140 



COVER CHARACTERISTICS AND SHELTER REQUIREMENTS 



dense tangles that follow by a few years the cultinn; of the winter's fuel supply in the farmer's 

 woodlot — these are the truly happy hunting grounds for grouse chicks. Of all the woodland 

 types only second-growth hardwoods (type E) with its often abundant understory. and spot- 

 lumbered areas (G) seem worth a second visit until the brood is well on the road to maturity. 

 Where summer slopes are dry. as in our Adirondacks, the moister alder beds (B) are ])rime 

 favorites. 



Least used are the t)pes where grass predominates (A), where the ground cover is rela- 

 tively deficient, as in the shade of older woodlands I F. FH I or under a dense stand of 

 conifers (HI. In fact, in New York, the j)resence of conifers, so dear to the hearts of grouse 

 in the late fall and winter, is now almost ignored. 



Yet it is not easy to state definitely just which are the most used types of brood cover. There 

 appears to be a rather strong relationship between the amount of cover and use. To be 

 strictly accurate, one must reduce brood contacts to a "per acre" basis. It was not feasible 

 to do this for all of the study areas from which the records collectively contributed to table 

 135*. Therefore, the amount of each type of cover down to one-tenth of an acre on the prin- 

 cipal study area. Connecticut Hill, was determined and the number of broods recorded was 

 adjusted accordingly as a basis for table 14. 



T.VBLE 11. TIl'KS OF COVER USED BY GROUSE HIU)()DS— 

 CONNECTICUT HILL .\REA— 1930-1936. 



*The adjusted number of broods is the number to be expected if each cover had had the average acreage of 189.0 acres, and if 

 each cover ty()e h«d been surveyed the average number of years. 5.1 years. 



Adjusted niiniber of hrnods ^ Y-O.HhO')\ ] -(1,1 I IO\'j; in which Y -= the observed number t)f broods iti a rover ty|>e, X j ^ the 

 deviiitioM cif Ih*- r^uridnT of years ii coNer lypt- was survryt'd from the avmiL-e number of yeiirs surveyed per rover type; X2 = 

 the deviiiti<iii of niinilier of iicres in 11 rover tyi)e from the aventue luiniber of acres |M?r rover type; U.HhOM «= nvera^'e increase in 

 number of broods with each year increase in times surveyed; 0.1 ItO = average increase in number of broods with earh acre 

 increase in <"over type. 



A'l'hn Murnber of br*>o<|H observed in Cover Types A, I'MI, F and FK were so few tluit it was apparent that these ty|>es are h'ttle 

 used by ^Toiise brtMHls. 



Outstanding among the differences noted is the elimination of second-growth hardwoods and 

 conifers (EH) as an important hrood type and the increase in rating of s|)ot-hHnhered hard- 

 woods (Gl. Unquestionahly. table 11 more accurately portrays actual hrood use. The com- 

 parison still further serves to emphasize the desirability of oyergrowii hinds, young hard- 

 woods and slashings as the types predominantly chosen by grouse broods. 



I hat second-grt)wlh hardwoods and conifers are neyertheless quite acceptable to broods 

 has been evident on the Adirondack area whrit' thc\ are a more predominant clrmtiil of llic 

 habitat. In this region, toit. aldci- runs ha\<' had a marked attra<lion for grouse broods. 



* Sfi- Aj.priidix. p. 801. 



