EMSL-LV-539-6 EMSL-LV-539-6
FOOD HABITS AND RADIONUCLIDE TISSUE CONCENTRATIONS
OF NEVADA DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP 1972-1973
Monitoring Systems Research and Development Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, NV 89114
Published June 1976
This study performed under a Memorandum
of Understanding No. AT(26-l)-539
for the
U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the
United States Government. Neither the United States nor the
United States Energy Research and Development Administration,
nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, sub-
contractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for
the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information,
apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its
use would not infringe privately-owned rights.
AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
SPRINGFIELD, VA 22161
PRICE: PAPER COPY $5.45 MICROFICHE $2.25
-------
EMSL-LV-539-6
EMSL-LV-539-6
FOOD HABITS AND RADIONUCLIDE TISSUE CONCENTRATIONS
OF NEVADA DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP 1972-1973
by ' *
K. W. Brown, D. D. Smith, D. E. Bernhardt,
K. R. Giles, and J. B. Helvie**
Monitoring Systems Research and Development Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, NV 89114
Published June 1976
This study performed under a Memorandum
of Understanding No. AT(26-l)-539
for the
U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Bernhardt is Chief, Artificial Radioactivity Section, Office of
Radiation Programs, Las Vegas Facility.
Mr. Helvie is Refuge Manager of the Sacramento National Wildlife
Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, Rt. 1, Box 311, Willows,
CA 95988.
-------
Effective June 29, 1975, the National Environmental Research Center-
Las Vegas (NERC-LV) was designated the Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory-Las Vegas (EMSL-LV). This Laboratory is one of
three Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratories of the
Office on Monitoring and Technical Support in the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development.
-------
FOOD HABITS AND RADIONUCLIDE TISSUE CONCENTRATIONS OF NEVADA DESERT
BIGHORN SHEEP 1972-1973*
Kenneth W. Brown, Donald D. Smith,
David E. Bernhardt, and Kenneth R. Giles
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
P. 0. Box 15027
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Jack B. Helvie
Sacramento National Wildlife Regure
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
Rt. 1, Box 311
Willows, CA 95988
Abstract: The botanical composition of the diet and radionuclide
content of selected tissues of desert bighron sheep (Ovis canadensis
nelsoni) collected during the 1972 and 1973 hunting seasons were
determined by analyzing rumen contents, and lung, liver, kidney,
and bone tissues.
Botanical examination of the rumen contents showed that grass
exceeded 50% of the diet of 10 of 14 animals collected in 1972
and 12 of 18 animals collected in 1973. Desert needlegrass (Stipa
speciosa), Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis hymenoides), and squirrel
tail (Sitanion hystrix) were the major grasses utilized. The
dominant shrub species consumed included the joint firs (Ephedra
viridis) and (Ephedra nevadensis), Mohave yucca (Yucca schidigera),
and cliff rose (Cowania mexicana).
*
Presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the Desert Bighorn Council,
April 9-11, 1975, Indio, California.
-------
With the exception of potassium-40, gamma-emitting radionuclides
were not detected in desert bighorn sheep tissue. The tritium
levels reported were within environmental levels. Strontium-90
levels averaged 4.9 and 4.1 pCi/gram of bone ash for 1972 and
1973, respectively, continuing the downward trend observed in
recent years. Uranium levels were similar to those reported from
cattle grazing the same general geographic areas. The daily con-
sumption for one year of 500 grams of liver containing the highest
levels of plutonium and uranium would result in a dose to the human
bone, the tissue expected to receive the highest dose, of approxi-
mately 1 mrem/year. This is less than 1% of the radiation
protection guides for the general population.
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service of the U.S. Department of
Interior and the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-
Las Vegas (EMSL-LV) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
have in past years initiated and cooperated in many investigations
concerning the desert bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni). The
information and data obtained from these cooperative studies such as
reported by Helvie and Smith (1970), Kramp (1965), and Cohen (1968),
have contributed not only to a greater understanding of this animal's
behavior, but also to better management practices.
-------
Investigations to determine radionuclide concentrations in various
tissues of wildlife species have been conducted for many years by
the Animal Investigation Program (AIP) of EMSL-LV. This program
was established in 1957 by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
(Recently renamed the Energy Research and Development Administra-
tion, ERDA). The program assesses fission and activation products
in biological samples, maintains veterinary relations with off-site
populations, and investigates alleged damage to domestic animals
from the ERDA testing activities.
During the past few years, a number of studies have been conducted
in Nevada in areas inhabited by desert bighorn sheep. These investi-
gations have been conducted in both southern Nevada and central
Nevada. The emphasis has been either on habitat analysis or vege-
tative surveys and, in some cases, food habit analyses. A few
reports have been published concerning radionuclide concentration
in selected tissues of big game animals in the southern Nevada area.
The data from most of these reports have been incorporated into a
soon to be published book entitled, The Desert Bighorn, Its Life,
History, Ecology, and Management, edited by Lowell Sumner and
Gale Monson (1971). Other data, which will be extremely useful
to investigators, include bighorn habitat evaluations by Ferrier
and Bradley (1971) and Breyen (1971), and the floras of the Virgin
and the McCullough Mountains by Armstrong (1969) and Bostick (1973).
-------
Most of the data dealing with radionuclide concentrations in desert
bighorn sheep have been reported in AIP annual progress reports.
Some additional data have been published in Desert Bighorn Council
Transactions. These papers were authored by Smith (1971), Kramp
(1965), and Fountain (1962).
In 1972, a cooperative study between the two Federal agencies
mentioned and the Nevada Fish and Game Commission was initiated to
identify species composition of vegetation in the rumen ingesta of
desert bighorn sheep and to determine the radioactive concentration
in selected tissues. The data presented in this report are from
animals collected during the 1972 hunt from November 16 to
December 17, and from the 1973 hunt from November 17 to December 16.
The authors are indebted to personnel of the Region III Headquarters
of the Nevada Department of Fish and Game for disseminating sample
collection kits and receiving samples from participating hunters.
The cooperation of these sportsmen in collecting samples from their
kills made this study possible.
METHODS
Prior to the 1972 and 1973 hunting seasons, hunters were given an
indoctrination course which emphasized the identification of
legally harvestable rams. During this course, each hunter was
requested, on a voluntary basis, to collect the following tissues,
-------
lung, liver, kidney, and bone, and to collect a sample of
rumen ingesta.
The samples were delivered to EMSL-LV for radionuclide and food
habit analyses. All samples except the bone were analyzed for
gamma-emitting radionuclides on a 4- by 4-inch Nal(Tl) crystal at-
tached to a 400-channel pulse height analyzer. Kidney samples were
analyzed for tritium using the method described previously by
Moghissi trt al_. (1973).
The samples for strontium, plutonium, and uranium analyses were
prepared by dry ashing. Plutonium and uranium were analyzed by
alpha spectroscopy (Talvitie, 1971 and 1972). Other radionuclide
analytical procedures used at the NERC-LV are described by
Johns (1970).
The botanical analysis of the rumen ingesta was accomplished by
examining a random aliquot of the ingesta with a binocular micro-
scope. The sample was washed on a fine mesh screen preparatory
to examination. After the species in the sample were identified,
a visual estimate of the percentage of each species was made and
recorded (Leach, 1956). No effort was made to determine the
radionuclide content of individual species found in the rumen
ingesta.
-------
The browse and forb species were identified according to Munz (1965)
and grasses according to Hitchcock (1950).
In 1972, the tissues and rumen ingesta from 14 animals were analyzed.
All were harvested in southern Nevada with eight collected on the
Desert National Wildlife Range, two from the Meadow Valley Range,
two from the Muddy Mountain area, and one each from the McCullough
Mountains and the Eldorado Mountains. These rams ranged from
4 to 11 years of age.
In 1973, 18 animals were sampled. Similar to the 1972 hunt, most
of these animals were collected in southern Nevada with 10 coming
from the Desert National Wildlife Range. Of the remaining eight
animals, three were collected in the Muddy Mountains-Boulder Wash
area, two from the Eldorado Mountains, one from the Meadow Valley
Range area, one from the Highland Range, and one from central Nevada
near the Lone Mountain in Esmeralda County. These rams ranged from
4 to 10 years of age.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Food Habits Analysis
The animals collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range will be
discussed and presented as a single grouping, because of their
geographical relationship. The data from the remaining animals,
except the ram harvested in Esmeralda County during the 1973 hunt,
will be composited and presented as another separate group. The
-------
compositing of data from the latter group was done because of the
small sample size collected from any specific geographical area.
Tables 1 and 2 show the botanical composition of forage utilized by
desert bighorn sheep collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range
in 1972 and 1973, respectively. The data show that in 1972 grasses
exceeded 70% of the diet of five of the eight animals collected,
with two having less than 15% and 40%. Browse species contributed
an average of 40% composition, with animals No. 1 -and No. 4 having
in excess of 85%. The forbs in the rumen contents of these eight
animals averaged less than 1.0%. However, wild buckwheat
(Eriogonum spp.) was present in 75% of the desert bighorn sheep
collected. Identified grasses included blue grass (Poa spp.) and
desert needlegrass (Stipa speciosa) which contributed an average
of 2.4% and 1.0%, respectively, to the diet of these animals while
unidentified grasses constituted 53.2% of the diet. Cliff rose
(Cowania mexicana), the joint firs (Ephedra vicidis) and (Ephedra
nevadensis), and big sagebush (Artemisia tridentata) were the major
browse species consumed, contributing 12.8%, 10.6%, 9.8%, and 5.9%
of the diet, respectively.
In 1973, the type of vegetation consumed by the ten animals col-
lected on the Desert National Wildlife Range was comparable to
that utilized by the eight animals collected in 1972. Grasses
-------
8
made up slightly more than 50% of the diet with browse species con-
tributing 45%. Forb species consumption increased over 1972 with
the spurge (Euphorbia spp.) and other unidentified species con-
tributing over half of the forbs utilized. A total of seven grasses
were identified in the ingesta with four of these contributing an
average of 39.4% of the diet. The frequency of occurrence of these
four species in the rumen was 80% for Stipa specidsa, 70% for
Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis hymenoides), 50% for squirrel tail
(Sitanion hystrix), and 60% for Hilaria jamesii. The major dif-
ference in browse species utilized between the two years was the
presence of the Mohave yucca (Yucca schidigera). This species}
which was absent in 1972, contributed over 17.0% of the diet and
occurred in 70% of the animals in 1973. Other important browse
species included Ephedra viridis, Cowania mexicana, four-winged
saltbush (Atriplex canescens), and Artemisia tridentata.
Tables 3 and 4 show the average botanical composition and frequency
of occurrence of plant species eaten by the second group of animals
harvested in southern Nevada from areas other than the Desert
National Wildlife Range during the 1972 and 1973 hunting seasons.
Grasses were the dominant type of vegetation by composition found
in these animals with 73% in 1972 and 72% in 1973. Forbs exceeded
13% of the diet in the 1973 animals with Euphorbia spp. accounting
for 7.8% of this total. The amount of forbs in the ingesta of the
1972 animals, 1.2% (Table 3), and that consumed by the 1973 animals,
-------
harvested on the Desert National Wildlife Range, 0.7% (Table 1),
are comparable. The occurrence of browse species for both groups
was approximately the same with Ephedra viridis heading the list
followed by CoWam'a mexicana, Ephedra nevadensis. and Artemisia
tridentata. Yucca schidigera was present in both groups of 1973
animals (Tables 2 and 4); however, the difference is quite signi-
ficant. An explanation for this difference is difficult as
Yucca schidigera is commonly found in all the bighorn habitats. The
preferred grasses were approximately the same as those found in
the animals collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range, with
Oryzopsis hvmenoides. Stipa speciosa. Sitanion hystrix, and
Hi!aria jamesii being dominant.
The single ram harvested on the Lone Mountain in Esmeralda County
had nearly 100% grass in its rumen. There was only a trace amount
of Eriogonium spp. in the ingesta and no browse species. The
preferred grasses included Stipa speciosa followed by Sitanion
hystrix, and giant wild rye (Elymus cinereus). The data obtained
from this animal substantiated the work done by Yoakum (1964).
He concluded that grasses were the preferred food during the fall
and winter months in this area.
The results of the food habit analysis from all these animals which
were collected in a variety of geographical areas in southern
Nevada, support previous investigations by Barrett (1964),
-------
10
Yoakum (1966), and Browning (1971). They reported that grasses
made up more than 50% of the diet of animals collected on the
Desert National Wildlife Range, the Meadow Valley Range, and near
the Potosi Mountain.
Radionuclide Content of Selected Tissues
The radionuclide data for each tissue from each animal sampled
during 1972 and 1973 are presented in the AIP annual reports
authored by Smith Łt aJL (1975 a, b). These data are summarized
in Tables 5 and 6 and in the following discussion. The data are
12
expressed as pCi or fCi. A pCi is 10 Curies and a fCi is
10 Curies. The Curie is a group of units indicating 3.7x10
disintegrations per second or the disintegration rate of one gram
of radium.
Other than the naturally occurring potassium-40, gamma-emitting
radionuclides did not exceed minimum detectable activities (MDA)
in any of the tissues sampled during 1972 or 1973. The rumen
contents occasionally contained detectable levels of zirconium-95,
ruthenium-103, cesium-137, and cerium-141.
Tritium levels in the aqueous portion of the kidneys during 1972
ranged from 260 to 1,800 pCi/liter (median value 355 pCi/liter)
while the 1973 levels ranged from 240 to 730 pCi/liter (median
value of 390 pCi/liter). These values are considered to be within
-------
11
environmental limits as the water from Lake Mead in 1973 averaged
890 pCi/liter (range of 640 to 1,300 pCi/liter) as reported by
the Monitoring Operations Division of EMSL-LV (1974).
The average strontium-90 content in the 1972 bones was 4.9 pCi/gram
of ash and 4.1 pCi/gram of ash in the 1973 samples. This continues
the downward trend observed in recent years; e.g., the average for
1971 was 5.8 pCi/gram of ash.
As reflected in Tables 5 and 6, bone (hock) was the only tissue
sampled during both years in sufficient numbers to allow meaningful
comparison of actinide values. The actinide levels in desert
bighorn sheep are generally of the same magnitude as reported in
cattle from similar areas. Uranium values were higher in animals
collected in southern Nevada than in animals from the Desert
National Wildlife Range. This was also found in a 1972 study with
cattle from an area near Searchlight, Nevada, and from the Nevada
Test Site (Smith e_fc ajk 1976). This probably reflects the levels
of naturally occurring uranium present in the soils of the two
areas (Garside 1973).
Human dose estimates, for assumed ingestion of the liver from
bighorn sheep, are given in Table 7. The estimates are for human
bone, based on postulated consumption of 500 grams of liver per day
from the animal containing the highest measured concentrations of
-------
12
plutonium and uranium. The concentrations of radionuclides, in pCi
per kilogram of wet tissue versus gram of ash, are taken from the
tabulation by Smith et_ al_. (1975 a, b).
The dose calculation parameters are based on the data and assump-
tions of the International Commission on Radiological Protection
(1959, 1968). Details concerning the calculations of the dose
conversion parameters are given by Smith e_t aj_. (1976).
The total dose committment to the bone, accrued over a 50-year
period after ingestion for one year, is 7 mrem. The total dose
rate at the end of one year's ingestion (not given in Table 7) is
about 1 mrem/year. This is less than 1% of the radiation
protection guides of the National Council on Radiation Protection
and Measurements (1971) for a sample of the general population.
It is obvious from these calculations that the consumption of the
flesh of these animals would pose little hazard to the public.
Insufficient data are available to draw any conclusions on possible
radiation effects on the desert bighorn sheep. However, detrimental
or deleterious effects have not been observed in domestic animals
whose tissues contained similar levels of radionuclides. Moreover,
pathological lesions have not been found at necropsy that could be
attributed to ionizing radiation.
—.
The mrem is 0.001 rem, a radiation dosimetry quantity that
considers energy absorption and biological effectiveness.
-------
13
LITERATURE CITED
Armstrong, J. D., 1969. Vegetation of the Virgin Mountains, Clark
County, Nevada. A thesis. University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
106 pp.
Barrett, R. H., 1964. Seasonal Food Habits of the Bighorn at the
Desert Game Range, Nevada. Desert Bighorn Council Trans-
actions (8) pp. 85-93.
Bostick, V. B., 1973. Vegetation of the McCullough Mountains,
Clark County, Nevada. A thesis. University of Nevada, Las
Vegas. 232 pp.
Breyen, L. J., 1971. Desert Bighorn Habitat Evaluation in the
Eldorado Mountains of Southern Nevada. A thesis. University
of Nevada, Las Vegas. 96 pp.
Browning, B. M., 1972. The Desert Bighorn, Its Life History,
Ecology and Management. Edited for the Desert Bighorn
Council by Lowell Sumner and Gale Monson. Chapter 4. Food.
(Preprint).
Cohen, S. L., 1968. Amputation of the Forelimb of a Desert
Bighorn Sheep. Desert Bighorn Council Transactions (12)
pp. 28-39.
The Desert Bighorn, Its Life History, Ecology and Management.
Edited for the Desert Bighorn Council by Lowell Sumner
and Gale Monson. 1971. (In review).
Ferrier, G. J. and W. G. Bradley, 1970. Bighorn Habitat in the
Highland Range. Desert Bighorn Council Transactions (14)
pp. 66-93.
Fountain, E. L., 1962. Nuclear Test Program as It is Related to
the Desert Bighorn Sheep. Desert Bighorn Council Trans-
actions (6) pp. 62-67.
Garside, L. J., 1973. Radioactive Mineral Occurrences in Nevada.
Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology. University of Nevada, Reno.
Bulletin 81. 121 pp.
Helvie, J. B. and D. D. Smith, 1970. Summary of Necropsy Findings
in Desert Bighorn Sheep. Desert Bighorn Council Trans-
actions (14) pp. 28-42.
-------
14
Hitchcock, A. S., 1950. Manual of the Grasses of the United
States. U.S. Department of Agriculture Misc. Publ. 200,
1051 pp. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1959. Report
of Committee II on Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation,
Report 2.
International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1968. Evalu-
ation of Radiation Doses to Body Tissues from Internal
Contamination Due to Occupational Exposure, Report 10.
Johns, F. B., 1970. Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory
Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical Methods. SWRHL-11.
Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory, Las Vegas,
Nevada. 122 pp.
90
Kramp, R. C., 1965. Preliminary Report on Sr Levels in Hock
Joints of Desert Bighorn Sheep and Mule Deer. Desert Bighorn
Council Transactions (9) pp. 87-92.
Leach, H. R., 1956. Food Habits of the Great Basin Deer Herds of
California. California Fish and Game No. 4. Vol. 42.
pp. 243-308.
Moghissi, A. A., E. W. Bretthauer, and E. H. Compton, 1973.
Separation of Water from Biological and Environmental Samples
for Tritium Analysis. Analytical Chem. Vol. 45.
pp. 1565-1566.
Monitoring Operations Laboratory, 1974. Environmental Monitoring
Report for the Nevada Test Site and Other Test Areas Used
for Underground Nuclear Detonations. NERC-LV-539-31.
National Environmental Research Center-Las Vegas, Las Vegas,
Nevada. 106 pp.
Munz, P. A. and D. D. Keck, 1965. A California Flora. University
of California Press. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1971.
Basic Radiation Protection Criteria. NCRP Report No. 39.
Smith, D. D., 1971. Radiation Surveillance of Ruminants On and
About the Nevada Test Site. Desert Bighorn Council Trans-
actions (15) pp. 101-108.
-------
15
Smith, D. D., S. C. Black, D. E. Bernhardt, R. R. Kinnison, and
K. R. Giles, 1976. Tissue Burdens of Selected Radionuclides
in Beef Cattle On and Around the Nevada Test Site. NERC-LV-
539-29. National Environmental Research Center-Las Vegas,
Las Vegas, Nevada. 84 pp.
Smith, D. D., K. R. Giles, and D. E. Bernhardt, 1975a. Animal
Investigation Program 1972 Annual Report. NERC-LV-539-35.
National Environmental Research Center-Las Vegas, Las Vegas,
Nevada. 82 pp. (in press)
, 1975b. Animal Investigation Program 1973 Annual
Report. National Environmental Research Center-Las Vegas,
Las Vegas, Nevada, (in preparation)
Talvitie, N. A., 1971. Radiochemical Determination of Plutonium in
Environmental and Biological Samples by Ion Exchange. Western
Environmental Research Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 43, pp. 1827-1830.
, 1972. Electrodeposition of Actinides for Alpha
Spectrometric Determination. Western Environmental Research
Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada. Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 44,
pp. 280-283.
Yoakum, J., 1964. Bighorn Food Habits - Range Relationships in the
Silver Peak Range, Nevada. Desert Bighorn Council Trans-
actions (8) pp. 95-102.
, 1966. Comparison of Mule Deer and Desert Bighorn
Seasonal Food Habits. Desert Bighorn Council Transactions (10)
pp. 65-70.
-------
Table 1
Botanical Composition by Percent of Forage Eaten by Bighorn
Sheep Collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range, Nevada-1972
Animal Av. Compo-
Species 1 2 3 45 6 7 8 sition (%) Frequency (%)
Other (unidentified) O6770TOTO 3370 S570 TO 71.0 53.2 100
Poa_ spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 2.0 10.0 2.4 37
Stipa speciosa 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 12
Hi!aria jamesii 1.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 25
Festuca spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.6 25
Stipa spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 12
Oryzopsis hymenoides 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 25
Bromus tectorium0.0 0.0 T 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 T 12
Total grass 7.0 79.0 75.0 12.0 40.0 95.0 78.0 84.0 58.7
Other (unidentified) T 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 50
Eriogonum spp.. 0.0 1.0 T 0.0 1.0 T T T 0.2 75
Chaenactis spp. 0.0 T 0.0 0.0 0.0 T 0.0 0.0 T 25
Phacelia spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 T 0.0 T 12
Total forbs T 1.0 T 1.0 3.0 1.0 T T 0.7
Cowania mexicana 89.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 9.0 1.0 12.8 75
Ephedra vTridis 0.0 0.0 0.0 84.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 12
Ephedra nevadensis 0.0 2.0 20.0 0.0 54.0 1.0 6.0 1.0 9.8 62
ArtemisiFtridentata 4.0 15.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 T 12.0 14.0 5.9 75
Other (unidentified) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.1 62
Cercocarpus intricatus 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 25
Ceanothus g'reggii 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 12
Pinus monophylla 0.0 0.0 0.0 T 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 T 12
iota I shrubs 93.0 20.0 25.0 87.0 57.0 4.0 22.0 16.0 40.6
trace
-------
Table 2
Botanical Composition by Percent of Forage Eaten by Bighorn
Sheep Collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range, Nevada-!973
ecies
^ speclosa
Oryzopsis hymenoides
Sitanion hystrix
Other (unidentified)
Hi!aria jamesii
Stipa spp.
Elymus cinereus
Bromus tectorium
1
b.O
9.0
17.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
b.
20.
0.
18.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
ly.o
0.0
0.0
9.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
10.0
0.0
0.0
26.0
4.0
14.0
0.0
0.0
Animal
5 6
34.0
13.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.
13.
0.
15.
0.
0.
6.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0.0
36.0
26.0
0.0
19.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8
24.0
0.0
16.0
0.0
17.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
9
21.0
6.0
15.0
3.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10
19.0
6.0
21.0
14.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Ay
si
Compo
tion
13
10
9
8
5
1.4
0.6
0.2
50.1
Frequency
80
70
50
60
60
10
10
10
Other (unidentified)
Euphorbia spp.
Sphaeralcea spp.
Eriogonum spp.
Erodi um~c"i cutari urn
Linum lewisii
Astragalus spp.
Total forbs
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
T
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
3.0
2.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
8.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o.
0.0
0.0
0.
4.
4.
0.
0.
3.
0.
11.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
T
T
1.6
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
T
4.2
40
30
20
30
10
10
10
-------
Table 2 (contd)
Botanical Composition by Percent of Forage Eaten by Bighorn
Sheep Collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range, Nevada-1973
Species
Yucca schidigera
Ephedra viridis~
Cowania mexicana
Atrip!ex canescens
Artemisia tridentata
Juniperus monosperma
Cercocarpus intricatus
Other (unidentified)
Yucca brevifolia
Encelia spp.
Colegyme ramosissima
Atn'plex spp.
Total shrubs
T = trace
1
36.0
0.0
7.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
32.0
0.0
16.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
3
38.0
11.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
0.0
17.0
6.0
0.0
2.0
1.0
9.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
Animal
5 6
4.0
12.0
19.0
6.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.0
14.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
7
4.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8
0.0
2.0
1.0
28.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
26.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.0
0.0
0.0
Av. Compo-
10 sition (%}
32.0"
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
17.4
5.8
5.6
3.4
3.0
2.8
2.6
1.7
1.4
1.2
0.6
0.2
Frequency (%)
70
60
70
20
50
20
40
40
20
10
20
10
66.0 54.0 61.0 46.0 45.0 58.0 13.0 41.0 38.0 34.0
45.7
00
-------
Table 3
Botanical Composition and Frequency of Occurrence
of Plant Species Eaten by Six Bighorn Sheep
Collected in Southern Nevada-1972*
19
Species
Other (unidentified)
Hi!aria jamesii
Festuca spp.
Stipa speciosa
Oryzopsi s hymenoi des
Poa spp.
Hordeurn spp.
Common Name
Galleta grass
Fescue
Desert needlegrass
Indian rice grass
Blue grass
Wild barley
Total
grass
Average
Composition
69.0
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.2
TO
,3
.0
,5
.3
,2
(%)
Frequency (%)
100
83
16
16
16
16
16
Eriogonum spp.
Other (unidenti fi ed)
Helianthus spp.
SphaeralZea spp.
Wild buckwheat
Sunflower
Mallow
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.2
Total forbs 1.2
100
16
33
16
Ephedra vi ri di s
Other (unidentified)
Ephedra nevadensis
Ceanothus greggn
CeanothuT spp.
Yucca spp".
Artemisia tridentata
Cowania mexicana
Cercocarpus intricutus
Coleogyne ramosissima
EncelTaTpp.
Atriplex canescens
Joint fir
Nevada joint fir
Desert ceanothus
Ceanothus
Yucca
Big sagebrush
Cliff rose
Little-leaved mahogany
Blackbrush
Encelia
Four-winged saltbush
Total browse
12.0
7.3
2.7
1.3
0.8
0.6
0
0
0
0.2
T
T
33
66
66
33
50
16
50
33
33
33
16
33
T = trace
*Excluding the Desert National Wildlife Range
-------
20
Table 4
Botanical Composition and Frequency of Occurrence
of Plant Species Eaten by Seven Bighorn Sheep
Collected in Southern Nevada-1973*
Species
Qry^opsis
S/tipa
hmenoi des.
Sitanion hystrix
Other (unidentified)
Elymus qinereus
Hilaria jamesij
Sporobolus spp.
Common Name
Indian rice grass
Desert needlegrass
Squirrel tail
Giant wild rye
Galleta grass
Dropseed
Total grass
Average
Composition (%)
23.4
22.8
13.9
8.1
1.4
1.4
0.9
7T79-
Frequency (%)
TOO
100
57
57
29
29
14
Euphorbia spp.
Other (unidentified)
Argemone spp.
Eriogonum spp.
Erodium"cicutarium
Chaenactis spp.
Linum lewisii
Spurge 7.8
2.6
Poppy 0.8
Wild buckwheat 0.7
Heron's bill 0.6
Pincushion 0.6
Blue flax 0.1
Total forbs TIT?
71
57
29
43
29
29
14
Cowania mexicana
Other (unidentified)
Artemi s i a tridentata
Ephedra Viridis
Yucca schidigera
Ephedra nevadensis
Quercus gambelii
Coleogyne ramosissima
Arctostapliylos spp.
Cliff rose
Big sagebrush
Joint fir
Mohave yucca
Nevada joint fir
Gambel's oak
Black brush
Manzanita
Total browse
5.
3.
2.
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.1
TO
,1
.8
.0
,4
.9
.9
,4
,3
29
71
14
43
29
14
14
29
14
Excluding the Desert National Wildlife Range
-------
Table 5
Surmiary of Actinide and Strontium Levels in the Ash from Selected Tissues from
Desert Bighorn Sheep Collected on the Desert National Wildlife Range, Nevada, 1972-1973
Tissue
Bone
Liver
Lung
Year
1972
1973
1972
. .^^
1973
1972
1973
238Pu
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Medi an
6
0
<0.87-<2.2
<2
8
7
0.77-45
2.4
7
5
<1. 6-790
11
1
0
<5.4
10
7
3.3-130
11
239PU
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
6
4
<1.3-5.2
3.1
8
4
<0.41-2.6
1.6
7
7
5.4-210
83
1
18
10
6
<7. 1-190
19
234U
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
6
6
1.2-7.7
6.4
8
8
1.8-6.4
2.85
NO SAMPLES
2
2
4.5-49
26.7
NA
6
6
5.8-140
14
235U
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
6
1
<0.31-<0.88
<0.43
8
0
<0.28-<1.2
<0.43
COLLECTED
2
0
<2.4-<12
7.2
NA
6
1
<4.6-6.4
<1.75
238U
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
6
6
1.1-7.3
6
8
8
1-3.9
1.8
2
2
5.5-25
15.3
NA
6
6
1.7-150
10.5
89Sr
pCi/kg
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
6
0
<3.4-<4.7
<3.5
8
2
MDA
Range
Median
6
6
3.4-9.4
4.8
8
8
2.4-7.7
4.3
NA
NA
NA
NA = Not analyzed.
-------
Table 6
Summary of Actinide and Strontium Levels in the Ash from Selected Tissues
from Desert Bighorn Sheep Collected in Southern Nevada, 1972-1973*
Tissue
Bone
Liver
Lungs
Year
1972
1973
1972
1973
1972
1973
238n
Pu
. fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
0
<0.76-<2.9
<2.2
7
6
<1.7-77
17
1
1,800 ±310
8
7
<6. 9-1 ,000
33
?^Q
"yPu
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
4
<1.3-17
2.9
7
2
<0. 62-15
<1.5
1
1
670 ± 140
8
4
<5.2-29
<14
234,
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
5
4.7-16
10
7
7
1.5-16
3.8
NO SAMPLES
1
1
710 ± 78
NO SAMPLES
7
6
<12-170
46
235U
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
2
<0.4-2
<0.63
7
1
<0.41-1.5
<0.49
COLLECTED
1
1
35 ± 14
COLLECTED
7
2
<2.5-10
<5
238U
fCi/g
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
5
4.4-15
9.2
7
6
<0.91-13
2.5
1
1
610 ± 72
7
7
8.9-170
34
89Sr
pCi/kg
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
0
<3.4-<5.2
<4
7
0
<0.83-<22
<2
NA
NA
90Sr
pCi/kg
# Samples
# >MDA
Range
Median
5
5
2.6-7.9
2.6
7
1.2-11
2.6
NA
NA
NA = Not analyzed.
^Excluding the Desert National Wildlife Range
-------
23
Table 7
Estimated Human Bone Doses from Ingestion of Liver
Dose Accrued Over 50-Year Period After
Ingestion of 500 Grams per Day for 1 Year
Nuclide
238Pu
239Pu
234,
Maximum
Observed Concentration
pCi/kg of Wet Tissue
33
12
13
Dose Factor
mrem:pCi/day
0.27
0.31
0.036 .
50-Year Dose
mrem
4.5
1.9
0.2
TOTAL 7
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1 - 40 Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory -Las Vegas
41 Mahlon E. Gates, Manager, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
42 Troy E. Wade, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
43 Bennie G. DiBona, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
44 David G. Jackson, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
45 Arthur J. Whitman, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
46 Elwood M. Douthett, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
47 - 48 Ernest M. Campbell, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
49 - 50 Paul B. Dunaway, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
51 - 52 Mary G. White, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
53 Roger Ray, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
54 Robert W. Taft, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
55 Leon Silverstrom, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
56 John 0. Cummings, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
57 Bruce W. Church, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
58 - 59 Technical Library, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
60 Chief, NOB/DMA, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
61 Martin B. Biles, DOS, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
62 Tommy F. McCraw, DOS, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
63 Major General Joseph K. Bratton, Asst. Gen. Mgr.,
DMA, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
64 Gordon F. Facer, DMA, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
65 James L. Liverman, Director, DBER, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
66 Robert L. Watters, DBER, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
67 John S. Kirby-Smith, DBER, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
68 L. Joe Deal, DOS, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
69 Charles L. Osterberg, DBER, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
70 Robert W. Wood, DBER, ERDA/HQ, Washington, DC
71 Harold F. Mueller, ARL, NOAA, Las Vegas, NV
72 Gilbert J. Ferber, ARL, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD
-------
75 Wiliam A. Mills, Dir., Div. of Criteria and Standards,
ORP, EPA, Washington, DC
76 Floyd L. Galpin, Dir., Field Operations Div., ORP, EPA,
Washington, DC
77 E. David Harward, Dir., Technology Assessment Div.,
ORP, EPA, Washington, DC
78 Albert C. Printz, Jr., Dir., Office of Technical Analysis,
Washington, DC
79 Library, EPA, Washington, DC
80 Richard L. Blanchard, Director, Radiochemistry and Nuclear
Engineering Branch, EPA, Cincinnati, OH
81 Peter Halpin, Chief, APTIC, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
82 Paul DeFalco, Jr., Regional Admin., Region IX, EPA,
San Francisco, CA
83 James K. Channel 1, Regional Radiation Representative,
Region IX, EPA, San Francisco, CA
84 Charles R. Porter, Dir., Eastern Environmental Radiation
Facility, EPA, Montgomery, AL
85 K. M. Oswald, Mgr., Health and Safety, LLL, Mercury, NV
86 Bernard W. Shore, LLL, Livermore, CA
87 James E. Carothers, LLL, Livermore, CA
88 Howard W. Tewes, LLL, Livermore, CA
89 Lawrence S. Germain, LLL, Livermore, CA
90 Paul L. Phelps, LLL, Livermore, CA
91 Mortimer L. Mendelsohn, LLL, Livermore, CA
92 J. C. Hopkins, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
93 George E. Tucker, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
94 Harry S. Jordan, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
95 Arden E. Bicker, REECo, Mercury, NV
96 Savino W. Cavender, REECo, Mercury, NV
97 Carter D. Broyles, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
98 Melvin L. Merritt, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
99 Richard S. Davidson, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH
100 Steven V. Kaye, Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge, TN
101 Leo K. Bustad, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington
State University, Pullman, WA
102 Leonard A. Sagan, Palo Alto Medical Clinic, Palo Alto, CA
-------
101 Leo K. Bustad, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington
State University, Pullman, WA
102 Leonard A. Sagan, Palo Alto Medical Clinic, Palo Alto, CA
103 Vincent Schultz, Washington State University, Pullman, WA
104 Arthur Wallace, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
105 Wesley E. Niles, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV
106 Robert C. Pendleton, University of Utah, Salt Lake, UT
107 William S. Twenhofel, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO
108 Lloyd P. Smith, President, Desert Research Institute,
University of Nevada, Reno, NV
109 Paul R. Fenske, Desert Research Institute, University of
Nevada, Reno, NV
110 Verle R. Bohman, University of Nevada, Reno, NV
111 Manager, Desert National Wildlife Range, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Las Vegas, NV
112 Supervisor, Region III, Nevada Fish and Game Department
Las Vegas, NV
113 Paul Lyons, Nevada Wildlife Research, Division of Archives,
Capitol Building Annex, Carson City, NV
114 Deward W. Efurd, McClellan Central Laboratory,
McClellan Air Force Base, CA
115 L. L. Skolil, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA
116 - 142 Technical Information Center, ERDA, Oak Ridge, TN
(for public availability)
------- |