Bobcat
 

Lynx rufus
 

 

Joshua Chiamulera

Eric Krueger

Chris Yarbrough
 

NATURAL HISTORY
 

Description 

Size.  Bobcat size seems to increase with latitude and elevation, making bobcats in Wisconsin larger (on average) than those from other parts of the country (Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  Lovallo (1993) conducted a home range study in northwestern Wisconsin where the average weight of adult males captured was 13.7 kg. (n=11) and the average weight of adult females was 9.7 kg. (n=5).  The average length for males was 104 cm (n=10) and the average length for the females was 100 cm (n=5). 
 

                                                       Bobcat Skull (click on image to enlarge)

There is marked sexual size dimorphism in bobcats.  There have been several suggested reasons for this phenomenon.  One hypothesis deals with the bobcats polygynous mating system.  Larger males are more likely to be successful when defending prime territory against smaller males, therefore obtaining more breeding opportunities (Vaughn 1978, Anderson 1987).  Because of this, evolutionary pressures favor larger males.  It has also been suggested that sexual size dimorphism allows for sex specific allocation of food resources in instances where male and female home ranges overlap (Fritts and Sealander 1978b, Anderson 1987).  The males will typically take larger prey while the females will prey upon smaller animals minimizing inter-sexual competition and ensuring that certain prey items are not overexploited (Fritts and Sealander 1978b, Litvaitis et al. 1984, Anderson 1987).
 
Bobcat or Lynx?  Although they are very similar in appearance , there are a few morphological characteristics that differentiate the bobcat from the Lynx.  Bobcats can be distinguished visually from lynx by their smaller foot pads, slightly longer tail, shorter black ear tuffs and more well defined spotting on the coat.  The tail of the lynx is shorter than the bobcats and ends in a black tip that completely encircles the tail (Figures 1 & 2).  The bobcats tail is longer, and has banding on the upper surface only (Lariviere and Walton 1997, Anderson and Lovallo 2003). 

Fig. 1. Bobcat tail (left) vs. Lynx tail  (right). SOURCE: Jackson (1961).

The bobcats foot pad is smaller than that of the lynx, which
hinders movement in deep snow.  This limited mobility in areas of
deep snow makes capturing prey more difficult and may serve as
one of the limiting factors for the bobcats northern distribution
(Quinn and Parker 1987, Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  On average,
adult bobcats are slightly smaller than lynx (Figure 2).  However,
because of the range of body size for bobcats, they often exceed
the size of lynx in areas of sympatry (Buskirk et al. 2000, Anderson
and Lovallo 2003).

Food Habits

The bobcat is strictly carnivorous.  Being a crepuscular hunter (hunting mainly during dusk and dawn), the bobcat has been known to take down many different species of animals.  The largest percentage of the bobcats diet is comprised of snowshoe hare, cottontail rabbit, squirrel, porcupine, and white-tailed deer.  Bobcat also feed on mice, voles, shrews, reptiles, birds, bats, turkey, grouse, insects, and woodchucks, but specialize on rabbit-sized animals (Anonymous 2004, Bluett 1984).
        
Variations in diet occurs between male, female, young, and adult bobcats.  Adult male bobcats have been shown to feed on mainly larger prey such as rabbits, porcupine, and even the occasional deer.  Adult female bobcats feed mainly on smaller prey.  About 70% of the females diet consists of prey such as hare, rabbit, mice, vole, and squirrel. Juvenile bobcats have also been shown to feed mainly on prey similar to that of the female bobcats, this is said to be due to the lack of strength and experience to take down larger prey (Bluett 1984, Anonymous 2004).  
 

Winter feeding habits for the Wisconsin bobcat will vary during each season depending on prey availability.   According to a Report done by Eric M. Anderson in 1987, studies suggest that more deer are taken during winter months than those in the fall. It has also been shown that both sexes will travel longer distances during winter months in search of food. More daytime activity during winter months has been observed in certain regions, but these study areas were located in other parts of the U.S. and not Wisconsin.

The bobcat has been known to occasionally feed on carrion but only when it has not yet spoiled. While hunting a bobcat will sometimes sit on rocks or overhanging branches and pounce on the backs of animals such as a deer in order to kill them. When the bobcat finishes eating its prey, it will sometimes cover up the remaining portions with sticks or leaves in order to return the kill at a later time (Oregon DFW 2004).  
 

Reproduction

Bobcats are considered polygamous breeders and they will take several different mates throughout their lifetime.  Females are considered polyestrous.  The estrus cycle lasts approximately 44 days and females are in estrus 5-10 days.  Females are probably spontaneous ovulators.  Ovulation may occur without the stimulation of the male, but coitus may make the process quicker.  If a female in estrus is not bred, it is possible that she will cycle up to three times that year (Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  In males, sperm production generally begins in September to October and they are fertile until the following summer (Whitaker, 1998).  In Wisconsin, the breeding season is generally late February into March (Bluett 1984).  Gestation is generally 63-70 days (Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  Birth usually occurs between April and July (Bluett 1984).  On average 2-3 kittens are born (Laycock 1983).  If a litter is lost shortly after birth, a second cycle may occur and thus a second litter. Dens are usually located in caves, rock crevices, hollow logs or trees, or beneath blow-down trees.  The same den site may be used many years in a row (Bluett 1984). 

Kittens are born completely furred, but their eyes remain closed for about 10 days.  They may weigh up to 12 ounces at birth and will weigh 5-10 pounds by autumn.  Survival of bobcat kittens is directly related to food abundance.  When there is high food availability, there is a high survival rate.  When the food availability is low, high mortality exists.  Male bobcats do not aid in raising their young (Laycock 1983).  Young are sexually mature at about 9-12 months.  Females generally do not produce a litter before the age of two.  Males are not sexually mature until their second year (Anderson 2003).  
 

Mortality

Natural causes of bobcat mortality include starvation, predation (Young 1958, Lembeck 1986, Knick 1990, Fedriani et al. 2000), diseases, parasites, and collisions with vehicles (Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  However, human activities account for the majority of bobcat mortalities in areas where hunting and trapping are permitted.   

In Wisconsin, harvesting bobcats by means of trapping and hunting are legal.  The main method of bobcat harvest appears to fluctuate from year to year.  Harvest data for 2001 show that 51% of the bobcats harvested were shot over dogs and 37% were trapped.  Data for 2002 (Table 1) show that 38% of the bobcats harvested were shot over dogs while 48% were trapped (Dhuey et al. 2002).              

High bobcat pelt prices and the harvest of fisher (both legal and illegal) played a large role in the increase of bobcat mortality rates in Minnesota (Fuller et al. 1985a). Berg (1981) found that 82% of the observed bobcat mortalities in his study sites were human-caused (Figure 4).  In the instances of natural mortality, one bobcat died of unknown causes, and two of the bobcats died due to porcupine quills that had pierced vital organs (Berg 1981).  Several studies have shown that juveniles and adult males comprise a majority of trapping related mortalities (Crowe and Strickland 1975, Fritts and Sealander 1978a, Blankenship 1979, Berg 1981, Parker and Smith 1983).  This has led some researchers to believe that juveniles and males are more susceptible to trapping due to factors such as the large home range sizes of adult males and the dispersal movements of juvenile bobcats looking for new territory (Blankenship 1979, Parker and Smith 1983, Anderson 1987).  

Fig. 5.  Bobcat kitten (Photo by Eric Anderson)

As is the case with many mammalian species, kitten and juvenile survival rates are typically lower than the adults (Figure 5) (Anderson 1987).  A reduction in prey abundance seems to be the main cause of kitten andjuvenile mortality (Bailey 1974, Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  However, exact kitten survival rates can be difficult to calculate due to their low representation in harvested animals (Bailey 1979).  Adult survival rates derived from radio telemetry studies range from 56% to 67% (Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  
 

 

 

Home Range and Social Organization
 

Fig. 6.  Drawing by Josh Chiamulera (Not drawn to scale)

In Wisconsin, male bobcats will generally range over 60 km² and will overlap several different female home ranges.  Female bobcats on the other hand, maintain a home range of 28 km² and are driven by the need for food, shelter, and a quality den site (Bluett 1984, Anonymous 2004).

Being primarily a solitary animal, the social organizations of bobcat populations vary depending on climate, habitat, food resources, and population densities in which they occur (Anderson 1987).  According to Anderson (1987) male bobcats overlap other male bobcat home ranges and those of several females.  However, female bobcat will mark their territory with feces, urine, and/or gland secretions in an attempt to keep out other females (Figure 6) (Oregon DFW 2004).

Seasonal home ranges will vary.  Female bobcats have been shown to significantly extend their home ranges during winter months, while the males have been shown to stay constant throughout the year (Anderson 1987).

In Wisconsin, it was observed that when a bobcat is harvested from an area, other adult cats immediately move into the area. Surrounding bobcats will move into the better habitat in search of den sites, food, cover, and water (Anderson and Lavallo 1995).  Generally the better the habitat, the less stress that is placed on bobcats and the higher the survival rate of the bobcat.  
 

Dispersal

Juveniles generally stay with their mother until breeding season in February or March.  Males generally disperse earlier and farther away than females.  Females often times settle in areas of their mothers home range.  However juveniles have been known to travel over 100 miles before reaching a permanent home.  Long dispersal distances generally occur in the northern part of their range, both at times of low prey availability, and at high population densities (Anderson  and Lovallo 2003). Some studies suggest that the movement of individual bobcats may be limited by increasing annual harvesting (Crowe 1975b).  
 

Habitat Association

Feeding:  Bobcats hunt by stalking and/or ambushing unsuspecting prey. The reliance on these hunting techniques may very well be why coniferous forests appear to be the habitat of choice for bobcats in both Wisconsin and Minnesota (Berg 1981, Fuller et al. 1985a, Lovallo and Anderson 1996).  Conifers offer excellent protection from severe weather for bobcats as well as prey species.  The thick cover that conifers provide allows bobcats to get closer to unsuspecting prey, thus increasing the chances of a successful hunt.

Male vs. Female Habitat Use:  Overall, both male and female bobcats exhibit the same affinity for coniferous forests, especially in the winter (Lovallo and Anderson 1996).  Several studies in Wisconsin and Minnesota have shown that female and male bobcats use different habitat types.  Fuller et al. (1985b) found that females used more lowland deciduous cover than males.  Lovallo and Anderson (1996) also found females using lowland deciduous forests more than males.  It has been suggested that females occupy higher quality habitat, where more food is available in a smaller area in order to meet the physiological demands of kitten rearing (Bailey 1981).  Seasonal habitat shifts have been observed in Wisconsin bobcats.  Both males and females used lowland conifers more in winter, while avoiding unforested areas and upland deciduous forests (Lovallo and Anderson 1996).  Conversely, Berg (1981) detected no seasonal habitat shifts in Minnesota.

Den Sites:  Bobcat dens have been found in caves, rock shelters, dense brush piles (Bailey 1974, Hamilton 1982, Kitchings and Story 1984) and even abandoned buildings (Bailey 1974).  Females move the kittens to several different den sites over the course of kitten rearing (Anderson and Lovallo 2003).  Bailey (1979) observed kittens being moved from their natal den to auxiliary dens up to five times.  
 

Interactions with Other Species
 

Fig. 7.  Picture taken by Joshua Chiamulera December 26, 2002

Adult bobcats have very few natural predators but have been known to die from infections in wounds after being stuck with quills from the porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum).  Juvenile bobcats are preyed upon by coyotes (Canis latrans), hawks and eagles (Falconiformes), owls (Strigiformes), fisher (Martes pennanti) and other bobcats (Bluett 1984, Anonymous 2004, Mallow 2004).

The Wisconsin bobcat competes with the coyote, wolf, fox, fisher, and lynx for food. Since the bobcat also occasionally scavenges carrion, it will also compete with other species such as raccoon (Figure 7), opossum, skunk, crows, eagles, and other scavengers. 
 

Management

In Wisconsin hunters and trappers must register their bobcats within 5 days after the month of harvest.  The WDNR has the authority to stop the taking of animals if they feel the harvest quota has been met (Rolley et al. 2000). 

Winter track surveys are the primary techniques used to monitor population changes by the Wisconsin DNR.  Other methods include data from hunters running dogs, sightings by WDNR officials, and pilot studies on a bow hunter wildlife observation surveys.

A modified version of the Minnesota furbearer model is used to model the bobcat population in Wisconsin.  This combines data on the size and sex-and-age-structure of the harvest with estimates of age-specific reproductive rates and non-harvest mortality rates.  Carcass collections provide data on harvest age-and-sex structure and give estimates of reproductive rates that are then used as model inputs.  Since 1983, almost 2,300 carcasses have been examined.  Based on the data compiled from these animals, the fall population estimate ranged from a low of about 1,500 in the mid-1980s to 2,200 animals in the late 1990s (Figure 8) (Rolley et al. 2000). 
 

Bobcat Economics

During the mid-90s, trappers were harvesting roughly 25,000 bobcats nationwide, bringing in a total of $2.5 million a year (Virchow and Hogeland 1994).  According to the WDNR, there were 253 bobcats harvested in the state for 2002 (Dhuey et al. 2002).  The average pelt price for 2002 was $46.31, making the average money earned from the sale of bobcat pelts approximately $12,000.  Over the years, bobcat pelt prices have fluctuated as a result of the change in market demand.  Despite these fluctuations, a gradual decline in the average pelt price can be observed (Figure 9).
 

The data for economic damage caused by bobcats in Wisconsin is rather limited.  In the more mountainous regions of the country, the most common complaints of bobcat predation involve small pets and poultry (Virchow and Hogeland 1994).  Predation on turkey, both wild and domestic, may also be a problem in some areas (Virchow and Hogeland 1994).  This may make the establishment of a healthy turkey population difficult in areas where bobcat densities are high.  Overall, it appears that the amount of damage attributed to bobcats in Wisconsin is relatively small.
 

Distribution in Wisconsin

The current distribution of the Wisconsin bobcat is shown in figure 10.  Sightings have been reported as far south as Dane, Iowa, and Sauk counties.  As of 2003, the WDNR estimated the bobcat population in Wisconsin to be 2,590 animals (Rolley et al. 2003).

 

History in Wisconsin

Historically, bobcats were found throughout the entire state of Wisconsin.  As the area became settled, the land was cleared for agricultural purposes.  This drove the bobcat population north.  For almost 100 years, bobcats were harvested, with no restrictions, for the sport of it and for bounty because of their potential threat to livestock (Bluett 1984). 

The first attempt to manage the harvest of bobcats was in 1867.  At this time, there was a $10.00 bounty per animal.  The bounty payments were reduced to $5.00 per animal in 1923.  Over the next 40 years, the yearly harvest on bountied bobcats ranged from less than 50 animals to 1,000 animals averaging about 425 animals per year.  As a result, the population was greatly reduced to the northern third of the state.  Bounties ended in 1963 and unregulated harvesting continued until 1970 (Rolley et al. 2000).

The first regulated harvest season on bobcats in the state took place in 1970.  A 5.5-month season was initiated.  In 1972, the season was shortened to 4.5 months.  In 1973 an attempt was made to monitor changes in harvest levels more closely by making it mandatory to register bobcat carcasses.  The season was again shortened to 3 months in 1978.  In 1980 the season was shortened to 2 months.  During this time, a season bag limit of 1 bobcat per hunter/trapper existed as well as a protection of bobcats south of State Highway 64 (Bluett 1984).  In 1983 the harvest season length increased to 2.3 months and the WDNR made it mandatory to turn in the carcasses for collection of age, sex, and reproductive information.  This information was then combined with data on the size of harvests in a model the population.

The management system was challenged in 1990 by the Coalition for Bobcat Preservation.  The coalition claimed the bobcat should be a threatened species in the state.  They stated that the harvest permits increased throughout the 1980s from 1,840 to more than 5,000 while the number of bobcats harvested per 1,000 permits declined from an average of 56 bobcats/1,000 permits from 1980-87 to 30 bobcats/1,000 permits in 1988 and 26 bobcats/1,000 permits in 1989 (Rolley et al. 2000).  From these data, they concluded that the states bobcat population was in trouble.  The WDNR conducted an environmental analysis of the evidence presented by the coalition.  They looked at harvest data from 1973-89, age structure of the harvest, sex structure of the harvest, pregnancy rates, litter size, winter track counts, scent-station surveys, and the population model itself.  In 1991 the claim by the petitioners was denied.  Over the next three years, the Coalition for Bobcat Preservation challenged the WDNR in the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  The final decision concluded that there was no scientific evidence to support giving the bobcat a threatened status.

 

Interesting Facts

Fig. 11. 22.2kg bobcat shot in Marinette County, WI (A. Wydeven, WDNR, personal communication)

The largest verified bobcat on record in Wisconsin was shot in 1984 and weighed 22.2 kg (Figure 11).

The largest confirmable bobcat from Minnesota weighed 17.6 kg (Berg 1981).     

Bobcats use a variety of structures as den sites.  One of the more bizarre locations of a den site in Wisconsin was reported by Lovallo et al. (1993) after finding three bobcat kittens inside of a beaver lodge.  

Although rare, bobcats occasionally attack humans.  In almost all of the cases, the offending bobcats are rabid and are unusually aggressive.  For some stories on bobcat attacks, visit the links below.

http://www.bigcats.org/abc/attacks/minnesota.html  (Bobcat attack in Minnesota)

http://www.bigcats.org/abc/attacks/sarasota.html

http://www.bigcats.org/abc/attacks/orlando.html
 

Additional Bobcat Links

http://www.cfr.msstate.edu/predator/clovellt.html

http://lynx.uio.no/lynx/catfolk/rufus-01.htm

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/agarman/bco/bobcat.htm

http://www.lioncrusher.com/animal.asp?animal=41

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Lynx_rufus.html

http://wildlifedamage.unl.edu/handbook/handbook/allPDF/ca_c35.pdf

http://hometown.aol.com/cattrust/bobcat.htm

http://www.canuck.com/iseccan/bobcat.html

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/eek/critter/mammal/bobcat.htm

 

Literature Cited

Anderson, E. M. 1987.  A critical review and annotated bibliography of literature on the bobcat.  Colorado Division of Wildlife. Terrestrial Wildlife Research.  Special report 62.

   , M. J. Lovallo.  2003.  Bobcat and Lynx.  Pages 758-786 in G. A. Feldhamer, editor. Wild mammals of North America: Biology management and conservation.  Johns Hopkins university press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Anonymous.  2004.  The bobcat.  Wisconsin department of natural resources.  http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/eek/critter/mammal/bobcat.htm  Accessed 22 January 2004. 

Bailey, T. N.  1974.  Social organization in a bobcat population.  Journal of Wildlife Management 38:435-446.

   . 1979.  Den ecology, population parameters, and diet of eastern Idaho bobcats.  Bobcat research conference proceedings.  National wildlife federation scientific and technical series 6:62-69.

    .  1981.  Factors of bobcat social organizations and some management implications.  Pages 984-1000 in J. A. Chapman and D. Pursley, eds.  Proceedings from worldwide furbearer conference.  Frostburg, Maryland, USA. 

Berg, W. E.  1981.  Ecology of bobcats in northern Minnesota.  Bobcat Research conference proceedings.  National wildlife federation scientific and technical series 6:55-61. 

Blankenship, T. L.  1979.  Reproduction and population dynamics of the bobcat in Texas.  M.S. Thesis, Texas A& M University, College Station.  53pp.

Bluett, R.  1984.  The bobcat.  Wisconsin department of natural resources.  Bureau of wildlife management.

Creed, W. A., J. E. Ashbrenner.  1976.  Status report on Wisconsin bobcats, 1975, report 87.  Wisconsin department of natural resources.  Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

   , and    .  1983.  Bobcat harvest and population trends in Wisconsin 1973-81, report 123.  Wisconsin department of natural resources.  Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 

Crowe, D. M.  1975.  A model for unexploited bobcat populations in Wyoming.  Journal of Wildlife Management.  39:408-415.

   , and D. Strickland.  1975.  Population structures of some mammalian predators in southeastern Wyoming.  Journal of Wildlife Management 39:449-450.

Dhuey, B., B. E. Kohn, and J. Olson.  2002.  Bobcat harvest 2002.  Wisconsin department of natural resources.  Small game reports.  pgs 99-102.  http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/harvest/Reports/03bobcatharv.pdf  Accessed 24 March 2004.

Fedriani, J. M., T. K. Fuller, R. M. Sauvajot, and E. C. York.  2000.  Competition and intraguild predation among three sympatric carnivores.  Oecologia 125:258-270.

Fritts, S. H., and J. A. Sealander.  1978a. Reproductive biology and population characteristics of bobcats in Arkansas.  Journal of Mammalogy 59:347-353.

   , and    .  1978b. Diets of bobcats in Arkansas with special reference to age and sex differences.  Journal of Wildlife Management 42:533-539.

Fuller, T. K., W. E. Berg, and D. W. Kuehn.  1985a. Survival rates and mortality factors of adult bobcats in north-central Minnesota.  Journal of Wildlife Management 49:292-296.

   ,    , and    .  1985b.  Bobcat home range size and daytime cover- type use in north central Minnesota.  Journal of Mammalogy 66(3):568-571.

Hamilton, D. A.  1982.  Ecology of the bobcat in Missouri.  M.S. Thesis, University of Missouri, Columbia. 132pp.

Jackson, H. H. T. 1961.  Mammals of Wisconsin.  University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Kitchings, J. T., and J. D. Story.  1984.  Movement and dispersal of bobcats in east Tennessee.  Journal of Wildlife Management 48:957-961.

Knick, S. T.  1990.  Ecology of bobcats relative to exploitation and a prey decline in southeastern Idaho.  Wildlife Monographs 108:1-42.

Lariviere, S., L.R. Walton.  1997.  Lynx rufus.  Mammalian Species 563:1-8.

Laycock, G.  1983.  North American wildlife.  Exeter books, New York, New York, USA.

Lembeck, M.  1986.  Long term behavior and population dynamics of an unharvested bobcat population in Sand Diego County.  Pgs 305-310 in S. D. Miller and D. D. Everett, eds.  Cats of the world: Biology,             conservation, and management.  National wildlife federation, Washington, DC.

Litvaitis, J. A., C. L. Stevens, and W. W. Mautz.  1984.  Age, sex, and weight of bobcats in relation to winter diets.  Journal of Wildlife Management.  48:632-635.

Lovallo, M. J.  1993.  Bobcat behavior and home range use in northwestern Wisconsin: in reference to censusing populations.  M.S. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Stevens Point.

   , J. H. Gilbert,  T.M. Gehring. 1993.  Bobcat, Felis rufus, dens in an abandoned beaver, Castor Canadensis, lodge.  The Canadian Field-Naturalist 107:108-109.

   , E. M. Anderson.  1995.  Range shift by a female bobcat (Lynx rufus) after removal of neighboring female.  American Midland Naturalist 134(2):409-412.

   ,    .  1996.  Bobcat (Lynx rufus) home range size and habitat use in northwest Wisconsin.  American Midland Naturalist 135(2):241-252.

Mallow, T.  Bobcat ecology.  Coryi foundation inc.  http://www.coryi.org/bobcatecology.htm  Accessed 22 January 2004.

Parker, G.R., G.E.J. Smith.  1983.  Sex- and age-specific reproductive and physical parameters of the bobcat (Lynx rufus) on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia.  Canadian Journal of Zoology  61:1771-1782.

Quinn, N.W.S., J.F. Gardner.  1987.  Lynx.  Pages 683-94 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard and B. Malloch, eds.  Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America.  Ontario Trappers Association, North Bay, Canada.

Rolley, R. E.  1985.  Dynamics of a harvested bobcat population in Oklahoma.  Journal of Wildlife Management 49:283-292.

   , B. E. Kohn, J.F. Olson.  2000.  Evolution of Wisconsins bobcat harvest management program.  Current bobcat research and implication for management symposium proceedings from the wildlife society 2000 conference.

   ,    , and A.M. Roth.  2003.  Bobcat Population Analyses 2003.  Wisconsin department of natural resources.  Small game reports pgs 113-114. http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/harvest/Reports/03bobcatpop.pdf Accessed 01 April 2004.

Vaughn, T.A.  1978.  Mammalogy.  W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia.  522pp.

Virchow, D., D. Hogeland.  1994.  Bobcat.  Pages 35-43 in S. E. Hygnstrom, R. M. Timm, and G. E. Larson, editors.  Prevention and control of wildlife damage. University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension, Lincoln.

Whitaker, J.O., W.J. Hamilton.  1998.  Mammals of the eastern United States.  Cornell University press, USA.

Young, S. P.  1958.  The bobcat of North America.  Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D. C.  193pp.