Help With Cougar Information

[younggun20]

Hey everyone, havn't been on here much lately due to school. But this time, I have a way to accomplish both at once. I am going to be giving a persuasive speech on why hunting cougars with dogs should be reinstitutionalized. If you guys/gals know of any good books, journals, magazines, newspaper articles, websites, etc., that I could use for sources of information it would be greatly appreciated! Thanks all, Cody

[baltz526]

(reinstitutionalized.)--- i think this is an incorrect word in your intended project. i think it should say: reinstitute sportsmen hunting cougars with dogs.

[BrianMaguire]

(reinstitutionalized.)--- i think this is an incorrect word in your intended project. i think it should say: reinstitute sportsmen hunting cougars with dogs.

Some loons in downtown Portland need to be re-institutionalized.

[Hawk]

Some loons in downtown Portland need to be re-institutionalized.

Oh how I would like to make a comment about the political bent of the voting populace in the metropolitan areas and how they tend to vote in a more "liberal" way, but the last time I did that it didn't turn out so well, so I won't say that the people of the metropolitan areas control the vote but don't understand all the ramifications of how their vote impacts the more rural areas of the state.

[Rank Amateur]

Go to the ODF&W website and read the Cougar plan, a lot of good info in that document.

Here's some of the highlights.

Cougars

Winter foods for cougars in Oregon's Cascade Range were principally black-tailed deer and
porcupine (Toweill and Maser 1985). Another Oregon study indicated deer, elk, and porcupine
were the most common winter food items (Toweill and Meslow 1977). In some cases there is a
difference in prey selection based on sex, age, and reproductive status of cougars (Anderson and
Lindzey 2003). In northeastern Oregon, Nowak (1999a) found adult females killed more mule
deer (65%) than elk (35%) and tended to select mule deer fawns, older adult mule deer females,
and calf elk over other sex and age classes of available prey. Pierce et al. (2000b) also concluded
that age and sex of prey was more important in cougar prey selection process than was body
condition of the prey. The number of prey consumed by an individual cougar varies with a
number of factors which include the cougar's sex, age, size, and reproductive status, as well as
weather conditions (kills spoil more rapidly in warm temperatures), competition with other
predators (e.g. black bear), and scavenging by other species (birds, coyotes; Iriarte et al. 1990).


In some cases, cougar predation can have a significant impact on specific prey
populations. For example, Sweitzer et al. (1997) determined cougar predation caused nearextinction
of a porcupine population in northwestern Nevada. In another study, Turner et al.
1992) concluded that cougar predation limited growth of a feral horse population on the
California-Nevada border. Wehausen (1996) reported several instances where cougar predation
bighorn sheep populations reduced population growth rates and stopped the opportunity to
remove surplus bighorn sheep for relocation to historic habitat. Therefore, a bighorn sheep
restoration program was effectively halted. Kamler et al. (2002) suggested cougar predation was
responsible for the decline in bighorn sheep populations in most areas of Arizona; these declines
most likely linked to overall declines in mule deer populations which resulted in cougar
taking bighorn sheep as alternate prey. Rominger et al. (2004) similarly reported that cougars
limited expansion of a transplanted population of bighorn sheep in New Mexico. Hayes et al.
2000) proposed that cougar predation on bighorn sheep may be impeding recovery of a federally
listed endangered bighorn sheep population in the Pennisular Ranges of California. In
California, cougar predation was found to be the primary cause of a significant decline in mule
in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, taking both adult and fawn deer (Harrison 1989).

The health of a cougar population is integrally linked to health of its prey base. High
cougar predation rates, especially on prey populations with few individuals, can reduce the size
and sustainability of prey populations. Likewise, when severe winter conditions or large scale
habitat loss severely reduces local prey populations, cougars dependent on those prey may
further depress or prevent prey population recovery (Neal et al. 1987). Unfortunately, when this
situation manifests itself, cougar populations will also decline (Kamler et al. 2002) or be forced
to turn to alternate prey which frequently are other ungulates or domestic livestock.


Cougar predation rates on ungulates have been studied by snow tracking (Connolly 1949
[in Anderson and Lindzey 2003], Hornocker 1970), intensive radiotelemetry monitoring
(Harrison 1990, Beier et al. 1995, Murphy 1998, Nowak 1999a), and use of GPS collars to locate
kill sites and determine ungulate kill frequency (Anderson and Lindzey 2003). From these
studies, cougars killed 1 ungulate every 7 to 8 days but predation rates and prey varied by
weather conditions, cougar gender, and reproductive status of females. If the kill was scavenged
or spoiled due to warm temperatures, cougars killed more often than during cold weather or in
the absence of scavengers. Females with young kill more often than an individual cougar.
Anderson and Lindzey (2003) estimated cougar kill rates for large mammals of 7.3 days/kill for
subadult females, 7.0 days/kill for adult females, 5.4 days/ kill for females with young, 9.5
days/kill for subadult males, and 7.8 days/kill for adult males. Nowak (1999a) found adult
females in northeast Oregon killed an average of every 7.7 days with a shorter time-frame in
summer-fall (5.6 days/kill) than in winter-spring (9.8 days/kill). Where both elk and mule deer
were present, female cougars tended to kill mule deer, whereas male cougars did not select for
any age or sex class of deer and tended to kill elk more frequently (Anderson and Lindzey 2003)


The common perception that cougars select only injured or sick animals is incorrect. In
California, Pierce et al. (2000b) found female cougars selected for young and older female deer
whereas male cougars did not, and mule deer body condition did not affect prey selection.
Nowak (1999a) found female cougars selected for calf elk and young or old mule deer.
Anderson and Lindzey (2003) found even though female cougars selected for mule deer and
males selected elk, both sexes killed elk and mule deer.


Cougar predation has been implicated in low calf elk survival and elk population
declines. In southeast Washington, cougar predation accounted for more than half the known elk
calf mortality (Myers et al. 1998) and end of winter calf:cow ratios averaged 21:100. Cougars
were found to impact calf survival in two Idaho study areas with low calf ratios. Cougars were
responsible for 38% of known calf mortalities in the Lochsa River study area and 36% in the
Clearwater River study area (P. Zager, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, personal
communication).
In northeast Oregon, calf:cow ratios declined significantly since the early 1990s in 8
Wildlife Management Units (WMUs). Elk populations declined in those same areas (Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife 2003b) even as numbers of elk hunters and harvest have been
reduced in an effort to maintain elk populations at Management Objective (MO). Since 2000,
elk calf:cow ratios have declined in Ukiah, Heppner, Starkey, Desolation, and Fossil WMUs
from long-term averages of 35-40 calves per 100 females to less than 20 calves per 100 females.
In the Wenaha WMU the elk population declined from more than 4,200 to less than 1,500 elk
from 1985 to 2000 (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2003b). In this area, cougars were
responsible for 69% of the radio-collared elk calf mortalities, while pregnancy rates of primeaged
cows were high (Rearden 2005). In most years, elk body condition and pregnancy rates in
northeast Oregon have been consistently high, and generally better than any other area in the
state (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2003b).


Cougar predation also impacts mule deer populations. In California, cougar predation
was found as the primary cause of a significant decline in mule deer in the Sierra Nevada
Mountains (Harrison 1989). A 3-year Oregon study found cougar predation of adult mule deer
as the leading mortality cause, accounting for 33% of all known mortality (Mathews and
Coggins 1997). A study of a wintering mule deer herd in Hells Canyon, Idaho showed a 25%
annual mortality rate for adult does from 1999-2001 (Edelmann 2003). The primary cause of
adult doe mortality was cougar predation. A review of published studies addressing deerpredator
relationships by Ballard et al. (2001) indicated impacts of predation were confounded
by numerous factors and predation may be significant in some areas under certain conditions.

During 2002-2004, ODFW researchers captured, marked and monitored 147 cow elk, 221
elk calves, and 43 cougars in the northeast study area. Preliminary analysis revealed densities of
sub-adult and adult cougars from 8-16 per 100 mi2. Annual calf survival ranged from 26-52%
and cougar predation caused 68% of documented calf mortalities. Preliminary analysis did not
indicate a direct relationship between cow nutritional condition and calf survival. Information on
calf survival from 2002-2004 has been summarized in a MS thesis (Rearden 2005). The ODFW
research is scheduled to continue through June 2008.
During 2002-2004, ODFW researchers captured, marked and monitored 110 cow elk, 132
elk calves, and 26 cougars in the southwest study area. Preliminary analysis revealed adult
cougar densities from 9-11 per 100 mi2. Annual calf survival ranged from 7-53% and cougar
predation caused 66% of the documented calf mortalities. Research on the southwest study area
will conclude in June 2006.

[younggun20]

Thanks a lot to all that replied. Rank, I missed your reply before I delivered the speech, doh! Thank you very very much for spending that much time to type that up though. The speech went well. I got an A, and I believe I really reached some people. Again, thanks for all the help. Cody

[sliverpicker]

Congrats on getting an "A" for your speech younggun20!

Is there any way you could put up the content's of your speech here so we could all read it?

[Limbhanger]

Great Job Cody, excellent way to get the word out to the general public.

[younggun20]

Here you go sliverpicker. This is just my outline. Between each one of these points I would fill in with some good material and other statistics. Remember this is a persuasive speech, so I had to appeal to the audience's emotions, hence the overexageration of the intro and conclusion. Also, I was restricted to 6-9 minutes, so I could not possibly cover every reason why cougars need to be better managed (ex. bighorn sheep). The speech is over, so please don't tell me how you would have changed this and that, and included this and that (not specifically you sliverpicker). Thanks all, Cody

Specific Purpose: At the end of my speech, the audience will better understand the Oregon Cougar Management Plan, and will be able to see why sportsmen hunting with hounds should be re-institutionalized.
Central Idea: The cougar population is exploding, and the current management plan is poor.
Type of Speech: The speech really hits all three styles, but the main goal at the end is a proposition of policy.
Audience Type: I will be facing a fairly neutral audience, as most people are uneducated on cougars in Oregon, and the current management plan. By the end, the audience will be empowered with knowledge, and will be moved to make something happen.

INTRODUCTION
I. With a show of hands, how many of you in this class have ever seen a cougar in the wild? Well, if you spend any amount of time in the woods camping, hiking, fishing, picnicking, or even if you just live on the outside of town, the chance of you having a run in with a cougar is very real. Will you be ready? With the population exploding from nearly extinct 40 years ago, to around 5,100 now, something needs to be done to change how cougars in Oregon are managed.

II. Cougars kill numerous deer, elk, and other mammals and can do damage to herds.

III. Since Measure 18 passed in 1994, making it unlawful to hunt cougars with hounds, the population has grown exponentially.

IV. A new cougar management plan was passed by voters in 2006, and although it is better, there is much need for further improvement.

BODY
[The first reason that something needs to be done about cougar management is:]
I. Cougars kill a lot of deer, elk, rabbits, and other mammals and can wreak havoc on a population.
A. The typical argument for cougars being vital to the ecosystems in Oregon is that cougar prey on the sick, weak, and old, thus making for a healthier population of ungulates. According to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, “In northeastern Oregon Nowak found that female cougars kill more mule deer (65%) than elk (35%) and tended to select mule deer fawns, older adult mule deer females, and calf elk over other sex and age classes of available prey. Pierce also concluded that age and sex of the prey was more important in cougar selection than was the body condition of the prey.”
B. “Anderson and Lindzey estimated cougar kill rates for large mammals of 7.3 days/kill for sub adult females, 7.0 days/kill for adult females, 5.4 days/ kill for females with young, 9.5days/kill for sub adult males, and 7.8 days/kill for adult males. Nowak (1999a) found adult females in northeast Oregon killed an average of every 7.7 days with a shorter time-frame in summer-fall (5.6 days/kill) than in winter-spring (9.8 days/kill).” Taking an average of one kill every seven days, with an estimated population of 5,100, cougars kill approximately 265,929 large mammals a year. These include things such as deer, elk, bighorn sheep, etc.

[The second reason for a need for reform of the current law is:]
II. Since Measure 18 outlawed the hunting of cougars with dogs, except for state and federal officials being able to use them to track and kill problematic cougars, the population has exploded.
A. “From 1990 - 2003, Oregon’s population grew 24.4 percent. Statewide cougar populations also have increased during that period to a 2003 estimated population of 5,101. Increased human developments, combined with increasing cougar populations, have led to a continual increase in conflict in rural, suburban, and urban settings,” according to ODFW.
B. According to the Oregon Department of Agriculture in 1998, “Livestock damage totaled $1.5 million with coyotes, cougars, and dogs causing most of the problems. Veterinary costs incurred when livestock was injured but not killed totaled $214,000.”
C. Before Measure 18 outlawed the use of hounds, the taking of cougars was a very selective process, with sportsmen wanting to harvest large, older males. Now, the harvest of cougars is just what hunters happen to stumble across, and as a result the age and sex of cougars being taken is changing. In an article written by Mark Freeman of KATU Outdoor News he states, “Before Measure 18, houndsmen typically were selective in the cougars they killed, focusing primarily on older males, Green says. By 2002, however, hunters killed more females than males, and the average age of the hunter-killed cougar dropped from 5.1 years old in 1992 to 3.2 years old in 2002.”

[The final reason the current management plan is not cutting it, and needs to be changed is:]
III. A new cougar management plan was drafted in 2006 thanks to the uneducated voting population. Although it is better than it was, there are many flaws.
A. The new plan is very expensive, and costs the public, you and I, a lot of money. An article written in the Oregonian states, “The new management plan envisions spending from about $436,000 to $589,000 a year to control cougar populations. Currently, the state fish and wildlife agency spends about $250,000.” So it’s going to cost up to more than twice what it currently does to control cougar populations.
B. Cougars are very, very, elusive. I have been hunting for 10 years and still have yet to see one. Because of the fact that hunters cannot possibly harvest enough cougars per year to control the population, the new plan is to hire bounty men to kill up to 2,000 cougars. An article in the StatesmanJournal states, “On April 13, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission made a bad decision and passed the 2006 Cougar Management Plan. Up to 40 percent of Oregon’s cougars are now targets for federal agents to trap, snare, track with hounds; killing up to 2,000 of the big cats.”

CONCLUSION
[I have now shown you three different reasons as to why the cougar management plan needs to be changed, but let’s highlight those one more time:]
I. Cougars do damage to deer, elk, bighorn sheep, and other large and small mammals.

II. The population of cougars in Oregon is booming.

III. The new plan of attack is costly to each and every one of us. And while it will be more effective in returning populations to a manageable level, it is still not ideal, or even as good as it was pre-Measure 18.

IV. According to a study done by Wildlife Ecology Professor Paul Beier on cougar attacks, “Thirty-seven of 58 victims (64%) were children.” If the re-institutionalization of hunting cougars with hounds does not occur, I hope that when you eventually want to take your son or daughter in the outdoors, or even the front yard, you can protect them from a 180 pound killing machine.

[Limbhanger]

I liked it, they will remember it if we are lucky enough to have the issue turn up in a voter's pamphlet.

Good job, again.

[ehunter]

I also liked it you covered some good info and gave facts.
good job If this is for a grade you had better get an A.... :grin: