ERADICATING TALL LARKSPUR ON CATTLE RANGES. 21 



larkspur as readily as they did other forage species. By close herd- 

 ing on the poison areas, however, all of the larkspur was either 

 grazed or trampled down before the cattle reached it. In the second 

 year of the test difficulty was encountered in securing sheep, for the 

 reason that the cattle range in question was some distance from the 

 regular sheep range, and the larkspur-infested areas to be grazed 

 were not large enough to justify removing the sheep from their ac- 

 customed range to the cattle range. This difficulty caused delay in 

 grazing the larkspur-infested areas and as a result four head of cat- 

 tle were poisoned before these areas were grazed by the sheep. Fur- 

 ther, the sheep were not close-herded on the larkspur patches long 

 enough to graze or destroy all of the larkspur, so that there was still 

 danger of cattle being poisoned after the sheep were removed. 



This case is typical of the difficulty that lies in the way of control- 

 ling loss of cattle from larkspur by grazing the infested areas with 

 sheep. Such areas are often at a considerable distance from regular 

 sheep range and are not large enough and are not properly dis- 

 tributed to accommodate the average-sized band of range sheep for 

 the summer season. To supplement the forage on the larkspur- 

 infested areas by additional portions of the cattle range not infested 

 would make it necessary to reduce the number of cattle below that 

 desired and needed by the cattle owners. 



On the Fishlake National Forest in Utah sheep grazing of in- 

 fested areas proved impracticable. The sheep grazed nearly all of 

 the other forage plants present in preference to the larkspur. Thus 

 by reducing the amount of forage palatable to cattle and eating only 

 a portion of the larkspur the sheep grazing had a tendency to in- 

 crease the loss of cattle from larkspur poisoning rather than to re- 

 duce it. The only effective way to reduce the loss under such condi- 

 tions would be to hold the sheep on the infested areas until they are 

 forced to eat or trample down all of the larkspur. This would be 

 both detrimental to the sheep and destructive to the range. It 

 would mean excessive trampling and in many cases would lead to 

 erosion. 



FENCING AS A PROTECTION AGAINST LOSS. 



Drift fences should be used as a means of controlling losses from 

 tall larkspur only where the cost of eradication is prohibitive, or on 

 areas where " sheeping off " the larkspur is not practicable, or where 

 the fence w r ill have additional value in the management of the stock 

 and range. 



The main objections to the use of drift fences are that they do 

 not offer a permanent remedy for the problem, and that unless 

 horses or sheep are available to place on the fenced areas consider- 

 able feed is wasted. There is also a chance that the stock will get 



