# Mt. Lion population



## cougar2 (Sep 5, 2011)

Anyone feel like Mt. Lion numbers are to high or suffering in the state of Utah and what areas, and are they having a serious effect on deer and elk?.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Ive personally seen more tracks, lion kills and actual lions in the last five years than i've seen in my life.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I heard over 30 were taken off the Stansburys this winter. Any truth to it?
If so, I would think that would help out.


----------



## kk11 (Sep 17, 2007)

Depends on the area, Henrys are increasing somewhat, they killed 7 lions and closed it down pretty early. Around the area I hunt, Lion numbers are the lowest that I have seen in over 20 years, but so are the deer. Every unit is different, some have quite a few lion some don't, I think state wide lion numbers are down,because deer numbers are down.


----------



## TopofUtahArcher (Sep 9, 2009)

Being in the hunting/sporting goods industry, I hear a lot and see pictures of a ton of cats being treed... fewer being actually harvested, but in my personal experience outdoors, I have had more encounters personally with cats the past 5 years than the rest of my life... and I get out quite a bit less now than when I was younger than 30...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

You guys are out to freak'in out lunch!!!!

80% of the state is exsperiancing the LOWEST lion population in 25 years...

Emergency lion hunt clousures are now starting to take place!!! 
Theres A LEAST 12-14 more lion units that need this emergency clouser in
addition to the one just done on the Manti...The lion MP needs MAJOR changes!

Only place there a good population of cats left in the state is right on the 
Wasatch front....No dog law in SLC county, + hounders and granola munchers dont mix.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

ridgetop said:


> I heard over 30 were taken off the Stansburys this winter. Any truth to it?
> If so, I would think that would help out.


No, theres 18 LE tags + 12 slpit season/HO quota. that equals 30,
But they have now were near filled that many tags....

In-fact, theres only been 210 cats taken STATE WIDE this year on split/LE/HO units.

http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hu ... units.html


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

Like has been mentioned, lion population trends vary from area to area. I've not hunted outside northern Utah for a couple of years now so I can't speak for those areas. The Ogden unit was dead this year....a good friend has a tag and despite multiple days of hunting, has yet to catch a lion on the unit and has found very few tracks compared to years past. The Cache unit, however, has continued it's slight growth cycle since it bottomed out 5-7 years ago. The reason for this is because a lot more of the local houndsmen are limiting their take to toms only......only one houndsman/guide from what I've observed is still being indiscriminate in the killing of females.

Whether cougar populations are having a serious effect on deer or elk populations continues to be debated. Of course lions kill deer and elk, but the question becomes is a deer or elk saved from cougar predation a net gain to the overall population?? The answer is not so clear as some will have you believe. This much is true, wherever it's been tried, efforts to eliminate or greatly reduce cougar populations to restore deer and elk herds has met with disappointing results.....yet we stubbornly persist.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

As usual, Kevin brings a level head to the discussion with valid points to consider. There was another thread I started a while back on coug populations that started to bring some good points together, then went off track so I stayed away; but I think I will revive it as there is never any harm in opportunities to learn about our wildlife.

There are several groups of folks that are directly affected by predator management, and that makes things pretty tough for wildlife managers to do their job biologically when social/emotional pressures are so high. There are those who would very aggresively reduce the cougar population, perhaps to the point of losing it's ability to sustain even level populations, and those on the other side of the spectrum who would end predator hunting altogether, with many hunters stuck in the middle. As to actual cougar numbers in the state, well that's up in the air right now. I haven't seen any recent estimates but that doesn't mean they haven't been done.

As to the effects of cougars on ungulates, like Kevin said, that's unclear at this point in the learning process. Many studies point to predators having little to no affect on reducing ungulate populations when the herds are at or near capacity with the landscape, the affect is assumed to be compensatory. However, studies also point to the issue of healthy ungulate populations that are well below capacity where in additon to other variables, cougars may be responsible for keeping the herds from actually growing; thus the predator management plans some of the western game agencies have in place to focus on these areas.

One thing is very clear: cougar population dynamics biology have no clear and complete answers, but they are making headway. The big problem facing the agencies is, of course, money. Guess we'll see where things go, one way or the other.

As to the "emergency closures" goofy is talking about, it had nothing to do with lion populations being in the tank. It was done according to the cougar management plan and the number of ADULT females lions taken on the unit. Since the division didn't have the age data from the females killed, they erred on the side of caution and the wildlife board closed the unit down, simple.


----------



## houndhunter (Oct 2, 2010)

I know the area I hunt is down drastically down in lion numbers. I have read alot of posts about this subject, and one thing I have noticed that is always left out is the presence of adult dominate tom lions. Within the range of a dominate tom lion, populations will be far less than one without. In the absence of hunter harvest, tom lions are the regulators. A dominant tom will kill every kitten or sub-adult male it can. They also kill alot of coyotes within that home range. When people say that they have seen more tracks now vs. then, I just kinda grin. Bring back LE on all lion units and let the toms do what they do. I'm not trying to start a pissin match between everybody on here. Taking lions out of the picture could very easily have a negative affect on deer populations. Less lions just opens the gates for coyotes, and I have seen alot of coyote kills on fawns this winter.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

So lets save the tom lions and kill the female lions then. Im good with that 

After I saw what happened when the lions were thinned on timp there isn't a houndsman alive that will convince me lions dont affect deer numbers. I watched the deer numbers go up and the buck numbers went up even more when those lions were thinned.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> So lets save the tom lions and kill the female lions then. Im good with that
> 
> After I saw what happened when the lions were thinned on timp there isn't a houndsman alive that will convince me lions dont affect deer numbers. I watched the deer numbers go up and the buck numbers went up even more when those lions were thinned.


Yep, i saw this first hand. I agree.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

houndhunter said:


> I know the area I hunt is down drastically down in lion numbers. I have read alot of posts about this subject, and one thing I have noticed that is always left out is the presence of adult dominate tom lions. Within the range of a dominate tom lion, populations will be far less than one without. In the absence of hunter harvest, tom lions are the regulators. A dominant tom will kill every kitten or sub-adult male it can. They also kill alot of coyotes within that home range. When people say that they have seen more tracks now vs. then, I just kinda grin. Bring back LE on all lion units and let the toms do what they do. I'm not trying to start a **** match between everybody on here. Taking lions out of the picture could very easily have a negative affect on deer populations. Less lions just opens the gates for coyotes, and I have seen alot of coyote kills on fawns this winter.


The population of the unit you hunt may indeed be down in numbers, as may be the case for other units as well. Hunter harvest is definately addative to cougar populations, and the game divisions use adult female numbers to manage that effect. The implications there is the type of cougar population in the unit, and whether or not it is a sink or source or even a metapopulation. Each one requires different management strategies. Your point about mature toms and their affect on the populations is a good one. That dynamic is still unclear, but there are indications that when mature toms are being targeted and the numbers are reduced, it can have direct implications with infanticide through immigration; which may also be a limiting factor in cougar population growth. In addition, depending on the area, targeting adult/mature toms and reducing the numbers can also be a factor in increased predation to ranch critters, ie. cattle and sheep. Still learning that part of the equation.



martymcfly73 said:


> swbuckmaster said:
> 
> 
> > So lets save the tom lions and kill the female lions then. Im good with that
> ...


Killing off the adult females in large numbers isn't the answer, but that aspect may soon become more of the management process consideration. Killing off the breeding population in large numbers does no one any good at this point. The questions are, imo, should it be done, how much of a reduction should be done, where it should be done, and how long should it be done if it is to benefit the ungulate populations. Complicated issues to be sure.


----------



## houndhunter (Oct 2, 2010)

The definition of insanity...trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results! I can only hope that all of us houndsman come together soon and take control of the situation. NUFF SAID


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

You mean like trying to have as many cougar as possible then send out 100,000 hunters out to do there best? 

And then when the deer herd decreases say it must have been weather or habitat because when a cougar kills a deer it doesn't count somehow.

It costs deer hunters well over 100,000 deer per yr to feed your kitty's. So go ahead. Houndsman unite! And crap in our nest. Matter of fact maybe you all should get a hold of the Sierra Club to help save your kitty's. It worked in California.

Don't you think you should get more deer before you push for more cougar? :roll:


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Don't you think you should get more deer before you push for more cougar? :roll:


Dude, the herd estamate this year for deer is 318,000 ....

The deer herd estamate in 2007 was 302,000 deer ..

Now, I'd sure the hell like to have the same number of lions NOW,
as we had in 2007 to chase...because 5-6 years ago there was 2-3 times as many cats.

Iron bear, Thats why nowone listens to all your lion/deer redotic.....


----------



## houndhunter (Oct 2, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> You mean like trying to have as many cougar as possible then send out 100,000 hunters out to do there best?
> 
> And then when the deer herd decreases say it must have been weather or habitat because when a cougar kills a deer it doesn't count somehow.
> 
> ...


We'll you already have a drastic reduction in cougar numbers! So when that doesn't work (and it won't) where are you gonna lay the blame? You think I don't contribute too the $100,000? I can't help but think of the deer herds on most LE units....lot's of deer and general units are crap. What is the major difference in these units? Wait, it's hunters! Let's go out to the book cliffs and I will show you 500 deer a day or diamond mountain, same thing. So do cougar like the taste of the general deer more? No, but I would bet that 90% of the people that complain about the herds cannot help but drag that trophy yearling home and brag. I do not want all lions saved as you say, but the slaughter is flat out ridiculous! I do not have a one sided mind on this subject. Once both species we're dong just fine. Utah was one place a large trophy lion could be taken and deer herds we're in alot better shape. When somebody tells me " have seen the tracks all over", I just have to laugh! I mean really! So I guess that means they are crawling all over the mountain like sheep! I saw a monster buck a long time ago, so I guess they are just everywhere huh? Look in the mirror people when you talk of the decline of mule deer.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Since when do you stand behind DWR deer population estimates? 16,000 deer is probably the margin of error on these counts. So to say the deer herd is increasing is a stretch at best. 

I'm not so sure "nowone" listens to all my lion/deer "redotic". I think most here don't like to think about it. They would rather float the river in Egypt and pray for good weather and habitat. Then concede that when a human kills a deer it counts. And if we are to save deer then take from the hunters. 

If there were 2000 hunters that were allowed to hunt deer 24/7/356 and take as many as 50 deer per yr buck doe or fawn. UWN members would surly identify them as the culprit in deer herd declines. None of this weather and habitat fuwie.

Did you read your cougar killed a couple more deer in the transport study? That's about one a week since the study started. o-||


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

As I've said a 1000 times before you cant have capacity cougar (predators) and then facilitate a general hunt with 100,000 hunters. It's just too much. The resource wont support it. Something has to give. You cant have your cake and eat it too. Only so many deer are born per yr. I don't know how else to put it. 

Cougar should be managed on a per deer basis with deer hunters as the priority. Since the 100,000 deer hunters are the biggest contributor to the big game budget. Unless houndsman want to kick in 3 million dollars a yr to take deer hunters place. Instead we manage cougar on a per acre basis and use houndsman as the primary factor to determine policy. Houndsman say there are few cougar therefore there must be few cougar. 

Get the deer back and you will have more cougar then you have today I assure you that. But so long as houndsman wont relent and insist on maximum cougar populations the deer herd will continue to decrease and so will your cougars. Because it takes 50 deer per yr to feed one.


----------



## houndhunter (Oct 2, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> As I've said a 1000 times before you cant have capacity cougar (predators) and then facilitate a general hunt with 100,000 hunters. It's just too much. The resource wont support it. Something has to give. You cant have your cake and eat it too. Only so many deer are born per yr. I don't know how else to put it.
> 
> Cougar should be managed on a per deer basis with deer hunters as the priority. Since the 100,000 deer hunters are the biggest contributor to the big game budget. Unless houndsman want to kick in 3 million dollars a yr to take deer hunters place. Instead we manage cougar on a per acre basis and use houndsman as the primary factor to determine policy. Houndsman say there are few cougar therefore there must be few cougar.
> 
> Get the deer back and you will have more cougar then you have today I assure you that. But so long as houndsman wont relent and insist on maximum cougar populations the deer herd will continue to decrease and so will your cougars. Because it takes 50 deer per yr to feed one.


I just don't understand why it is that everyone thinks that lions only eat deer. You can take that 50 deer a year number (wherever you got it) and cut it by almost half! They kill elk as well ya know. But that wouldn't go with the THEORY of the predators keeping the deer herds down. :O•-:


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

OK so say a cougar only kills 25 deer a yr. That makes about 50,000 deer per yr. That's more than twice the hunters take. And some of those 50K deer are life giving doe that increase the deer herd. If a cougar kills a wet doe it's effectively killed 2 deer. How many fawn will a doe have in her lifetime? So when a doe gets killed at 2 yrs old by a cougar. How many deer did we loose in the long run? Hunters for the most part only kill buck. And I learned from this very website that only doe produce fawn so they are the important part of the herd. 

Sure a cougar will kill an elk. When it cant find a deer. But who's worried about decreasing elk populations in Utah?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Why are most of the better cat units also some of the crappiest general deer units? 

Example
The bookcliffs has loads of deer and it takes 2 years or less to draw a cat tag. The nebo's deer herd seems to be struggling and its pretty hard to draw a cat tag. The nebo also seems to have a hard time with depredation tags. Maybe its the predators pushing the deer low?

I had a cat tag for the bookcliffs one of the harder areas to get a cat from what i hear. The guide i hired told me no kill no pay. Then took me out and in one day they cut multiple tracks and i had my cat in one day. So ive got mixed feelings on how hard it is to find a cat.

I go out coyote hunting and cut tracks. I see matt running them down on foot without dogs and i see cat tracks every time im on the Wasatch Front with new snow.

They kill a load of cats off timp so the big horns could have a chance and next thing you know the buck to doe ratio in that area was higher then most any other general deer areas while the cat numbers were low. Coincidence?

Sure there are areas where deer and cat numbers are low "Cash" but that is what id expect that with predator prey relationships.

When deer are at an all time low and shrinking every year across the west it makes sense that the cat population would also be at an all time low.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> When deer are at an all time low and shrinking every year across the west it makes sense that the cat population would also be at an all time low.


 I am pretty sure deer populations are NOT at "an all time low"......... :?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> swbuckmaster said:
> 
> 
> > When deer are at an all time low and shrinking every year across the west it makes sense that the cat population would also be at an all time low.
> ...


Your correct.

If we implement your management will just need to give out a million deer tags and quite killing coyotes and lions and are deer herd will double over night. :-?:-?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> If we implement your management will just need to give out a million deer tags and quite killing coyotes and lions and are deer herd will double over night. :-?:-?


 When have I EVER called for such? Using hyperbole doesn't minimize where you are wrong, it highlights them....... How about we try and stick in the real world, and discuss things that are real, or maybe even accurate, eh?

To show how absurd your post is: I sent out an open invite on this site for people to come hunt, and hopefully KILL, coyotes on my place and neighboring lands. I only had TWO takers this past fall/winter.......Now, if I were an advocate of "quite" killing coyotes, and other predators, why did I send out the invite? :O•-:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> swbuckmaster said:
> 
> 
> > If we implement your management will just need to give out a million deer tags and quite killing coyotes and lions and are deer herd will double over night. :-?:-?
> ...


Im not going to argue with you over hyperbole.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Swbuckmaster makes a wise decision and wins by default!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Airborne said:


> Swbuckmaster makes a wise decision and wins by default!


 I didn't know it was about winning. I thought it was about being intellectually honest........my bad!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Since when do you stand behind DWR deer population estimates? 16,000 deer is probably the margin of error on these counts. So to say the deer herd is increasing is a stretch at best.


So you are saying there could be closer to 334,000 deer statewide? Awesome!


----------



## torowy (Jun 19, 2008)

I don't think the state has any idea how many cats are out there....


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

torowy said:


> I don't think the state has any idea how many cats are out there....


Not true.

The Dwr has a better idea of lion numbers than most think.
Every lion harvested has to be checked in, aged, questionnaire filled out.

Pretty sure EVERY pursuit tag holder is surveyed every year, I know I have been.

The trends are 100% crystal clear, lion populations have been declining since 1997.

Decent Toms are FEW and FAR between any more in Utah,
Younger average age cats being harvested every year for several years now ..

Average cats per day treed by pursuit tag holders, falling like a rock!

Pretty clear, The data all shows EXACTLY what is happening, and the state 
knows it :!:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> torowy said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think the state has any idea how many cats are out there....
> ...


So correct me if I'm wrong, but you trust the DWR cat data, but not the deer data?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well now Tree, You sure like following my posts around lately ..

Tell ya what, 100% harvest reporting on lions. 

May-be that has somthing to do with the DWRs lion data being correct ..

Just call'in it how I see it Tree, You got a problem with that?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Why no, no problem here. Don't get all wound up. We're having a conversation here.

We're not just talking about harvest data, though. We're talking about all aspects of management, as far as I can tell. I'm clear that age trends and female harvest are a very good indicator of population and population age structure. Many young Tom's and high female harvest typically means there are issues with a units population and ultimately, population objective. I've checked lions in before and have participated in several meetings regarding lions, objectives, age dynamics and the roles they play in determining what's on the range and many of the other aspects involved with developing a the cougar management plan.

Similar to how harvest success and buck to doe ratios are indicative of deer population and herd structure.

And I know you are calling it how you see it, but most of what I read is perspective based conjecture that is predicated on the following(And please correct me if I am wrong):

-You are a cat guide.

-You are or have been a big game guide. 

-You prefer to hunt for trophies or not at all.

All of these things are the grains of salt that must be considered when reading what you attempt to write. Many times I see you present ideas or statements as empirical and absolute, when they are as I said, largely based on conjecture.

Be clear, I'm sincerely not coming at you. I've been through it before with you and my intention is not to hurt your feelings or belittle you.


----------



## houndhunter (Oct 2, 2010)

Goofy is right...48 hours to check in a lion after harvest.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Powned


----------



## houndhunter (Oct 2, 2010)

martymcfly73 said:


> Powned


Is that pound? :roll:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> And I know you are calling it how you see it, but most of what I read is perspective based conjecture that is predicated on the following(And please correct me if I am wrong):
> 
> -You are a cat guide.
> 
> ...


 Careful, tree, or you'll be getting PM's where you will be subject to dropped eff-bombs, threats, and other childish actions....many of us have been there......


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > And I know you are calling it how you see it, but most of what I read is perspective based conjecture that is predicated on the following(And please correct me if I am wrong):
> ...


I got one a few days ago. He's a real tough guy.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I dont think anyone on these forums will agree 100% with each other but id bet you could get along with anyone outside these forums if given the chance.

There is something about words and how people will twist one sentence out of a paragraph you wrote to prove your wrong or prove there point that gets a guy all worked up. Im as bad at this as anyone so im not pointing fingers here.

I dont always agree with what goofy, pro, tree or the rest. Ive even had words with goofy behind the scenes but there is one thing about goofy that i admire. He is a man that can forgive and forget. He will give the shirt off his back to help you out even though you can butt heads. To me this shows good character. I feel the same way about pro, tree and the rest. I hope its mutual.

I say give goofy a break and try and keep the post more civil.


----------



## torowy (Jun 19, 2008)

Even if the population trend is going down, they still don't know if there are 1,000 or 1,0000 cats in the state. Their surveys on population density are guesses at best. You can't fly and count them.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

torowy said:


> Even if the population trend is going down, they still don't know if there are 1,000 or 1,0000 cats in the state. Their surveys on population density are guesses at best. You can't fly and count them.


As you mentioned, getting an accurate count of cougar populations is a difficult task.....they are a reclusive animal that don't loan themselves to an easy census. But that doesn't mean you can't get a close enough estimate on lion populations to come up with a management plan. In fact, I would argue that the actual number of cougar is less important in managing the species than the population trends.....which can be easily measured and compared with historical data of harvest numbers, hunter surveys, and even the population trends of their ungulate prey base. Biologists can get a fairly clear picture of cougar population trends in their area just by examining information that they routinely collect.

Is it the ideal system? Of course not. But given the limited budgets and nearly impossible task of conducting yearly census surveys on cougar populations, it still does the job.


----------



## BLACKEYE (Feb 1, 2012)

Kev,
Your exactly right these are the only tools any biologist has to manage with in Utah.

BUT there is a POOR tool called the "Wildlife board" not biologists that continue to order revisions to the cougar management plan. As well a past director that had "emergency" openings on the same unit that the wildlife board just closed.

The wildlife board has continually created conflict, confusion, over harvest, openings and closings during the last 5 years.

Wildlife board if you dont understand the plan dont act!!! Who ever has the most $$$$ or sends the most emails is not a good reason to mess with any plan if you dont undersand the RESULTS!!! 

If a biologist was allowed to manage these predators & all game without a sales pitch to keep his plan in tact ALL OF UTAH WILDLIFE WOULD PROSPER!!! 

I will not speculate what the lion population in Utah IS but I sure know what it WAS.

We all still see no response from the deer herd. 

JMHO


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

You're preaching to the choir Blackeye. The function of the wildlife board is to set the social and political parameters in which they want lions managed, and the job of the biologist is to see those objectives are reached within the parameters set. What makes sense from a biological perspective may not be feasible given the political parameters set by the wildlife board.......and you're right, it doesn't help when the wildlife board keeps moving the goal posts. But that is a separate issue.

I first started tagging along with a buddy's dad on hound/lion hunts back in 1975, and have been running my own hounds continuously in the same areas since 1983. I mention this only because I do have a personal historical perspective on where the lion population has been and the direction it is headed. I've seen the ebbs and the flows of the lion/deer population dynamics and the consequences of nearly 40 years of political objectives set by the wildlife board.

Houndhunter brought up an interesting point when he said that lion population actually *increases* when you take the dominant toms out of the population. That is something I too have observed. The highest lion numbers I have seen was back in the early to mid 90's right after the wildlife board decided to increase the lion harvest to save the deer. We didn't have the big toms any longer, but suddenly we had an explosion of young cats that took their place over the next few years.......exactly the opposite of what the wildlife board intended.

I remember some biologists at the time predicted this would happen, but bowing to pressure from the newly formed SFW, the wildlife board did it anyway. Sometimes, you have to be careful what you wish for.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> ridgetop said:
> 
> 
> > I heard over 30 were taken off the Stansburys this winter. Any truth to it?
> ...


goofy, I talked to the Biologist today and he said that there has only been 4 cats killed off the Stansburys this year. He said that there are only about 30 cats total on the Oquirrh/Stansbury unit. Someone is sure spreading a wild rumor.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Yep ridge, I'd say you've got the right numbers now ...


----------

