Proceedings of the fifth mountain lion workshop: 27

80 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP
there appears to be a correlation between the number of
scrapes and the number of male tracks recorded, providing
support for the notion that more males have been using the
study area during the last two years of the track count. The
increased scratching activity could indicate a higher
proportion of young males vying for home areas, possibly a
result of the removal of one or two established resident males
from the area during the winter of 1993-1994.
The value of making a second survey of the routes,
based on the results listed in Table 1, is uncertain. Because
care was taken only to record tracks deposited since the first
survey, the accumulation period for the second survey is less
than five days. It is difficult to constrain the accumulation for
the first survey, but it is likely less than a week, with the
exception of tracks in mud which were observed to persist for
several weeks. As indicated in table 1, the number of tracks
recorded during the first and second run were similar. Thus,
it might be more productive to survey additional routes instead
of repeating the track count along the base routes. We note,
however, that while the total number of tracks recorded in
1994 were similar for the first and second surveys, more male
tracks were recorded during the second survey.
Many more years of data need to be collected on the
Fort Huachuca track count before our interpretation of the data
can be realistically considered to be meaningful. In the
meantime, an important aspect of the Track Count is the
increasing number of volunteer participants (39 in 1995),
which provides an excellent forum for the discussion of lion
issues, the study of local flora and fauna, and networking
among the participants. The Fort Huachuca track count has
also facilitated important spinoffs, including the formation of
Keeping Track, Inc., The Juniper Institute, and the Canelo
Hills track count.
CANELO HILLS TRACK COUNT
Starting in August 1995, the Fort Huachuca track
count was expanded to identify potential corridors between
the Huachuca Mountains and the neighboring mountain ranges
used by lions and other large carnivores. We speculate that
the Huachuca Mountains fall within the home ranges of
several lions, and that there is movement by lions between the
Huachuca Mountains and neighboring ranges. Each of the
four closest mountain ranges to the Huachuca Mountains are
within the possible range of an adult lion: the Santa Rita
Mountains (with about 47 mi 2 of lion habitat) lie 27 miles
northwest; the Whetstones (with 22 mi 2 of habitat) lie 15 miles
north; 17 miles to the east and across the San Pedro River lie
the Mule Mountains (with 23 mi 2 of habitat); and 22 miles to
the west are the Patagonia Mountains (with 8 mi 2 of habitat).
These estimates of lion habitat are based on areas above 5000
feet, which approximately delineate the transition from
grasslands to the encinal vegetation zone. We note that even
this rough estimate of the amount of lion habitat indicates that
no single mountain range contains habitat for a single lion,
particularly for males.
The Canelo Hills, a rolling terrain varying in
elevation between 4700 and 6000 feet is composed primarily
of pinyon-juniper-oak woodlands, may act as a natural conduit
between the Huachuca Mountains and the Santa Rita
Mountains to the northeast and the Whetstone Mountains to
the north (Figure 1). A number of drainages run north-south
throughout the Canelo Hills, including Post Creek, O'Donnell
Creek, Turkey Creek, and Lyle Creek. Four of the routes (No.
3,5,6,7) follow drainages in the area (Figure 1). The
remaining routes are located between the drainages in country
which is characterized by wooded mesas. The routes were
chosen to transect the study area approximately parallel to the
trend of the hills, thereby intersecting the hypothetical
corridors passing through the area.
At the present, the Canelo Hills track count (Table 2)
is monitoring possible corridors along the western side of the
Huachuca Mountains, where development pressures have been
light. In the future, we hope to extend the track count to
include possible corridors through the more heavily urbanized
eastern margin of the Huachuca Mountains where Fort
Huachuca and the city of Sierra Vista have impacted the
connective links to the San Pedro River Valley and Mule
Mountains to the east.
To date fewer lion tracks have been recorded in the
Canelo Hills (0.06 tracks per mile of route) compared to the
track density recorded on the FHMR in 1995 (0.28 tracks per
mile of route). Even when the months of adverse weather are
not included in the calculation, the recorded density of tracks
(0.12 tracks per mile of route) is less than half that recorded
on the FHMR. Additionally the number of bear tracks
recorded has been comparable to the number of lion tracks
(0.15 tracks per mile of route versus 0.12). We interpret this
correlation as evidence that the Canelo Hills corridors are not
restricted to use by lions. Lion tracks generally have been
recorded in the drainage areas (routes 3,5,6 and 7), while the
bear tracks have been observed in the interdrainage areas
(routes 1 and 2).
The monthly scheduling of the track count has
proved to be affected by adverse weather conditions. Poor
weather (primarily rain), and associated poor tracking
conditions resulted in no tracks being recorded for three of the
eight months (September 1995, December 1995, and February
1996), which represents more than a third of the track surveys.
As a possible solution to the problem, we plan to conduct the
track count quarterly starting in June 1996, surveying the
routes only after a week of dry weather. In addition, we plan
to repeat the track counts after 3-5 days, following the method
employed by the Fort Huachuca track count, to provide a more
complete survey of the routes.
Given the short time the Canelo Hills track count has
been conducted, the interpretations presented above are