The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife lists the Oregon cougar population at 6,400 cougars, with 3,300 of these being adults. This estimate comes from a deterministic model published by Keister and Van Dyke in 2002.
This population estimate is has been contested for its accuracy when compared to other neighboring states with similar habitat conditions. If correct, these densities are in fact exceptional and worth further investigation. If incorrect, monitoring strategies in Oregon would need to be reevaluated.
Learn more about mountain lion policy, laws and habitat.
UPDATE – March 2023: As of March 20, 89 cougars have died in Oregon in 2023. In July 2023, there will be the opportunity to submit public comments to the Commission regarding cougar hunting in the state. As the time approaches, be sure to tune in for talking points with the Mountain Lion Foundation when proposals are released. Until then please feel free to reach out to your commissioners letting them know that preserving the cougar population in Oregon is important to you.
Talking Points
Estimated population: ODFW lists the population at 6,000. ODFW reports some of the highest cougar densities in the U.S., but this is highly controversial. Unlike other states, ODFW includes kittens in its estimate. ODFW estimates their population by using a model that factors densities, habitat suitability, and mortality. While hunting has increased, the model has predicted an ever-increasing population size. This model has not been verified, in small areas where abundance data can be obtained. It is imperative that the ODFW updates and tests its model to ensure its accuracy, so cougars can be managed appropriately.
Annual trophy kills: 327 in 2019
Oregon’s first Cougar Management Plan was developed in 1987 with revisions in 1993, 1998, 2006, and 2017. According to a 2008 ODFW report on the status of Oregon’s cougars, the 2006 revision established “5 guiding objectives for cougar management in Oregon:
Within these objectives, a number of zone-specific criteria are established that trigger management actions and are used to monitor progress toward objectives. Proactive management of cougars may include intensive, administrative removal of cougars in targeted areas where zone specific criteria have been met.”
As you can see, “proactive management,” while sounding responsible and scientific, merely means “reduce the cougar population.” ODFW’s so-called proactive cougar management plan is in reality a set of directives for the elimination of the species in Oregon. We believe that ODFW’s statement of intent to maintain Oregon’s cougar population at 1994 levels is a public relations attempt to placate Measure 18 supporters and is little more than a meaningless slogan to justify the killings.
Their management plan is fundamentally flawed because:
Today, ODFW’s estimate of 6,600 cougars in Oregon would indicate a cougar density roughly 2.5 times that of neighboring Washington and is widely believed by biologists to be overstated. Given the available habitat and results from scientific research conducted in Washington showing roughly 5 independent cougars per 100 square miles, the Mountain Lion Foundation would estimate fewer than 3,000 independent adult cougars in the State of Oregon.
Between 1918 and 1961 (Oregon’s recorded cougar bounty period) 6,762 cougar carcasses were turned in for a bounty. During this 44-year period, the annual cougar mortality numbers only exceeded the 300 level three times, with the all time high of 375 reached in 1937. In fact, the 200 to 300 mortality level was reached only eight times. For almost a third of this 44-year period the annual cougar mortality numbers never even reached 100; and this wasn’t just at the end when Oregon’s cougar population had basically been wiped out.
A comparable time period of regulated hunting has now passed (1967 to 2009 — the last year of records released by ODFW). During these 43-years, 7,468 cougars (4) were reported killed.
In 2008 neighboring Washington state (which in 1996 passed similar legislation to Measure 18, and whose state wildlife agency followed ODFW’s game plan of numerous, cheap cougar hunting tags and long hunt seasons) reported a nearly 40 percent drop in the state’s cougar population from five years previous.(5) The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife posits that this drastic decline might be a direct result of current hunting policies which have caused a “shift to harvesting more females and younger animals.”
The questions one must ask are these:
Cougars are native to all of Oregon and historically have been prevalent and widespread across the landscape there.
Mountain lions are native to Oregon, and as happened in so many other states, when settlers began to arrive, mountain lions began to decline. Settlers considered mountain lions a danger to humans and livestock and also competitors for the native game like deer and elk.
The settlers set up a ferocious predator removal effort of endless trapping and hunting. ‘Wolf meetings’ were a common event in local towns, where the inhabitants would come together to discuss what to do about mountain lions and other predators, which always involved more predator killing.
Fur was the first natural resource to be recognized and exploited in what is now Oregon. Fur were an extremely valuable commodity of international trade as beaver and otter pelts, specifically, were in high demand in Europe and China. One of the objectives of the Lewis and Clark expedition was to find and map wildlife populations and find waterways to access the territories. Because of the great profits that were reported to be made, the first settlements in Oregon were fur trading outposts established by competing fur trading companies.
At first, traders in Oregon acquired furs by bartering with the local Native Americans but as word got out about the rich fur resources available, big fur companies such as Hudson’s Bay Company and American Fur Company began to employ their own professional trappers. It didn’t take long to start depleting fur-bearer populations in Oregon and the entire Northwest and by 1824 some fur companies began to employ a strategy called ‘trapping out’ which meant intentionally eliminating beavers and other fur-bearers from Oregon territory to keep rivals from moving in. By the late 1800’s, the fur trade was essentially played out, fur-bearers depleted and Native Americans more dependent on outside food sources and no longer able to live off the land around which their entire cultures had been based.
In 1843 a bounty program was called on cougars in the Oregon Territory. The bounty continued for 44 years and was discontinued in 1961 by the State of Oregon for a lack of cougars – only 28 cougar carcasses were turned in that year. The first year mortality records were available was 1918 and between that year and 1961, a total of 6,762 cougars were killed and turned in for bounty. In 1961 it was estimated that Oregon’s cougar population had dropped to only 200 animals and were in danger of extirpation.
In 1843 a bounty program was called on cougars in the Oregon Territory. The bounty continued for 44 years and was discontinued in 1961 by the State of Oregon for a lack of cougars – only 28 cougar carcasses were turned in that year. The first year mortality records were available was 1918 and between that year and 1961, a total of 6,762 cougars were killed and turned in for bounty. In 1961 it was estimated that Oregon’s cougar population had dropped to only 200 animals and were in danger of extirpation.
In 1967 cougars were reclassified as game animals in an effort (according to ODFW) to protect the species from unregulated hunting. During the following 26 years of “regulated” cougar hunting in Oregon the annual hunting mortality numbers steadily increased from 6 in 1967 to a high of 187 in 1992.
In 1994 voters approved Measure 18 which banned the use of hounds to hunt cougars. Since hound-hunting is recognized as the most efficient method to hunt cougars, many proponents of Measure 18 saw it as a way to effectively reduce the number of cougars killed annually by sport hunters. Immediately following Measure 18’s passage, sport hunting related cougar mortalities declined dramatically statewide (22 in 1995).
To offset these sport hunting mortality declines, ODFW lengthened the hunting season to year-round in some regions, significantly reduced the cost of a cougar hunting tag for Oregon residents, increased annual hunting quotas, increased the bag limit, and issued an unlimited number of hunting tags – more than 43,000 cougar hunting tags were sold in 2009.
As a result, sport-hunting related cougar mortalities have increased to record highs despite the ban on using hounds.
A recent estimate by ODFW claims the state’s mountain lion population has increased to 6,300 individuals.
The state of Oregon encompasses 95,996 square miles of land. Of this, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) claim that 71,997 square miles, or 75 percent of the state, is suitable cougar habitat.
However, a review by MLF researchers of a 2001 GAP analysis habitat map could only identify approximately 49,344 square miles or roughly 51 percent of the state as viable cougar habitat. The difference between the two numbers could be significant in accurately determining Oregon’s cougar population.
In 1996, two years after the passage of Measure 18, ODFW placed the state’s cougar population at approximately 3,000 to 3,300 animals. Ten years later, despite larger than ever mortalities caused by ODFW’s Post-Measure 18 sport hunting policies, the Department ramped the population estimate up to 5,000 cougars. They justified this boost by claiming that “Local cougar population densities exceed any documented in North America.”(1) As of April, 2011 ODFW’s website posted an estimate of more than 5,700 cougars residing in Oregon, and some hound-hunting proponents are even claiming the cougar population in Oregon has reached the 7,000 level.
It is possible that this disturbing trend of ever-increasing cougar population estimates has more to do with justifying policy decisions to kill more cougars than reliable scientific data.
Generally, treatment of wildlife in the State of Oregon is governed by the Oregon Revised Statutes – the state’s collection of all the laws passed by its legislature. Wildlife treatment is also managed by regulations in the Oregon Administrative Rules – the collection of all the state agency rules. Since our summary below may not be completely up to date, you should be sure to review the most current law for the State of Oregon.
You can check the statutes directly at a state-managed website: https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/Pages/ORS.aspx These statutes are searchable. Be sure to use the name “cougar” to accomplish your searches.
Oregon’s Department of Fish and Wildlife regulations are found in the Oregon Administrative Rules. The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission sets the state’s wildlife regulations.
The Oregon Legislative Assembly is a bicameral legislative body. The lower chamber — the House of Representatives — consists of 60 members who serve 2-year terms. The upper chamber — the Senate — consists of 30 members who serve 4-year terms. Information on how to contact your member of the Oregon House of Representatives can be found here while information on how to contact your state senator can be found here.
The Oregon Legislative Assembly’s regular sessions convene on the first day of February each year — unless February begins on a Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, in which case the session convenes on the following Monday. The Oregon Constitution limits the duration of regular sessions in odd-numbered years to 160 calendar days and 35 calendar days in even-numbered years. However, the Oregon Constitution also allows the legislature to extend regular sessions by five days with the approval of two-thirds of the members of each chamber and does not limit the number of times a session may be extended. The legislature may also meet in organizational sessions, the duration of which the constitution does not limit, in order to set legislative rules. Special sessions may be called by the governor or by the majority of the members of each legislative chamber. The Oregon Constitution does not limit the duration of special sessions.
