|
Foraging Ecology of Bison and
Cattle
Glenn E.
Plumb and Jerrold L. Dodd
Authors are
wildlife biologist, Badlands National Park, Box 6, Interior, S.D.
57750; and professor, Department of Range Management, Box 3354,
University Station, Laramie 82071.
This
research was sponsored by The Nature Conservancy and the Department
of Range Management and Agricultural Experiment Station of the
University of Wyoming.
Reprinted
from Rangelands 18(3), June 1994 pages 107-109.
Summary
Widespread
access to bison of breeding age in the recent decade has created an
alternative to cattle in grassland natural area management. Cattle
and bison are considered generalist foragers, yet, differences in
food habits indicate that cattle are more selective for than bison (Peden
et al. 1974). During rut, investment in social interactions should
be greater for bison than cattle and might be expected to influence
foraging behavior. Foraging by either herbivore may directly
influence ecosystem structure and interactions in the biotic
community (Ellis et al. 1976).
The
challenges facing natural area managers often include recognizing
ecological disturbances which are essential (i.e., fire, herbivory)
and learning how to implement such processes within fragmented
natural landscapes (Steuter et al. 1990). In a natural area context,
are bison and cattle analogous herbivores? The paper is a
condensation of an earlier report by Plumb and Dodd (1993) and
discusses data collected during 1985 to 1987 on a mixed-grass
prairie owned and managed by The Nature Conservancy in north-central
South Dakota.
Results
and Discussion
Diet
Composition
In our
study warm-season (C4) grasses accounted for
approximately one-third of bison diets early in the season and
increased to 40% during late July and all of August. Bison reduced
feeding on the warm-season grasses after September 1 to about 15% by
September 30. A large increase in cool-season (C3)
graminoid use by bison occurred after September 1, to levels
greather than 80%. Total graminoid use consistently increased during
early summer, reaching 90% of diets by fall. After July, forbs
contributed little to bison diets. Browse contribution to diets of
bison was minimal (0-3%)
Trends in
use of warm-season grasses by cattle were less dynamic. Cattle use
of warm-season grasses did not vary from late June through early
August. Use of warm-season grasses declined in cattle diets after
September 2. Shifts in the amounts of cool season graminoids and
total graminoids eaten by cattle occurred biweekly throughout the summer.
Forbs contributed 15% and browse contributed near 10% of cattle
diets during June and early July. Forb and browse use by cattle
decreased in late-July and was
maintained at this level for the remainder of the summer. As
observed for cattle, seasonal variation in the contribution of
graminoids to bison diets also appears to be correlated to seasonal
peaks in forage quality (Peden et al. 1974).
There were
herbivore by date interactions in amounts of each major forage class
contributed to bison and cattle diets. Bison generally consumed more
warm-season grasses
or cool-season graminoids than cattle from early June through
August. Bison always consumed more total graminoids than cattle.
Cattle use of forbs was greater than
bison from early July through mid-September. Forbs were never less
than 5% of cattle diets and peaked in early July at 16%. Conversely,
only during June and early July were
forbs of any importance to bison diets. Use of browse species by
cattle was greater than by bison at five sampling dates from June
through mid-September.
Forage
Selection
Each
herbivore exhibited selectivity by using forage resources out of
proportion to availability. Bison and cattle selected for
warm-season grasses and against cool-season graminoids during June
and August. During July and August, bison selected against forbs. In
June, cattle selected for forbs and browse. However, during August,
cattle consumed forbs in proportion to availability while selecting
for browse forage.
Time
Budgets
There were
significant herbivore and month effects for percent time spent
grazing per day, duration of grazing periods, and number of grazing
periods per day. Cattle allocated more time to grazing than bison
during the entire summer. The time cattle spent grazing per day
increased rapidly during early to mid-summer, reaching 70% by
August. Bison always allocated less time to grazing than cattle but
also increased grazing activities throughout
the summer season. Cattle grazing period duration was longer than
that observed for bison, yet it is unclear whether observations
represent the upper limit for
either herbivore. In accordance with seasonally increasing grazing
activity of both herbivores, the number of grazing periods
decreased.
As total
feeding time increases, cattle may allocate greater time to finding
a broader array of the nonrandomly distributed forage resource.
While allocating greater time than bison to search and feeding
activities during early and mid-summer, cattle diets are more broadly based
on forbs, browse, and graminoids. As the season progresses towards
late summer with increases in senescent standing crop, the bison rut
is ending and feeding time allocation becomes less relevant. This is
the time that cattle and bison diets should contain most similar
levels of graminoids. Our study suggests that the relationship
between social time investment (as it influences feeding and
non-feeding time partitioning during the rut) and forage patchiness
is important in explaining differences
in diet choice between bison and cattle.
Implications
for Natural Area Management
The
appropriateness of bison or cattle for natural area management may
depend on the potential of either herbivore to interact within the
context of the evolutionary history of the site. In a review of
bison-fire-small mammal herbivore relationships on mixed prairie,
Steuter et al. (1990) conclude that natural area stewardship
independent of the landscape's disturbance history, will strongly
limit native community structure and function. An example of early
historical references (1690-1880) suggests that bison grazed heavily
on a local scale, which combined with secondary effects such as
wallowing, trampling and rubbing, created a vegetation mosaic
(England and DeVos 1969). This literature suggests that prehistoric
habitat use patterns of bison regulated different forage classes,
altered vegetation structure, and produced variable conditions
amenable to other plains ungulates.
Relevant
Agents of Stewardship?
It may be
incorrect to broadly suggest that because of their prehistoric role
in grassland ecology, bison are the large herbivore of choice for
grassland natural area management. We presume that bison reflect to
a greater degree the evolutionary context of a grassland natural
area. We also presume that differences between free- roaming bison
on pristine grasslands and semi-free roaming bison on a fenced
natural area must be much greater than those of the latter and
domestic cattle.
Inasmuch as
changes in grassland structure and function may occur as a result of
grazing-related activities, bison and cattle are similarly capable.
An assessment of whether bison and cattle are analogous herbivores
in an ecosystem context can be evaluated by considering the foraging
behavior of these herbivores at various ecological scales. Within a
fenced natural area, feeding station/ patch and landscape scales are
generally most important. Bison tend to avoid patches dominated by
forbs and browse while cattle select more strongly for these
forages. This suggests that at the patch scale, bison respond to
reduced feeding time per day by maximizing intake of high quality,
randomly distributed grasses and graminoids.
Within a
landscape large ungulates should select for feeding areas which
maximize foraging efficiency. Indeed, both bison and cattle respond
positively to relatively coarse patterns of higher forage quantity
and/or quality induced by grazing, fire and seasonal growth
dynamics. Whether bison and cattle are analogous in a natural area
context is scale dependent. Incorporation of bison and/or cattle
into management planning must match these scale dependent goals.
It must
also be asked under what programmatic circumstances do semi-free
roaming bison or cattle represent appropriate grassland natural area
management tools?
Fig. 1. When considering large ungulates as a stewardship
alternative, concerns about herbivore tractability , size of natural
area, complexity of management plans, and capital return on
investment may become very important. Since bison breeding stock are
relatively expensive, an initial investment could be very large.
Additionally, disposal of surplus bison requires involvement in a
small but highly charged market where outlets and prices vary
greatly from year to year. Bison should be a preferred alternative
when the natural area is medium to large, economics are acceptable,
facilities exist to permit proper handling, and management plans are
sufficiently simple so as to preclude very difficult herd
manipulations. The actual assessment of the suitability of either
herbivore is necessarily case dependent, but major concerns can be
estimated as in Figure 1.
In a
hypothetical case where natural area size is small, economics are
poor, a fire return interval is estimated at five years, and grazing
is periodically desired, it seems more reasonable to devote
available resources to achieving a proper prescription burn and
graze the site with cattle to a desired utilization level on a
periodic basis.
Where
natural areas encompass medium and large tracts, the intimate
relationship between bison and grasslands suggests that stewardship
with bison may continue relatively uninterrupted throughout the year
at a lower stewardship cost per acre. Indeed, stewardship plans
encompassing bison and cattle may prove to optimize economic
stability and ecological integrity of management.
Summary
The
relationship between feeding time investment and forage patchiness
appears to be important in determining diet choice of bison and
cattle. Both display generalist food habits, exhibiting forage
selection while consuming a variety of forages. In contrast to
cattle, it appears that bison balance nutrient and time demands by
consuming almost exclusively graminoids.
The
similarities and differences in the foraging ecology of bison and
cattle suggest interesting opportunities for natural area
management. When managed to encourage strong
social time investment, bison should forage at a feeding
station/patch scale primarily on graminoids and impact herbaceous
non-graminoids relatively less than cattle. Yet, at the landscape
scale, a mixed management model incorporating both herbivores may
prove more flexible and appropriate to implement herbivorous
disturbance. We suggest that only under certain programmatic
conditions does the combination of strong social organization and
environmental tolerances (as they influence foraging and fitness)
suggest that bison are the most appropriate large herbivore for
northern mixed prairie natural area management.
Literature
Cited
England,
R.E., and A. DeVos. 1969. Influence of animals on pristine
conditions on the Canadian grasslands. J. Range Manage. 22:87 -94.
Ellis, J.E.,
J.A. Wlens, C.F. Rodeli, and J.C. Anways.1976. A conceptual model of
diet selection as an ecosystem process. J. Theor. Biol.60:93-103.
Peden, D.G.,
G.M. Ven Dyne, R.W. Rice, end R.M. Henlen.1974. The trophic ecology
of Bison bison L. on shortgrass plains. J. Appl. Ecology
11:489-498.
Plumb, G.E.
end J.L. Dodd. 1993. Foraging ecology of bison and cattle on mixed
prairie: implications for natural area management. Ecological
Applications. 3:631-643.
Stueter,
A.A., C.E. Grygell, and M.E. Blondlnl. 1990. A synthesis approach to
research and management planning: The conceptual development and
implementation. Natur. Areas J. 10:61-68.
|