ns where traps were actually operated. Fitch
(1952:8-22), Leonard and Goble (1952:1015-1026) and Martin
(1956:366-372) have described parts of the Reservation that include the
study area.

I am grateful to Professor Henry S. Fitch for guiding my work, to
Professor Rollin H. Baker for suggestions and encouragement in the
early part of the study, to Mr. Robert L. Packard for certain trapping
records that supplemented my own, and to Professor E. Raymond Hall for
valuable suggestions. Norma L. Janes, my wife, typed the manuscript.
Photographs were taken by me. The State Biological Survey of Kansas
provided funds, equipment, and transportation.

METHODS AND TECHNIQUES

Schwartz (1941), Dalke and Sime (1938), Dalke (1937 and 1942),
Hendrickson (1936), and Allen (1939) estimated the home range of the
cottontail by drawing, on a map, straight lines that connected all
marginal points of capture in live-traps. The resulting home ranges
were polygonal figures. Haugen (1942) altered this method by drawing
lines that connected points midway between the actual points of capture
and the next outermost traps in the grid. Fitch (1947) used a method
for enclosing all points of capture in a circle or ellipse that
represented the home range boundaries and expressed home range as the
diameter of these figures. Another method, which has been used to
determine the home range of birds, is to map the movements of an
individual as it is observed. Stebler (1939) suggested the use of
tracking records to determine home range. Connell (1954) expressed home
range of cottontails as the average distance traveled from a computed
center of activity. The method was originally proposed by Hayne (1949).

The methods used by other investigators to calculate the home range of
the cottontail have yielded estimates varying from 0.1 acre to 100
acres. Such wide variations in the estimated size of home range may
result from the use of different methods and from insufficient data.
The data obtained from live-trapping are not fully adequate because
traps cannot sample, in time and space, the entire home range of an
individual. Also, "trap habit" or "trap shyness" may distort the
apparent shape of the home range. In order to compare these methods I
have calculated home range from my data by each of five different
methods. The results are shown in Table 1.

No two methods yielded exactly the same results. To utilize all
available data for each individual, I r