Proceedings of the fifth mountain lion workshop: 27

More documents

Recommendations

Info

90 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP The absence of male mountain lions and the subsequent reproductive failure led to a partial breakdown of the mutual avoidance reaction. The mutual avoidance reaction may be a means by which adult female mountain lions protect their young kittens. * Present address: Environmental Resources Management Unit, Santa Clara Valley Water District, 5750 Almaden Expressway, San Jose, California, 95118. MOVEMENTS AND DIETS OF MOUNTAIN LIONS IN SOUTHWESTERN ARIZONA M.F. Peirce. Arizona Game and Fish Department, P.O. Box 1736, Wickenburg, AZ 85358, USA. J.L. Cashman. Hornocker Wildlife Research Institute, P.O. Box 288, Reserve, NM 87830, USA. Much of Arizona supports a healthy, viable mountain lion (Puma concolor) population. However, movements and diets of mountain lions in the desert portions of southwestern Arizona have not been described in detail. The Arizona Game and Fish Department has conducted lion track surveys in the Lower Colorado River Valley Subdivision of the Sonoran Desert habitat (Shaw et al. 1988). Lion tracks were not observed during 22 routes totaling 346 kilometers (215 miles). Mountain lions have been documented (sport, road, and depredation kills) within the Arizona Upland Subdivision of the Sonoran Desert. This subdivision forms a curving border along the northeastern edge of the Sonoran Desert. We studied mountain lion occurrence, movements, and food habits within a 2,575 square kilometer (1,000 mi 2 ) study area centered 129 kilometers (80 miles) northwest of Phoenix, Arizona. The Sonoran Desert in southwestern Arizona is located within the Basin and Range Geographic Province. This area is characterized by small (often 15 vertebrate items in 159 mountain lion scats. Desert mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus crooki) (36%), was the primary food item, followed by collared peccary (Tayassu tajacu) (21%), cattle (10%), desert bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis mexicana) (7%), small rodents (6%), lagomorphs (6%), badger (Taxidea taxus) (5%), and skunk (Spilogale sp. or Mephitus sp.) (3%). Our results suggest that mountain lions in the Sonoran Desert may be dependent upon alternative prey which compensates for low ungulate densities. In small populations of bighorn sheep (
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP 91 MOUNTAIN LION-HUMAN AND MOUNTAIN LION-LIVESTOCK INCIDENTS IN MONTANA Shawn J. Riley. Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA. Keith E. Aune. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA. We present data on 245 mountain lion incidents reported in Montana between July 1989 and July 1995. Incidents were defined as an interaction between mountain lions and humans or livestock, initiated by the mountain lion, that was perceived serious enough to warrant attention by wildlife agencies. Combined incidents increased from 23/yr to 48/yr throughout the period. There were 123 (50.2%) incidents involving livestock and 122 involving humans. The number of livestock incidents increased regularly from 8 in 1989-90 to 35 in 1994-95. Sheep (67%) were most frequently preyed upon by mountain lions followed in rank by horses, goats, cattle, poultry, llamas and rabbits. Human incidents were highest in 1991-92 (n=27) and declined steadily to 14 in 1994-95. The peak time period for both livestock and human incidents was between June and November. Age and physical condition of mountain lions killed in control actions is characterized as young (1-4 yr; 61%#2 yr) and in good condition. There is no difference in either age structure or condition class of lions involved in livestock vs. human incidents. Male mountain lions were involved in significantly more livestock incidents than females, but sex ratios of lions involved in human incidents were not significantly different from 50:50. Livestock incidents occurred in central Montana where sheep production is greatest and in western valleys where there is a greater proportion of hobby ranchers. Human incidents mostly occurred near western intermountain valley communities. A record of the frequency of calls to agencies by people involved in incidents inflates the reporting of actual incidents. We discuss biological, socioeconomic, and policy factors affecting rates of both livestock and human incidents. DEVELOPING AN ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR MOUNTAIN LIONS (Puma concolor) IN MONTANA Shawn J. Riley. New York Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA. Richard A. Malecki. New York Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA. We describe research initiated in Montana during 1995 to help reduce the uncertainty associated with decisions concerning mountain lion management in a rapidly changing environment. The American West is experiencing the most massive redistribution of humans since the early land-rush days. Of the 10 US states with the fastest growing human populations, seven are in the West. At the same time, mountain lion populations are reported to be reaching historically high levels in many of these areas. Human-mountain lion interactions are also reported to be increasing and creating difficult choices for people living and working in the region, as well as for agencies responsible for mountain lion management. We use a risk assessment approach that identifies real or objective risks associated with mountain lions and perceived or subjective risks. Both risks have associated benefits and costs to society or management that we are measuring with economic methodology. Socio-economic literature suggests a bimodal distribution of beliefs about such risks, skewed to both over and under estimation of the objective risk. The discrepancy between what the public perceives and those risks that experts believe is scientifically founded creates significant policy dilemmas. Over-estimation of the risk increases management costs. Underestimation may initially lower costs, but creates a potentially volatile whiplash of negative sentiment in the event of low probability-high consequence mountain lion-human interactions. To understand and manage the objective risk, we are comparing distribution and abundance data for mountain lions with variables pertaining habitat, prey, land-use, humans, policy governing mountain lions, and the historical influence of wolves. For the subjective risk, we are using mail and telephone surveys to gain insights into the knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and underlying assumptions of both the public and wildlife professionals about mountain lions. We are also using an economic method of "expressed preference" to estimate the public's acceptance of risk associated with mountain lions. Results will be formulated into conceptual models as well as an objective feedback management function based upon historical data but designed for systematic updating. MOUNTAIN LION PREDATION ON BIGHORN SHEEP
Page 1:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN L
Page 4 and 5:
© Copyright 1997 The Southern Cali
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAI
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51: 40 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAI
Page 110 and 111: 100 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTA
show all

Proceedings of the fifth mountain lion workshop: 27

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?