# Michigan Cougars: The Final WordFor Now



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

This is excellent reading that I just had to bring over from Linda G's site. It was posted by a ken c. Thanks Linda & ken. 

Woods-n-Water News
January 2004
Michigan Cougars: The Final WordFor Now
By Tom Carney

Recent revelations from out-of-state experts invite a closer scrutiny of all claims made by the Michigan Wildlife Conservancy over the past two years.

The Conservancy professes to have proven that a wild, remnant, breeding population of cougars (pumas, mountain lions, panthers) roams the states two peninsulas.

But to cast a more accurate light on their claims, we need to travel back to October 2001. A report from the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory to the Conservancy (formerly the Michigan Wildlife Habitat Foundation) on October 10 concluded that 8 of 13 samples of scat examined at the lab came from an animal in the Feline Family, most probably a mountain lion.

Subsequently, an October 29 memorandum from Dee Dee Hawk, Forensic Specialist at the lab to Dr. Pat Rusz, the Director of Wildlife Programs for the Conservancy, said, I would like to assure you the results are reliable. We are confident in the conclusions made in this lab . . .

Even so, on the same date, the Conservancy issued a press release stating, in part, that the group had found indisputable physical evidence that cougars inhabit some remote parts of Michigan.

The primary evidence: eight droppings (feces) that DNA analysis by the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory verified as cougar scat.

By November 1, 2001, the story began appearing in publications such as The New York Times, The Detroit Free Press, and The Traverse City Record Eagle. The Associated Press reported the story; The Detroit News and The Grand Rapids Press picked it up. In most cases, adjectives like irrefutable and conclusive accompanied the word evidence.

But thats not what her lab reported, said Hawk recently. The initial results looked like they were going to come out cougar. We needed confirmatory testing. We told the Conservancy that we could not confirm it and handed it off to Central Michigan.

Granted, Dr. Brad Swanson at Central Michigan University has since identified a few scat samplesamong which might or might not be some of the Wyoming groupas coming from cougar. But he didnt begin testing until late summer 2002, and though he gave preliminary results to the Conservancy as he went along, he didnt prepare his report until November 2002. By then, the Conservancy had gained a years head start with its own version of the Wyoming test results.

The problem arises from the Conservancys use of the phrases indisputable physical evidence and verified as cougar scat. Both of these contradict the Wyoming report that went only so far as to say the scat most probably came from cougar.

But theres more.

The Detroit Free Press of November 15, 2001, quotes Rusz: Non-scientists probably don't understand the incredible power of the new DNA testing methods.

We non-scientists, however, can easily understand the implications of the Wyoming DNA analyses if we first compare researchers to dairy farmers. Think of the test sample (tissue, hair, scat) as a cow. The DNA that is extracted from the sample is the milk. Subjecting the DNA to different tests generates different markers, just as subjecting the milk to different processes yields items like butter, ice cream, or cheese.

A discussion of the scat collected by Rusz brings four different tests into play. Each answers a different question:

1. What kind of animal deposited the scat?
2. If Feline, then did it come from a cougar?
3. If cougar, then what was the origin of its mother: North American (NA) or South American (SA); if DNA shows SA genotypes, the cat most likely comes from captive stock, if NA the cat likely (but not positively) comes from wild;
4. How many individual animals dropped the scat?

Notice the lab report indicated that the folks in Wyoming only performed Test #1. The Conservancys press release clearly implies positive results to Test #2.

By press time for this article, December 2003, Swanson himself had not gone beyond Test #2, Remarkably, though, for over two years the Conservancy had implied the Wyoming lab had also conducted Test #3: From The New York Times, December 23, 2001: DNA analysis of the scat samples Rusz found in the Upper Peninsula did not show any of the South American genotypes. . .

An August 2002 edition of The Highlands Voice, the newsletter for the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, states unequivocally, DNA of scats from Michigans Upper Peninsula is of the North American type, leading Patrick Rusz to conclude that Michigan cougars are probably natives.

Nearly a full year after Wyoming had reported inconclusive results for Test #1, Rusz told the October 6, 2002, Detroit News, The Wyoming Fish & Game Laboratory in Laramie, and Central Michigan University, have analyzed many scat samples and much of it was determined to be from cougars. And, to clarify matters, the animals were North American cougars. 

We never even got close to Test #3, said Dee Dee Hawk. We couldnt even prove for sure that it was cougar. She said she told Rusz in a phone call that we did not have the time or the money to continue to try and make this type of analysis work, and therefore I could not confirm that any of the samples were mountain lion in origin.

Making matters worse, in that same October 29, 2001, press release, the Conservancy introduced the idea that photographs of cat-killed deer, had been reviewed by nationally known cougar expert Harley Shaw, of New Mexico, a former cougar research specialist for the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

By November 2, the AP and The Traverse City Record Eagle reported the Conservancys assertion that Shaw had determined the photographs showed scenes consistent with a cougar deer kill in every aspect and detail.

The problem with this is that Harley Shaw himself, recently stated, I do not remember confirming any kills as definitely cougar.

Moreover, he added, I requested that my name not be used in conjunction with the Conservancy work, and I really don't want to get entangled with that issue any further.

He acknowledged that his experience with the Conservancy had been similar to Dee Dee Hawks.

Says Hawk, One of the reasons we distanced ourselves from Rusz is he had no scientific objectivity. He had an end-goal in mind.

She carefully weighed the effect of her words for a few moments, and then decided to let them stand.

I am a scientist and I have to go in with an open mind, and wherever the science leads you thats where you have to go. You cant have an end point determined and try to make the science get you there.

For a glimpse at what she was talking about, we can turn, once more, to the October 29 press release. The Conservancy launched its field work in May it says, and the previous March the Conservancy had issued a 66-page report that concluded cougars roam our state. The recent field studies prove that thesis (emphasis added).

By its own admission, therefore, the Conservancy determined its conclusion prior to conducting any type of experimentation, and simply put, thats not how science works.

Applied science requires the careful study of problems and testing of theories before arriving at conclusions. It has to be as precise and exact as possible. Close enough isnt good enough.

According to a story in Traverse magazine from January 2002 Rusz views himself as a man of science, trained to be skeptical. These days, though, he minimizes the importance of that quality.

Theres a fine line between healthy, scientific skepticism and being just plain stupid, he proclaimed in Grayling last October to the Michigan chapter of The Wildlife Society (TWS), an organization of wildlife professionals.

He ridiculed the chief requirement for good sciencethe kind of support that can withstand rigorous skepticism and challenges from ones peersdismissing it as some of our professions lovely B.S. 

Rusz breathed life into his disdain with the evidence he offered the Michigan TWS.

In order to determine that three white-tailed deer carcasses he had located matched cougar feeding signs to a T, Rusz observed the feeding habits of captive cougars.

The animals did exactly what they were supposed to do, according to the books. Exactly how its done by cougars throughout the world, he said.

Wild cougars had stashed the carcasses, he concluded, despite another possibility suggested by the results of those same observations: the kills could have been made by once-captive cats.

Also, inconceivably, the only proof he offered for the contention that Michigan cougars are breeding was some reports he allegedly received from people who said they had observed cubs. This despite the fact that hearsay evidence doesnt hold up in science, in court, anywhere.

Personal observations and personal communications do not carry much weight, said Dr. Gary Roloff, Senior Ecological Specialist with Boise Cascade and President of the Michigan TWS at the time of Ruszs presentation. I havent ever read a scientific article based only on these types of data.

As part of his presentation, Rusz likes to mention a cougar skull found a couple years ago in Chippewa County. He described it as having, the tooth wear of a 2-year-old, wild cougar, then added, despite anything you heard in newspapers that they were of a captive cat.

Forget newspapers! Check out the actual report that came from the University of Michigan: Given the animals apparent age, we were surprised at how unworn the animals cheekteeth were . . . This suggests to us (but certainly does not prove) that the animal may have been an escaped captive.

Rusz also contradicted other claims previously made by the Conservancy itself.

In news stories, the Conservancys Executive Director Dennis Fijalkowski has been quoted as saying, Based on sighting data, there are now between 50 and 80 cougars in Michigan. Yet Rusz told TWS the 50-80 is a number I just pulled out of my (hat). He blamed journalists who kept asking him for numbers and it got to a point where I shot out an estimate and everyone latched on to that.

In presentations, Fijalkowski has given a simple reason no cougars have been treed by hunters running their dogs on bobcat or coyotes: Michigans hounds are incapable of catching the scent of a cougar. Yet Rusz told TWS, Michigan bobcat hunters have treed a lion. **** hunters have treed a cougar.

Addressing the Native American Fish and Wildlife Society in Traverse City on May 20, 2003, Fijalkowski announced the Conservancy had located a breeding population of cougars near Three Rivers in extreme southern Michigan. The Michi-ana group he called them since they, ostensibly, criss-cross the Michigan/Indiana state line regularly. Last October, though, while naming areas in the state where cougars have allegedly established themselves, Rusz didnt mention the Michi-ana group at all.

One way to summarize all this is that people who want to believe the Conservancy has proven its contentions will believe, no matter what. Those who doubt the claims will doubt, no matter what. But what about those in the middle, the uncertain majority?

The evidence speaks for itself.

=30=


----------



## whitedog (May 11, 2003)

hamilton reef like i tell everyone else that believes this myth show me a track and my hounds will show what made it all tha others that have showed me the tracks that seen them all showed me the tracks of a wolf i will not run a wolf till i have a kill tag for one man i sure want a wolf rug on my wall as for mt,lion its a myth hell one guy told me he seen a african lion i tryed to buy the drugs off him that he was on lmfao and yes the evidence does speak for its self it tells me theres a bunch of no brainers on drugs that believe it again lmfao


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

That story is in the current issue (January) of Woods N Water News.

You can also find it online at:

http://www.easterncougarnet.org

A very reputable organization, from what I've found out about them, that is very interested in what has transpired recently in Michigan. 

There is some very interesting reading on that site, be sure to go to their breaking news section.


----------



## whitedog (May 11, 2003)

like i say no brainers on drugs lol


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Linda, Thanks for the easterncougarnet site and the breaking news section. I recognized the list of articles from the other states. I had not been posting them here or other sites for fear of out-of-state boredom with one topic. I was trying to just relate to the Michigan articles. Your reference site is a great way for those interested to keep up with the cougar topic.


----------



## mondrella (Dec 27, 2001)

Someone started a rumor that the DNR has released cougars in mich to help lower the deer herd. They back it up by saying so and so killed one with a sealed tracking collar. This is a bunch of bull. The black helicopters would be on them so quick there would be a missing persons report filed. 
There may be a few escaped cats around or someone letting thier big pet out to wander from time to time. Most of the houndsmen I know carry a camera more than a gun these days. There would be tons of pics of a Mi. cat by now if they exist.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Mason County - Cougar sightings continue in 2003	

The year 2003 may not be the year of the cougar in any of the worlds various calendar systems, but for Mason County, it was the year of the cougar sighting. There may have been more unreported sightings in the past, but one thing is certain, this year, people have broken their silence on the subject. 

http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/news.php?story_id=21290


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Some have no idea what or how big a cougar is. Here is a pic of one supposededly shout in PA last year.

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=13380


----------



## mich buckmaster (Nov 20, 2001)

Boehr!! THank You!! People dont know how big they really are. They may be seeing bobcats, coyotes, BIG domestic cats, or whatever, but I for one am not convinced yet, WHEN proof comes about, then I will join the bandwagon and hop on proudly. 

Until then I put UFOs, Bigfoot, and Cougars in the same catigory for Michigan. 

I will say in defense of the cougar is that I NEVER believed that beavers were down this South in Michigan and I now have problems with beavers on one of our farms.

So I guess time will tell!!


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

Someone sent me that photo and an accompanying article on that cat last week-maybe it was Hamilton. Anyway, that cat was shot out west somewhere, not in Pennsylvania.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

This first paragraph caught my attention so I sent it to Brian at Ludington Daily News for fun.

Man pleads guilty to releasing cougar in wildlife area 

January 14, 2004  A Petersburg man has been sentenced to a year of supervised probation after pleading guilty to illegally buying a cougar and later releasing it in a wildlife area in Mason County. 

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/news/011404_ap_ns_wildcougar.html


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

With attention from sightings, environmentalists want plan to manage cougars

I was close enough that I could have just patted it on the back, Comings, of Frankfort, recalled of her encounter last fall. It stopped right in front of me. ... It moved off the right, on a deer path.

http://www.detnews.com/2004/metro/0401/17/metro-37978.htm


----------



## catch&release (Jan 17, 2004)

Now I've walked that trail where the cougar was reportedly spotted about 20 times this summer with my dog. It is a mix of sand dunes, some swamp and there are a fair amount of turkey. Never spotted a coyote but have seen lots of tracks. There are some deer but they're pretty wary.

All I know is that there is plenty of food for a big predator to eat. It is also very undeveloped, with essentially miles of beach and dunes where a big cat could hide itself.

If that USFS employee does not regularly patrol the area, I would be highly suspicious of her claims. But if she's in the area more than most, maybe her story is true.


----------



## Youper (Jul 8, 2001)

These fake cougar sightings are just a power grab, and we should not tolerate it.


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

Eleanor Comings is NOT an employee or trained personnel of the USFS or National Park Service...she is a "trained" volunteer...trained at what is what I want to know.

She leads trail walks and nature tours, that sort of thing.


----------



## fishlessyooper (Feb 8, 2003)

I did see one Cougar in the U.P. ; in November 2003. I was at the Alger/Marquette county line (Sand River); heading West when the animal crossed the road. It crossed from the South side of the road & headed towards the Lake Superior shoreline. I couldn't believe what I saw; laugh if you want. F.Y.I., I don't drink or do drugs. I did report it to the D.N.R. Jeff


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Officer mistakes cat for lion	

REDLANDS - A police officer shot and killed a neighborhood cat he thought was a mountain lion Thursday after two cougar sightings were reported in the same area over the last eight days.	
The officer told Redlands Animal Control Supervisor Gayle Lipes he had shot the cat, which he described to her as very large and resembling a wild animal.
"Why the hell did you shoot it before we got here?" Lipes asked.
Clearly upset, Lipes and another animal control officer got back in their truck and drove to the clearing between Crestview and Marion roads where the carcass of the black-striped cat lay. She scooped it into her arms and placed it in the truck. 

http://www.dailybulletin.com/Stories/0,1413,203~21481~1896512,00.html


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

People are forming vigilante groups to kill cougars

There's no argument that mountain lions exist in Michigan. Too many credible people have seen them. But the debate -- whether these animals are escaped and/or released pets or the offspring of a remnant population -- rages on. 

http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/statewide/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/107589300117170.xml


----------



## otown (Jul 11, 2003)

Saw a cougar twice in back of our place in Cheboygan County.
I'm not dumb, screwed up or stupid.
Want credentials or just want to be critical? A panther is a panther, bottom line. A bobcat is a bobcat, bottom line. I know the difference. Sorry most of you have seen neither in the wild.
No, I ain't a tree hugger.

o town
MS Ohio State, animal science
PhD USC veterinary science
Ch. Florida Panther Restoration Society
Orlando, FL
Onaway, MI


----------

