(Bjugstad and Dalrymple 1968), prairie re- 
gions (Moorefield and Hopkins 1951; Weaver 
and Tomanek 1951; Hubbard 1952; Peterson 
and Woolfolk 1955; Dwyer 1961), the foothills 
of the Sierra Nevada (Wagnon 1963), and in 
Ceylon (Fernando and Sivalingam 1961) and 
in Japan (Nakata, Kaminaga, and Yokoyama 
1962). These and other studies have contrib- 
uted to the knowledge of established grazing 
patterns by providing observations of the 
changing seasonal grazing pattern due to plant 
selectiveness of grazing cattle. However, Hub- 
bard (1952) observed that cattle showed no 
preference for different species, but would 
graze any species within reach before moving 
to another area. Also, Jones (1952) in Wales 
recognized grazing patterns but concluded that 
evening and morning dews altered the prefer- 
ence of stock for plant species to the point they 
desired and grazed certain areas over others. 
This points out the value of having microcli- 
matic weather records when observing grazing 
animals. 
The Bjugstad and Dalrymple (1968) study 
in the Ozarks showed that beef heifers grazed 
in old fields and open glades in mid-May where 
there was ample young, nutritious forage. But 
from late May to mid-July the grazing 
switched to open and closed woods, and the 
heifers searched for mushrooms even though 
the open areas still had plenty of forage. The 
protein and phosphorus content of grass and 
sedge forage was dropping to deficiency levels 
during this period. Apparently the cattle were 
alleviating a dietary deficiency by eating the 
mushrooms (high in protein and phosphorus) 
growing in the woods. But to do this, the ani- 
mals spent much time searching and expending 
energy. Fernando and Sivalingam (1961) 
stated, ‘Energy expended in work, as a result 
of excess grazing, is used to the expense of 
production, particularly when herbage is 
sparse and supplementary feeding is not the 
general practice.” 
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY 
Direct observation of domestic livestock can 
determine what species and plant parts are 
being consumed, when (season) different spe- 
cles are eaten, where on the range the animals 
consume the forage, and how the animals feed. 
Observations alone, however, cannot determine 
how much forage is being consumed. The time 
and number of bites required to consume equal 
amounts of various types of forage are not nec- 
essarily equivalent. Observation methods do 
not determine the percentage of weight, 
height, or plants grazed. However, the ranking 
of relative preference is useful. 
Observations on a mixed browse-grass range 
yield a ratio of all species eaten. Plant compo- 
sition and density must be determined since 
availability may influence annual consumption. 
Herd composition must also be considered since 
a cow and calf herd may exhibit different pref- 
erences than a herd of steers. 
Observations are made as animals feed. Ob- 
servations are time consuming, especially on 
brushy ranges, and unfavorable weather can 
increase the time required to obtain adequate 
information. Plans must provide ample time, 
with leeway for unfavorable weather and 
other uncontrollable factors. 
If there is sufficient need, interest, and time, 
then direct observations of livestock can yield 
good information on seasonal forage selected at 
different areas on the range. Direct observa- 
tion does not give a good quantitative measure 
of consumption. However, this method can be 
used to measure deviations from established 
grazing patterns that can be useful to the 
range manager as an indication of forage inad- 
equacies. 
LITERATURE CITED 
Bjugstad, A. J., and Dalrymple, A. 
1968. Behavior of beef heifers on Ozark ranges. Mo. 
Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. B—870, 15 pp. 
Cowlinshaw, S. J., and Alder, F. E. 
1960. The grazing preferences of cattle and sheep. J. 
Agr. Sei. 54(2) : 257-265. 
Currie, P. O. 
1966. Marking cows with human hair dye. J. Range 
Manage. 19: 306-307. 
Dwyer, D. D. 
1961. Activities and grazing preference of cows with 
calves in Northern Osage County, Okla- 
homa. Okla. State Exp. Sta. Bull. B—588, 61 
pp. 
Fernando, G. W. E., and Sivalingam, T. 
1961. Studies on the grazing habits of cattle in rela- 
tion to the seasonal utilization of dry zone 
pasture. Trop. Agr. 117(2): 89-99, bibliog. 
6. 
Halls, L. K. 
1954. The approximation of the cattle diet through 
diet sampling. J. Range Manage. 7: 269-270. 
Herbel, C. H., and Nelson, A. B. 
1966. Species preference of Hereford and Santa 
Gertrudis cattle on Southern New Mexico 
range. J. Range Manage. 19: 177-181. 
Hubbard, W. A. 
1952. Following the animal and_ eye-estimation 
method of measuring the forage consumed 
by grazing animals. Sixth Int. Grassland 
Congr. Proc. IT: 1843-1347. 
Hughes, G. P., and Reid, D. 
1951. Studies on the behavior of cattle and sheep 
in relation to the utilization of grass. J. 
Agr. Sci. 41: 350-366. 
Hurd, R. M., and Blaser, R. E. 
1962. Palatability of herbage: Pasture and range 
research technique, pp. 65-69. Ithaca, N.Y.: 
Comstock Publishing Assn. 
Joint Committee of the American Society of Range 
Management and the Agricultural Board. 
1962. Basic problems and techniques in range re- 
103 
