Vol. 21 , No. 2 
Page 3 
In summary, we could not demonstrate anv s i an i fi rant c 
feeding shelled corn on our study area. Na^raify'o^lng 
average to above average during the 3 -year study. The I976-77 winter was 
unusually severe; the two previous winters were of average severUy? 
We believe that feeding corn was actually somewhat detrimental to the 
squ.rrels. We base our belief on the lower weights and carcass fat indices 
conJro! n area's r q! rrels the Al ee e d ^ ‘a ^ 5Pn ' n9 ° f ' 977 ’ compared with the 
, squ.rrels. As we pointed out in a previous newsletter (MWRL 
20(10:2), our penned fox squirrels lost weight on a pure diet of corn 
Soutrre S 5 h" 8,S ° fOUnd ^ ht lo55 Elated with a corn dlet" 
saw . J S USU f y eat ° n y a Sln 9 ie item at each meal; if they became 
likeW a^eiah! t d ^ n° thS exclusion of "«ural foods, which seems 
k ly, a weight loss such as we demonstrated would be expected. 
R esponses of Prairie Chickens to Habitat Manipulation 
ry 
R* L. Westemeier, 
D. R. Vance 
struck r I e - 0rted ^ MWRL l9(IO):3 ’ a technique for measuring vegetative 
subiect L Tff ^ 9rasslands apparently could distinguish between fields 
subject to different management methods. After 2 years of using this 
technique, we also found that structural differences in fields were related 
to the nest density of prairie chickens. related 
In 1976 , cover in fields containing more than one prairie chicken nest 
(densitvrof a 22T he ' 9ht (MMH) ° f 9 °' 3 Cm and a mean P ercent occurrence 
id a density of oTpe^?'' 6 '’ f ' e ' dS With "° " eStS had an MMH of ^-8 cm 
_ nrl J" 1977 1 . fi ? ,ds containing more than one nest had a cover MMH of 77 R cm 
and a cover densitv of 1 R 7 norrpnf i n £• . . ... n ur ' cm 
An 7 no . , , 7 . - J *' Percent. In fields with one nest, the MMH was 
i°:l t: ss idenlrtioVu Fie,ds with -™ had “ ™ 
These data have not been statistically analyzed because of the diffic.ltl#»c 
S“r h C e U :i° n :with-' Vin9 unequa ^ and ^onl na te subclass n^ts '" 
Nevertheless, two things are evident in the data. First Drairie r hirk*n« 
tend to nest in the tallest, most dense cover available on the particular 
data He ry “ mp,ex s ‘“ d,ed < Yeatter < p ' e ' d r end McGraw sanctuaries). These 
data do not negate the possibility that some cover types are too tall and 
uc cie r r P d r t7 o e t C e iCk : nS V*"'” 85 neSt “ They India* it that 
coter avttlfbte tn Si °" V area 5tudled in 1976 and ' 977 . Second, the 
res !dua! cii^'i —’ 9-th and, hence, less 
much ?t,f he deti Sd t-rt e observatio " s > our management should provide as 
ucn tall, dense residual cover as possible. | n I976 and I977 these cover 
tei'^ L W ^lottt). in UndiStUrbed Stand5 and ^ 5tandS ha -i'ed S ™a r ss 
