Elsevier

Ecological Modelling

Volume 222, Issue 3, 10 February 2011, Pages 897-900
Ecological Modelling

Short communication
Modelling potential habitat for cougars in midwestern North America

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.11.017Get rights and content

Abstract

Cougars (Puma concolor) are of considerable interest to wildlife biologists and the general public in midwestern North America, yet no researchers have modelled potential habitat in the region. We created a model of potential cougar habitat in 9 midwestern states using geospatial data, expert-opinion surveys, the analytical hierarchy process, and a GIS. About 8% of the study region contained highly favorable habitat (with favorability scores ≥75%) for cougars; the states of Arkansas (19%) and Missouri (16%) contained the highest proportions of potentially favorable habitat. We identified 6 large (≥2500 km2 in size), contiguous areas of highly favorable habitat for cougars. Model testing procedures indicated a valid model when compared to an independent set of cougar locations, a null dataset, and similar studies. Our model is useful as a planning tool to proactively address future human–cougar conflicts should cougars re-colonize the Midwest via subadult dispersal.

Introduction

Cougars (Puma concolor) have historically occupied most of the western hemisphere, ranging from the Atlantic to Pacific oceans and from northern British Columbia to southern Chile (Sunquist and Sunquist, 2002). These top predators were extirpated from eastern and midwestern North America by the early 1900s, however, because of habitat loss and intentional killing due to concerns about human safety, ungulate populations, and livestock depredation (Sunquist and Sunquist, 2002). Distributions were restricted to the rugged topography and remoteness of the west, where cougars remained a bountied animal until the 1960s (Desimone et al., 2005). Cougars were then reclassified and managed as a big game species in most western states (Desimone et al., 2005, Nadeau, 2005, Whittaker, 2005). Increased protection, along with increasing prey densities (e.g., elk), has allowed for a rebound in cougar numbers across the West (Nadeau, 2005). The potential for re-colonization of cougars in the region is of considerable interest to wildlife managers and the public alike (Nielsen et al., 2006, Davenport et al., 2010, Beier, 2010).

Large-scale habitat models have been created for many carnivore species using animal location information, remotely sensed data, multivariate statistics, and a geographic information system (GIS; Carroll et al., 1999, Mace et al., 1999, Nielsen and Woolf, 2002, Treves et al., 2004, McDonald et al., 2008). These models are created by statistically evaluating relationships between species occurrences and landscape characteristics (Store and Kangas, 2001); such analyses typically rely upon empirical data regarding species occurrence. However, empirical data may not be available, especially in the case of rare species. Expert-opinion surveys can be used in lieu of empirical data to obtain information regarding habitat needs (Pearce et al., 2001, Clevenger et al., 2002, Martin et al., 2004, LaRue and Nielsen, 2008). Store and Kangas (2001) describe a technique in which GIS, spatial analysis, and decision analysis techniques are used to develop large-scale habitat models. Expert opinion and multi-criteria analysis, specifically the analytical hierarchy process (AHP; Saaty, 1980), transform expert knowledge regarding wildlife habitat needs into numerical form. Geographic information system applications are then used to produce cartographic maps by combining the expert-assisted data and spatial analysis of landscape information (LaRue and Nielsen, 2008).

Although confirmations of cougar presence (i.e., carcasses, DNA, photographs, and video) in midwestern North America have increased dramatically during the past 20 years (Nielsen et al., 2006, Cougar Network, 2010), no researchers have yet developed models of potential habitat for cougars in North America's interior. Furthermore, relatively few applications of multi-criteria evaluation modelling exist for carnivores (Clevenger et al., 2002, Doswald et al., 2007, Singh et al., 2009). We previously modelled potential dispersal corridors for cougars into the Midwest based on expert opinion surveys within the AHP modelling framework; much of our discussion regarding these techniques are provided in LaRue and Nielsen (2008). The objectives of the present paper are to (1) quantify the amount and distribution of potentially favorable cougar habitat in the Midwest based on our previous work (LaRue and Nielsen, 2008); (2) delineate large areas of contiguous, highly favorable habitat; and (3) discuss model utility.

Section snippets

Methods

We assessed potential habitat for cougars using the same 9-state midwestern North America study area as in LaRue and Nielsen (2008). We were unable to use empirical data from midwestern cougars because such data were unavailable; confirmation location data (Nielsen et al., 2006, Cougar Network, 2010) from most states were deemed unsuitable, as they were likely dispersing animals and not selecting habitat optimally while dispersing (LaRue and Nielsen, 2008). Briefly, our approach to identify

Results and discussion

We provide the first large-scale assessment of potential cougar habitat in midwestern North America based on the collection and analysis of ecological data used for model building and validation. Of the 11 expert surveys returned (38% return rate), results were consistent among biologists surveyed, and indicated that land cover, specifically mixed and deciduous forest cover, was the most influential factor for potential habitat for cougars in the Midwest (Table 1). Distance to water was

Model utility

The modelling framework we employed was useful for identifying potential habitat for cougars in midwestern North America and provides an example approach for modelling potential habitat for large carnivores in the region and elsewhere. Gray wolves (Canis lupus) and black bears (Ursus americanus), have recolonized and increased their distribution in several midwestern states during the past decade (Gehring and Potter, 2005, Bales et al., 2005, Beringer, 2008). These top-tier trophic species will

Acknowledgements

We thank the Summerlee Foundation, Shared Earth Foundation, Cougar Network, and Graduate School and Cooperative Wildlife Research Laboratory at Southern Illinois University Carbondale for project funding. Thanks to C. Anderson, P. Beier, C. Christianson, G. Koehler, D. Onorato, H. Quigley, T. Ruth, H. Shaw, S. Wilson, A. Wydeven, and J. Young for evaluating and returning our expert-opinion survey. T. Oyanna and P. McDonald provided considerable support with GIS. Thanks to D. Fecske for

References (38)

  • P. Beier

    A focal species for conservation planning

  • J.A. Beringer

    Management Plan for the Black Bear in Missouri

    (2008)
  • C. Carroll et al.

    Using presence–absence data to build and test spatial habitat models for the Fisher in the Klamath Region, USA

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1999)
  • A.P. Clevenger et al.

    GIS-generated, expert-based models for identifying wildlife habitat linkages and planning mitigation passages

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2002)
  • Cougar Network

    Cougar Confirmations Recorded by the Cougar Network

    (2010)
  • M. Davenport et al.

    Attitudes toward mountain lion management in the Midwest: implications for a potentially recolonizing large predator

    Hum. Dimensions Wildl.

    (2010)
  • R. Desimone et al.

    Montana mountain lion status report

  • N. Doswald et al.

    Testing expert groups for a habitat suitability model for the lynx Lynx lynx in the Swiss Alps

    Wildl. Biol.

    (2007)
  • Fecske, D.M., 2003. Distribution and abundance of American martens and cougars in the Black Hills of South Dakota and...
  • Cited by (25)

    • Potential distribution and connectivity for recolonizing cougars in the Great Lakes region, USA

      2021, Biological Conservation
      Citation Excerpt :

      We identified 191 potential suitable patches with a minimum size for an adult female cougar to establish an annual home range (i.e. core patches), as well as 362 linkages connecting those patches. The northern half of our study area, which we identified as most suitable, is characterized by low human population and road densities, abundant water, diverse topography, and abundant forests (O'Neil et al., 2014; LaRue and Nielsen, 2011), and based on the available ungulate biomass, over 500 cougars could eventually occupy this area (~500 projected for Wisconsin and Michigan; O'Neil et al., 2014). Range-shifting taxa are often the species for which predictions of potential distributions are needed most (e.g. invasive species, recolonizing species), yet they violate the equilibrium assumption and often require model extrapolation (Elith et al., 2010; Gallien et al., 2012).

    • Population viability of recolonizing cougars in midwestern North America

      2016, Ecological Modelling
      Citation Excerpt :

      The model that implemented harvest in western populations resulted in lower cougar abundance, but still indicated that some females were likely to disperse into the interior Midwest. We found that two relatively large patches of habitat in Nebraska (though <600 km2 each – an area smaller than what previous research suggested as the minimum patch size for cougars; Beier, 1993; Thatcher et al., 2006; LaRue and Nielsen, 2008, 2011) contained cougars for most of the 25-year period, regardless of harvest scenario. Indeed, substantial physical evidence supports our findings and further suggests that cougar range is expanding via stepping stone dispersal (LaRue et al., 2012).

    • Modeling cougar habitat in the Northeastern United States

      2014, Ecological Modelling
      Citation Excerpt :

      This is implied by cougar presence in Florida (e.g. Maehr, 1997) among other places. While LaRue and Nielsen's (2011) model is the only one that included slope as a predictor, selecting for steeper areas over flatter areas, all models identified some viable habitat in steeper terrain – likely due to the relationship between terrain and the physical limitations of human development. When slope was tested as a predictor during the development of an original model, I did not find the geographic placement of viable habitat to deviate significantly from models that excluded slope.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text