A noninvasive method using auditory predator calls and hair snares to detect and genetically sample cougars (Puma concolor)
Date
2016
Authors
Yeager, Kirstie L., author
Kendall, William L., advisor
Alldredge, Mathew W., committee member
Crooks, Kevin R., committee member
Funk, W. Chris, committee member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Abstract
A noninvasive method that will sample all individuals in a population over multiple occasions is a useful tool in assessing population demographics with little disturbance to the target animals; however, finding such a method for large carnivores, such as cougars, is challenging due to their elusive nature and large home-range sizes. Current methods to sample cougars usually involve a physical capture component, but obtaining reliable estimates can be difficult and cost prohibitive when using capture as the sole sampling method. Because cougars leave sign, and exhibit behaviors like territoriality and curiosity, a noninvasive-genetic-sampling (NGS) method may be a plausible alternative. Hair contains DNA, which can be genetically analyzed to yield the individual identification necessary for population assessments and can be obtained without handling the animal. I tested NGS techniques using attractants, specifically scent lures and auditory calls, and hair snares to sample cougars at lure sites on the Front Range, Colorado during February – April, 2012 and November, 2012 – April, 2013. First, I established 16 – 20 sites over four ≈ 30-day sampling periods. At sites with auditory calls, photographs documented 40 visits by ≥ 13 individual cougars, and I obtained 14 hair samples. Only two hair samples were collected using scented scratch pads and no samples were acquired via a novel hair snare. Because my initial results indicated calls were more effective attractants than scents, I narrowed my focus to the cubby hair-snare design and increased my effort by establishing 148 lure sites over three or four sampling periods in two study areas: the Front Range (FR; 1,270 km2) and the Uncompahgre Plateau (UP; 540 km2). Each site was active an average of 28.5 days (4,214 sampling nights). On the FR, I observed 98 detections by 13 independent marked cougars, two sibling groups, and ≥ 16 unique unmarked animals. On the UP, I documented 18 detections by seven independent marked cougars. Collectively, 14 of the 20 marked cougars detected were observed multiple times. I used the GPS location data of 27 previously marked cougars to determine availability and estimate detection probabilities. The probability of detecting via camera an independent marked cougar at least once during the study with no assumption of closure (superpopulation) was 0.65 ± 0.11 (FR) and 0.64 ± 0.15 (UP). I collected 59 hair samples. Thirty-two were genotyped at ≥ 8 loci identifying 26 unique cougars. I conclude that auditory calls and hair snares may be an effective way to collect the various biological data that are needed to inform management decisions.