Some Puma concolor facts for California Apex predator California population estimated at 4,000-
6,000 Extensive habitat across the state Coincides with deer habitat Possibly 30-40 Puma in Santa Cruz Mountains Territories and populations socially regulated
An individual’s range can be as large as 100 square miles
Major threats: Habitat fragmentation & genetic isolation Vehicles, disease, shooting, wildfires
Methodology Publicly reported puma sightings recorded from multiple sources &
mapped San Mateo County police reports News articles Blogs & forums iNaturalist YouTube JRBP camera traps >330 reports during an 8-year period, >50 cities and towns
Sightings rated by degree of confirmation: Confirmed, Probable, Kill (carcass from likely kill by Puma), Unconfirmed
Data narrowed to sightings occurring within a Greater Bay Area quadrangle, Sept. 2009-May 2011 (150 reports)
JRBP photos used as control
Data Challenges & Limitations Inconsistent observation and reporting
False positives Under reporting in areas where Puma more
common Based on chance Newsworthiness varies
News archiving: older data less availableSmall numbers at municipality levelMany underlying variables – data inherently
“messy”
So why bother?Numbers are significant in aggregateQualified sightings can provide additional
puma movement data beyond camera trap locations & radio-collared cats Limitations exist on both of these methods
High number of sightings and/or high-profile events can pinpoint localities where public education and responder protocols are needed
Initial results
Quadrangle covers area within San Rafael-Martinez-Gilroy-Santa Cruz boundaries
277 sightings within quad
8 year time period
Narrowed to likely sightings
Confirmed, probable and kills only
8-year period (2004-2011)
175 data points within quad
Likely sightings, 2009-2011Confirmed, probable
& kills onlySept. 2009 – May
2011 (corresponds to JRBP camera trap Puma sightings)
119 data points within quad; 76 excluding JRBP camera traps
Sightings show surprising degree of confirmation
32%
16%9%
43%
Puma Sightings 2004-2011 excluding JRBP cameras
ConfirmedProbableKillUnconfirmed 57%
Likely
233 sightings Confirmed: Photo/
video, wildlife officer corroboration, or multiple witnesses
Probable: Credible description (“long tail” important)
Kill: Deer or livestock carcass, ideally with wounds identified as likely Puma-inflicted
…but reported sightings appear to be increasing
2011 data extrapolated to full year (50 actual sightings so far, Jan-May)
Excludes JRBP cameras
Caveat: under-recording of older years
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Greater reporting possibly a result of greater awareness?
Num
ber o
f rep
orte
d sig
htin
gs
Seasonality of sightings is indeterminate
Possible pattern in data; not clear Possible
correlation with deer movement patterns?
JRBP differences could be due to sample size
More research needed
FALL WINTER SPRING SUMMER
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2004-20112009-2011JRBP Camera Traps
Time of day: Morning & evening sightings most likely
Time segments: Early a.m.
(EAM): 00:00-5:59 a.m.
A.M. (AM): 6:00-11:59 a.m.
Afternoon (AFT): 12:00-5:59 p.m.
Evening (EVE): 6:00-11:59 p.m.
198 sightings; excludes killsEAM
AM
AFT
EVE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
20
72
37
69
7
27
6
28
4
7
5
13
8
24
21
24
Unconfirmed SightingsProbable SightingsConfirmed SightingsAll Sightings
Evening Confirmed +Probable reports = 42% of Total
Afternoon Confirmed + Probable = 11%
Morning Confirmed + Probable = 35%
Early Morning Confirmed+Probable = 11%
Daytime sightings not bizarre
Daytime = 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.24 % of total confirmed sightings
This is consistent with other Puma activity studies1
8:15 8:45 9:00 9:55 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 15:30 16:16 17:3516:30
• 9/23/10 Pescadero: Puma behind school• 3/29/11 Redwood City : Puma shot in neighborhood
• 10/14/10 Pescadero: Puma behind school• 10/21/07 Gilroy: Cub found eating dog food• 6/13/06 Pleasanton: 50-60 lb. Puma shot near condo
• 9:00, 9/13/10 Morgan Hill: Puma spotted, escapes• 9:55, 1/13/05 Palo Alto: 50-lb. male Puma spotted, escapes
• 1/12/10 Los Gatos Older male struck, killed by car
• 4/29/05 San Jose Photo taken of 80-lb puma in yard• 8/31/08 Portola Valley Credible sighting near yard
• 6/29/08 “daytime” Morgan Hill YouTube video
• 5/17/04 Palo Alto Puma shot by police
• 11/1/08 Saratoga Riders see Puma in open space
• 1/31/10 “late after-noon” La Honda Hikers approached by 2 Puma
• 1/1/07 Portola Valley Puma seen by 3 people
• 3/12/11 Los Altos Puma on security cam
1 Hansen, 1992
Sightings by locality probably do not reflect amount of actual Puma movement
aptos
belmon
t
berkel
ey
boulde
r cree
k
burlin
game
Clayto
n
danvill
e fel
ton gilr
oy
Hayward
la hond
a
los alt
os
Mill Vall
ey
montar
a
morgan
hill
novato
pacific
a
pescad
ero
pleasa
nton
redwoo
d city
san ca
rlos
San Le
andro
san m
ateo
santa
cruz
Scotts
Valley
stanfo
rd
Walnut
Creek
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Confirmed Probable Kill Unconfirmed
JR Camera traps
High variability in number, confirmation level of sightings across communities
Expected & actual impact of human population density on sightingsWe might expect to see a relationship
between human population density, actual Puma movement, and propensity to report sightings…
# Re
porte
d Si
ghtin
gs
Population density
More rural = Puma considered more commonplace; observers less likely to report sightings
More urban = Puma activity is unusual but there is a much higher propensity to report it
A hypothetical “sweet spot” may exist in semi-rural areas where Puma activity is not unusual but people consider sightings noteworthy
…Data say “sort of” JR camera
traps excluded (not a function of human observation)
Some outliers can be explained, but not all
Relationship looks better on log scale; don’t know why!10 100 1000 10000 100000
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Population density per locality
# of
repo
rted
Pum
a sig
htin
gs
Pescadero schoolyard sightings
Portola Valley, Woodside
• Outliers include Gilroy, Morgan Hill with a high # of livestock kills.• Other outliers have mixed densities (Palo Alto, Redwood City)
Education can be prioritized by community
Relatively dense communities with high %s of likely sightings should be prioritized for education outreach & responder training (Shaded area)
Cities in bold have already had incident needing responder training
Likely Sightings as % of Total Sightings per Locality
Population Density (person/mi.2)
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000-10%
10%
30%
50%
70%
90%
110%
= Total # of Sightings
San Mateo
Berkeley
San JoseGilroy
Morgan Hill
Palo AltoRedwood City
Los Altos
Daly City
Portola Valley
Woodside
Pescadero
Note: JR data omitted
Terrain characteristics of sightings are consistent Consistent nearby land features: Always 1 or
more within < 3 miles Streambeds Open space/parks Hilly terrain, often wooded These are typical Puma habitat features
Even “urban” sightings are within 2-3 miles of 1 or more features Berkeley “Gourmet Ghetto” lion, August 2009 Redwood City Sequoia Hospital puma, March 2011
Pumas typically travel 0.5 miles/hour;1 thus can travel 2-3 miles in a few hours from a habitat area into human habitation
1Kevin Hansen, citing Paul Beier, 1992
Open Spac
e
Stre
ambed
Hilly T
erra
in0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
84%
34%51%
Chart notes:• Percents sum to >100%• Terrain rating estimated
“Urban” sightings not far from Puma habitat areas
San Francisquito Creek
Berkeley Redwood City
Palo Alto
Streambeds
Gilroy
1 Mile
Conclusions Social and news media can be a useful ecology tool
Citizen science puma tracking Even this “messy” data yields some useful information
Corroborates behavior studies Has potential predictive value
Reported Puma sightings in the greater Bay Area appear to be increasing
Sightings peak during morning and evening as expected but almost 25% occur during daytime
Sightings vary greatly among communities Communities can be prioritized for education & training outreach There are common terrain features near sightings, even urban
ones, that can possibly be used to anticipate future Puma activity Human demographics and Puma behavior data can potentially be
combined to predict human-Puma interaction at a high level
Next Steps Share results with Felidae Conservation Fund, other researchers Tie results in with puma radio movement data – possibly
identify individuals Do additional research to add to/scrub data:
Police reports Animal Control
Conduct more in-depth terrain & seasonality analysis Use results to identify areas to find pumas to collar Use results to place cameras at likely corridor points Develop “citizen science” puma app to capture better data
when new sightings occur http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RR3YTWN
Some interesting Puma sightings
Video: Los Altos Hills http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLXGLgSAZj4
Video: Morgan Hill http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8DK2RGUXuk
Video: Ben Lomond (Felidae Fund) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1axaB_zRn8
Some photos from JRBP