684 COORDL\ATL\G GROUSE PRODLLTION WITH OTHER PRIMARY LA\D USES 



lines. Since these areas were also "Public Hunting Grounds", this policy was of great con- 

 cern to many sportsmen. As a resuh of many conferences between interested foresters and 

 game managers the policy was changed to further both interests. Among the several revi- 

 sions was one to provide that a chain width I 66 feet I be left unplanted on each side of all 

 roads and fencerows. Thus a network of hardwood cover was assured through the new 

 coniferous areas since most natural reproduction would be of that type. Also it provided 

 an opportunity for shrub borders to be planted or open edges maintained in accordance 

 with the grouse or other game needs of the area. 



The important thing to emphasize here is not only (hat an adjustment in favor of grouse 

 was made but that it was only possible by adjusting the policies of the agency. It is in the 

 top office that the coordination of grouse production with forestry must originate for public 

 ■forests. 



Parks and Forest Preserves 



There are two types of state parks in New York and they differ from each other markedly. 

 One is the typical reservation of a unique spot for recreational use, such as bathing beaches, 

 beautiful ravines, picnic groves and the like. In the second class are extensive forest areas 

 that include great opportunities for recreation. The Adirondack and Catskill Forest Pre- 

 serves and the Allegany State Park are examples of the latter. Their management differs 

 from that of a public forest in that they are not managed for the production of wood products. 

 In fact, in the Adirondack and Catskill parks, the State Constitution expressly forbids the har- 

 vest of live trees, which includes a large share of practical forestry, as well as those game 

 management practices involving improvement of the environment by controlling the vegeta- 

 tive cover by cutting. 



The ordinary state parks are areas of concentrated human activity and hence it has been 

 necessary to prohibit hunting. Even where grouse range exists in a park, this obviously 

 limits the opportunity for correlating grouse production, since the normal objective of pro- 

 duction is harvest by hunting. The cause is not wholly lost, however, for the grouse is also 

 a first class asset to a park just from the natural history point of view. If a park area can 

 support grouse for people to see, the usefulness of the park for recreation is thereby 

 enhanced. 



Except within the highlv developed (and often artificialized) portions of a park, the man- 

 agement of park woodlands may well incorporate measures advantageous to grouse. \\ hen a 

 woodland border is being landscaped, it can well become a useful shrub border (fall feeding 

 ground) for grouse by a judicious selection of shrub species. When a nature tr;iil is being 

 constructed, it may well provide desirable openings for the grouse. 



These methods should be worked into the development plan for the area with deliberate 

 consideration of the desired objectives. The maintenance problems must likewise be cared 

 for by specific practices to bo fdlloucd in tiic (ipcr;iti(in of the park. 



The forest preserve ty|)e of park presents a greater opportunity for |)roducing grouse than 

 parks of the kind just mentioned. In the Northeast, it is all grouse rangi-. usually with a 

 rather low carrying capacity but capable of great improvement. On the other hand, most 

 grouse management in such preserves in New York State is impossible owing to the legal lim- 

 itations on use of the areas. Most of the forest preserve parks are open to hunting, how- 

 ever. 



