More elk killed by mtn lions than wolves?

[Firestone]

I just asked for proof wolves chase mountain lions off kills. Don't much care, but it seems like bs. mtmuley

Not bs, i have seen it first hand probably a dozen times in northwest montana. It may be just a "random occurrence" but I think its a random occurrence that happens more then you think.

 

[ndbuck09]

So since we have wolves we now have an additional 32% predation from a "new" predator. That's a third more elk dying than before they were reintroduced. So in effect, more death of elk, less elk, and then the conclusion being pulled out is that since Mtn Lions were 35% they account for more mortality. HAHA. It's a straw-man for the real issue that the reintroduction has wreaked havoc on the elk due to this additive mortality in the elk herds! That 1/3 was/is the tipping point! But hey, "enlightened" individuals all over are so happy that wolves are on the landscape in great number.

 

[BuzzH]

Your conclusions are not conclusions, but rather an opinion that doesn't look at facts.

We have people on this thread saying that wolves are pushing lions off kills, which I also agree with. Very rarely does a lion eat even close to all of their kills, perhaps females with half grown kittens being the exception. Many single lions kill and eat only a small portion of their prey, eat the most desirable portions and kill another. According to the best available science, they kill about a deer, elk, sheep, etc. a week. No way a 120-130 pound animal is consuming that volume of biomass by itself in 7 days.

So, if wolves do find and scavenge on old lion kills, its not correct that an "additional" amount of prey is killed.

What elk are being killed by which predator is also relevant. It would appear if you're trying to grow an elk herd, you'd focus efforts on keeping calf elk alive. What predator is killing the most calf elk?

Do we have the tools in our tool box to control lions easier? Should we focus that management on certain segments of the lion population?

I don't believe anyone knows all those answers, but to ADDRESS the issues and management direction of both prey, predators, and the inter-relationship, there has to be studies like this conducted if your goal is moving the needle in the direction of your desired outcome.

Makes no sense to focus your efforts 100% on one prey species, when another is having the larger impact. In some cases, if elk are over state defined management objectives, it may not make sense to change predator management at all. Why reduce predator species to increase a prey species you cant control now?

This study, IMO, opens the door for all kinds of interesting management moving forward. Definitely doesn't lead me to any kind of "conclusion".

 

[freebird134]

I contend its better to not "guess" if you don't know for sure, in particular on a 15 year study.

Buzz, we are on the same page. I’m not saying it’s one or the other. I’m saying that those unknowns could be anything—wolves, cougar, etc. So, if there’s any chance that they are wolves or cougar, it’s reckless to make strong conclusions.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[mtmuley]

Not bs, i have seen it first hand probably a dozen times in northwest montana. It may be just a "random occurrence" but I think its a random occurrence that happens more then you think.

I hope you are killing some of those wolves that you are watching chase lions off of kills. Twelve times. mtmuley

 

[IdahoHntr]

They didn’t have lion density in the models. See the last sentence of the abstract, as well as parameters estimated in tables (eg, table 3).

So they can’t say lion density didn’t matter. They can’t say wolf density mattered more than lion density. They simply have no casts on lion density, so you can’t say wolf density is more important than lion density.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That makes sense. They honestly don't have any better understanding of wolf density than they do lion density and yet they were still confident enough to make that claim though? Interesting.

I would still go back to the study linked done in the Bitterroot where the cat population was more than 3 times that of wolves and yet mortality caused by each species was virtually equal. That is 3 times the population by the end of the study. Through most of the study window the cats actually had an even larger population compared to the wolf population in the area.

From your posts on this thread, I would say we have come to similar conclusions. This study doesn't tell us much except for MAYBE that lions are killing more elk than we thought. With that large of sample of unknowns, the study honestly can't conclude too much. For all we know, one species of predator was responsible for every single one of the unknown deaths and those conducting the study just couldn't tell.

 

[slick]

IdahoHntr- wish more people were as open minded as you.

Some have a hard time deciphering that a study isn’t necessarily gospel, but it’s a strategic way to try and look at something with as little bias as possible. There are always flaws- nothing’s perfect, and I think you hit the nail on the head when you wrote “lions are killing more elk than previously thought”.

People get a mentality that one shoe fits all and that doesn’t work in predator-prey interactions, nor large scale ecological processes.

Others also have maybe seen something once, twice, or ten times, and then believe that to be the norm, when it may or may not be, but then nothing will change their mind.

Thanks Buzz, Freebird, and Idaho for speaking about this intellectually, and without emotion.

 

[BuzzH]

Population density of each predator may not make any difference either. Elk aren't the only thing that lions and wolves eat.

However, from some research a friend of mine did in the Frank Church on lions, there are individual lions that prey almost exclusively on elk. They had a radio collared female lion that killed primarily elk, and she wasn't a very big cat either (100-110 pounds).

Others may never kill an elk at all, so predator density may not be all that conclusive either when trying to figure out which predator is killing more.

Prey density may be more of a factor on what the predators are selecting...makes sense that lions or wolves will kill what's most readily available and easiest to catch. These animals are not trophy hunting, they're hunting to survive.

That's why its research and why we need to conduct studies like this.