# North Dakota's 2nd mountain lion season



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

http://www.in-forum.com/ap/index.cfm?page=view&id=D8I3DSRO2
*Game and Fish Department backing second mountain lion season*
The Associated Press - Wednesday, June 07, 2006
BISMARCK, N.D.

North Dakota's Game and Fish Department is proposing a second hunting season for mountain lions, although an agency official says it would need some new restrictions.

The state's first season, which ran from September to January, was "an unqualified success," said Randy Kreil, chief of the agency's wildlife division. Five lions were shot before the season was closed Jan. 15.

Kreil told the Legislature's interim Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday that the agency will request a second season, which would begin Sept. 2. It would end when five mountain lions are killed, or March 12, whichever came first.

The proposal will go to Gov. John Hoeven for approval late next month, along with other regulations for small game and furbearers such as fox and mink.

Mountain lion kittens, which can be identified by their spots, should be off limits during the new season, along with female lions who are accompanied by kittens, Kreil said. Hunters also will not be allowed to use dogs to pursue a lion after Jan. 1, under the proposal.

Dorothy Fecske, a Game and Fish Department biologist, said lions' spots fade as they get older. They are normally no longer visible when the lion is a year old, she said. During the first season, the last lion killed - a female between four and six months old - would have been off limits to hunters.

Kreil said the first hunting season had provided valuable information to the Game and Fish Department. Hunters were required to turn over carcasses to the agency.

"We documented once and for all that mountain lions are breeding in this state," Kreil said. "We think that continuing with an experimental mountain lion season ... would be a good way to collect (more) biological information."

Fecske said three of the five lions shot during the last season were living in North Dakota. She said the state's only suitable habitat is in the Badlands, which could support from 45 to 74 lions. Fecske said she could not estimate how many mountain lions are living in the state.

Some view the animals as part of the natural environment while others want them eliminated.

"People need to think about what it means and how it's going to affect their lives, livestock operation, recreational and hunting opportunities," Kreil said. "It's all part of the learning process and we're all learning together."


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

Since the population in North Dakota has rebounded a little bit over the past few years, I dont think that the experimental hunting season was the best way to gather information on the cats-shooting 5 all ready "endangered" cats is not a way to go about it right away. I think that the population has to grow more before a season is put in place.

One question, Why is only the western part of the state suitable for mountain lions?

Ryan


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Would someone from the G&F post the report, conclusions, findings or the like from the first season.
Also guides and outfitters and professional hunters should NOT be allowed to participate this year.


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

The only thing i have heard them post is that the animals" Are breeding" in the area :roll:


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

Zogman
Would someone with trained hounds be considered a professional?

Reason I ask is if you live in North Dakota and have put the time and money into training your dogs and usually go to Montana with the dogs for tracking, it would be a shame not to be not included in your resident states season. Keep in mind, most people who have put the time and money into this are doing for the sport, they do not shoot the treed mountain lion often; more after the adrenaline rush, keeps the dogs happy and also get pictures or video.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

NO, not in my humble opinion. However that being said as I understand the 5th Cat (kitten) killed last year was killed by a professional hunter.


----------



## dogdonthunt (Nov 10, 2005)

If Im not mistaken I was under the impression that that same pro with trained dogs was the one who took three of the cats in ND, which if its true then maybe they should put a limit on how many one person can take, like an above post said these guys spend all there time training and going to MT which is fine but not really fair to other hunters who might wish to try thier luck and get a nice trophy....this was an expiremetal hunt not a go ahead and take what one person can get....this is my opinion and you are welcome to agree or disagree if you like but if you look at it like any other wild population there is an estimated amount that will not be taken during hunting regs and maybe that will add to the pop. also or like I said it would give someone else a chance.....dont get me wrong, if someone takes the time and money to train dogs then by all means go ahead and take a shot but give someone else a chance, besides these dogs were trained before this season and they werent trained to take the ones from ND :2cents:


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

If i am correct, Werent only 2 of the cats that were killed tracked by dogs? the rest were shot during deer season were they not


----------



## frosty (Dec 6, 2002)

dogdonthunt:

Please get your information correct before you spread false information. There was a rule in place last year that allowed the taking of 1 cat, per person. Five different cats, five different people.

"The pro" that you are referring to took the last cat of the season, not the last three. He is a dedicated hunter and yes he has hounds in which he spent numerous in the badlands last year.

I personally like the new regs, gives everyone (foot hunters and houndsmen) good opportunity to pursue cats in North Dakota. As with the restriction on kittens, also a good change. During the experiemental season it provided great information but this year wouldn't provide much other than bad publicity.

Hats off to NDGF.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Frosty says


> During the experiemental season it provided great information


Please post the info. I don't think many have seen that information.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Zoggy, request sent in, we'll see what comes back.


----------



## Curt Wells (Jan 13, 2003)

Lindbergh9,

Who ever gave you the impression mountain lions are endangered? That's simply not true, not even close.


----------



## mburgess (Aug 11, 2003)

Go to www.easterncougarnet.org. There have been many Mountain Lion confirmations in the Turtle Mountains as well, so the badlands aren't the only habitat that hold lions. It has been known for years that lions are breeding in the turtle mountains by people who live in that region, this website is great as it shows all of the confirmed cases in ND by professionals. I think the changes made were good ones in my opinion, but I don't believe that their population is so great in the state that a continued hunting season year after year is warranted and that NDGF is treading a fine line with this situation.


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

Curt Wells said:


> Lindbergh9,
> 
> Who ever gave you the impression mountain lions are endangered? That's simply not true, not even close.


That is why I put endangered in quotations-meaning over the past few years, mountain lion populations (meaning in North Dakota)have been rebounding from very very low numbers. Sorry for the confussion


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Thanks, Dick


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

A big thank you to Dorothy Fecske, ND Game and Fish Department biologist for the following info:

Status of Mountain Lions (Puma concolor) in North Dakota
A Report to the Legislative Council
Submitted by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department
June 2006
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Section 2 of House Bill 1102, enacted by the 2005 legislature, directed the North Dakota Game
and Fish Department (Department), in cooperation with Tribal authorities, to assess the status of
mountain lions (Puma concolor) in North Dakota and report its findings to the legislative council
before July 1, 2006. In the past year, the Department: 1) reviewed reported sightings of lions
from the recent past (2001-2005), 2) surveyed North Dakota hunters for additional sighting
information, 3) mapped suitable lion habitat throughout the state, and 4) initiated an
experimental mountain lion season with a quota of five animals. Although most of North Dakota
is unsuitable for mountain lions, the habitat suitability map identified the North Dakota Badlands
(Badlands) and associated Missouri River (MR) Breaklands as having a sufficient amount of
suitable habitat to support a small resident population. Data from verified reports of sightings
and the experimental season indicated mountain lions either have recolonized or are in the
process of recolonizing a portion of their former range in the Badlands. Not only did the
majority of verified sightings occur in the Badlands and vicinity, but also, all animals harvested
during the state-wide season were taken from this area. The relatively small lion population in
the Badlands likely will be vulnerable to human-caused mortality due to its geographic isolation
from breeding lion populations in adjacent states, therefore, close monitoring of management
prescriptions carried out on the population will be necessary if a reproductively viable population
is to be maintained. Based on an initial analysis of habitat quality, approximately 2% of North
Dakota (suitable habitat in the Badlands and MR Breaklands) could support an average of 45 to
74 resident adult animals under a management scenario with no harvest mortality. This is not an
estimate of the current population size, but rather an estimate of habitat potential for the area.
iii
Plans for 2006-07 are to: 1) continue to record and verify reported sightings of lions, 2) survey
hunters for lion sighting information, 3) test the habitat suitability map, 4) conduct field surveys
to monitor the population, 5) coordinate with Tribal authorities and adjacent state agencies on
lion management issues, 6) continue with education efforts and 7) conduct a second experimental
season.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................II
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................ IV
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................V
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ VI
LIST OF APPENDICES........................................................................................ VII
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1
HISTORICAL AND LEGAL STATUS.................................................................................1
OBJECTIVE ...............................................................................................................2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ..........................................................................2
REPORTED SIGHTINGS BY THE PUBLIC ........................................................................2
REPORTED SIGHTINGS BY HUNTERS ............................................................................4
MAPPING SUITABLE HABITAT FOR MOUNTAIN LIONS....................................................4
METHODS ................................................................................................................6
REPORTED SIGHTINGS BY THE PUBLIC ........................................................................6
DEER HUNTER OBSERVATION QUESTIONNAIRE AND FURBEARER HARVEST SURVEY ........6
HABITAT SUITABILITY MAP .........................................................................................7
COORDINATION WITH TRIBAL AUTHORITIES AND STATE AGENCIES .............................10
EXPERIMENTAL MOUNTAIN LION SEASON..................................................................11
RESULTS ................................................................................................................12
MOUNTAIN LION SIGHTINGS.....................................................................................12
DEER HUNTER OBSERVATION QUESTIONNAIRE ..........................................................14
HABITAT SUITABILITY MAP .......................................................................................14
EXPERIMENTAL MOUNTAIN LION SEASON..................................................................15
DISCUSSION..........................................................................................................17
MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS .......................................................................22
MANAGEMENT APPROACH FOR MOUNTAIN LIONS 2006-2007 ...............24
LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................27
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Landscape characteristics used to create a habitat suitability map for mountain lions
by recoding values according to their suitability to the species&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..
9
Table 2. Number of reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota (2004 - 2005)
by month&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;...
30
Table 3. Number of reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota (2004 - 2005)
by sighting classification&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..
31
Table 4. Number of verified reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota (2001-
2005) by type of sighting (sign or event)&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;
32
Table 5. Number of unfounded reported sightings (n=22) of mountain lions in North
Dakota (2004-2005) by type of mistaken identity&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..
33
Table 6. Hunting units in North Dakota in which hunters reported seeing a mountain lion
while hunting deer over opening weekend (November 4-5) of the 2005 deer gun
season&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;
34
Table 7. Regions in North Dakota that contained relatively large and contiguous areas
(measured in km2) of moderate-high (Rank 3) and high- (Rank 4) quality habitat for
mountain lions&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..
35
Table 8. Mountain lions harvested in North Dakota during the 2005-06 experimental
mountain lion season&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;
36
Table 9. Nutritional condition of five mountain lions harvested in North Dakota during the
2005-06 experimental mountain lion season&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..&#8230;&#8230;..
37
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Three components [concealment/stalking cover (trees and shrubs), concealment/
stalking topography (slopes) and travel habitat (habitat near streams)] used to
construct the habitat suitability map for mountain lions in North Dakota ...............
38
Figure 2. Verified reports of mountain lion locations in North Dakota, 2001-2005 &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;... 41
Figure 3. Counties in North Dakota with reported mountain lions sightings in 2004 ............. 42
Figure 4. Counties in North Dakota with reported mountain lions sightings in 2005 &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. 43
Figure 5. Hunting Units in North Dakota in which hunters reported seeing a mountain
lion while hunting deer opening weekend (November4-5) of 2005 the deer
gun season&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.
44
Figure 6. Habitat suitability map for mountain lions in North Dakota&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. 45
Figure 7. Ecoregions in North Dakota that can support a breeding population of
mountain lions&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..
46
Figure 8. Verified reports of mountain lions in North Dakota since the end of the 2005-06
experimental season (Jan. 15, 2006)&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.
47
vii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix I. Large carnivore report form&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. 48
Appendix II. Guidelines for mountain lion/human/property interactions&#8230;.&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. 49
Appendix III. 2005 Deer hunter observation questionnaire and 2005-06 Furbearer
harvest survey&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;
53
Appendix IV. Regional mountain lion management meeting, March 9-10, 2006, Dickinson,
North Dakota&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.
55
Appendix V. Parameters of 2005-06 experimental mountain lion season&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;... 58
Appendix VI. Data collection sheets for harvested mountain lions&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;... 59
1
INTRODUCTION
Historical and legal status
Historically mountain lions (Puma concolor) occurred in North Dakota, although the
species was considered scarce in the open prairie country (Bailey 1926). According to historic
records, in the 1800s lions were found along the Little Missouri River in the North Dakota
Badlands (Badlands), Killdeer Mountains, and the Missouri River (MR) Breaklands. At the
time, the species was not protected from indiscriminant killing, and by the early 1900s, the
population was believed to be extinct (Young and Goldman 1946). The last confirmed record in
North Dakota was in 1902, when a 65 kg (143 lb) male mountain lion was shot by Mr. C. Parker,
40 km (25 mi) down the Missouri River from Williston, North Dakota, on the south side of the
River (Bailey 1926).
When mountain lions returned to North Dakota is unknown. The earliest record
documented by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department (Department) occurred in 1958,
near Killdeer, North Dakota. From 1958 until 1991 there were 11 confirmed reports in the state.
Then, in 1991, after a young female lion was shot in a barn near Golva, North Dakota, lions were
legislatively classified as a furbearer with a closed season (Senate Bill 2043, Section 1).
However, regulations still allowed landowners to kill a lion that was depredating poultry or
domestic animals, and in 2005, a law change required that such lions be turned in to the
Department (House Bill 1102, Section 1). In the 12 years following regulation of the species
(1991-2003), the number of confirmed reports (26) more than doubled from the previous 33
years. When continued presence of mountain lions in North Dakota was apparent, a more formal
reporting system was initiated and a mountain lion action plan was prepared by McKenna, Ermer
2
and others (2004) to address interactions between lions and humans or their property (McKenna,
Ermer et al. 2004).
Objective
The objective of this report is to assess the current status of mountain lions in North
Dakota. According to Section 2 of House Bill 1102, enacted by the 2005 legislature, the
Department, in cooperation with Tribal authorities, was directed to assess the status of mountain
lions in North Dakota and report its findings to the legislative council before July 1, 2006. To
accomplish this assessment, this past year, the Department: 1) reviewed reported sightings of
lions from the recent past 2) surveyed North Dakota hunters for additional sighting information,
3) evaluated suitable lion habitat in North Dakota, 4) carried out an experimental mountain lion
season, 5) coordinated with Tribal Authorities, and 6) coordinated with adjacent states on status
and management of mountain lions. Questions the Department was seeking to answer included:
1) Are lions found throughout the state or are they concentrated in a few regions?
2) Are there individual adult breeding females in the state?
3) Is there an established breeding population?
4) What habitats are important to lions in North Dakota? and
5) Can North Dakota support a lion population or does it serve mainly as dispersal
habitat for young lions?
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Reported sightings by the public
Sightings of mountain lions reported by the public can be helpful to wildlife managers by
identifying habitats or regions that may be important to the species as well as documenting their
3
presence in these areas. Sightings are not reliable for documenting annual population trends due
to the high rate of misidentification of the species and a number of factors that influence reports
[i.e., media coverage of incidents involving lions and people or domestic animals, increases in
human population and road densities, greater public awareness of the species presence, trends in
recreational use, changes in prey abundance, etc.; VanDyke and Brocke 1987; Cougar
Management Guidelines Working Group (CMGWG) 2005]. However, reports of sightings,
when carefully screened for reliability and used in conjunction with other information, can aid in
assessing population status.
The Department has collected information on reported sightings of mountain lions in
North Dakota since 1958. Initially, reports were infrequent, and although some historic records
contain sufficient information to assess their validity and map respective locations, others
provide little detail. In 2004, the Department adopted a more formal and consistent method of
reporting and verifying sightings (McKenna, Ermer et al. 2004). In addition to recording
specific locational information (i.e., Township, Range, Section or U.T.M. coordinate) and
specific information on the nature of the sighting on a Large Carnivore Report Form (Appendix
I), attempts are made to verify reports by obtaining physical evidence (i.e., video of animal,
photos of lions or their tracks, scat, hair, documented kill site of wild or domestic prey). After an
investigation (via phone conversation or on-site visit), sightings are classified according to their
validity, as unfounded, improbable/unverified, probable/unverified or verified. Through this
process, appropriate responses by the Department are determined based on the type of sighting
documented (i.e., general sighting; recurring sighting; encounter; incident or attack), as defined
in the guidelines for mountain lion/human/property interactions (Appendix II). These guidelines
were established in order to minimize damage to private property, reduce the potential for public
4
safety concerns, and to provide guidance to the Department on how to handle situations where
mountain lions interact with people or property (McKenna, Ermer et al. 2004).
Reported sightings by hunters
Although reported sightings are not useful for indexing lion populations, sighting data
collected annually from resident hunters may be useful for documenting population trends
(DeSimone and Semmens 2004). Deer hunters occur statewide, and hunting is a common
activity associated with lion sightings (VanDyke and Brocke 1987). Data collected on numbers
of hours hunters spent hunting (observing wildlife) over a specified period of time (e.g., during
opening weekend of the deer gun season) and numbers of lions seen, would provide the
necessary information to calculate population indices for North Dakota. Sightings by hunters are
not verified, however, and indices obtained from hunter sighting data must be viewed cautiously,
and periodically verified with empirical surveys (e.g., snow-track surveys, camera-station
surveys).
Mapping suitable habitat for mountain lions
Because mountain lions are wide-ranging, solitary animals that are difficult to monitor,
identifying suitable habitat is fundamental for defining breeding populations (CMGWG 2005).
Large geographic areas are required to accommodate populations of mountain lions and
management at the landscape level is necessary to manage populations long-term (Sinclair et al.
2001). Landscape level characteristics that can be measured across the range of the mountain
lion include vegetative cover, topography, streams, and areas of human activity. These
characteristics can be examined according to their suitability to mountain lions and mapped
using geographic information system (GIS) technology. GIS enables rapid analysis and mapping
5
of landscape-level characteristics over large geographic areas to create species-specific habitat
suitability maps.
Throughout their geographic range, mountain lions have adapted to a variety of habitats
and environmental conditions where prey are abundant (primarily mule deer, Odocoileus
hemionus, white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus and elk, Cervus elaphus; Anderson 1983).
However, an essential component of lion habitat is vegetative or topographic cover for
concealment (Sunquist and Sunquist 2002). Dense thickets, overhanging boughs of trees, and
other landscape elements (e.g., roots and logs of downed trees, shallow caves, rock outcrops,
boulder piles, and undercut cliffs) provide lions cover for hunting and stalking prey, security
while feeding and resting, and den sites for females with kittens (Hornocker 1970; Seidensticker
et al. 1973; Logan and Irwin 1985; Laing and Lindzey 1991; Jalkotzy et al. 1999; Koehler and
Hornocker 1991; Logan and Sweanor 2000; Sunquist and Sunquist 2002). Seidensticker et al.
(1973) noted that mountain lions were "constantly moving through the country in a way that
optimized encounters with prey and provided them with the best possible positions in terms of
cover from which to launch attacks." Once kills were made, lions dragged their prey into brush
or dense thickets before feeding and generally remained near their kills until consumed. Dickson
and Beier (2002) reported riparian habitats provided important stalking and feeding cover for
mountain lions.
Not only must landscapes contain suitable habitat characteristics for mountain lions, but
also, they must be distributed over a considerable area due to the large home ranges of these
animals. For example, home ranges of four female and three male resident lions in the Black
Hills of South Dakota ranged from 74 - 395 km2 (29 - 152 mi2) and 251 - 1,329 km2 (97 - 513
mi2), respectively (Fecske 2003). According to Beier (1993), a minimum of 1,000 - 2,200 km2
6
(386 - 893 mi2) of suitable habitat was needed to support a small lion population (15 - 20 adult
animals) with a 99% probability of persistence for 100 years. Habitat suitability maps can
identify areas that have a sufficient amount of suitable habitat to support a resident population, as
well as smaller areas that may serve as travel habitat and temporary sites for dispersing animals.
Logan and Sweanor (2001) noted the importance of identifying, mapping and conserving current
mountain lion habitat, including travel habitat, to maintain self sustaining, interconnected
populations. Like other large carnivores, mountain lions are considered an umbrella species
(Logan and Sweanor, 2001), in that maintaining or enhancing habitat to sustain their numbers
conserves viable populations of other species (Minta et al., 1999).
METHODS
Reported sightings by the public
Any Department employee who receives information regarding a human/mountain lion
interaction is responsible for filling out a large carnivore report form (Appendix I). Such forms
are forwarded to the Furbearer Biologist who enters the information in a web-based database.
Data on historic records also have been entered in this database. To aid in understanding the
distribution of mountain lions in North Dakota in the recent past, verified reports collected from
2001 - 2005, were mapped (Arc GIS 9, ESRI, Inc. Redlands, CA). Additionally, to document
factors influencing lion sightings in North Dakota, the number of sightings by month and year
(2004-2005), county of occurrence, type of sighting and verification status were examined.
Deer hunter observation questionnaire and furbearer harvest survey
Questions were added to the state's 2005 deer hunter observation questionnaire and 2005-
06 furbearer harvest survey (Appendix III) to gain more information on the distribution of lion
7
sightings in North Dakota and provide baseline data for documenting state-wide population
trends. For example, Question #7 on the deer hunter observation questionnaire asked "While
hunting, did you see a mountain lion?". Five thousand of these surveys were sent to deer hunters
immediately prior to opening weekend of deer gun season. The data collected included, for a
sample of hunters in each of the 37 deer gun hunting units in North Dakota, total number of
hours spent hunting ("observing") wildlife opening weekend of deer gun season and number of
lions seen. The data were used to obtain a population index for each hunting unit using the
number of lions seen per 1000 hours of observation.
A question on mountain lions also was added to the 2005 furbearer harvest survey to
measure hunter effort for the species by county. This questionnaire surveyed 5,000 hunters and
trappers statewide who either bought a furbearer stamp or a combination license for the 2005-06
season. On the annual survey, the mountain lion was added to the list of species hunted.
Respondents were asked to record the number of days they spent hunting lions, the county of
most activity, and number harvested.
Habitat suitability map
The mountain lion habitat suitability map for North Dakota was created in a GIS (GIS;
ArcGIS 9, ESRI, Inc., Redlands, California), based on published literature on habitat
requirements of the species and available digital databases. The model integrated three
landscape level characteristics: concealment/stalking cover (trees and shrubs),
concealment/stalking topography (slopes) and travel (riparian) habitat considered important to
lions. Digital, gridded (30-m2 cells) databases of habitat characteristics were recoded with
numerical values according to their suitability to lions, and then summed to create a final habitat
suitability map for the species. Landscapes unsuitable to lions [high-density residential/urban
8
areas (Dickson and Beier 2002) and open water] were incorporated into the final model by
creating a binary grid, where unsuitable areas were assigned a value of zero; the unsuitable layer
was then multiplied by the final habitat model to 'zero out' these regions.
The concealment/stalking cover component of the habitat-relation model was created
under the premise that prairie landscapes having a higher percentage of concealment/stalking
cover per 2.6 km2 (1.0 mi2) are more suitable to lions than those having lower percentages of
cover per 2.6 km2. Therefore, for each land cover class in a gridded National land cover (NLC)
database (NLC dataset; North Dakota GIS Hub), numerical values of the 30-m cells that
represented classes offering concealment/stalking cover to lions were reclassified to a value of
"1". All other NLC classes were assigned a value of "0". A focal sum analysis then was
conducted on the binary grid. Focal sum analyses search a specified distance surrounding each
cell in a grid, add up all assigned values for cells within the search distance, and assign the total
to the cell in the center of the searched neighborhood. Higher cell values indicate higher
suitability to mountain lions. For this component of the habitat suitability map, the focal sum
determined, for each 30-m cell, the number of cells per 2.6 km2 that contained
concealment/stalking cover for lions. The final layer contained four values representing ranks of
the percentage of concealment/stalking cover per 2.6 km2, from least (0% stalking/concealment
cover per 2.6 km2 or a Value equal to 1) to most (>50% stalking/ concealment cover per 2.6 km2
or a Value equal to 4) suitable to mountain lions (Table 1; Figure 1a).
9
Table 1. Landscape characteristics used to create a habitat suitability map for mountain lions by
recoding values according to their suitability to the species. Highest quality habitat
contained >50% cover per 2.6 km2, occurred in habitat with slopes >50%, and was
within 2.6 km2 of a permanent water source.
Landscape characteristics
Category
Value
Concealment/stalking cover
(trees and shrubs)
0 % cover per 2.6 km2 (1 mi2)
1-25% cover per 2.6 km2
26-50% cover per 2.6 km2
>50% cover per 2.6 km2
1
2
3
4
Concealment\stalking topography
(slopes)
0% slope
1-20% slope
21-50% slope
>50% slope
1
2
3
4
Travel habitat
(drainages)
No streams present within 2.6 km2 (1 mi2) area
Intermittent streams present within 2.6 km2 area
Perennial streams or shoreline present within
2.6 km2 area
1
2
3
Unsuitable habitat
Residential/urban areas; open water
0
Slopes of land in North Dakota were derived in ArcGIS from a mathematical model run
on a 30-m digital elevation model (National Elevation Dataset; North Dakota GIS Hub). Slopes
(measured in percent) were recoded into four categories according to their suitability to mountain
lions from least (0% slope or a Value equal to 1) to most (>50% slope or a Value equal to 4)
suitable (Table 1; Figure 1b).
10
Land in North Dakota was mapped according to its likelihood of being used as travel
habitat among suitable patches or for dispersing animals, or its proximity to a water source. A
database of streams (National Hydrography Dataset; North Dakota GIS Hub) was converted to a
30-m cell grid, in which perennial streams were assigned a value of 3, intermittent streams, a
value of 2 and other habitat a value of 1. A focal sum analysis then was conducted on the grid to
determine, for each 30-m cell the value of all cells including and surrounding [per 2.6 km2 (1.0
mi2)] that cell; cells with higher values had more travel habitat and or permanent water
surrounding those cells than cells with lower values. The final travel habitat layer contained
three values representing 2.6 km2 areas that either contained habitat with no streams (Value = 1),
intermittent streams (Value = 2), or perennial streams or shoreline (Value =3) for North Dakota
(Table 1, Figure 1c). Unsuitable habitat was mapped by creating a binary grid where residential
and urban areas and open water were assigned a value of zero.
The final habitat suitability map for mountain lions in North Dakota was made by adding
the three ranked grids representing stalking/concealment cover, stalking/concealment topography
and travel habitat and multiplying by the unsuitable habitat quality layer. Highest-quality habitat
for the species contained >50% stalking/concealment cover per 2.6 km2 (1.0 mi2) occurred at
slopes >50% and was located in close proximity (within 2.6 km) to a permanent water source
(Table 1).
Coordination with Tribal authorities and state agencies
Prior to setting the experimental mountain lion season, the Department coordinated with
Tribal authorities regarding season parameters. An agreement was made with the Three
Affiliated Tribes to include lions taken from Fort Berthold Reservation in the five lion quota.
Also, because the lion population in North Dakota is heavily influenced by populations, habitats,
11
and lion management in surrounding states and provinces, it was essential to meet and coordinate
with lion biologists from the region. In March 2006, the Department hosted a regional mountain
lion management meeting in Dickinson, North Dakota (Appendix IV). Agenda items included
setting seasons on lions, dealing with problem animals, analyzing reported sighting information,
population status and current research (i.e., understanding dispersal patterns, genetic techniques
to determine relatedness, field surveys for population monitoring, etc.).
Experimental mountain lion season
The Department proposed an experimental mountain lion season in the Governor's 2005-
2006 Small Game and Furbearer Hunting Proclamation which was approved (Appendix V). The
experimental season was initiated so the Department could gather locational and biological
information on a small number of lions (n=5), without causing irreparable harm to the region's
populations. The season was a cost-effective way to obtain information, while providing a
modest amount of recreational hunting opportunity to North Dakota residents. A mandatory
check-in of intact carcasses of all animals taken was required so the Department could collect
biological and locational information on these animals (Appendix VI).
Dates, locations (Township, Range and Section), and method of take were recorded for
all animals harvested during the season. Lions were weighed and sex identified. A cursory
examination was performed on the carcasses prior to skinning the animals. Ages were
determined based on tooth wear and fur color characteristics (Anderson and Lindzey 2000).
Bodies were examined for wounds from intraspecific aggressive encounters (e.g., scratches or
puncture wounds on face or limbs) or capturing prey (e.g., broken limbs, bruising, etc), presence
of porcupine quills or ectoparasites, and to obtain body measurements to relate to nutritional
condition. Distances between upper and lower canines were measured to build a database on bite
12
distances for identifying wild and domestic kills made by cougars in North Dakota. For females,
nipple size and shape were examined for evidence of lactation (Anderson and Lindzey 2000).
Necropsies were performed on harvested mountain lions to assess nutritional condition,
document food habits and collect other biological data. Organ (mesentery, heart and kidney) fat
reserves were examined and subjectively categorized as low, moderate or high. Additionally,
percent kidney fat was determined by weighing kidneys (K), and perirenal (PR) and riney kidney
(RK) fat (to the nearest gram) and using the following equation:
(PR fat weight + RK fat weight) / K weight * 100% = Percent Kidney Fat
Stomach and intestinal tracts were collected to document food habits and examine for internal
parasites. For females, reproductive tracts were examined for evidence of breeding activity.
Samples of muscle tissue were collected for genetic analyses. Also, in cooperation with USDA
Wildlife Services, blood samples were collected to test for disease (tularemia and sylvatic
plague).
RESULTS
Mountain lion sightings
From 2001-2005, there were 41 verified reports of mountain lions in North Dakota, of
which 32 (78%) occurred within, or in the vicinity of the North Dakota Badlands, in Golden
Valley, Billings, McKenzie and Dunn Counties (Figure 2). Nine verified reports occurred
outside of the Badlands, in Divide, Mountrail, McHenry, Rollette, Dunn, Traill and Grand Forks
Counties. In four cases of the 41 verified reports, the sex and age of the animals was known.
Two subadult lions, one of each sex, were killed illegally, and one subadult female was killed by
an archery hunter who felt threatened by the animal. The fourth animal was a subadult male lion
13
that had been radio-collared in the Black Hills of South Dakota for research (D. Thompson,
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, South Dakota State University, Unpublished
Data). The animal was last located by the researchers September 2004 in northwestern South
Dakota. Three months later, a North Dakota resident reported seeing a radio-collared lion in
Turtle River State Park, eastcentral North Dakota, in Grand Forks County. The animal was
confirmed to be the study animal from South Dakota and was subsequently monitored by the
Department. However, the young male continued traveling northeast into Minnesota and
eventually Manitoba, Canada.
A total of 187 mountain lion sightings were reported to the Department during 2004
(n=69) and 2005 (n=118) (Table 2). Sightings were reported all months of the year, although,
overall, the greatest numbers of sightings occurred in September, October and November. By
sighting classification, 12% (n=8) of the reported sightings in 2004, and 15% (n=18) in 2005,
were verified as being from a mountain lion (Table 3). Close to half of the sightings, [49%
(n=34) in 2004 and 47% (n=56) in 2005] were classified as either improbable/unverified or
unfounded. Seventy-one sightings could not be ruled out as being legitimate sightings, but
lacked the evidence for verification. In 2004 and 2005, these "probable/unverified" sightings
made up 39% (n=27) and 37% (n=44), respectively, of the reported sightings and occurred in
counties throughout North Dakota (Figures 3 and 4).
Of the verified reported sightings, over half (n=24 or 58%) were confirmed based on field
sign, primarily from tracks left by the animal (Table 4). In two cases during June 2005,
mountain lions were involved in negative encounters with domestic livestock or humans; three
domestic sheep were killed by a mountain lion near Richardton, North Dakota, in Dunn County,
and a lion behaved aggressively toward a couple south of the north unit of Theodore Roosevelt
14
National Park, McKenzie County. Of the 22 reports considered "Unfounded", the greatest
number of reports (n=8) was due to tracks of domestic dogs being mistaken for mountain lions
(Table 5).
Deer hunter observation questionnaire
A total of 2,058 deer hunter observation questionnaires were filled out and returned to the
Department for a return rate of 41.0%. Of these, nine (0.4%) respondents from eight hunting
units (2G, 2E, 2I, 3A1, 3A3, 3C, 4C, 4D; Figure 5) reported they saw a mountain lion while
hunting during opening weekend of the deer gun season (Table 6). Unit 3A1 had the greatest
number of reported sightings (n=2) and the highest population index value (Value = 2.42).
Habitat suitability map
The habitat suitability map classified habitat in North Dakota as either suitable or
unsuitable to mountain lions based on four ranked habitat classes: Rank 1 (unsuitable; lowquality
habitat; summed value = 3, 4, or 5), Rank 2 (unsuitable; moderate-low quality; summed
value = 6), Rank 3 (suitable; moderate-high quality; summed value = 7) and Rank 4 (suitable;
high-quality habitat; summed value = 8, 9, 10 or 11; Figure 6). According to the map, 94% of
the state's land area [183,597 km2 (70,888 mi2)] was considered not suitable to mountain lions
(Rank 1 and Rank 2 habitat; residential/urban areas, and open water). The remaining 6%,
classified as suitable (Rank 3 or Rank 4) habitat, was concentrated in a few regions of the state
(North Dakota Badlands, Northern MR Breaklands, Turtle Mountains, Pembina Gorge, and west
and south of the Knife River), or represented riparian habitat along streams. However, of this,
only suitable habitat in the North Dakota Badlands and the Northern MR Breaklands region
(about 2% of the state's land area) met the size criteria of having sufficient suitable habitat to
support a small population of animals [1,000-2,200 km2 (386-893 mi2); Beier 1993; Figure 7]. Of
15
the two regions, the Badlands contained a greater amount, and more contiguous distribution of
high-quality (Rank 4) habitat.
The greatest area of contiguous suitable mountain lion habitat [2,927 km2 (1,130 mi2)]
occurred in western North Dakota, in the Badlands ecoregion (contained in portions of Bowman,
Slope, Golden Valley, Billings, McKenzie and Dunn Counties and including portions of Fort
Berthold Reservation; Table 7, Figure 7). A relatively large area of suitable habitat [1,710 km2
(660 mi2)] also occurred in western North Dakota in the northern MR Breaklands ecoregion
(along the Missouri River, in portions of McKenzie, Williams, Mountrail, Dunn, McLean and
Mercer Counties, and including portions of Fort Berthold Reservation). Other areas of the state
that contained suitable mountain lion habitat included the Turtle Mountains of Bottineau and
Rolette Counties, including portions of Turtle Mountain Reservation [573 km2 (221 mi2)], the
Pembina Gorge in Cavalier and Pembina Counties [270 km2 (104 mi2)], and west and south of
the Knife River in Mercer County [344 km2 (133 mi2)]. These smaller areas of suitable habitat
represented potential temporary sites for dispersing/transient mountain lions.
The map also identified potential travel habitat throughout North Dakota (Rank 3 habitat
occurring outside of the Badlands and northern MR Breaklands) based on the proximity to
perennial streams. Habitat near intermittent streams was less likely to be used by lions for travel
(Rank 2 habitat), but more likely than habitat containing no streams (Rank 1 habitat).
Experimental mountain lion season
Five mountain lions (3 males, 2 females) were harvested during the 2005-06 state-wide
experimental season which began September 2, 2005 and ended when the 5th animal was taken
(15 January 2006; Table 8; Figure 2). The first two animals were shot mid-November
(November 16 and 17, respectively) during deer gun season. The first lion (F1) was a 42 kg (92
16
lb), 2.5-3-year-old female, and the second (M2), a 45 kg (99 lb), 1.5-2-year-old male. Three lions
were taken by houndsmen after being chased by dogs. The third lion (M3), a 4-5-year-old, 63 kg
(140 lb) male, was killed on December 31. The fourth lion (M4), taken January 6, was a 2-yearold
male and weighed 50 kg (111 lb). The fifth lion (F5), an 18 kg (39 lb), 4-6-month-old
female, was taken January 15.
The five lions were harvested within a 1,632 km2 (630 mi2) area in the Badlands and
vicinity (Killdeer Mountains and near Fairfield, North Dakota; Figure 2), in McKenzie, Dunn
and Billings Counties. Three animals (F1, M3 and F5) were considered residents and were
harvested within a 116 km2 (45 mi2) area along the Little Missouri River; an additional kitten
was treed and photographed in the same area, but not harvested (A. Anderson, Williston, North
Dakota, reported sighting).
Harvested mountain lions were in good physical condition (no scratches or puncture
wounds on face or limbs, or broken limbs, bruising, etc., were apparent on any of the animals)
and good to fair nutritional condition based on cursory examination of body and intestinal tract
and examination of organ fat reserves (Table 9). Female (F1) had not yet had her first litter and
was not pregnant at the time of her death. Documented prey species consumed by these animals
included deer and porcupine. All animals tested negative for exposure to tularemia, but F5 tested
sero-positive for exposure to sylvatic plague (R. Powers, USDA Wildlife Services, Bismarck,
North Dakota, Personal Communication).
DNA samples (hair and tissue) were collected from all lions (5 hunter-harvested, 1
illegally trapped, and 1 shot by bowhunter) provided to the Department. Initially, it was believed
that DNA analysis may provide insight as to the particular source population (Black Hills or
Rocky Mountains, for example) from which the state's re-colonized lion's lineage derived.
17
However, DNA research regarding mountain lions throughout the United States has shown little
to no genetic diversity among populations. Therefore, determining the origin of lions found in
North Dakota will not be accomplished through DNA analysis. However, genetic history results
will be valuable in determining with some degree of certainty the relatedness among the seven
lions. In time, this background information may provide insight into generational structure and
breeding, reproduction, and recruitment success, as well as determining the genetic health of the
population and making inferences on relationships to other populations. Samples were sent to
U.S. Forest Service Mountain Research Station, Missoula, Montana for analysis. Results from
this genetic testing have not been completed to-date. Therefore, no findings can be reported at
this time.
DISCUSSION
The majority of reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota occurred during
months associated with hunting activity (September, October and November). During this time,
a large number of people are traveling to, and hiking in, remote country throughout the state,
increasing the probability of seeing a mountain lion. Similar to other states, a large percentage of
reported sightings were either unverifiable due to lack of physical evidence or turned out to be
other animals, primarily domestic dogs. Of the 41 sighting reports that were verified, 39 (95%)
were non-threatening observations of either the animal or its sign (tracks or wildlife kills),
supporting the fact that mountain lions are secretive, primarily nocturnal animals that typically
avoid people. However, in one case, a negative mountain lion/human encounter was reported.
In June 2005, an aggressive interaction was documented between a mountain lion and
two adult mountain bikers south of the north unit of Theodore Roosevelt National Park of the
18
Badlands. The couple knew how to act if confronted by a lion. They performed appropriate
behaviors, remained unharmed, and the lion left the vicinity. In accordance with the
Department's action plan, an attempt, although unsuccessful, was made to remove this
potentially aggressive animal. As expected, due to media coverage of the encounter and
heightened concern by the public, the number of sightings reported to the Department reached
the highest documented to date in one month (n=17), in the four weeks following the incident,
although only one of these reports was classified as a verified sighting. To continue to educate
the public about this species, the Department created a powerpoint presentation on lions which
will be presented to general audiences as part of the Department's outreach effort. Additionally,
an educational brochure was produced (currently in review) that contains information about the
species and what people should do if they see a mountain lion.
The habitat suitability map identified the Badlands and associated northern Missouri
River (MR) Breaklands ecoregions as having a sufficient amount of suitable habitat to support a
small resident population. The Badlands are a 6,322 km2 (2,441 mi2) region in western North
Dakota characterized by a highly variable landscape of clay slopes, steep canyons, buttes and
bottomlands. Although not forested, the region is vegetated (primarily on north and east facing
slopes) with thickets of small trees and shrubs, woody draws of cottonwood and green ash, and
scattered stands of Rocky Mountain Juniper and ponderosa pine trees (Hagen et al. 2005).
Bisecting the Badlands is the Little Missouri River which originates in eastern Wyoming, flows
north through the Badlands and drains into Lake Sakakawea of the Missouri River. To the north
of the Badlands is the Northern portion of the MR Breaklands, an area of about 4,318 km2 (1,667
mi2), which also has a steep, dissected topography. Uplands in this region are vegetated with
shortgrass prairie, but the area also contains woody draws and riparian cottonwood forests.
19
Not only do the Badlands contain a sufficient amount of suitable mountain lion habitat to
support a small population (based on the habitat suitability map), but also, other data indicated
the species either has re-established or is in the process of re-establishing in the Badlands, and
the nearby Killdeer Mountains. The majority of verified reports of lions were concentrated in the
Badlands. Also, resident, breeding animals (an adult male, adult female and two family groups)
were documented during the experimental harvest. Furthermore, since the season ended, there
have been five confirmed reports of lions in the region, four in the Badlands, and one, in the
Killdeer Mountains (Figure 8). The Killdeer Mountains, are a small [60 km2 (23 mi2)], elevated
region rising 213-305 m (700-1,000 ft) above the surrounding prairie, located east of, and
adjacent to, the Badlands, in northwestern Dunn County. The mountains are vegetated by
deciduous woodlands of burr oak, quaking aspen, green ash, paper birch, western black birch and
American elm (Hagen et al. 2005). Due to their small size, the Killdeer Mountains likely only
can support few individuals. However, the area represents an extension of the Badlands with
respect to delineating a breeding lion population. The North Dakota Badlands and Killdeer
Mountains historically were part of the mountain lion's range in North Dakota (Bailey 1926).
According to the habitat suitability map, the Northern MR Breaklands also contained a
sufficient amount of suitable habitat to sustain a small number of cougars. This region is
interconnected with the Badlands and historically a part of the species range in North Dakota
(Bailey 1926). However, the northern MR Breaklands is smaller region, containing a more
fragmented distribution of suitable habitat. The implications are, that from a regional
perspective, lions in the Badlands (including the Killdeer Mountains) and Northern MR
Breaklands are part of the same population, however, habitat potential for mountain lions outside
20
of the Badlands is lower due to reduced habitat quality. Since 2001, only one verified sighting
has occurred in the MR Breaklands region.
The habitat suitability map identified portions of western North Dakota as having
sufficient suitable habitat to support a small population of mountain lions. This information can
be used to estimate habitat potential for the species based on density estimates determined for
other mountain lion populations (Table 10-7 in Logan and Sweanor 2001). Based on an initial
analysis of habitat quality [4,637 km2 (1,790 mi2) of suitable habitat in the Badlands and MR
Breaklands], North Dakota could support an average of 45 to 74 resident, adult animals under a
management scenario with no harvest mortality. [Habitat potential was derived from the average
minimum and maximum density estimates (lions per 100 km2) reported for other lion
populations (New Mexico, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, and British Columbia and Alberta, Canada)
extrapolated to suitable habitat in North Dakota (ave. min.= 45 ± 18 (SD), ave. max.= 74 ± 27
(SD))]. This is not an estimate of the current population size, but rather an estimate of habitat
potential for the area based on the following assumptions:
1) Mountain lion prey are abundant throughout the Badlands and Northern MR
Breaklands,
2) The habitat suitability map accurately identifies suitable mountain lion habitat in
North Dakota, and
3) Density estimates reported for adult resident lions in other lion populations are similar
to lion densities in suitable habitat of North Dakota.
More information is needed to estimate the current distribution and abundance of mountain lions
and their prey (deer, elk, bighorn sheep), as well as impacts to prey populations in the Badlands
and Northern MR Breaklands.
21
The Department currently is closely monitoring the recovering bighorn sheep population
in the Badlands for mortality due to lions, because predation by lions on bighorn sheep can
negatively impact small and isolated sheep populations (CMGWG 2005). According to the
guidelines for mountain/lion/human/property interactions, mountain lions will be removed when
they are determined to be a substantial, unpreventable threat to bighorn sheep, or other species of
high public interest (McKenna, Ermer et al. 2004).
Mountain lion population densities are influenced by densities of their prey and habitat
quality (Logan and Sweanor 2001). Although the Badlands contain suitable habitat and are
supporting an unknown number of lions, most of the region does not contain the highest quality
concealment/stalking cover and topography identified for the species (>50% concealment/
stalking cover per 2.6 km2 (1.0 mi2); area having slopes >50%) by the habitat suitability map. In
fact, nowhere in North Dakota, are large expanses of dense forest cover and steep slopes
available to mountain lions. The majority of concealment/stalking cover in the Badlands and MR
Breaklands fell into the 26 to 50% per 2.6 km2 (1.0 mi2) range and most of the slopes fell in the
20 to 50% range. This could influence habitat potential for mountain lions in North Dakota and
respective density estimates. In Montana, rugged topography in forested habitats supported the
highest densities of lions, although the animals also could be found in areas with rugged
topography and little forest cover. However, lions were sparsely populated in areas where
topographic heterogeneity was low and there was little forest cover (Riley and Malecki 2001).
The habitat suitability map should be tested for its ability to predict mountain lion presence,
based on confirmed sightings and locations of harvested animals. Additional research conducted
in this region (i.e., harvest derived information, snow-track surveys, camera-station surveys, etc.)
22
would provide data to test the habitat suitability map and enable the Department to have a better
understanding of mountain lion distribution and abundance in the Badlands.
Although resident adult animals have not been documented outside of the Badlands,
individual animals have traveled through other portions of the North Dakota. A small number of
confirmed reports of lions have occurred outside of the Badlands and MR Breaklands, and
sightings classified as probable/unverified exist throughout all regions of North Dakota (Figures
3 and 4). It is likely, that the majority, if not all of the animals sighted outside of the North
Dakota Badlands are dispersing individuals. The habitat suitability map identified riparian
habitat and small islands of high-quality habitat that while too small to support breeding
populations (e.g., Pembina escarpment), may be important for these transient individuals by
serving as travel habitat and temporary sites (Figure 6).
According to the habitat suitability map, the Turtle Mountains of North Dakota did not
contain a sufficient amount of suitable habitat to qualify as an area that could support a breeding
population of mountain lions. However, the mountains extend into Canada, and habitat was not
mapped for the Canadian Turtle Mountains. Including Canada, the total area of the Turtle
Mountains is approximately 1,680 km2 (649 mi2), of which about 1,058 km2 (408 mi2; 63%) is in
North Dakota. More information is needed to determine if the Turtle Mountains of North Dakota
and Canada can support a small number of lions. Since 2001, there have been two verified
reports of lions in the Turtle Mountains.
MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
The Department initiated an experimental, state-wide season on mountain lions in 2005,
and future seasons for recreational hunting are a management option, provided the population
23
can sustain annual harvest mortality. However, lions in the Badlands are geographically isolated
from breeding populations of lions in Montana and South Dakota due to the vast expanses of
agricultural and grassland landscapes surrounding the region. For example, the nearest known
breeding lion populations to the west of the Badlands occur in the Little Rocky and Wolf
Mountains, of northeastern and southeastern Montana, approximately 346 km (215 mi) and 138
km (86 mi), respectively, from the North Dakota Border (Rauscher 2005; Montana Department
of Fish, Wildlife & Parks 2005; see Appendix IV for regional map showing nearest breeding
mountain lion populations to the North Dakota Badlands). The nearest population to the south,
occurs in the Black Hills of South Dakota, about 159 km (99 mi) from the North Dakota border.
This isolation, coupled with management prescriptions (e.g., recreational harvest, nuisance
animal removal) carried out by state agencies on lion populations in Montana and South Dakota,
likely have influenced, and will continue to influence dynamics of the Badlands lion population.
Reduction in immigration to the Badlands from an increase in annual harvests of lions in
Montana, and as of 2005, harvests in the Black Hills, South Dakota, could make the population
in North Dakota more vulnerable to harvest mortality, especially the females; immigration likely
already is hampered due to the tendency for females to return to, or remain near the area where
they were born. Immigrant lions are important for maintaining genetically healthy
subpopulations regionally, and for increasing numbers of animals in establishing populations
(Logan and Sweanor 2001). Therefore, close monitoring will be necessary to assess impacts to
the population from future recreational harvest. The habitat suitability map identified areas that
could potentially serve as travel habitat and temporary sites for immigrant animals in North
Dakota. Travel habitat and temporary sites outside of North Dakota will need to be identified to
24
understand population dynamics of the Badlands population and for long-term management of
the species.
MANAGEMENT APPROACH FOR MOUNTAIN LIONS 2006-2007
During 2006-07 the Department plans to undertake the following activities:
1) Continue to record and verify reported sightings of mountain lions
2) Continue the deer hunter observation questionnaire and furbearer harvest survey
3) Test the habitat suitability map
4) Conduct field surveys (snow track and camera station surveys) to monitor the population
5) Coordinate with Tribal authorities and other state agencies on lion management issues
6) Continue with education efforts (via general audience presentations and brochure on
lions), and
7) Conduct a second experimental mountain lion season in 2006-07 with the following
parameters:
DATES: September 2, 2006 through March 12, 2007
LOCATION: State-wide
HOURS: One half hour before sunrise to one half hour after sunset
WEAPONS: Any legal weapon currently allowed for other furbearers
DOGS: The use of dogs will be allowed. No hunting or pursuing with dogs until after January
1, 2007. People hunting with dogs may not pursue or take a female mountain lion accompanied
by kittens.
LEGAL ANIMAL: Any mountain lion other than kittens (lions with visible spots) or females
accompanied by kittens.
25
TRAPS AND SNARES: Are not allowed. Any incidental take of a mountain lion in a
trap or snare must be reported within 12 hours and the entire intact animal must be
submitted to the Game and Fish Department for analysis.
WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO PARTICPATE: By state law only North Dakota
residents are allowed to take furbearers other than fox or coyotes.
LICENSE REQUIREMENTS: A valid furbearer or combination license
LIMITS: One mountain lion per hunter per season
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS: Any mountain lion that is taken must be
reported to the Game and Fish Department within 12 hours and the entire intact
animal must be submitted to the Game and Fish Department for analysis. Legally
taken animals will be returned to the hunter following analysis.
QUOTA: The taking of 5 mountain lions will be allowed. Once this quota is
reached, the season will close. This quota includes mountain lions taken by USDA
Wildlife Services, the Game and Fish Department, taken by private landowners in
defense of livestock, road killed animals, incidental animals taking by traps or snares, and
animals taken for human safety issues. This quota does not include mountain lions taken
on Indian land within the exterior boundaries of a Reservation. EXCEPTION: mountain
lions taken on the Fort Berthold Reservation will be included in the quota. In the event
that none of the five lions are taken on Fort Berthold Reservation, one additional
mountain lion may be taken on the Reservation once the quota has been reached and the
statewide season closed.
NOTIFICATION OF SEASON CLOSURE: Once the quota of 5 mountain lions has been
reached the season will be closed immediately. The Game and Fish Department will
26
inform the public through press releases, public service announcements, and media
contacts.
27
LITERATURE CITED
Anderson, A.E. 1983. A critical review of the literature on puma (Felis concolor). Colorado
Division of Wildlife Special Report No. 54. 91 pp.
Anderson, C. R. Jr., and F.G. Lindzey. 2000. A guide to estimating cougar age classes.
Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Laramie, Wyoming. 2 pp.
Bailey, Vernon. 1926. A biological survey of North Dakota. North American Fauna,
No. 49, 416 pp.
Beier, P. 1993. Determining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for cougars.
Conservation Biology 7:
Cougar management Guidelines Working Group 2005. Cougar management guidelines,
First edition, WildFutures, Bainbridge Island, Washington. 137 pp.
DeSimone, R. and B. Semmens. 2004. Garnet Mountains mountain lion research: Progress
Report January 2003-December 2004. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena
Montana. 16 pp.
Dickson, B.G. and P Beier. 2002. Home range and habitat selection by adult cougars in
southern California. Journal of Wildlife Management 66:1235-1245.
Fecske, D.M. 2003. Distribution and abundance of American marten and cougars in the Black
Hills of South Dakota and Wyoming. Ph.D. Dissertation, South Dakota State University,
Brookings. 171 pp.
Hagen, S., P. Isakson and S. ****. 2005. North Dakota comprehensive wildlife conservation
strategy. North Dakota Game and Fish Department, Bismarck, North Dakota. 454 pp.
http://www.nd.gov/gnf/conservation/cwcs.html
28
Hornocker, M.G. 1970. An analysis of mountain lion predation upon mule deer and elk
in the Idaho Primitive Area. Wildlife Monographs 21:1-39.
Jalkotzy, M.G., Ross, P.I. and Wierzchowski, J. 1999. Cougar habitat use in southwestern
Alberta. Prepared for Alberta Conservation Association. Arc Wildlife Services Ltd.,
Calgary.
Koehler, G.M. and M.G. Hornocker. 1991. Seasonal resource use among mountain lions,
bobcats, and coyotes. Journal of Mammalogy 72:391-396.
Laing, S.P. and Lindzey, F.G. 1991. Cougar habitat selection in south-central Utah. In:
C.E. Braun, Editor, Mountain lion-human interaction symposium and workshop, April
24 - 26, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, USA, pp. 27-37.
Logan, K.A. and L.L. Irwin. 1985. Mountain lion habitats in the Big Horn Mountains,
Wyoming. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13:257-262.
Logan, K.A. and L.L. Sweanor. 2000. Puma, p. 347-377. In: S. Demarias and P. R. Krausman
(eds.). Ecology and management of large mammals in North America. Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. 778 pp.
Logan, K.A. and L.L Sweanor. 2001. Desert Puma: evolutionary ecology and conservation of
an enduring carnivore. Island Press, Washington, D. C. 463 pp.
McKenna, M., J. Ermer, S. Hagen, S. ****, R. Kreil, G. Link and M. Johnson. 2004. Mountain
lions in North Dakota: A report to the Director. North Dakota Game and Fish
Department, Bismarck, North Dakota. 51 pp.
29
Minta, S.C., Kareiva, P.M. and Curlee, A.P., 1999. Carnivore research and conservation:
learning from history and theory. In: T.W. Clark, A. Peyton Curlee, S.C. Minta and P.
M. Kareiva, Editors, Carnivores in ecosystems: the Yellowstone experience, Yale
University Press, New Haven, pp. 323-404.
Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks. 2005. Big game harvest and inventory:
mountain lion, non-glaciated eastern plains ecoregion, Southeastern, Montana. 3 pp.
Rausher, R.L. 2005. Mountain lion report: Region 6 (1992-2004 seasons). Montana
Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Glasgow, Montana. 18 pp.
Riley, S.J. and R.A. Malecki. 2001. A landscape analysis of cougar distribution and abundance
in Montana, USA. Environmental Management 28:317-323
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.
Sinclair, E.A., E.L. Swenson, M.L. Wilfe, D.C. Choate, B. Bates and K.A. Crandall. 2001.
Gene flow estimates in Utah's cougars imply management beyond Utah. Animal
Conservation 4:257-264.
Sunquist, M.E. and Sunquist, F., 2002. Wild cats of the world. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, Illinois, USA. 452 pp.
Van **** and Brocke 1987. Sighting and track reports as indices of mountain lion presence.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 15:251-256.
Young, S.P. and E.A. Goldman. 1946. The puma: mysterious American cat. Dover
Publications, Inc. New York, New York. 358 pp.
30
Table 2. Number of reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota
(2004 -2005) by month.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Total
2005
9
6
5
3
5
8
17
14
12
10
14
15
118
2004
4 1 4 1 4 4 3 8 11 13 12 4 69
Total
13
7 9 4 9 12 20 22 23 23 26 19 187
31
Table 3. Number of reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota (2004-2005)
by sighting classification. Numbers in parentheses are percentages.
Sighting Classification
2005
2004
Unfounded
30 (25)
13 (19)
Improbable Unverified
26 (22)
21 (30)
Probable Unverified
44 (37)
27 (39)
Verified
18 (15)
8 (12)
Total
118
69
32
Table 4. Number of verified reported sightings of mountain lions in North Dakota
(2001-2005) by type of sighting (sign or event).
Type of sighting
(sign or event)
Type of evidence
Number
Reports
Total
Field sign
Tracks of animal
Wildlife kills:
Bighorn sheep
Mule deer
14
5
1
20
Visual observation
Credible Witness
Video/photo
Confirmed with Tracks
Radio-collared animal
6
5
4
1
16
Human-caused mortalities Illegally killed
Legally killed
2
1
3
Domestic animal depredation
Domestic sheep kill 1 1
Close encounter
Aggressive behavior 1 1
Total
41
33
Table 5. Number of unfounded reported sightings (n=22) of mountain lions in North
Dakota (2004-2005) by type of mistaken identity.
Type of sighting
(sign or event)
Mountain lion
mistaken for:
Number
Reports
Field sign (tracks of animal)
Domestic dog
8
Visual observation
Domestic dog
Coyote
Unknown animal
Domestic house cat
2
2
2
1
Domestic animal attack
(> 1 scratch marks on animal)
Horse
Cow
Barb wire
Barb wire (n=1); unknown (n=1)
3
2
Video
Domestic house cat 2
Total
22
34
Table 6. Hunting Units in North Dakota in which hunters reported seeing a mountain lion while
hunting deer opening weekend (November 4-5) of the 2005 deer gun season.
Hunting
Unit
No.
Respondents
No.
lions seen
No.
Hours hunted
Population Index
No. reports / 1000 hours hunted
2E
49
1
578
1.73
2G
65 1 910 1.09
2I
58 1 763 1.31
3C
61 1 798 1.25
3A1
62 2 824 2.42
3A3
63 1 856 1.16
4C
51 1 750 1.33
4D
50 1 655 1.52
Total
459 9 6,134 1.46
Note: See Figure 5 for a map of hunting units in North Dakota.
35
Table 7. Regions in North Dakota that contained relatively large and contiguous areas
(measured in km2) of moderate-high (Rank 3) and high- (Rank 4) quality habitat for
mountain lions.
Region
Unsuitable
Habitat
Rank 1
Habitat
Rank 2
Habitat
Rank 3
Habitat
Rank 4
Habitat
High-quality
Habitat
North Dakota Badlands
(6,322 km2)
59
1,168
2,181
2,022
905
2,927
Northern MR Breaklands
(4,318 km2)
1,128 1,403 1,439 1,217 493 1,710
Turtle Mountains
(1,058 km2)
171 78 226 525 48 573
Pembina Gorge
(708 km2)
6 266 163 114 156 270
South of the Knife River
(Mercer County)
19 1005 459 261 83 344
36
Table 8. Mountain lions harvested in North Dakota during the 2005-06
experimental mountain lion season.
Lion
ID
Date
Harvested
Sex
Age
(Years)
Weight
(lbs)
County
Harvested
F1
11/16/05
Female
2.5-3.0
92
McKenzie
M2
11/17/05 Male 1.5-2.0 99 Dunn
M3
12/31/05 Male 4.0-5.0 140 McKenzie
M4
1/6/06 Male 2.0-2.5 111 Billings
F5
1/15/06 Female 4-6 months 39 McKenzie
37
Table 9. Nutritional condition of five mountain lions harvested in North Dakota during the
2005-06 experimental mountain lion season.
Lion
ID
Age
(Years)
Weight
(lbs)
Rank
mesentery
Fat
Rank
Pericardial
Fat
Rank
Kidney
Fat
%
Kidney
Fat
Prey consumed
F1
2.5-3.0
92
HIGH
MOD
HIGH
164.6
M2
1.5-2.0 99 MOD HIGH MOD 108.6 Porcupine/Deer
M3
4.0-5.0 140 MOD LOW MOD 59.0
M4
2.0-2.5 111 HIGH MOD HIGH 98.7
F5
4-6 mo. 39 MOD LOW MOD 56.7 Porcupine
Note: Mesentary, Pericardial and Kidney fat were subjectively ranked as low, moderate (MOD) or high. Percent
kidney fat was calculated based on the equation: perirenal fat weight + riney kidney fat weight / total kidney weight
* 100. Prey consumed was based on cursory examination of intact carcasses (presence of porcupine quills on body
or limbs) and gastro-intestinal tract.
38
Figure 1a-1c. Three components [concealment/stalking cover (trees and shrubs), concealment/
stalking topography (slopes) and travel habitat (habitat near streams)] used to
construct the habitat suitability map for mountain lions in North Dakota.
1a.
39
1b.
40
1c.
41
Figure 2. Verified reports of mountain lion locations in North Dakota, 2001-2005.
42
Figure 3. Counties in North Dakota with reported mountain lions sightings in 2004.
43
Figure 4. Counties in North Dakota with reported mountain lions sightings in 2005.
44
Figure 5. Hunting Units in North Dakota in which hunters reported seeing a mountain lion
while hunting deer opening weekend (November4-5) of 2005 the deer gun season.
45
Figure 6. Habitat suitability map for mountain lions in North Dakota.
46
Figure 7. Ecoregions in North Dakota that can support a breeding population of
mountain lions.
47
Figure 8. Verified reports of mountain lions in North Dakota since the end of the
2005-06 experim


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

thanks for the info-it was alot. That is the first report I have seen. I read through thru the habitat part several times and couldnt figure out why the central part of the state isnt suitable habitat for the lions
Thanks for the info

Ryan


----------



## b_grover (Jun 2, 2006)

Thanks for the G&F report. They provide solid information that is available to anyone that asks. 
I'm a little bothered by the fact that horses were attacked by Arvilla recently and a Warden claimed a dog attack. After the holiday weekend there was a mountain lion sighting by area law enforcement. This is some cause for alarm due to the fact that livestock was involved, as well as the fact that these animals are recognized within the state of ND.
I could just be the only person who is bothered by this situation. I would love to see anyone's cat photos from the previous season, if they are available, as well as the hunt story.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

bg, there is a topic with photos I think in open forum, try a search. If anybody wants the pdf report, pm me an email address.


----------



## frosty (Dec 6, 2002)

bgrover:

What are you concerned about? Now a days when their horses spook, or are cut up, cattle out, etc., etc. etc...it must be a mountain lion right? From what I heard wildlife professionals (including a houndsman) covered the suspected area with a fine tooth comb and found nothing but dog tracks. Absolutely no sign of a cat.

The Grand Forks sheriff's Department even came out with a follow up statement saying it probably wasn't a cat.


----------



## b_grover (Jun 2, 2006)

I wasn't aware of the amount of people who went over the area, and I didn't not hear of the follow up report from the Sheriff's department.
Just concerned due to the conflicting information that was presented to the public.


----------



## NDTracer (Dec 15, 2005)

I was camping in Turtle River SP Memorial weekend and wondered why the county police were in the campground. I worked at one during a summer and they never came out and I saw them there multiple times with cars and SUV's like they were looking for something. I later heard that they were looking for a cat.


----------

