Proceedings of the Seventh Mountain Lion Workshop

More documents

Recommendations

Info

48 SOUTH DAKOTA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPORT · Kintigh BLEICH. 2003. Efficacy of photographic scent stations to detect mountain lions. Western North American Naturalist 00: In Press. LITERATURE CITED BEIER, P. 1993. Puma: a population simulator for cougar conservation. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 21:356-357 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEVENTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP VAN SICKLE, W.D., AND F.G. LINDZEY. 1991. Evaluation of a cougar population estimator based on probability sampling. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:738- 743.
MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPORT FOR TEXAS JOHN YOUNG, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 3000 IH 35 South Suite 100, Austin, TX 78612, USA, email: john.young@tpwd.state.tx.us Texas does not currently have a statewide management plan for mountain lions and the species is classified as nongame. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) non-game codes authorize the agency to establish hunting seasons, to close seasons, set bag limits, establish management zones, in other words, to utilize all of the management tools available for game species. With the exception of a short list of non-game species of concern to TPWD, non-game species may be taken at any time of the year in any numbers, which is the case for mountain lions at the present time. TPWD’s objective for mountain lions is to maintain a viable population, while minimizing human conflicts. No changes in mountain lion status have occurred in the past decade. DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE Based on confirmed sightings and mortality records mountain lions are most common in the Trans Pecos and the brush country of South Texas. Mortality records 49 Proceedings of the Seventh Mountain Lion Workshop over the last 20 years combined with photos confirm at least the occasional presence of lions in all other sections of the state; more information is needed to determine population levels. Based on sightings, and voluntarily reported mortalities dating back to 1983, mountain lion populations appear stable. Table 1 presents mountain lion mortality information by ecological region for the time frame 1998/99 to 2001/02 Texas does not currently estimate mountain lion populations, opting to monitor the species using sightings and mortality reports. The lack of a satisfactory scientifically rigorous method to estimate mountain lions has been the primary reason TPWD has not attempted to do so. Texas has recently provided funding to a university-based scientist to estimate mountain lion population size, structure, and habitat factors utilizing new, highly credible molecular genetics. The study will be conducted over the next 2 years and will provide an estimate for Texas’ mountain lion population. Table 1. Mountain lion mortalities by ecological region, September 1998 through September 2002. Ecological Region 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 20001/02 Pineywoods 0 0 0 0 Gulf Prairie & Marshes 0 3 0 0 Post Oak Savannah 0 0 0 0 Blackland Prairies 0 0 0 0 Cross Timbers 0 0 0 1 South Texas Plains 7 10 0 4 Edwards Plateau 30 14 6 12 Rolling Plains 0 0 0 0 High Plains 0 0 0 0 Trans-Pecos 92 60 64 48
Page 1 and 2:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEVENTH MOUNTAIN
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface..........
Page 5 and 6:
COUGAR PREDATION ON PREY IN YELLOWS
Page 7 and 8: PREFACE vii PREFACE The Wyoming Gam
Page 9: ix IN MEMORY
Page 12 and 13: 2 STATUS OF MOUNTAIN LION POPULATIO
Page 14 and 15: 4 STATUS OF MOUNTAIN LION POPULATIO
Page 16 and 17: CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REP
Page 18 and 19: 8 CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS R
Page 20 and 21: 10 CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS
Page 22 and 23: 12 CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS
Page 24 and 25: COLORADO MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPOR
Page 26 and 27: 16 COLORADO MOUNTAIN LION STATUS RE
Page 28 and 29: FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVAT
Page 30 and 31: 20 FLORIDA STATUS REPORT · Lotz an
Page 36 and 37: 26 IDAHO MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPOR
Page 38 and 39: 28 IDAHO MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPOR
Page 40 and 41: 30 MONTANA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REP
Page 42 and 43: 32 NEVADA MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPO
Page 50 and 51: 40 NEW MEXICO MOUNTAIN LION STATUS
Page 52 and 53: 42 NEW MEXICO MOUNTAIN LION STATUS
Page 54 and 55: 44 SOUTH DAKOTA MOUNTAIN LION STATU
Page 56 and 57: 46 SOUTH DAKOTA MOUNTAIN LION STATU
Page 60 and 61: 50 TEXAS MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPOR
Page 62 and 63: 52 UTAH MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPORT
Page 64 and 65: PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEVENTH MOUNTAIN
Page 70 and 71: WASHINGTON COUGAR STATUS REPORT RIC
Page 72 and 73: 62 WASHINGTON COUGAR STATUS REPORT
Page 74 and 75: WYOMING MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REPORT
Page 76 and 77: 66 WYOMING MOUNTAIN LION STATUS REP
Page 82 and 83: 72 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf F
Page 84 and 85: 74 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf C
Page 86 and 87: 76 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf A
Page 88 and 89: 78 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf f
Page 90 and 91: 80 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf b
Page 92 and 93: 82 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf N
Page 94 and 95: 84 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf C
Page 96 and 97: 86 CRYPTIC COUGARS · Tischendorf m
Page 98 and 99: 88 IMPROVING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF M
Page 100 and 101: 90 REDUCING PUMA ATTACKS · Fitzhug
Page 108 and 109:
98 REDUCING PUMA ATTACKS · Fitzhug
Page 110 and 111:
100 REDUCING PUMA ATTACKS · Fitzhu
Page 112 and 113:
102 REDUCING PUMA ATTACKS · Fitzhu
Page 114 and 115:
104 A CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND APPRAISA
Page 116 and 117:
106 MOUNTAIN LION MOVEMENTS AND PER
Page 118 and 119:
108 PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF FLORIDA
Page 120 and 121:
110 ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND EVO
Page 122 and 123:
112 MOUNTAIN LION BED, CACHE AND KI
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
120 EFFECT OF ROADS ON HABITAT USE
Page 132 and 133:
122 COUGAR ECOLOGY AND COUGAR-WOLF
Page 134 and 135:
124 ARE PUMAS OPPORTUNISTIC SCAVENG
Page 136 and 137:
126 COUGAR PREDATION ON PREY IN YEL
Page 138 and 139:
128 COUGAR TOTAL PREDATION RESPONSE
Page 140 and 141:
130 CHARACTERISTICS OF COUGAR HARVE
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
136 DEFINING AND DELINEATING DE FAC
Page 148 and 149:
138 MANAGEMENT OF COUGARS (PUMA CON
Page 150 and 151:
140 PROJECT CAT (COUGARS AND TEACHI
Page 152 and 153:
142 ESTIMATING COUGAR ABUNDANCE USI
Page 154 and 155:
144 PRESENCE AND MOVEMENTS OF LACTA
Page 156 and 157:
146 RECONCILING SCIENCE AND POLITIC
Page 158 and 159:
148 PUMA MANAGEMENT IN WESTERN NORT
Page 160 and 161:
150 MOUNTAIN LIONS AND BIGHORN SHEE
Page 162 and 163:
152 DISPERSAL IN MALE PUMAS · Laun
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
162 ASSESSING GPS RADIOTELEMETRY RE
Page 174 and 175:
164 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE OF COUGARS
Page 176 and 177:
166 DEPREDATION TRENDS IN CALIFORNI
Page 178 and 179:
168 PUMA ACTIVITY AND MOVEMENTS IN
Page 180 and 181:
170 MOUNTAIN LION SURVEY TECHNIQUES
Page 182 and 183:
172 CRITICAL COUGAR CROSSING AND BA
Page 184 and 185:
174 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Chris Beld
Page 186 and 187:
176 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Steve Fitz
Page 188 and 189:
178 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Mollie Hog
Page 190 and 191:
180 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Cheryl Le
Page 192 and 193:
182 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Ryan Nelso
Page 194 and 195:
184 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Harley Sha
Page 196:
186 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Patricia W
show all

Proceedings of the Seventh Mountain Lion Workshop

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

Delete template?

Save as template?