The endangered Florida panther population has taken a big hit. In 2014, 30 of these elusive felines, listed as an endangered species for more than 40 years, have died, the majority of which met their fates on highways in three southwest Florida counties: Collier, Lee and Hendry.
Four of the deaths occurred near the Big Cypress National Preserve, and more than a third of the deaths were females of kitten-bearing age. The 30 dead cats represents a 50 percent increase from 2013, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, and exceeds the previous record of 27 deaths counted in 2012.
While the panther once roamed much of the eastern United States, it is now confined to just a small area in southwest Florida, 5 percent of its original range. This year's number of fatalities may represent up to a quarter of the entire panther population, though exact counts are difficult to obtain because the use of radio tracking has declined. Only seven of the dead panthers this past year were wearing radio collars.
According to PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, "The management of the Florida panther is biology by body count.”
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has recorded 32 kittens born this year, but their survival rate is low. The population is in decline and long-term recovery seems bleak, according to PEER. The reduction in genetic diversity has also affected these cats.
PEER points to Florida's new, sprawling development in panther country, and an increase in off-road vehicle traffic, specifically in the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Lands, as contributors to the high fatality count. And, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has not designated critical habitat for the animal. From 1984 to 2009, the agency approved 127 developments that could affect habitat, according to PEER.
"In south Florida, the panther literally is a speed bump to sprawling development,” Ruch said. “Many believe we have already reached the tipping point where a viable population of Florida panther can no longer exist in the wild and the future of this alpha-predator is as a zoo species.”
Comments
I'm supposing you are including the human predators in this?
It is humans who created this situation in the first place.
Well then, you need to tell the biologists and geneticists they don't know how to do their jobs because, you know, you recollect.
Charles Fergus wrote his book in 1998 as a story. He is a writer, not a biologist. I'm not sure you recollect too well as Fergus was all about saving the panther not, as you seem to prefer, destroying it.
Of course human predators need controls and they have them in Florida - they hunt during daylight hours only, during a date specific season, mostly only take male deer, turkeys on public lands inhabited by panthers in So Fla, do not hunt Fakahatchee 75,000 ac. , do not hunt panther or 10,000 islands refuges ?65000 ac ?, etc., etc. yet panthers hunt all genders and age classes of all mammals in the region they inhabit 7-24-365.
Yes also to the fact you bring up dahkota that it is humans (e.g. government panther protection agencies and their extreme eco .org partners) who have created the impossible situation some must live with most sadly the panthers who kill each other over territory due to management policies that have intentionally forced them to do that due to no upper limit based on current available public acreage and habitat quality.. Oh yes and I know the other complaint against humans as a cause for panther challenges is that humans moved into the panthers, bears, species de jour's home which doesn't cut it once the money is paid and the deed signed since it is all legal in our system until made illegal by law.
I fully understand Mr Fergus was fully supportive of saving panthers and I would never claim otherwise or have I - I understood that from his book and our telecon. His book which clearly exposes truly questionable ethical decisions made as far back as 1998 as well as ever since then, among other junk science examples I have personally witnessed cause me to be very skeptical of most of what government albeit ESA driven and their environmental financially motivated partners have to say about this and many other conservation issues.
We are all subject to being sort of programmed by our life experiences and mine have led me to the beliefs I hold.
I actually see some hope nowadays since agencies are considering changing the delisting criteria for panthers to realistic numbers instead the lunacy and stupidity of housing 3 populations of 240 panthers each two of which (480) would be in Fla which isn't even large enough to hold them properly if we moved all the people out and gave panthers the entire state.
Yes, another screed. If nothing else posting here I have learned a new word. :)
If we could just teach them pesky panthers to eat them pesky anaconda's.....
That python/panther battle may already be happening. They're both such efficient predators the battle might be a draw/tie.
We did not say that 70% of panthers died from collisions. Simply, that the only reasonable and accurate comparison of panther deaths in relation to the panther population can be extraoplated from collared cats. That is the only population of cats that can be accurately quantified, and is also the reason why there is such a difference in numbers between the two pie charts. Youh ave been duped, as have most of the public by the misinformation that is being disseminated to maintain a bogus program.
We remiind you that the statistics we are discussing were compiled and published by the government "experts". While the chart says 1979 - 1997, and that is in fact an almost 20 year window, panthers were not fitted and monitored with tracking collars until the mid 1990's, before, during and after the introduction of female cougars from West Texas. So while the government would like you to believe that the statistics of collared cats is 20 years of data, IT IS NOT. The collared panther data only reflects a small window of maybe 2 to 4 years. Again, that is the only somewhat accurate data, as nobody ever finds ALL the dead or live panthers. The 20 year window they refer to is the graph for "all panthers" which is misleading. Nobody, not even the "experts", know exactly how many panthers make up "all panthers". To date they still do not know with any certainty exactly how many there are. What they do know, because they actually counted them is that there are no less than 133 panthers in the 78% of public land that encompasses the Panther Primary Zone. They have absolutley no idea how many exist on the most desireable, properly managed 22% of private lands in the "zone". The "experts" have shown models that show that there may be as many as 272 in that same zone.
The issue at hand is not who kills how many deer, or if man kills more deer than panthers. The issue is that the land can only sustain 94 panthers, PERIOD. There is no way around that. If the land remained unchanged from here on out, 94 is the maximum amount of cats that can live here. That was determined by calculating how much land is available to sustain an animal that ranges 200 square miles, and the amount of food available to them, without depleting those species and eradicating them from that land. You should also be aware that the same government agency responsible for the protection of Florida Panthers, authorized and permitted the development of 50,000 acres of land within the Primary Panther Zone, in the same 15 year period you refer to, Ave Maria being the biggest and most damning of them all.
Certainly, man has changed the entire ecosystem by altering water flow, changing land contours and through development. Unfortunately those things can not be fully reversed, the ecosystem will never function the way it was intended to. It is for that reason that man now bears the responsibility of ensuring that what is left of the land functions at optimum potential. That means man is responsible to ensure an even balance between the needs of man and the needs of the wildlife.
If and when the intentions of restoring the everglades to historic levels are realized, the problems will only be further exacerbated. You see Panthers are currently restricted to the 3.5 million acres that comprise the Everglades Ecosystem. All of the wildlife has learned to acclamate to those conditions over the last 150 years. The land they used to use before drainage has been developed, it is no longer an option for them. When the land they live on now is restored, and high water levels are maintained for 8 months out of the year, all of that wildlife will suffer. The same animals we are working so hard to save, will die as a result of flooding the only land left for them to inhabit. To understand that you must realize, that most of the 3.5 million acres is BCNP and ENP, and if you remove the ability of those animals to use that land, due to flooding, they have no other option and will have nowhere to go.
Furthermore, your bet of deer loss being greater by man than panther is probably, very wrong. Panther experts estimate there are between 75-100 female panthers in the panther zone. A female panther with young requires one deer sized prey, daily, in order to sustain her young. To be conservative, lets say there are 50 females, eating 200 deer a year. Over the course of one year that is 10,000 deer sized prey just on 3.5 million acres, no animal population can sustain those losses. That is just panther depredation, that is not including bobcats, coyotes, bears, alligators and pythons. Compare that to the maybe, and a big maybe, but certainly verifiable, 500 deer(90% bucks) that all hunters harvest in the same 3.5 million acres over the course of that same year, that is the equivalent of two female panthers. That is harldy comparable over the 15 years you speak of, and we didnt even include the predation by the male cougars in that time span.
Ultimately we are attempting to sift through and bring to light the constant misinformation, mismanagement and misconceptions that people have of this government created boondoggle. The masses never bother to read into the data and only accept, at face value, the propaganda that they are being fed to perpetuate a very destructive program. A program that is consuming funding and resources that could be applied in a more appropriate manner to achieve the same goals.