Diet selection of mountain lions in southeastern Arizona

Journal of Range Management

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 202-207

  Cunningham, Stan C ^a   Gustavson, Carl R ^a   Ballard, Warren B ^a  

^a ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT   (United States)

Author keywords

Cattle; Diet selection; Javelina; Mule deer; Prey availability; Puma concolor; White tailed deer

Indexed keywords

CARNIVORE; DIET; PREY SELECTION;

ARIZONA; UNITED STATES;

BOS TAURUS; CARNIVORA; CERVIDAE; LEPUS CALIFORNICUS; ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS; ODOCOILEUS VIRGINIANUS; ORYCTOLAGUS CUNICULUS; OVIS ARIES; OVIS CANADENSIS; PANTHERA LEO; PECARI TAJACU; PUMA CONCOLOR; RODENTIA; SCATOPHAGIDAE (FISHES); SYLVILAGUS; TAYASSU; TAYASSU TAJACU;

EID: 0032903324     PISSN: 0022409X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/4003681     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Ackerman, B.B., F.G. Lindzey, and T.P. Hemker. 1984. Cougar food habits in southern Utah. J. Wildl. Manage. 48:147-155.
2. Ackerman, B.B., F.G. Lindzey, and T.P. Hemker. 1984. Predictive energetics model for cougars. Pp 333-352 In: S.D. Miller and D.D. Everett, eds. Cats of the world: biology, conservation and management. Nat. Wildl. Fed., Washington, D.C.
3. Anderson, A.E. 1983. A critical review of literature on puma (Felis concolor). Colo. Div. Wildl. Spec. Rep. 54, Denver, Colo. 91pp.
4. Anderson, D.R., J.L. Laake, B.R. Crain, and K.P. Burnham. 1979. Guidelines for line transect sampling of biological populations. J. Wildl. Manage. 43:70-78.
5. Barnes, C.T. 1960. The cougar or mountain lion. The Ralton Co., Salt Lake City, Ut. 176pp.
6. Brown, D.E. and C.H. Lowe. 1974. A digitized computer-compatible classification for natural and potential vegetation in the Southwest with particular reference to Arizona. J. Ariz.-Nev. Acad. Sci. 9 (suppl. 2): 1-11.
7. Burt, W.H. and R.P. Grossenheider. 1964. A field guide to mammals. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Mass. 284 pp.
8. Burnham, K.P., D.R. Anderson, and J.L. Laake. 1980. Estimation of density from line transect sampling of biological populations. Wildl. Monogr. 72. 202 pp.
9. Byers, C.R., R.K. Steinhorst, and P.R. Krausman. 1984. Clarification of a technique for analysis of utilization-availability data. J. Wildl. Manage. 48:1050-1053.
10. Christensen, G.L. and R.S. Fisher, editors. 1976. Transactions of the mountain lion workshop. U.S. Fish and Wild. Serv. and Nev. Div. Wild., Sparks. 213pp.
11. Cunningham, S.C., N. Dodd, and R. Olding. 1993. Arizona's bighorn sheep reintroduction program. Pp. 203-239 In: R. Lee, ed. The desert bighorn sheep in Arizona. Ariz. Game and Fish Dept., Phoenix, Ariz.
12. Cunningham, S.C., L.A. Haynes, C. Gustavson, and D.D. Haywood. 1995. Evaluation of the interaction between mountain lions and cattle in the Aravaipa-Klondyke area of southeast Arizona. Ariz. Game and Fish Dep. Tech. Rep. 17, Phoenix, Ariz. 64 pp.
13. Danner, D.A. and N.L. Dodd. 1982. Comparison of coyote and gray fox scat diameters. J. Wildl. Manage. 46:240-241.
14. Hadley, D., P. Warshall, and D. Bufkin. 1991. Environmental change in Aravaipa, 1870-1970: an ethnoecological survey. U.S. Bur. Land Manage. Cultural Res. Ser. No. 7. Safford, Ariz. 368 pp.
15. Iriate, J.A., W.L. Franklin, W.E. Johnson, and K.H. Redford. 1990. Biogeographic variation of food habits and body size of the American puma. Oecologia 85:185-190.
16. Jacobs, J. 1974. Quantitative measurements of food selection. Oecologia 1:413-417.
17. Johnson, M.K. and D.R. Aldred. 1982. Mammalian prey digestibility by bobcats. J. Wildl. Manage. 46(2):1982.
18. Kruuk, H. 1986. Interactions between Felidae and their prey species: a review. Pp 353-374 In: S.D. Miller and D.D. Everett, eds. Cats of the world: biology, conservation and management. Natl. Wildl. Fed., Washington D.C.
19. Laake, J.L., K.P. Burnham, and D.R. Anderson. 1979. User's manual for program TRANSECT Utah State Univ. Press, Logan, Ut. 26 pp.
20. Lowe, C.H. 1964. The vertebrates of Arizona. Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, Ariz. 270 pp.
21. Moore, T.O., L.D. Spence, C.E. Dugnolle, and W.G. Hopworth. 1974. Identification of the dorsal guard hairs of some mammals of Wyoming. Wyo. Game and Fish Dept. Bull. No. 14. 117 p.
22. Murie, O.J. 1954. A field guide to animal tracks. Houghton-Mifflin Co., Boston, Mass. 374 pp.
23. Nowak, R.M. 1976. The cougar in the United States and Canada. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Washington, D.C., and New York Zool. Soc., New York, N. Y. 190 pp.
24. Neu, C.W., C.R. Byers, and J.M. Peek. 1974. A technique for analysis of utilization-availability data. J. Wildl. Manage. 38:541-545.
25. Shaw, H.G. 1977. Impacts of mountain lion on mule deer and cattle in northwestern Arizona. Pp 306-318 In: R.L. Phillips and C. Jonkel, eds. Proc. 1975 predator symp., Univ. Montana, Missoula, Mont.
26. Shaw, H.G. 1981. Comparison of mountain lion predation on two study areas in Arizona. Pp 306-318 In: Proc. Wildl. livestock relationships symp. Univ. Idaho Forest Wildl., and Range Exp. Sta., Moscow, Ida.
27. Shaw, H.G. 1989. Mountain lion field guide. Fourth ed. Ariz. Game and Fish Dept. Spec. Rep. 9, Phoenix, Ariz 47 pp.
28. Shaw, H.G., N.G. Woolsey, J.R. Wegge, and R.L. Day, Jr. 1988. Factors affecting mountain lion densities and cattle depredation in Arizona. Ariz. Game and Fish Dept. Final Report, P-R Proj. W-78-R, Work Plan 2, Job 29, Phoenix, Ariz. 16 pp.
29. Sunquist, M.E. and F.C. Sunquist. 1989. Ecological constraints on predation by large felids. Pp 283-301 In: J. L. Gittleman, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology and evolution. Cornell Univ. Press. Ithaca, N.Y.
30. Tully, R.J. 1991. Results, 1991 questionnaire on damage to livestock by mountain lion. Pp. 68-74 In: C. E. Braun, ed. Proc. mountain lion-human interaction symp., Colo. Div. Wildl., Denver, Colo.