INTRODUCTION 



Large areas of southwestern Idaho deer winter ranges have declined in both acreage and 

 forage productivity (Holmgren and Basile 1959). Many factors have contributed to the decline. 

 Wildfire, insect infestations, rodents, overuse by livestock and big game, urban expansion, 

 agricultural development, road and highway construction, and water storage projects have been 

 among the most damaging impacts (Klemmedson 19b7) . Effectively improving the forage produc- 

 tivity of these winter ranges is a major challenge. 



One way to improve winter ranges is through artifical revegetation--the direct establish- 

 ment of food and cover plants. Seeding or planting often is the only practical means of 

 restoring productivity where essential food and cover plants are lacking or sparse. Early 

 attempts to directly improve southwestern Idaho deer winter ranges through shrub planting 

 programs were mostly unsuccessful (Holmgren 1956). As a result, studies began for developing 

 the knowledge required for effective range restoration. 



Holmgren (1954) evaluated 50 native and exotic browse species for their potential suit- 

 ability for artificial revegetation. Of those species, only four indicated promise, and only 

 antelope bitterbrush {Purshia tridentata [Pursli] DC.) was outstanding. Consequently, many 

 later studies dealt almost exclusively witli bitterbrush. 



These studies included methods of collecting and cleaning seeds, preplanting treatment 

 of seeds (Casebeer 1954), season of seeding, seeding rates, depth of seeding (Basile and 

 Holmgren 1957), seeding methods and equipment, site preparation techniques, effects of plant 

 competition, influences of small mammals and insects, and effects of trampling and browsing. 

 Holmgren and Basile (1959) summarized these investigations and recommended species to be 

 planted, planting methods, planting locations, and methods of protecting and managing planted 

 areas. 



Yet, shrub planting programs failed to achieve consistent results. Small experimental 

 plantings became well-established stands. Successes were uncommon on large plantings. Oper- 

 ational projects were scaled back to minor trials on limited areas. 



Causes of failure are conjectural in most cases. Holmgren (1956) provided evidence that 

 competition for soil moisture from cheatgrass {Browus tectorum L.) and other annuals was 

 particularly damaging. Poor quality seed, improper planting technique, high rodent and rabbit 

 populations, disease, insect depredation, frost injury, frost heaving, summer drought, and 

 trampling and browsing by lioofed mammals have been advanced as associated or additional causes 

 of poor stand establishment. Also, environmental conditions for shrub establishment on south- 

 western Idaho winter ranges are harsh, particularly southern exposures. 



We wondered whether knowledge was in fact adequate for the task of revegetating those 

 winter range problem areas most in need of restoration. Our observations suggested that 

 research-tested and recommended procedures were adequate, and that inconsistent results were at 

 least partly due to improper application. To examine this, we established a carefully control- 

 led and supervised pilot planting on a representative area of deer winter range in poor 

 condition. We designed the planting to serve as a full scale test of the applicability of 

 recommended procedures, to help define problems yet unsolved, and to provide the basis for 

 additional experimentation. For the experimental function, we defined three specific objectives: 

 (1) to compare two planting methods--direct seeding and transplanting; (2) to compare two browse 

 species--antelope bitterbrush and wedgeleaf ceanothus {Ceanothus cuneatus [Hook.] Nutt.); 

 and (3) to compare two bitterbrush seed sources--southwestern Idaho and northwestern Nevada- - 

 for both the seeding and transplanting treatments. 



1 



