HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-0217 Documents Submitted at Meeting
'Wb~ 7/17/07
fu~t 7o/2vPJ\-~
Good Evening Ashland Council Members,
My name is Sally Mackler, I am the wildlife chair for the Oregon Sierra Club.
It is regrettable that the young cougar was killed in Ashland. He did not appear to be acting
aggressively and most likely his biggest crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong
time. In truth, it is likely that this animal (and others we have no idea about) frequently utilize
the creek bed running along the area as a wildlife corridor. Wildlife frequent fringe areas like
greenbelts, golf courses and river channels as regular corridors at night when we are
unaware of their presence. I do not believe a person could have legally killed the animal, as
the conditions do not seem to reach the legal criteria for public safety killing. I have included
a copy of the state law, fyi.
Feb. 17,09
The state has a policy of not relocating cougars or bears, hence their typical response is to
kill the occasional bear or cougar or bear who gets caught in town. Either with bullets directly,
as in this case, or by chemical tranquilization and 'euthanasia'.
As far as I know, there is nothing prohibiting Ashland from establishing its own wildlife
management ordinance, should you decide to consider alternatives to the state's policy.
You may want to research this by contacting wildlife advocacy agencies, as well as state
authorities, and look into nonlethal remedies that may be preclude the need for killing.
Preventing conflict is the best policy to ensure public safety. Unfortunately, our state's
management strategies may actually be creating conditions for conflict, rather than
preventing it. In the last 15 years management has successfully and intentionally increased
the mortality of cougars such that more than double the number of cougars are killed annually
in Oregon (from around 200 in early 90's to approx. 500 in 07 and 08). Decades of
research on cougars has shown that heavy hunting disrupts the social system and leaves an
abundance of juvenile animals, the age class usually responsible for conflicts. Current
research is underway in Washington State Carnivore Lab which confirms this to be true.
Washington shares a similar management history of cougars to our own state. They
prohibited sport hound hunting and have increased their kill nos significantly through
aggressive hunting programs like ours. Their last few years of research show that what was
thought to be a growing Washington cougar population, based on public complaints and
high mortality figures, is actually a population in decline by 20 to 300/0. Their studies also
showed the stable territories of adults to have been weakened by heavy hunting, opening
territory up to juveniles who move in and cause conflict. Wildlife managers in Washington
state are now backing off their aggressive hunting program in order to not cause further
damage and instability to the population and to attempt to prevent the growing conflicts
their program may unwittingly have created. Managers in Oregon have not considered this
informati<;>n or adjusted their program accordingly, rather they continue to increase kill quotas,
Rep. Buckley has a bill drafted to require the state to provide this type of nonlethal
information to the public. I can think of no more appropriate place to put this progressive
policy into action than in Ashland. At the least, Ashland may want to begin a proactive
program of educating people on how to behave should they see a cougar or bear, and
how to avoid drawing unwanted wildlife into residential areas.
Thank you for your time.
Sally Mackler
846 6148 (not for publication)
\\\\JII"\ilt l" SL\ll'
~.', - --';---- -.. .. '. - --;.-;', -- ---
y l " I \ l ;{\ I I '1
Current Projects
!:'~ Effects of Hunting on Cougar Population Ecology
.~ Hilary Cooley, H.S. Robinson, B.T. Maletzke, G.M. Koehler, R.B. Wielgus & others
" This project is on-going as part of Hilary Cooley's, Hugh Robinson's,and Ben Maletzke's Ph,D, programs, We
· compared a heavily-hunted (Kettle Falls WA) and a very lightly hunted population (Cle Elum WA) to test for
, ' differences in population demography. We examined male mortality, male immigration, female maternity, cub
.~ survival, female survival, and population growth rates to test the "closed population, increased reproduction"
, or "open population, decreased reproduction" hypotheses of population regulation in large carnivore
populations, (See hunting of grizzlies in Completed Projects). High mortality of resident adult males resulted
in increasing numbers of potentially infanticidal immigrant males, decreasing numbers of juveniles and
females, but no net change in total cougar numbers, Low mortality resulted in high emigration of younger animals, stable
numbers of juveniles, females, and males, and no net change in total cougar numbers. Hunting did not reduce total numbers
or densities of cougars, as commonly thought, because of male immigration, Lack of hunting did not i~prease total numbers or
densities of cougars, as commonly thought, because of emigration, Hunting caused a shift in the sex and age structure
towards younger males and a female population decline. Our results support the open population, decreased reproduction
hypothesis of cougar population regulation,
Robinson, H,S" R.B, Wielgus, H,S, Cooley, and S,W, Cooley, 2008. Sink populations in large carnivore management: cougar
demography and immigration in a hunted population. Ecological Applications (In Press). See Sink,pdf
Cooley, H,S" R.B, Wielgus, G.M, Koehler, and B,T., Maletzke. 2008. Source populations in large carnivore management:
cougar demography and emigration in an unhunted population, Ecological Applications (In Prep),
Effects of Hunting on Cougar/Human Conflicts
Ben Maletzke, G.M. Koehler, H.S. Cooley, & R.B. Wielgus
This project is on-going as part of Ben Maletzke's Ph,D. program, Heavily hunted and white-tailed deer
occupied areas appear to show much greater incidences of cougar-human conflicts (cougar complaints,
cougar use of human occupied areas; attacks on humans, pets, and livestock) than lightly hunted, white-tail
free areas_ We hypothesize that heavy hunting of resident adult cougars in such areas results in high rates oU,.,
immigration and settling by sub-adult males and that these males use human-occupied and white-tailed deer
areas, and cause more atta<?ks than adults, Results to-date indicate that unhunted, older, resident cougars
have stable home ranges and avoid human-occupied areas whereas hunted, younger, immigrant cougars have unstable home
ranges and use human-occupied areas. Heavy hunting and white-tailed deer expansion appears to exacerbate, not alleviate,
cougar/human conflicts,
Effects of Hunting on COUg9r Prey Selection and Sexual
Habitat Segregation
Jon Keehner, H.S. Cooley, and R.B. Wielgus
This project is on-going as part of Jon Keehner's M_S, to Ph,D. Program, Cougars selectively prey on
mule deer but not sympatric white-tailed deer, We tested and rejected the hypothesis that many mule
, deer killed by cougars are actually mule deer/white-tailed deer hybrids that have poor predator
. avoidance and escape strategies, We also tested and supported the hypothesis that selection for
mule deer was caused, by cougar sexual habitat segregation, Only females (especially those with
kittens) select for mule deer. Our preliminary results suggest that high mortality of resident adult
males and corresponding high immigration by potentially infanticidal males results in sexually selected habitat segregation
~
.' ....
~
# .'~, t
. ';; ..{f~,
-.' .."
~.
~,
~".
<<. . ..~
...,~
. ..... ...
.~ 1
",I!"
f'.
If' . "
,,'
l
af\\
.
: r-' ~ ~
\' '_..' ~..
'. I
Recent trends in cougar (mountain lion) damage, harvest and other mortality in Oregon,
1992-2008.
Cougar Human
Number of Tags Hunter Damage Safety Other Total
Year Complaintsl Sold2 Harvest Ki1l3 Ki1l4 Mortality5 Mortality6
1992 184 517 187 17 3 22 229
1993 276 560 160 21 6 21 208
1994 554 588 144 30 9 21 204
1995 742 385 34 41 22 12 109
1996 840 779 45 66 32 25 168
1997 798 935 61 82 20 18 181
1998 954 11,761 152 93 20 17 283
1999 1,072 14,564 157 91 30 25 312
2000 942 22,386 135 120 25 19 300
2001 829 28,447 220 97 25 23 365
2002 765 32,126 232 111 23 37 403
2003 697 34,135 248 111 28 25 412
2004 545 34,071 265 95 28 35 423
2005 622 38,079 224 125 28 30 407
2006 451 38,719 289 106 26 32 453
2007 445 41,813 308 115 21 93 537
20087 451 43,211 274 106 23 84 487
1 Number of complaints received during the calendar year, Sightings not associated
with damage or public safety concerns are not included.
2 Includes general and additional tags (including sportpac licenses).
3 Number of animals killed as a result of damage during a calendar year.
4 Animals killed as a result of real or perceived threat to humans or pets.
5 Includes roadkill, accidental, found dead, illegal kill, and Administrative Removals
(2007-2008 only).
6 Includes harvest, damage, and other known mortality.
7 Data are current throu2h 30 Jan 2009. Numbers may chan2e as data are added as
necessary.
498.166 Bears or cougars posing threat to human safety. (1)
Notwithstanding the licensing and tag requirements of ORS 497.102
and 497.112, a person may take a cougar or bear that poses a threat to
human safety.
(2) Any person who takes a cougar or bear pursuant to subsection
( 1) of this section shall immediately report the taking to a person
authorized to enforce the wildlife laws and shall dispose of the animal in
such manner as the State Fish and Wildlife Commission directs.
(3) Any regional office of the State Department ofFish and Wildlife
ordering the disposal of an animal under subsection (2) of this section
shall file a report with the State Fish and Wildlife Director within 30
days after the disposal. The report shall include but need not be limited
to the disposition of the animal, the events leading to the taking of the
animal and any injUl)' caused by the animal to hun1ans or domesticated
animals. The director shall compile all reports received under this
subsection on a bimonthly basis. The reports compiled by the director
shall be available to the public upon request.
( 4) As used in this section:
(a) "Structure" includes a building being used as a residence, a
building located on land actively used for agricultural, timber
management, ranching or construction purposes or a building used as
part of a business.
(b) "Threat to human safety" means the exhibition by a cougar or
bear of one or more of the following behaviors:
(A) Aggressive actions directed toward a person or persons,
including but not limited to charging, false charging, growling, teeth
popping and snarling.
(B) Breaking into, or attempting to break into, a residence.
(C) Attacking a pet or domestic animal as defined in ORS 167.310.
(D) Loss of wariness of humans, displayed through repeated
sightings of the animal during the day near a permanent structure,
permanent corral or mobile dwelling used by humans at an agricultural,
timber management, ranching or construction site. [2001 c.431 g2]
Note: 498.166 was added to and made a part of the wildlife laws
by legislative action but was not added to ORS chapter 498 or any
G'l
~
~
g;
5
G'l
~
i
g
[
C/lC/lC/l
g ~ ~
5' .;;c:. .;;c:'
~ g g
Q~~
c21'8c-
g ~ CD
o
a
@
:::l.
OJ
~
a.
~
G'l
iil
a
!!L
~
:I:
:a:
~
(")
o
~
f
a.
G'l
i
I
~
~
o
~
:::
o
w
~
i
o
tV
C/lC/l::O::O::O"U
~ ~'c8 c8 c8 iU
~i~~~!
~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-enC/lO :::I
~ '<~ ::T
~, ~ 3 ~
~. g~,
en '<.:<
o
Cl)
<
Cl)
-8
3
(I)
;a
o
~
a
~
6'
:::I
-0
o
o
I'.)
.0
8
--.j
(J'l
o
.I:>. W
en<n
8 8
I'.)
-0
o
o
-.j .I:>.
-(J'l'O
8 8
..1:>.
NO)
-8 ~
8
(J'l
.8
o
_a. -..j
~ .~
(J'l
-0
o
o
0) 00
.0.0
o 0
o 0
w
W
-.j
(J'l
-I'.) .1'.)
~~
'0
8
~ .8
o 0
.~
(J'l
o
o
~
.1'.)
~
o
w I'.)
-(J'l "(J'l
o 0
o 0
.I:>.
N
o
o
.I:>.
-0
8
O;_~_~_o ~
0, (J'l (J'l (J'l .(J'l
8888 8
iJlO)
~ -:;,
-.j 0
-l
Cl)
(I)
:::I
-l
~
a
~
"UOOZ
!B .... .... co
@C@C@~
:x::::I:::Ia.
gitr~~
~'g ~~
~2;'~~
~ ~ 8_
D)' a
!!l 5'
G) :::I
!;;,
a:
"U
~
Q)
3
I'.)
en
8
.~
(J'l
o
o
w
N
~
I'.)
<n
o
o
w _~
'O(J'l
88
0)
.0
8
0)
~
o
0)
-8
o
-..j
'8
(J'l
'0
o
o
-.j
'8
o
..1:>.
~
~~
=: n
~i
al,.i)
~~2g
~ Ci)' g. cu
~ := ~
~ ~ ~~
(;)m~
!;;, : iir
~q~
o-<g
(jj 0 3
co S-
a ::T
:::I
w
0,
8
I'.)
'0
8
o
o
o
o
c.n '0
00
o 0
I'.)
c.n
8
I'.)
-g
c,)
::>::-l:X:
I ~~.
~ ~ g
OJ ~ ~
ag~
~~(j)
~ ~
~q
::0
~
cO'
6'
:::I
_.I:>.
8
o
.I:>.
'0
8
_(J'l
8
o
CD
~
c.n
.0
8
(3
-(J'l
8
~
~
-l00
~ ~, ~
(I) co co
Hi
Oen
~
Q)
:::I
'<
,~
o
o
o
I'\.)
'0
8
en
o
o
I'\.)
-(J'l
8
!'>
~
o
00
o
8
w
.0
8
-..j
-0
8
I'\.) I'\.)
-(J'l -(J'l
88
I'\.)
.~
9.~~
q:s.![
~- ~ S
~ ~ ~
~ "U
~~
-l Q)
ma
g~
;:~
en OJ
;;z: a
8.~
1.0
.0
8
o ,~
-8 ~ 8
o 0 0
o
.0 ~
o 0
o 0
o
8
o
I'\.)
8 '~
-..j .0)
.(J'l
88
-.j (J'l W
0, '0 -.I:>.
000
000
.(J'l I'\.) ..1:>.
00,0
888
.I:>. I'.) .I:>.
"(J'l c.n 0
000
000
(J'l
-~
I'\.)
0,
g
(J'l 0) 0)
'0.0 '0
ggg
_.I:>. _0) en
O(J'l'O
888
!'> ..1:>.
~~~
~~
::T ::T
~ ~
a. a.
(;)0
!!1.. a
~~
:> ~,
~.:<
8, =J
g.~
:::I CD
_.I:>. (J'l
(J'l -0
88
(J'lO
8~
o 0
~~?i?i?ii
iUo:E:~~:::I
aE~~~~
OJ :::I m IU
8.9,3. ii.
Q) a~ "U
5. C/l :::I. 0
'iR~~ ~
!B'ilen ~
~ 3
~Q
z Cl)
~g
~
.0
8
I'\.) .I:>.
00
o 0
o 0
9' !'>
~ ~
,-
00
I'.)
o
.00
~
_w
~
o
w
'0
o
o
w
en
8
w
.0
8
w
~
w
-(J'l
o
o
.(J'l
8
w
-8
o
I'\.)
'w
~
I'\.)
0,
8
Z
IU
3
CD
~:>"T1
~ -<
IU co
a~
~8
~ :> ~
~ co
a.U'1
CD <0
c.. en
~ ~ ~
IU co
a. a>
CD <0
c.. -..j
~ :> "T1
~ -<
IU co
i~
~ :> "T1
~ -<
ali
~:8
-EA :> "T1
~ -<
IU co
a. co
CD 6
c.. 0
-EA:>"T1
~ -<
a~
~~
~:>"T1
~ -<
ag
CD 6
c.. N
~:>"T1
~ -<
~ 0
'8 ~ ~
o c.. C".)
-EA :> ~
:l 0
I'\.) a. 'f>
"8 ~ ~
~ :> 'TI
~ -<
IU ~
~6
c.. U'I
-EA
~ .CJ1
- 8
~~
~~
a.U'1
CD 6
c.. en
.1'.)
o
(J'l
~~~
IU 0
a. a>
(I) 6
c.. ......
-EA :> 'TI
~ -<
IU 0
~6
c.. Q)
U) ~ ~
DO 0
~~
c.. co
m
8
:::I
o
3
i'i"
DO
:::I
c..
n
c:
;:;:
~
o
~
(I)
0-
"C
3
(II
;a
G)
iil
:::I
;;
m
(')
o
::J
o
3
C:;.
A)
::J
0-
n
c::
e:n
iit-<
-0
c-
~ i:
(I) ::T
aiii'"
"O::J
30-
ft)
a
G>
ji;
3-
::I:
iii"
0-
-<
~
~
l~
~
!~
'i
Q
if
~
i};
E
Q
~
m
~
(")
i,
a
~
Q
~
!i:
Wjl
~
I
in'
I
(")
o
~
!!..
~
a.
~
i
I
!a:
~
I
:::
8
~
i
'"
o
'"
~
g-
o
III
5'
~
5'
*
~
5'
a.
lD
a.
-4
o
~
j~~
g ~ ~
zOo
(J)~9
f~~
~ ~ III
(j) 3 9.
,,9.0
~~~
~~~g
0" ~
!! 5
..
N
tl
u.
8
2~~~
~.8.8~
~
o
8
~~~~
i~.~ .8
..
N
~
o
o
o
/'oJ
~::::~~
~ .8 8 "--J
~ooi:;
..
N
W
~
(,0>
U\
o
/'oJ
..... 'l W
oN ...... .w .~
~88i:;
..
8
o
8
~ .;j
Goo>
88
...
N
::!
~
tl'l
CD (J)
~~
.~
0)
8
~
~ .~
o 0
e 0
..
~
(.,)
~
c..>
~ .~
(.,)w
~~
..
~
8
o
~Ci
0>
j:~
00
t>
0)
Co
o
o
~N
..r>o. N
.r>o. .w
..... W
/'oJ N
~
0.
.....
U\
~Ci
~.8
~
_U\
co
0)
~N
~ .~
..... 0
U\
e
.....
o
~
c..>
0)
ow
Cow
~8
U\ c.>
~ ~.O)
<D ~ 8
8
(.,)
~
w
~~
Co .",
tl~
-<~=i=i
~~~(ll
(J) 5" ~ ~
3~:;;'=~
l ~ ~. ~
'< ~ ~
9.. w
o
(j)
cg
~
U)
c::
a'
0"
!!
iD
~~
N
o
8.....
08
~
~ -CJ1
0) .l>-
e 0
~ ....
-""'CJ1
o~
$
-0
8
c..>
w
~~
a;
N
-.I>-
8
c..>
I<.) W
en .0
88
~
m
-.I>-
o
o
~w
c." ..1>-
g8
~
"0
8
Siw
oi-J
8~
~
'"
~
o
8i",
~8
00
N
m
.N
.I>-
o
Ul
oN .w
.r>o. 0
/'oJ 0
CD 0
~
..1>-
fd
lB~
~ .0
t:s8
'"
~
U\
~
..... CJ1
~ -~
'"
~
-...j
-m
~
(Jl
SiCJ1
g .8
0> 0
'"
CJ1 Ul
CJ1 .Ul a>
.~ ~ ~
'"
R3
.-...j
~
fjw
-~ .~
~~
o~
~~
"U
8-
c::
$4
5'
~
'"
(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)
8 g 8 ~ ~
5'5'5'~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
QQQQQ
c2lc2lc2lc2lc2l
00000
~~~~~
~l~~~
~ g' g, (J) Qo
~ Ql.. ~ 8. ~
{o.a?g>~~
c5 m. Q, ~
~-8~~
3 w
~ a.
~ a:
(") ~
~
~
:t
:I1
3
~
;c.
0)
..:;;:;
w
.CJ1
8
w
.~
o
CJ1
"0
8
.N
~
CJ1
"~
CJ1
~
CJ1
.0
o
o
-...j ......
~o
o 0
00
-...j
~
o
8
.I>-
o"--J
go
'" CJ1
8~
o .I>-
.~ 0>
0'"
88
W <D
-~ ~
.AO>'"
0"0",
8g8
CJ1
"8
w
.w
-...j
(Jl
~
"@
!J
~
(J) (J) (J) '>
Oooca
.c 0 0 ~
z::o::o~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~, j
~. (ll 0 Ai
~-8~ :r
~,,~ ~
i- i ~ ~
~ g ~
~m~
~ ~, g.
~~
:t::x:
i~
(ll m
f-
~
o
o
o
w CJ1
0>"0
o 0
o 0
CJ1
"0
8
w
o
g
w
"0
g
.'" 0>
.CJ1
e 8
'"
-CJ1
8
~
g .8
o 0
-~
a>
"0
o
o
~
ffi
~
$
a>
N
~
'>-n
:E -<
III <D
a~
l!.~
'>-n
~ -<
a~
(II <D
Co 0)
~~
II) <D
aO)
(II cO
Co .....
'>-n
:E -<
III <D
i-:-"
Co:g
'>-n
:E -<
a:g
(II cO
Co <D
~~
lU <D
a<D
(II 6
c. 0
~~
a.~
~~
w
.0
8
~~
III ~
g.6
Co I<.)
'"
o
o
o
~~
lU 0
a/'oJ
(II 6
Co W
'>-n
lIE -<
III 0
W a c.p
~ ~ ~
>-n
:E -<
-~ a ~
8 ~ ~
~~
II) CI
maUl
--...j (II 6
~ Co 0)
>-n
:E -<
~ CI
CoO)
~ ~ ~
>"
:E -<
<:n III CI
.Q ~ '6
~ Co 0>
>-n
:E -<
CJ1 a g
S: (II 6
-...j Co <D
m
8
~
(,i"
lU
~
Co
o
c::
;::;:
c
~
o
~
(II
0-
-c
3
(II
~
Q
DJ
~
fi)
m
(")
o
:::J
o
3
cr
II)
:::J
c..
("')
c:
;:;:("')
;~
-0
c-
a.1>
< en
a. ::r
oiii"
"O::J
3 c..
ttI
3-
G')
Q;
:a.
::x:
iii"
0-
-<