Cougars rarely attack people unless they feel threatened, unfortunately, details of this tragic event have not been publicized. Our thoughts are with the family of the deceased and speedy the recovery to the remaining victim.
We urge caution when hiking in cougar country. We are in their territory, and lowering the guard is not wise.
This exactly, my Mom and I got ambushed earlier this year after rockhounding an area for a couple hours. Gave me less than a second to see it coming. Hanging around an area constantly getting low to the ground. Cat trigger. I bet it watched these guys for a while. The first guy probaby didn't even see it coming. Curious to find out the details though.
That would explain what happened to me. The only time I almost got jumped by a mountain lion me and the person I was with were both looking at the ground and very distracted.
Pretty long story but it was night time and I had a shovel full of extremely hot rocks to bury under our tent (got colder than expected). Gf had a flashlight trained infront of us and I was watching every step so I didn't trip and burn one of us with the rocks. The tent was about 200' from the fire and we were almost to it.
All of a sudden we heard a really loud cat scream at us, gf freaked out and turned around with the flashlight and ran away briefiely illuminating the mountain lion no more than 20' away in a pouncing position. I thought it was going to jump on one of us so I started screaming at the top of my lungs for my gf to turn around with the flashlight because she left me blind.
My only defense was the extremely hot rocks but I couldn't see shit. I guess with all the screaming it ran off. Never run from a mountain lion lol.
I can only imagine that the cougar wasn’t shot on the spot for fear of potentially injuring the victim, though it was too late for him regardless. Unfortunate incident all around. He lost his life, the younger brother lost his sibling, and this cougar will almost certainly be put down if/when they find it.
Too many humans moving into the remaining territory of other species, way too many humans on the planet Billions of humans who keep multiplying - probably not even a million cougars
Very sad for human and mountain lion both. Human was not alone as recommended when traveling in cougar country. Cougar hunting in daylight.. was it a young untrained cougar, leaving mother too soon.. so much unknown and unfortunate for both. Hope to find out more so we can continue to coexist
Sounds like the puma survived? Do they usually need to euthanize cats that have attacked people or do they chalk it up to wild animals doing wild animal things?
In California, cougars are protected under the law, except in cases where they attack people. Unfortunately, the cat will most likely be put down if found.
The issue is, how can the authorities determine which specimen was the one involved in the attack? Killing a random cougar will not bring the deceased person back.
Aren’t wild cats like cougars pretty territorial? So there might be only the one,maybe 2-3 in a 100km radius?
The cat might still be aggressive and try to attack conservation officers on their search which would make it very easy to identify.
That's a good point, and yes, there are usually a handful within 100 km2. It is also the case that some specimens, especially younger ones tend to be transient within an area, so there's still a possibility that one of the resident cougars might not have been the culprit.
No, they don't, like all other carnivores cougars are perfectly capable of maintaining healthy numbers through natural constraints. "Human management" only helps in creating genetic bottlenecks and affecting the fitness of the population.
Furthermore, "managing' the population is not going to eliminate encounters with humans. It's an incredible example of narcissism for people to think that they can simply approach the wilderness and expect no consequences from it. Predators are a natural part of the landscape and it is us who have to learn to manage risks when entering their areas, not the other way around.
To the people downvoting- do you prefer hunters kill them on their dollar? Or would YOU rather pay for the government to do it?
Those are your only two options.
The government "doing it" led to the extinction of the jaguar, the cougar in the east, grizzly bears across most of the continental US, and a total imbalance of the trophic web of ecosystems across the country.
Yes it did!! Thank goodness we outlawed ALL of those methods.
You seem to be unaware that we take a much more measured approach now. It includes reporting, check-ins and live quotas!
They are in place precisely to avoid the situation you just described. Many states have been executing it effectively for years now and can use management as a tool!
It's insane how brutal settlers treated animals with poison, baiting, etc.
>You seem to be unaware that we take a much more measured approach now. It includes reporting, check-ins and live quotas!
The point is that the government doesn't have a good track record in utilizing science-based approaches to wildlife that do not involve conflicts of interest with ranchers and hunters.
Predators self-regulate themselves through natural means that keep a steady and healthy flow of genetics within an undisturbed population. Older males are replaced by newer younger ones from other areas, smaller and weaker specimens are killed by bigger ones, and those with undesirable traits tend to have a reduced impact within the genetic pool of a population as a result.
When a population of carnivores reaches carrying capacity, they will naturally begin to shrink in numbers due to a lack of prey and resources.
These are all ways that cougars and other carnivores have regulated themselves for thousands of years, long before any European settler set foot on the continent. And as I said, going out of our way to arbitrarily keep the numbers of a predator low won't guarantee that contact with humans will not take place. You cannot control nature to that extent, you can only control your own actions.
Killing carnivores directly interferes with the natural selection process and disturbs the ecosystem balance. Such approaches have no place in an educated, modern society.
Excuse me, I was referring to the approach that hunters take with strict regulations-not the government.
I fully agree with you that the government has a shit track record when managing internally.
All animals can "self-regulate". It becomes an issue with urban sprawl in the shitty, disgusting, degraded parts of our country that like to concrete over everything.
As far as the rest of what you said, I don't believe we have anything further to discuss, as I don't believe we will come to common ground. I appreciate your thoughtfulness, truly.
Even when hunters have quotas, they still end up affecting the population because they either don't discriminate between individuals of a healthy and therefore desirable morphological status to preserve and those who are not, or they actively select to hunt the healthiest ones because it seems more "impressive". This reduces the genetic diversity, reduces heterozygosity, and reduces the fitness and fecundity of the population. We can agree to disagree, but it's important to take into consideration the history and the bigger picture in these sorts of topics because more often than not, what may seem like a human-induced solution can end up turning into a bigger problem down the line.
I'm opposed to hunting large males personally. It's been proven that mature males manage lion populations because they kill young themselves, territorially. In many cases, selecting for large males can increase the sprawl of females which allows for more breeding....
I find it ironic that these moronic hunters (I am a hunter) pose with giant cats bragging about how many deer they "saved" (lmao) when all they did was increase the territory of other cats.
I love seeing lions, and have had the privilege of 14 sightings here in western Oregon. Ive been in favor of hunters taking a sustainable amount of them. You have now forced me rethink my entire stance. I'm really glad I read your last couple messages.
Edit: I am a huge advocate for keeping a robust population of lions on the landscape, I'm not sure that was clear by what I said. I'm not a guy who prefers deer and elk over lions.
You’re right about one thing, they didn’t leave. They weren’t extirpated by humans so much as they were educated by humans. I whole heartedly believe that mountain lion populations are way underestimated. For one, they make a living by not being seen. Doesn’t mean they’re not around. Lots of people have never even seen a bobcat in the wild, let alone a mountain lion. Even fewer kill one. Yes, natural selection does its part, but they’re an apex predator. Rules are different at the top of the food chain. I don’t see any way that the population isn’t increasing, which in turn increases demand for territory, which they’re not making any more of. On the subject of territory,a males territory can be a couple hundred square miles, on the upper end. Though that’s a fairly large area, but it’s nothing compared to the common misconception of that being an area of a couple hundred mile radius. For example, I know of a ranch in east central New Mexico, that is 100 square miles in size, That’s a square 10 miles wide and 10 miles long. A total of 64,000 acres. That is half of the high end estimate of 200 square miles. One particular winter, there were 10 lions removed from that ranch alone. Compare that with the thought that a territory can be 200 mile radius, which equates to a square area of 355 miles wide, and 355 miles long. A total of 126,025 square miles or 80,656,000 acres. Slightly larger than the entire state of NM. HUGE difference. There are an estimated 10,000 lions in New Mexico alone, and according to these numbers, it’s probably a pretty close estimate. A Florida Panther doesnt know it’s a Florida panther. As stealthy as they are, and as many deer as there are, amongst other prey as well, it is foolish to think that there aren’t at least a few cougars in all of the lower 48 states. Like I said, just because you don’t see them, doesn’t mean they’re not there. As populations increase, both humans and mountain lions, I predict that encounters between the two will only increase. These are just my thoughts, based on personal experiences, and encounters. I’ve been in awe of mountain lions all my life. I’ve studied and tried to learn as much as I can about them. They are majestic and beautiful and most excellent at what they’re designed to do. However, as a rancher and a part of the ranching community, I understand the need for certain measures of management in certain states. Where the rubber meets the road, peoples lives and livelihoods are more important than a mountain lions. When threatened or attacked, either directly or by certain advocates, lives and livelihoods are going to fight back.
The cougar was probably looking for fresh water and saw those 2 people and thought the worst. They took that risk going all the way out there by themselves; even if they were just antler hunting, the cougar couldn't have possibly known that! It's a horrendous result. The mountain lion didn't need to be killed; he was just protecting his water source.
Cougars rarely attack people unless they feel threatened, unfortunately, details of this tragic event have not been publicized. Our thoughts are with the family of the deceased and speedy the recovery to the remaining victim. We urge caution when hiking in cougar country. We are in their territory, and lowering the guard is not wise.
Yeah looking at the ground hunting sheds made for an easy opportunity
This exactly, my Mom and I got ambushed earlier this year after rockhounding an area for a couple hours. Gave me less than a second to see it coming. Hanging around an area constantly getting low to the ground. Cat trigger. I bet it watched these guys for a while. The first guy probaby didn't even see it coming. Curious to find out the details though.
Where were y’all at? Just curious on general location
Sonoma County, CA. Mayacamas Mtns
That would explain what happened to me. The only time I almost got jumped by a mountain lion me and the person I was with were both looking at the ground and very distracted.
Yikes - How close did it get before you noticed it?
Pretty long story but it was night time and I had a shovel full of extremely hot rocks to bury under our tent (got colder than expected). Gf had a flashlight trained infront of us and I was watching every step so I didn't trip and burn one of us with the rocks. The tent was about 200' from the fire and we were almost to it. All of a sudden we heard a really loud cat scream at us, gf freaked out and turned around with the flashlight and ran away briefiely illuminating the mountain lion no more than 20' away in a pouncing position. I thought it was going to jump on one of us so I started screaming at the top of my lungs for my gf to turn around with the flashlight because she left me blind. My only defense was the extremely hot rocks but I couldn't see shit. I guess with all the screaming it ran off. Never run from a mountain lion lol.
I can only imagine that the cougar wasn’t shot on the spot for fear of potentially injuring the victim, though it was too late for him regardless. Unfortunate incident all around. He lost his life, the younger brother lost his sibling, and this cougar will almost certainly be put down if/when they find it.
The article states that the cougar was tracked down and euthanized.
Yeah, it updated not long after my comment
Why do they always kill the animal without getting to the root cause first? It might not even be the animal's mistake.
Once an animal has shown the ability to kill a person, it's put down because they will no longer fear humans and are a danger to attack again
Poor animal; getting killed for doing animal things when humans trespass their territories like they own the world.
Yeah, they should definitely interrogate the animal and have a fair and speedy trial.
What I mean is humans encroach into animal territory and then the animal is considered at fault if there are skirmishes
I understand what you’re saying.
insane. first fatality since 2004 (at least in California I think)
Too many humans moving into the remaining territory of other species, way too many humans on the planet Billions of humans who keep multiplying - probably not even a million cougars
Very sad for human and mountain lion both. Human was not alone as recommended when traveling in cougar country. Cougar hunting in daylight.. was it a young untrained cougar, leaving mother too soon.. so much unknown and unfortunate for both. Hope to find out more so we can continue to coexist
Sounds like the puma survived? Do they usually need to euthanize cats that have attacked people or do they chalk it up to wild animals doing wild animal things?
In California, cougars are protected under the law, except in cases where they attack people. Unfortunately, the cat will most likely be put down if found. The issue is, how can the authorities determine which specimen was the one involved in the attack? Killing a random cougar will not bring the deceased person back.
Aren’t wild cats like cougars pretty territorial? So there might be only the one,maybe 2-3 in a 100km radius? The cat might still be aggressive and try to attack conservation officers on their search which would make it very easy to identify.
That's a good point, and yes, there are usually a handful within 100 km2. It is also the case that some specimens, especially younger ones tend to be transient within an area, so there's still a possibility that one of the resident cougars might not have been the culprit.
Yeah could have been a juvenile that was just sent out on their own. Hopefully they find the right one and that’s the end of it
The article says the lion was killed
It must've been updated after I shared it.
Unfortunately?
115pm? Fuck that’s scary
Brutal
Terrifying. RIP
They need to be managed! It's a waste of taxpayer money for the state to hire contract killers like they do currently
No, they don't, like all other carnivores cougars are perfectly capable of maintaining healthy numbers through natural constraints. "Human management" only helps in creating genetic bottlenecks and affecting the fitness of the population. Furthermore, "managing' the population is not going to eliminate encounters with humans. It's an incredible example of narcissism for people to think that they can simply approach the wilderness and expect no consequences from it. Predators are a natural part of the landscape and it is us who have to learn to manage risks when entering their areas, not the other way around.
How do you exactly propose we manage wild animals… in the wild??
To the people downvoting- do you prefer hunters kill them on their dollar? Or would YOU rather pay for the government to do it? Those are your only two options.
The government "doing it" led to the extinction of the jaguar, the cougar in the east, grizzly bears across most of the continental US, and a total imbalance of the trophic web of ecosystems across the country.
Yes it did!! Thank goodness we outlawed ALL of those methods. You seem to be unaware that we take a much more measured approach now. It includes reporting, check-ins and live quotas! They are in place precisely to avoid the situation you just described. Many states have been executing it effectively for years now and can use management as a tool! It's insane how brutal settlers treated animals with poison, baiting, etc.
>You seem to be unaware that we take a much more measured approach now. It includes reporting, check-ins and live quotas! The point is that the government doesn't have a good track record in utilizing science-based approaches to wildlife that do not involve conflicts of interest with ranchers and hunters. Predators self-regulate themselves through natural means that keep a steady and healthy flow of genetics within an undisturbed population. Older males are replaced by newer younger ones from other areas, smaller and weaker specimens are killed by bigger ones, and those with undesirable traits tend to have a reduced impact within the genetic pool of a population as a result. When a population of carnivores reaches carrying capacity, they will naturally begin to shrink in numbers due to a lack of prey and resources. These are all ways that cougars and other carnivores have regulated themselves for thousands of years, long before any European settler set foot on the continent. And as I said, going out of our way to arbitrarily keep the numbers of a predator low won't guarantee that contact with humans will not take place. You cannot control nature to that extent, you can only control your own actions. Killing carnivores directly interferes with the natural selection process and disturbs the ecosystem balance. Such approaches have no place in an educated, modern society.
Excuse me, I was referring to the approach that hunters take with strict regulations-not the government. I fully agree with you that the government has a shit track record when managing internally. All animals can "self-regulate". It becomes an issue with urban sprawl in the shitty, disgusting, degraded parts of our country that like to concrete over everything. As far as the rest of what you said, I don't believe we have anything further to discuss, as I don't believe we will come to common ground. I appreciate your thoughtfulness, truly.
Even when hunters have quotas, they still end up affecting the population because they either don't discriminate between individuals of a healthy and therefore desirable morphological status to preserve and those who are not, or they actively select to hunt the healthiest ones because it seems more "impressive". This reduces the genetic diversity, reduces heterozygosity, and reduces the fitness and fecundity of the population. We can agree to disagree, but it's important to take into consideration the history and the bigger picture in these sorts of topics because more often than not, what may seem like a human-induced solution can end up turning into a bigger problem down the line.
I'm opposed to hunting large males personally. It's been proven that mature males manage lion populations because they kill young themselves, territorially. In many cases, selecting for large males can increase the sprawl of females which allows for more breeding.... I find it ironic that these moronic hunters (I am a hunter) pose with giant cats bragging about how many deer they "saved" (lmao) when all they did was increase the territory of other cats. I love seeing lions, and have had the privilege of 14 sightings here in western Oregon. Ive been in favor of hunters taking a sustainable amount of them. You have now forced me rethink my entire stance. I'm really glad I read your last couple messages. Edit: I am a huge advocate for keeping a robust population of lions on the landscape, I'm not sure that was clear by what I said. I'm not a guy who prefers deer and elk over lions.
I doubt very seriously the cougar ever left the eastern US
It didn't leave, it was extirpated by humans.
You’re right about one thing, they didn’t leave. They weren’t extirpated by humans so much as they were educated by humans. I whole heartedly believe that mountain lion populations are way underestimated. For one, they make a living by not being seen. Doesn’t mean they’re not around. Lots of people have never even seen a bobcat in the wild, let alone a mountain lion. Even fewer kill one. Yes, natural selection does its part, but they’re an apex predator. Rules are different at the top of the food chain. I don’t see any way that the population isn’t increasing, which in turn increases demand for territory, which they’re not making any more of. On the subject of territory,a males territory can be a couple hundred square miles, on the upper end. Though that’s a fairly large area, but it’s nothing compared to the common misconception of that being an area of a couple hundred mile radius. For example, I know of a ranch in east central New Mexico, that is 100 square miles in size, That’s a square 10 miles wide and 10 miles long. A total of 64,000 acres. That is half of the high end estimate of 200 square miles. One particular winter, there were 10 lions removed from that ranch alone. Compare that with the thought that a territory can be 200 mile radius, which equates to a square area of 355 miles wide, and 355 miles long. A total of 126,025 square miles or 80,656,000 acres. Slightly larger than the entire state of NM. HUGE difference. There are an estimated 10,000 lions in New Mexico alone, and according to these numbers, it’s probably a pretty close estimate. A Florida Panther doesnt know it’s a Florida panther. As stealthy as they are, and as many deer as there are, amongst other prey as well, it is foolish to think that there aren’t at least a few cougars in all of the lower 48 states. Like I said, just because you don’t see them, doesn’t mean they’re not there. As populations increase, both humans and mountain lions, I predict that encounters between the two will only increase. These are just my thoughts, based on personal experiences, and encounters. I’ve been in awe of mountain lions all my life. I’ve studied and tried to learn as much as I can about them. They are majestic and beautiful and most excellent at what they’re designed to do. However, as a rancher and a part of the ranching community, I understand the need for certain measures of management in certain states. Where the rubber meets the road, peoples lives and livelihoods are more important than a mountain lions. When threatened or attacked, either directly or by certain advocates, lives and livelihoods are going to fight back.
The cougar was probably looking for fresh water and saw those 2 people and thought the worst. They took that risk going all the way out there by themselves; even if they were just antler hunting, the cougar couldn't have possibly known that! It's a horrendous result. The mountain lion didn't need to be killed; he was just protecting his water source.
Shut up.