Mountain Lions of the Black Hills

Perceptions of Mountain Lions 123

pro- lion attitude was a little stronger adjacent to or within lion country (counties in or
near the Black Hills), compared to areas farther from lion country (counties east of the
Missouri River) ( table 8.4). This was prob ably because people living near lion country
had a history of living near lions without experiencing any prob lems, while people far-
ther away from lions could imagine potential prob lems from having lions living nearby.
The excitement connected with the presence of this new predator, as well as the
fact that there had been limited negative interactions with the species, likely affected
survey respondents’ attitudes toward their preferred population status for mountain
lions in the Black Hills. Those respondents who were pro- lion were much more likely
to be comfortable with the current number of lions or would actually like to have more
lions in the Black Hills ( table 8.5). Respondents who held contra- lion attitudes pre-
ferred a slightly or greatly decreased population size of lions in the Black Hills.
South Dakota has a relatively high proportion of residents engaged with outdoor
activities, including fishing (23%) and hunting (10%) (US Fish and Wildlife Ser vice

Table 8.4. Eastern South Dakota vs. western South Dakota (East River vs. West River)

county residence analyzed by mountain lion attitude group

Mountain lion attitude group (group size)

County residence

East River

(70%)

West River

(30%)

Strongly pro- lion (23%) 21% 28%
Slightly pro- lion (34%) 34% 34%
Neutral (11%) 12% 9%
Slightly contra- lion (23%) 23% 20%
Strongly contra- lion (10%) 10% 10%

Source: Gigliotti, Fecske, and Jenks 2002.

Table 8.5. Preferred mountain lion population analyzed by mountain lion attitude group

Mountain lion
attitude group

Preferred mountain lion population

Decrease

greatly

Decrease

somewhat

Remain at

current level

Increase

somewhat

Increase

greatly

No

opinion

Strongly
pro- lion

1% 0% 24% 53% 12% 11%

Slightly
pro- lion

1% 4% 38% 33% 4% 21%

Neutral 3% 10% 59% 12% 0% 15%
Slightly
contra- lion

4% 15% 38% 11% 1% 31%

Strongly
contra- lion

43% 29% 16% 0% 2% 10%

Source: Gigliotti, Fecske, and Jenks 2002.