05.08.2013 Views

Proceedings of the Ninth Mountain Lion Workshop - Carnivore ...

Proceedings of the Ninth Mountain Lion Workshop - Carnivore ...

Proceedings of the Ninth Mountain Lion Workshop - Carnivore ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Harvest Rate Change<br />

Four long-term cougar research projects were conducted in Unit 26 using capturerecapture<br />

and radio-telemetry techniques to produce a resident cougar population<br />

estimate for each time period. Hornocker (1970) and Seidensticker et al. (1973)<br />

determined that <strong>the</strong> cougar population was stable with a stable-to-increasing elk and mule<br />

deer prey base and minimal harvest (no harvest in <strong>the</strong> first period and mean annual<br />

harvest <strong>of</strong> less than 1 cougar in <strong>the</strong> second period). Each study identified a resident<br />

cougar population <strong>of</strong> 6 females and 3 males during 1965-1969 and 1970-1973 study<br />

periods. Quigley et al. (1989) found that <strong>the</strong> resident cougar population had increased to<br />

10 females and 3 males simultaneously with an increased prey base, primarily elk, and<br />

light harvest (mean annual harvest <strong>of</strong> 1.0 cougars) during <strong>the</strong> 1984-1986 period.<br />

Akenson et al. (2005) documented a declining resident cougar population that initially<br />

consisted <strong>of</strong> 6 females and 4 males, which <strong>the</strong>n decreased to 4 females and 2 males<br />

during <strong>the</strong> 1999-2002 time period. This decline occurred concurrently with high cougar<br />

harvest (mean annual harvest <strong>of</strong> 3.8 cougars), a declining elk prey base, new wolf use in<br />

<strong>the</strong> unit, and a large-scale wildfire in 2000 that significantly altered <strong>the</strong> environment.<br />

Cougar harvest in Unit 26 increased nearly 4-fold over <strong>the</strong> past 4 decades. This is in<br />

contrast to <strong>the</strong> trend from resident cougar population estimates from 4 cougar research<br />

projects conducted in Unit 26 during 1965-2002 (Fig. 3). The consequence <strong>of</strong> higher<br />

harvest in Unit 26 without a similar change in <strong>the</strong> cougar population was an increase in<br />

<strong>the</strong> harvest rate on cougars. The harvest ratio (harvest per resident adult population) for<br />

each decade increased from 0.11 during 1960s and 1970s research to 0.17 during <strong>the</strong><br />

1980s, and 0.34 to 0.67 during <strong>the</strong> 1999-2002 research period, reflecting an increasing<br />

harvest rate trend over time. During <strong>the</strong> 1998-2006 time period, we estimated 29-48% <strong>of</strong><br />

resident adult cougars and 21-32% <strong>of</strong> resident adult female cougars were harvested<br />

annually in Unit 26.<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s<br />

Mean Annual Harvest<br />

Resident Population<br />

Figure 3. Unit 26 – Big Creek mean annual cougar harvest by decade (Idaho Department <strong>of</strong> Fish<br />

and Game Big Game Management Records database) compared to resident cougar population<br />

estimates from Big Creek research in 1965-1969 (Hornocker 1970), 1970-1973 (Seidensticker et<br />

al. 1973), 1984-1986 (Quigley et al. 1989), and 1999-2002 (Akenson et al. 2005).<br />

<strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Ninth</strong> <strong>Mountain</strong> <strong>Lion</strong> <strong>Workshop</strong><br />

179

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!