Cougar News

ALERT! BESEIGED BLACK HILLS COUGARS! Deadline for comments is Monday, July 26!

Jul 22nd, 2010 by admin

The South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks (GFP) is proposing to increase the kill of cougars in the next Black Hills hunt to reduce the population by 30%. The data analysis in their management proposal is skewed; the reduction of the cougar population could be much greater. At the same time, Wyoming proposes to turn its portion of the Black Hills into a cougar population sink without giving any reasons. Cougar biologists call a region a population sink when deaths—largely caused by humans—exceed births.

Here is the link to the draft management proposal – http://gfp.sd.gov/wildlife/docs/SDmountainLionmanageplan2010-2015.pdf

The Black Hills have been a major source of the dispersing young adults that are showing up from time to time in the Midwest. Dispersal is a normal part of a thriving cougar population. It maintains genetic diversity and gives cougars the ability to colonize good habitat with few or no cougars. If human-caused cougar deaths exceed births in the Black Hills, that potential recolonization process could end.

The draft proposal states, “Due to land ownership on the prairie and limited available habitat preferred by mountain lions, GFP currently does not intend to manage for a sustainable population outside the Black Hills ecosystem.” They don’t want let the cats decide for themselves where the good habitat is. At present, the GFP has an unlimited quota for cougars on the prairies during the cougar hunting season. Few have been killed by hunters. But patches of good cougar habitat do exist outside the Hills–areas where females could settle and rear kittens, some of which would disperse East and South and continue the recolonization process. The GFP should protect cougars on the prairies outside of the Black Hills unless they attack wildlife or are a CLEAR IMMINENT threat to humans.

Dr. Sharon Seneczko, president of the Black Hills Mountain Lion Foundation says, “After speaking with various GFP officials, it seems that the reason for the proposed dramatic reduction in the lion population is a combination of things such as complaints from ranchers (although GFP staff tell me that there is actually very little lion depredation on livestock) and an old anti-predator mentality, pressure from hunters who believe that lions are the main reason that prey species have declined (some GFP biologists have worked hard to dispel this but have been unsuccessful) and intolerance based in fear.”

Three different analyses have demonstrated that the GFP’s estimate of the number of cougars in the Black Hills is flawed. These flawed calculations could lead to the decimation of the Black Hills cougar population.

Shell-game science, no peer review and a management plan gerrymandered to appease one constituency–deer hunters. When will game agencies begin managing not by numbers, but by the integrity of the ecosystems they are entrusted by the public to protect and preserve?

Please visit http://www.mountainlion.org/states/SD_related_Material.asp for a set of documents relevant to the draft management plan, and go here for an overview of the history of cougar management in South Dakota – http://www.mountainlion.org/states/_state_South_Dakota.asp

The deadline for comments is July 26th. Email your comments to chad.switzer@state.sd.us

Posted in Action Alert, ECF, Hunting, Preservation | Comments Off

Conviction growing that cougars exist in the Kenora area of western Ontario

Jul 22nd, 2010 by admin

http://www.atikokanprogress.ca/2010/07/21/conviction-growing-that-eastern-cougars-are-here/

Conviction growing that Eastern Cougars are here

by Atikokan Progress

Latest sighting on Eva Lake Turnaround Road

Jessica Smith

Do cougars prowl in the wilderness areas surrounding Atikokan?

Their presence has been confirmed in the region and throughout Ontario, yet despite several reported sightings here in recent weeks there has yet to be any hard evidence here, said Atikokan MNR biologist Brian Jackson. Considering a four-year Ministry study has recently confirmed through DNA evidence the presence of the animals in the Kenora area however, it would seem probable that at least some of those four sightings south and east of town are accurate.

Actually, sightings have been reported here for nearly around a decade. Yet until the animal is clearly photographed or DNA evidence is found here, such accounts will still be viewed with some skepticism by MNR and locals alike – something I discovered after my own sighting.

Driving up the back road off Highway 633 a few weeks ago, my family and I saw what at first appeared to be a lynx, sitting right at the corner of the Eva Lake Turnaround Road . The fact that the animal was so uncharacteristically bold, sitting on the road a stone’s throw from the truck, prompted us to back up for a closer look to see if the animal was injured or ill. As we got closer, it became clear that it wasn’t grey but reddish brown and as it got up and ran down the road, something else was obvious: the tail was not a short nub, but rather long, thick and nearly touching the ground as it ran.

Our ‘aha’ moment occurred when it ran just off the road and stopped to look at the truck. The feline face was large and the ears rounded – not pointed with tufts, like a lynx. Growing up on a trap line, I have seen most animals native to the area, and I’m pretty sure of what I saw: it was a cougar.

While I have encountered some polite suggestion that it was a case of mistaken identity, many with whom I have shared my account claim to also either have seen one in the Atikokan area or heard of someone who had. That doesn’t surprise Jackson, who has been hearing accounts of sightings for close to a decade, and the variety of accounts indicate that both responses are fair reactions to my story.

“We’ve never had a real, hard, verified report. We had one guy who said he saw a cougar jump across the road and we went out and checked and in the track marks, yes, that’s what it looks like. We’ve never had anyone give us a picture. We have had a whole mix of stuff: some people are out in the bush all the time and say they have never seen one and then at the opposite end of the spectrum, we have people tell us they see one every week,” he said.

However, thanks to the recent work to establish the cougar’s existence in Ontario, those who say they have seen a cougar no longer have to feel as though they are lumped in with those who have witnessed Sasquatch encounters and alien abductions. The question is no longer whether cougar exist here, but rather whether a cougar is in fact what you saw.

While some Atikokan accounts over the years appear quite probable, others have turned out to be in actuality wolves, coyotes, lynx and even house cats, said Jackson. He said many are sure of what they think they saw, the power of suggestion can be a strong influence when a person sees something they don’t immediately recognize. The MNR has even received supposed cougar photos of drenched wolves whose long, wet tails bore a resemblance to that of a cougar, he said.

“What would be most valuable is if we could get hair or even fresh scat so [the ministry] could do the DNA analysis.”

Just ended last month, the MNR study included collection of 30 pieces of evidence across the province, including photos of tracks, and samples of scat and DNA since 2006. The most recent confirmed sightings were near Kenora, Sault Ste Marie and Lindsay between March and September of 2009. As part of the effort, the ministry set up 30 motion-sensor cameras (equipped with a cougar attractant) across the province in locations where cougars have been sighted. Two were placed in the Atikokan area where past sightings have occurred and will remain up until March, 2011, after which time the study’s findings will be published.

Despite these efforts however, the animal has yet to be photographed anywhere in the province. That may hardly be surprising, given that the animal covers a huge territory (between 500-1,000 square kms) and can travel up to 50 kms in one night; therefore may not return to the particular area where it was once spotted.

Sightings here in recent weeks may be the result of a single cougar “that could be wandering around, and often that’s what happens. Sometimes we get a whole rash of reports in a certain area and then we don’t get them from that area again,” said Jackson.

The cougar, also known as a puma, mountain lion, and eastern panther has a long body (males reach two metres in length and weigh over 100 kg and females are slightly smaller), long thick tail, rounded ears, reddish or brown coloured body and white underside. Their preferred food is deer, but they will also hunt for beaver, porcupine and other small mammals. According to the Ontario Puma Foundation, there are believed to be around 550 in the province.

Jackson said there are three possible origins of the cougar in this area: escaped or released pets, western cougars roaming into the area from the Dakotas, or the least likely scenario, a remnant eastern cougar population that was hunted to near extinction in Ontario in the 1800s (that species has been designated as endangered in the province and there have been no confirmed sightings since the 1800s).

Former pet cougars could plausibly find their way into this region because of our proximity to Minnesota where the cost of a cougar kit (baby) is similar to that of a purebred puppy. There, pets that have escaped or been released by their owners have been shot when they approached humans looking for food, and their tame nature was mistaken for aggressiveness, said Jackson.

The possibility of western cougars ranging from as far away as South Dakota may seem unlikely, but it is possible, he said. “It really isn’t too far from the Dakotas where there are wild cougars. We know there is a population there. Especially adult males of many species tend to wander a long ways. There have been lynx collared south of Quetico Park in the States who ended up getting trapped in Terrace Bay. If you [compare that range] it’s almost the distance from South Dakota to northwestern Ontario.”

So what to do if you think you see a cougar?

“If you think you see something, take a picture. If you see tracks, mark them with flagging tape or something and let us know as soon as possible [before conditions erode the quality of the print]. Especially in the winter, if you can get on the tracks and follow it you might find scat or if they go by trees and lose a tuft of hair… Stuff like that is really valuable. If we start getting the DNA [evidence] we can get better information on where those animals are coming from.”

Posted in Monitoring, Ontario | Comments Off

Skewed data analysis used to justify upcoming cougar hunting season in the Black Hills of South Dakota

Jul 21st, 2010 by admin

The Black Hills cougar population is extremely important to the recovery of cougar populations in the Midwest. It’s likely that a high percentage of the scattered subadult male dispersers now showing up in states such as Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin and Illinois originated in the Black Hills. If the Black Hills population is drastically reduced, it may mean no more dispersers in the Midwest and no recovery of breeding populations there.

Page 7 of the proposed hunting plan clearly states that SD has no plan or desire to manage cougars outside the Black Hills. They want to stop dispersers.

The South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks is accepting public comment on their new mountain lion management plan through July 26th. Comments can be emailed to chad.switzer@state.sd.us

Or you can write to:

Mountain Lion Plan Comments
South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks
523 E Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501

***************

Here are three informed comments on the upcoming Black Hills cougar season.

Tim Dunbar, CEO of the Mountain Lion Foundation, writes:

Seven years ago, the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks (SDGF&P) presented the
world with their version of a mountain lion management plan. In that plan was the proposal for
an “experimental” mountain lion hunting season. They justified this action as “just another step
in the evolution of responsible mountain lion management,” and because it “would
communicate to some people that mountain lions are being managed responsibly.” Now, five
hunting seasons later, SDGF&P is kowtowing to special interest hunting groups and proposing a
new mountain lion management plan where the recreational hunting of lions is no longer
considered as experimental, but is the cornerstone of their entire management program. Read more at http://www.mountainlion.org/blog_article.asp?news_id=1205

South Dakota’s “2 + 2 = 5″ Mountain Lion Population Estimate Error

Just one of the many holes in SDGF&P’s 2010-2015 Mountain Lion Management Plan you could drive a bus through By Amy Rodrigues

The South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks (SDGF&P) has submitted its 2010-2015 Mountain Lion Management Plan for public review. The new plan calls for reducing the state’s mountain lion population by about 80 to 100 cats in order to bring their estimated population total down from an approximated 251 lions to only 150 to 170 mountain lions. The current 251 estimate includes kittens. Since mountain lion kittens may not legally be hunted, and South Dakota fails to recognize that killing a mother lion often results in her orphaned kittens starving to death, their mountain lion management plan ultimately calls for the removal of 80 to 100 adult lions. Read more at http://www.mountainlion.org/

********

Dr. John Laundre’, Vice President of the Cougar Rewilding Foundation (formerly the Eastern Cougar Foundation), writes:

Response to the Draft South Dakota Mountain Management Plan 2010-2015:

First, I would like to complement the South Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks for their holistic guiding philosophy (Page 15) regarding the return of mountain lions to the state of South Dakota, specifically, the Black Hills region. As an ecologist and specifically a predator ecologist, I find the views expressed there to be refreshing and enlightened regarding the role of mountain lions (and all predators ) in ecosystems. I, like you, have come to see that predators such as mountain lions are needed elements in maintaining the biodiversity of an ecosystem.

I applaud your goal of trying to manage mountain lions in accordance with sound biological information. What you have expressed here indeed should be the guiding principles for your Department and the State. However, upon reading the accompanying document and based on my experience of working with mountain lions for over 20 years, I do find that there may be some concern regarding management goals established. I would like to address these concerns in the spirit of your guiding philosophy to manage mountain lions with the best possible biological principles.

Before I get into specifics, I would like to state that I am not opposed to a hunting season on mountain lions but am opposed to the possible overuse of this resource, which would then endanger the population, and your guiding philosophy. Mountain lions, as a hunting resource should be treated as a trophy species, one who’s taking should rank up with that of bighorn sheep, African lions, and other noted wildlife species. They should not be hunted as vermin nor the privilege to hunt them sold cheaply. Having said that, here are my concerns.

The biggest concern I have is in regards to the accuracy of your estimates of the number of mountain lions there are in the Black Hills. This concerns me because, as you know, if one overestimates the population size, the projected number of animals to be removed can have a very destabilizing impact on the population and could lead to a loss of ecological functionality of the mountain lions in the Black Hills. With regards to the estimates that have been made of the current population level (251 animals), first I think it needs to be made clear and maintained throughout the document what you really mean is 160 adult animals, being reduced to 138 per year, plus the 113 kittens of various ages. To use the 251 number obviously inflates the perception of the population size and the total density of the area, e.g. Black Hills is 8,400 km sq and at 251 lions, it is a density of 3 lions/100 km sq but at 160 lions it is only a density of 1.9 ADULT lions/100 km sq and is normally how the density is expressed. If, as you point out, you feel the population is currently stable, that means that excess animals, mostly young dispersers, will be leaving the Black Hills and the stable resident population is the lower number. To use the higher number makes it seem to the general public that there are more lions there then biologically there really are. IF you want to maintain this stable number around 160, then you can talk about what will happen to these excess animals produced each year, many will disperse, as they should be allowed to, many will die from other causes (we still do not have an idea of what mortality rates of dispersing animals are), some will fill the slots vacated by resident animals, some can be removed by the hunt. How many depends on the mortality and dispersal levels.

Based on your estimate of 160 adult lions, I am not sure what that would all equate to as a final number of animals that could be removed by hunters. I would need to sit down and go through the calculations. I am just saying that it is a more biologically correct way of presenting the data on the number of lions there actually are. Regarding that number, however, I do have some concerns as to how the 160 (and the 113 kittens) was derived. The first concern I have is that it does not provide any possible range of error. You do use a standard deviation on page 5 but I am not sure where that came from. What I do see is that only one set of values (e.g. one MAXIMUM growth rate, one percent of females with kittens, etc., most from just one area, the desert of New Mexico, hardly like the Black Hills) when we know biologically these values can change yearly in one area and do change geographically. What this does is present just one scenario and thus one estimate of the number of lions. And more specifically, without any knowledge of whether or not these values apply to your population in the Black Hills. As examples, why would we use only the maximum growth rate from a desert population of mountain lions for a population in a totally different habitat? It could be lower than that and if it is, the resulting population estimate would not have any bearing in reality. Even if it did, the repeated use of single values likely makes any final estimate to be far from reality. For example, you used 50% as the number of females with kittens at any one time. Other studies have shown that it could be as low as 20%. If that is the case for the Black Hills, the number of kittens produced and surviving each year drops from 113 to 45, quite a difference.

As for the estimate of the number of adult females based on the “capture/recapture” estimate of females killed by hunters, this also relies on just one estimate and unfortunately because of the small sample size (5/35) and possible bias of hunters to not shoot collared animals, could lead to an overestimate of the number of females. If a hunter passed up just one collared female, the total number of collared females that would have been killed would be 6/35 and would result in an estimate of only 93 females in the population rather than 112. Running this number of females through all the numbers, we get only 93 kittens, etc. etc. And if 2 collared females were passed over, it goes even lower. So because of all these unknowns, we really don’t know if the ADULT lion population in the Black Hills is 160, 100, ???.

I know it is difficult to get these numbers and that should not stop us from attempting to come up with an estimate but to use just single values, especially those which seem to exaggerate the population size, which seems to be the case here, is not biologically honest. What needs to be done, and has been done in a lot of instances, is to present a range of estimates (worse case/best case scenarios) so that the public has an idea as to in what range the lion population size likely falls. What I suggest is that all the population estimate figures need to be reworked using a wider range of data than just one study so that reasonably low and high estimates can be presented and then use these for the basis of your management decisions. This would be more biologically correct and more politically transparent. As the guiding philosophy states, you need to provide accurate information to the public regarding the mountain lions. Your current population estimates are by far not accurate nor justifiable. California lost its ability to hunt mountain lions because they could not justify their population estimates and I feel that, as presented, nor can South Dakota. Until we have a reasonable RANGE of possible population estimates, it appears that the Department is attempting to justify higher killing of mountain lions by inflating the population numbers. I would hope that that is not the case.

One last concern I have is regarding the orphaning of kittens (birth to independence). Though one can reduce the number of <3 month old kittens orphaned by changing the season dates and trying to find those that are, there still will be small spotted kittens left out in the woods to starve to death. The public needs to know this. Also, by the calculations presented, 40 % of the females killed will have kittens between 3 months and 1 year old. Though there is a 71% survival rate (again one value from one study), this still means that out of the 20 females with these age kittens, 17 died of starvation and over 40 survived uneducated! These become the trouble makers, the ones who will go to human inhabited areas and eat pets or domestic stock, or attack people. Are we not exacerbating the dilemma of problem cougars (which some then use as an excuse to kill more)? I think that there can be an acceptable level of orphaning but the current management plan does not achieve it.

Lastly, I would like to observe that many of the management strategies proposed here, if applied to ungulates, would be considered biologically unacceptable. For example, would the Department propose that out of a bighorn sheep population of 160 adult (huntable animals), hunters could kill 40 of them, including females?? Would the Department allow the killing of does with spotted fawns? For that matter, would current game laws permit hunters to shoot deer, take their head and hide and leave the meat in the forest? I think these issues need to be addressed and the public be made aware of them if the all the public is to make sound decisions on the management of mountain lions.

I end by again applauding the Department’s guiding philosophy but urge it to use this philosophy and a wider range of sound mountain lion science to produce a more scientifically sound management plan. In my professional opinion it seems that this document was develop based on selective use of existing science, mainly to produce inflated estimates of mountain lion numbers. Some could interpret this as a way to justify the higher kill levels that appear to be predetermined based mainly on political factors. For the sake of transparency, and producing a more legally sound management document, I hope that you consider my observations and concerns.

Respectfully,

Dr. John W. Laundré

Posted in Hunting, S. Dakota | Comments Off

Why cougars in the Black Hills are not significantly reducing the deer herd

Jul 18th, 2010 by admin

JohnLaundre reports on the true positive of having predators in the system

In a blatant attempt to use fear, South Dakota “sportsmen” are trying to influence cougar management by raising the specter of a bloodthirsty predator killing all THEIR deer and elk. In South Dakota is where cougars are making a valiant attempt to re-establish themselves in historical range, an effort we has humans would admire and hold in awe as an ecological wonder for any other non-predator native species. This selective and outright prejudice against predators has got to stop. Not just because it is ecologically disastrous but also because it is flat out logically wrong! All across the West, so called sportsmen have been blaming predators, mainly cougars, for declines in deer populations that began in the early 1990’s and have yet to recover to previous, probably unhealthy, highs in the 1980’s. In the scientific literature, I demonstrated that if you go through the calculations and add the numbers up, it just does not make sense. Logically, given what cougars eat, the numbers of cougars, and the number of deer, cougars just can’t eat enough deer to make a difference. To do so, there would have to be higher numbers of cougars than has ever been reported and they would weight over 700 pounds after one year!

Posted in Hunting, Preservation, S. Dakota | Comments Off

Animal control officers misinterpret key evidence in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

Jul 15th, 2010 by admin

The assumed panther track was made by a large dog. All of the assumed panther (cougar, mountain lion) tracks that we have seen in the East outside of Florida are either dog tracks or small bear tracks. Kim Cabrera’s Bear Tracker website has an excellent section on how to distinguish these tracks. Learn the track characteristics of these three species, and you will be on your way to being a cougar tracking expert! Here’s the link to Cabrera’s website – http://www.bear-tracker.com/caninevsfeline.html

http://www.sunherald.com/2010/07/13/2329366/police-caution-residents-to-watch.html

SunHerald.com – Biloxi-Gulfport and South Mississippi

Police caution residents to watch for big cat

By DONNA MELTON – dmelton@sunherald.com

Animal Control officer Dorty Necaise compares a cast of the mystery cat’s print, left, with that of a Great Dane. photo(DONNA MELTON/SUN HERALD)

BAY ST. LOUIS — Police are warning residents to watch their pets and small children until a mystery creature roaming the Cedar Point area is caught.

Animal Control officer Dorty Necaise tracked the animal this weekend and found pawprints that were the size of a Great Dane’s, but obviously from a feline with big claws.

“Now that this thing is hunting, people need to watch their children,” Deputy Police Chief Mike DeNardo said.

Necaise and DeNardo believe it’s a big cat they’re looking for, possibly a Florida panther.

They’d heard of sightings, but had no proof.

Then last week something ate Chris and Julie Cowart’s schnauzer.

The Sun Herald first broke the story of Norman the schnauzer Saturday. Julie Cowart watched the creature snatch her 7-year-old dog from her Felicity Street backyard and drag him away. Her husband, Chris Cowart, later found Norman’s remains in the woods behind their home and buried him.

They called police.

“It’s big. It’s a predator,” Necaise said.

Although Florida panthers are an endangered species mostly found in the Sunshine State, it’s possible one could be prowling Bay St. Louis, Necaise said.

Historically, the species roamed the entire southeastern United States, including Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas and Louisiana, according to a Web site for the Friends of the Florida Panther.

The panther — also called puma, mountain lion and cougar — is tan, with a long, black-tipped tail. Males average 7 feet from nose to tail and weigh about 120 pounds; females can be a foot shorter and weigh about 70 pounds.

Law enforcement officers are employing private tracker Clark Breland to help. The goal is to catch it in a humane, rubber-coated wire trap and hold it for pick-up by the state Department of Wildife, Fisheries and Parks.

Since Hurricane Katrina left so many home sites vacant, more wildlife is moving back into the woody, swampy areas of the city, Necaise said.

In recent years he’s spotted hogs, alligators, a python and even a kangaroo.

But whatever this one is, it’s dangerous, he said.

DeNardo is asking any one who sees it to call 911. He warns against residents trying to trap it or shoot it themselves.

Posted in Mississippi, Tracks, Unconfirmed Sightings | Comments Off

More about young cougar’s long journey from CO to KS, OK and NM

Jul 12th, 2010 by admin

http://cjonline.com/sports/outdoors/2010-07-10/young_lion_well_traveled

Topeka Capital-Journal

Young lion well-traveled

By Marc Murrell

A young male mountain lion that might have looked like this one was found in Colorado as a kitten, turned over to a rehabilitator and was later released near Estes Park. A GPS tracking collar allowed officials to track the lion. To date, the roaming lion is in New Mexico and has traveled more than 1,000 miles.

For decades, reports of mountain lions were common in Kansas. The state’s mountain lion history is mired in stories of sightings and tales from nearly every county. But until recent times there has never been any documentation or physical evidence to support these claims. Nobody really doubts mountain lions could have been present at some point, but without a photo, track or carcass, their presence could not substantiated.

Over the last few years all that has changed as the presence of three mountain lions have been confirmed. The first occurred in Barber County in 2007. A trail camera photo showed another lion in Trego County last fall. The most recent might be the most intriguing as a Colorado mountain lion ventured into the western part of the state this year and spent a considerable amount of time.

“It was here approximately the month of March,” said Matt Peek, furbearer biologist with the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP). “It came into the state in northwest Kansas in Cheyenne County and left in southwest Kansas in Morton County.”

The lion’s life history can be documented.

It was found as a kitten near Firestone, Colo., and turned over to a rehabilitator because it was too small to survive on its own. Officials from the Colorado Division of Wildlife released the sub-adult male near Estes Park last October when it was approximately 11 months old. A GPS tracking collar was placed on the lion allowing officials to get a fix on its position every three hours. The information was downloaded monthly.

As young male mountain lions often do, it started roaming looking to establish a home range and possibly a mate. Its initial trek took it from the Rockies east where it entered Kansas.

“During its travels through the state it never got more than 12-14 miles away from the Colorado border and never really slowed down too much as it didn’t spend a lot of time in any one place for too long,” Peek said. “That pattern isn’t unusual for the age and sex of that mountain lion.”

The lion’s journey while here didn’t follow any major landscape feature. Much of the area it traveled was primarily agricultural and largely uninhabited. It moved from habitat clump to habitat clump which included old, abandoned farmsteads or tracts of CRP. One area was in essence someone’s yard: It took refuge in a shelterbelt near a Kansas landowner’s house in Morton County.

“They knew it was there,” Peek said after a visit with the lady. “They saw tracks in the driveway one morning when they were taking the kids to the bus and followed the tracks to the shelterbelt. They took pictures of the tracks and sent them to relatives in Colorado and they definitely had mountain lion tracks. They’ve had other species of wildlife show up in their yard in the past and she didn’t appear overly alarmed about this one.”

Peek and other KDWP biologists were able to go to western Kansas in mid-April and using the waypoints provided from the GPS coordinates they found evidence of the big cat’s existence and some interesting information about its diet.

“The Colorado Division of Wildlife had identified “clusters” of GPS points which showed the animal was either resting or had killed something and was eating it,” Peek said. “We found evidence of a variety of prey including raccoon, porcupine and a domestic cat. We found a deer cache but we couldn’t tell if the lion had killed the deer or it was simply a road kill or had died from some other cause. In Colorado it had eaten a couple coyotes, turkey, pheasant and some small raptors.”

There was no evidence or reports of it killing any Kansas livestock.

Upon exiting the state the wondering cat ventured back into Colorado and through the Oklahoma Panhandle and the corner of Texas. It continued west and at last check was in New Mexico. To date, it had traveled more than 1,000 miles.

“That’s what’s so interesting about this information is we actually had a track and series of dots we could connect to see where it traveled,” Peek said. “Most of the other cats that have shown up far from their initial location only have a beginning point and an ending point and we never really know what route it took to get there. We can see a definite trail with this one.”

The documented presence of this lion provides a unique look at one of the country’s most secretive predators. The KDWP is appreciative the Colorado Division of Wildlife shared this information allowing biologists to gain information that may be used to better understand this species.

With the confirmed presence of mountain lions in Kansas in the last three years, it’s normal for individuals to wonder about their safety.

“I don’t think so,” Peek said when asked if people should be overly concerned. “People live in close proximity of mountain lions throughout the west, particularly in Colorado. They take precautions but conflicts between people and mountain lions are few and far between. Their presence in Kansas is nothing to be alarmed about and a few, dispersing animals doesn’t constitute any severe threat.”

Posted in Colorado, Kansas, Monitoring, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Radio Collar Tracking | Comments Off

Mountain Lion Foundation to offer training for law enforcement and wildlife officers

Jul 10th, 2010 by admin

This type of training is also needed to prevent the unnecessary killing of the few cougars that are turning up in the Midwest.

http://www.mountainlion.org/newsroom.asp

Mountain Lion Presentation Offered to Law Enforcement Officers

After public outcry over the recent shooting of a mountain lion in San Luis Obispo by police officers, the Mountain Lion Foundation and Animal Rescue Team Inc have teamed up to help local law enforcement and wildlife officers prepare for future wildlife encounters. On Friday, July 23rd, MLF field volunteer Robin Parks will brief local officers on how to handle mountain lion calls with non-lethal techniques. The presentation will be hosted by the Animal Rescue Team Inc at their facility in Solvang, California. Police, Sheriffs, Animal Control and CA Fish & Game officers are invited to attend, and many have already RSVP’d. (Article #1202) To read the actual news story click here…

Law Enforcement Officer Training

Sadly another one of our state protected mountain lions has been shot, and killed. A resident of Jeffrey Street in the city of SLO saw a mountain lion in one of their backyard trees. They called 911 and the SLO Police Department responded and confirmed there was a mountain lion in their tree about 15 feet from the ground. SLO PD officers established a perimeter in the yard while SLO County Animal Services and California Department of Fish & Game officials responded to the scene.

All agencies assessed the situation and determined that the mountain lion posed a serious threat to the public and neighborhood residents because of its location in a heavily populated residential area, especially if the mountain lion were to flee from the yard into the neighboring yards and residential areas. Officials developed a plan to tranquilize the mountain lion in an attempt to remove it from the area.

At about 6:25PM personnel from the SLO county Animal Services shot the mountain lion with a tranquilizer dart while the animal was still in the tree. Approximately 4 minutes later the lion fell from the tree and landed on the ground. The lion then got up and tried to leave the yard by jumping the rear fence. As the mountain lion began to jump over the rear fence, police officers shot the mountain lion, however it was still able to jump the fence into the rear yard of a neighboring home. Once in the neighboring yard, a police officer shot and killed the lion.

The mountain lion appeared to be an adult. Hopefully not a lactating mother, leaving orphaned cubs behind?

Our Reaction

We appreciate that the responding officers recognized a mountain lion hiding in a tree is not a reason to immediately kill it, and that they tried to do the right thing by resolving the situation non-lethally. As natural habitats continue to disappear at a high rate, interactions with wildlife will inevitably become more common. Urban law enforcement could benefit from proper training to better handle mountain lion as well as bear encounters. All involved had the right intention, they just needed the appropriate training and tools. We at Animal Rescue Team, Inc. will have a field volunteer from The Mountain Lion Foundation, who offers briefings to law enforcement agencies, and covers “shoot/don’t shoot” scenarios host a training at our facility .

Tips

Even if an official is unable to tranquilize and relocate a lion, we highly recommend giving the animal time and space to move on. Mountain lions are solitary animals and each one roams its own territory often a hundred square miles or more in size. They rarely stay in one place for long. Aversive conditioning can be very effective in scaring a lion away from populated areas. Just last month, police officers in Gilroy used pepper balls (similar to a paintball gun that shoots pepper spray-like balls) to scare away a wandering mountain lion (read more). Rubber bullets are one of the more common – and successful – methods used by officers. Other states like Washington have even started using specially trained Karelian bear dogs to “teach” relocated mountain lions and bears to stay away from towns. (learn more about this great program or See an example) Alternatives to killing must be considered.

Working with our Law Enforcement & Wildlife Officials

The Mountain Lion Foundation, in conjunction with Animal Rescue Team, Inc. will be hosting a one hour briefing at the ART Inc.’s wildlife rehab facility for local law enforcement ONLY as well as media on Friday July 23, 2010 at 15:00.

Our guest speaker will be Robin Parks:

Robin Parks retired from the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) in 2004 after a 25 year career in federal law enforcement. Robin’s career required he work and live in various locations in the US, Europe, Mexico, and on US Navy ships at sea. A life long admirer of the great cats, he began doing volunteer work at animal sanctuaries in California and other states in 2000 where he first encountered captive mountain lions. This later led him to MLF where he has been a field volunteer in several projects. He now is very much involved in reaching out to law enforcement agencies who are the first responders to cougar-human encounters. Robin received a large amount of media coverage for his educational briefing to the Santa Paula Police Department after officers shot and killed a lion kitten in town. Robin’s presentations provide basic cougar biology and safety tips, but primarily discuss “shoot/don’t shoot” considerations and scenarios which demonstrate that killing a cougar simply because it has wandered into human territory is rarely necessary and is often the wrong decision. Robin lives in San Diego.

It is clear that the public likes mountain lions and does not want them killed. There are many effective non-lethal tools out there for handling mountain lion calls. The Mountain Lion Foundation is happy to help any way they can. For more information, visit MountainLion.org.

For reservations and directions please call 805 896-1859,

Thank you,

Julia Di Sieno, Executive Director
Animal Rescue Team, Inc.
www.animalrescueteam.net
805 896-1859

Amy Rodrigues, Outreach Coordinator
amy@mountainlion.org
Mountain Lion Foundation
www.mountainlion.org
800 319-7621

Posted in California, Control, Monitoring, Preservation | Comments Off

Volunteers to distribute information on how to keep livestock safe from Florida panthers in Golden Gate Estates on Sat. July 10th

Jul 9th, 2010 by admin

http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2010-07-01/Panther-attacks-on-livestock-up-in-rural-Collier-County

WinkNewsNow

Panther attacks on livestock up in rural Collier County

Collier County, Fla – With four confirmed Florida panther attacks in June in the Golden Gate Estates area of Collier County, several concerned organizations are sponsoring a campaign in a northern Golden Gate Estates neighborhood on Saturday, July 10 to distribute information to residents on how to live responsibly with Florida panthers, bears and other wildlife in southwest Florida.

Over 1,000 homes are in the area, so volunteers are needed to help distribute the materials. Those interested in volunteering for this effort should contact Shannon Miller at Defenders of Wildlife at smiller@defenders.org or (727) 823-3888.

Volunteers should report to Max Hasse Community Park, 3390 Golden Gate Blvd. West in Naples at 8:30 a.m. July 10. The morning will start with a brief orientation for volunteers. Then teams will be formed, given maps and handout materials and assigned specific areas of the neighborhood.

“We’ll have plenty of water. People should bring their cell phones, wear comfortable shoes, hats and sunscreen, insect repellent, etc.,” said Elizabeth Fleming of Defenders of Wildlife.

This campaign is a joint effort by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, National Park Service, Naples Zoo, Collier County Sheriff’s Office and others working to conserve and recover the Florida panther.

FWC biologists believe a panther family is roaming around residents’ properties looking for food. The female panther has killed chickens and goats. The attacks occurred in areas that did not have predator-proof enclosures for the animals. “Vigilance is the key to protecting people’s pets and livestock,” said Mark Lotz, a biologist on the FWC’s panther team. “These animals need to be secured, especially at night, in predator-proof enclosures that have sturdy walls and a roof.”

Florida panthers were listed as endangered in 1967 and are protected under both federal and state laws. “Floridians love their wildlife and have adjusted their lifestyles to help recover alligators, waterbirds, and other species. Effective efforts to save our endangered Florida panther means we can also expect to see more human-panther encounters. Like beach residents who switch off lights for sea turtles or boaters who slow down to help manatees, we need to update the way we care for our pets and livestock to protect them and help panthers,” said Tim Tetzlaff of the Naples Zoo.

According to FWC biologists, it is important to remember that a panther sighting does not necessarily constitute a threat to human safety. The FWC recommends that anyone who spots a panther should enjoy the experience from a safe distance or from inside a structure.

However, if people happen across a panther outdoors they should remember that most panthers don’t want a confrontation, so always give them space to move away. Don’t run and stay outwardly calm. Stay still or back away quietly and slowly — always facing the panther. Do all you can to appear bigger. Pick up any small kids and hold them. If a panther is aggressive, wave your arms, yell and toss objects at it. The goal is to send the message you’re not easy prey and may be dangerous. Fight back if attacked.

**********************************************************************

http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2010-07-02/Panthers-killing-hundreds-of-dollars-in-livestock

WinksNewsNow

Panthers killing hundreds of dollars in livestock
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, Fla. – Panthers are on the prowl in Golden Gate Estates and now livestock is turning up dead. It’s such a problem for residents, that a task force is trying to help the community be more aware about protecting their animals.

“I hear my chickens clucking and chickens flying everywhere and going hysterical, and I look out here and I see a panther.”

That’s when instinct kicked in and Humberto Suarez went running outside in an attempt to save his animals.

“For a minute the panther just went down like this and just looked at me, and then just took off for the back of the property,” Suarez recalls of his close encounter.

That wouldn’t be the only time the Estates resident and his chickens came across the endangered feline. Another night, the female panther pulled up part of the fence to the hen house. She was caught with an infrared camera Florida Fish and Wildlife installed on his property.

The panther wound up killing five of Suarez’s chickens. “There was just trails of white feathers going all the way towards the back there.”

FWC has counted at least 20 areas in Collier County where a family of panthers have been checking out livestock. Over half of the locations have resulted in animals being killed.

For Suarez, his chickens are pets, but for others the animals killed were worth hundreds of dollars in income.

Suarez tells WINK News FWC informed him someone has also tried to shoot at a panther, which is a felony.

July 10th, state and local agencies will gather at Max Hasse Park in the Estates to talk about these issues and distribute information. Click here to find out more http://www.colliersheriff.org/index.aspx?recordid=13589&page=1929

Posted in Control, Florida Panther, Monitoring | Comments Off

Older Posts »