deer and mule deer, <br />~~ occur in Routt County. tVhite-tailed da_r are essentially <br /> restricted to riparian habitats in w_stern Colorado and <br /> occur in low numbers along the Ya.:,pa and Williams Fork <br /> Rivers. No white-tailed deer are recorded from the <br /> aountain shrub habitat characteristic of the study, site. <br /> Whi*_e-tailed deer may be found it areas near the study <br />°~,_ site. ' <br />~• Mule dear are abundant in the t7i11iams Fork :fountains. <br /> Colorado Division of Wi131ife ga^.~~ management Unit 13, <br />~~ which includes the study site, has one of the largest annual <br /> deer harvests in the state (see Figure 2.b). Densities of <br /> mule deer for the area arour_d tae study site were 20 per <br /> <br />~ <br />' sauar_ mile in 1975 (Coioradc Division cf Wildlife, 1976). <br />~ The deer population increased in .1976 due to a good fawn <br />_ crop and the present density is approximately 25 per square <br /> <br />~ mile in this same area (Hectcr, 1976). <br />J <br />Most of the mule dezr in the region summer in <br /> the Williams Fork idountains and minter to the west in the <br />~,. Piceance ?;asin. Migration folloc~s the Nilliams Fork River. <br /> The timing of migrations corresponds to increasing sno:u <br />~' depth. Most of the deer migrate by early December, but in <br /> <br />~,~ years with light snowfall, deer :•~i11 remain ir. the Williams <br /> Fork ~IOUntains all winter. Even in winters with deep snocu <br />•- conditions, up to 25 percent of the herd will not migrate. <br /> <br />~ The herd normally returns to the Williams Fork .fountains <br />- in early April. Deer use of the;•Williams Fork Mountains <br />_ usually does not conflict with elk use, since the elk only <br /> use the range in winter. However, some overlap occurs <br />~; between deer and elk during spring. This overlap is <br />~.• <br />-71- <br />~° <br />