Proceedings of the Seventh Mountain Lion Workshop

communication with Kevin Bergersen,
Arizona Game and Fish Department, 15 Jul
2002.)
We speculate that in most of these
situations the innate attack behavior either
never was initiated, or was satisfied when
the puma determined that the prey already
was moribund, and only needed dragging to
a protected location to be fed upon. The
puma simply examines the sleeper, and then
drags the sleeping bag or mat away from the
site. When the victim or companions awake
and begin making noise, the puma is
frightened and leaves. Perhaps there is an
element of surprise or ambush by humans;
perhaps the attack behavior is not initiated
and therefore does not need to be fulfilled.
We found, in addition to the 12 mentioned
above, several oral history accounts (not
included in our data)of pumas covering
sleeping people with debris (e.g., Seton
1929:98-99).
Are You Safer Riding Horseback?
Of 9 incidents involving riders on
horseback, none was seriously injured and
most were unharmed. In 8 of these cases,
the puma failed in the initial attack and the
horse outran it. In the other case, the rider
killed the puma. If the rider dismounted,
accidentally or otherwise, the situation
became more similar to a puma attacking a
person afoot.
Risk of Attacks
Puma attacks on humans are rare by
almost any measure. Bear attacks are much
more common. But rarity may be a matter
of scale, proximity and individuality. Risk
depends on where people are and what the
conditions are in that area. Statistics that
compare the frequency of puma attacks with
that of some other phenomenon, such as
lightning strikes, are misleading. Such data
normally fail to account for risk levels. For
example, the risk of being attacked by a wild
puma in a large metropolitan area is close to
zero, but the large urban areas include most
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEVENTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP
REDUCING PUMA ATTACKS · Fitzhugh et al. 101
of the people who make up the denominator
in the attack rate. The risk of being attacked
in a puma’s natural territory is higher, only
because the puma may be present. The
same logic applies to bites by domestic
dogs. Mail carriers are more at risk from
dog bites than are other people because they
periodically enter yards that the dogs
consider to be their territory. In fact, the
mail carriers’ risk level increases
dramatically the instant they enter a yard
containing a dog.
The situation is similar with puma
attacks. Most of us have almost no risk, but
under certain conditions the risk rises
considerably. Data presented by Mattson et
al, at the Seventh Mountain Lion Workshop,
was an effort to predict conceptually some
of these risk factors. Our presentation, on
the other hand, is mostly an effort to help
people manage an attack situation. Data
presented by Sweanor et al., at the Seventh
Mountain Lion Workshop, is a strong
beginning toward collecting data to identify
risk factors.
A person in an encounter should always
judge the puma’s responses and adjust
defensive measures according to the puma
response. Each puma has its own
personality, as the following incident
illustrates. A United States Forest Service
employee was in a remote area away from
roads doing silvicultural analysis. While in
her sleeping bag in camp she noticed a puma
at her feet near the edge of her sleeping bag.
She calmly said, ”excuse me,” whereupon
the puma moved 4.6 m (15 feet) away and
sat. It seemed to be a healthy, curious puma.
If she got upset and tried to make it leave, it
got aggressive; if she lay there quietly, it
calmed down, reclined, and licked itself. If
she yelled at it, it would pin its ears and
charge. The puma started to circle her, so
she threw sticks and rocks at it to keep it at
bay and lit the fire. She called in coordinates
via radio to her supervisor. The puma