Table 25. Amphibians and reptiles observed on the Otter Creek 

 study area. 



1. Woodhouse toad 



2. Tiger salamander 



3. Northern chorus frog 



4. Leopard frog 



5. Snapping turtle 



6. Painted turtle 



7. Sagebrush lizard 



8. Racer 



9. Bull snake 



10. Prairie rattlesnake 



Ba{)0 woo dhou-itA. 

 Ambif-itoma tigfiZnum 

 P6zadacKi6 t>i-ii>(i>ilata 

 Rand plplzn^ 

 Ch^tijdna iitfipzYitlna. 

 ChfiijfiZmyii picta 

 SdztopoKViii gfLacioia6 

 Colubzfi con&tfi-ictoit 

 P-ituophl.!, catzni{)t/i 

 Cfiotatai, vifildii 



Hanging Woman Creek 



Mule Deer 



Population characteristics : During the fifteen months of field 

 work, 1830 mule deer were observed in the Hanging Woman Creek 

 study area (Table 1). Group size averages were largest during 

 the winter season, 10.2, and smallest during the summer time, 

 2.0. Deer gradually separated from their winter herds during 

 April and May in both years reaching their smallest sized groups 

 in June. Winter herds were formed in December. 



Hanging Woman Creek supported the highest density of mule deer 

 of the three study areas. Observations per hour of aerial 

 survey ranged from a summer low of 19.4 to a winter high of 

 74.8 (Table 26). During the January flight, 144.4 mule deer were 

 seen per hour of flight. The highest number seen in Otter Creek 

 per hour was 55.0 (Table 2). 



The population structure (Table 27) shows a slightly lower 

 percentage of fawns than observed in the Otter Creek area. Does 

 comprised 47.8 percent of the population in October. This is 

 slightly higher than the 41.7 percent observed in the Otter 

 Creek area (Table 3). While the fawn production was lower than 

 that observed on Otter Creek, it was still very good at 92.2 fawns 

 per 100 does. This area has been classified as having stable 

 population levels (Swenson 1978) of mule deer in low nutritional 

 condition (Swenson and Knapp 1979). These data seem to indicate 

 an under-harvested mule deer herd. 



Distribution : Spring mule deer distribution is shown in Figure 

 22. The deer are fairly evenly distributed throughout the study 

 area. The largest grouping of observations stretches across 



53 



