UC Davis

Human-predator conflicts are an important current issue, but resolution of these conflicts through lethal management is increasingly problematic, leading to an interest in nonlethal alternatives. Hazing, which involves harassing wildlife, has been increasingly advocated as a non-lethal solution to human-predator conflicts. However, the efficacy of hazing is not well documented, especially in mountain lions. We used data on 76 mountain lions equipped with radio collars, 34 that were hazed with hounds and 42 that were not hazed (control), to determine if hazing lions with dogs has potential for reducing human-mountain lion conflicts by deterring lions from returning to sites of conflict. We used daily GPS locations following release to compare the rates of return and distances over time from the capture sites for the control group and the hazed group. Distance from the capture site was similar for hazed and control lions through 45 days following release, with the exception of a slightly greater distance for hazed lines shortly after release. Almost all lions (97.6% of control group; 94.1% of hazed group) returned to within 6 km of the capture site at some point during the 45 days following release, and most (88.1% of control group; 76.5% of hazed group) returned to within 1 km, with no significant difference between hazed and control lions An analysis using best-fitting general linear models showed that 2 factors, sex being male and increasing distance from urbanization, had negative effects on the number of times mountain lions returned to the vicinity of the capture site at either the 6-km or 1-km distance. Therefore, aside from the possibility of a modest short-term effect, we did not find evidence that hazing with dogs is association with a capture event is an effective method for displacing mountain lions from a conflict location.