Cited by 51Wildlife Ecology and ConservationRangeland and Wildlife ManagementWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation

A Landscape Analysis of Cougar Distribution and Abundance in Montana, USA

Riley, Shawn J., Malecki, Richard A.·2001·Environmental Management

Abstract

Recent growth in the distribution and abundance of cougars (Puma concolor) throughout western North America has created opportunities, challenges, and problems for wildlife managers and raises questions about what factors affect cougar populations. We present an analysis of factors thought to affect cougar distribution and abundance across the broad geographical scales on which most population management decisions are made. Our objectives were to: (1) identify and evaluate landscape parameters that can be used to predict the capability of habitats to support cougars, and (2) evaluate factors that may account for the recent expansion in cougar numbers. Habitat values based on terrain ruggedness and forested cover explained 73% of the variation in a cougar abundance index. Indices of cougar abundance also were spatially and temporally correlated with ungulate abundance. An increase in the number and total biomass of ungulate prey species is hypothesized to account for recent increases in cougars. Cougar populations in Montana are coping with land development by humans when other components of habitat and prey populations are sufficient. Our analysis provides a better understanding of what may have influenced recent growth in cougar distribution and abundance in Montana and, when combined with insights about stakeholder acceptance capacity, offers a basis for cougar management at broad scales. Long-term conservation of cougars necessitates a better understanding of ecosystem fun…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s0026702503

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the western states, the distribution of cougars is influenced by the amount of topographic heterogeneity and the quantity of forested cover.

    “In the western states, the distribution of cougars is influenced by the amount of topographic heterogeneity and the quantity of forested cover [37]”

    From Landscape Analysis of Adult Florida Panther Habitat (2015) · cites this paper as [37]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Riley, S. J., & Malecki, R. A.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
Venue
Environmental Management
Published
2001-04-11
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
317-323
ISSN
  • 0364-152X (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1009
OpenAlex
W2055815412
Cited by
51
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Keywords
Puma concolor, habitat suitability, landscape parameters, terrain ruggedness, forest cover, prey biomass, population growth, wildlife management, conservation, Montana
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animals, Wild, Carnivora, Conservation of Natural Resources, Decision Making, Environmental Monitoring, Female, Male, Population Dynamics, Predatory Behavior, Ecosystem

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review