Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40936321›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2025

Puma habitat preferences when moving and feeding predict the potential for human-carnivore conflict in shared landscapes.

Justin P Suraci, L Mae Lacey, Patrick T Freeman, Andrew Stratton, Caitlin Kupar, Kimberly Sager-Fradkin, Dylan Bergman, Bethany Ackerman, Kristen A Phillips, Shannon Murphie and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Puma habitat preferences when moving and feeding predict the potential for human-carnivore conflict in shared landscapes.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Justin P SuraciConservation Science Partners, Inc., Truckee, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5952-2186
L Mae LaceyConservation Science Partners, Inc., Truckee, California, USA.
Patrick T FreemanConservation Science Partners, Inc., Truckee, California, USA.
Andrew StrattonPanthera, New York, New York, USA.
Caitlin KuparPanthera, New York, New York, USA.
Kimberly Sager-FradkinLower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Port Angeles, Washington, USA.
Dylan BergmanPoint No Point Treaty Council, Poulsbo, Washington, USA.
Bethany AckermanSkokomish Indian Tribe, Skokomish, Washington, USA.
Kristen A PhillipsQuinault Division of Natural Resources, Taholah, Washington, USA.
Shannon MurphieMakah Tribe, Neah Bay, Washington, USA.
Cassandra SullivanPort Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, Kingston, Washington, USA.
L Mark ElbrochPanthera, New York, New York, USA.

Funding

Administration for Native AmericansAyers Wildcat Conservation TrustDorothy BahnaFat Cat Feline FundNational Geographic SocietyStevenson family, Miriam and Gerry Scully, and othersUSFW Tribal Wildlife Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large carnivore persistence in an increasingly human-dominated world requires coexistence between carnivores and people on shared landscapes. Yet, sharing space with carnivores presents challenges, including maintaining sufficient habitat to allow carnivores to satisfy life-history needs (e.g., hunting, dispersal, and territory establishment) while avoiding conflict with people. To understand the drivers of carnivore habitat use and conflict in shared landscapes, we quantified puma (Puma concolor) habitat selection while moving and while feeding on native prey across a mosaic of developed areas, working landscapes, and wildlands on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington, USA. We fit resource selection models to movement data from GPS collars and to kill site locations for pumas across four age-sex classes: male and female adults and dispersers. We then quantified the association between habitat preferences for each behavioral state (moving and feeding) and the spatial distribution of puma-human interactions reported to state wildlife authorities. Across age-sex classes, puma habitat selection was more strongly influenced by human land uses when moving than when feeding, with adult females being the only age-sex class to exhibit avoidance of development and agriculture when feeding. Correspondingly, areas categorized as highly suitable for feeding but unsuitable for movement tended to have substantially greater amounts of developed and agricultural land than areas considered suitable for both behaviors. Analysis of puma-human interactions revealed that habitat preferences when feeding were strongly associated with the probability of both domestic animal depredations and sightings of pumas by people across most puma age-sex classes (except adult females). By contrast, habitat selection when moving was negatively associated with depredations and sightings for all pumas. These findings suggest that pumas are encountering livestock, pets, and people opportunistically in areas that are otherwise highly suitable for hunting native prey, but that sensitivity to human disturbance when moving across the landscape leads to limited opportunity for conflict when engaged in this behavior. We leveraged these findings to identify important multifunctional habitat across our study area (i.e., places that will support both moving and feeding) and to explore pathways toward stable puma-human coexistence based on achievable changes to human behavior that minimize conflict opportunities.

Indexed as

EcosystemFeeding BehaviorHuman-Animal InteractionPumaAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleWashingtonbehavior‐specific habitat selectioncarnivore ecologyhuman–wildlife coexistenceintegrated step selection analysisresources selection function

Identifiers

PMID40936321
PMCPMC12426584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.