More than 1,400 California mountain lions are now protected by the state’s Endangered Species Act.
On Thursday, the California Fish and Game Commission unanimously voted to list six isolated puma populations in Southern California and the Central Coast as threatened under the state law, meaning they’re likely to become endangered in the absence of intervention.
During the public meeting, Commissioner Erika Zavaleta said it’s good that the lions aren’t facing imminent extinction, explaining, “I believe it’s better for us to take action before we get to that point.”
These lions — ranging from the Bay Area to the U.S.-Mexico border — are especially imperiled by the loss of gene flow due to fragmentation of their dwindling habitat, compounded by serious risks posed by car collisions, rat poison and disease, according to state wildlife officials.
Scientists and conservationists believe the action was needed to give the iconic animals a chance at survival. Hemmed in by freeways and housing, cougar clans in the Santa Monica and Santa Ana mountains — both included in the listing — have a 16% to 28% chance of extinction in 50 years if they aren’t able to reach lions to mate with in other areas, providing genetic diversity.
However, opponents including ranchers and farmers say their threatened status will make it harder to kill lions that pose a safety risk to people and livestock, and that the apex predators were already well protected under state law.
Several measures expected to help mountain lions are in place or in progress, including a gargantuan wildlife crossing being constructed over the 101 Freeway and a law that requires cities to consider connectivity in their land-use plans. But their impact will take time the lions don’t have.
“Despite these improvements, it’s going to take decades to restore connectivity between the small, isolated genetic populations [of lions],” said Daniel Applebee, of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. In the meantime, populations are at risk of being wiped out by inbreeding, fierce wildfires or a number of other factors.
The listing decision arrives about seven years after the Center for Biological Diversity and the Mountain Lion Foundation, nonprofit environmental organizations, petitioned the commission to consider listing the half-dozen lion populations.
In 2020, the commission gave the lions temporary endangered species protections as “candidates” for listing.
In December, the Department of Fish and Wildlife — tasked with advising the commission on policy decisions — recommended granting threatened species status to lions in an area that mostly coincided with what the petitioners had requested.
The area includes the Santa Cruz, Santa Monica, San Gabriel, San Bernardino and Santa Ana mountains, as well as the Eastern Peninsular ranges. It leaves out a proposed swath of the southeastern desert and farmland in the Sacramento-San Joaquin-Delta.
The protections provide a legal mandate for state agencies to protect the lions; gives wildlife officials the authority to develop a recovery plan; and requires developments proposed in lion habitat to be more wildlife friendly, according to the Center for Biological Diversity. The conservation group said it could lead to the construction of more wildlife crossings and tighter restrictions on rat poison.
“You have the power to choose coexistence over extinction,” Tiffany Yap, the center’s urban wildlands science director, told commissioners before the vote. “You have the power to choose to protect our incredible wildlife and our environment at a time when the federal administration is attacking our environment and rolling back environmental protections.”
Valerie Termini, acting director of the department, said the decision was “overdue” at the meeting, while acknowledging that mountain lions are polarizing animals.
“They evoke strong and varied perceptions” on how they should be managed, she said, “but the segment of the population we’re talking today about is clearly at risk from distinct threats.”
Adding a layer of complexity to the state’s management of its mountain lions is the fact that a number of lions in the state are doing just fine, including populations on the northwestern coast and both sides of the Sierra Nevada. Those groups were not proposed for listing.
California is home to roughly 4,172 mountain lions, according to wildlife officials.
Strong, opposing perspectives on the cats were on full display during the meeting, which drew 57 speakers during public comment.
The National Wildlife Federation, the San Diego Humane Society, Citizens for Los Angeles Wildlife, the Los Padres Forest Watch and Project Coyote conveyed their support, among others. Proponents hailed lions as a keystone species that enhances biodiversity and pointed out the affection they generate — from Los Angeles’ late, famed P-22 to the lion that recently strolled through San Francisco.
A San Francisco resident described hearing one of the big cats while camping, saying, “I felt very lucky to live in a state that cares about the conservation of these animals and that has an opportunity today to further protect them.”
Opponents included the California Farm Bureau, the California Cattlemen’s Assn., the California Deer Assn., the California Bowmen Hunters/State Archery Assn. and the California Four Wheel Drive Assn. Detractors said lions were increasingly feasting on livestock as their prey, such as deer, has declined, and some expressed concerns about the safety of pets and loved ones.
“This petition is going to hurt the mountain lion more than anything,” said Vince Fontana, a fourth-generation rancher from San Mateo County. The reason the lion is in trouble is “he’s overpopulated, and the sad thing is, he’s out of food.”
California’s lions enjoyed certain protections before being listed. In 1990, voters approved Proposition 117, which designated them a “specially protected species” and banned hunting them for sport. State officials will now have to reconcile the two statutes.
The post More than 1,400 California mountain lions get endangered species protections appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
