Mountain Lion, Puma, Cougar

Puma concolor schorgeri
 

Matthew Hamilton
Peter Hundt
Ryan Piorkowski

 NATURAL HISTORY

Description: 

     The Wisconsin mountain lion is currently considered extirpated in Wisconsin (Jackson 1961; Cory 1912).  The last recorded individual was killed in 1908 in Douglas County (Cory 1912).  Adult mountain lions are large unspotted cats (Fig. 1) (Jackson 1961); in Latin, the species name of the mountain lion, concolor, means single color (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Juvenile mountain lions have black spots (Fig.4) on buff-colored fur for the first 18 months of

life (Jackson 1961). Adult mountain lions have a relatively small round head that sits atop a long, tawny, cinnamon buff-colored torso (Jackson 1961) which is contrasted by a white belly (Pierce and Bleich 2003). Reddish, yellowish and grayish tinges are the most common variations in pelage color.  The middle of the back is darker than the rest of the body.  Other than the black markings at the base of the whiskers (Fig. 2 and 3), tip of the tail, and the dorsal surface of the ears there are no obvious contrasting markings on the coat of an adult mountain lion.  The claws which are retractable function to grasp and hold prey, rather than to aid in forward locomotion (Pierce and Bleich 2003).

     Adult Mountain lions exhibit sexual dimorphism; males tend to be larger in size than females (Pierce and Bleich 2003). Adult Mountain lions average 5-9 ft (1.6-2.7 m).  This includes the tail which is 28-35 in (70-90 cm) in length (Jackson 1961).   Jackson (1961) reported that adult mountain lion weights were variable and could range from 80 lbs (36 kg) to 210 lbs (95 kg).  An average male weighs about 160 lbs (73 kg) where as an average female weighs about 135 lbs (61 kg).  A more recent study (Whitaker 1998) estimated male weights ranging from 121-145 lbs (55-65 kg) and female weights ranging from 77-99 lbs (35-45 kg).  Compared to canids, the rostrum of mountain lions is short and occipital orbits are large (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  The shortened rostrum allows for a more powerful bite but reduces olfactory sense; however the larger occipital orbit increases their vision, the sense which they rely on the most.

   

 

 

Adult Dental Formula:

     

           

Food Habits:

 

     The Wisconsin mountain lion was almost exclusively carnivorous, with a diet consisting of primarily (60-80%) of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) (Jackson 1961; Cory 1912).  However, the mountain lion also probably preys upon: moose (Alces alces), elk (Cervus elaphus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), ground squirrel (Spermophilus spp.), beaver (Castor canadensis), porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), and skunk (Mephitis mephitis) (Jackson 1961; Cory 1912).  The diet of the Wisconsin mountain lion probably also include, although rarely, some bird species such as wild turkey (Melagris gallopavo), grouse(Bonasa spp., Tympanuchus spp.,  Falcipennis spp.), and quail (Colinus virginianus) (Jackson 1961).

 

     Depredation by mountain lion on domestic animals included cattle, sheep, and pigs; although they seem to prefer horse (Jackson 1961; Cory 1912).  Remains of bobcat (Lynx rufus), coyote (Canis latrons) and other carnivore, including raptors such as eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and turkey vultures (Carthartes aura) have also been found in feces of mountain lion.  Mountain lion seem to target the younger, older, or more vulnerable animals (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  In certain species further west, big horn sheep (Ovis Canadensis), deer (Odocoiles virginianus) male individuals in a weakened state, for example following a rut or during drought conditions, were selectively predated (Pierce and Bleich 2003).

Reproduction:

     Previous studies (Jackson 1961) revealed that mountain lions in Wisconsin seemed to be exhibit monogamous relationships, with few cases of two or more males fighting for a female during mating season (Jackson 1961).  However, more recent studies of the western mountain lion found that, like most felids, polygynony was the most common reproductive behavior. It was also noted that males do not contribute to raising young (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  The male that successfully mates with the female may continue to breed with her over many years, but this is not always the case.  The pair will typically breed during December through March; however mountains lion are multi-seasonal breeders and have been known to mate at anytime of the year (Jackson 1961; Robinette et al. 1961; Ashman et al. 1983).   A female becomes sexually mature at about the age of three, and has a litter once every two or three years.  The gestation period last between 91-97 days; after this time she will give birth to litter ranging

 from one and three cubs, and up to five (Jackson 1961). At birth the cubs (Fig. 4) weigh 14 and 16 oz. Estrous cycles in females that have overlapping home ranges may be synchronous (Padley 1990; Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Periods of mating generally last 2-5 days (Beier et al. 1995), during which time the pair may copulate up to 70 times a day (Eaton 1976).  Female estrous cycles last approximately 8 days (Rabb 1959; Pierce and Bleich 2003) and gestation around 82-96 days (Young and Goldman 1946; Jackson 1961; Anderson 1983).  Males tend to have relatively large home ranges that can overlap with more than one female.  This tends to give males more opportunities for mating (Seidensticker et al. 1973, Logan et al. 1986a; Pierce et al. 1999b, 2000b).  Male and female mountain lions rely primarily on auditory and olfactory signals to locate each other for mating (Currier 1983).

     Reproductive cycles in mountain lions may be affected by climate or prey abundance (Logan et al. 1996: Pierce al. 2000a).

           Female mountain lions have eight mammae (teats), only six of which produce milk (Lechleitner 1969).  Litter sizes range from 2-5 cubs (Robinette et al. 1961; Asman et al. 1983; Ross and Jalkotzy 1992; Logan et al. 1996) but there can be greater variability in size depending on prey availability, population density, and demographics (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Females average more offspring per litter in their first years of reproduction, and then decrease in future litters (Logan et al. 1996).  Most mountain lions studies have reported equal sex ratios among young (Donaldson 1975; Anderson et al. 1992; Logan et al. 1996).

       Kittens are brought to kill sites by their mothers as early as 8 weeks of age, but are not weaned until they are 2-3 months old (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Canine teeth first appear between ages of 20 and 30 days; while molars begin to protrude after 40 days (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Dens generally are located in rocky terrain or dense, shrubby vegetation (Beier et al. 1995; Bleich et al. 1996, Logan et al. 1996).  Females with kittens have restricted movement patterns until the young are old enough to travel away from the den (Beier et al. 1995).  A mother may move her young to several different dens before they are weaned (Shaw 1989).

Mortality: 

    There is little or no information on mortality of Wisconsin mountain lions, therefore western mountain lion mortality information has been provided.  Mountain lions have a tendency to attack prey larger than themselves; this can lead to their own death on occasion (Anderson 1983).  Mountain lions, like many animals, are often killed accidentally. There have been reports of fatal incidents involving cars, trains, drownings in wells, and several human self-defense inflicted deaths.  Legal hunting is the best documented and most significant source of mountain lion mortality.  Cannibalism and intraspecific deaths are also sources of mountain lion mortality, but little is known of the degree to which they impact population size.  If the females previous litter has not dispersed by the time she enters estrus; typically the breeding male will kill them (Young and Goldman 1946; Ackerman et al. 1984; Logan and Sweanor 2001).     

Home Range Size and Social Organization:

     Mountain lions are a solitary species; rarely have they been observed in groups more than two (aside from rearing cubs).  Jackson (1961) reported that a male mountain lion would travel 25 to 30 mi (40 to 48 km) from their den or

move 50 or more miles (80 km) or more to locate food during shortages.  In the western U.S. home range sizes males range from 187 km² (72.20 mi²) to > 800 km² (308.88 mi²).  Females ranges are smaller and average between 70-300 km² (27.03-115.83 mi²), although one study in Utah reported an average female home range size of nearly 700 km² (270.27 mi²) (Pierce and Bleich 2003).

     Individuals are generally mild tempered; however when males encounter each other they will growl, spit, and if neither retreats, an aggressive attack typically begins.  Fighting usually results from defending a prey carcass, territory, or between males competing for a female (Fig. 5).

Dispersal:

     Mountain lion kittens remain with their mother (Fig. 6) for 12-18 months (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  The young begin to disperse as the female comes into estrus; if they fail to leave the adult male will typically kill the young.

(Young and Goldman 1946; Ackerman et al. 1984; Logan and Sweanor 2001).  Once young disperse they initially do not have a defined home range area and are considered transients (Pierce and Bleich 2003).

    Periods of dispersal are relatively risky for many species (Baker 1978).  Survival rates for mountain lions decline during the dispersal period (Logan and Sweanor 2001).  Mountain lions that are dispersing are more likely to be involved in depredation incidents or conflicts with humans, as they attempt to locate food (Torres et al. 1996).  Males, rather than females, are more likely to disperse from their natal ranges, and also tend to disperse further (Anderson et al. 1992; Sweanor et al. 2000).  Mountain lions can disperse nearly 500 km (193.05 mi²)from their natural home range (Logan and Sweanor 1999).  Reduction in the size of habitat islands for populations of any species increases the chance of extirpation for that population (MacArthur and Wilson 1967).  Survivorship of adults varies annually (Lindzey et al. 1988), but can be significantly affected by hunting (Anderson 1983).  Destruction of habitat also can have large impacts on the population demographics of mountain lion (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Furthermore, real estate development may limit prey populations, increase depredation events and increase collisions with automobiles (Maehr 1997; Beier et al. 1995; Shaw 1980; Cunningham et al. 1995; Torres et al. 1996).

Habitat:

     In Wisconsin, mountain lions were found either in forests or forest edges, especially in rough terrain with hills and rocks (Jackson 1961).  Areas near the headwaters of streams were preferred, and occasionally mountain lions were known to search for food in grasslands and prairies(Fig. 10) (Jackson 1961).  Mountain lion and deer habitat in the eastern United States were probably very similar (Whitaker 1998).  Both mountain lions and their primary food source, white-tailed deer, (Odocoiles virginianus) inhabited woods, but preferred a mosaic of woods and open areas with plenty of edge (Whitaker 1998).  Both resided in wetlands during certain times of the year (Whitaker 1998). 

     Den Sites:

    In most cases den sites, or lairs, showed no attempt at nest building (Jackson 1961).  These sites could be found under low branched trees, an overhanging branch, or in dense clump of bushes (Jackson 1961).  Mountain lions went some distance away from the den to deposit urine and feces, which was then covered with soil (Jackson 1961).

Interaction With Other Species:

     Aside from humans, mountain lions had no natural enemies in Wisconsin (Jackson 1961).  There was a recorded incidence, in Wyoming, where a mountain lion was attacked and mortally wounded by a wolverine (Grinnell 1926), but even these cases are rare and extraordinary (Young and Goldman 1946).  However, there have been accounts further

.west of grizzly bears mauling mountain lions (Young and Goldman 1946).  These interactions led to subsequent encounters where the mountain lion gave wide berth to the grizzly bear.  The mountain lion is mostly nocturnal and at times crepuscular (Jackson 1961).  Like many felids its main mode of locomotion is walking, but mountain lions will never trot (Jackson 1961).

      The mountain lion is a reclusive animal that rarely make noise that would reveal its presence (Jackson 1961).  While in pursuit by humans or Canids, the mountain lion is able to gallop in long elegant leaps of more than 25 feet (Young and Goldman 1946); they will then typically take to a tree for refuge (Fig. 7). If cornered mountain lion will attack; normally, however, they are quite curious animals and will often follow another animal or human apparently out of curiosity with no apparent intention of attack.  In general, they seem to prefer retreat as opposed to conflict. Despite the myths attributed to some cats, mountain lions dont avoid water; in fact they will enter watersheds freely and are able to swim for several miles (Jackson 1961).

     There are a considerable number of predators and mesopredators that overlap competitively with the mountain lion.  Within this overlap, both exploitative and interference competition likely occur with species such as wolves (Canis lupis) (Kunkel et al. 1999), coyotes (Canis latrans) (Pierce et al. 2000), bear (Ursus spp.)  (Young and Goldman 1946), and bobcat  (Koehler and Hornocker 1991).  Niche partitioning through habitat use and prey species generally allows for these territorial species to exist together (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  However, this coexistence is not without conflict (Fig. 8).  While scavenging for food mountain lion will occasionally kill smaller predators such as bobcat with no intention of consuming them (Harrison 1990). Likewise, mountain lions have been killed by wolf packs under the same conditions, suggesting that competition is probably related to the predator-prey interactions within each of these species.

     The mountain lion was host to a variety of parasites in Wisconsin, some of the external parasites, which are common in many vertebrates, include the louse (Trichodectes felis) ticks (Dermacentor variabilis, Ixodes ricinus, and I. cookei) and fleas (Arctopsylla setosa) (Jackson 1961).  Internal parasites include nematodes (Physaloptera praeputialis) and various cestodes (Echinococcus granulosus, Taenia taeniaformis, and T. lyncis) (Jackson 1961).

Current Management:

     Demographic information is difficult to obtain for populations of large, cryptic predators like mountain lions (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Track surveys have been a traditional method of determining presence or absence of mountain lions as well as establishing estimates of relative abundance (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Track investigation among

 individual mountain lions was considered to be not reliable because there is a lack of unique characteristics between individuals (Currier et al. 1977; Van Dyke et al. 1986).  Radio telemetry has been used extensively to determine the distribution of mountain lions, from which density estimates have been derived (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Recently, new molecular techniques allow for investigators to identify individual mountain lions using DNA obtained from blood, tissue, or hair samples (Ernest 2000a, 2000b; Pierce and Bleich 2003) and from feces (Ernest 2000 et al., Pierce and Bleich 2003

 

     Mountain lion relocation has been used to manage problem lions; including lions that have depredated livestock or occupy ranges close to residential areas.  This technique is very controversial and inconsistent with management

policies in some states due to potential liabilities (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Survival rates of relocated mountain lions are generally very low.  Current management of depredation on livestock or incidents involving humans usually involves killing of the problematic animal (Fig.9), a strategy unlikely to change in the immediate future (Pierce and Bleich 2003). 

 

     The last know mountain lion killed in Wisconsin was 1908 (Lewis and Craven 1987; Cory 1912) and are considered extirpated from the state, though every year there are accounts of sightings in northern Wisconsin. Currently there is no official protection for mountain lions in Wisconsin.  Sport hunting of mountain lions occurs in the majority of states that have viable populations of this species, and harvesting is a method by which managers attempt to control lion numbers (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Conservation of mountain lions has a long and varied history, and has been couched largely in terms of political expediency (Torres 1997).  Efforts to control or eliminate mountain lions by unrestricted harvest and bounty systems were unsuccessful throughout much of the United States, but their efficacy is clear by the absence of mountain lions from much of their historical range (Pierce and Bleich 2003).  Elimination of mountain lions that threaten human safety is generally accepted by the public (Pierce and Bleich 2003).

Economic Value:

     The main economic value of the mountain lion was sport hunting or trapping.  The pelt had little economic value, but was prized more as a trophy (Jackson 1961).  If natural prey populations were down mountain lions resorted to killing livestock, which was not tolerated by local ranchers (Jackson 1961).  The mountain lion predates on white-tailed deer, which is its main food source (Jackson 1961).  However, the impact is probably minimal in many areas since they only kill in the neighborhood of 50 deer per year (Pierce and Bleich 2003).

History of Species in Wisconsin:

     Prior to 1870 the mountain lion occurred throughout most of the state, especially in valleys and tributaries of the Mississippi and Fox River (Jackson 1961).  Most of the records came from areas around Lake Winnebago and from valleys of the Chippewa and St. Croix Rivers (Schorger 1982).  The Museum of Lawrence College in Appleton has on display the only mountain lion specimen killed and mounted locally.  There were also accounts of mountain lion located in Dane County of southern Wisconsin.

     The landscape of pre-settlement southern Wisconsin (Curtis 1959), would have provided an abundant prey source for the Wisconsin mountain lion (Wydeven and Ashbrenner 1994).  Southern Wisconsin consisted of oak-savannas,

upland deciduous forest, and grasslands that would likely have supported a variety of ungulate species including elk, white-tailed deer, and a modest number of bison. This would have contributed to the increased population of mountain lion in southern and central Wisconsin, which would have been lacking in the northern coniferous forests (Wydeven and Ashbrenner 1994).  This would correlate with other studies that have determined prey source is most likely the main determining factor of mountain lion distribution (Pierce and Bleich 2003; Pierce et al. 2000).

 

 

 

 

Interesting Facts:

     Mountain Lion attacks are rare. According to the Mountain Lion Foundation, 13 people have been killed in mountain lion attacks in North America in the past 100 years. That compares with 1,300 deaths by rattlesnakes and 4,000 by bees. http://www.mountainlion.org/Education/workshops.htm

     Mountain Lions can leap over 20 feet from a stand still. http://www.humboldt.net/~tracker/mountain lion.html

 Mountain Lion Links:   

http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/eacofs.html

http://www.easternmountain lion.org/

http://www.easternmountain lionnet.org/

http://www.enature.com/fieldguide/showSpeciesSH.asp?curGroupID=5&shapeID=1027&curPageNum=5&recnum=MA0014

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0507_030507_mountain lions.html

http://www.garlynzoo.com

http://www.elements.nb.ca/theme/endangeredspecies/mountain lion/mountain lion1.gif

http://www.snowwowl.com/images/animals/land/mountain lion.jpg

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

 

Mountain Lion Sounds from http://www.garlynzoo.com

 Cougar cry and purr

Cougar cry

Cougar purr

Cougar

Young cougar squeaks

 

Literature Cited:

Ackerman, B.B., F.G. Lindzey, and T.P. Hemker. 1986. Predictive energetics model for mountain lions.  Pages 333-52 in S.D. Miller and D. Everett, eds. Cats of the world: Biology, conservation, and management.  National Wildlife Federation, Washington, DC.

Anderson, A.E. 1983. A critcal review of literature on puma (Felis Concolor) (Special Report No. 54).  Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins.

Anderson A.E., D.C. Bowden, and D.M. Kattner. 1992. The puma on Uncompahgre Plateau, Colorado (Technical Publication 40). Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins.

Ashman, DL., G.C. Christensen, M.L. Hess, .K. Tsukamoto, and M.S. Wickersham. 1983.  The mountain lion in Nevada (Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration , Final Report W-48-15, Study S&I, Job 5 and Study R-V, Job 1).  Nevada Department of Wildlife, Reno.

Bier, P., D. Choate, and R.H. Barrett. 1995. Movement patterns of mountain lions during different behaviors.  Journal of Mammalogy 76:1056-70.

Bleich, V.C., B.M. Pierce, J. L. Davis, and V.L. Davis. 1996 Thermal characteristics of mountain lion dens.  Great basin Naturalist 56:276

Cory, C. B. 1912. The mammals of Illinois and Wisconsin. Field Museum of Natural History- Zoology 11:280-286.

Cunningham, S.C., L.A. Haynes, C. Gustavson and D.D. Haywood. 1995 Evaluation of the interaction between mountain lions and cattle in the Aravaipa-Klondyke are of southeast Arizona (Technical Report 17).  Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Donaldson, B.R. 1975.  Mountain lion research (1971-75) (Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Final Report Project W- 93-R-17).  New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe.

Eaton, R.L. 1976.  Why some felids copulate so much.  Pages 74-94 in R.L. Eaton, ed.  The worlds cats, Vol. 3. Carnivore Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle.

Eaton, R.L., and K.A. Velander. 1977.  Reproduction in the puma:  Biology behavior and ontogeny.  Pages 45070 in R.L. Eaton, ed. The worlds cats, Vol. 3 Carnivore Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle.

Ernest, H.B. 2000a. DNA analysis for mountain lion conservation.  Outdoor California 61 (3):16-19.

Ernest, H.B. 2000b.  DNA sampling and research techniques.  Outdoor California 61 (3):20-21.

Grinnell, G. B. 1926. Habits of the wolverine. Journal of Mammalogy 7(1):30-34.

Hansen, K. 1992. Mountain lion: The American lion.  Northland, Flagstaff, AZ.

Harrison, S. 1990.  Mountain lion predation on bighorn sheep in the Junction Wildlife Management Area, British Columbia. M.S. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Lechleitner, R.R.  1969.  Wild mammals of Colorado.  Pruett, Boulder CO.

Lewis, T.L. and S.R. Craven. 1987. Mountain lions in Wisconsin? Maybe. Wisconsin Natural Resources 11(1):21-25.

Lindzey F.G., B.B. Ackerman, D. Barnhurst, and T.P. Hemker. 1988. Survival rates of mountain lions in southern Utah. Journal of Wildlife Management 52:664-67.

Logan, K.A.,and L. Sweanor. 1999. Puma. Pages 344-77 in S. Demarais and P.R. Krausman, eds. Ecology and management of large mammals in North America.  Prentince-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Logan, K.A., L. Sweanor. 2001.  Desert Puma: Evolutionary ecology and conservation of an enduring carnivore.  Hornocker Wildlife Institute, Island Press, Washington.

Logan, K.A., L. Sweanor, and M. Hornocker. 1996.  Mountain lion population dynamics.  Chapter 3 in Mountain lions in the San Andreas Mountains, New Mexico (Project No. W-128-R, Final Report).  New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe.

Logan, K.A., E.T. Thorne, L.L Irwin, and R.Skinner.  1986b. Immobilizing wild mountain lions (Felis concolor) with ketamine hydrochloride and xylazine hydrochloride.  Journal of Wildlife Diseases 22:97-103

Jackson, H. T. 1961. Mammals of Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, WI, USA. Pages 389-395

Koehler, G. M., and M. G. Hornocker. 1991. Seasonal resource use among mountain lions, bobcat, and coyotes. Journal of Mammalogy 72:391-396 

Kunkel, K. E., T. K. Ruth, D. H. Pletscher, and M. G. Hornocker. 1999. Winter prey selection by wolves and mountain lions in and near Glacier National Park. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:901-910.

MacArthur, R.H. and E.O. Wilson. 1967. The theory of island biogeography.  Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.

Maehr, D.S. 1997.  The Florida panther: Life and death of a vanishing carnivore.  Island Press, Washington.

Nowell, K. and P. Jackson, eds. 1996. Wild Cats: Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland.

Padley, W.D. 1990. Home range and social interactions of mountain lions (Felis concolor) in the Santa Ana Mountains, California. M.S. Theisi, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona.

Pierce B.M., and V. C., Bleich. 2003.  Mountain Lion.  Pages 744-757 in G.A. Feldhamer, B.C. Thompson, and  J.A. Chapman, eds. Wild Mammals of North America. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.

Pierce, B.M. V. C. Bleich, and R.T. Bowyer. 1999a. Population dynamics of mountain lions and mule deer: Top-down or bottom-up regulation? Final report.  Deer Herd Management Plan Implementation Program, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.

Pierce, B.M. V. C. Bleich, and R. T. Bowyer. 2000a. Selection of mule deer by mountain lions and coyotes: Effects of hunting style, body size, and reproductive status.  Journal of Mammalogy 81:462-72.

Pierce, B.M. V. C. Bleich, and R. T. Bowyer. 2000b. Social organizations of mountain lions: Does a land-tenure system regulate population size?  Ecology 81:1533-43.

Rabb, G.B. 1959.  Reproductive and vocal behavior in captive pumas.  Journal of Mammalogy 40:616-17.

Ross, P.I. and M.G. Jalkotzy. 1992.  Characteristics of hunted population of mountain lions in southwestern Alberta.  Journal of Wildlife Management 56:417-26.

Schrorger, A. W. 1982.  Wildife in early Wisconsin. Student chapter of the wildlife society. Eds. K. M. Brockman and Dow Jr., R. A. Pages 470-471

Seidensticker, J.C., IV., M.G. Hornocker, W.V. Wiles, and J.P. Messick. 1973.  Mountain lion social organization in the Idaho Primitive Area.  Wildlife Monographs 35:1-60

Shaw, H.G. 1980. Ecology of the mountain lion in Arizona.  Final report (P-R Project W-78-R, Work Plan 2, Job 13) Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix.

_____.  1989. Soul among lions: The mountain lion as peaceful adversary. Johnson, Boulder, CO.

Smallwood, K.S. 1997. Interpreting puma (Puma concolor) population estimates for theory and management.  Environmental Conservation 24:283-89

Torres, S., T.M. Mansfield, J.E.Foley, T. Lupo, and A. Brinkhaus. 1996. Mountain loin and human activity in California:  Testing speculations.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 24:451-60

Van Dyke, F.G., R.H. Brocke, H.G. Shaw, B.B. Ackerman, T.P. Hemker, and F.G. Lindzey. 1986. Reactions of mountain lions to logging and human activity.  Journal of Wildlife Management 50:95-102.

Whitaker, J.O.  1998.  Mammals of the Eastern United States.  Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, New York, USA.

Wydeven, A. P., and J. P. Ashbrenner. 1994. Eastern mountain lion conference. June 3-5, Gannon University, Erie, Pennsylvania. 

Young, S. P., and E. A. Goldman. 1946. The puma, mysterious American cat. Dover Publications, Inc. New York, New York, USA.