Hunter Conference Center, Southern Utah University Cedar ... MLW Proceedings 10-2014.pdf · 2...

Proceedingsofthe

11thMountainLionWorkshopIntegratingScientificFindingsintoManagement

HunterConferenceCenter,SouthernUtahUniversity

CedarCity,Utah

May12‐15,2014

Sanctionedby:

WesternAssociationofFishandWildlifeAgencies

WAFWAAgencyHost:UtahDepartmentofWildlifeResources

WorkshopCo‐Host:

WildFelidResearchandManagementAssociation(WFA)

WorkshopOrganizingCommittee:

OrganizingCommittee

Proceedingsofthe11thMountainLionWorkshop

WorkshopOrganizingCommittee:

JohnShivikUtahDivisionofWildlifeResources

johnshivik@utah.gov*

LindaSweanorWildFelidResearchandManagementAssociation

lsweanor@gmail.com

DavidStonerUtahStateUniversitydavid.stoner@usu.edu

DanCockayne

UtahHoundsmenAssociationDanc@sandlinc.com

MichaelWolfe

UtahStateUniversity(emeritus)michael.wolfe@usu.edu

TeresaGriffin

UtahDivisionofWildlifeResourcesteresagriffin@utah.gov

*Presentaddress:johnashivik@fs.fed.us

WorkshopSponsorsandVendors:

SUGGESTEDCITATION

Completevolume:Shivik,J,andL.Sweanor,editors.2014.Proceedingsofthe11thMountainLion

Workshop,May12‐15,2014.CedarCity,Utah,USA.

Individualarticle/abstract:Author’sname(s).2014.Titleofarticleorabstract.Pages00‐00inShivik,J.andL.

Sweanor,editors.Proceedingsofthe11thMountainLionWorkshop.May12‐15,2014.CedarCity,Utah,USA.

ThecompleteproceedingsareavailableattheWFAwebsites:www.wildlife.utah.govhttp://www.wildfelid.org

Preface

ChronologyofMountainLionWorkshops: 1stMountainLionWorkshop–Sparks,Nevada

2ndMountainLionWorkshop– St.George,Utah3rdMountainLionWorkshop– Prescott,Arizona4thMountainLionWorkshop– Denver,Colorado5thMountainLionWorkshop– SanDiego,California6thMountainLionWorkshop– SanAntonio,Texas7thMountainLionWorkshop– JacksonHole,Wyoming8thMountainLionWorkshop– Leavenworth,Washington9thMountainLionWorkshop– SunValley,Idaho10thMountainLionWorkshop–Bozeman,Montana11thMountainLionWorkshop– CedarCity,Utah

The11thMountainLionWorkshopwasheldatSouthernUtahUniversityinCedarCity,UtahfromMay12to15,2014.Thethemeoftheworkshopwas“IntegratingScientificFindingsintoManagement.”Dr.JohnLinnell,NorwegianInstituteforNatureResearch,Trondheim,Norway,gavetheKeynoteAddress.Dr.Linnell’sinspiringpresentationontheecologyandstatusofEurasianlynxprovidedmanycomparableinsightstomountainlions,anotherwidespreadspecieswithahighlyvariablestatus.AttheWednesdaynightbanquetDr.MikeWolfe,EmeritusProfessoratUtahStateUniversity,gaveanotherexcellentpresentationwithatalkentitled“Predation:theroadfrommythtoreason.”

Sessiontopicsincluded:stateandprovincereports;felidecology,conservationandpopulations;predatorsandprey;felidsandhumans;non‐invasivetechniques;andmanagementstrategies.Allofthepresentationswereprofessional,timely,andwell‐attended.PresentationsfocusedonpumaresearchandmanagementinthewesternU.S.(including3onrecentlyrecolonizedpopulationsintheDakotas)andCanada,withtwoadditionaltalksontheFloridaPanther.ToprovideinsightsintopumamanagementandconservationconcernsoutsideofNorthAmerica,WFAsponsoredDr.MauroLucherini,UniversidadNacionaldelSurinArgentina,whosetalkexaminedpuma‐livestockconflictsintheEspinalofCentralArgentina.

Alongwithover50presentations,fifteenpostersweredisplayed,withtopicscoveringdiseases,feedingecologyanddiet,orphans,GPSlocationclusteranalysis,rangeexpansion,effectsofambientlight,comparisonsofnoninvasiveandinvasivemethodsofpopulationmonitoring,compensatoryandadditivemortality,andpuma‐humanconflicts.Twosessionsincludedfollow‐uppaneldiscussions.Duringa2‐hour,WFA‐sponsoredsessionWednesdaymorning,DavidStonermoderatedapredator‐preysessionthatincluded5invitedspeakers(BeckyPierce,DavidChoate,AlysonAndreasen,JeffVillepique,andMarkHurley)withintimateknowledgeaboutspecificpredator‐preysystems.Presentersdiscussedtop‐downversusbottom‐up

forcesonapuma‐deersystem,thepotentialofwatersourcestofunctionasecologicaltrapsformuledeerandbighornsheep,pumaspecializationonnovelprey(feralhorses),rangeabandonmentbybighornsheep,andthedemographicresponseofdeertoexperimentalreductionsofcoyotesandpumas.Laterthatsameday,JohnShivikmoderatedasessiononpuma‐humanconflictthatincludedshortpresentationsandapaneldiscussionbyindividualsfrom6differentinterestgroups:sport‐hunters,houndsmen,livestockranchers,animaldamagemanagement(WildlifeServices),pumaadvocacy–philosophicalaspects,andpumaadvocacy–scienceaspects.Thetopicquestionwas“Howshouldwebalancepumaconservationwithpredatorpopulationreduction?”Thissessionwaswell‐receivedandmanyattendeesthoughtthatsimilarpaneldiscussionsshouldbeofferedatfutureworkshops.

Therewere188registeredworkshopparticipants.Wereceived$29,651.61inregistrationfees,contributions,sponsorships,andvendorfees.Weexpended$24,227.78whichleftuswith$5,423.83whichwassenttoWAFWAandwillbeavailableforthenextworkshop.Eachworkshopregistrantwasprovidedwithasatchelandbeaniewiththeconferencelogo.Thankstoalloftheparticipants,attendees,organizers,moderators,andvolunteersformakingthisasuccessfulworkshop!AspecialthankstoDivisionstaffwhoactedaboveandbeyondtheirnormaldutiesbyassistingwithregistration,refreshments,andrunningtheconference.TheyincludeNatalieBrewster‐Wilson,MindiCox,TroyDavis,DarrenDebloois,StephanieRainy,andHeatherTalley.KenLogan,CarnivoreResearcherwithColoradoParksandWildlife,requestedthatColoradohostthenext(12th)workshopin2017;allagreed.Theexactworkshoplocationwillbedeterminedatalaterdate.

JohnShivikmoderatingtheFelidsandHumanspaneldiscussion.

THE11thMOUNTAINLIONWORKSHOPAgenda

Monday,12MayEveningSocial,Registration4:00–8:00p.m.IronGateInn,100N200WSt,CedarCity,UT84720Tuesday,13May8:15 Welcome–JohnShivik(UtahDepartmentofWildlifeResources)PlenarySession1–State&ProvincialReportsModerator:JohnShivik8:30 Utahmountainlionstatusreport,JohnShivik(UDWR)

8:45 Wyomingmountainlionstatusreport,JustinClapp(WDG&F)

9:00 Idahomountainlionstatusreport,JimHayden(IDF&G)

9:15 Floridapantherstatusreport,MarcCriffield(FFWCC)

9:30 Nevadamountainlionstatusreport,CarlLackey(NDW)

9:45 Washingtonmountainlionstatusreport,RichBeausoleil(WDF&W)

10:00 Californiamountainlionstatusreport,MarcKenyon10:15 Break10:30 Albertamountainlionstatusreport,JayHoneyman

10:45 Nebraskamountainlionstatusreport,SamWilson

11:00 NewMexicomountainlionstatusreport,EliseGoldstein(NMDG&F)

11:15 Montanamountainlionstatusreport,JimWilliams(MFW&P)

11:30 Arizonamountainlionstatusreport,AprilHoward(ADG&F)

11:45 NorthDakotamountainlionstatusreport,StephanieTucker12:00 Lunch

PlenarySession2:KeynoteIntroduction:DavidStoner,UtahStateUniversity

1:00 Abigcatinasmallbody:DoEurasianlynxhavewhatittakestosurvivetheAnthropocene?Dr.JohnLinnell,NorwegianInstituteforNatureResearch

PlenarySession3:FelidEcology,Conservation,&Populations,Part1Moderator:TeresaGriffin 2:00 Potentialbarriersrestrictinggeneflowamongmountainlionsin

Arizona.AshwinNaidu.

2:20 Theimportanceofscaleandbehavioralstateinpumaresourceselectionfunctions.KathyZeller.

2:40 California’scougarconnectivity:geneticsinformingconservationandmanagement.HollyErnest.

3:00 Populationgeneticsofasmall,isolatedpopulationofmountainlions:Barriers,inbreeding,andgeneticrescue.SethRiley.

3:20 BreakPlenarySession4:FelidEcologyConservation,&Populations,Part2Moderator:TeresaGriffin3:40 Homerangecharacteristicsofasubordinatepredator:selectionfor

refugiaorpreyavailability?PatrickLendrum.

4:00 GeneticstructureofcougarsintheBlackHills,SouthDakota.RebecaJuarez.

4:20 IntegratingResourceSelectionandHarvestintoSpatialCapture‐RecaptureModelsforestimatingmountainlionabundance.KellyProffitt.

4:40 EvaluationofharvestindicescurrentlyusedforcougarmanagementinUtah:Oquirrh‐StansburyandMonroeunitsascasestudies.MikeWolfe.

5:00 SurvivalratesofcougarsinOregonfrom1989–2011:aretrospectiveanalysis.DarrenClark.

5:20 UsingDNAtoevaluatefieldidentificationofcougargenderbyagencystaffandhuntersusingtraineddogs.RichBeausoleil.

PlenarySession5:PostersPosterstobedisplayedduringentireconferenceintheYankeeMeadowsandVermillionCliffsRooms.Presentersinattendancefrom5:40‐6:40.

PeterAlexander.Cameratrappingvsradio‐telemetry:acomparisonofnoninvasiveandinvasivemethodsformonitoringcougarpopulations.

RichBeausoleil.OrphanedkittensinWashingtonresultinadecadeofnationwidecougareducation.

LinseyBlake.ForagingpatternsofcougarsinthePryorMountainsofWyomingandMontana.

KevinBlecha.ImprovementsonGPSlocationclusteranalysistechniquesforpredictingfeedingactivities.

MarcCriffield.Trichinellaintwodisjunctpopulationsofpuma.

AaronGhaemi.ConfirmedmountainlionsinOklahoma.

BenjaminMaltetzke.Cougarresponsetoresidentialdevelopment.

RickMinter.WildpumasinBritain–exploringevidenceandgaugingpeople’sattitudes.

JohnOdden.Theecologyofaconflict:Eurasianlynxdepredationondomesticsheepandsemi‐domesticreindeerinNorway.

OmarOhrens.Therelationshipofruraldepopulationtopuma‐humanconflictintheAltiplanoregionofTarapacá,Chile.

SadiePerrin.Effectsofpumasex,season,andhabitattypeondiet.

Scarlett Sellers. Effects of ambient light on puma, deer, and elk activity.

JeffSikich.P22:WillthismountainlionmakeitinHollywood?

AlexViere.Pumaactivityandmesocarnivores.

MikeWolfe.Compensationandadditivityincougarmortality:learningfromheavilyandlightlyharvestedpopulations.

Wednesday,14MayPlenarySession6:PredatorsandPrey,Part1Moderator:DavidStoner8:20 ProgramCluster:identifyingpredationeventsthroughclusteredGPS

data.PeterMahoney.

8:40 Cougarstrategiesoffeedingsiteselection:energymaximization,classicaloptimalforaging,orfeardrivenhumanaversion?KevinBlecha.

9:00 Estimatingmountainlion(Pumaconcolor)predationratesintherecentlyrecolonizedregionoftheLittleMissouriBadlands,NorthDakota,USA.DavidT.Wilckens.

9:20 Estimatingcougar(Pumaconcolor)consumptionratesandpreycompositionintheBlackHills,SouthDakota.JoshuaSmith.

9:40 Nowheretohide:pumas,blackbearsandcompetitionrefuges.MarkElbroch.

10:00 BreakPlenarySession7:PredatorsandPrey,Part2Moderator:DavidStoner10:20 Top‐downversusbottom‐upforcing:evidencefrommountainlionsand

muledeer.BeckyPierce.

10:35 CougarpredationintheMojaveDesert:seasonalspatio‐temporaloverlapinfluencespreyselectionmorethanwateruse.DavidChoate.

10:50 VariationinpreyselectionandincidenceofindividualspecializationonnovelpreyintheGreatBasin.AlysonM.Andreasen.

11:05 Rangeabandonmentbyungulates:Predatoravoidanceorresponsetohabitatchangesinducedbydrought?JeffreyVillepique.

11:20 Demographicresponseofmuledeertoexperimentalreductionofcoyotesandmountainlions.MarkHurley.

11:35 PanelDiscussion

12:05 Lunch

PlenarySession8:FelidsandHumans,Part1Moderator:LindaSweanor1:20 Cougarspaceuseonalandscapewithhighlevelsofanthropogenic

disturbanceinsouth‐centralUtah.JulieYoung.

1:40 Correlatesofpuma‐livestockconflictsintheEspinalofCentralArgentina.(SponsoredbyWFA)MauroLucherini.

2:00 RoadimpactsonmountainlionsinOrangeCounty,California:usingmultipledatatypestoprioritizemanagementactions.PatrickHuber.

2:20 AnoverviewofpumadepredationtrendsinCalifornia,1972‐2013.AnneOrlando.

2:40 Floridapantherrecovery:Livestockdepredation,predationriskmaps,andnewapproachestocompensationprograms.CaitlinJacobs.

3:00 Break

PlenarySession9:FelidsandHumans,Part2Moderator:JohnShivik3:20 Anintegratedregionaloutreachandresearchmodelforwildlife

conservationacrosstheSanFranciscoBayArea.AnneOrlando

3:40 ByronBateman,representingsportsmen(deerhunters)

4:00 DanCocayne,representinghoundsmen

4:10 KirkRobinson,CougarAdvocate,representingphilosophicalaspects

4:20 BrettSelman,representinglivestockinterests

4:30 BobMcCoy,CougarAdvocate,representingscienceaspects

4:40 MikeBodenchuk,WildlifeServices,representinganimaldamagemanagement

4:50 PanelDiscussion:“Howshouldwebalancecougarconservationwithpredatorpopulationreduction?”

6:30 SocialandBanquetHeritageCenter,105North,100EastPresentation–Predation:theRoadfromMythtoReason

MikeWolfeThursday,May15PlenarySession10:Non‐invasiveTechniquesModerator:KenLogan8:20 EstimatingCougarDensitiesinnortheastOregonUsingConservation

DetectionDogs.GregoryDavidson.

8:40 DNA‐baseddietidentificationofmountainlionsinsouthwesternArizona.JohnClemons.

9:00 PumaPlex:Arapidandhigh‐throughputmethodtogenotypesinglenucleotidepolymorphismsinmountainliontissuesandscats.AlexIrwin.

9:20 LynxmonitoringinScandanavia.JohnOdden.

9:40 UseofcameratrapstoassesspreyavailabilityanddistributionrelativetomountainlionpredationintheDavisMountains,Texas.CatherineC.Dennison.

10:00 Break

PlenarySession11:ManagementStrategiesModerator:KenLogan10:20 Conservationofpumas(Pumaconcolor)inarapidlyurbanizing

landscape;researchinformingtheneedformoreaction.T.WinstonVickers.

10:40 Predation‐specificresourceselectionbycougarsinthePryorMountainsofWyomingandMontana.LinseyBlake.

11:00 TechniquesusedtoraiseorphanedFloridapanthersforreleasetothewild.MarkLotz.

11:20 EffectsofRemedialSportHuntingonCougarComplaintsandLivestockDepredations.RobertB.Wielgus.

11:40 Researchtoregulation:cougarsocialbehaviorasaguideformanagement.RichBeausoleil.

12:00 Closingcomments,finalbusiness.

JohnLinnellandMikeWolfeoutsidetheHunterConferenceCenter.

Session1:

StateandProvincialReports

Proceedingsofthe

EventsinUtah’sCougarManagement,2011‐2014JohnA.Shivik,UtahDivisionofWildlifeResources;johnshivik@utah.govAbstract:Utah’scurrentcougarmanagementplanwasapprovedbytheWildlifeBoardin2009.Theplanincorporatedaregionalmanagementapproachwherehuntingunitsweregroupedinecosystem‐sizedmanagementareas,andideasofsource‐sinkdynamicswereimplemented.Someunitswereassignedaslimitedentryunitsandothersasharvestobjectiveunits,withothersbeingahybridofthetwo,splitunits,whichopenedaslimitedentryunitsandthentransitionedintoharvestobjectiveunitsforthesecondpartoftheseason.Theplanwasdesignedtobefolloweduntil2021,withmanagementrecommendationsonlybeingmadeon3‐yearcycles.However,continuedcontroversyanddiscussionsledtofrequentrevisionsbytheWildlifeBoardduringthe2011‐2014timeframe.Someunitswereputontopredatormanagementplans,andsomewereassignedminimumharvests.Acomplexflow‐chartandseriesofrulesthatdictatedallocationofpermitswasdevised.Anotherunitwasclosedbyemergencyaction.Mostrecently,theDivisionhasbeengivendirectionbytheWildlifeBoardtosimplifytheplan,whichwehopetodobyreturningtoaunitbasedmanagementsystemthatincorporatesdatacollectionatanecosystemscale.

AssessmentofPopulationTrendsandManagementStrategiesforMountainLionsinWyomingJustinG.Clapp,WyomingGameandFishDepartment,260BuenaVistaDr.,Lander,

WY82520,USA;Justin.Clapp@wyo.gov(presenter)DanielJ.Thompson,WyomingGameandFishDepartment,260BuenaVistaDr.,

Lander,WY82520,USAAbstract:In2007Wyomingbeganmanagingmountainlionpopulationsunderanadaptivemanagementplan,withharvestlimitssettoachievestable,source,orsinkpopulationobjectiveswithin5mountainlionmanagementunits(MLMUs)acrossthestate.Theannualmonitoringcriteriausedtoassesspopulationstatusprimarilyquantifiesthedensityofhuman‐causedmortality/1,000km2ofsuitablewintermountainlionhabitat,proportionofadultfemalesintheharvest,andthemeanageofadultfemalesharvested.Mountainlionmanagementstrategiesandharvestlimitsareproposedona3‐yearcycletoassesspopulationtrendandefficacyofmanagementstrategies.Harvestyear2012markedtheendofthesecond3‐yearcycleunderthismanagementplan,andweprovideanupdateontheeffectivenessofthestrategytosustainmountainlionpopulationsthroughoutsuitablehabitatatvaryingdensitiesforeachMLMUinWyoming. INTRODUCTIONIn2007,Wyomingbeganmanagingmountainlionpopulationsunderanadaptivemanagementplan,withharvestlimitssettoachievestable,source,orsinkpopulationobjectiveswithinfivemountainlionmanagementunits(MLMUs)acrossthestate.

Primarymonitoringcriteriawereestablishedviaempiricallytestedresearch

(AndersonandLindzey2005),whichprovidedinsighttogeneraltrendsinmountainlionpopulationsundervariousconditionsandhuntingpressures.Telemetrydatawerecollectedfromasampleofvariouscohortsofmountainlionsthroughouttestandreferenceareaswithinthestate,andpopulationestimateswereestablishedthroughmark‐recapturetechniques.Locationdatafromthesesampleswerealsousedinaresourceselectionfunctionanalysistoestimateandmapsuitablemountainlionhabitat.Huntingpressurewasappliedtotestareastoincreasemountainlionmortalityandtoestimateamortalitydensitythatresultedindecreasingpopulationestimates.Whenhuntingpressurewasrestricted,mortalitydensitieswereagainestimatedtodeterminethelevelatwhichpopulationestimatesrebounded.Ageandsexcompositionofmortalitydatawerealsogatheredthroughoutthisprocess.Generally,asrelativemortalityincreased(numberofmortalities/unitareaofsuitablehabitat),ahigherproportionofadultfemaleswere

harvested,andtheaverageageofthosefemalesdecreased.Theoppositewastrueofthesetrendsasrelativemountainlionmortalitydecreasedacrossthelandscape.

Thesefindingswereusedasaframeworkfortheadaptivestatemanagement

plan(WGFD2006),whereprimarymonitoringcriteriacanbederivedthroughmountainlionmortalitydataincluding:(a)human‐causedmountainlionmortalitydensity/1,000km2suitablewinterhabitat,(b)proportionofadultfemalesharvested,(c)meanageofadultfemalesharvested.(Femalestatusisdeterminedbylactation.)Thesecriteriaareassessedatthehuntarealeveltodetermineastatusofsource,stable,orsinktrends.Primaryhuntareamanagementobjectivecriteriainclude:

1. Sinkmanagement:reducemountainliondensities

a) Maintaindensityofhuman‐causedmortality>8mountainlions/1,000km2(386mi2).

b) Achieveadultfemaleharvest>25%oftotalharvestfor2seasons.c) Progressioninmeanageofharvestedadultfemalesshoulddecline

to<5yearsold.

2. Sourcemanagement:maintainhuman‐causedmortalitylevelsthatallowmountainlionpopulationgrowthormaintainrelativelyhighmountainliondensitiesthatprovideasourcetootherpopulations.

a) Maintaindensityofhuman‐causedmortality<5mountainlions/1,000km2(386mi2)

b) Maintainadultfemaleharvest<20%oftotalharvest.c) Maintainolder‐ageadultfemalesinthepopulation(>5yearsold).

3. Stablemanagement:maximizelong‐termhuntingopportunityand

populationviability.

a) Maintainhuman‐causedmortalitydensitybetween5‐8mountainlions/1,000km2(386mi2)

b) Adultfemaleharvestshouldnotexceed25%oftotalharvestformorethan1season.

c) Maintainintermediateagedadultfemales(mean4‐6yearsold)intheharvest.

Inadditiontothehuntareacriteria,otherfactors(e.g.,totalage/sex

compositiontrends,huntereffort,andhunterselectivity)arealsoevaluatedwhenassessinghuntareaand/orMLMUpopulationtrends.

Figure1.MountainlionHuntAreaandManagementUnitboundariesforWyoming,USAin2013.

Figure1showscurrentmountainlionhuntareasandMLMUsacross

Wyoming.Additionally,thewestMLMUispartitionedintoDataAnalysisUnits(DAUs)duetotheexpanseofcontiguoussuitablehabitatidentifiedthroughoutthewesternportionofthestate.TheseDAUsincludeAbsaroka(huntareas19and20),WindRiver(huntareas3,4,18,and28)andWyomingRange(huntareas2,14,17,26,and29).

MountainlionmanagementinWyomingusesthedescribedcriteriatoassess

trendsona3‐yearmanagementcycle,wherealterationstoobjectives,harvestlimits,seasons,andboundariesareminimizedduringamanagementcycletoprovidenecessarydatatodelineatetrendandavoidreactionarymanagementdecisionsbasedonvariationwithinanygivenharvestyear.The3‐yearmanagementcyclealsobolsterstheevaluationandclassificationofsink,stable,orsourceforhuntareasgivenpreviousdirectionintrends.Managingfora

combinationofsource,stable,andsinkmountainlionsubpopulationswithinMLMUs(i.e.,atthehuntarealevel)providesflexibilitytoaddresslocalmanagementconcerns(e.g.livestockdepredation,proximitytoresidentialareas)whilemaintainingoverallpopulationviabilityonalandscapelevelaswellaslong‐termharvestandrecreationalopportunities(WGFD2006).

Harvestyear2012(1Sept.2012–31Aug.2013)markedtheendofthe

second3‐yearcycleunderthemanagementplan,whichprovidedcompleteharvestdatainWyomingnecessarytoassesstheeffectivenessofthemountainlionmanagementstrategyacrosstwocompletemanagementcycles.Therefore,harvestdatacollectedafter31Aug.2013arenotincluded.ThesedataalsoincludeannuliagesforthemajorityofmountainlionmortalitiesinWyoming,providingmoreaccurateageestimationandclassificationsthanfieldpersonnelestimationsalone.WYOMINGMANAGEMENTOBJECTIVESANDPOPULATIONTRENDSWequantifiedhuntareaobjectivesbasedonmortalitydensitycriteria(a)thatwouldclassifysource,stable,orsinkmanagementforeachmountainlionhuntareathroughoutWyomingatthebeginningofeach3‐yearmanagementcycle.MortalitylimitssetforeachhuntareareflectrecommendationsincludingWGFDbiologistperspectives,public/landowner/sportsmencomments,andthepotentialforlivestockdepredation,humansafety,andpotentialimpactstosympatricpreypopulations.ThestatusforeachhuntareawasestimatedusingallWGFDmonitoringcriteria,andwascomparedtotheobjectivessetforeachmanagementcycle(Table1).Sincetheimplementationofthemanagementplanin2007,mosthuntareastatusmatchedobjectivessetinthemanagementstrategy,withapproximately82%matchingortrendingtowardobjectives.Allhuntareasthatdeviatedfromobjectivesresultedfromastatusthatwashigherthanthepotentialobjective,adirectreflectionofapproximately25%ofhuntareasclosingannuallyduetoreachingorexceedingsetmortalitylimitspriortoseasonalclosuredates.Sixhuntareas(~21%total)adaptedmanagementattheendofthefirstcycletoincreaseallowablemortalitylimits,resultinginachangeinclassification(i.e.HAs1,3,6,13,22,and30),oneareachangedobjectiveclassificationbyreducingmortalitylimits(HA29).

Weusedtheproportionofmatchinghuntareaobjectivesasaroughestimate

toquantifytheeffectivenessofthemanagementplanatahuntarealevel,butitisimportanttoconsiderhowtheculminationofmountainlionmanagementatlocalscalesimpactthepopulation.Whenconsideringthehabitatthatsupportsinterconnectedmountainlionpopulationsstatewide,mortalitylimitsrevealedanoverallobjectivetoslightlyreducemountainlionpopulationsacrossthestate,andthemonitoringcriteriaweusedshowastatewidepopulationstatusthatistrendingtowardstabilityinthemountainlionpopulationinWyoming(Table1).

Table1.MountainlionhuntareaobjectivesvsstatusforfirstandsecondmanagementcyclesinWyoming.Objectivesarebasedonlyonpotentialmortalitydensities.StatusarebasedonallWGFDmonitoringcriteriaforeachmanagementcycle.

FirstCycle(HY2007‐HY2009)SecondCycle(HY2010‐

HY2012)

MLMU HuntArea Objective Status Objective Status

Northeast

HA1 Stable/Sink Sink Sink SinkHA30 Source Source Sink SinkHA32 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Sink SinkHA24 MinimalHabitat NA MinimalHabitat NA

Northcentral

HA15 Sink Sink Sink Sink

HA22 Stable Stable Sink Stable

Southeast

HA5 Source Source Source Source

HA6 Source Source Stable Stable

HA7 Sink Stable→Sink Sink Stable→Sink

HA8 Stable Source Stable Source

HA9 Sink Stable/Sink Sink Stable/Sink

HA10 Sink Stable→Sink Sink Stable/Sink

HA16 Stable Stable Stable Source

HA25 MinimalHabitat NA MinimalHabitat NA

HA27 Sink Stable→Sink Sink Source

HA31 Stable Stable Stable Stable

SouthwestHA11 MinimalHabitat NA MinimalHabitat NA

HA12 Stable Stable Stable Stable/Sink

HA13 Source Source Stable Stable

AbsorokaDAU

HA19 Stable/Source Source Source/Stable Source→Stable

WindRiverDAU

HA3 Stable/Source Stable/Source Stable Source

HA4 Stable Stable Stable Stable/Sink

HA18 Stable/Sink Source Stable/Sink Stable/Source

WyomingRangeDAU

HA14 Stable Stable Stable Stable

HA17 Stable/Source Source Stable/Source Source

HA26 Stable/Sink Stable/Sink Stable/Sink Source

HA29 Stable Source Source/Stable Source/Stable

STATEWIDE Stable Stable/Source Stable/Sink Stable*Arrowsindicatedatatrendingtowardobjectives.**HuntArea32didnotexistpriortoHY2012,andonlyincludesoneyearofdata.

DISCUSSION–SUCCESSFULAPPLICATIONSANDCHALLENGESWITHSOURCE/STABLE/SINKMANAGEMENTSTRATEGIESWeprovidethesoutheastMLMUasanexampleofawell‐balancedmountainlionmanagementunit,locatedinsoutheasternWyoming.Figure2depictsclassificationsofhuntareastatusbasedonmonitoringcriteriathroughoutthefirsttwocyclesofthestatemanagementplan(2007−2012).IndividualhuntareastatuswithintheMLMUhavethepotentialtobeinfluencedbyalterationsinmanagementobjectives,aswellasbynaturalvariationinpopulationdynamicsorenvironmentalconditionsinfluencingtrackingconditionsthatdriveharvestsuccess.However,theoverallstatusofthisMLMUindicatedasustainableandwell‐functioningsystemwheresourceareasprovideopportunityforrecruitmentandjuveniledispersaltoadjacentareas,stablehuntareasmaintainbalancedsubpopulations,andsinkareasallowincreasedmortalitywithoutjeopardizingtheintegrityofthepopulation.

Figure2.AverageHuntAreastatusclassificationwithinthesoutheastMLMUinWyomingfromHY2007−HY2012.MonitoringcriteriaindicatethisMLMUfunctionedatastable/sourcelevel([a]human‐causedmortalitydensity=5.0/1000km2suitablewinterhabitat,[b]%adultfemaleharvest=15.5,[c]averageageofadultfemalesinharvest=5.5years)

Wealsoprovideanexampleofthebenefitsderivedfromtheabilitytoadaptmanagementstrategies.In2011,theWGFDrespondedtopublicperceptionregardingregionalmountainlionmanagementaswellaspotentialconflict,

primarilyintheformofdomesticsheepdepredationinnortheastWyoming.ThisresultedinhuntareaboundaryandmortalitylimitchangesimplementedinthenortheastpriortoHY2012todirectmountainlionharvestontoprivatelandssurroundingtheBearLodgeMountains(HuntArea32).WeusedakerneldensityestimatorasavisualaidtocompareharvestdensitiesrelativetothenortheastMLMUbeforeandaftermanagementstrategieswereimplemented.Figure3Ashowsgeneralareaswherethethehighestdensitiesofmountainlionharvesthadoccurredprevioustothehuntareaboundaryalterations(HYs2010−2011).WhencomparedtoFigure3B(HYs2012−2013),therestructureofthehuntareasresultedinashiftinharvestdensitiestowardthedesiredarea,drivenbydirectingharvesttothenewlyestablishedhuntarea32andaccompaniedbyanincreaseinoverallharvestlimitsforthenortheastMLMU.

Figure3.Spatialcomparisonofrelativeharvestdensitiesbefore(A)andafterdirectingmountainlionharvest(B)byincorporatinganewHuntArea32inHY2012withintheNortheastMLMU.

Aswithanyimplementationofwildlifemanagementstrategiesintendedto

addresscomplexecologicalprocessesandsocialcommentary,challengesandcomplicationsareinevitable.Aswelookatharvestdataacquiredovertwocompletemanagementcycles,weidentifysomeofthesechallenges,giveexamplesofwheretheyoccur,anddiscusspotentialramificationsforlimitationswithincurrentstatemonitoringcriteriaandmountainlionmanagementacrossWyoming. Interpretationofmonitoringcriteriatodeterminetrendsinhuntareastatuscanbechallenging.Lowsamplesizesinhuntareaharvestoftenresultinsporadicandhighlyvariableresults,wheretheproportionofadultfemalesharvested(criteria(b))canbeincreasinglydifficulttodetermine.Forexample,huntarea13consistentlyreportedlowoverallharvestnumbers,andthereforewasincreasingly

difficulttodetermineareliabletrendintheproportionofadultfemalesharvested(Figure4).

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Subadult Male

Subadult Female

Adult Male

Adult Female

Figure4.Age/sexcompositionofmountainlionhuntarea13inWyomingfrom2007−2012.Boldnumbersindicatereportedsamplesizesforeachcohort.

Collectingadequateharvestdatacanbeaccomplishedeitherbyspatiallyexpandingtheareaunderanalysistoincorporatemorepotentialharvest,orbytemporallyextendingthegiventimeframetoallowmoreharvesttooccurandbeassessedundervariousmethods(e.g.,3‐yearaverage,runningaverages,smoothingmethods).Explainedwithinthemanagementplan,refrainingfrommakingmanagementchangeswithinthe3‐yearcycleprovidesvaluabletemporalbufferstoalleviatethesesamplesizeconcerns.However,furthercomplicatingsamplesizeadequacywithinthesescenariosistheapplicationofcriteria(c),wheretheaverageageofadultfemalesharvestedisfurtherusedtoassesspopulationtrend.Atahuntarealevel,withsuppressedoverallharvestalreadyinfluencingtheaccuracyoftheproportionofadultfemalestaken,thisissueisexacerbatedwhenthesamplesizeisfurtherrestrictedtotheamountofadultfemalesharvestedwithinahuntarea,andoftenresultsinasamplesizeof1or2adultfemalemountainlionsindeterminingtheaverageage(e.g.Figure4).

Tomaximizeaccuracyintrendanalyses,thecurrentmanagementplanalso

emphasizestheimportanceofusingmultiplemetricstodeterminepopulationstatus,suchasthedensityofhuman‐causedmountainlionmortality/1000km2(a).Althoughmortalitydensityistypicallyoneofthestrongestmetricsusedtodeterminehuntareastatus,thistoohaslimitations.Human‐causedmortalitydensityiscalculatedbasedontheamountofhighqualitywinterhabitatidentifiedformountainlions,andwasderivedinpartthroughresourceselectionmodelsdevelopedinselectareasinWyomingandextrapolatedviapredictivemapsacrossthestate.Theseempiricallytestedmortalitydensitiesandassociatedhabitatmodels

areessentiallythefoundationforthisportionofthestatemanagementplanmonitoringcriteriainWyoming.Anassumptionnecessaryfortheapplicationofstatewidesuitablehabitatmodelincludethatmountainlionshaveindeedcolonizedallareaswherehabitathasbeenidentified,whichisgenerallysupported.However,withvariabilityinkeyhabitatcharacteristics(e.g.largeorsmallconnectedareasofsuitablehabitat,variouspreydensities,etc.)acrossthestate,weunderstandthatmountainliondensitiesareunlikelytobeuniformacrossthelandscape.Specifichuntareaswherelittletonosuitablehabitatisapparentrendersmortalitydensitiesinapplicabletoevaluate.Andwhilethemanagementplansupportstheabilitytorestructurehuntareaboundariesasnecessary,huntareasaremoreoftensplittocreatenewareasthanmergedtogether.Whilethesechangesareoftenimplementedtotargetharvesttospecificareas,theseactionsoftentiebacktotheimportanceofconservationofspatialareathatsupportthesamplesizesnecessaryforpreviouslymentionedmetricsofhuntareatrends.Althoughsamplesizeadequacywasgivenmuchconsiderationduringthedevelopmentofthestatemanagementplan,itnever‐the‐lesspersistsasaprimarychallengewhenanalysingmountainlionmortalitydata.

Anotherchallengethatmeritsdiscussionistheverbiageofobjectiveswithin

themountainlionmanagementplan.Theveryterm“objective”ironicallymaybesubjectiveundervariouscircumstances,aswellasatvariousscales.Atpopulationlevels(MLMUorstatewide),thegeneralmissionofmountainlionmanagementinWyomingisapparent:tosustainmountainlionpopulationsincorehabitatatvaryingdensitiesdependingonmanagementobjectives(WGFD2006).However,huntarealevel“objectives”forstable/source/sinkarelessclear.In2010,mountainlionregulationnomenclaturewaschangedfromtheuseof“harvestquotas”totheterm“mortalitylimits.”Thiswasdonetosupporttheconceptthatgiventheself‐regulatingtendencyofmountainlionpopulations,thelevelofallowablemortalityaremeanttoprovidelimitsthatmaybereachedthroughhuntingopportunity,butarenotnecessarilyafailureifnotmetorexceeded.Soalthoughsource/stable/sinkmaybeusedtoclassifyanobjectiveforeachhuntarea,itisthecombinedresultthatprovidessustainabilityinmountainlionpopulations.However,specifichuntareaswithinthestatedosetobjectiveslikenedtoaspecificmanagementgoal(e.g.,toreducelocalmountainliondensities).Althoughwecannotforcehunterstoincreaseharvestofmountainlionswithinhuntareaswhereharvestlimitsarenotreached,thestatedoesattempttoincreaseharvestlevelsbyprovidingadditionalandreducedpricelicensesinsomehuntareas,orbyalteringhuntareaboundariestofurtherdirectharvest.Thisseemscontradictorytothepreviousargument,andrendersobjectivesdifficulttointerpretdependingondesiredoutcomes.Forexample,whenquantifyinghuntareaobjectivesbasedonmortalitylimits,thestatehasshownanincreaseintheproportionofhuntareasthatwouldclassifyasasinkifallmortalitylimitswerereached.Whileaportionofthesehuntareamortalitylimitsaresetwiththeintentiontoreducelocalpopulationdensities,othersaresetsimplytomaximizehunteropportunity.Regardlessofintent,theflexibilityinthemanagementstrategydesignedtoregulatemortalitylimitstomeetobjectivesofsource,stable,orsinkhuntareasthereforehavethepotentialtobecomeskewed.

Managingmultipleadjacenthuntareasatrelativelyhighmortalitydensitiescancauseareductiontheproportionofresidentmountainlions,whichmaycomplicateinterpretationofmonitoringcriteriausedtoassesspopulationtrends.Forexample,HuntArea1locatedintheBlackHillsisoneoffourhuntareasundermanagementforlocalreductionsintheresidentmountainlionpopulationwithinthenortheastMLMU.From2007−2009,thishuntareaexhibitedhigherproportionsoffemalesharvestedinresponsetoincreasedmortalitylimits.However,recentdata(HY2010−HY2012)haveshiftedthismetrictoarelativelylowproportion,duetoassumedsuppressioninoverallabundanceofmatureindividualsunderincreasingmortalitydensities(Figure5).Underconsistentlyhighmortalitydensities,theelevatedproportionofadultfemalesharvestedcannotbesustainedforprolongedperiods,andscenariossuchastheseconveytheimportanceofassessingharvestdatathroughtimetoidentifytrendsinthedata,aswellgatheringaspectrumofdatatobestdeterminethestatusofthepopulation.Inthissituation,thechallengethereinliesnotsolelyinthemanagementplanitself,butintheadherencetomaintainabalanceofsource/stable/sinkthroughmortalitylimitssetwithineachMLMU.

Figure5.HuntArea1trendinmortalitydensity(blackline)andage/sexcompositionofharvestedmountainlionsfrom2007−2012.Mortalitydensityvaluesfrom5−8generallyindicatestabilityinthepopulation.Notetheinverserelationshipbetweentheproportionofadultfemalesharvested(red)andmortalitydensitytrend.

Inconclusion,Wyoming’smountainlionmanagementplanhasthusfarprovidedaneffectiveframeworktoaccomplishthestatewideobjectivetoprovideviableandsustainablemountainlionpopulationsatvaryingdensitieswithinsuitablehabitat.Wyominghasreportedrecordharvestlevelsoverthepastseveralyears,butmonitoringcriteriadataindicatestabilizationintheassumedincreaseinmountainliondistributionandabundanceoverthepastfewdecades(Jenks2011).

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Subadult Male

Subadult Female

Adult Male

Adult Female

Mortality Density

Theflexibilityoftheplanhasprovidedtheabilitytobeproactiveinthepreventionofmountainliondepredationevents,toaddresspublicsafetyconcerns,andworkinconcertwithmanagementstrategiesaimedtosupportotherwildlifespeciesthroughoutthestate.LITERATURE CITED ANDERSON, C.R., JR., AND F.G. LINDZEY. 2005. Experimental evaluation of population

trend and harvest composition in a Wyoming cougar population. Wildlife Society Bulletin 33:179-188.

JENKS, J.A., editor. 2011. Managing cougars in North America. Jack H. Berryman

Institute, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA.

THOMPSON, D. J., AND LARGE CARNIVORE SECTION. 2013. Wyoming mountain lion harvest/mortality report: Harvest years 2010-2012 (1 September 2010 – 15 April 2012). Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Lander, Wyoming, USA.

THOMPSON, D. J., AND TROPHY GAME MANAGEMENT/RESEARCH BRANCH. 2010.

Wyoming mountain lion harvest/mortality report: Harvest years 2007-2009 (1 September 2007 – 23 April 2010). Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Lander, Wyoming, USA.

WYOMING GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT. 2006. Mountain Lion Management Plan. Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA.

RecentManagementApproachesforCougarinIdaho

JimHayden,IdahoDepartmentofFishandGame,2885WestKathleenAvenue,Coeurd’Alene,Idaho83815,USA,jim.hayden@idfg.idaho.gov

Abstract:IdahocurrentlyoperatesunderaCougarManagementPlandraftedduring2002andoriginallyslatedtobere‐writtenby2011.CougarhuntingseasonsaresetonaGameManagementUnit(GMU)scale,butanalysisofharvestdataoccursacross18DataAnalysisUnitscomprisedof2to14GMUs.Seasonsaresetannually.Atthestartoftheplanningperiod,harvestin35GMUswasmanagedusingafemalequota.Oftheremaining64GMUswithoutaquota,9weremanagedundera2cougarbaglimit.Currently,managementof35GMUsremainsunderafemalequota,and13oftheremainingunitsaremanagedundera2cougarbaglimit.PredationmanagementplanshavebeenapprovedfortwoareasofIdaho(theLolo/SelwayandtheMiddleForkSalmonRiver)toaddresssubstantialdeclinesintheseelkherds.However,nocontrolactionshavebeenincludedtodateforcougarwithintheseareas.WhiletherearenofirmplansforaCougarManagementPlanre‐write,thisneedisbeingdiscussed.FloridaPantherStatusReportMarcCriffield,DavidOnorato,DarrellLand,MarkA.Lotz,andMarkCunningham;

marc.criffield@myfwc.comAbstract:Floridapanthers(Pumaconcolorcoryi)arefederallyclassifiedasendangeredbytheEndangeredSpeciesActandprotectedinFlorida.Assuch,panthersaremanagedundertheFloridaPantherRecoveryPlanwiththeoverallgoalofachievinglong‐termviabilityanddelisting.TheFloridaFishandWildlifeConservationCommission(FWC)initiatedresearchonFloridapanthersin1981.Overthelast33years,withassistancefromourFederalpartners,wehaveradiocollared229panthers,andhandled405neonatekittensatdens.TheFWCcontinuestoassessprogresstowardspantherrecoveryvialong‐termmonitoring,researchinitiativesaimedatassessingpopulationparameters,andworkingtoresolvehuman‐pantherconflictscoincidingwithagrowingpantherpopulationinshrinkinghabitat.TheFWCandourpartnersarecurrentlyfocusedonseveralresearchstudiesincluding:1)assessingmultipletechniquestoderiveastatisticallydefensiblepantherpopulationestimate;2)continuedassessmentoftheimpactsofgeneticrestoration;and3)monitoringthepotentialimpactsofwildlifediseasesonpantherrecovery.TheFWCandtheUniversityofFloridaarecollaboratingonresearchaimedatgarneringabetterunderstandingofhumandimensionissuesassociatedwithanexpandingpantherpopulation.TheseincludeanassessmentofthecausesofcalfmortalityonranchingoperationsinSouthwesternFloridaanddeterminingeconomicallyfeasiblemethodsofprovidingincentiveprogramstoprivatelandownerstoconserveandmanagetheirlandinwaysthatbenefitboth

traditionallandusesandhabitatforpanthers.Floridapantherrecoveryreliesonlong‐termmonitoringdatatoguidepubliclandhabitatmanagement,minimizelossofhabitatfromnewdevelopmentsandtosupportcooperativeprogramswithprivatelandownerstohelpconserveremainingpantherhabitatinFlorida.NevadaCougarManagementTopicsCarlW.Lackey,NevadaDepartmentofWildlife,1100ValleyRoad,Reno,NV89423,

USA,clackey@ndow.org

Abstract:Nevada’sMountainLionManagementPlanwaslastupdatedin1995.Sincethattimetherehavebeenseveralregulatorychangestocougarmanagementinthestate,mostofwhichwereimplementedwiththegoalofincreasingannualharvest.Thiswastheproductofapoliticallychargedsystemunderwhichcougarmanagementinthestatewasoperating.Theserevisionsincludedreducedtagcosts,over‐the‐countertagsales,increasedbaglimitsandchangestoayear‐aroundseason.Thesechangeshavehadonlymoderateeffectsontotalharvest.Currentharvestlevelsrepresentroughly11%oftheadultcougarpopulationandarebelowthe5‐yearand10‐yearharvestaverages.Statewidecougarharvestprobablyhasbeenmoredependentonyearlyclimaticfluctuationsthanithasontheimposedregulatorychangesmentioned.CougarresearchcontinuesinwesternNevadawithacontributiontothejournalMolecularEcology(2012)byAlysonAndreasen,UniversityofNevada,Reno.AdditionalpublicationsfromthatPhDdissertationareforthcoming.Wecontinuetoinvestigateresearchopportunitiesandareanticipatingthatacougarandblackbearinteractionstudywillbegininfallof2014.WashingtonMountainLionStatusReport–2014RichardA.Beausoleil,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;

richard.beausoleil@dfw.wa.govAbstract:Thisstatusreportwillbeanupdateofcougarresearch,management,andlegislativeactivitiesinWashingtonsincethe2011mountainlionworkshop.After13yearsofcontinuousresearchon6studyareasinWashington,manycougarresearchprojectshavebeencompletedinvolvingpersonnelfromWDFW,WashingtonStateUniversity,andUniversityofWashington.Muchofthisresearchhasbeenpublishedsincethelastworkshopandseveralmoremanuscriptsareinproductionandpress;thosewillbehighlightedinthispresentation.Activityduringthelast3legislativesessionssincetheMontanaworkshopwillalsobesummarized;theyincludeSubstituteSenateBill1885regardingfeedingofwildlifeandfinesandSenateBills5356and6287concerningtheuseofdogstohuntcougar.Finally,in

2012‐13,WDFWadoptedanewharvestguidelinestructureincorporatingthesocialstructureofcougarsintomanagement.Thestatewasdividedinto49populationmanagementunits(PMUs)anda12‐16%harvestguidelinewasappliedtoeach.Thisprocess,aswellasresultsfromthepast2years,willbediscussed.EventsinCalifornia’sMountainLionManagement,2011‐2014MarcW.Kenyon,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife,1701NimbusRd,Suite

D.,RanchoCordova,CA95670,USA,Marc.Kenyon@wildlife.govAbstract:Mountainlionsaredesignatedasa“speciallyprotectedmammal”forwhichhuntingisprohibitedandnofundsareallocatedformonitoring,researchordepredationandpublicsafetyresponse.Asaresult,California’smountainlionmanagementhasbeenguidedbystatelawthatislimitedtorespondingtohuman‐mountainlionconflicts,andconflictsassociatedwithsensitivebighornsheeppopulations.Althoughrespondingtomountainlionconflictsrepresentsanunfundedmandate,thepublicexpectsawell‐coordinatedresponsetosuchcallsforservicewhereindividualsperceiveathreattopublicsafety.However,duetorecentreductionsinforce,highpersonnelturnover,andreductionsinresourcesavailabletorespondingpersonnel,thisexpectationhasnotbeenconsistentlymetthroughoutthestate.Toamelioratethissituation,CDFWbeganrevisingthestate’smountainlionpolicy.Thiswaspromptedbyaseriesofunfortunatecircumstancesincludinganincidentthatresultedinthedeathof2juvenilemountainlionsinthecityofHalfMoonBay.Thisincident,coupledwithahistoryofsimilarsituations,resultedinlegislativechangesrequiringCDFWtoconsiderutilizingtheexpertiseofnon‐agencypersonnel(localveterinarians,universityresearchers,wildliferehabilitators,andNGO’s)andrecommendedtheuseofnon‐lethalmeasuresasaninitialsteptoresolvinghuman‐mountainlionconflicts.Theselegislativerequirementswereincorporatedintothenewpolicy,whichhasbeenineffectsinceJanuary,2013,andwearedevelopingcoordinated‘regionalresponseteams’toassistoureffortswhennecessary.CDFWhasrecentlyallocatedfundingtobegindevelopingastatewideconservationmanagementprogram.Thisprogramwillbehighlycollaborativeandinvolvediversestakeholderstohelpdefineconservation,managementandresearchprioritiesthroughoutthestate.Thiseffortwillalsoevaluateusinghabitatsuitabilitymodelsandresourceselectionfunctionscoupledwithpopulationgeneticstodevelopregionalizedpopulationmonitoringprioritiesforassessingthestate’smountainlionpopulation.

AlbertaCougarManagementJayHoneyman,AlbertaEnvironmentandSustainableResourceDevelopmentAbstract:CougarpopulationsinAlbertahadundergonesignificantdeclineandrangecontractionasaresultofpreydeclineanddirectpersecutionoverthelastcentury.Morerecently,fromthetimetheywerefirstdeclaredabiggamespeciesin1971,cougarpopulationshaveincreasedinnumbersandexpandedindistribution.Cougarmanagementhasbeenadjustedthroughthe1900’sand2000’storeflectthegrowingpopulation,withnewhuntingareasandseasonsaddedascougarscontinuetoexpandtheirrange.In2014,cougarmanagementinAlbertareflectsaneedtobalancecougarconservationwithstrongpublicsentimentthatopposesthepresenceofcougarsinruralresidentialandagriculturallandscapes.ToreadAlberta’scougarmanagementplangoto:http://esrd.alberta.ca/fish‐wildlife/wildlife‐management/documents/WildlifeMgmtPlan‐Cougars‐Nov2012B.pdfNebraskaMountainLionStatusReportSamWilson,NebraskaGameandParksCommission;sam.wilson@nebraska.govAbstract:MountainlionswereextirpatedfromNebraskabytheearly1900sduetounregulatedhunting,trapping,poisoninganddecimationofpreyspecies.In1991afemalewaslegallyshotinthePineRidgeregionofnorthwesternNebraskamarkingthefirstdocumentedpresenceinmoderntimes.Afemalemountainlionwithkittenswasdocumentedinthisregionin2007,whichprovidedthefirstevidenceofaresidentpopulationsinceextirpation.RecentevidenceofreproductionandresidentanimalssuggestsmountainlionsarealsorecolonizingtheWildcatHillsinthesouthernpanhandleandtheNiobraraRivervalleyinnorth‐centralNebraska.TheCommissioninitiatedgeneticsurveysutilizingscatdetectordogsin2010toestimatethesizeofthemountainlionpopulationinthePineRidge.TheamountofsuitablehabitatwasalsoestimatedusingGISbasedhabitatmodeling.Thegeneticsurveywasrepeatedduring2012.Nebraska’sinauguralmountainlionharvestseasonopenedonJan1,2014.Thestateisdividedintofourunits:1)thePineRidgeunit–whichencompassesthelargestknownpopulation,2and3)theUpperPlatteandKeyaPahaunits–whichencompassthetwonewlydocumentedpopulations,and4)thePrairieunit–whichconsistsof87%ofthestatewherenopopulationshavebeendocumentedandhabitatmaybelimited.HuntinginthePineRidgeunitresultedinaharvestoftwomalesandonefemale.ThePrairieunitremainsopenyear‐roundandthereisnoharvestlimit.Noharvestisallowedduring2014intheUpperPlatteandKeyaPahaunits.Additionalresearchisplannedfor2014and2015inordertocreatepopulationestimatesforthePineRidgeandtherecentlyrecolonizedareas.

NewMexicoCougarManagementUpdate2014EliseJ.Goldstein,NewMexicoDepartmentofGameandFish,1WildlifeWay,Santa

Fe,NM87507;elise.goldstein@state.nm.usFredericWinslow,NewMexicoDepartmentofGameandFish,1WildlifeWay,Santa

Fe,NM87507Abstract:Cougars(Pumaconcolor)becameaprotectedspeciesinNewMexicoin1971,andhuntingmanagementwasbasedonazonemanagementsystemstartingin2000.Habitatmodellingestimatesacougarpopulationof3,100to4,300individuals.Thereare19managementzones,11aremanagedforincreasingpopulations,and8aremanagedforstabletodecreasingpopulations.Forincreasingpopulations,totalharvestcannotexceed25%ofthepopulation,withfemaleharvestnottoexceed30%ofthetotalharvest.Forstabletodecreasingpopulation,totalharvestcannotexceed30%ofthepopulation,withfemaleharvestnottoexceed50%ofthetotalharvest.Currently,onlysportharvestcountstowardsthemaximumsustainableharvestlimit.From2010‐2013,40%oftotalharvestwasfemales,≥50%offemalesharvestedwere<2.5yearsold,andtheaverageannualtotalharvestwas215animals.Annually,4‐7%ofthecougarpopulationiskilledfromallsourcesofhuman‐causedmortality.

Desertbighornsheep(Oviscanadensis)werelistedasastateendangeredspeciesin1980,andinthe1990sitwasdocumentedthat85%ofknowncausemoralitywascausedbycougarpredation.From1979to2001,249bighornweretransplantedintothewild,andfrom2002‐2013231bighornweretransplantedintothewild.In2001,acougarremovaleffortwasimplementedindesertbighornhabitatinNewMexico;theareaconstitutes~1%ofcougarhabitat,andanaverageof2.6cougarspermountainrangeperyearisremovedunderthisprogram.Cougarpredationmortalityratesfordesertbighorndeclinedfrom0.16priortocougarremovalto0.06followingcougarremoval.Allothercausesofmortalityremainedfairlyconstantat0.05priortocougarremovaland0.06followingcougarremoval.Thisdemonstratesthatcougarpredationisanadditivesourceofmortalityfordesertbighorn.Desertbighornincreasedfrom<170animalsin2001toapproximately800in2013.Whenhighcougarpredationratesarelimitingbighornpopulations,acougarremovalprogrammayallowbighornpopulationstoexpand.

ACausetoPauseinMontana,Again–What’s‐upwithMontanaMountainLions?2011‐2014JimWilliams,MontanaFish,WildlifeandParks;USA,jiwilliams@mt.govAbstract:Montanaisintheprocessofdedicatingresourcestocreateanewstatewidemountainlionmanagementplan.Wearecurrentlyoperatingunderaplanthatwaswrittenin1996.TheJournal;ofWildlifeManagementhastentativelyacceptedanewmonographtitled“LinkingResourceSelectionandMortalityModelingforPopulationEstimationofMountainLionsinMontana”.ThisstatewideresearcheffortwillhelprefineharvestMontanamanagementgoals.Morespecifically,intheBitterrootValleyofwestcentralMontana,mountainliondensityestimatesarebeingproducedbycurrentresearcheffortsthatchallengetraditionaldensityparadigms.Lastly,ecologicaldiscussionsfromthelastWAFWAworkshopwereincorporatedintosomeregionalMontanamountainlionhuntingseasonstructures.ArizonaGameandFishReportAprilHoward,ArizonaGameandFishDepartmentAbstract:Researchhasshownthatpredationbymountainlionscanlimitbighornsheeppopulationsandimpederestorationeffortsorinducepopulationdecline.AftermountainlionscolonizedsouthwesternArizonaintheearly2000’s,bighornsheeppopulationsinthatareadeclinedby50%.In2013,atranslocationof31bighornsheepintosoutheasternArizona,whichoncecontainedarobustandindigenouspopulationofdesertbighornsheep,werequicklyreducedto14within4months.Afteranalysesoftheprobablecausesofthesheepdeclineinbothareas,predationbymountainlionswasidentifiedasonefactorthatcouldpotentiallybelimitingtherecoveryofthebighornsheeppopulations.ArizonaimplementedAdaptiveMountainLionPredationManagementPlansforeachsite.AnimportantcomponentofeachPlanistouseresearchandmonitoringapproachestoincreaseknowledgeandtoevaluatemanagementactionsacrossabroaderareaoftheselowerdeserthabitats.Althoughitisprematuretoformanyconclusions,currentinformationcollectedfromcollaredsheepandmountainlions,andsurveydataareusedtoimplementandevaluatemanagementstrategiessuchas“offending“lionremoval,multiplebaglimits,andmountainlionmanagementzones.

EvolutionofmountainlionmanagementinNorthDakota,2011‐2014StephanieTucker,NorthDakotaGameandFishDepartment,Bismarck;

satucker@nd.govAbstract:ManagementofmountainlionsinNorthDakotafocusedonhumanconflictsandharvestmanagementduringthepast3years.Alsoduringthistime,thefirstactiveresearchprojectonmountainlionsinNorthDakotabegan.Thisfirstphaseofresearchconcentratedonadultmountainlionsurvivalandfoodhabitsasascientificcomparisontolandownerandhunterconcerns.Landownertoleranceformountainlionsremainslow.Additionally,mountainlionscontinuetobeascapegoatforlowmuledeernumbers.Anupcomingsecondphaseofresearchwillattempttoverifyourpopulationandhabitatmodels,sothatarealisticlevelofcertaintycanbeachievedtoaidinharvestmanagement.ThesmallpopulationsizeofmountainlionsinNorthDakotaaddschallengestothespecies’management.

PlenarySession2:KeynoteAbigcatinasmallbody:DoEurasianlynxhavewhatittakestosurvivetheAnthropocene?Dr.JohnLinnell,NorwegianInstituteforNatureResearch,Trondheim,NorwayAbstract: Thereiscurrentlyahugefocusontheglobalstatusoflargecarnivores,withsomespeciessuchastigers,snowleopards,cheetahandAfricanlionsattractingmostattention.Althoughthereisnodoubtthatthesespeciesareinneedofallthehelptheycanget,thedominanceofthesespeciesinthepublic’seyedetractsfromthemorecomplexsituationsfacingotherspecies.Theseincludespecieslikemountainlions,leopardsandEurasianlynx.Thesespeciesarewidespreadandhavehighlyvariablestatus.Populationsvaryfromlarge,wellconnectedandexpanding,tosmall,isolatedandhighlyendangered.ThistalkfocusesontheEurasianlynx,exploringwhatweknow,anddon’tknow,aboutitsecologyandconservationstatusacrossitswidedistributionthatstretchesacrossEurasia.Thetalkwilladdressdetailsofitsecologyandmanagement,especiallyfocusingonissueswithparallelstomountainlions–includingcompetitionwithhuntersforwildungulates,depredationonlivestock,monitoringandhunterharvest.ThetalkwillsummarizewhatisknownfromthemanystudysitesinEuropewhereithasbeenwellstudied–butwillalsoprofilejusthowmuchisunknownaboutitsstatusandecologyacrossthemajorityofitsrangeinAsia.

JohnLinnelldiscusseslynxecology.

Session3:

FelidEcology,Conservation,andPopulations,

AshwinNaidutalksaboutbarriersandgeneflow.

Proceedingsofthe

PotentialbarriersrestrictinggeneflowamongmountainlionsinArizona.AshwinNaidu,SchoolofNaturalResourcesandtheEnvironment,Universityof

Arizona;ashwin@email.arizona.eduRobertR.Fitak,InstitutfürPopulationsgenetik,VeterinärmedizinischeUniversität

Wien,Vienna,Austria,rfitak9@gmail.comMelanieCulver,GraduateInterdisciplinaryPrograminGeneticsandSchoolof

NaturalResourcesandtheEnvironment,UniversityofArizona;mculver@email.arizona.edu.

Abstract:Weinvestigatedthepopulationgeneticstructureofmountainlions(Pumaconcolor)inArizonafromhunter‐harvestedtissueandscatsamplescollectedduring2008‐2012.Ourgoalwastoexaminewhatgeographicfeatures(e.g.interstatehighways,theColoradoRiver,theGrandCanyon)arepotentiallyrestrictinggeneflowamongmountainlionsinthestate.Wegenotyped466DNAsamplesfor10well‐knownFeliscatusmicrosatelliteDNAmarkers,andwith“PumaPlex”–apanelof26singlenucleotidepolymorphisms(SNPs)recentlydevelopedforpopulationgeneticstudiesonmountainlions.Wefoundthehigheststatisticalsupportforfoursub‐populationsofmountainlionsinArizona.Geographicvisualizationofthesesub‐populationssuggestedthatInterstatehighways(particularlyInterstate‐10westofPhoenix,Interstate‐17andInterstate‐40)andthelowerColoradoRivermightberestrictinggeneflowamongmountainlions.Tocorroborategeneticdataonmountainlionpopulationsubstructureandconnectivity,wearecurrentlycreatingaGIS‐basedhabitatsuitabilitymodelformountainlionsthatwillprovideuswiththepotentialcorridorsformountainlionmovementacrossthesebarriers.Datageneratedfromthisstudywillbeusefulforwildlifemanagers,stakeholders,andconservationplannersinmakingregionalorstatewidemanagementdecisionsformountainlions,designatingwildlifecorridorareas,andfacilitatingcollaborativeresearchbetweenindividuals,laboratoriesandagencies.

Theimportanceofscaleandbehavioralstateinpumaresourceselectionfunctions.KathyA.Zeller,DepartmentofEnvironmentalConservation,Universityof

Massachusetts,Amherst;kathyzeller@gmail.com

KevinMcGarigal,DepartmentofEnvironmentalConservation,UniversityofMassachusetts;mcgarigalk@eco.umass.edu

PaulBeier,SchoolofForestry,NorthernArizonaUniversity,Flagstaff;paul.beier@nau.edu

SamuelCushman,U.S.ForestServiceRockyMountainResearchStation,Flagstaff;scushman@fs.fed.us

T.WinstonVickers,WildlifeHealthCenter,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCaliforniaDavis;winstonvickers@charter.net

WalterM.Boyce,WildlifeHealthCenter,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCaliforniaDavis;wmboyce@ucdavis.edu

Abstract:Pumahabitatrelationshipsaretypicallyestimatedwithresourceselectionfunctions(RSFs),whicharebasedonapaired‘used’/’available’design.ManypumaRSFsusetheareaofthehomerange,orlarger,fortheavailableextent.Additionally,mostRSFsusealldatapointsforanalysis,regardlessofthebehavioralstateofanindividual.Wewereinterestedinexaminingselectionatfinerscalesandfordifferentbehavioralstates.GPStelemetrydatacollectedat5‐minutefixintervalsfrompumasinsouthernCaliforniawereusedinapairedused/availabledesigntoexplorethesensitivityofRSFstotheextent,orscale,ofavailablehabitatandtothebehavioralstateofindividuals.Weexamined37scalesofavailablehabitat,from250mto10,000m,andtwobehavioralstates,resourceuseandmovement.Acrossthefullfactorialofscalesandbehavioralstates,wecomparedparameterestimatestodeterminethestrengthofselection,andmodelperformancetoassesspredictiveability.RSFsweresensitivetothescaleofavailablehabitat.Multiplecharacteristicscaleswerefoundacrossourpredictorvariables,indicatingthatpumasinthestudyareaarerespondingatdifferentscalestodifferentlandscapefeaturesandthatmulti‐scalemodelsmaybemoreappropriate.Acrossbehavioralstates,pumasrespondtograsslands,coastaloakwoodlandsandcoastalscrubatfinescales,andurbanandagricultureatcoarsescales.RSFswerealsosensitivetobehavioralstate;specifically,pumasengagedinresourceusebehaviorhadanoppositeselectionresponsetosomelandcovertypesthanpumasengagedinmovementbehavior.Allmodelsperformedwell,withcoarserscaleandmulti‐scalemodelsoutperformingfine‐scalemodelsandresourceusemodelsgenerallyoutperformingmovementmodels.OurresultsindicatethatmultiplescalesofselectionandbehavioralstatesshouldbeexaminedinpumaRSFs,especiallywhenresultswillbeusedformanagementpurposes.

California’scougarconnectivity:geneticsinformingconservationandmanagementHollyB.Ernest.WildlifeHealthCenterandVeterinaryGeneticsLaboratory,School

ofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;hbernest@ucdavis.edu

T.WinstonVickers.WildlifeHealthCenter,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;winstonvickers@charter.net

WalterM.Boyce.WildlifeHealthCenter,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis

SethP.D.Riley.NationalParkService‐SantaMonicaMountainsNationalRecreationArea,ThousandOaks,CA

ChristopherC.Wilmers.EnvironmentalStudiesDivision,UCSantaCruzAbstract:Mountainlions(Pumaconcolor)inCalifornialiveamongsthabitatmosaicsspanningarangebetweenextremesofurbanizedfragmentedcoastalenvironmentsandvastmontanewildlandsinthenorthstateandinland.CoastregionsextendingbetweenSanFrancisco,LosAngeles,andSanDiegohaveburgeoninghumanpopulationswhiletheNorthCoastRange,SierraNevada,andModocPlateauencompassvastsectionsofintactpumahabitatlessimpactedbyhumandevelopments.InordertoassesspopulationconnectivityandgenetichealthofCaliforniamountainlionsacrosstheseextremes,weconductedadetailedappraisalofthegeneticdiversity,relatedness,andpopulationstructureofCaliforniapumapopulationsusing354samplesanda46‐locusmicrosatelliteDNApanel.Thisstudyfollowsuponworkconductedtenyearsagoandemploysanexpandedgenetictoolsetandlargercoastregionsamplesize.Weevaluatedandcomparedlevelsofgeneticdiversity,inbreeding,relatedness,effectivepopulationsizes,andtestedwhethergeneticdatasupportedhypothesesofrecentbottlenecksinkeypopulationsincludingtheSantaCruzMountains(n=78),SantaMonicaMountains(n=26),SantaAnaMountains(n=42)andadjacentPeninsularRanges(N=55).WefoundthatcoastpopulationsnearlargeurbancentershadmuchlowergeneticdiversitythaninlandpopulationssuchasthoseinSierraNevada.Specificinstancesofrepeatedinbreedingandsignsofpotentialgeneticdefectsweredetected.ThesefindingsraisemajorconcernsaboutthecurrentstatusofCaliforniacoastalmountainlionpopulations,andthelonger‐termoutlookforpumasinsouthernandcentralcoastalCalifornia.Inparticular,thefindinghighlighttheurgencytomaintain–andenhance–whatconnectivityremainsforpumas(andpresumablynumerousotherspecies)acrosshumanbarriersincludingmultilanehighwaysanddevelopments.Wearehopefulthatthesenewgeneticresults,coupledwiththedemographicfindings,willmotivategreaterconservationfocusandeffectiveoutcomes.

Populationgeneticsofasmall,isolatedpopulationofmountainlions:Barriers,inbreeding,andgeneticrescue.SethP.D.Riley,SantaMonicaMountainsNationalRecreationArea,NationalPark

Service,401W.HillcrestDr.,ThousandOaks,CA91360,USA,seth_riley@nps.gov

JohnPollinger,DepartmentofEcologyandEvolutionaryBiology,621CharlesE.YoungDriveSouth,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,CA90095‐1606,USA,jpolling@ucla.edu.

LaurelSerieys,DepartmentofEcologyandEvolutionaryBiology,HersheyHallBox957246,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,CA90095‐7246,USA,laurelserieys@gmail.com.

JeffreyA.Sikich,SantaMonicaMountainsNationalRecreationArea,NationalParkService,401W.HillcrestDr.,ThousandOaks,CA91360,USA,jeff_sikich@nps.gov.

LisaDalbeck,WildlifeGenetics,GenomicsandPopulationHealth,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,OneShieldsAvenue,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,CA,95616,USA,ldalbeck@ucdavis.edu.

RobertK.Wayne,DepartmentofEcologyandEvolutionaryBiology,621CharlesE.YoungDriveSouth,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,CA90095‐1606,USA,rkwayne@ucla.edu.

HollyB.Ernest,WildlifeGenetics,GenomicsandPopulationHealth,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,OneShieldsAvenue,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,CA,95616,USA,hbernest@ucdavis.edu.

Abstract:Mountainlionspersistnaturallyatlowdensitiesandcanbeparticularlysensitivetotheeffectsofhabitatlossandfragmentation,includinggeneticeffectssuchasinbreedingandthelossofgeneticdiversity.TheSantaMonicaMountains,northwestofLosAngelesarea,arecompletelyisolatedfromotherlargenaturalareasbyurbandevelopmentandlargefreeways,specificallythe101Freewaytothenorth.LocationsofGPSradio‐collaredmountainlionsindicatethatthesefreewaysareasignificantbarriertomountainlionmovement.Toevaluatetheeffectsofthesebarriersinmoredetail,wegenotyped26lionscapturedaspartofalong‐termNationalParkServicestudy,aswellas16otherlionsintheareaat54microsatelliteloci.MountainlionsintheSantaMonicaMountainshadsignificantlylowergeneticdiversitythanthosenorthofthefreewayasmeasuredbyexpectedheterozygosityandnumbersofalleles.Morebroadly,thissmallpopulationalsoexhibitedthelowestlevelsofgeneticdiversitythathavebeenreportedbothinCaliforniaandthroughoutthewest.Basedonpedigreeconstructionandgene‐dropanalysis,individualmalemountainlionscanhaveveryhighreproductivesuccessanddominatethegenepoolofthispopulation.Becauseofourdetailedknowledgeofthissmallpopulation,wewereabletodocumentthatindividualeventssignificantlyaffecteditspopulationgenetics.Specifically,ayoungmale(P12)immigratedintothepopulationfromnorthofthe101Freeway,Hepossessed20allelesthatwerenot

previouslypresentintheSantaMonicaMountainspopulation,19ofwhichhepassedontohisoffspring,increasingthepopulation‐leveldiversity.However,wealsodocumentedmultipleinstancesofclose‐inbreeding,specificallybetweenfathersanddaughters,somethingthathasrarelybeenreportedinthisspeciesandwhichhadmeasurablynegativeeffectsongeneticdiversity.Currently,connectivitybetweentheSantaMonicaMountainsandothernaturalareastotheNorthisverylimited;maintainingandenhancingconnectivitywillbecriticalforthelong‐termdemographicandgenetichealthofmountainlionpopulationsinthisandotherfragmentedlandscapes.

SethRileydiscussesmountainlionpopulationgenetics.

Session4:

FelidEcology,Conservation,andPopulations,

Proceedingsofthe

Homerangecharacteristicsofasubordinatepredator:selectionforrefugiaorpreyavailability?PatrickE.Lendrum,Panthera,NewYork;plendrum@panthera.org

L.MarkElbroch,Panthera;melbroch@panthera.org

HowardQuigley,Panthera;hquigley@panthera.org

DanielJ.Thompson,WyomingDepartmentofGameandFish;daniel.thompson@wyo.gov

MichaelJimenez,UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService,Jackson,Wyoming;mike_jimenez@fws.gov

DerekCraighead,CraigheadBeringiaSouth;derek@craighead.us

Abstract:Cougars(Pumaconcolor)aredescribedas“habitatgeneralists”,butlittleisknownaboutwhichecologicalfactorsdrivetheirhomerangeselection,particularlyinthepresenceofdominantcompetitors(i.e.wolves,Canislupus).WetrackedcougarsusingVHF(2001to2005)andGPS(2006to2011)technologyintheSouthernYellowstoneEcosystem(SYE)innorthwesternWyoming,USA.Wetestedwhetherdatatype(VHFvs.GPS),cougarsex,accesstoforests(refugia),orpreyavailabilityexplainedthesizeof50%and95%kerneldensityestimator(KDE)homeranges.Second,wequantifiedattributesofcougarhomerangesandtestedwhethertheyweredifferentfromattributesoftheoverallstudyarea,toaddresstheecologicalquestion:Docougarsselecthomerangesbasedontheavailabilityofrefugia,preyavailability,orsomecombinationofthetwo?Cougarsexanddatatypeprovedsignificantpredictorsofhomerangesizeforboth95%and50%KDEs,andtheamountofforestpartlyexplainedthesizeof50%KDEs.CougarhomerangesderivedfromVHFdatawere1.4‐1.9timeslargerthanhomerangesderivedfromGPSdata,however,homerangeattributesdeterminedfromVHFandGPSdatawereremarkablyequivalent.Femalecougarsselectedhomerangeswithhigherhuntopportunitythanmales,andhigherthanexpectedwhencomparedtothemeanvalueofthestudyarea,supportingthelong‐standingassumptionthatfemalesprimarilyselecthomerangeswithsuitablepreytosustainthemselvesandtheirdependentyoung.Allcougarsselectedhomerangesfurtherfromknownwolfpacks,providingevidencefornewlyestablishedcompetitionbetweenresidentcougarsandrecolonizingwolves,butdidnotselecthomerangeswithgreateraccesstolandscaperefugia.OurresultsprovidedevidencethatcougarsintheSYEselecthomerangesthatprovidehighpreyavailabilityandaspatialbufferthatmitigatespotentialconflictswithadominantcompetitor.

GeneticstructureofcougarsintheBlackHills,SouthDakota.RebecaL.Juarez,DepartmentofNaturalResourceManagement,SouthDakotaState

University;rebeca.juarez@sdstate.edu

JonathanA.Jenks,DepartmentofNaturalResourceManagement,SouthDakotaStateUniversity

MichaelK.Schwartz,USDAForestService,RockyMountainResearchStationKristyP.Pilgrim,USDAForestService,RockyMountainResearchStation,MissoulaDanielJ.Thompson,WyomingGameandFishDepartment

Abstract:Assessinggeneticstructureofgamespeciespopulations,suchascougars(Pumaconcolor),providesknowledgeofpopulationdemographicsandisvitalforlong‐termmanagement.Havingre‐populatedtheBlackHillsby1998,thecougarpopulationreachedsaturationin2005,promptinganinitiationofaharvestseasonbySouthDakotaDepartmentofGame,FishandParks.IncreasingharvestquotasinconjunctionwiththerelativeisolationoftheBlackHillsmaydeterconnectivityandacttodecreaselong‐termviability.OurobjectivesweretoassessgeneticstructureofcougarsintheBlackHills,SouthDakota,measureeffectivepopulationsize(Ne),andcompareresultswiththosefoundbeforeaharvestseasonhadbeenimplementedusing20microsatelliteloci.WealsocomparedgeneticstructureandconductedpopulationassignmenttestswiththeneighboringcougarpopulationsinWyomingandNorthDakota.Weconductedgeneticanalysison712DNAsamplesfromcougarsintheBlackHillscollectedfrom2003‐2013.Capturedanimalswerefittedwithradio‐collarsandeartagged.Blood/tissuesampleswerecollectedfromallradio‐collaredandharvestedindividuals,aswellasnon‐harvestrelatedmortalities.GeneticanalysiswasmeasuredusingGenAlEx,HP‐Rare,ONeSAMP,andSTRUCTURE.Pre‐harvestgeneticanalysisfoundanexpectedheterozygosity(HE)of0.55,observedheterozygosity(HO)of0.55,andeffectivepopulationsizeof27.9(23‐39;95%CL).Incomparison,wedeterminedthatcougarsinSouthDakotapostinitiationofharvesthadanaverageexpectedheterozygosity(HE)of0.56,andanaverageobservedheterozygosity(HO)of0.55.EffectivepopulationsizeofcougarsintheBlackHills,SouthDakotawas28.4individuals(23‐37;95%CL).WewereabletosuccessfullyassigncougarsfromSouthDakota,NorthDakota,andWyomingintoseparatepopulations.GeneticvariabilityofcougarsintheBlackHillsremainsstable,possiblyasaresultofemigrationandimmigration.ContinuedgeneticassessmentofcougarsinSouthDakotaisrecommended.

IntegratingResourceSelectionandHarvestintoSpatialCapture‐RecaptureModelsforestimatingmountainlionabundance.KellyM.Proffitt,MontanaFish,WildlifeandParks;kproffitt@mt.gov

MarkHebblewhite,UniversityofMontana,WildlifeBiologyProgram,Missoula;mark.hebblewhite@umontana.edu.

JoshuaGoldberg,UniversityofMontana,CollegeofForestryandConservation,Missoula;Joshua.f.goldberg@gmail.com.

MikeThompson,MontanaFish,WildlifeandParks;mthompson@mt.gov.

BenJimenez,MontanaFish,WildlifeandParks;bjimenez@mt.gov.

RobinRussell,USGS,NationalWildlifeHealthCenterMadison;rerussell@usgs.gov.

Abstract:ThelackofrigorousmountainlionabundanceestimateshascontributedtomakingmountainlionmanagementoneofthemostcontentiouswildlifeissuesinwesternMontana.Recentadvancesinspatialcapturerecapture(SCR)modelshaveprovidednewapproachesforaddressingthisimportantneedandprovidinganobjectivebasisformountainlionmanagement.WedevelopedextensionstostandardSCRmodelstoincorporatesimultaneouslivesamplingandharvesteventsandhabitatqualityinformation.WedemonstratetheuseofthesenovelmethodsinestimatingmountainlionabundanceanddensityintwomountainlionmanagementunitsinwesternMontana,huntingdistricts250and270.WeidentifiedindividualsthroughDNAsamplescollectedby1)biopsydartingtreedmountainlionslocatedduringsystematicsurveys,2)opportunisticallycollectinghairandscatsamples,and3)samplingallharvestedmountainlions.Weincluded80DNAsamplescollectedfrom62independentindividualsintheanalysis.Weestimatedtheabundanceof85(95%CI=54,141)independentmountainlionsinhuntingdistrict250and82(95%CI=51,137)inhuntingdistrict270.Theseresultsare2‐3timeshigherthanpreviouslyestimatedminimummountainlionabundancesinthisarea,andcorrespondtodensityestimatesof4.6and5.4lionsper100km2.BecausecurrentharvestregulationsinwesternMontanaweredevelopedundertheassumptionoflowerpopulationabundance,lionmanagementobjectivesareunlikelytobemetunlessharvestprescriptionsareadjustedtoaccountforthisnewunderstandingoflionpopulationstatus.Morebroadly,theanalyticimprovementsinSCRmethodswillenhancetheabilityofwildlifemanagerstoreliablyandeconomicallyestimateabundanceofmountainlions,aswellasotherlargecarnivores.

EvaluationofharvestindicescurrentlyusedforcougarmanagementinUtah:Oquirrh‐StansburyandMonroeunitsascasestudies.MichaelL.Wolfe,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity,Logan;

michael.wolfe@usu.edu

EricM.Gese,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices,Logan;eric.gese@usu.edu

PatTerletzky,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity,Logan;pat.terletzky@usu.edu

DavidC.Stoner,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity,Logan;david.stoner@usu.edu

LiseM.Aubry,DepartmentofWildlandResourcesandtheEcologyCenter,UtahStateUniversity;lise.aubry@usu.edu

Abstract:WepresentdemographicestimatesfromtwocougarpopulationsinUtahthathavebeenintensivelymonitoredfor17years,andcomparethesedemographicratestoharveststatisticsprovidedbytheUtahDivisionofWildlifeResources(UDWR)coveringthelengthofthestudyperiod.WequantifytherelationshipbetweenharvestindicesandestimateddemographicratesfortheMonroeandtheOquirrh‐Stansburymanagementunits,respectively.ThefirstisahuntedpopulationintheMonroeMountains,aremotelocationinsouth‐centralUtah;andthesecondisasemi‐protectedpopulationintheOquirrhMountains,ontheperipheryofSaltLakeCity.OuroverallobjectivewastoassesstherelationshipsbetweentheharvestindicescurrentlyusedforcougarmanagementinboththeOquirrh‐StansburyandMonroewildlifemanagementunitsandprovidetheUDWRwithrecommendationstohelpcalibratecurrentlyusedindicestoactualpopulationdynamics.BecausetheOquirrh‐Stansbury(i.e.,whereanthropogenicsourcesofmortality,otherthanharvest,arepredominant)andMonroemanagementunits(i.e.,whereharvestisthemaincauseofmortality)aresubjectedtocontrastingmortalityregimes,resultsprovidedbythisstudycouldbeexpandedtoothermanagementunitsthatexhibitsimilarcharacteristicstotheunitsdescribedhere.

SurvivalratesofcougarsinOregonfrom1989–2011:aretrospectiveanalysisDarrenA.Clark,OregonCooperativeFishandWildlifeResearchUnit,Corvallis;

darren.a.clark@state.or.us

BruceK.Johnson,OregonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;bruce.k.johnson@state.or.us.

DeWaineH.Jackson,OregonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;dewaine.h.jackson@state.or.us.

MarkHenjum,OregonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

ScottL.Findholt,OregonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;scott.l.findholt@state.or.us.

JamesJ.Akenson,OregonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

RobertG.Anthony,OregonCooperativeFishandWildlifeResearchUnit,Corvallis

Abstract:Weconductedaretrospectiveanalysisofsurvivalandcausesofmortalityof222radiocollaredcougars(Pumaconcolor)in3lightlyhuntedcougarpopulationsinOregonfrom1989–2011.Twostudies[CatherineCreek(1989–1996)andJacksonCreek(1993–2002)]overlappedthepassageofMeasure18in1994,whichprohibitedtheuseofdogstohuntcougars,buttheWenaha‐SledSprings‐Mt.Emily(WSM)didnot(2002–2011).HuntingmortalitywasthemostcommoncauseofdeathatCatherineCreekandWSM.Incontrast,naturalmortalitywasmostcommonatJacksonCreek.AnnualsurvivalratesofadultmaleswerelowestatCatherineCreekpre‐Measure18(0.57)andincreasedpost‐Measure18(0.86),similartothoseratesobservedatJacksonCreek(0.78)andWSM(0.82).Sub‐adultmalesurvivalincreasedpre‐Measure18(0.57)topost‐Measure18(0.86)atCatherineCreek,whichwasgreaterthansurvivalratesobservedatJacksonCreek(0.60)andWSM(0.45).Regardlessofhuntingregulations,annualsurvivalratesofadultandsub‐adultfemalesweresimilaramongstudyareas(0.85–0.89).WeobservedaneffectageonannualsurvivalatbothJacksonCreekandWSM,whereyoung(1–3years)maleshadlowersurvivalthanyoungfemales,butsurvivalofmalesandfemalesweresimilarbyage4or5years.Survivalofbothgendersdeclinedatolderages(6+years)atWSMbutnotJacksonCreek.WedidnotobserveaneffectofageonsurvivalatCatherineCreek.Ourresultsindicatedsourcesofmortalityvariedwithinjurisdictions,evenifmanagementpracticesweresimilar.Huntingcougarswithdogsloweredofadultmalescomparedtoareaswherecougarsarehuntedwithoutdogs.Theeffectofincreasingageoncougarsurvivalshouldbeconsideredwhenusingsurvivalratestoestimatepopulationgrowthrates.

UsingDNAtoevaluatefieldidentificationofcougargenderbyagencystaffandhuntersusingtraineddogs

RichardA.Beausoleil,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife,3515State Highway97A,Wenatchee,WA,richard.beausoleil@dfw.wa.gov

Abstract:Cougarhuntinghastypicallybeenclassifiedaseitherselective‐huntingwiththeaidofdogsornon‐selective‐huntingwithoutdogs,basedontheassumptionthathuntersusingdogscanbetteridentifygenderofcougarspriortoharvest.Subsequenttohuntactivity,94%ofallwildlifeagenciesthatallowcougarhuntinghavemandatoryinspectionswheregenderisidentifiedandrecordedbyagencystaff.TotesttheabilityofhuntersandagencystaffinWashingtontocorrectlyidentifygenderofcougarsinthefieldduringhuntingseasonsandinspectionofmortalities,respectively,thisprojectusedDNAanalysisoftissuesamplescollectedwithbiopsydartsandduringinspection.ThegenderassignedbydoghuntersinthefieldmatchedgenderfromDNAanalysis70%ofthetime(n=159);correctidentificationvariedbetween57and88%peryear.ThegenderidentifiedbyagencystaffduringinspectionofmortalitiesmatchedDNAanalysis85%ofthetime(n=1,331);correctidentificationvariedbetween71and90%peryear.Becausegendermisclassificationhasthepotentialtoalterintendedhunterharvestaswellashowsuccessofmanagementprescriptionsareinterpreted,agenciesmaywanttoinitiateinternalandhuntereducationprograms.Sincethemajorityalreadyhavemandatoryinspections,agenciesmayalsowanttoconsiderDNAcollectionduringmandatoryinspectionstoidentifyerrorratesofgenderidentificationbystaffwithintheirjurisdiction.Finally,consideringthesizeofcougarmanagementunitsinjurisdictionscanbeavaluablewayforagenciestopreventcomplicationsofpotentialgendermisidentification.

Session5:

Posters

Proceedingsofthe

OrphanedkittensinWashingtonresultinadecadeofnationwidecougareducation

RichardA.Beausoleil,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife,richard.beausoleil@dfw.wa.gov

Abstract:Between2002and2012,26orphancougar(Pumaconcolor)cubshavebeenreportedtoWashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife(WDFW),capturedbystaff,andplacedwithfacilitiesaccreditedbytheAssociationofZoosandAquariums(AZA)throughouttheU.S.Inadditiontoover15millionvisitorsperyearatthesefacilities,innumerabletelevisionandnewsprintstorieshavecoveredthecapture,transport,andarrivaloftheseanimals,thusreachingouttocountlessmillionsmorepeople.Thishasnotonlyresultedinhighqualitycougareducationprogramsbenefitingpeoplewhomayneverhavethechancetoseeacougarinthewild,butalsobroughtprominentnationalattentiontoWDFW.Theprocessofresponding,capturing,andprovidingcareuntilarrangementsarefinalized,andtransportinganimalsrequiresorganization,commitment,andonoccasionpersonaldonationsoftimeandmoney.Inalmostallcases,orphanedcougarkittensarereportedtoWDFWbyamemberofthepublicconcernedthattheanimalswillnotsurviveontheirown.Manytimes,thereportsaregivenwithoutthereportingpartyknowingthespecifics;onlythatthekittenshavebeenseenwithoutanadult.Ifit’sthefirstsighting,andwedonothavebackgroundknowledge,weaskthattheyleavetheanimalsaloneandkeepusinformeddaily;thisavoidsremovingkittensthatarenotorphanedandlefttemporarilywhiletheadultfemaleishuntingforfood.Asadditionalinformationisobtained,andwearecertaintheadultisnolongerpresent,aresponseisinitiated.Inadditiontousingseveraltypesofboxtraps,kittenshavebeencapturedusingWDFW’sKarelianBearDogs(treeingkittens),andbyhandonseveraloccasions.Oncecaptured,allkittensaretestedforFeLV/FIV,transportedtoaveterinarianandgivenathoroughexamination,careisadministeredifneeded,andbiologicalmeasurementsaregatheredandrecorded.Healthcertificatesandimportpermitsarethenobtainedtofacilitatetransfer.Manytimes,kittensneedtotravelbyaircrafttotheirfinaldestination.Regulationsrequireanabsorbentmaterialbeusedasabaselayerinthetransportcrate,windowsanddoorsaresecurelycoveredwithbreathableburlap,doorsaresecurelylocked,andfoodandwaterisprovided.Flightsarealmostalwaysdirecttothedestinationtolimittimeinthecrate.Asmuchaspossible,wekeepthereportingpartyinvolvedthroughouttheprocess;thishadresultedinrespect,credibility,andmuchappreciation.WeacknowledgetheassistanceofMichelleSchireman,NorthAmericaSectionAZAFelidTAGPumaPopulationManager&RegionalStudbookKeeper,whohasbeenaninvaluablecollaboratorinplacingtheseanimals,andtheAZAorganizationsthroughouttheU.S.thathaveprovidedaplacefortheseanimalstobecomeambassadorsforthespecies.Pleasecomebyandseethisdescriptiveposterandlearnmoreaboutthisprocessduringthepostersession.

ForagingpatternsofcougarsinthePryorMountainsofWyomingandMontana

LinseyW.Blake,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity,Logan;linsey.blake@aggiemail.usu.edu

EricM.Gese,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices,Logan;eric.gese@usu.edu

Abstract:Theimpactofcougarpredationontheirpreyspeciesvariesregionally.Todocumenttherelationshipsbetweencougarpredationandthebighornsheep,muledeer,andferalhorsepopulationsoftheBighornNationalRecreationAreaandthePryorMountains,wedeployedGPScollarson6cougarsandvisitedtheirlocationclusterstodeterminetheirkillratesandforagingpatterns.Weexaminedthepreycompositionoftheirkills(n=200)byspecies,muledeersexandageclasses,preysizeclasses,aswellasthesexorsocialclassofthecougar.Weexaminedselectionrelativetoungulatepopulationcompositionobtainedthroughanaerialsurvey.WefoundmuledeerweretheprimarypreyofcougarsinthePryorMountains,whilebighornsheepandferalhorsesconstitutedsecondarypreyspecies.Whilecougarsselectedforbighornsheep,thiswasallattributabletooneindividualthatspecializedonbighornsheep.Thiscougarpopulationalsoselectedforadultmaleandjuvenilemuledeer.Femalecougarskilledmoredoesandmaleskilledmorebucks.Familygroupshadtheshortesttimeintervalsbetweenkills,whileadultmaleshadthelongest.Werecommendthatmanagerscontinuetoinvestigateoptionstoreducepredationpressuresfromcougarsonthebighornsheeppopulation.Modificationofpredationriskthroughhabitatmanipulationcouldbeconsidered.Managersshouldbeawarethatsmall,isolatedbighornsheeppopulationscanbedifficultandexpensivetomaintain.Inaddition,atthetimeofthisstudy,thecougarpopulationwasnotdepredatinganyferalhorses;thusmanagerswillneedtocontinueactionstoreachtheirmanagementobjectivesofreducingtheferalhorsepopulation.ImprovementsonGPSlocationclusteranalysistechniquesforpredictingfeedingactivities

KevinA.Blecha,GraduateDegreePrograminEcology,ColoradoStateUniversity,FortCollins;Kevin.blecha@gmail.com

MatW.Alldredge,ColoradoParksandWildlife,FortCollins;Mat.Alldredge@state.co.us

Abstract:GPSlocationclusteranalysishasbecomeastapletechniqueinlargepredatorfeedingstudies.Wedemonstratethreeimprovementstothemethodbasedonstudydesignandtechnologicaladvancementsinafouryearstudyof4600clusterground‐truthingvisitstoGPSlocationclustersfrom53cougarsubjects:1)

Ground‐truthingpotentialfeedingsiteshavegenerallyreliedoneitherexhaustivelyvisitingallclustersofanindividualsubjectorbyopportunisticnon‐randomsampling.Theformermaybecostprohibitiveandlimitthesamplesizeofanimalsubjects,whilethelattermayleadtobiasedestimatesofkill‐rate/preycomposition.Wedemonstrateastratifiedrandomsamplingschemeformonthlyvisitationperiods,alongwithasampleof“singlepointclusters”consistingofasingleGPSlocation.2)Feedingeventpredictionmodelsusingclassicclusteranalysesarelikelybiasedtowardlargerpreyitems.Wedemonstrateasimpleintegrationofaccelerometersensordataasanadditionalcovariatetohelpimprovepredictionmodels.3)Itissuspectedthattheprobabilityatechniciansuccessfullyclassifiesaclusterwhileground‐truthingdeclinesasthevisitationlag(timedelaybetweentechnicianvisitationandcougarfeedingdate)increases.Directsatellitecommunicationcapabilitiesnowallowreal‐timedownloadingofGPSdata,andthusnearreal‐timeground‐truthing.Wetestedthisonasampleofclusters(n=202)withvisitationbyonetechnician1‐3dayspostinitiationbythecougar,andthenbyasecondindependentblindobserver1‐60dayslater.Thedoubleobserversconcurredinthepresence/absenceoffeedingremainsin98.6%ofthecases,whileconcurringonspeciesidentificationin93.6%.Whileclassificationsuccessofpreyspecies,sex,andagewilllikelydecreaseaspreyremainsdegrade,researchersshouldbeconfidentthatthepresence/absenceclassificationcomponentisrobustforthelogisticallyfeasiblevisitationlagsthatweretested.Trichinellaintwodisjunctpopulationsofpuma

MarcCriffield,FloridaFishandWildlifeConservationCommission,Naples;marc.criffield@myfwc.com

JenniferE.Thomas,OklahomaStateUniversity;jennifer.e.thomas@okstate.edu

KenLogan,ColoradoDivisionofWildlife;ken.logan@state.co.us

MarkCunningham,FloridaFishandWildlifeConservationCommission;mark.cunningham@myfwc.com

DaveOnorato,FloridaFishandWildlifeConservationCommission;dave.onorato@myfwc.com

EdoardoPozio,IstitutoSuperiorediSanità,Rome,Italy;edoardo.pozio@iss.it

MasonV.Reichard,OklahomaStateUniversity;mason.reichard@okstate.eduAbstract:Trichinellaspp.arezoonoticnematodescommonincarnivoresthroughouttheworld.Theseparasitesareuniquebecausethesameindividualishosttoallstagesofthenematodeandtransmissionisbasedoningestionofinfectedtissues.WedeterminedtheprevalenceofTrichinellaspp.infectionsinFloridapanthers(Pumaconcolorcoryi)andcougar(P.concolorcouguar)fromColorado.Tonguesamplesfrom114pantherand40cougarmortalitieswerecollectedatnecropsyandexaminedbyartificialdigestion.Trichinellaspp.larvaeweredetected

in24(21.1%)panthersand18(45.0%)cougars.OftheseTrichinellasamples,19fromFloridaand9fromColoradoweregenotypedtospecies.FromFlorida,T.pseudospiraliswasdetectedin16,T.spiralisin1,and2pantherswereinfectedwithbothT.pseudospiralisandT.spiralis.FromColorado,T.murrelliwasdetectedin5,T.pseudospiralisin3,and1cougarwasinfectedwithTrichinellagenotypeT6.OurresultsindicatedthatinfectionofTrichinellaiscommonthroughoutdifferentpopulationsofpumasintheU.S.ThisisthefirstreportofTrichinellapseudospiralisinpanthersandcougarsandonlythethirdreportinU.S.wildlife.InfectionofTrichinellaspp.inpumaisusuallysubclinicalandrarelycausesdisease.However,understandingtheepidemiologyofTrichinellaspp.inpumabecomesincreasinglyimportantsinceFloridapanthersareendangeredandcougarsharvestedinColoradoareoftenconsumedbyhumans.ConfirmedmountainlionsinOklahoma

AaronGhaemi,OklahomaDepartmentofWildlifeConservation;aghaemi@cableone.net

Abstract:TheMountainlion(Pumaconcolor)historicallyroamedmuchoftheUnitedStatespriortoearlysettlement.EarliestreportsofmountainlionsinOklahomadatebacktothemid1800’s.Since2002,fourteenmountainlionshavebeenconfirmedinOklahomabytheDepartmentofWildlifeConservation.Confirmationconsistsofphotos,tracks,scat,orotherphysicalevidence.Whenpossible,sexofthelionswasdetermined.Sevenmalesandfourfemaleswereclassified.Threelionswereunclassified.Necropsieswereperformedon3lioncarcassesandallfemalesexaminedtodatehaveshownnoevidenceofreproduction.AsmountainlionpopulationsinthewesternU.S.continuetoexpand,dispersalislikelytocontinueintoOklahoma,bringingtransientlionsseekingnew,uninhabitedterritoriestoestablishhomeranges.Pumaactivityandmesocarnivores

AlexViere,FurmanUniversity,DepartmentofBiology,Greenville;aviere23@gmail.com

TravisW.Perry,FurmanUniversity;Travis.Perry@Furman.eduAbstract:Apexpredatorsmayexerttopdowneffectsonecologicalcommunitiesdirectlybyaffectingtheabundanceanddistributionofherbivoresthroughpredationandpredatoravoidance,orindirectlybyaffectingherbivoresthroughsimilareffectsonmesocarnivores.Ourobjectivewastodeterminewhethertherewasasignificantnegativeassociationbetweenpuma(Pumaconcolor)activityandtheactivityofmesocarnivorescoyote(Canislatrans),bobcat(Lynxrufus),andgrayfox(Urocyoncinereoargenteus)activityasmeasuredbyphotographicrateson

remotecameras.Weusedphotographicdatacollectedfrom18May2008to1June2012from25remotecamerasdistributedatfixedlocationsover100km2insouth‐centralNewMexico.Weloggedatotalof25,475cameranightsandcollected538photosofpuma,892ofcoyote,278ofbobcat,and2,945ofgrayfox.Negativebinomialregressionsrevealedasignificantnegativeassociationbetweenpumaactivityandcoyoteactivity(z=‐14.423;df=25;p<0.0001)andpumaandbobcatactivity(z=‐2.417;df=25;p=0.008).Wealsofoundanegativeassociationbetweenpumaandgrayfoxbutthisrelationshipwasnotstatisticallysignificant(z=‐0.932,df=25,p=0.176).Ourdatasupportthehypothesisthatpumareducethepresencesmallercarnivores.Ifpumadodisplacemesocarnivorestothedegreewehaveobserved,pumamayexertadditionaleffectsonecosystemprocessesquiteapartfromthelargeherbivoremediatedprocesseswithwhichwearemorefamiliar.However,wecannotruleoutthepossibilitythatdifferencesinfinescalehabitatpreferencesamongthesespeciesareresponsibleforthepatternsweobservedinthisstudy.Rigorouscomparisonsbetweenareaswithandwithoutpuma,orbeforeandafterpumaareremoved/added,couldaddressthisambiguity.Effectsofpumasex,season,andhabitattypeondiet

SadiePerrin,FurmanUniversity,DepartmentofBiology,Greenville;sadieperrin@gmail.com

TravisW.Perry,FurmanUniversity;Travis.Perry@Furman.edu

Abstract:Ourobjectivewastodeterminewhetherpumasexesrespondeddifferentlytoseasonandhabitattypewithrespecttodiet.FromFebruary26,2008toJune6,2012,weinvestigated392preycaches,representingthedietsof15adultpumatotalacrosstwostudyareasinsouth‐centralNewMexico.Weusedlog‐linearanalysesandpost‐hocChi‐SquaretestsofIndependencetoelucidatetheinteractiveeffectsofseason(cold‐dryversushot‐wet),habitattype(riparianfloodplainonBosquedelApacheNationalWildlifeRefuge(BDA)versuscanyon‐landfoothillsontheLadderRanch(LR)),andpumasexondiet.Wefoundamarginallysignificantsexxhabitattypexpreysizeeffect(G=‐7.661;df=3;p=0.053).BothmaleandfemalepumaatemoresmallandmediumsizedpreyitemsontheBDA.Thispatternwasstatisticallysignificantforfemales(G=58.7;df=2;p<0.001)butnotformales.OntheBDAwefoundamarginallysignificantsexxseasonxpreysizeeffect(G=‐7.1008;df=3;p=0.069).Heremalesandfemalesconsumedmoremediumandsmallpreyinthewarm‐wetseason.Thispatternwasmuchmorepronouncedformales(G=6.875;df=3;p=0.076).OntheLRwefoundasignificantsexxseasonxpreysizeeffect(G=‐11.023;df=3;p=0.012).Femalestendedtoconsumemorelargeandmediumpreyinthewarm‐wetseasonwhereasmalesconsumedmoremediumandsmallpreyduringthistime.Thiswastrendwasstatisticallysignificantformales(G=16.099;df=3;p=0.001)butnotforfemales.Ingeneral,malepumadietdemonstratedmoredramatictemporalchangesthanspatialchanges.OnboththeBDAandLRmalepumadietshiftscorrespondedtotheungulatebirthpulse.While

femalepumaalsorespondedtotheungulatebirthpulseonbothstudyareas,femalepumaexploitedtheincreasedavailabilityofsmallpreyspeciesinthefloodplaintoagreaterextentthanmales.Effectsofambientlightonpuma,deer,andelkactivity

ScarletSellers,FurmanUniversity,DepartmentofBiology,Greenville,SC;ssellers91@gmail.com

TravisW.Perry,FurmanUniversity,DepartmentofBiology;Travis.Perry@Furman.edu

Abstract:Puma(Pumaconcolor)dependonconcealmenttopreyprimarilyonungulates.Weaskedwhetherpumaactivity,asmeasuredbyremotecameras,andpredation,asmeasuredbyindividualpredationevents,wasaffectedbyambientlightandparticularlybylunarphase.Wealsoaskedifactivityofmuledeer(Odocoileushemionus)andelk(Cervuselaphus),weresimilarlyaffected.Toexaminetheeffectsoflunarilluminationonpumapredationwecomparedthemeanfractionofthemoonilluminatedbetweennightswhenkillsweremadeandnightswhenkillswerenotmadeusingat‐test.ToexamineactivitypatternsacrossilluminationperiodsweconductedtwosetsofChi‐squaredtestsofindependence.First,wecomparedphotocountsacrossilluminationperiodsofdawn,sunlight,dusk,dark,andmoonlightfortwostudyareas,theBosquedelApacheNationalWildlifeRefuge(BDA)andtheLadderRanch(LR)whichdifferedinhabitattypeandhumanactivity.TheBDAislocatedinriparianfloodplainandexperienceshighhumanvisitation.TheLRisincanyonlandfoothillsandhumanvisitationisrare.Second,werepeatedtheseanalysesacrossthelunarphasesofdark,1stquarter,2ndquarter,3rdquarter,and4thquarter.Usingdatafrom35camerasoperatedforvaryingperiodsfrom18May2008to1July,2012,werecorded791pumaphotos,2,922muledeerphotos,and1,201elkphotos.Pumawereprimarilynocturnal;deerandelkwereprimarilydiurnal.However,allthreespeciesweremoreactiveatnightontheBDAandmoreactiveduringdaylightontheLR(pumaX2=9.0173;df=4;p=0.061;deerX2=213.6;df=4;p<0.001;elkX2=90.75;df=4;p<0.001).Pumaactivitywasnotassociatedwithlunarphase.Deerandelkweresignificantlymoreactiveinmoonlight(X2=24.24;df=4;p<0.05andX2=21.14;df=4;p<0.05).Lunarilluminationwasnotgreateronnightswhenpumamadekills.

Cameratrappingvsradio‐telemetry:acomparisonofnoninvasiveandinvasivemethodsformonitoringcougarpopulations

PeterAlexander,CraigheadBeringiaSouth,andDepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;peter.d.alexander@gmail.com

EricM.Gese,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices

HowardQuigley,Panthera

DanThompson,WyomingGameandFishDepartment

MarkElbroch,Panthera

Abstract:Conventionalmethodsformonitoringcougarpopulationsinvolvecaptureandradio‐collaring,followedbyintensiveradio‐trackingand,essentially,simpleenumerationofindividualcougars.Thismethodisassumedtobeaccurate,butprohibitivelyexpensiveandlogisticallychallenging.Noninvasivesurveytechniquesmayofferopportunitiestoaccuratelymonitorcougarpopulationtrendsatlowercoststhanconventionalcaptureandradio‐collarresearch.However,fewofthesesurveytechniqueshavebeenemployedinconjunctionwithconventionalcougarmonitoringmethodsinordertovalidatethenoninvasivepopulationestimatesagainstthosederivedfromradio‐telemetry.Along‐termcougarecologystudycurrentlybeingconductedintheJacksonHoleregionofNorthwestWyoming(theTetonCougarProject(TCP))offersanopportunitytotestnoninvasivemonitoringtechniquesonapopulationofcougarswithanestimatedknowndensity.Wesetupanarrayof43remotecamerastationsacrosstheTCPstudyareafromJunetoSeptemberin2012and2013.Thearraycomprisedof6x6kmcells,coveringatotalof1,548km2.Camerastationsweresetupusinganon‐rewardbloodluretoincreasedetectionprobabilityandtoincreaseprobabilityofidentificationthroughrepeatedphotographsperdetection.Werecorded17and16cougarphoto‐eventsin2012and2013,respectively.Weidentifiedindividualcougarsbasedonsize,morphology,andnaturalmarkings.Weproducedestimatesofabundanceusingcapture‐mark‐recaptureanalysis.Preliminaryanalysisindicatesthatthetelemetry‐derivedpopulationestimatesfallwithintheconfidenceestimatesproducedbythecamerasurvey.However,lownumbersofuniqueindividualsdetectedandpotentialviolationsofmark‐recaptureassumptionspresentissuesthatstillneedresolving.

P22:WillthismountainlionmakeitinHollywood?

JeffA.Sikich,SantaMonicaMountainsNationalRecreationArea;jeff_sikich@nps.gov

SethP.D.Riley,SantaMonicaMountainsNationalRecreationArea;seth_riley@nps.gov

Abstract:Understandingthemovementsandecologyofmountainlions(Pumaconcolor)iscriticalfortheeffectiveconservationofthiswide‐rangingandlow‐densityspecies,especiallyinurbanfragmentedlandscapes.InFebruary2012amountainlionwasdiscoveredbyremotecamerasinGriffithPark,anisolated20km²patchofhabitatnexttodowntownLosAngelesthatiscompletelysurroundedbyfreewaysanddevelopment.InMarch2012,theNationalParkServicecapturedandGPSradio‐collaredayoungmale(P22),whowecontinuetofollowaspartofourlongtermstudyofmountainlionecology,behavior,andconservationinSantaMonicaMountainsNationalRecreationArea(SMMNRA)andthesurroundingregion.GenetictestingindicatesthatP22iscloselyrelatedtomountainlionsintheSantaMonicaMountainstothewest,inwhichcasehewouldhavehadtocrosstwomajorfreeways(405and101)toarriveinGriffithPark.WereportonP22’smovementpatterns,diet,andlocationswithinGriffithPark’snaturalareasandthesurroundingurbancommunities.GriffithParkreceives10millionvisitorsyearly,andyetP22remainselusiveandisrarelyseenbypeople.P22hasalsobecomeanambassadorforwildlifeandcorridorneedsintheLosAngelesarea,ashisstoryhasbeenwellcoveredinmediaoutlets.Wehavedocumentedmanyanthropogenicthreatstomountainlionsoverthecourseofourresearch,includinganticoagulantrodenticideexposure,roadmortality,andpotentiallyincreasedintraspecificconflict.ContinuedtrackingofP22willprovideimportantinsightsonmountainlionsurvivalandmovementinanisolatedandurbanlandscape,includingwhetherandwherehemovesoutofGriffithPark.Followingmountainlions,includingP22,inthefragmentedhabitatssurroundingSMMNRAwillallowustoidentifyhabitatlinkagesandcorridorscriticaltothesurvivalofmountainlionsandotherlargemammals.Inaddition,wehopetodeterminehowmountainlionscanbestcoexistwithhumansinthiscomplexurban‐wildlandinterface.

Compensationandadditivityincougarmortality:learningfromheavilyandlightlyharvestedpopulations

MichaelL.Wolfe,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;michael.wolfe@usu.edu

DavidC.Stoner,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;david.stoner@usu.edu

EricM.Gese,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices;eric.m.gese@aphis.usda.gov

PatTerletzky,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;pat.terletzky@usu.edu

DavidM.Choate,SchoolofLifeSciences,UniversityofNevada,LasVegas;choate.davidm@gmail.com

DavidN.Koons,DepartmentofWildlandResourcesandtheEcologyCenter,UtahStateUniversity;david.koons@usu.edu

LiseM.Aubry,DepartmentofWildlandResourcesandtheEcologyCenter,UtahStateUniversity;lise.aubry@usu.edu

Abstract:Theinteractionbetweenanthropogenicandnaturalmortalityhaslonginterestedecologistsandisofcentralimportancetospeciesconservationandmanagement.Westudiedmortalitypatternsoftwocougar(Pumaconcolor)populationsinUtah,one(Monroe)exposedtohighlevelsofhuntingmortalityandthesecond(Oquirrhs)wassubjectedtomoderatelevelsofexploitation.Weusedcompetingriskanalysistodeterminesurvivalandcause‐specificmortalityratesusinginformationon224cougarsthatwerecapturedandequippedwithradio‐collars.Duringthis17‐yearinvestigation,146animalsdiedofaknowncauseofmortality(11diedofunknowncauses),andtheremaining67individualswereright‐censoredattheendofthestudyperiod.Anthropogenicmortalitycountedfor85.8%and51.9%ofthetotaldeathsintheheavilyandlightlyexploitedpopulations,respectively.Inbothpopulations,theprimarycausesofdeathwerehuntingandpoaching,withtheexceptionoffemalesontheOquirrhmountainsthatprimarilydiedofnaturalcauses.Regressionofannualsurvivalasafunctionofallsourcesofhumanexploitationrevealedasignificantnegativerelationship,indicatingstrongadditivityofanthropogenicandnaturalmortalityintheheavilyexploitedpopulation.Exploitationinthesemi‐protectedpopulationdidnotleadtoanysignificantdeclinesinannualsurvival,suggestingsomelevelofcompensationbetweennaturalandanthropogeniccausesofmortality.Empiricalstudiesthatdirectlyaddressadditiveversuscompensatorymortalityinexploitedpopulationsoflargecarnivoresarerare.Ourresultsdemonstratetheneedfor,andpowerof,sustainedlong‐termdatacollectioninaddressingimportantquestionsconcerningtheconservationandmanagementoflong‐livedcarnivores.

Therelationshipofruraldepopulationtopuma‐humanconflictintheAltiplanoregionofTarapacá,Chile

OmarOhrens,NelsonInstituteforEnvironmentalStudies,UniversityofWisconsin,Madison;ohrens@wisc.edu

AdrianTreves,NelsonInstituteforEnvironmentalStudies,UniversityofWisconsin,Madison;atreves@wisc.edu

CristianBonacic,FaunaAustralisWildlifeLaboratory,DepartmentofEcosystemandEnvironment,SchoolofAgricultureandForestry,PontifíciaUniversidadCatólicadeChile,Santiago,Chile;bona@uc.cl

Abstract:IntheAltiplanoregionofTarapacáinChile,theAymarapeoplehavereportedanincreaseofpuma‐humanconflict,mainlyincludingpredationonlivestock.Thelackofinformationaboutthestatusofthisspeciesandtheabsenceofverificationofpumaattacksonlivestockmakeitdifficulttoapplyinterventions.Moreover,themigrationofnumerousAymaratocitieshasmeantchangesintraditionalagriculturalpractices,whichmayaccountforanincreasedsenseofvulnerabilitytopumas.WeinterviewedAymaralivestockownerstounderstandhowcertainpatternsofruraldepopulation(olderpeople,smallerhouseholdsizes,lesssupervision,lowresidency)couldberelatedtotheconflictbetweenpumasandpeople.Wefoundthatolderrespondents,withsmallerhouseholdsizesandlesstimespentintheirresidence,perceivedadeclineinpumapredationevents.However,respondentswhoperceivedanincreaseinpredationeventspresentedtheoppositepatterns.Wefoundanassociationbetweentheperceivedlevelofconflictandtheuseornotofaguard.Respondentsthatperceivedahighriskofpumaattackimplementedtheuseofaguardwhentheywereabsentfromtheirresidence,indicatingcertainadaptationstotheirtraditionalpractices.Themitigationoftheconflictandthereforethefutureofpumaconservationintheregionmaydependontheimplementationofinterventionsthatinfluencepeople’sperceptions.Weproposethehighest‐priorityinterventionincludesverifyingandmeasuringlossesandfurtherhumandimensionsworktoidentifycausesofcomplaints.Subsequentinterventionstopreventlossesorpreventretaliationagainstpumascanthenbetargetedmoreprecisely.

WildpumasinBritain–exploringevidenceandgaugingpeople’sattitudes

RickMinter,BigCatStudy,RoyalAgriculturalUniversity,Cirencester,UK;rickminter@easynet.co.uk

Dr.AndrewHemmings,BigCatStudy,RoyalAgriculturalUniversity,Cirencester,UK

Abstract:AcrossBritain,allegedsightingsofpumasandblackpanthershaveoccurredfromthe1970s.Insomecounties,scoresofallegedsightingsaredocumentedannuallybyvolunteergroups.Itisassumedmanyencountersarekeptsecret,withpeoplefearingridiculeorconcernedatattractingtrophyhunters.Withnoknowledgeofpumas,peoplehavedescribedtheform,colour,locomotion,calls,andinrarecasestheyoung,ofcatsresemblingPumaconcolor.Puma‐likecatsaccountforuptoathirdofthedescriptionsinthedocumentedreports,yearonyear.Melanisticleopardisthemaincandidateforplausibleblackpantherreports.Despitetheconsistencyandcontinuityofwitnessreports,primaryevidenceislessapparent,butincludesasmallnumberofcarcassremainsverifiedbyvetsanduptoahandfulofDNAresults.Thepaucityofhardevidenceshouldbejudgedagainstthelackofresourcesappliedtodate,andtheabsenceofpastsystematicwork.AnemergingstudyattheRoyalAgriculturalUniversityexplorestheevidenceforbigcatsandlinkswithcommunitiesandlandowners.Trustingrelationshipsareimportant,givenpropertyowners’reticenceindrawingattentiontobigcatslinkedwiththeirlandandbusiness.People’sattitudestowardspossiblebigcatsarealsodocumentedatthestudy’soutreachevents.Underthenewstudy,aswellasDNAtesting,earlyprogressincludesthecollectionofskeletalremainsfortoothpitanalysis.Thescaleandpatternofcarnassialimpressionsonfourspecimenstodate,fromdifferentareas,weighsinfavourofpuma/leopardsizecats.Theattitudinalresultsshowamarkedconsistencyacrossthedifferentsamples:offeredarangeofoptions,includingscepticismandintolerance,peoplemainlyexpressfascinationandconcludethat(conditional)tolerance,andproperstudy,istheresponsiblewayforwardforunderstandingpossiblebigcatsintheirlocality.Theecologyofaconflict:Eurasianlynxdepredationondomesticsheepandsemi‐domesticreindeerinNorway

JohnOdden.NorwegianInstituteforNatureResearch;john.odden@nina.no

JennyMattisson.NorwegianInstituteforNatureResearch

JohnLinnell.NorwegianInstituteforNatureResearch

Abstract:Publicattitudestowardslargecarnivoreshavechangeddramaticallyduringthelast30years,andmanylargecarnivorepopulationsarenowrecoveringandexpandingintonewareas.InNorway,theEurasianlynx(Lynxlynx)population

increasedrapidlyinthemid1990’sresultinginincreaseddepredationandconflictswithsemi‐domesticreindeer(Rangifertarandus)andsheep(Ovisaries)herders.Annually,closetotwomillionsheeparegrazinginforestandalpine‐tundrahabitatsfromJuneuntilSeptember.SheepgrazingareasarefoundthroughoutNorway,butgrazingisespeciallyintensiveinthemountainsofsouth‐westernNorway.Inaddition,indigenousSámipeoplemanage230000semi‐domesticreindeerinthecentralandnorthernpartsofNorway.Thereisalegalrequirementthatalllossestolargecarnivoresshouldbefullycompensated.Anexpostfactocompensationschemeisbasedonanestimationoflossesandispaiddirectlytotheowners.In2013,alynxpopulationofapproximately350individualswasheldresponsibleforkilling7111sheepand8054reindeer.PersonnelfromtheStateNatureInspectorate(SNO)examinealllivestockfounddead,anddocumentthecauseofdeaththroughanecropsy.However,thedetectionrateofcarnivore‐killedreindeerisverylow(9%inwinterand2%insummer)sothereisahighdegreeofuncertaintyconcerningtherealmagnitudeofdepredation.Understandingthefactorsshapingthedynamicsofcarnivore–livestockconflictsisvitaltofacilitatelargecarnivoreconservationinmulti‐uselandscapes.Inthisstudywequantifiedlynxkillratesonsheepandreindeerintwostudyareas,onenorthernarea(sheepandreindeer)andonesouthernarea(sheep).Dataondiet,killratesonsheepanddomesticreindeer,andmovementof80individuallynxwerecollectedfrom1995to2013.Inthesouthernareaweinvestigatedhowthedensityoftheirmainwildprey,roedeer(Capreoluscapreolus)modulateslynxkillratesonsheepacrossarangeofsheepandroedeerdensities.Weusedzero‐inflatednegativebinomial(ZINB)modelsincludinglynxsex,sheepdensityandanindexofroedeerdensityasexplanatoryvariablestomodelobservedkillratesonsheep,andrankedthemodelsbasedontheirAICcvalues.Themodelincludingtheeffectsoflynxsexandsheepdensityinthezero‐inflationmodelandtheeffectoflynxsexandroedeerdensityinthenegativebinomialpartreceivedmostsupport.Irrespectiveofsheepdensityandsex,wefoundthelowestsheepkillratesinareaswithhighdensitiesofroedeer.Asroedeerdensitydecreased,maleskilledsheepathigherrates,andthispatternheldforbothhighandlowsheepdensities.Similarly,femaleskilledsheepathigherratesinareaswithhighdensitiesofsheepandlowdensitiesofroedeer.However,whensheepdensitieswerelowfemalesrarelykilledsheepirrespectiveofroedeerdensity.Inthenorthernareawequantifylynxkillratesonreindeeracrossarangeofecologicalconditions.Killrateswerestronglyaffectedbysexandsocialstatus(i.e.femaleswithandwithoutkittens),aswellasseasonandreindeeravailability.Thehighestkillrateswereobservedinsummerformalelynx,andthelowestwereobservedduringwinterforsolitarylynxatlowreindeerdensity.Ourquantificationofdepredationratesonsheepandreindeercanbethefirststeptowardsestablishingfairercompensationsystemsbasedonmoreaccurateandareaspecificestimationoflosses.Thisstudydemonstrateshowwecanuseecologicaltheorytopredictwherelossesofsheepwillbegreatest,andcanbeusedtoidentifyareaswheremitigationmeasuresaremostlikelytobeneeded.

Cougarresponsetodifferentlevelsofresidentialdevelopment

BenjaminT.Maletzke,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;Benjamin.Maletzke@dfw.wa.gov

MarkE.Swanson,DepartmentofNaturalResources,WashingtonStateUniversity;markswanson@wsu.edu

RichardA.Beausoleil,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;Richard.Beausoleil@dfw.wa.gov

GaryM.Koehler,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;garykoehler@nwi.net

HilaryS.Cooley,LargeCarnivoreConservationLab,DepartmentofNaturalResources,WashingtonStateUniversity;Hilary_Cooley@fws.gov

RobertB.Wielgus,LargeCarnivoreConservationLab,DepartmentofNaturalResources,WashingtonStateUniversity;Wielgus@wsu.edu.

Abstract:Theproximityofcougars(Pumaconcolor)andpeoplehasalwaysbeenamanagementconcern,butlittleisknownofhowuseofresidentialareasisaffectedbyhousingdensitylevelsandpatterns.Weusedutilizationdistributions(UDs)derivedfromGPS,ARGOSandVHFcollardatafrom101cougarstocomparehowdifferentlevelsofresidentialdevelopmentinfluenceuseacross4studyareasinWashington.WecomparedtheUDsofcougarswithresidentialdevelopmentquantifiedfromcountytaxparceldatausingaWeibullmodelinganalysisandmultiplecomparisontechniques.Cougarsusedpredominantlyundevelopedparcelsatboththehectare( =98.09%ofuse,SD=3.12,n=101)andkm2( =81.59%,SD=15.60,n=101)scalesandusedecreasedwithincreasingresidentialdensities.Ninety‐ninepercentofcougaruseofresidentialareasinwesternWashingtonoccurredinareaswith≤846.0residences/km2,whichwassignificantlyhigherthanintheeasternWashingtonstudyareaswherecougarsusedareaswithresidentialdensities≤55.2residences/km2.Diffuse,lowdensitydevelopmentfacilitateshigherlevelsofcougaruse,butresidentialdevelopmentaturbandensitieswithadjacentwildlandhabitatcomprisedofdensevegetationappearstoincreasecougaruseofresidentialdevelopmentwithminimaldirectuseofdevelopedparcels.Wildlifemanagersandlandscapeplannerscouldusethemodeltoidentifyandmaintainwildlifecorridorsindevelopingareas,locationstoconstructhighwaycrossingstructurestopreserveconnectivity,reduceuseofresidentialareasbycougars,oridentifywherecougaruseofresidentialdevelopmentislikelytooccursoastotargeteducationandoutreachefforts.

Session6:

PredatorsandPrey,Part1

Proceedingsofthe

ProgramCluster:identifyingpredationeventsthroughclusteredGPSdata

PeterJ.Mahoney,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;pmahoney29@gmail.com

JulieK.Young,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices;julie.young@usu.edu.

JohnA.Shivik,UtahDivisionofWildlifeResources;johnshivik@utah.gov

DavidC.Stoner,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;david.stoner@usu.edu.

Abstract:Non‐parametrickerneldensityestimatorsarecommonlyusedtoclassifyhomerangesorutilizationdistributionsfromanimallocationdata.Here,weextendther‐LoCoHestimatorofGetzetal.(2007)usingtime‐constrainedconvexhulls.Thisextensionwasoriginallydevelopedwiththeintentofidentifyingpredationeventsusingglobalpositioningsystemdataderivedfrompredatorspace‐usemonitoringefforts,butcanbeappliedtoanysystemwherefrequentandaccuraterelocationdataareavailableandrelocationclusteringinspaceandtimeareindicativeofbehaviorsofinterest(i.e.denning,nesting).ThepresentmethodiswrappedinaPythonprogramcalledProgramClustertoalloweasyandrapidimplementationbyuserswithlimitedprogrammingknowledge.TheoutputfromProgramClusterresemblesafragmentedutilizationdistribution,witheachfragmentcorrespondingtoareasidentifiedasintenselyusedinthelocationdatabasedonuser‐specifiedspatialandtemporaltuningparameters.Further,eachfragmentcanbeinterpretedasanindividualutilizationdistributionwithmoreheavilyshadedregions(i.e.greatesthulloverlap)correspondingtoareaswiththehighestintensityofuse.Wediscusstheextendedr‐LoCoHmethod,programimplementation,andoutputinthecontextanon‐goingcougar(Felisconcolor)studyonMonroeMountain,FishlakeNationalForest,Utah.Cougarstrategiesoffeedingsiteselection:energymaximization,classicaloptimalforaging,orfeardrivenhumanaversion?

KevinA.Blecha,GraduateDegreePrograminEcology,ColoradoStateUniversity;Kevin.blecha@gmail.com

MatW.Alldredge,ColoradoParksandWildlife;Mat.Alldredge@state.co.us

RandallB.Boone,DepartmentofEcosystemScienceandSustainability,ColoradoStateUniversity;Randall.Boone@Colostate.edu

Abstract:Understandingpredatorforagingecologyinregionsofincreasinganthropogenicdevelopmentisimportantwhendevisingmanagementstrategiesto

reducecougar‐humanconflicts.Apureenergymaximizationstrategypredictsthatpatchuseofaforagingcougarisdrivenbytheselectionoflandscapefactorsthatmaximizeencounterswithprimarypreyspecies.However,previousresearchonfinescalepatch‐userarelyshowslinearrelationshipswithdirectmeasuresofpreyavailability.Apurefear‐drivenstrategypredictsthatpatchuseisdrivenbylandscapefactorsassociatedwithhigherriskofmortality.Whileitislogicalthatacougarwouldavoidareaslinkedtohigherratesofmortality,testingthishasbeenmetwithonlylimitedsuccess.Optimalforagingtheorywouldattempttoexplainpatchusageasabehavioralbalancingactbetweenenergymaximizationandfear‐drivenhumanaversion.Totestthis,measuresofpreyavailabilityandcougarusagemustbeattainedatscalessuitabletothebehavior.Anovelcameratrappingsurveytechniqueusing41,000trapnightswasusedtomodelthebackgroundencounterratesacrossthelandscapeofvariouspreyspeciesofcougars,withparticularemphasisonarangeofhousingdensities.Predictedfeedingsitelocationswerederivedfor49cougarsbyamodelusingatrainingsetof4,400clustersofground‐truthedGPSlocations.Usingconditionallogisticregressionanalysis,characteristicsoffeedingsites(humanhousing,backgroundpreyencounterprobabilities,andnaturalhabitat)werecomparedtocharacteristicsofGPSlocationswithinthepriortravellingsequencetotestthedegreeofoptimalforagingatafinespatialscale.Preliminaryresultsindicatedirectandindirectrelationshipsinreferencetohumansandbackgroundencounterratesofprimaryprey(deer).However,somedifficultiesarisewhenteasingoutadditionalinfluencesofhighlyusedalternativepreyspecies(i.e.,raccoon,domesticcat),whosebackgroundencounterratesaredrivenbythepresenceofhumandwellings.Estimatingmountainlion(Pumaconcolor)predationratesintherecentlyrecolonizedregionoftheLittleMissouriBadlands,NorthDakota,USA

DavidT.Wilckens,DepartmentofNaturalResourceManagement,SouthDakotaStateUniversity

JoshuaB.Smith,DepartmentofNaturalResourceManagement,SouthDakotaStateUniversity

StephanieA.Tucker,NorthDakotaGameandFishDepartment

DanielJ.Thompson,WyomingGameandFishDepartment

Abstract:Recentrecolonizationofmountainlions(Pumaconcolor)intotheBadlandsofNorthDakota,USAhasledtoquestionsonthepotentialimpactsofpredationonpreypopulationsintheregion.From2012‐2013,wedeployed9real‐timeglobalpositioningsystem(GPS)collarstoinvestigatemountainlionfeeding

habits.Wemonitoredmountainlionsfor1,845days,investigated506GPSclusters,andidentified292feedingevents.Weusedlogisticregressiontopredictfeedingeventsandsizeofpreyconsumedatanadditional535non‐investigatedclustersites.Ourtopmodelforpredictingpresenceofpreyitemsproducedareceiveroperatingcurve(ROC)scoreof0.90andanoverallaccuracyof81.4%;topmodelforpredictingpreysizehadaROCscoreof0.89andanoverallaccuracyof84.6%.ApplicationofourmodelstoallGPSclustersresultedinanestimatedungulatekillrateof1.09ungulates/week(95%CI=0.83–1.36)insummerand0.90ungulates/week(95%CI=0.69–1.12)inwinter.Weestimatedmountainlionsconsumed39.6kg/week(95%CI=30.4‐48.8)insummerand51.6kg/week(95%CI=37.4–65.8)inwinter.Overallscavengerateswere3.7%insummerand11.9%inwinter.Preycompositionincludedhigherproportionsofnon‐ungulatesinsummer(female=21.5%;male=24.8%)thaninwinter(female=4.8%;male=7.5%).ProportionofjuvenileungulatesinmountainliondietsincreasedfollowingtheungulatebirthpulseinJune(June–August=60.7%,95%CI=43.0–78.3;Sept‐May=37.2%,95%CI=30.8–43.7),resultinginanungulatekillrate1.61timeshigherduringfawningseason(1.41ungulates/week,95%CI=1.12–1.71)thanduringtheremainderoftheyear(0.88ungulates/week,95%CI=0.62–1.13).OurresultsdocumentfeedinghabitsofarecentlyrecolonizedmountainlionpopulationandwillincreaseeffectivemanagementofthisspeciesintheBadlandsRegionofNorthDakota.Estimatingcougar(Pumaconcolor)consumptionratesandpreycompositionintheBlackHills,SouthDakota.

JoshuaB.Smith,DepartmentofNaturalResourceManagement,SouthDakotaStateUniversity;Joshua.Smith@sdstate.edu

DavidT.Wilckens,DepartmentofNaturalResourceManagement,SouthDakotaStateUniversity

JohnBroecher,SouthDakotaDepartmentofGame,Fish,andParks

Abstract:Followingdeclinesinthe19thand20thcenturies,recentrangeexpansionsofcougars(Pumaconcolor)intotheupperMidwestarechallengingeffectivemanagementofthesenewpredator–preysystems.Theseregionsprovideauniqueopportunitytoassesstheroleofthisapexpredatoronpreypopulationdynamicsandecosystemprocessesinareaswhereanthropogenicinfluencesaresignificantlydifferent(e.g.,higherroaddensities,higherhumanpopulations)frompreviousstudies.Ourobjectiveswereto:1)determinepreycompositionofcougardiets,2)quantifyungulatekillrates,3)assesstheinfluenceofseasonanddemographicstatusonpredationrates,and4)determinetheinfluenceofscavengingonoverallcougarconsumptionratesintheBlackHills,SouthDakota.From2009–2012,we

captured41cougars(29females;11males)andusedglobalpositioningsystem(GPS)telemetrytolocate1,506feedingevents.Deer(Odocoileusspp.)comprisedthemajorityofcougardiets(83%),andincaseswherewecouldidentifyspecies,white‐taileddeer(Odocoileusvirginianus)dominated(63%).Overallungulatekillrateaveraged0.79ungulates/week,butwashighlyvariable(range=0.13–1.75ungulates/week)amongindividuals.Wefoundkillratesweresignificantlyhigher(P<0.001)insummer(x̄=0.92;95%CI=0.81–1.03)thaninwinter(x̄=0.62;95%CI=0.51–0.74);however,wefoundnodifferencesbydemographicstatus(e.g.,sex,age,orpresenceofcubs)withinthesameseason(summer:P=0.581;winter:P=0.607).Scavengingaccountedfor17.3%(n=260)ofallpreyitemsfoundintermsofrelativefrequencywithhigherratesobservedinwinter(x̄=0.21events/week)thaninsummer(x̄=0.08events/week).OurresultshighlighthowadaptableandopportunisticcougarsareatforagingforpreyandprovideinformationtodirectfuturecougarandungulatemanagementintheBlackHillsecoregion.Nowheretohide:pumas,blackbearsandcompetitionrefuges

L.MarkElbroch,Panthera;melbroch@panthera.org

PatrickE.Lendrum,Panthera;plendrum@panthera.org

MaximilianL.Allen,SchoolofBiologicalSciences,VictoriaUniversityofWellington;maximilian.allen@gmail.com

HeikoU.Wittmer,SchoolofBiologicalSciences,VictoriaUniversityofWellington;Heiko.Wittmer@vuw.ac.nz

Abstract:Interspecificcompetitionisasignificantinfluenceonthediversityandmembershipofcommunityassemblages,andaprevailingquestionishowcompetitivecarnivorescoexistwithoutthedominantcarnivoredrivingthesubordinatecompetitortolocalextinction.Onehypothesisisthatthesubordinatecarnivorerequiresandutilizes“competitionrefuges,”wheretheinfluencesofthedominantcompetitorareminimized.Americanblackbears(Ursusamericanus)aresympatricwithpumas(Pumaconcolor)acrossmostofthepuma’srangeinNorthAmerica,andadominantscavengerthatdisplacepumasfromtheirkills.Wetestedfortheeffectofblackbearkleptoparasitsimonpumasearchtime,handlingtimeandkillratesintwostudysystems:westernColoradoandnorthernCalifornia.Pumasexhibitedincreasedkillratesandshorterhandlingtimes,andselectedforsmallerprey,whenbearswereactive.OurResourceSelectionFunctionanalysesshowedthatwhenbearswereactive,theywereaslikelytofindpumakillsanywhereonthelandscape.Weconcludedthatduringthebearseason,pumascouldnoteffectivelyhidefromthem;insteadourresultssuggestedthatundiscoveredpumakillswererandomeventsorduetosomevariablewedidnottest.Further,ourfindingssuggestedthatbearkleptoparasitsmmaybedrivinghigherpumakillratesinthewarmerseasonswherethetwospeciesoverlap,whichhasimplicationsforbothcarnivoreandungulatemanagement,aswellaspotentiallyimpactingpumafitness.

Session7:

PredatorsandPrey,Part2

Proceedingsofthe

Top‐downversusbottom‐upforcing:evidencefrommountainlionsandmuledeer

BeckyM.Pierce,SierraNevadaBighornSheepRecoveryProgram,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife;cattrack@verizon.net

VernonC.Bleich,WildlifeInvestigationsLaboratory,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife

KevinL.Monteith,DepartmentofBiologicalSciences,IdahoStateUniversity

R.TerryBowyer,DepartmentofBiologicalSciences,IdahoStateUniversity

Abstract:Westudiedmountainlions(Pumaconcolor)andmuledeer(Odocoileushemionus)inhabitingaGreatBasinecosysteminRoundValley,California,tomakeinferencesconcerningpredator–preydynamics.Ourpurposewastoevaluatetherelativeroleoftop‐downandbottom‐upforcingonmuledeerinthismultiple‐predator,multiple‐preysystem.Weidentifiedaperiodofdecline(by83%)ofmuledeer(1984–1990),andthenaperiodofslowbutsteadyincrease(1991–1998).Formuledeer,bitterbrush(Purshiatridentata)indiets,percapitaavailabilityofbitterbrush,kidneyfatindexes,fetalrates(youngperadultfemale),fetalweights,andsurvivorshipofadultsandyoungindicatedthattheperiodofdeclinewastypicalofadeerpopulationnearorabovethecarryingcapacity(K)ofitsenvironment.Numbersofmountainlionsalsodeclined,butwithalongtimelag.Theperiodofincreasewastypifiedbydeerdisplayinglife‐historycharacteristicsofapopulationbelowK,yetthefiniterateofgrowth(k¼1.10)remainedbelowwhatwouldbeexpectedforapopulationreboundingrapidlytowardK(k¼1.15–1.21)intheabsenceoflimitingfactors.Life‐historycharacteristicswereconsistentwiththemuledeerpopulationbeingregulatedbybottom‐upforcingthroughenvironmentaleffectsonforageavailabilityrelativetopopulationdensity;however,predation,mostlybymountainlions,waslikelyadditiveduringtheperiodofincreaseandthus,top‐downforcingslowedbutdidnotpreventpopulationgrowthofmuledeer.Theseoutcomesindicatethatresourceavailability(bottom‐upprocesses)hasanever‐presenteffectondynamicsofherbivorepopulations,butthattherelationshipcanbealteredbytop‐downeffects.Indeed,top‐downandbottom‐upforcescanactonpopulationssimultaneouslyand,thus,shouldnotbeviewedasastarkdichotomy.CougarpredationintheMojaveDesert:seasonalspatio‐temporaloverlapinfluencespreyselectionmorethanwateruse

DavidM.Choate,SchoolofLifeSciences,UniversityofNevadaLasVegas,&WesternEcologicalResearchCenter,U.S.GeologicalSurvey;choate.davidm@gmail.com

KathleenM.Longshore,WesternEcologicalResearchCenter,U.S.GeologicalSurvey;longshore@usgs.gov.

DanielB.Thompson,SchoolofLifeSciences,UniversityofNevadaLasVegas;daniel.thompson@unlv.edu.

Abstract:Cougar(Pumaconcolor)predationindesertenvironmentsmaybeenhancedwhenungulatepreyincreasetheiruseofwatersourcesduringsummermonths.Understandingtheconditionsinwhichdifferentfactorsinfluencepredationremainsanimportantissueforwildlifemanagers.Forwatersourcestofunctionasecologicaltrapsitisnecessarynotonlytodetectpredationeventsproximatetowatersources,butalsotodeterminethattheseeventsoccurmorefrequentlythanexpectedbyspatialoverlapofcougarsandprey.Weinvestigatedthespatio‐temporalpatternsofcougarpredationondesertungulatesinrelationtowateruseontheDesertNationalWildlifeRefuge(DNWR)NV,bytrackingGPS‐collaredcougarsandbighorn.Annualsurvivorshipforcollaredbighornwashigh(~93%).Cougarkillscomprised~64.3%muledeer(Odocoileushemionus)and30.3%bighornsheep,andoccurredclosertowatersources(3.4±2.4km)thanrandompoints(6.6±3.2km).However,only1killoccurredwithin200mofawatersourceand<5%ofallkillsoccurred<0.5kmfromwater(range=0.32–16.7km).Cougarlocationsweremorecloselyrelatedtosheeplocationsthanwatersources,withnosignificantdifferenceinspatialoverlapacrossseasons.Althoughbighornusedwatersourcesmostextensivelyduringdaylighthoursofsummermonths,asrecordedby24‐hcamera‐monitors,fewbighornwerekilledduringsummer.Instead,mostwerekilledduringwinter/springatthegreatestdistancesfromwatersources.Conversely,muledeerwerekilledacrossallseasons,despiteasimilarproximitytowatersources.Differentialuseofthelandscapebymuledeermayexplaintheirincreasedriskofpredationbycougarsinthisdesertenvironment.OntheDNWR,watersourcesdonotappeartofunctionasecologicaltraps;rather,seasonaldifferencesinspatio‐temporaloverlapinfluencetheriskofcougarpredationforpreymorethansimplyproximitytowatersources.VariationinpreyselectionandincidenceofindividualspecializationonnovelpreyintheGreatBasin

AlysonM.Andreasen,WildlifeConservationSociety;aandreasen@wcs.org

JonP.Beckmann,WildlifeConservationSociety;jbeckmann@wcs.org.

KelleyM.Stewart,NaturalResourcesandEnvironmentalSciences,UniversityofNevada,Reno;kstewart@cabnr.unr.edu

WilliamLongland,USDAAgriculturalResearchServices,UniversityofNevada,Reno;longland@unr.edu

CarlLackey,NevadaDepartmentofWildlife;clackey@ndow.org

Abstract:Variationinpredationbehaviorandpreyselectionofpredatorscanhaveimportantimplicationsforecology,conservationandmanagement.Wetestedhypothesespertainingtothedegreeofindividualdietspecialization,andpotentialfitnessconsequences,ofmountainlions(Pumaconcolor)inareaswithvaryingabundancesandtypesofpreyinthewesternGreatBasinandeasternSierraNevada.Wevisited1,330GPSclustersmadeby21mountainlions(7males;14females)fittedwithGPScollarsfrom2009‐2012.Wefollowedindividualsanaverageof55weeks(SD=36)andlocatedremainsofpredationeventsat804oftheclusterssearched(61%)comprising14species.Dietsvariedamongindividualswithinandbetweenmountainranges.Muledeerwerethemostcommonpreyinthedietsof13individualsandferalhorseswerethemostcommonpreykilledby8individuals.Tenof13mountainlionswithaccesstoferalhorsesinGreatBasinrangesconsumedhorsesasprey.However,therewasconsiderablevariationamongthedietsofthoseindividualswithsomeindividualsspecializingonhorsestothenearexclusionofotherpreyitems.InsomeareasoftheGreatBasin,feralhorsesprovidedecologicalopportunityforpreyspecializationwheremuledeerdensitieswererelativelylow;inareasoflowavailabilityoftotalprey,however,allindividualshadgeneralistforagingstrategies.Wefoundnodifferencebetweenspecialistsandgeneralistsinbiologicalcorrelatesoffitness.Nonetheless,ourresultssuggestthatpredationonferalhorsesinaridGreatBasinRangesmayresultinfitnesscomparabletothoseofmountainlionsinareaswheredensitiesofmuledeeraresubstantiallygreater,suchastheSierraNevada.Rangeabandonmentbyungulates:Predatoravoidanceorresponsetohabitatchangesinducedbydrought?

JeffreyT.Villepique,DepartmentofBiologicalSciences,IdahoStateUniversity;

BeckyM.Pierce,SierraNevadaBighornSheepRecoveryProgram,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife;cattrack@verizon.net

VernonC.Bleich,SierraNevadaBighornSheepRecoveryProgram,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife;vcbleich@gmail.com

AleksandraAndic,DepartmentofAstronomy;aleksandra.andic@gmail.com

R.TerryBowyer,DepartmentofBiologicalSciences,IdahoStateUniversity;bowyterr@isu.edu.

Abstract.Weinvestigatedinfluencesofriskofpredationbymountainlions(Pumaconcolor),measuresoftopographicruggednessatmultiplescales,andvegetation,land,andsnowcover,onresourceselectioninwinterbySierraNevadabighornsheep(Oviscanadensissierrae),anendangeredtaxon.Wehypothesizedthatthosemountainungulateswouldtradeoffrewardsaccruedfromuseofcriticallow‐elevationhabitatinwinterforthesafetyofareaswithreducedriskofpredation.

Wealsoinvestigatedthetradeoffbetweenforageandriskofpredationbytestingthehypothesisthatdifferencesinqualityofforageatlow‐elevationsversushigh‐elevationswerereducedinyearsofbelow‐averageprecipitationthaninwetyears,yieldingareducedbenefitofmigrationtolow‐elevationsduringdroughtyears.SierraNevadabighornsheepdidnottradeoffbenefitsofforageforreducedriskofpredation,butselectedareasofhighsolarradiation,whereriskofpredationbymountainlionswasgreatest,whilemitigatingindirectriskofpredationbyselectingforsteep,ruggedterrain.Bighornsheepselectedmorestronglyforareaswheremountainlionswereactiveandkilledbighornsheep,thanforlowelevationhabitatinwinter,likelybecausemountainlionsweremostactiveinthoseareasofbighornwinterrangesoverlappingrangesofmuledeer(Odocoileushemionus),wherebothungulatesaccruedforagebenefits.Wedemonstratedreducedbenefitofmigrationtolowelevationduringdroughtyears,whenthedifferenceinqualityofforagewassignificantlylowerthaninyearsofabove‐averageprecipitation,providinganalternativeexplanationtothepredator‐inducedabandonmenthypothesisforthedisuseoflow‐elevationwinterrangeobservedduringdroughtyears.Demographicresponseofmuledeertoexperimentalreductionofcoyotesandmountainlions.

MarkA.Hurley,IdahoDepartmentofFishandGame

JamesW.Unsworth,IdahoDepartmentofFishandGame

PeterZager,IdahoDepartmentofFishandGame

MarkHebblewhite.WildlifeBiologyProgram,CollegeofForestryandConservation,UniversityofMontana

EdwardO.Garton.DepartmentofFisheriesandWildlifeResources,UniversityofIdaho

DebraM.Montgomery.DepartmentofFisheriesandWildlifeResources,UniversityofIdaho

JohnR.Skalski.SchoolofAquaticandFisherySciences,UniversityofWashington

CraigL.Maycock.UnitedStatesDepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices

Abstract:WetestedtheefficacyofremovingcoyotesandmountainlionsonmuledeerpopulationdynamicsinsoutheasternIdaho,1997‐2006.Wemonitoredaspectsofmuledeerecologywhileexperimentallymanipulatingpredatorpopulationswithin10GameManagementUnits.Todeterminesurvivalandcausesofmortality,250neonates,2846‐month‐oldfawns,and254(521deeryears)adultfemalesweremonitoredwithradiotelemetryin2studysites,onewithcoyoteandmountainlionremovalandonewithout1998‐2002.Survivalofneonateswasrelatedtoalternatepreyabundance,coyoteremovalrates,andweatherconditions.Winterfawnsurvivalwasinfluencedbysummerprecipitation,winterprecipitation,

mountainlionremoval,andfawnmass.Adultfemalewintersurvivalincreasedwithmountainlionremoval.Decemberfawn‐to‐adultfemaleratios(fawnratios)increasedsignificantlyatmaximumratesofmountainlionremoval.Coyoteremovalhadnosignificanteffectonfawnratios,exceptafteraweather‐relatedpopulationreduction.Coyoteormountainlionremovalalonedidnotinfluencemuledeerpopulationgrowthrate,althoughthetopmodel,includingpreviousyear’smountainlionremovalandwinterseverity,explained27%ofthevarianceinpopulationrateofincrease.Thelackoffawnratioorpopulationresponsetocoyotereductionindicatesthatdecreasedneonatemortalityduetocoyoteremovalispartiallycompensatory.Mountainlionremovalincreasedmuledeersurvivalandfawnratios,producingaminimalpositiveeffectongrowthrates.However,weobservedsomeevidenceforcompensatorymortalityinadultfemalemuledeerduringperiodsofprolongedmountainlionremovalandwhencoupledwithsignificantweathereffectsmayreducetheeffectofpredatorremovalonpopulationgrowthrate.PanelQ&A,PredatorsandPrey.

Participants:BeckyPierce,AlysonAndreasen,DaveChoate,MarkHurley,&JeffVillepique

Moderator:DavidStoner

Thefollowingisadaptedfromatape‐recordingofthediscussion.Questionsandresponseshavebeenshortenedandarenotverbatim.Q:Aproblemwehavewithmanagingwildlifeisthecomplexityoftheenvironment.Ourtoolsarefairlycoarse.Ultimatelymostpopulationsarefoodlimited.Withrespecttopumacontrolorharvestbeingacommonmanagementtactictoenhancepreynumbersandsurvival,atwhatpointinthecyclemightpumapredationbeadditive?Wheremightpredatorremovalhavesomebeneficialeffect?Becky–BasedonourresearchothermortfactorsbecomemoreadditivewhenapreypopulationisbelowK.Weseefluctuationsbetweenforageanditsimpactondeerfetalratesandrecruitmentbecauseotherfactorscomeintoplay.ForpredatorremovaltobeeffectiveyouneedtoknowtherelationshipofthepreytoK.Ifthepreyareinpoorconditionbecauseofdensitydependenteffects,muchofpredationiscompensatoryandpredatorcontrolwon’tmakemuchdifference.Q‐Whatinfluencehaveyouhadonpublicperceptionsconcerningpredationandpredatorcontrol?

Becky–Includinglocalsintheresearchmadeabigdifference.Forexample,volunteersthatwentouttolocatecollareddeerwouldsee1collarinagroupof50deerandrealizethedeerpopulationwashigherthantheyrealized.However,CAis

differentthanotherareas;thevariouspublicsdemandthatcontroleffortsbewelljustified.Alyson–Initiallythesportsmen’sgroupsweapproachedthoughttheykneweverything.Somesurprisingresultsopenedthepublic’seyes.Astohowpredationonhorseshasbeenperceived,thesportsmenthinkitisgreat.AlthoughIthoughthorseadvocateswouldbeupset,theyseemtoappreciatetheresultsandthatpumapredationonhorses(aspeciesthatwasassumedtohavenopredators)actuallyhelpstheircause.Mark–Wespentasignificantamountoftimetalkingtopeople.Talkingtosportsmenseemedtohelp.Alotofthestudywasfundedbysportsmenandtherewasabetteracceptanceoftheresults(whichwerecontrarytowhattheyexpected)becausetheyhelpedfundit.Dave–Sportsmendirectlyinvolvedwiththeresearchweremoresupportive.Therewasadifferenceinpublicperceptionsbasedonwheretheylivedinthestate.LasVegaswasdifferentthanotherpartsofthestate.Thegeneralpublichadapoorunderstandingofwhatdensityisallabout,showingsurprisethatanimalscouldsurviveontheharshlandscapeandthatindividualsneededsomuchspace.Jeff–Providedtheobservationthatitiseasiertoconveyresultsshowingpredationisnotlimitingthepreywhenyouhavegrowingpopulationsofungulates.Q–Thereisannualvariationinweatherpatterns,andtheestimatesofK.Howcanweincorporatethisinformationintoatimelymanagementresponse?Dowehaveenoughtimetogetregulationsinplacetoachieveapredatorcontrolgoal?Mark–WeareconductingpredatorcontrolinIdahorightnow.Weneedspecialconditionstomakepredatorcontrolwork.Ourstructureis2yearsout.SowhatID’sdoneisthatwesawlionremovalhadsomeeffectsoweincreasedquotas.Howevertheincreasesareprobablynotenoughbecauseweneedtoremovealotmoretocauseaneffect.Wearenotkillingmanymorelionsthanwewerebefore.Weknowthatcoyotecontrolonthefawningrangeiswherewecanmakeadifference.Becky–WeneedtoconsidertherelationshipofpreytoK.Wewereluckytofindthatbitterbrushleadergrowthwasacriticalfactor.That’ssomethingyoucando(measure).Anothermeasureisscoringdeerbodyconditioninthefield.Ratherthanpredator,golookattheprey(it’seasierandcheaper).Alyson–Ourresultsmightsuggestthatathighdensitiesofprey,thebestapproachistoonlyremoveindividualpredatorsthataredoingdamageisthebestapproach.Whenpreydensitiesarelow,abroadbrushapproachtopredatorremovalmaybemoreeffective.David–Thewindowofinferencemaybeshorttermobservation.Butwerespondtolong‐termissues.Workwithpublictoexplainthatwecan’tmanageseasonto

season.Wecouldincorporatenoninvasiveassessmentssuchascameratrapsatwatersourcestodeterminepreycondition.Easiertodowithsheepthandeer.Q.Mark,inyourexperimentalremovalofpredators,didyoufindmeso‐predatorreleaseanddidthathaveanimpactonfawnmortality.Also,doyouthinkit’spossiblethattheconstantremovalofterritorialanimalsresultsinanartificiallylargepredatorpopulation?Mark–Wehadsomeanecdotalobservationsofincreasedbobcatmortalityonfawns.Removalratesandsocialdynamicswascertainlyanissueincoyotes;wehadnoopportunitytolookatthepumasocialsystem.However,thepumakittensthatwedidcollaremigratedtoareawherewewereremovingpumasandallwerekilled.Q.Alyson,wherewerethepumaskillingthehorses?Alyson–Horseswerekilledwherevertheywereactive:acrossshaleslopes,incanyonbottoms,inopensagebrush.Itwasreallyvariable.Q.Didanyofyourstudiesshowanylong‐termdemographicconsequences?Becky–Wesawashiftinmigrationpatternsofdeer,butwethinkthiswascausedbybearpredationonfawns.Aprimarymigratorypatternceasedtobethebestchoice.Mark–Anolderagestructureinthedoesleadstosenescence.Adultdeerstartintosenescenceatabout6.5years.Theseolderdeerproducefewerfawns.Manydeerpopulationshaveanolderdoeagestructuresoanythingwecandotoreducetheageonthedoeswouldhelp.DaveStoner’sclosingstatement:Frommanagementstandpointitisimportanttoincreaseeffortsatconveyingsciencetothevariouspublicsthatweserve.Therehasbeenalotofbasicresearchpresentedthismorning,Itwillbenicetoseeitappliedinthefuture.

Session8:

FelidsandHumans,Part1

Proceedingsofthe

Correlatesofpuma‐livestockconflictsintheEspinalofCentralArgentina

MauroLucherini,GECM,Cát.FisiologíaAnimal,DepartamentoBiología,BioquímicayFarmacia,Argentina;lucherinima@yahoo.com

MariaGuerisoli,GECM,Cát.FisiologíaAnimal,DepartamentoBiología,BioquímicayFarmaciaArgentina;mariadelasmercedesguerisoli@gmail.com

NicolasCaruso,GECM,Cát.FisiologíaAnimal,DepartamentoBiología,BioquímicayFarmacia,UNS‐CONICET,Argentina;nccaruso@gmail.com

EmmaCasanave,GECM,Cát.FisiologíaAnimal,DepartamentoBiología,BioquímicayFarmacia,UNS‐CONICET;casanave@criba.edu.ar

EstelaLuengosVidal,GECM,Cát.FisiologíaAnimal,DepartamentoBiología,BioquímicayFarmacia;eluengos@gmail.com

Abstract:Puma(Pumaconcolor)stillhasawidespreaddistributioninArgentina.However,manypopulationsarethreatenedbyhabitatdestructionanddirectkillingassociatedtothespreadingofcroplandsandranchlands.ThisisthecaseofpumasinhabitingtheEspinalofthecentralArgentinalowlands,anecoregionmarkingthetransitionfromthePampasgrasslands,wherethepumahasalmostgoneextinct,totheMontewoodlands.Inthisregion,theintensefragmentationofnaturalhabitatsanddecreaseofnativepreyhasincreasedtheencroachmentofpumaswithlivestock.Retaliatorykilling,whichisthecommonresponsetopumapredationoncattle,isincreasingandlocalranchersarerequestingalegalbountysystemtohuntpumas.WereporttheresultsofthefirststepsofaprojectaimingtounderstandtheecologyofpumapopulationsintheEspinal,characterizepuma‐livestockconflicts,andidentifyconflictmitigationstrategies.Our148semi‐structuredinterviewstolocalranchersshowedthat45.7%ofrespondentsthinkthatpumascausemajordamage,47.5%reportedlossescausedbypumasinthepreviousyearand70.2%consideredthatpredatorcontrolwasthebestsolutiontoconflicts.Landscape‐scalecameratrapsurveys(totalinganeffortof7054trap‐days)produced45recordsofpumasin11.5%of184samplingstations.Apreliminaryhabitatsuitabilityanalysisbasedon110presencerecordssuggeststhatmostsuitablelocationsforpumawereawayfromcroplandorurbanareasandfromthemainroads,distancestoroadsandtoscrublandpatcheswerethevariablesaffectingthemostitsnichebreadth,andonly16.3%oftheregionhasahighqualityforthisfelid.OurresultssuggestthatwhereaspumasincentralArgentinamaytoleratesomedegreeofhabitatdegradationandhuman‐relatedmortality,humansarerarelywillingtotolerateeconomiclossescausedbydepredationandthatconflictmitigationmeasuresarerequiredtoensurepumaconservation.

RoadimpactsonmountainlionsinOrangeCounty,California:usingmultipledatatypestoprioritizemanagementactions

PatrickR.Huber,InformationCenterfortheEnvironment,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;prhuber@ucdavis.edu

T.WinstonVickers,WildlifeHealthCenter,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;twvickers@ucdavis.edu

WalterM.Boyce,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;wmboyce@ucdavis.edu

Abstract:Roadimpactsareathreattomanyspeciesdueprimarilytohabitatfragmentationanddirectmortalityfromvehiclecollisions.WestudiedtheeffectsofarelativelynewhighwayonmountainlionsandseveralotherspeciesinOrangeCounty,California.Weusedthreedifferenttypesofdata:roadkillrecords,GPScollardata,andleastcostconnectivitymodels.Roadkillrecordsindicatedthat11mountainlionshadbeenkilledbycarsinthe15milelongstudyareasincehighwayconstruction,withanadditional6killedonanothersectionofthehighwayoratitsjunctionswithotherroads.MountainlionGPScollardatawerecollectedatvaryingintervalsfromeveryfiveminutestoeverysixhours.GPSpointstakenatfiveminuteintervalswereusedtoidentify20crossinglocations,andleastcostconnectivitymodelsusinglongerintervaldatawereutilizedtoestimatethelocationsof55additionalcrossingevents.Becauseimpactswerebeingassessedformultiplespecies,deersurveyandroadkilldatawereusedtoidentifyareasofhighriskforotherspecies.Thehighwaysectionbeingstudiedwasthensplitinto500‐metersegments.Thevariousdatawerecombinedintoafinalimpactscoreandvalueswereassignedtoeach500‐metersegment.Resultsarecurrentlybeingusedtoprioritizemanagementactionsbythehighwaymanagementagency,includinginstallationofextensivenewfencingandmonitoringofexistingcrossingstructureswithcameras.Inaddition,weusedthedatatoadvisetheagencyonthedesignofapotentialfutureextensionofthehighwayinordertoreducetheexpectedimpactsonmountainlionsandotherspecies.AnoverviewofpumadepredationtrendsinCalifornia,1972‐2013

AnneM.Orlando,FelidaeConservationFund;anne@felidaefund.org

MarcKenyon,CaliforniaDept.ofFishandWildlife;marc.kenyon@wildlife.ca.gov

Abstract:Factorsrelatingtomountainliondepredationsincludegeographicattributes(landscapescale),propertyattributes(propertyscale),andattributesofthedepredatingindividual(organismalscale).WeexpandonpreviousworkbyapplyingGeographicInformationSystemsmethodsandclassificationtreeanalysistoCalifornia’sstatewidepumadepredationpermitdatabase,whichcontainsrecords

from1972–2013.Thesemethodsallowustodiscernrelationshipsbetweenenvironmentalandorganismalvariablesaffectingdepredationpatternsthatcouldotherwisebeobscuredbyimpactsofscale.Wesupplementthisanalysisbyincludingrecordsinthestate’spumanecropsydatabase,whichcontainsnecropsyrecordsofnearlyallpumastakenpursuanttodepredationpermitsfrom1993–2013.Here,wepresentdescriptivestatisticsandanalysesexplicatingtemporalandspatialtrendsinfrequencyofpumadepredation,domesticspeciesaffected,environmentalandgeographiccorrelates,andmitigatingfactorsthatmustbeconsideredwhenexaminingthesedata.Wediscusshowthesefactorscaninformlocalwildlifemanagementandecologicalconservationplanningefforts.CougarspaceuseonalandscapewithhighlevelsofanthropogenicdisturbanceinsouthcentralUtah

JulieK.Young,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices;julie.young@usu.edu

PeterJ.Mahoney,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;pmahoney29@gmail.com

Abstract:Weevaluatedcougar(Pumaconcolor)spaceuseinrelationtogeneralpatternsofhumanlandscapeuseonMonroeMountaininsouthcentralUtah.CougarsonMonroeMountainareexposedtoheavyhumanpressurebothdirectlyduringchase,limited‐entry,andharvestobjectiveseasonsduringthewinterandspringandmoreindirectlyduetotrafficassociatedwithrecreationalOHVactivityandgamehunterusethroughoutthesummerandfall.Toassesshowcougarsrespondtohumanactivity,weevaluatedrelativeselection(RSFwithausedvs.availabledesign)usingBayesiangeneralizedlinearmixedmodelswithweaklyinformativepriorsandarandomeffectofindividualtoaccountfordifferencesinindividualsamplingintensity.Seasonalhomeranges(99%isopleths)weregeneratedforeachindividualwithinourdatasetusingakerneldensityestimatorwithapluginbandwidthestimationalgorithm.Availabilitywasestimatedsystematicallyusingacompletecensusof30meterpixelswithineachhomerange.Distancetosecondaryandtertiaryroads,distancetowater,distancetonearesthumanresidence,ruggedness,aspect,slope,andvegetativecoverwerecalculatedforeachusedandavailablepointwithinthedatasetandutilizedasexplanatoryfixedeffectsintheRSFmodel.Wecomparedcougarresponsetoroadsandhumanresidenceacrossseasonsandbetweennightanddayinanefforttoidentifypatternsofcougarresponsetohumanactivity.Ourresultssuggestillustratetheindirectimpactshumanshaveoncougarsandtheneedformorestudiesthatdirectlyaccountforhumanactivitywhenevaluatingspatialandhabitatuse.

Livestockandlions:Aresearchprogramtolearncoexistencestrategies

HarleyG.Shaw;hgshaw@windstream.net

DavidJ.Mattson,PeopleandCarnivores;davidjmattson@gmail.com(Presenter)

ElizabethA.Haynes,SchoolofNaturalResourcesandEnvironment,UniversityofArizona;lynx@email.arizona.edu

SethM.Wilson,PeopleandCarnivores;swilson@bigsky.net

Abstract:Conservationofecologicallyfunctionalpopulationsofcougars(Pumaconcolor)isdependent,inpart,onreducingconflictswithlivestockproducersandreducingrelatedpreventativeorretaliatorykills.Appreciabledepredationoflivestockbycougarsislargelyrestrictedtoeithersheeportocowcalvesinwarmsemi‐aridtoaridregions.OurpreliminaryinvestigationsinArizonasuggestthatterrainruggedness,warmth,andariditytogetherengenderhusbandrypracticesthatleadtogreateravailabilityofvulnerablecowcalves.Wehypothesizethatpolledbreeds,cow‐calfoperations,lowstockingdensities,andyear‐roundbreedingandcalvingareattherootofproblematicdynamics,inplacesamplifiedbysource‐sinkdynamicsthatrecruityoungdispersingcougarsintolivestock‐producingareas.Giventhepotentialimportanceofcoexistencebetweenlivestockandcougarstolong‐termconservationofcougarpopulations,weadvocatealarge‐scaleresearchefforttotesttheefficacyofdifferenthusbandrypracticesinreducingcougardepredation.Suchaprogramwouldideallyfocusonrangeswithhistoriesofdepredationandemploycontrolsthroughapaireddesign.Candidatetreatmentswouldincludeuseofmoreaggressivehornedbreeds,abbreviationofbreedingandcalvingseasons,andconcentrationofcalvingcowsunderconditionswheretheycouldbegivengreaterprotection.Executionofsuchstudieswould,ataminimum,dependuponrecruitingrancherstoparticipateandfindingfinancialresourcestoalleviatetheeconomiccostsandrisksofparticipation.Werecommendthatanysuchstudyincludeassessmentofeconomicfeasibilityandpracticalitytotherancher,aswellaspotentialimpactonrangecondition.

Session9:

FelidsandHumans,Part2

Proceedingsofthe

Floridapantherrecovery:Livestockdepredation,predationriskmaps,andnewapproachestocompensationprograms

CaitlinJacobs,UniversityofFlorida,Dept.WildlifeEcologyandConservation;caitlin.jacobs@ufl.edu

MartinMain,UniversityofFlorida,Dept.WildlifeEcologyandConservation;mmain@ufl.edu

Abstract:CalfdepredationbythefederallyendangeredFloridapanther(Pumaconcolorcoryi)onranchesinsouthwestFloridaisanimportantissuebecauseranchesprovidehabitatcriticaltopantherrecovery.Asthepantherpopulationincreases,conflictbetweenranchersandpantherswilllikelyincreaseaswell.Tobetterunderstandthisconflict,thegoalsofthisstudyweretoquantifycalfdepredationbypanthersontworanchesinsouthwestFlorida,identifyfactorsthatinfluencepredationrisk,anddeveloppredationriskmapstoinformmanagementdecisions.Tomonitorcalflossweeartagged409calveswithVHFtransmittersontworanchesduring2011‐2013.Weevaluatedcalfmortalitiesforcauseofdeathandplacedcameratrapsatcachesitestoidentifyindividualpanthers.WeusedArcGISandFragstatstoquantifylandscapevariablesaroundeachkillsiteandforeachranch.WedevelopedpredationriskmapswithMaxEntusinglandscapevariablesandpantherGPSdata.Calfdepredationbypanthersvariedbetweenranches,withanaveragecalflosstopanthersof5.3%/yearonRanchAand0.5%/yearonRanchB.Pantherskilledcalvesrangingfrom<1weekoldand<25kgto>8monthsoldand>150kg.Cameratrapdatarevealedthatpanthersofdifferentagesandsexeskilledcalvesandthatsomepanthersmademultiplekills.LandscapeanalysisindicatedthatRanchAcontainedagreaterpercentageandpatchdensityofuplandforest,greaterconnectivitybetweenforestpatches,greateredgedensity,andsmallerpatchesofimprovedpasturethanRanchB.TheseresultssuggestthatthelandscapeonRanchAmayprovideamoreoptimalhuntingenvironmentforpanthers.MaxEntresultssuggestthatpredationriskmapscaninformconflictmitigationstrategiesandpotentiallyhelptostructurecompensationprogramsthatarebasedonlandscapefeaturesratherthanonverifiedkills.Conflictwithoutend:Cougardepredationineast‐centralArizona

DavidJ.Mattson,PeopleandCarnivores;davidjmattson@gmail.com

ErinSavage,AppalachianVoices,erin@appvoices.org

SusanG.Clark,SchoolofForestry&EnvironmentalStudies,YaleUniversity;susan.g.clark@yale.edu

Abstract:GrahamandGreenleecountiesineast‐centralArizonahaveexperiencedhighlevelsofcougar(Pumaconcolor)predationoncowcalvesforatleastthelast20

years.Killsofcougarsfordepredationcontrolinthesetwocomparativelysmallcountieshaveaccountedfor62%ofthestate’stotal.Ouranalysisofthiscasesuggeststhathighlevelsofdepredationarenotadequatelyexplainedbydensitiesofcougars,cattle,ornativeprey.Morelikely,thispatternofdepredationconflictisduetohusbandrypracticesrootedineconomicnecessityandunproductiverangeconditions,coupledwithinstitutionalizeddepredationcontrol.Moststakeholdersactiveinthiscaseseemtosharetheviewthatnatureisprimarilysomethingtobedominatedandutilized.Butdivergentgoalsarisefromdifferencesintheextenttowhichstakeholdersvalueconservationoflionsforhunting,prioritizelivestockrearingforprofit,ordistrustgovernment.Wefoundlittleevidencetosuggestthatcurrentpracticesandperspectivesservedanyone’smaterialinterests.Calflossesandkillsoflionsfordepredationcontrolpersistathighlevelswhichpotentiallyjeopardizeregionalsporthuntingandconservationoflions.Currentmanagementoflionsaffirmsprevailingworldviews,whichmakeslethalcontroloflionsa“necessity,”butwithoutresolvinganyon‐the‐groundproblems.Althoughalternativescanbeimagined,limitedresources,limitedsalience,andprevailingworldviewswillverylikelyperpetuatecurrentdynamicsintheshortterm.Longerterm,patternsofdepredationsandassociatedhumanbehaviorsinthisregionwillmorelikelybechangedbylarge‐scaleclimaticandeconomicforcescurrentlyreconfiguringwildlifemanagementandranchinginthesemi‐aridWest.AnintegratedregionaloutreachandresearchmodelforwildlifeconservationacrosstheSanFranciscoBayArea

ZaraMcDonald,FelidaeConservationFund;zara@felidaefund.org

AnneM.Orlando,FelidaeConservationFund;anne@felidaefund.org

AllyC.Nauer,FelidaeConservationFund;allycat@felidaefund.org

Abstract:TheSanFranciscoBayAreahostsavibrantandexpandingeconomyandanenvironmentallyconcernedpopulace.Heavilydevelopedareasandcongestedhighwaysabutcriticalnetworksofprotectedopenspaceandlargeworkingranches.Weprovideanoverviewofregion‐widecollaborativeeffortstomodel,designandconservefunctionalnetworksofcontiguouswildlifehabitat.Yet,inadditiontoscientificallyvalidconservationdesign,sustainingwildlifecommunitiesrequiresaddressingdifferingconcernsforurbanedgeversusruralresidents.WedescribethecombinedecologicalresearchandoutreachmodelwehavedesignedtoincorporatethesedistinctpopulacesintotheworkoftheBayAreaPumaProject,alandscape‐scaleresearchandconservationprogram.Urbanedgepumaconservationneedsincludeidentifyinglandscapemovementbarriers;providingsafehighwaycrossings;protectinglandscape‐scalecorridors;alleviatingdepredationonpetsandhobbyanimals;identifyingandalleviatinginadvertentpoisoning;addressinghumanlevelsoffearanddefiningsafetythreats;anddevelopingprotocolsforremovingpumasfromhigh‐densityresidentialareas.Incontrast,wherethesamepumas’

homerangesintersectruralranches,potentialimpactsonlivestock,interactionswithdeerpopulation,andoccasionally,inadvertentpoisoningbecomethemainconcerns.WepresentdatafrompumaGPScollars,GIS‐basedanalyses,andfindingsfrom3seasonsofregion‐widecamera‐trappingthatdocumentedvaryingoccupancyandactivitypatternsofpumasandothermammalsbetweenurbanedgeandruralenvironments.Wedescribehowwehaveusedthesefindingsandinputfromdiversehumancommunitiestodynamicallylinkresearchwithruralandurbanstakeholderoutreachandinvolvement.Theprojectthuscreatestheimpetusforlandscapeconservationoutcomeswithintheprocessofconductingaresearchprogram,fromchoosingappropriatequestionstoconductingfieldwork,andfromanalysistocollaborativemanagementplanning.BanquetSpeech

MichaelL.Wolfe,ProfessorEmeritus,UtahStateUniversityAbstract:Thisnarrativeweavesataleofhumankind’srelationshipwithpredatoryanimalslargelywithinthecontextofwesternculture.Fromprehistorictimeshumansdevelopedconflictedrelationshipswithlargecarnivores,perhapsstemmingfrommutualkleptoparasatismandbiophobia.Withthedevelopmentofpastoralandagrariansocietiestheserelationshipsmorphedintoaculturalenmitywithcertainlargepredatorsincorporatedintolegendandfolkloreandabettedbytheadventofnon‐animisticmonotheisticreligions.However,notalllargepredatorsperceivedwereviewedequallywiththewolfbeingalmostuniversallyreviledandlionsandbearswereviewedinsomewhatmorefavorableterms.EuropeancolonistsbroughtthesetraditionswiththemwhentheysettledNorthAmericaandappliedtheanti‐predatormentalityvigorouslyintheirconquestoftheAmericanfrontier.Thisresultedinavirtualpogromagainstpredators,andtheneareradicationofseverallargecarnivoresbythe20thcentury.Withthedemiseoflargerpredators,thecoyotebecametheprincipaltargetofpredatorcontrolefforts.However,thereemergedinthelatterhalfofthatcenturyamoreenlightenedperceptionoflargecarnivores,largelyoccasionedbytheresearchandteachingsofseveralvisionaryecologistsandthewritingsofseveralpopularauthors.Changingpublicattitudesresultedinoftencontroversialeffortstoprotectandrestorelargecarnivores.Thepastseveraldecadeshavewitnessedaveritableexplosioninpredation‐relatedresearchenhancedbysignificantadvancesintechnologyandairedpubliclyinmodernmedia.Thisworkandaparadigmshiftinecologyhaveresultedindevelopmentandslowacceptanceofamodernsynthesis,wherebypredatorsareviewedintheirappropriateanddiverseecologicalrolesneitherasuniversalvillainsormessiahs.However,attitudestowardspredatoryanimalsremainsharplypolarizedandsignificantchallengespersist.Theseincluderangeexpansionorrecolonizationbycoyotesandcougarsaswellconcernsforhumansafetypromptedbythepresenceofpotentiallydangerousanimalsinnearurbanenvironments.

Session10:

Non‐invasiveTechniques

Proceedingsofthe

EstimatingCougarDensitiesinnortheastOregonUsingConservationDetectionDogs

GregoryA.Davidson,FindItDetectionDogs;greg@finditdetectiondogs.com

DarrenA.Clark,OregonCooperativeFishandWildlifeResearchUnit,DepartmentofFisheriesandWildlife,OregonStateUniversity;Darren.A.Clark@state.or.us.

BruceK.Johnson,OregonDepartmentofFishandWildlife;bruce.k.johnson@state.or.us

LisetteP.Waits,DepartmentofFishandWildlifeSciences,UniversityofIdaho;lwaits@uidaho.edu

JenniferR.Adams,DepartmentofFishandWildlifeSciences,UniversityofIdaho,;adamsj@uidaho.edu

Abstract:Estimatingdensitiesofcougar(Pumaconcolor)isimportantformanagingcougarsandtheirpreybutremainschallengingduetocougar’selusiveandsolitarybehavior.Traditionalmethodsforestimatingabundanceanddensityofcougarsrequireseveralyearsofextensiveandexpensivemark‐recapturework.Toevaluateanon‐invasive,geneticcapture‐recapturemethodtoestimatecougarpopulationsizeanddensity,wesurveyeda220‐km2areausingconservationdetectiondogstrainedtolocatescatovera4‐weeksamplingperiodinnortheastOregon.Wecollected272scatsamplesandconductedDNAanalysison249samplesfromwhichwedeterminedindividualidentificationfrom73samplesthatrepresented21cougars(9malesand12females).Weevaluated4modelstoestimatecougardensities:Hugginsclosedpopulationmark‐recapture(Huggins),CAPWIRE,multipledetectionswithPoisson(MDP),andspatiallyexplicitcapturerecapture(SECR).Populationestimatesforcougarsusingourstudyareawere26(95%CI=22–35,9malesand17females)fromHugginsmodels,24(95%CI=21–30,9malesand15females)fromCAPWIRE,and27(95%CI=24–42,9males,18females)fromtheMDPmodel.Weaccountedfortheedgeeffectindensityestimatescausedbyindividualswhosehomerangesincludedonlyaportionofthesurveygridbybufferingthestudyareausingthemeanhomerangeradiusof8cougarsequippedwithGlobalPositioningSystemcollarsonornearthestudyarea.Weestimateddensitiesof4.6cougars/100km2(CI=3.8–8.3)fortheHugginsmodel,4.8cougars/100km2(CI=4.2–7.8)fortheMDPmodel,4.2cougars/100km2(CI=3.3–5.3)fortheCAPWIREmodel,and5.0cougars/100km2(CI=3.2–7.7)fortheSECRmodel.Ourresultssuggestedestimatingcougardensitiesusingscatdetectiondogscouldbefeasibleatabroaderscaleatconsiderablylesseffortoverashorterdurationthantraditionalmark‐recapturemethods.

DNA‐baseddietidentificationofmountainlionsinsouthwesternArizona

JohnClemons,ArizonaDesertBighornSheepSociety;clemonsjp@aol.com

AshwinNaidu,SchoolofNaturalResourcesandtheEnvironment,UniversityofArizona;ashwin@email.arizona.edu

MelanieCulver,GraduateInterdisciplinaryPrograminGeneticsandSchoolofNaturalResourcesandtheEnvironment,UniversityofArizona;mculver@email.arizona.edu

Abstract:Mountainlion(Pumaconcolor)dietshavelongbeenasubjectofcontroversyandhavebeenstudiedusingvariousmethodsinthepast30years.Mostearlyattemptstoascertainpredatordietwerefocusedonmethodsemployinganalysesofcontentsinfecesbasedonmorphologicalidentificationofhairandbonefragments.Thesemethodscanbesubjecttosignificantvariationinindividualinterpretationandcanlackincertaintyofidentificationofthepreyspeciesconsumedbypredators.Inthisstudyweemploygeneticanalysesofscatcontentstoidentifymountainlionprey.Weopportunisticallycollected152scatsamplessuspectedtobeofmountainlioninoriginfrommountainrangesinsouthwesternandsouthcentralArizonaduring2006–2012.Weamplifiedandsequenceda472bpfragmentofthemitochondrialcytochromebgenetoidentifypredatorspecies.Weconfirmed77(50.7%)scatstobefrommountainlions.Wedismantledthesemountainlionscatstorecoverboneandconnectivetissuefragmentscontainedtherein.Wethenpulverizedthesefragmentsinafreezermillandidentifiedpreyspeciesalsousingthecytochromebgene.Ourpreliminaryresultsdemonstratedthatmountainliondietconsistedof44%muledeer(Odocoileushemionus)and27%desertbighornsheep(Oviscanadensis)asthemajorpreyitems,amongotherminorpreyitems.Withseasonaldivisionofdiet,weobservedapotentialpositivecorrelationbetweenmountainlionpredationandthedesertbighornsheeplambingseason,andaninverserelationshipbetweenmuledeeranddesertbighornsheeppredation.WeconcludedthatDNA‐basedidentificationisaneffectivetoolingeneratingdataonmountainliondiets,andsuchdatacanbeusefulforwildlifemanagement,particularlyinmodelingtheimpactofpredationandvulnerabilityofpreyspeciestomountainlions.

PumaPlex:Arapidandhigh‐throughputmethodtogenotypesinglenucleotidepolymorphismsinmountainliontissuesandscats

RobertR.Fitak,InstitutfürPopulationsgenetik,VeterinärmedizinischeUniversitätWien,Vienna,Austria;rfitak9@gmail.com

AshwinNaidu,SchoolofNaturalResourcesandtheEnvironment,UniversityofArizona;ashwin@email.arizona.edu

MelanieCulver,GraduateInterdisciplinaryPrograminGeneticsandSchoolofNaturalResourcesandtheEnvironment,UniversityofArizona;mculver@email.arizona.edu

Abstract:Populationgeneticanalyseshavebecomeapowerfultoolfortheconservationandmanagementofwildlifepopulations.However,themostcommongeneticmarkers,microsatellites,oftenincurahighcostofexamination,sufferfromhomoplasy,andproducedatadifficulttocompareacrossstudies.Recently,alternativegeneticmarkers,calledsinglenucleotidepolymorphisms(SNPs),havereceivedmuchattentionfortheiranalyticalsimplicity,high‐throughputcapabilities,consistencyacrossstudies,andpotentialutilityinancient,degraded,andnon‐invasivelycollectedsamples.Inourstudywedesignedahigh‐throughputassay(calledPumaPlex)tosimultaneouslygenotype26SNPsinmountainlions(Pumaconcolor).Todate,wehavegenotypedmorethan700mountainlions,including~500individualsfromArizona.OurresultsfromusingPumaPlexproducedcomparableresultstothatofmicrosatellites,withasubstantialdecreaseinoverallcostsandturnaroundtime.Additionally,wedirectlycomparedgenotypingsuccessofPumaPlexwithapanelof12well‐knownFeliscatus(FCA)microsatellitelociin46mountainlionscatsamples.WefoundthatmeasuresofgenotypingsuccessweresignificantlyimprovedforPumaPlexrelativetomicrosatellites.TheadvantagesofPumaPlexcomparedwithtraditionalmicrosatellitegenotypingmakeitavaluableadditiontoexistingmethodstoassistgeneticmonitoringandmanagementofmountainlionsthroughouttheirrange.

Inthelion’sfootsteps:MonitoringMountainlionusinganon‐invasiveandcost‐effectivefootprintidentificationtechnique

ZoeCJewell,Visitingresearchscientist,NicholasSchooloftheEnvironment,DukeUniversity;zoejewell228@gmail.com

SkyKAlibhai,Visitingresearchscientist,NicholasSchooloftheEnvironment,DukeUniversity;zoesky@wildtrack.org

JonahW.Evans,Mammalogist,TexasParksandWildlife;jonah.evans@tpwd.texas.gov

Abstract:Mountainlionsaresolitary,elusiveandcoververylargeareas,andasaresult,itisverydifficulttocollectreliabledataonpopulationcharacteristics(parameters)anddistribution.Whiletelemetryand/orcamera‐trappingtechniquescanprovideusefulinformation,theyarerelativelyexpensiveanddifficulttodeployoverlargeareas.Also,ifmonitoringdataaretobereliableandreflectthetruepopulationdynamicsthenthemethodofcollectionmusthaveminimalornoimpactonnaturalbehaviororphysiologyofthetargetanimal.Theauthorsdevelopedafootprintidentificationtechnique(FIT),initiallyforusewithblackandwhiterhinoinsouthernAfrica,andhavesinceadapteditforusewithfelidsincludingBengalandAmurtiger,Africanlionandcheetah.Digitalimagesofmultipleleft‐hindfootprintsfromindividualanimalsarecapturedusingabasicdigitalcamera.TheyareuploadedtoanFITadd‐inforJMPdatavisualizationsoftwarefromSASInstitute.Featureextractionallows>120measurementsoflength,angleandareatobecollected.Usingacustomizedcross‐validatedpairwisediscriminantanalysiswithWard’sclusteringtechnique,thefootprintscanbeclassifiedbyindividual,sex,age‐class,andspecieswithahighdegreeofaccuracy.JewellandAlibhaihavecollaboratedwithJonahEvans,MammalogistforTexasParksandWildlife,toadaptFITforuseinmonitoringfree‐rangingmountainlionpopulations.Theyhavecollected535footprintsfrom35captive(16:19)animalsofknownsexandidentitytoformtheinitialreferencedatabase.Accuraciesof>90%havebeenobtainedinclassifyingbyindividualandsex.FITisinexpensive,non‐invasive,andprovideshighaccuracywhencomparedwithothermethods.Thistoolcouldpotentiallybeusedtoestimatemountainlionpopulationsatdramaticallyreducedcostsinareaswithsuitablesubstrate.Theauthorswillinvitethosewithaccesstofree‐rangingmountainliontrackstojointhiseffortbycontributingfootprintsforfieldvalidationtrials

UseofcameratrapstoassesspreyavailabilityanddistributionrelativetomountainlionpredationintheDavisMountains,Texas

CatherineC.Dennison,BorderlandsResearchInstitute,SulRossStateUniversity;cden5410@sulross.edu

DanaMilani,BorderlandsResearchInstitute,SulRossStateUniversity

RonThompson,BorderlandsResearchInstitute,SulRossStateUniversity

BertGeary,BorderlandsResearchInstitute,SulRossStateUniversity

PatriciaMoodyHarveson,BorderlandsResearchInstitute,SulRossStateUniversity

LouisA.Harveson,BorderlandsResearchInstitute,SulRossStateUniversity

Abstract:WeusedanarrayofcameratrapsandinformationcollectedfromGPScollaredanimalstotesttherelationshipbetweenpreyavailabilityandmountainlionpredationintheDavisMountainsofwestTexas.Cameratrapswereusedtoestimatetherelativeabundanceanddistributionofmountainlionsandtheirprey.GPScollardatawasusedtoidentifylikelykillsitesandfieldinvestigationsconfirmedwhetherornotakillwaspresent,aswellasthespeciesthatwaskilled.Wecomparedpreyavailabilityacrossthestudysitetothecompositionofallkillsitesobserved.Cameratrapdatawasusedtoinvestigatethedistributionofprey,includinghabitatpreferencesforseveralcategoriesincludingelevation,terrainruggedness,andecologicalsite.Wealsolookedatindividualkillsitesandcomparedthosetotherelativepreyabundancebasedoncameratrapdatainthemoreimmediateareasurroundingthekill.Whileferalhogswerethemostabundantpreyspeciesoncameratraps(composing23%oftotalanimalsobserved)theywerethefourthmostcommonspeciespreyeduponbymountainlionsaftermuledeer,elk,andwhite‐taileddeer.Weobservedsignificantdifferencesbetweenthedietsofthemaleandfemalecatspresentonthestudysite,aswellasdifferencesindietbasedontheageoftheanimal.However,wealsonotedvariationinthedietpreferencesofindividualmountainlionsthatfallwithinthesamesexandagegroups.Abetterunderstandingofhowlocalpreyavailabilitybothonafineandbroadscaleaffectsmountainlionpredationwillhelplandmanagerstobettermanageforbothmountainlionsandtheirprey.

Session11:

ManagementStrategies

Proceedingsofthe

TechniquesusedtoraiseorphanedFloridapanthersforreleasetothewild.PresentedbyMarkLotz

Conservationofpumas(Pumaconcolor)inarapidlyurbanizinglandscape;researchinformingtheneedformoreaction

T.WinstonVickers,WildlifeHealthCenter,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;twvickers@ucdavis.edu

JessicaN.Sanchez,WildlifeHealthCenter,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;jnsanchez@ucdavis.edu

ChristineK.Johnson,WildlifeHealthCenter,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;ckjohnson@ucdavis.edu

RandyBotta,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife;randy.botta@wildlife.ca.gov

PatrickR.Huber,InformationCenterfortheEnvironment,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;prhuber@ucdavis.edu

ScottA.Morrison,TheNatureConservancy;smorrison@tnc.org

BrianCohen,TheNatureConservancy;USAbcohen@tnc.org

WalterM.Boyce,SchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis;wmboyce@ucdavis.edu

Abstract:Wide‐ranginglargecarnivoressuchaspumasposemyriadchallengesforconservation,perhapsespeciallyinurbanizinglandscapes.Weconducteda12‐yearstudyofpumas(Pumaconcolor)insouthwesternCalifornia,USA,anareathatisthefocusofmultiplelandscape‐scaleconservationplanningeffortsaimedatprotectinganetworkofhabitatreservesamidstextensiveurban,suburbanandexurbandevelopment.Themajorityofurban(74%)andrural(79%)residentsinthisregionagreedthatpumasareasignofahealthyenvironment,and>60%saidpumashavearighttoexistwherevertheyoccur.However,despiteprotectionfromrecreationalhunting,annualsurvivalwassimilartoheavilyhuntedpopulations,andhumanactivities,especiallyvehiclecollisionsanddepredationpermits,weretheleadingcausesofdeath.Ouranalysesshowedthatdespitelandscape‐scaleconservationplanningthathasbeenvigorouslypursuedinthisregion,habitatfragmentationhasresultedindemographicisolationandgeneticrestrictionandthedefactocreationoftwopumapopulationsseparatedbyaninterstatehighway(I‐15).Dominantcausesofdeathvariedsignificantlybetweenthetwopopulations,andbygender,withvehiclescausingoverhalfofmortalitieswestofI‐15intheSantaAnaMountains.Ourdatahighlighttheimportanceandurgencyofprotectingandrestoringwildlifecorridorsifpumapopulationsaretobeviableinfragmentinglandscapes.Wediscussapplicationsofourdatatoeffortstoreducehuman‐causedmortalityofpuma,includingcorridorplanning,highwayimprovements,andpublicoutreach.Withouttheseexpensivesolutions,intensivemanagementoftheSantaAnaMountainpopulationmaybenecessary,possiblyinperpetuity.Wepredictthatpositivehumanattitudestowardpumasinthisregionwillhavetobecombinedwithconcertedeffortsbyconservationandgovernmentalorganizationsinordertoavoidthisoutcome.

Predation‐specificresourceselectionbycougarsinthePryorMountainsofWyomingandMontana

LinseyW.Blake,DepartmentofWildlandResources,UtahStateUniversity;linsey.blake@aggiemail.usu.edu

EricM.Gese,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,WildlifeServices;eric.gese@usu.edu.

Abstract:Cougarsareanambushpredatorwhoselandscapeselectionandpredationpatternsintertwine.Wherefeasible,modificationoflandscapefeaturescouldmanipulatepredationrisk.Ourobjectivewastoexaminepredation‐specificresourceselectionattwodifferentscales(fineandcoarse)inthePryorMountainsofWyomingandMontana.Wevisitedclusters(n=388)ofGPSlocationsfrom5radio‐collaredcougarsduring2011–2012tolocatepreyremains.Itisoftenimpossibletoidentifyspecifickilllocations,somanystudieshavereliedonthecharacteristicsofcachesitestodescribekillsitecharacteristics,likelyresultinginsomeinaccuracies.Toavoidthis,whenpossiblewebacktrackedfromcachelocationstokillpointsandusedafine‐scaleanalysistoexaminelandscapecharacteristicswithin25moftheseconfirmedkillpoints(n=30).Atthisscale,killsiteshadlowerhorizontalvisibilityandelevationsthanrandomsites,andweremoreapttobeinjuniper‐mountainmahoganyvegetationandlesslikelytobeingrasslands.Forourcoarsescaleanalysisofpredationriskweusedourentiredatasetofkills(n=195)byusingthe95%uppercut‐offpointoftheknowndistances‐dragged(94.9m)tobuffercachessites,therebycreatingriskzoneswhichhadahighlikelihoodofcontainingthekill.Wemodeledcougarpredationsiteselectionbyconstructingresourceselectionfunctionsfortheseriskzones.Thetopmodelforsummerriskzonesconsistedofvegetationclass,distance‐to‐waterandaquadratictermforslope,whilethetopmodelforwinterriskzonesincludedvegetationclassandelevation.Localwildlifemanagerswhohaveaninterestinreducingpredationtobighornsheepwillbeabletointersectthepredationriskresourceselectionfunctionswithbighornsheephabitattoguidehabitatmodificationeffortsaimedatincreasinghorizontalvisibilitytoreducetheriskofcougarpredation.

TechniquesusedtoraiseorphanedFloridapanthersforreleasetothewild

MarkLotz,FloridaFishandWildlifeConservationCommission;Mark.Lotz@myfwc.com

KarenMeeks,WhiteOak;KarenZ@wogilman.com

Abstract:TheFloridapanther(Pumaconcolorcoryi)isanisolatedsubspeciesofpumawithabreedingpopulationrestrictedtoapproximately800,000hectaresinsouthernFlorida.Geneticrestorationeffortsinthemid‐1990’sincreasedheterozygosityandweresuccessfulathelpingthepopulationreboundto100‐160adults.Nevertheless,thecurrentsizeofthispopulationisinsufficienttoensureageneticallydiverse,self‐sustainingpopulationandindividualpanthersstillrepresentasignificantproportionofthegeneticstructureinthewild.TheFloridaFishandWildlifeConservationCommission,incooperationwithWhiteOak,hasraisedten(4M,6F)orphanedorinjureddependant‐agedkittensandreleasedthembacktothewildwheretheyhadanopportunitytoberecruitedintothebreedingpopulation.Femalerecruitmenthasbeenexcellentandmosthaveproducedlitters.Additionally,severalofthecaptiveraisedfemale’soffspringhavebeendocumentedtoproducelitters.Malerecruitmentresultshavebeenmixed.Wedescribecaptivehabitatconditions,feedingregimens,staff‐pantherinteractionprotocols,andpre‐releaseconsiderationsimplementedwhilepanthersarebeingheldcaptivethatappeartobecriticalforimprovingtheprobabilityofsuccessfulrecruitmentofindividualsbackintothewildpopulation.Investinginindividuals,especiallyinsmall,isolated,andendangeredpopulationshasgeneticconsequencesforconservation,management,andrecovery.Asotherstateagenciesdevelopalternatepoliciesfordealingwithorphanedpumas,theknowledgegainedinFloridamayassistinincreasingthelikelihoodofsuccessfulreleases.EffectsofRemedialSportHuntingonCougarComplaintsandLivestockDepredations

RobertB.Wielgus,LargeCarnivoreConservationLaboratory,SchoolofEnvironment,WashingtonStateUniversity;

KaylieA.Peebles,LargeCarnivoreConservationLaboratory,SchoolofEnvironment,WashingtonStateUniversity

BenjaminT.Maletzke,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

MarkE.Swanson,SchoolofEnvironment,WashingtonStateUniversity

Abstract:Remedialsporthuntingofpredatorsisoftenusedtoreducepredatorpopulationsandassociatedcomplaintsandlivestockdepredations.Weassessedthe

effectsofremedialsporthuntingonreducingcougarcomplaintsandlivestockdepredationsinWashingtonfrom2005to2010(6years).Thenumberofcomplaints,livestockdepredations,cougarsharvested,estimatedcougarpopulations,humanpopulationandlivestockpopulationswerecalculatedforall39countiesand136GMUs(gamemanagementunits)inWashington.Thedatawasthenanalyzedusinganegativebinomialgeneralizedlinearmodeltotestfortheexpectednegativerelationshipbetweenthenumberofcomplaintsanddepredationsinthecurrentyearwiththenumberofcougarsharvestedthepreviousyear.Asexpected,wefoundthatcomplaintsanddepredationswerepositivelyassociatedwithhumanpopulation,livestockpopulation,andcougarpopulation.However,contrarytoexpectationswefoundthatcomplaintsanddepredationsweremoststronglyassociatedwithcougarsharvestedthepreviousyear.Theoddsofincreasedcomplaintsandlivestockdepredationsincreaseddramatically(36to240%)withincreasedcougarharvest.Wesuggestthatincreasedyoungmaleimmigration,socialdisruptionofcougarpopulations,andassociatedchangesinspaceusebycougars‐causedbyincreasedhuntingresultedintheincreasedcomplaintsandlivestockdepredations.Widespreadindiscriminatehuntingdoesnotappeartobeaneffectivepreventativeandremedialmethodforreducingpredatorcomplaintsandlivestockdepredations.Abundanceofpumas(Pumaconcolor)inthenorthernSierraMadreOccidental,Mexico:arewereadytohaveaharvestquota?

HeliCoronelArellano.UniversidadAutónomadeQuerétaro;heli.coronearellano@gmail.com

NalleliE.LaraDiaz.UniversidadAutónomadeQuerétaro;Nalleli.lara@yahoo.com.mx.

CarlosA.LopezGonzalez.UniversidadAutónomadeQuerétaro;Cats4mex@gmail.com.

Abstract:PumasinMexicoalthoughconsideragamespeciesaretreatedasvarmints.Thisnonglamorousstatusistheresultofpredatorcontrolcampaignsassociatedtolivestockdepredation.Nevertheless,thereisnoaccountingtothenumberofmountainlionskilledasthereisnodirectbenefittotheranchingcommunity.OurobjectivewastodeterminethenumberoflionspresentinthelandscapeofthenorthernSierraMadreOccidental(SMOcc)toprovidebaselineinformationtoassistmanagementagenciesintheregion.OurstudyareaisthenorthernSMOccincludingNWChihuahuaandNESonora.ThehabitatsincludeamosaicofSonoranDesert,grasslands,oakwoodlands,andChihuahuandesert.Weusedcameratrapstoassesstheabundanceoflionsindifferenthabitats.Pumaabundancerangefrom1to4ind/100km2witha1M:1Fsexratio,usingtheseresults,managementunitsshouldhaveaminimumsurfaceof1250to5000km2

(habitatdependent).Additionalvariablesinthisproposalshouldincorporatepreyabundance,livestockproductionandconservationstatusoftheland.Theranching

communityshouldfavorasustainablehuntingscenarioinsteadofthetraditionalpredatorcontrolbysupportingoutfitterguidesdedicatedtothisspecies.ResearchtoRegulation:CougarSocialBehaviorasaGuideforManagement

RichardA.Beausoleil,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

GaryM.Koehler,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

BenjaminT.Maletzke,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

BrianN.Kertson,WashingtonDepartmentofFishandWildlife

RobertB.Wielgus,LargeCarnivoreConservationLab,WashingtonStateUniversity

Abstract:Cougar(Pumaconcolor)populationsareachallengetoestimatebecauseoflowdensitiesandthedifficultymarkingandmonitoringindividuals.Asaresult,theirmanagementisoftenbasedonimperfectdata.Currentstrategiesrelyonasource–sinkconcept,whichtendstoresultinspatiallyclumpedharvestwithinmanagementzonesthataretypicallyapproximately10,000km2.Agenciesoftenimplementquotaswithinthesezonesanddesignatemanagementobjectivestoreduceormaintaincougarpopulations.Weproposeanapproachforcougarmanagementfoundedontheirbehaviorandsocialorganization,designedtomaintainanolderagestructurethatshouldpromotepopulationstability.Toachievetheseobjectives,hunterharvestwouldbeadministeredwithinzonesapproximately1,000km2insizetodistributeharvestmoreevenlyacrossthelandscape.Wealsoproposereplacingtheterm'quota'with'harvestthreshold'becausequotasoftenconnoteaharvesttargetorgoalratherthanathresholdnottoexceed.InWashington,USA,wherethesource–sinkconceptisimplemented,researchshowsthathighharvestratesmaynotaccomplishtheintendedpopulationreductionobjectivesduetoimmigration,resultinginanalteredpopulationagestructureandsocialorganization.Werecommendaharveststrategybasedonapopulationgrowthrateof14%andaresidentadultdensityof1.7cougars/100km2thatrepresentprobableaveragevaluesforwesternpopulationsofcougars.Ourproposaloffersmanagersanopportunitytopreservebehavioralanddemographicattributesofcougarpopulations,providerecreationalharvest,andaccomplishavarietyofmanagementobjectives.Webelievethisscience‐basedapproachtocougarmanagementiseasytoimplement,incursfewifanyaddedcosts,satisfiesagencyandstakeholderinterests,assuresprofessionalcredibility,andmaybeappliedthroughouttheirrangeinwesternNorthAmerica.

Hunter Conference Center, Southern Utah University Cedar ... MLW Proceedings 10-2014.pdf · 2...

Documents

2nd Workshop Proceedings

PROCEEDINGS ICOSAMP Workshop - Agricultural … Library/Proceedings of 2002... · PROCEEDINGS ICOSAMP Workshop Plant Protection Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa 21-23 May

Proceedings of the International Workshop

Proceedings TRANSCODE 2 Ghana Workshop

Workshop Evaluation Report & Proceedings

Hydro Workshop Proceedings 13feb06

z Workshop 2003 Proceedings

Design for the Experience: Proceedings & Workshop …davidslight.com/documents/designexperienceconferenceproceedings.pdfDesign for the Experience: Proceedings & Workshop Summaries

WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS (Part 2)

Workshop & Steering Meeting Proceedings

WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS - Graham Sustainability …graham.umich.edu/.../Great-Lakes-SWAT-Modeling-Workshop-Procee… · WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS . 2 ... SWAT model applications, identify

Proceedings IABSE Helsinki Workshop 2015

Workshop Proceedings - EUV Litho Source Workshop Proceedings.pdf · WORKSHOP Proceedings ... Krzysztof M Nowak, Yasufumi Kawasuji, Hiroshi Tanaka, Yukio Watanabe, ... Taisuke Miura1,

Climate Change Workshop proceedings

PROCEEDINGS ENTER21 Ph.D. Workshop

Water Balance Workshop - proceedings

Proceedings of the Workshop

Proceedings COST Workshop, Israel

Workshop on Configuration - CEUR Workshop Proceedings

2012 Penstate Nutrition Workshop Proceedings