REP05658 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 17 ~~ c~~9`~~ appears that neither the permit area nor adjacent areas provide important( ~ wintering habitat for elk or deer. However, as previously discussed the I severity of the previous two cainters have affected elk movements and range utilization. This being primarily due to the feeding program that occurred during the winter of 1983-84. 1luring the course of the current winter which has been more average (at least to date), the elk have gone back to. their more traditional movements and associated habitat utilization. As discussed in previous reports, a different situation occurs within the permit area during the late spring through fall period. As shown by the data on Tables I and II, there is high use of the mine ares by elk and deer from spring through fall. There are, however, definite differences in the way the permit area is utilized by these animals. The deer are observed more commonly in the Moffat area and in the mountain brush commun- ities .wound the reclaimed areas (especially east ridge) where they feed at night leaving early in the mornings to move into the mountain shrub commun- ities on the Moffa± area or to the slopes above yak Creek for cover during the day. Until the summer of 1982, observations (aerial and ground) showed little use of any portion of the Edna permit area for fa~+ning activities. In 1982, there was a significant increase in the use of the Moffat area by does for fawning and rearing activities even though similar habitat for fawning in surrounding areas had remained unchanged. In 1993, higher numbers of does with fawns were again observed utilizing the Moffat area. In 1984 the total deer population in the area was down due to high mortality the previous winter which resulted in the numbers of does with fawns being reduced. This lower total population in the study area is reflected in the data on Table II. However, the percentage of does with