Register      Login
The Rangeland Journal The Rangeland Journal Society
Journal of the Australian Rangeland Society
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Spatial Distribution of Sheep, Feral Goats and Kangaroos in Woody Rangeland Paddocks.

J Landsberg and J Stol

The Rangeland Journal 18(2) 270 - 291
Published: 1996

Abstract

The densities and distributions of sheep, kangaroos and feral goats were assessed from extensive dung surveys following dry, moderate and green seasons in three large paddocks in the wooded rangelands of north-westem New South Wales. Densities of sheep (21 9nanimals/km2) were around the long-term district average. Densities of goats (24 animals/km2) were often higher than sheep. Densities of kangaroos (1 1 animals/km2) were usually much lower than either sheep or goats. Animal density was usually related to vegetative cover (ground cover for sheep and kangaroos, shrub and tree cover for goats), but there were also differences among paddocks. Distribution of kangaroos showed the most differentiation according to vegetation type, with densities being consistently high on a small area of alluvial grassland and very low in the paddock with no alluvial plains and the lowest levels of ground cover. The distributions of sheep and goats were correlated in the dry season and both species showed similar ranges in preferences for different vegetation types. Of the large herbivores present in these woody rangelands, kangaroos were the most selective in terms of the vegetation types they grazed, and goats were the least selective. Because their grazing activities are focussed on alluvial grasslands, kangaroos have potential to degrade this locally uncommon vegetation type. However, the densities of kangaroos in other, more widespread, vegetation types were uniformly low. Goats were frequently the most abundant large herbivores present and were also the least selective. Therefore goats probably have the greatest potential for causing widespread grazing impacts across much of these woody rangelands.

https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ9960270

© ARS 1996

Committee on Publication Ethics


Export Citation Cited By (40)

View Dimensions