Jump to content

Talk:Cougar/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

?

What is there to be discussed?

Subspecies: genetic research indicates that there are actually only 6 subspecies of Puma concolor. The current classification strikes me as old fashioned science that sees separate populations and calls them seperate subspecies just because. I've seen this with elk and many other species and because of environmental interests some people seem willing to defend the outdated subspecies. Look people, we should not let our desires get in the way of science. If Puma concolor cougar is genetically unimportant, we should not protect them on that basis. We should change the law to recognize the importance of native species throughout their range rather than having the Endangered Species Act which sees one small population of a species (or subspecies) as a sufficient act of conservation. The current system of subspecies in North America dates back to the 40s. If no one objects to phylogenic evidence (http://www.coryi.org/Florida_panther/Miscellaneous_Panther_Material/Genomic%20ancestry%20of%20the%20American%20puma.pdf), I would like to replace the contents of the subspecies section with the following:
Genetic evidence has shown that many of the subspecies previously recognized were genetically indistinguishable from one another (reference to above link). This study indicates that the original North American subspecies of Puma concolor went extinct during the pleistocene extinctions some 10,000 years ago and that North America was then repopulated by South American Pumas, leading to the genetic similarity of modern North American cougars. The subspecies determined by Dr. Culver are the following
  • North American Cougar (Puma concolor cougar): includes the previous subspecies coryi, shorgeri, cougar, azteca, improcera, missoulensis, hippolestes, oregonensis, vancouverensis, californica, kaibabensis, browni, stanleyana, and mayensis
  • Costa Rican Cougar (Puma concolor costaricensis)
  • Northern South American Cougar (Puma concolor concolor): includes the previous subspecies concolor, bangsi, soderstromi, incarum, and osgoodi
  • Southern South American Puma (Puma concolor puma): includes the previous subspecies patagonica, puma, pearsoni, and araucanus
  • Eastern South American Cougar (Puma concolor capricornensis): includes the previous subspecies discolor and acrocodia
  • Argentine Puma (Puma concolor cabrerae)
The common names I made up, but the subspecies are from the paper. I guess I'd have to make a new article for North American Cougar. Thoughts? I'd like to include the maps in figure 1 from the link above but I'm not sure how all the copyright stuff works on Wikipedia...
I went ahead and changed it, but for some reason the eastern cougar link is dead. Any idea why? Eco jake 13:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Eco Jake

I object strongly to the changes in description of subspecies status made by Eco Jake, as there is no scientific consensus to support his views. Dr. Culver's findings are interesting, but do not in themselves constitute or warrant a revision of subspecies standing. The original subspecies list should be restored, followed by a summary of Dr. Culver's findings, with the caveats included that no consensus has been reached on subspecies changes and that other factors are considered in addition to reported genetic similarities on a molecular level.

(The comment below is cross-posted on the Florida panther discussion page):

The dialogue between subspecies lumpers and splitters is ongoing for many animals, including puma, but there is certainly no consensus to revise subspecies status for the Florida panther. Given the relevance to protection under the Endangered Species Act, such a revision should not be proposed lightly. Although a recent study describes the subspecies of Puma concolor as fairly similar on a molecular level, the panther is one of the more distinctive of the subspecies, and factors other than molecular similarity are considered when deciding whether to revise subspecies status. Recent scientific articles about the Florida panther retain the subspecies designation (see Beier et al. 2006 and Conroy et al. 2006), as does the the Draft USFWS Florida Panther Recovery Plan, recently released for public comment.

Beier, P, MR Vaughan, MJ Conroy, and H Quigley. 2006. Evaluating scientific inferences about the Florida Panther. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:236-245. online URL: http://www.wildlifejournals.org/archive/0022-541X/70/1/pdf/i0022-541X-70-1-236.pdf

Conroy, MJ, P Beier, H Quigley, and MR Vaughan. 2006. Improving the use of science in conservation: lessons from the Florida panther. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1-7. online URL: http://www.wildlifejournals.org/archive/0022-541X/70/1/pdf/i0022-541X-70-1-1.pdf

Ecover 00:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, reverted to earlier list. Betula 17:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the lack of response - I've been away from computers for a while. I see the validity of your point and it seems like a good compromise to state both viewpoints. Eco jake

Classification

The Felidae page suggests the Puma is in a separate genus, not part of the Felis genus. -- Loren

Fixed :) -- Timwi 21:58 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)

No ,it isn't of the Felis genus. It's Puma Concolor.211.72.108.3 02:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Classification

Above says genus contradiction is fixed but it still exists. Species page says "Felis concolor" but the family Felidae page says mountain lion is part of genus Puma and not genus Felis.

I think the consensus within the scientific community is that the puma should definitely be in its own genus (having enough autapomorphies to warrant this); moreover mtDNA analysis suggests it's related to the cheetah (weird, I know).

Distribution

The map and article texts describe different distributions - The text describes verified sigtings along Lake Superior, whereas the map shows the limit of the distribution as several hundred miles to the east. I think the map is based on old information, although there is a lot of controversy over the presence of cougar in the eastern US. Toiyabe 00:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I have seen mountain lions with my own eyes in the mountains of North Carolina, and have also seen foot prints in the snow that could only be a mountain lion (too large to be a bobcat, yet with retracted claws so not a black bear). Their range is almost certainly greater than that indicated by the map. 71.75.170.119 06:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

--John A. Lutz 23:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Sound of puma

Is there any audio media that'd give a good picture of what a puma sounds like? I've heard puma can purr and thus can't roar. It sounds strange, though. Does puma meow then? chery 06:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The only cats that can roar are those in genus Panthera; they have a modified hyoid bone. They can purr as well, though.
As cats go, pumas aren't of the quiet persuasion, in any case. They may purr, hiss, cry, chirp (surprising as it may sound), snarl and yowl; it's this last sound, usually employed as a mating call, which is most distinctive. 212.145.174.77 10:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

There is an overabundance of unpublished data surrounding documented evidence showing wild pumas continue to survive in the eastern United States. I personally have gathered more than 7,500 reports and conducted hundreds of field investigative studies since 1965. At least 50% of my reports were made by the most credible witnesses who were or are trained observers with backgrounds in wildlife, forestry and law enforcement in the mid-atlantic states. In those 40+ years of field studies, we have gathered enough evidence in the form of videotapes, photographs and plaster casts of tracks, including adult and cubs together that should satisfy any serious researcher. –John A. Lutz

Can't roar? I swear I've seen cougars depicted as making a schreeching sound much like a roar. But I guess that could just be on TV...

A roar is a very specific phenomenon that only cats from the genus Panthera can make. Their ancestors' anatomy evolved to allow them to make this deep cry. I don't know what you'd call the sound a puma makes (a cry perhaps?) but it is at any rate not a roar.Eco jake 23:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Eco Jake

Yes it is called a cry and many articles call it a screech. I want to mention that I've seen an impressive video of a puma fending off a grizzly bear. I menation this because I don't think many articles give much credit of pumas' fighting abilities. They may be somewhat shy and only are fierce against other invading pumas, but when it comes to protecting their young or themsleves they appear feircer than anything!

Are you guys sure mountain lions don't roar, I've heard one roar before it was close to me too, I'll tell ya I never rode my bike so fast in my life.64.230.108.232 19:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC) this was [[[User:TotallyTempo|TotallyTempo]] 05:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 05:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC) before user account created.

No, mountain lions cannot roar at all; only tigers, lions, jaguars and leopards are capable of that little trick. However, there is one sound they are infamous for, because it sounds an awful lot like a woman screamin

so if they can't roar, I have no idea what was in that field that day...also I got me a user account...TotallyTempo 05:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 05:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Cryptozoology

This page needs some editing to remove the crpytozoological aspects and keep the focus on the known facts about the animal. Although there are reported sightings from time to time in New England, all inquiries made by biologists and other wildlife experts have failed to produce any evidence that here is a surviving population and instead the sightings seem explanable by misidentification of the area's native wildcats (Lynx and Bobcats) and even of large domestic cats. The same is true of the alleged New York State incidents. The "phantom Cougar" stories could be placed on a page in the cryptozoology section but do not belong on the main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.172.69.2 (talk • contribs)

Elisha Cuthbert

Elisha Cuthbert's character on the TV show 24 (Kim Bauer) was caught in a snare trap. Supposedly while filming, Elisha was attacked, but this was not while "hiking in the wilderness", it was while filming a show. Very misleading. Someone who knows more about this should correct it.

Surprisingly sloppy page

Considering the amount of information available about this animal, I'm surprised at the content of this article. Too much of the article focuses on human attacks and "popular culture" while there is nothing about mountain lions in native American culture. Nor is there any information about the various names of the animal and what it's called in which regions (which is the reason I visited this page in the first plave). I'd like to see information like this: http://www.floridaconservation.org/panther/handbook/natural/whatname.html.

Also, I'm surprised that there's no discussion or controversy regarding the use of the name "puma" instead of "cougar" or "mountain lion" as the page title. There is seemingly no real consensus (the San Diego Zoo website says "mountain lion" (http://www.sandiegozoo.org/animalbytes/t-puma.html) while the Western North Carolina Nature Center calls them "cougars" (http://wildwnc.org/af/cougar.html). The only consensus I can see is that in North America the animal is *never* called the puma. That name appears to be strictly European in its popularity. I'd love to see a link to research that identifies this nomenclature as the English language norm. Thanks, all. 69.231.194.152 21:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, not true that it's never called puma in north america! That was one of the first names--maybe THE first--that I learned for it as a kid just in talking to other kids and/or school and/or family. (Probably Colorado or New York.) Elf | Talk 05:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
It's usually called a cougar, mountain lion, or panther here in Indiana where I live, but there are a sizable amount of people who call them 'pumas' here too. I've never heard it was just a European name, just that the other names were more popular in North America. - Indy Gold 20:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

To be frank, I have heard at least eight of the names mentioned here in the States, all in different areas of the country. For example, "painter" you'd probably find in parts of Tennessee, but in Vermont they still adhere to "catamount" (the word itself is a contraction of the phrase "cat of the mountains".) The name "puma" you'll find just about anywhere (especially useful when conversing with a Spanish speaker, as it is the same in both languages.)

Npt only that but "suçuarana" is not the Tupi nam efor the cougar but the name of a species of snake.

Extraterritorial Occurences: Released Captives

Some years ago, before I became acquainted with Wikipedia, I was on vacation in Maine and saw a story in the Portland paper about cougar tracks in the area. Some were well preserved, and the local game warden said they were definitely cougar. The state wildlife authorities said that there may be a remnant population of cougars in Maine's north woods, but the Portland area is too populous for a remnant population, and these tracks must have been made by a released captive animal.

National Public Radio had a story a few years ago about a population of cougars in Devonshire in England. They were said to be black, and to have been verified as cougars by zoological experts. They were formidable evening hunters, and helped themselves liberally to sheep, as the local sheepfolds were of course not designed to keep cougars out. There was no question that these animals must have been released from a private zoo. A few years earlier the keeping of normally wild animals had been made considerably more expensive, and someone had irresponsibly turned his animals loose, and they had prospered in what remains of rural England. J S Ayer 02:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Range Expansion?

The reason why people are seeing cougars in odd places these days does hold a kernel of truth in it, and it seems to have to do with range expansion. Recently North Dakota acknowledged the presence of the cats within its borders, as have some other midwestern states. Dr. Maurice Hornocker even endorsed the idea that the cats are moving back home as it were, and if you take out a map and chart where solid evidence has been found (pug marks, carcasses, or poop) your eyes will go wide. I guess my question is, why has nobody written about this?

Name

For an animal with so many names (Puma, Cougar, Moutain lion, etc) this article lacks any mention of these names and where these words come from/where they are used. Not only that, but these are also just nicknames. i don't care how names differnet people use, the scientific name would have helped.

Puma Safety Tips

The article says "Instead, stand and face the animal, but do not make eye contact (experts suggest looking at the feet)." Is that your feet or the cat's feet? I've found two references that contradict this advice: both http://www.adventuresmart.ca/cougarsafety.php and http://www.macecanada.com/tips/cougars.htm say "keep direct eye contact with the cougar". Julesd 15:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Interesting problem. Perhaps a good trade-off would be to face the cougar, but not look it in the eye? Between small cats at least, direct eye contact can communicate rank, similar to wolves. But you don't want to be facing away from the cougar, because if you're giving them the message "I can't see you," that's about the same as saying "Come and eat me." 71.217.114.221 17:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

How big is the damned thing?

I couldn't find that anywhere, which is a surprisingly basic peice of information not to have in an article. -Toptomcat 02:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Up to about 180-200 lbs. Big.

They are also about 6 feet long from nose to tail.

I find the sentence "They are secretive cats who sometimes avoid people, and attacks on humans are not extremely rare." ridiculous. They will nearly always avoid humans and attacks ARE extremely rare. Some parts of this article seem like they were written by a puma hunter apologist.

Mesonychid

I am confused on the talk of Mesonychid under the Attacks on Humans section. Mesonychids are extinct. Is the author saying the specialists think one of these was doing the predation?

Typing slurs

Typing and wording were terrible, this goes for the editing, too —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.39.251.35 (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

It is very obvious to me that the authors of this article are having disagreements about their facts, particiuarly in regards to safety and possible sightings in the northeast. Very choppy article with many details that should be deleted. I would do this but I know nothing about Pumas.

safety tips

One of the first tips is "Do not run." Then further down the list it says "Run if possible." It looks odd.

Also, it says "do not shoot it, they are protected" or something like that. This is supposed to be a safety tip list of what to do if confronted by a puma. If a puma is going to attack you, I'm sure it'd be okay to shoot it (or are you just supposed to allow yourself to be mauled?!?!) At the very least, this is debatable.

We're not talking about hunting or chasing pumas, we're talking about defending oneself when confronted or ambushed by a puma. I think that "don't shoot it" part doesn't belong in a "safety tip" list in fact I think it looks ridiculous. Anyone else?

Yeah, I removed that section from the safety tips as it was just contradicting itself. 137.99.179.251 05:52, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hear hear, I would shoot it if it were going to attack me, believe me Puma's are freaking scary animals -TotallyTempo

The following is a closed discussion of the move request. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was to move the article as proposed.

Requested move

I'm planning on moving this article to Cougar, and making the redirected Puma a genus level article. This is in accordance with what Mammal Species of the World, 3rd ed, (MSW3) lists as the common name, and also accomodates the fact that the Jaguarundi is in the Puma genus. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. Cougar is somewhat more common, I believe. --BlueSquadronRaven 00:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Support They both have alternative usage but I think Puma is more closely associated with the clothing line then the Animal while Cougar is probably the most closest association to the animal. 205.157.110.11 04:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Just checking the dictionaries and encyclos...here are the names that the dictionaries give primacy to (i.e., the main entry, with synonyms linking to it):
While I normally hate doing the US/UK English thing -- it creates such bad feelings -- cougar seems to have the right of the line in American and Canadian dictionaries, and it is a beast from the New World, so it should be cougar per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National varieties of English. -- SigPig |SEND - OVER 14:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Felis concolor vs. puma concolor

What is the difference between felis concolor and puma concolor? As a followup to that: felis concolor redirects here but I can't find "felis concolor" on this page. Cburnett 03:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Felis concolor and Puma concolor are the same species. In older classifications, this species was in genus Felis, in modern classifications it is in genus Puma. I've added the synonym to the taxobox. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The safety tips

As Wikipedia is not a how-to, these don't belong. Can we compress this section into a single paragraph under "attacks on humans"? Marskell 13:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I find the safety tips very out of place in an encyclopedia. Slow Graffiti 15:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I concur. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Done. Marskell 09:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Canine Tracks

This photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cougar_Tracks_in_snow.JPG which is included in the "physical charactaristics" section is most certainly that of a canine of some sort. Cougars ALWAYS retract their claws when on the move. http://www.easterncougar.org/tracks.gif DHollerman 21:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a canine to me too. The metacarpal pad is too small compared to the toes, and there's the distict 'X' in front of the metacarpal pad, which is typical of canines, instead of the 'C' that is typical of cats. It's probably a domestic dog, wild canines tend to have narrower prints. Toiyabe 22:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I am the person who took the photo of the tracks. To figure out what those tracks are let me describe the area first: It is on southwestern Vancouver Island, in an area that is devoid of houses or dwellings for 20 kilometers (12 miles) radius. The tracks came out of the forest, then proceeded many kilometers along the logging road uphill. There were no other humans in the area, or human tracks for at least 5 days, as evident by the snow. These are the first large tracks I have ever seen in that area in the last 5 years. One valley further north (12km) is a large wolf population that is not known to frequent the area where I took that picture, nor have I ever heard any wolves howl in that area either. Is it normal for Wolves to be solitary? I am curious, and if those are indeed canine tracks then let's figure it out and I'll remove the image. If anyone wants to see the full set of those tracks go to http://freeminer.ca/03-01-2007/ and scroll down to the pictures section. Chaosdna 21:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

After further research I have concluded that the image shows a print of a Wolf, not a Cougar. I checked with the Wolf article on the German Wikipedia and they helped me identify it. Here is a link to the discussion: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Wolf#Wolfspur_oder_Puma.3F . Consequently I will remove the image. Chaosdna 23:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed 30k killed

"State agency records show that over 30,000 cougars were killed for sport between 1996 and 2006, one of the highest totals for any decade on record." The IUCN reports 50 000 individuals, in general. If the rm'ed statement is true, it would mean a close to 40% drop based solely on American hunting in a decade. Or am I missing something? Marskell 13:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

A take of 3,000 per year from a population of 50,000 sounds reasonable. That figure should be cited, though. Remember that breeding females produce a litter of about 3 kittens per year, and that in most areas of the US where they are hunted the agency goal is to maintain or reduce current populations. Toiyabe 15:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Point understood re the cat being fecund, but with a lifespan close to a decade, this attrition rate from hunting alone in the US alone doesn't make sense. Particularly, when half of the article talks about its startling comeback in the US. In any case, it should be sourced if it is to be re-added. Marskell 20:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Did a little searching and here's what I found (state, year, sport harvest):
NV 2005 115 [3]
OR 2005 141 [4]
WA 2005 202 [5]
ID 2004 329 [6]
CO 2003 370 [7]
MT 2006 283 [8] (note: season still open)
WY 2005 175 [9]
NM 2006 117 [10] (note: season still open)
AZ 250-350 [11]
Note that those aren't all for the same years (just the latest year I could find data for), and in two states the data isn't complete. I couldn't find anything for Texas or Utah - put them down for 200 each, and you get about 2,400. There's probably a few other states with cougar hunting that I missed. 3,000 per year for the US is a plausible number. I'm confident that the true number is somewhere between 2,000 and 4,000. Personally, I wouldn't have taken that text out, just put a citation needed tag in. Toiyabe 22:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I retract my intuitive criticism of the numbers. If it does go back in, not in the lead please. Marskell 14:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Cougar populations of the United States and Canada

Any suggestions on compressing this as well? We're not much talking about the cat; only where it's been sighted in the US. Marskell 18:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Leaping ability

(Hopefully not another un-replied-to thread...)

So how high? The page unsourced says eight feet, which seems a little low. I'm seeing 18 feet from Can. Geo. [12] and the San Diego Zoo [13] and was humming along about to add that. And then I thought...that's fu**ing nuts. Eighteen feet? Elephants are like 10 or 12 feet at the shoulder. Does anyone have a canonical source on this? Unfortunately, the IUCN sources don't have this detail.

And while at it, how far horizontally? Forty feet? Ha! Maybe I'm not being imaginative enough. Marskell 21:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The Canadian Geographic site has a "Facts" page [14] that gives the horizontal jumping distance as 30 feet.
I live in an area with cougars, and these numbers seem credible to me. Both sources are reliable even if they're not aimed at a specialist readership. I think you can safely cite either or both of them. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Ya, I'd read the Can Geo stuff, which is why I asked. I can't quite believe it, but hey, it's not truth but attribution that matters. I'm going to add it now. Marskell 18:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

To do

(Jaguar as template)

  • 1 Etymology (started)
  • 2 Taxonomy (Good)
  • 3 Biology and behaviour
  • 3.1 Physical characteristics (Good)
  • 3.2 Reproduction and life cycle (Good)
  • 3.3 Social structure (Good)
  • 3.4 Hunting and diet (Good)
  • 4 Ecology
  • 4.1 Distribution and habitat (Good)
  • 4.2 Ecological role (Good)
  • 5 Conservation status (Good)
  • 6 Attacks on humans (Good)
  • 6 In mythology and culture (nope)

http://www.wemjournal.org/wmsonline/?request=get-document&issn=1080-6032&volume=014&issue=03&page=0169

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0888-8892(199303)7%3A1%3C94%3ADMHAAH%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I#abstract

subspecies

Here's MSW3's list of subspecies, including synonyms. I included the authorities only when multiple meanings are possible.

  • P. c. concolor: bangsi, incarum, osgoodi, soasoaranna, soderstromii, sucuacuara, wavula
  • P. c. anthonyi: acrocodia, borbensis, capricornensis, concolor (Pelzeln, 1883)[preoccupied], greeni, niigra
  • P. c. cabrerae: hudsoni, puma (Marcelli, 1922)
  • P. c. costaricensis
  • P. c. couguar: arundivaga, aztecus, browni, californica, coryi, floridana, hippolestes, improcera, kaibabensis, mayensis, missoulensis, olympus, oregonensis, schorgeri, stanleyana, vancouverensis, youngi
  • P. c. puma (Molina, 1782): araucanus, concolor (Gay, 1847), patagonica, pearsoni, puma (Trouessart, 1904)

Looks like we'll need to change the existing section a little, and Florida Panther is no longer a valid subspecies unto itself, but a population of North American Cougar P. c. couguar, along with the extinct Wisconsin Cougar. Probably moving Eastern Cougar to North American Cougar would be a good thing, along with mergin in the existing Florida Panther article. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Blah. This is hard when you have 32 to deal with... Four of the six above correspond to Culver, who is referenced a lot. I suggest we create one canonical list for the latest MSW3. Other things can be edited in around it. Marskell 20:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The changes from Culver are small and seem only to be in regards to which epithet has priority; the six subspecies seem to be identical otherwise. I'm going to take a stab at rewriting the section. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

So basically, 32 have ceased to be canonical and six have become so? This will make our list much easier to deal with. Marskell 08:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see you've already made the change. Note MSW3 was not yet used on the page, so you'll have to fix that ref. Marskell 08:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, and yes. :) I've also reworded the section a little, removing "Culver" since we now have the reference and don't need to refer by name. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I've also taken the liberty of moving Eastern Cougar to North American Cougar, and tagged Florida Panther to be merged there. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I named him again to avoid confusion with the intervening study (Johnson) I just introduced. A good section we've got now. I haven't looked at the sub-articles...I'm bad that way.

Behavior (cut)

As I've gone through this, the initial behavior section became increasingly redundant. Basically all of the hard data was shoved into this one section. I'm going to cut it for now and leave it here, to see if something can be used later. Marskell 20:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

"The cougar can kill and drag prey about 7 times its own weight. It usually kills with a bite at the base of the skull to break the neck of its target. The carcass of the kill is usually then buried or partially covered to protect it for several days, while the cougar continues to roam and comes back for nourishment as needed. The cougar does not enjoy being a scavenger, however, and will generally hunt for its own food and not eat from a carcass, even if one is available. The cougar will catch and kill its prey 82% of the time, and are consequently finicky eaters. Like other cats, it will also move to certain areas for feeding. Adult males tend to claim a 100 square mile (250 km²) stretch for their territory; adult females take 20 to 60 square miles (50 to 150 km²) on average; however their ranges can vary from as much as 370 square miles (1000 km²) to as little as 10 square miles (25 km²).

The cougar, like all other cats, is territorial, although more territorial than most cats, especially animals from desert and very snowy regions. It will mostly avoid fighting and usually wards off others with urine markings, but it sometimes competes aggressively for territory, especially among males.

A male may breed with several females. Females usually have 3 or 4 kittens in a den in a rocky location. If a male cougar invades the territory of another male, he may kill the kittens of resident females so that they will become receptive to mating."

Further cut

I have cut the following because I think it over-specific (we don't need to list every state in the union) and because I don't think it totally verifiable.

"The cougar is gradually extending its range to the east, following creeks and riverbeds, and has reached Missouri, Michigan and Kansas. In Texas, the cougar is generally confined to the western ⅔ of the state. However, there have been Cougar sightings in 218 of the 254 Texas counties, with confirmed mortalities in 67 counties since 1983, an indication that it is expanding statewide to its historical range.[1] There are continuing reports of the survival of a remnant population of the eastern cougar in Maine, New Brunswick, Ontario and the Gaspé Peninsula of Quebec.

In the eastern United States, rumors and myths of the cougar never died, but this cat is slowly making its way from myth to reality, especially along the Appalachian Mountains from Virginia to Georgia. In this region cougar sightings are steadily increasing, and a government bounty is offered in many places for confirmed sightings. One very compelling piece of evidence surfaced in June 1997, when a Kentucky man hit and killed a cougar kitten with his truck. DNA analysis proved that the animal was descended in part from wild North American cougars, and it showed no evidence of having been someone's escaped pet.[2]"

Marskell 20:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

More culture references

Would adding at least the bolded ones risk the section expanding too much? :-) At the very least, Cougar Mountain seems to be directly relevant. Maybe add to the 'see also' section some geographical places named "cougar" because there are cougars there? Carcharoth 14:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear! Carcharoth 01:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I added Cougar Mountain to the see also. With the habitat corridor, it's directly relevant. I'm indifferent on the rest though. Marskell 03:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Less cultural references

I'll add more queries if I find any. Carcharoth 23:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't actually add that. Mya is indeed better; it has been changed. Marskell 03:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:04, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Greatest of any large wild terrestrial mammal in the Western Hemisphere?

Greater than a Kodiak or a polar bear? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.254.4.11 (talk) 06:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, "great" as in distribution, not size. Editor abcdef (talk) 06:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I read this article the other day on my I-phone and also noted the apparent error. It was only today, as I came back to this article, that I re-read the sentence, that I discovered that it indeed pertains to "range" or distribution and not size.Terry Thorgaard (talk) 12:27, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Primary food sources

The second paragraph might not be accurate with regard to the cougar's primary food source including livestock. That claim would certainly need a reliable citation, or perhaps some clarification or rewording. Cougars eat such a wide range of prey species that I think the first few sentences could be rewritten to accurately reflect its diet, generally. Across its range, regional variations in prey animal numbers abound, and livestock predation would rarely be a 'primary' food source, even for young male cougars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berglopen (talk • contribs) 05:43, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks SineBot, I forgot. Berglopen (talk) 05:48, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. The assertion that cougars rely on livestock as a primary food source is ridiculous and is unsupported by any legitimate published source, much less any rigorous scientific research.
The opening remark for this section has been open for disagreement far beyond a reasonable length of time; seeing none I accordingly will change the article text accordingly by removing "livestock" where the cougar's primary food sources are discussed. BLZebubba (talk) 12:46, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

additional name

In the upper South of the United States, including the Ozarks, it has long been, and is still, called a "painter." Just for example, here's a children's nature guide title: https://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Lion-Panther-Painter-Cougar/dp/1879373009 67.60.187.45 (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes; this is already in the article, in the section on "naming and etymology". Anaxial (talk) 22:54, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Recent Attacks Increasing?

The statement in the introduction that cougar attacks have been increasing in recent years is more than 10 years outdated (referencing a 2003 paper). According to this page , only 3 fatal attacks have occurred since 2000. While the statement is not inaccurate in citing the increased contact between humans and cougars as a factor, this statement is still misleading. Attacks are still tremendously rare, and there is little evidence to suggest that they have continued to increase since this trend emerged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeyyacapulco (talk • contribs) 06:05, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Deer, Moose, Elk

I've reverted a change that replaces "Deer, Moose and Elk" with various things under the claim that Moose and Elk are deer. I don't think any of the changes are an improvement in the article, the fact that Moose and Elk are in the same biological family does not make the distinction moot. Please discuss before you revert again. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 06:36, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

What distinction? Size? Well sambar deer grow as large as wapiti, yet it's called "deer", it seems that exclusion of moose and wapiti from deer is mostly North American.[3] Editor abcdef (talk) 06:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Not being funny but the new user has a point, not sure we should right it off as moot. Elk (I just checked) are deer. So you have to fix the sentence because it is like saying Great Apes, Humans and Hominids can use tools. --Inayity (talk) 09:46, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
As a non-biologist, the term "deer" means animals like White-tailed deer and Mule deer, not the entire family of Cervidae. When you say "cougars eat deer", the general understanding would be the smaller animals, not including Moose and Elk, so removing them from the description does a disservice. Remember, this article is aimed at a general audience, not biologists. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 22:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I understand that, but we edit as a group here. And if someone has a valid point, backed up by R.S then we entertain it and improve the article. While it looks like a nitpick to maybe you and me, I believe in entertaining any challenge which improves this encyclopedia, and on that note it is an encyclopedia where accuracy is paramount, where educating the uninformed non-biologist is important. I was unaware of this issue and I am happy I was informed that deer includes ELK. RS say it does and that is our first concern.--Inayity (talk) 23:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
It's a language issue. Does "cat" mean felis catus or does it mean the entire family of Felidae? In the case of deer, common use is for the smaller members of the family. It's only in a context of Linnaean nomenclature where you use it to include the entire family of Cervidae. If you're concerned about accuracy, there are several approaches:
  • Enumerate all of the species in question. This does a disservice by providing a pedantic list where you must repeat "deer" multiple times (whitetail deer, blacktail deer, mule deer, elk, moose).
  • Rephrase it to something like "cougars eat deer, including the larger ones like elk and moose". That's a diversion from the subject article as readers go "Gee, I didn't know Moose were Deer", but this is an article about cougars.
  • Rephrase it to be precise: "cougars eat members of the family Cervidae". That does a disservice by using a term that will be unfamiliar to casual readers.
The point is that as it stands right now, it's readily comprehensible that "deer" refers to the common use of the term, rather than the biological family term. The two approaches I've backed out were both worse - one had bad grammar, the other just said "deer" which would clearly be misconstrued by most readers in assuming the common use of the term rather than the family use. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 00:25, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
U have definitely demonstrated your point clearly. And we def not going to make it ultra precise because that would be ridiculous LOL. So I guess per RS we could say common usage of the word deer is understood to mean the tiny little Bambi type folk.--Inayity (talk) 00:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
WP:SARCASM Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 02:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
You mentioned size, but again, sambar deer weigh the same as wapiti. Editor abcdef (talk) 05:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
It is too fine a point to press, and If you have an article, books where they show clear distinction or a better way to phrase the sentence to avoid the aforementioned, issues please share--Inayity (talk) 08:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Better wording that would include elk and moose as deer could be:

"An excellent stalk-and-ambush predator, the cougar pursues a wide variety of prey. Primary food sources are ungulates, which include deer, such as mule deer, white-tailed deer, elk, and moose, other ungulates it prey on are bighorn sheep, as well as domestic cattle, horses and sheep, particularly in the northern part of its range." Editor abcdef (talk) 08:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

That's certainly better, I don't object. Minor grammar error, though, prey->preys. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 17:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
And take out the word "excellent"--Inayity (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
How is 80% hunting success rate not excellent? Editor abcdef (talk) 02:07, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
WP:PEACOCK--Inayity (talk) 08:38, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Texas was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference attacks was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ http://animals.pawnation.com/difference-between-elk-moose-deer-7261.html

Grammar

In section “Biology and behavior”#“Hunting and diet”, it said, “In Pacific Rim National Park Reserve, raccoons made up 28% of the cougar's diet, harbor seals and blacktail deer 24%, North American river otters 10%, California sea lion 7%, and American mink 4%, while the rest 3% are unknown.” I rewrote it as: “In Pacific Rim National Park Reserve, raccoons made up 28% of the cougar's diet, harbor seals and blacktail deer 24% each, North American river otters 10%, California sea lion 7%, and American mink 4%, while the rest 3% are unknown.” (Added the word each to make it grammatically clear.) I added the percentages; they add up to 100% if you read it as “harbor seals and blacktail deer 24% each” (together accounting for 48%). Okay?Solomonfromfinland (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Adding “each” was definitely an improvement. I’ve added mention of scat sampling to indicate where the 3% came from, and tweaked the phrasing of the last bit.—Odysseus1479 20:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2017

Reference number 44, "Nowell, K.; Jackson, P (2006).", has wrong date. It was published in 1996. 213.113.218.18 (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Done Gulumeemee (talk) 02:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2017

This sentence is not supported by the cited source: "Some instances of surplus killing have resulted in the deaths of 20 sheep in one attack.[138]" 73.30.63.46 (talk) 17:42, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: To quote the citation: "Lions have killed as many as twenty sheep at one time." This statement alone is enough to keep the sentence. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
The full quote, "The mountain lion ... will kill for the sake of killing. A lion may kill many more animals in an attack than it can possibly consume. Lions have killed as many as twenty sheep at one time", supports the surplus killing claim as well.   Jts1882 | talk  07:27, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:34, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:52, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Images

That is how you can group adjacent photographs together. As for the lead photograph, I shifted the image of the captive cougar elsewhere, and one of a wild North American cougar, because that is how it often is with articles of big cats. Leo1pard (talk) 16:56, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cougar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2018

Karlkvngh (talk) 23:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

This article on Cougars claims these felines are also known as pumas, mountain lions, panthers... etc the first two are correct but 'panther' is not. Cougars / Pumas are not also referred to as panthers. Panthers are typically black coloured Jaguars (or leopards) due to a pigmentation mutation that can occur in big cats with patterned coats. Cougars don't have patterns and this condition can't occur unless the cougar has be cross breed with a cat that does. So it's impossible for a Cougar to be a Panther!

In the line first line, please change "The cougar (Puma concolor), also commonly known as the mountain lion, puma, panther, or catamount, is a large" to "The cougar (Puma concolor), also commonly known as the mountain lion, puma, or catamount, is a large".

Remove the panther related statements. They are incorrect. Thanks!

Although you're right that panthers in the scientific sense are jaguars or leopards showing melanism, nevertheless in parts of the United States cougars are colloquially called "panthers". That's what the local folks actually do call them. The article is therefore correct.Ttocserp 13:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Spintendo      19:14, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
This isn't an issue of providing sources as the claim in the request is simply not correct as already pointed by Ttocserp above (see for instance [15])--Kmhkmh (talk) 05:23, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Is the cougar a man-eater?

Yes, attacks on humans have not merely been about defense, and information can be found in List of fatal cougar attacks in North America. Leo1pard (talk) 15:51, 2 September 2018 (UTC)ot

It's true that there have been cases where individuals of the species Puma concolor have eaten humans. It's also true that there have been cases where dogs (or for that matter, humans) have eaten humans; but obviously that doesn't justify putting Canis lupis familiaris (or indeed Homo sapiens) in the category "Man-eater". It's a matter of definition.
I would have thought that for a species to fall within the category "man-eater', man-eating must be a habitual or at least fairly commonplace characteristic; and not one that is very rare or atypical.
Now, this article, citing references, shows that the cougar does not innately regard man as a prey animal; that fatal attacks on people are, statistically, exceedingly rare; and that cases of eating people are a tiny number per century. If there was such a thing as a category "Animals that have been known to eat man in the past", that would be different. Ttocserp (talk) 19:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

By that definiton, are there any "man-eaters" at all?Mukogodo (talk) 02:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2018

Change statement that cougars are solitary animals to statement that they show "adaptive social strategies" as shown by Oct. 2017 research (http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/10/e1701218) Withoutdoing213 (talk) 02:34, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  Spintendo  19:11, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@Withoutdoing213: @Spintendo: I agree with the above edit request. This article needs some serious effort on modification due to the more recent discoveries about the species and their social nature. With the misinformation the current article gives, I might even suggest to de-feature it until the changes are made. PseudoSkull (talk) 02:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2019

The scientific name for a cougar is Felis concolor, not Puma concolor! 163.41.15.177 (talk) 22:27, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

First of all the information about Felis concolor is already in the article (see at end of the infobox). Secondly Puma concolor is the correct and current name (see [16], [17]).--Kmhkmh (talk) 03:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cougar/Archive_1&oldid=1136639529"