Starting at the lower edge of the tract, treatments were applied sequentially to two rows 

 of scalped planting spots each, covering the width of the tract on east-west contours. The 

 fixed arrays of six treatments (12 rows) were repeated contiguously up the slope until the 

 entire tract was planted. 



Twelve wel 1 -distributed blocks, approximately 75-by-150 feet (23-by-46 meters) wide and 

 encompassing one set of six treatments each, were subsequently marked off for observation of 

 plant response. But the consistent arrangement of treatments for all blocks gave no design 

 protection against response bias that could result from top-to-bottom nutrient or moisture 

 gradients in the sloped blocks. Sucli gradients were expected to have a minimal effect, however, 

 within the rather short length of slope for each block. Also, this judgment appeared to be 

 supported by the data. Response magnitudes were generally inverse to the direction of expected 

 bias effect associated with treatment location. Thus, within-block bias effects were assumed 

 to be negligible and the data were analy::ed as for a conventional randomized block design. 



PLANTING METHODS 

 Direct Seeding 



Seeding methods were essentially those recommended for bitterbrush by Holmgren and Basile 

 (1959). There were minor modifications based on recent findings. 



Seed source .- -Bitterbrush seeds were collected from Ada and Boise Counties in southwestern 

 Idaho, and from Washoe County in northwestern Nevada. Wedgeleaf ceanothus seeds were collected 

 from Shasta County in north-central California. 



Seed treatment . --Bitterbrush seeds were treated with a mixture of Endrin (50 percent 

 wettable powder) and liquid Arasan 42-S (thiram fungicide). Endrin was applied at a rate of 

 1 percent by weight and Arasan at a rate of 4 percent by weight. Both chemicals were mixed 

 with diluted (9:1) Dow Latex 512R adhesive before application. Aluminum powder was used as a 

 coating to prevent caking. Wedgeleaf ceanothus seeds were soaked in water heated to 176° F 

 (80° C) to reduce hard seed coats (Grisez and Hardin 1967) and planted without Endrin-Arasan 

 treatment . 



Seeding season .- -Both species were seeded in late October and early November 1968. 



Site preparation . --Competing vegetation was reduced by preparing scalps about 3-ft 

 (1-m) square and 2 inches (5 cm) deep with hoes made from square-nosed shovels. 



Seeding depth . --Both bitterbrush and wedgeleaf ceanothus were seeded at a depth of 1 to 

 1,5 inches (2.5 to 3.5 cm) (Basile and Holmgren 1957; Adams 1962). 



Seeding rate . --Three spots were seeded near the center of each scalp at a rate of 12 to 

 16 seeds per spot (Ferguson and Basile 1967). Schussler hand-operated seeders were used to 

 dispense seed and control planting depth. 



Spacing . --About 1,200 scalps per acre (3 000 per ha) were prepared on a spaced grid 

 pattern of 6 ft (2 m) from center to center. 



Transplanting 



Bare-root planting stock (1-0) of both bitterbrush and wedgeleaf ceanothus was obtained 

 from the Lucky Peak Forest Nursery, located near Boise, Idaho. Plants were lifted in early 

 April, sorted, and graded for an undamaged root system, undamaged tops, and adequate root 

 length and root : shoot balance. Polyethylene-lined kraft paper bags were used for cold storage 

 and transport. 



3 



