1. Executive Summary
2. Introduction
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Methodology
7. Acknowledgements
8. Literature Cited
9. Printable Version

Conclusions and Recommendations

The global loss of biodiversity poses one of the greatest challenges facing human society. Large carnivores are considered a pivotal tool in the effort to conserve biodiversity because of their ability to maintain the health and integrity of ecosystems (Terborgh et al. 1999, Ray et al. 2005). According to Ray et al. (2005), “keeping large carnivores is a measure of how we are doing in the battle to save the planet’s biodiversity.”

In the western United States, the mountain lion is the only remaining large carnivore with viable populations throughout the region (Logan and Sweanor 2001). Consequently, conserving mountain lions in viable and ecologically effective populations can strongly benefit efforts to conserve native biodiversity.

However, heavy and sustained exploitation of mountain lions by humans has resulted in lion population declines in at least four of the eleven western states (i.e., Idaho, Montana, Utah and Washington). These population declines raise questions about the impacts of current management practices on the long-term viability of mountain lion populations and thus on biodiversity. Unfortunately, there is a striking lack of research aimed at understanding the short term and cumulative effects of exploitation on mountain lion populations or on ecosystem health.

Effectively conserving self-sustaining and ecologically effective populations of mountain lions in the American West will require actively addressing issues related to exploitation and habitat loss. More specifically, however, it will require that wildlife agencies change their management focus from a single-species, utilitarian approach to an ecosystem management approach that considers mountain lions in their ecological context rather than simply as resources for hunters or problems for ranchers, landowners and the general public.

Critically, we must pursue strategies for conservation and management that satisfy the common good—such as maintaining ecological health, conserving biodiversity, and representing the full array of human values towards this species—rather than merely satisfying the needs of special interests.

To this end, the Mountain Lion Foundation makes the following recommendations:

• Manage mountain lions in the context of their important ecological role in maintaining and restoring ecosystem health. Base management policies and approaches in the principles of conservation biology (Torres et al. 2004).
• Scientifically demonstrate that current management practices are maintaining sustainable and ecologically effective populations of mountain lions.
• Create protected areas and linkages for mountain lions to promote the long-term viability of mountain lion populations.
• Standardize recording and compilation of mountain lion mortalities so that reporting is consistent within and across states.
• Standardize criteria and protocols for the issuance of depredation permits and public safety removals of mountain lions so that these are consistent within and across states.
• Support and initiate research to determine when and where mountain lions play ecologically significant roles and what densities of mountain lions are needed to generate these effects (Ray et al. 2005), and how exploitation of mountain lion populations affects the species’ ecological role.
• Implement the following management principles and other recommendations of the Cougar Management Guidelines (CMGWG 2005: 8-10), which include:
• “A large-landscape approach, on the order of thousands of square kilometers of well-connected habitat with thriving natural prey populations, is necessary for healthy, self-sustaining cougar populations.”
• “Given uncertainties about basic demographic parameters [of mountain lion populations], responses of populations to management prescriptions or hunter selectivity, temporal and spatial variation, and understanding that cougar habitat is changing, cougar management should adopt an adaptive management approach.”
• Adaptive management is “A type of natural resource management in which decisions are made as part of an ongoing science-based process. Adaptive management involves testing, monitoring, and evaluating applied strategies, and incorporating new knowledge into management approaches that are based on scientific findings and the needs of society. Results are used to modify management policy, strategies, and practices” (water.usgs.gov/owq/cleanwater/ufp/glossary.html)
• “Cougar management should reflect the full array of human values and input from all stakeholders.”
• “In light of the diversity of stakeholders and human values, funding for cougar research, management, and conservation should not be derived solely from hunting-related programs.”

 Next Section