r)R2 COORDINATING GROUSE PRODUCTION WITH OTHER PRIMARY LAND USES 



Iiiterestiii}; landou iicis iji inacticitij; grmisi- inanagemenl cm llicii lands is piiTiiariK a mai- 

 ler of eclutaliiiii. ( |). 685). 



Un corporate lands, grouse inaiiageineiil ma) Lcsl l)c realized tlirough desirable practices for 

 timber, livestock or crop production as well as for grouse, (p. 686). 



Catering to the hunting fraternity builds goodwill for corporate owners of large land areas. 

 I p. 686). 



Soil Conservation Districts and Forest Districts offer an opportunity for landowners to carry 

 out soil, water, forest, and wildlife conservation in a coordinated program with the 

 aid of state and federal conservation agencies, (p. 686). 







The ruffed grouse is but one of the useful game species produced in most woodlands. Like- 

 wise, game, as a group, is but one of several important natural resources that are derived from 

 the land. It is evident that the degree to which grouse needs may be worked into the 

 handling of an area will depend, to a large extent, upon the primary uses of the land and 

 the ways in which these uses conflict with grouse interests. 



Since the grouse is a resource of importance to the public at large, its development is of 

 great social importance as well as of interest to landowners. Thus, the type of ownership as 

 well as the primary land use is an important factor in coordinating grouse management with 

 other land use practices. * 



FITTING GROUSE NEEDS INTO MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC LANDS 



Public lands are of many sorts, acquired foi- a wide variety of purposes. The Federal 

 Government owns land in vast acreages for national forests, and in small areas for light- 

 houses, national parks and monuments, prisons, customs houses, and waterfowl refuges, which 

 are just a few of the hundreds of types of use of land owned by the United States. Similarly, 

 the State acquires land for many purposes, some of them paralleling federal uses. Forests, pen- 

 itentiaries, parks, highways, canals and game lands are a few examples. Among the smaller 

 units of government, the county is most likely to own lands extensively. However, other 

 governmental units such as townships and conservatidii districts inan\ also have lands of 

 various sorts under their control. 



A large proportion of these public lands will not contain important grouse coverts. Off- 

 setting this, those that do include grouse habitats are usually among the more extensive 

 holdings. Of greatest importance are game lands. ])nblic forests and parks. 



Game Lands 



There should be little difficulty in meeting grouse cover requirements on most game lands. 

 Where the prin\ary land use is for game, it is merely a question of balancing the re(]uircmcnts 

 of the various species. The conflicts are less likely to be connnon or serious than on otiicr 

 lands. Within this limitation anything the grouse needs may be provided. liniilcd. of course, 

 bv the restrictions of economic feasibility. 



In the Northeast, the game and fur animals most commonly found on grouse range are cot- 



