COUGAR ECOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR IN AN INCREASINGLY URBAN WORLD Brian Kertson Wildlife Science Group WACFWRU/SFR University of Washington

COUGAR: A CAT BY MANY NAMES Puma concolor – “cat of a single color” Cougar, Mountain Lion, Puma, Catamount, Panther, Ghost Cat, Deer Tiger, Devil Cat, Klandaghi, Katalgar, Ko-Icto, ……………..

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Long Tail: 1/3 Smallish Head: ♀ Long, Sleek, Muscular Color: Varies-tawny, reddish, gray Adults: Solid; Kittens: Spotted

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Sexual Dimorphism: -Males: lbs x= 155 lbs -Females: lbs x= 92 lbs

PHYSICAL ABILITY

SOLITARY AND SECRETIVE

PREDATION Stalking predator Deer (Odocoileus sp.) and Elk Physically impressive Opportunistic and highly adaptable Predation rates vary: -Sex -Reproductive status -Prey consumed

n = 18 cats, 304 kills

CACHING

COUGAR REPRODUCTION Mature: yrs Breed year-round Birth pulse: June-Aug Gestation: ~ 92 days 1-6 Kittens, avg. 2-3 No male parental care

DISPERSAL (Koehler and Maletzke unpubl. data)

HOME RANGE & MOVEMENTS Far-ranging : -M: 505 km 2 -F: 168 km 2 Overlap: variable Movements: -M: 4.17 km/day -F: 2.82 km/day

SOCIAL AND POPULATION DYANMICS M:territorial F: mutual avoidance Prey: changes reproductive rates Self-limiting Low density: /100 km 2

SCRAPES

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION Largest geographic distribution of any terrestrial mammal in the western hemisphere Extinct in east, but recolonizing

HABITAT Cover* Riparian (rivers, streams, wetlands) Edge Young forest = Prey availability and vulnerability Travel- ridges

WASHINGTON STATE 88,497 km² of suitable cougar habitat (gray) 2,000-3,000 estimated cougars Classified as game species

WASHINGTON AND PEOPLE Increasing human pops -WA 2030: 8.2 million Habitat loss -WA: 27 km² per year High levels of interaction Management needs

COUGAR MANAGEMENT Pre-1970: Bounty Post 1970: Game species High profile, significant interest Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife -Maintain viable, stable populations -Recreation -Ensure public safety -Aesthetic, cultural value -Predator-prey relationships

URBANIZING LANDSCAPES

COUGARS IN A RAPIDLY URBANIZING WORLD

COUGAR-HUMAN INTERACTION Interactions are more commonplace Lots of hypotheses, poorly understood Function of spatial and temporal overlap of cougars and people

Investigate cougar ecology and behavior in the Wildland-Urban Interface and residential areas -Use levels -Document behaviors -Interaction levels and patterns OBJECTIVE

STUDY AREA Seattle

HOW TO CATCH A COUGAR +=

CAPTURE AND MONITORING 32 adult and subadults collared -16 male, 16 female x = 332 days (SD = 301) x = 477 relocations/yr (SD = 540) 27 w/ ≥ 30 relocations n = 33 cougar yrs

RESIDENTIAL USE Residential use common Overlap: -93% of cats (n = 27) Average: -Volume = 16.86% ± Area = 18.35% ± Exurban and/or near WUI Full suite of behaviors

Not True TROLLING FOR MOUNTAIN LIONS?

INTERACTION 73 reports investigated 29% of reports confirmed -Depredations (goats, sheep, and llamas) -Poor animal husbandry (89%) -55%: bobcats, bears, coyotes Avg. = 3.43 km (SD = 3.57) from WUI

INTERACTION RATE Marked cougars (n = 32): -1.6 interactions per 1000 radio days Adjusted rate: -1.9 interactions per radio days 2,323 observations ≤ 500 m from development: -Interactions in % of observations

WILDLAND-URBAN ECOLOGY Maximize predation opportunities, minimize exposure to residential development Minimizes potential for interaction while maintaining role as apex predator

PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT Landscape matters: -Threshold residential densities Target specific areas: -Exurban and WUI -RUF

Discovery Park

CONCLUSIONS Cougars use of residential areas will continue: -Connectivity, cover, and prey Residential areas function as modified, not unsuitable habitat Must account for spatial ecology Education and landscape planning is key Cougars and people coexist better than previously realized

Questions?