(DRAFT) - Taxonomy
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
TAXONOMY
NAME - OCELOT
OTHER COMMON NAMES - OCELOT; CAT, LEOPARD; CAT and TIGER; OCELOTE;OCELOTL;TIGRILLO
ELEMENT CODE -
CATEGORY - Mammals
PHYLUM AND SUBPHYLUM - CHORDATA,
CLASS AND SUBCLASS - MAMMALIA,
ORDER AND SUBORDER - CARNIVORA,
FAMILY AND SUBFAMILY - FELIDAE,
GENUS AND SUBGENUS - FELIS,
SPECIES AND SSP - PARDALIS,
SCIENTIFIC NAME - FELIS PARDALIS
AUTHORITY -
TAXONOMY REFERENCES -
COMMENTS ON TAXONOMY -
Ocelot
Felis pardalis Linnaeus, 1758
KINGDOM: Animal GROUP: Mammal
PHYLUM: Chordata CLASS: Mammalia
ORDER: Carnivora FAMILY: Felidae
The ocelot is a medium-sized cat (01) with grayish or buff upper
parts, heavily marked with blackish spots, small rings, blotches and
short bars. The underparts are white spotted with black (02). The
long tail is either ringed or marked with dark bars on its upper
surface (03). The head and body is 27 to 35 in.; the tail is 13 to 15
in.; the weight is 20 to 40 pounds. This small, spotted cat with a
long tail does not have rosettes of the jaguar. Some of the dark
markings are elongate, more nearly stripes than spots. The eyeshine
is golden. The skull has 30 teeth and there are 4 mammae.
Felis pardalis was first described by Linnaeus, 1758; type
locality is the State of Veracruz, Mexico (04). The genus Leopardus
is frequently used for the ocelot and, although not as commonly
employed as Felis, it is not discredited by Honacki et al. (05).
Navarro-Lopez (06) listed the following eleven subspecies (with
taxonomic author, date and type locality):
Taxonomy - 1 (DRAFT) - Taxonomy
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
F.p. aequatorialis Mearns, 1902; type locality - Paramba,
Ecuador.
F.p. albescens Pucheran, 1855; type locality - Arkansas, United
States.
F.p. maripensis J.A. Allen, 1904; type locality - Maripa,
Bolivar, Venezuela.
F.p. mearnsi J.A. Allen, 1904; type locality - Talamanca, Limon,
Costa Rica.
F.p. mitis F. Cuvier, 1920; type locality - Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil.
F.p. nelsoni Goldman, 1925; type locality - Manzanillo, Colima,
Mexico.
F.p. pardalis Linnaeus, 1758; type locality - Veracruz, Mexico.
F.p. pseudopardalis Boitard, 1842; type locality - Colombia or
Venezuela Caribbean littoral.
F.p. pusaea Thomas, 1914; type locality - Changon, Provincia
Guayas, Ecuador.
F.p. sonoriensis Goldman, 1925; type locality - Camoa, Rio Mayo,
Sonora, Mexico.
F.p. steinbachii Pocock, 1941; type locality - Buena Vista,
Departamento Santa Cruz, Bolivia.
The taxonomic history of ocelots is confusing, partly because
several species and subspecies were described from pelage variations
of a limited number of specimens (06). Cranial dimensions of several
South American ocelot specimens were analyzed and determined
indistinguishable from F.p. mitis (07). A systematic revision is
needed and probably several recognized subspecies are synonyms (07).
The taxonomic treatment for Felis pardalis albescens Pucheran (type
locality; Arkansas) the Texas subspecies is as follows (04):
1855. Felis albescens Pucheran.
1901. Felis limitis Mearns.
1906. Felis pardalis albescens, J.A. Allen.
1911. Felis ludoviciana Brass.
The taxonomic treatment for Felis pardalis sonoriensis Goldman (type
locality; Camoa, Rio Mayo, Sonora) the Arizona subspecies is as
follows:
1925. Felis pardalis sonoriensis Goldman.
The vernacular name of the ocelot is derived from the Nahuatl
"ocelotl," a name also applied to jaguars (08). Other common names
for the ocelot include tiger cat, leopard cat and ocelote or tigrillo
in Latin America (01,09,10). Tigrillo is also often used in referring
to margays.
Taxonomy - 2 (DRAFT) - Status
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
STATUS
Coded Status
E: Federal Endangered
Pest
Commercial
Game (Consumptive Recreational)
Non-consumptive recreational
Ornamental
COMMENTS ON STATUS -
U.S. STATUSES AND LAWS:
The ocelot (Felis pardalis) has been designated an Endangered
species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (50 CFR 17.11;
P.L. 93-205, 87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1540), as amended. The
species has this status wherever found including the States of Arizona
and Texas as well as throughout South America, Central America, and
Mexico.
This species is protected by the Lacey Act (P.L. 97-79, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.) which makes it unlawful to import,
export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any wild
animal (alive or dead including parts, products, eggs, or offspring):
(1) in interstate or foreign commerce if taken, possessed,
transported or sold in violation of any State law or
regulation; or
(2) if taken or possessed in violation of any U.S. law,
treaty, or regulation or in violation of Indian tribal law.
It is also unlawful to possess any wild animal (alive or dead
including parts, products, eggs, and offspring) within the U.S.
territorial or special maritime jurisdiction (as defined in
18 U.S.C. 7) that is taken, possessed, transported, or sold in
violation of any State law or regulation, foreign law, or Indian
tribal law.
RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL AGENCIES:
USFWS -Responsible for the management/recovery, listing, and
law enforcement/protection of this species.
All Federal agencies have responsibility to ensure that any
Status - 1 (DRAFT) - Status
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
action authorized, funded, or carried out by that agency is not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of Critical Habitat (50 CFR 402),
and to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the
conservation of the species.
STATE STATUSES AND LAWS:
STATE: Arizona
DESIGNATED STATUS: Prohibited Wildlife
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Arizona Game and Fish Department
STATE STATUTE: Administrative Rules and Regulations 12-4-319,
1980.
STATE: Texas
DESIGNATED STATUS: Endangered
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
STATE STATUTE: 31 Texas Administrative Code, Sec 57.133
(127.30.09.03) July 1977.
INTERNATIONAL STATUSES, TREATIES, AND AGREEMENTS:
All Felidae (except Felis catus) are listed in CITES Appendix II
except the following Felis pardalis subspecies which are listed in
Appendix I: Felis pardalis mearnsi-Costa Rican ocelot and F.p.
mitis-Brazilian ocelot (77/02/22:35 FR 10462/10488). Felis pardalis
is listed as "Vulnerable" in the IUCN Red Data Book, 1978. In
Argentina the species is listed in "Fauna en Vias de Extincion, 1967."
The ocelot (ocelote) is also listed as Endangered in Mexico's
"Especies de Fauna en Peligro de Extincion en Mexico"; a
recommendation to CITES I (Reyes; August 1982).
ECONOMIC STATUSES:
The skins of the ocelot are valuable as trophies (ornamental) and
the species offered sport to the hunter. The ocelot does little
economic damage because it is so rare. However, ocelot are a local
poultry pest (01,26,27) and unwanted predators are often removed (28).
Another risk to ocelot populations is the pet trade. These cats
exhibit a tamed disposition in captivity and thus serve as excellent
pets (03,29,30). It also has value as a part of the natural heritage
of biotic diversity throughout its historic range. The ocelot has
aesthetic recreational value.
72/03/30:37 FR 06176/ - Foreign populations listed as Endangered
82/07/21:47 FR 31670/31672 - U.S. populations listed as Endangered
77/02/22:42 FR 10461/10488 - Implementation of/listing in CITES
81/02/27:46 FR 14651/14658 - Five year review
87/07/07:52 FR 25523/25528 - Notice of review
Status - 2 HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS
HABITAT - TERRESTRIAL
TERRESTRIAL
INLAND AQUATIC
LAND USE -
Cropland and Pasture
Orchards, Groves, Vineyards, Nurseries,
Shrub and Brush Rangeland
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY CODES
NWI NWICLS NWIMOD NWISPEC
Palustrine SS1
Palustrine FO1
COMMENTS ON HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS -
The ocelot occupies a variety of habitats, including humid
tropical and sub-tropical forests, swampy savannas (03,33), estuarine
mangroves (25,33,34,35) and rocky terrain (36). In Texas, ocelots
occur in the dense thorny chaparral of the Rio Grande Valley (02,20,
37,38,39,40), and formerly inhabited dense cedar breaks of the Edwards
Plateau Region (20,21). However, only about 1 percent of the south
Texas area supports what is currently defined as optimal habitat (18).
In the Rio Grande Valley this species occurs in seasonally flooded
palustrine areas considered aird riparian with dense brush and trees.
Hollow trees and dense thickets may be used as cover/shelter (03,15).
Den sites may include caves in a rocky bluff (38) or a hollow tree or
hollow log (21,26,39).
In Mexico, Leopold (01) believed ocelot habitat varied from heavy
rain forest to sparse tropical deciduous forest. Similarly, Hall and
Dalquest (41) stated these cats utilized the forests and jungles of
the tropical parts of Veracruz.
Ocelot also use a variety of habitats in Costa Rica, ranging from
sea level to about 3,800 meters. These communitites include dense
forest, secondary forest, swamp forest, mangrove, scrub, pasture,
subalpine paramo and occassionally, though rarely, coffee plantations
(35).
In Venezuela, ocelot inhabit "lowland tropical humid evergreen
forest, premontane humid evergreen forest, lowland tropical
semideciduous forest, premontane semideciduous forest, and tropical
dry thorny forest (42)." Mondolfi (42) believes that although ocelot
prefer gallery (riverine) forest, they also use mangroves, pasture
lands, upland savannas and swampy savannas. Ocelot occupy the
mountainous areas of Columbia, Ecuador and northern Peru, but not the
high plateaus of southern Peru and Bolivia (03).
The ocelot is adaptable to some habitat alterations (15,35) and
will use dense cover near large towns (25,33). The essential habitat
component is probably dense cover near the ground (18) with ocelots
completely avoiding open country (03).
Habitat Associations - 1 (DRAFT) - Food Habits
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
FOOD HABITS
TROPHIC LEVEL -
CARNIVORE
LIFESTAGE FOOD FOOD PART
General Fish
General Amphibia
General Reptilia
General Aves
General Mammalia
Food Habits - 1 (DRAFT) - Environment Associations
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS
G = General A = Adult
LIM = Limiting RA = Resting Adult
J = Juvenile FA = Feeding Adult
RJ = Resting Juvenile BA = Breeding Adult
FJ = Feeding Juvenile P = Pupae
L = Larvae E = Egg
RL = Resting Larvae
FL = Feeding Larvae
LIFESTAGE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS
G
G Terrestrial Features: Caves, dry
G Terrestrial Features: Rock outcrops
G Terrestrial Features: Downed logs
G Snags: Unknown
G Tree Cavities: Unknown
G Availability of fence rows: roadside ditches and grassy
G Human Association: Public residential parks
Environment Associations - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
LIFE HISTORY
FOOD HABITS:
Ocelots feed upon a variety of small and medium-sized mammals and
birds (01,29,43) as well as some reptiles, amphibians and fish (26,37,
39,44,45). Specifically, prey listed for ocelot include rabbits (26,
46,47), rodents (26,27,47), nutria (48), pacarana (Dionomys branicki)
(49), pacas (46,50), agouti (26,41,46,47,50), coatis (46), porcupines
(Coendou mexicanus) (47,51), young pecaries (46), lesser anteater
(Tamandua tetradactyla), monkeys (03,29,46,47,50), guan (Penelope
sp.), (45), snakes (37), iguanas (44), tree lizards (47), frogs (44,
47), crabs and small turtles (44).
Mondolfi (42) analyzed the contents of 16 ocelot stomachs in
Venezuela and found the following frequency of occurrence; mammals
(81%), birds (12%), reptiles (25%), insects (6%) and grass (18%).
Some prey items included agouti (Dasyprocta aguti) (2/16 stomachs),
sloth (Bradypus tridactylus) (1/16), oppossum (Didelphis marsupialis)
(1/16), armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) (1/16), rodents (9/16),
[including spiny rat (Proechimys spp.) (3/16), cotton rat (Sigmodon
hispidus) (1/16), forest spiny pocket mouse (Heteromys anomalus)
(1/16)], newborn bat (Sturnira spp.) (1/16), domestic chicken (1/16),
colubrid snake (Chironius sp.) (1/16), iguana (Iguana iguana) (1/16),
land tortoise (Geochelone carbonaria) (1/16), tree frog (Phrynohias
venulosa) (1/16), and an unidentified frog (Leptodactylus spp.)
(1/16).
In Panama, Enders (52) analyzed feces and identified the
following as ocelot prey (in descending order of importance); spiny
rat (Proechimys semispinosus), agouti (Dasyprocta punctata), paca
(Agouti paca), brocket deer (Mazama sartorii), snakes and lizards.
Stomachs of three ocelots yielded forest rabbit (Sylvilagus gabbi),
coati (Nasua narica) and porcupine (Coendou rothschildi). Remains of
rats (Oryzomys sp.) were recovered in several cases but no birds were
found.
The utility of this food habits information is greatly reduced
because prey availability and density data are absent. Even so, this
account represents the best current state of knowledge for ocelot
foraging ecology.
HOME RANGE/TERRITORY:
Little information exists regarding ocelot home range or
territoriality. Ocelots are solitary or live as pairs (01,03,36,42,
46,53) and mark their territory with urine (54,55) or feces (53).
Radio-telemetry data from Texas, though not completely analyzed,
indicates the home range of one male may overlap the home range of one
or two females. However, no intrasexual (male-male or female-female)
home range overlap was observed. Also, evidence was obtained which
indicated ocelots maintain intrasexually exclusive territories (15).
In a study, the average home ranges of adult male ocelots (N=5)
was 17.67 sq. km and of adult females (N=3) was 11.04 sq. km (66).
PERIODICITY:
Most of the popular literature states the ocelot is primarily a
nocturnal cat (01,03,29,39,40,51). Although some authors cited
Life History - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
diurnal activity (42,52) particularly if human disturbance was absent
(26,56). In southern Veracruz (Mexico), Hall and Dalquest (41)
believed ocelots were diurnal.
Radio-telemetry data from south Texas indicated ocelots were
primarily nocturnal with crepuscular activity peaks (15). Some
diurnal activity was observed during cool winter days, but activity
was greatly reduced on hot summer afternoons (15).
MIGRATION PATTERNS:
Ocelots are not known to exhibit migratory behavior.
COVER/SHELTER REQUIREMENTS:
Most literature does not distinguish between natal dens or other
types of dens or shelters. Dense cover in the stratum adjacent to the
ground seems to be selected by ocelots (18).
Guggisberg (03) believed ocelots spend days sleeping on a branch,
in a hollow tree, in a bromeliad patch shadowed by bushes, or in
prickly opuntia scrub. Two ocelot mortalities in south Texas were
observed near shallow depressions at the base of a large tree
concealed inside a brush thicket (15). Two other live ocelots were
resting on the bare ground also concealed by a thicket (15).
REPRODUCTIVE SITE REQUIREMENTS:
The literature reveals few accounts of ocelot natal dens.
Kittens are reportedly born in "a well-concealed canyon den or wooded
area where there are piles of fallen jungle debris and brush (57)."
Other den sites include a cave in a rocky bluff (38), a hollow tree
or hollow log (21,26,39), in the densest part of a thorny thicket (21)
or forest thicket (46), and in the center of a tussock of grass (67).
REPRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS:
(Note: The notations "c" or "w" designate the origin of
information from either captive or wild ocelots, respectively).
Although little breeding behavior information is available, mock
fighting is believed to "stimulate" ocelots prior to breeding (c)
(58). Minimum breeding age for females has been cited as 18 months
(range 15 to 22) (c and w) (42,59) and even 10 to 11 months for
captives (60); maximum breeding age is 13, possibly 15 years (c) (60).
Tropical felids are polyestrous (61) and Cisin (62) believed
female ocelots entered estrus every 4 to 6 months (c). Duration of
estrus for captive ocelots averaged 7 to 10 days unless conception
occurred, which reduced the period to 5 days (60,63). Inter-estrous
periods of 6 weeks were observed with some averaging a week or less
(c) (60). One captive female yielded 5 parturitions in a 16 month
period (63).
The ocelot breeding season in the tropics is considered to
continue throughout the year (w) (42,47,57,61). Other authorities
cite a fall breeding season from September to November (09,64). Fall
breeding peaks (w) also occur in Texas (13,15,21,38), Mexico (01) and
Paraguay (46).
Litter sizes usually range from 1 to 2 (w) (09,21,41,42,43,65).
Of 151 captive-born litters, average size was 1.4 with only 3 litters
yielding 3 kittens (the largest litter size) (60). Gestation has been
Life History - 2 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
estimated as 70 days (03,53), 74 to 76 days (61) and 80 days (60,63).
PARENTAL CARE:
Little information is available regarding parental care in wild
ocelots. Caras (39) stated "both parents probably attend to the
all-important education of the young..." However, this belief was
contradicted by radio-telemetry studies in south Texas, which
indicated the male spends little time with the mother and her young
(15).
POPULATION BIOLOGY:
There is no information regarding population parameters (e.g.,
survival rate, mortality rate, sex ratio, etc.) of ocelots.
SPECIES INTERRELATIONSHIPS:
Predator-prey interactions and ecologically similar carnivores
are probably capable of significantly impacting ocelot populations.
Data on both of these aspects are currently being analyzed from a
south Texas study (15) but results are not presently available.
OTHER LIFE HISTORY DESCRIPTORS:
No other information can be added at this time.
Life History - 3 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE
Beneficial Restricting/regulating human disturbance of populations
Beneficial Maintaining undisturbed/undeveloped areas
Beneficial Land Acquisition
Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Agricultural Practice
Beneficial Stocking captive-reared wild-strain animals
Beneficial Transplanting wild animals
Beneficial Disease Control Measures
Beneficial Restricting Poaching
Adverse Subsistence Hunting/Fishing/Trapping
Existing Subsistence Hunting/Fishing/Trapping
Adverse Incidental Capturing/Killing
Existing Incidental Capturing/Killing
Adverse Poaching
Existing Poaching
Adverse Commercial Exploitation
Existing Commercial Exploitation
Adverse Rural Residential/Industrial Areas
Existing Rural Residential/Industrial Areas
Adverse Predator control
Existing Predator control
Adverse
Existing
Adverse Vegetation Composition Changes
Existing Vegetation Composition Changes
Adverse Harvesting
Existing Harvesting
COMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES -
The ocelot is considered an Endangered species (11,12). Its
historical distribution is thought to have extended from Arkansas and
Arizona in the United States; to Peru, Paraguay and northern Argentina
in South America (04,07). In Texas, Bailey (13) cited many ocelot
records, possibly indicating that in southern Texas this cat was not
rare (14). However, other evidence does not support this assertion
(15,16).
Presently in the United States, Sealander (17) considers the
ocelot extirpated from Arkansas. Tewes and Everett (18) believe this
felid is restricted to a few disjunct habitat islands in south Texas.
Reasons for the ocelot's Endangered status include habitat
destruction, fur trapping and hunting, predator control and the pet
trade (06).
Intensive clearing of brush communities in south Texas for the
past 60 years is probably the major threat to ocelot survival in the
United States (18,19,20,21). Forest (or brush) clearing was done for
agricultural and general development purposes which changed the
vegetation composition. Because only fragmented patches of habitat
remain in Texas (18) the ocelot remains very vulnerable (11).
In Latin America, the ocelot is exposed to widespread and
Management Practices - 1 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
seemingly uncontrolled mortality through the illegal fur trade (22,23,
24). Relatedly, cat hunting has provided supplementary income to
thousands of subsistence farmers (25). Koford (25) believed the
ocelot would be suited to hunting or for tourism in some regions of
Latin America, but stated detailed management information must first
be obtained to properly regulate this use.
Ocelot are a local poultry pest (01,26,27) and unwanted predators
are often removed (28) in addition to incidental trapping or shooting.
Another risk to ocelot populations is poaching for the pet trade.
These cats exhibit a tamed disposition in captivity and thus serve as
excellent pets (03,29,30).
UNAPPROVED PLAN:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Recovery Plan for the Listed
Cats of Arizona and Texas. Agency Draft. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv.,
Albuquerque, NM. 65 pp.
The primary objective of the Recovery Plan for the Listed Cats
of Arizona and Texas is to maintain existing ocelot populations in
Texas. Ocelots have been documented in recent studies in Texas. The
plan recommends monitoring through continued trapping and
photodocumentation of known populations and expanding those activities
into Class I and II sighting areas not yet surveyed. Mail surveys of
trappers and hunters should be expanded to determine if more Class I
areas exist. Trapper and hunter surveys should be started in Arizona.
The status of the ocelot in northern Tamaulipas, Mexico, should also
be assessed with the cooperation of the Mexican biologists and
government officials. More data needs to be gathered on captured
ocelots including:
1) A 10 year commitment of continuing to gather data on ocelots
and congeners through radiotelemetry.
2) Determination of habitat utilization parameters.
3) Determination of potential influences of diseases with a)
seriological surveys for viral activity, b) parasite surveys, and c)
assessment of general health of captured ocelots. Pertinent
information may be used in a disease control program.
Protection and management of habitats utilized by ocelots should
should include:
1) Implementation of the USFWS Plan for the National Wildlife
Refuge in the Lower Rio Grande Valley with associated land
acquisition.
2) Maximizing habitat on managed lands by restricting habitat
loss, development, and some agriculture practices.
3) Minimizing human disturbance or access on protected habitats.
Potential habitat should be identified and protected,
particularly habitat adjacent to that known to be utilized by the wild
cats. Private sector protection of habitat should be encouraged.
Potential habitat in south Texas and in other areas of Texas and
Arizona (within the historic range of these cats) should be
identified. Stabilization of habitats in south Texas should remain
the highest priority.
Second priority is given to increasing ocelot populations and
Management Practices - 2 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
distribution. Potential sites for establishing peripheral populations
should be identified and the techniques for translocation (of captured
or new founder stock from captive breeding) should be developed.
Minimal population and genetic level parameters should be developed on
the contingency that the Texas ocelot population will be
geographically isolated form the Mexican population.
Finally, an information and education program should be
developed, focusing on the need to preserve and manage Tamaulipan
habitat for the benefit of all wildlife. Educating the public will
help restrict poaching for pelts and shooting or trapping due to
poultry conflicts between the cats and farmers.
Management Practices - 3 (DRAFT) - References
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
References
***** REFERENCES FOR ALL NARRATIVES EXCEPT N-OCCURRENCE *****
01 Leopold, A.S. 1959. Wildlife of Mexico. Univ. of CA Press,
Berkeley Press. 568 pp.
02 Schmidly, D.J. 1977. The mammals of Trans-Pecos Texas. Texas A &
M Univ. Press, College Station. 225 pp.
03 Guggisberg, C.A.W. 1975. Wildcats of the world. Taplinger Publ.
Co., NY. 382 pp.
04 Hall, E.R. 1981. The mammals of North America. 2 vols., John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1,181 pp.
05 Honacki, J.H., K.E. Kinman and J.W. Koeppl (eds). 1982. Mammal
species of the world. Allen Press, Inc. and the Assoc. of
Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. 694 pp.
06 Navarro-Lopez, D. 1985. Status and distribution of the ocelot
(Felis pardalis) in South Texas. MS Thesis, Texas A & I Univ.,
Kingsville. 92 pp.
07 Ximenez, A. 1974. Notas sobre felidos neotropicales, VI.
Contribucion a la elucidacion de las variaciones individuales de
Felis pardalis Linne, 1758 (Mammalia - Felidae). Comunicaciones
del Mus. Argentino de Cienc. Nat. Bernardino Rivadavia, Zoologia
4:41-55.
08 Simpson, G.G. 1941. Vernacular names of South American mammals.
J. Mamm. 22:1-17.
09 McSpadden, J.W. (ed). 1937. Animals of America - mammals of
America. Garden City Publ. Co., Inc., NY. 335 pp.
10 Lowry, G.H., Jr. 1974. The mammals of Louisiana and its adjacent
waters. Louisiana State Univ. Press. 565 pp.
11 Anon. 1982. Endangered classification extended to ocelots in the
US. End. Spe. Tech. Bull. 7:1.
12 IUCN. 1982. Red Data Book - part 1. Compiled by Jane Thornback.
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
13 Bailey, V. 1905. Biological survey of Texas. North American
Fauna, vol. 25. USDA/BBS. 222 pp.
14 Hock, R.J. 1955. Southwestern exotic felids. Amer. Midland Nat.
53:324-328.
15 Tewes, M.E. 1985. Personal files. Dept. of Wildlife, University
of Idaho; Moscow, ID.
16 Smith, J.C. 1981. Feline status survey. Performance Report, Job
No. 12, Texas Parks and Wildl. Dept., Austin. 6 pp.
17 Sealander, J.A. 1979. A guide to Arkansas mammals. River Road
Press, Conway, AR. 313 pp.
18 Tewes, M.E. and D.D. Everett. 1985. Status and distribution of
the Endangered ocelot and jaguarundi in Texas. In: Proc. Int'l.
Cat Symp.; Kingsville, TX.
19 Davis, R.B. and R.L. Spicer. 1965. Status of the practice of
brush control in the Rio Grande Plain. Texas Parks and Wildl.
Bull. No. 46. 40 pp.
20 Russell, D.N. 1971. History and status of the felids of Texas.
Pp. 54-58. In: Proc. of the native cats of North America, their
status and management symposium. E.E. Jorgensen and L.D. Mech,
eds, USDI/FWS, Twin Cities, MN.
References - 1 (DRAFT) - References
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
21 Davis, W.B. 1974. The mammals of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildl.
Bull. No. 41. 252 pp.
22 Grimwood, I.R. 1969. Notes on the distribution and status of some
Peruvian mammals, 1968. Am. Comm. for Intl. Wildl. Prot. and the
NY Zool. Soc., Spec. Publ. 21.
23 Doughty, R.W. and N. Meyers. 1971. Notes on the Amazon wildlife
trade. Biol. Cons. 3:293-297.
24 Paradiso, J.L. 1972. Status reports on cats (Felidae) of the
World, 1971. USFWS, Spec. Sci. Rep. Wildl. No. 157. 43 pp.
25 Koford, C. 1976. Latin American cats: Economic values and future
prospects. In: The world's cats: Contributions to status,
management and conservation. Vol. 3, No. 1.
26 Cahalane, V.H. 1947. Mammals of North America. The MacMillan
Co., NY. 682 pp.
27 Smith, N.J.H. 1976. Spotted cats and the fur trade. Oryx 13:362-
371.
28 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Endangered status for U.S.
population of the ocelot. Fed. Reg. 47:31670-31671.
29 Shuffeldt, R.W. 1921. The mountain lion, ocelots, lynxes and
their kin. Amer. For. 27:629-636,659.
30 Davis, W.B. 1958. Ocelot...denizen of the brush country. Texas
Game and Fish, No. 1. 2 pp.
31 Goldman, E.A. 1943. The races of the ocelot and margay in middle
America. J. Mamm. 24:372-385.
32 Navarro-Lopez, D., J.H. Rappole and M.E. Tewes. 1985. The
albescent ocelot is probably extinct. Oryx.
33 Koford, C. 1973. Spotted cats in Latin America: and interim
report. Oryx 12:37-39.
34 Osgood. 1912. (In: Mondolfi, E. 1985. Notes on the biology and
status of the small wild cats. Proc. Intl. Cat Symp., Kingsville,
TX).
35 Vaughan, C. 1983. A report on dense forest habitat for Endangered
wildlife species in Costa Rica. National Univ., Heredia, Costa
Rica. 99 pp.
36 Grzimek, B. (ed). 1975. Grzimek's animal life encyclopedia.
Mammals, I-IV. Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY.
37 Nelson, E.W. 1930. Wild animals of North America. National
Geographic Soc., Washington, DC. 254 pp.
38 Petrudes, G.A., B.O. Thomas and R.B. Davis. 1951. Breeding of the
ocelot in Texas. J. Mamm. 32:116.
39 Caras, R.A. 1967. North American mammals: Fur-bearing animals of
the United States and Canada. Meredith Press, NY. 578 pp.
40 Culbertson, K. and D. Schmidly. 1974. Summary of statements on
the status of the Rare, Endangered and peripheral mammals of Texas.
TX Organiz. for Endan. Sp., Temple.
41 Hall, E.R. and W.W. Dalquest. 1963. The mammals of Veracruz.
Mus. of Nat. Hist. Univ. of Kanasas, Lawrence. 362 pp.
42 Mondolfi, E. 1985. Notes on the biology and status of the small
wild cats. Proc. Intl. Cat. Symp., Kingsville, TX.
43 Cockrum, E.L. 1982. Mammals of the southwest. Univ. of Arizona
Press, Tucson. 176 pp.
44 Allen, J.A. 1906. Mammals from the states of Sinaloa and Jalisco,
Mexico, collected by J.H. Batty during 1904 and 1905. Bull. Amer.
References - 2 (DRAFT) - References
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
Mus. Nat. Hist. 22:191-262.
45 Kulhorn. 1955. (In: Mondolfi, E. 1985. Notes on the biology
and status of the small wild cats. Proc. Intl. Cat Symp.,
Kingsville, TX).
46 Rengger, J.R. 1830. Naturgeschichte der Saeugethiere von
Paraguay. Basel.
47 Denis, A. 1964. Cats of the world. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
144 pp.
48 Dennler, G. 1930. Die Nutria in ihrer Heimat. Dte
Pelztierzuchter 2:4-45.
49 Matthews, L.H. 1971. The life of mammals. 2 vols., Universe
Books, NY. 440 pp.
50 Gaumer, G.F. 1917. Monografia de los mamiferos de Yucatan. Depto
Talleres Graficos de la Sria. de Fomento, (Mexico). 331 pp.
51 Alvarez del Toro, M. 1977. Los mamiferos de Chiapas. Univ.
Auton, Chiapas. 147 pp.
52 Enders, R.K. 1935. Mammalian life histories from Barro Colorado
Island, Panama. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., Harvard, 78:385-502.
53 Badino, G. 1975. Big cats of the world. Bounty Books, NY.
54 Fiedler, W. 1957. Beobachtungen zum Markierungsverhalten einiger
Saugetiere. Z. Saugetierk 22:57-76.
55 Sanchez, J.M.A. 1981. Rastros de los mamiferos silvestres de
Mexico. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones, Sobre Recursos
Bioticos, Xalapa, Veracruz. 198 pp.
56 Boorer, M. 1970. Wild cats. Grosset & Dunlap, NY.
57 Peterson, W. 1967. The ghost cat. Pacific Discovery 20:28-29.
58 Ann. 1979. Wild animals of North America. National Geographic
Soc., Washington, DC. 406 pp.
59 Schauenberg, P. 1979. Sa majesta l 'ocelot. Musees Geneve,
20:2-6.
60 Eaton, R. 1977. Breeding biology and propagation of the ocelot
(Leopardus [Felis] pardalis). Zool. Garten 47:9-23.
61 Ewer, R.F. 1973. The carnivores. Cox & Wyman Ltd. 494 pp.
62 Cisin, C. 1967. Especially ocelots. Harry G. Cisin, Publ.,
Amagansett, NY. 167 pp.
63 Hatfield, K. and J. Hatfield. 1973. Domestic breeding at the
Hatfield compound. Long Island Ocelot Club Newsletter 17:8-9,14.
64 Slaughter, B.H. 1967. Animal ranges as a clue to Late-Pleistocene
extinction. Pp. 155-167. In: Pleistocene extinctions: The
search for a cause. Martin, P.S. and H.E. Wright, Jr. (eds). Yale
Univ. Press, New Haven. 453 pp.
65 Zuckerman, S. 1953. The breeding seasons of mammals in captivity.
Proc. Zool. Soc., London 122:827-950.
66 Tewes, M.E. 1986. Ecological and behavioral correlates
of ocelot spacial patterns. Ph.D. diss. Univ. of Idaho, Moscow.
128 pp.
67 Laack, L. and J.H. Rappole. 1986. Investigation into the basic
ecology of the ocelot an south Texas. Final rpt. to the U.S.
Fish and Wildl. Serv. Contract no. 14-16-0002-81-229.
Albuqueque, NM.
***** REFERENCES FOR N-OCCURRENCE NARRATIVE ONLY *****
References - 3 (DRAFT) - References
Species OCELOT
Species Id ESIS052005
Date 14 MAR 96
01 Goldman, E.A. 1943. The races of the ocelot and margay in middle
America. J. Mamm. 24:372-385.
02 Davis, W.B. 1951. Unusual record of the ocelot in Texas. J.
Mamm. 32:363-364.
03 Petrudes, G.A., B.O. Thomas and R.B. Davis. 1951. Breeding of the
ocelot in Texas. J. Mamm. 32:116.
04 Denis, A. 1964. Cats of the world. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
144 pp.
05 Lowery, G.H., Jr. 1974. The mammals of Louisiana and its adjacent
waters. Louisiana State Univ. Press. 565 pp.
06 Guggisberg, C.A.W. 1975. Wildcats of the world. Taplinger Publ.
Co., NY. 382 pp.
07 Hall, E.R. 1981. The Mammals of North America. 2 vols., John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1,181 pp.
08 Cockrum, E.L. 1982. Mammals of the southwest. Univ. of Arizona
Press, Tucson. 176 pp.
09 USFWS. 1982. Endangered status for U.S. population of the ocelot.
Federal Register 47(140):31670-31671.
10 USFWS. 1982. Endangered classification extended to ocelots in the
U.S. Endangered Species Tech. Bull., Vol. 8, No. 8:1.
11 Tewes, M.E. 1984. Personal files. Dept. of Wildlife, University
of Idaho; Moscow, ID.
12 Tewes, M.E. and D.D. Everett. 1985. Status and distribution of
the Endangered ocelot and jaguarundi in Texas. Proc. Int'l. Cat
Symp.; Kingsville, TX.
13 Tewes, M.E. and D.D. Everett. 1982. Study of the Endangered
ocelot occurring in Texas. Year-end Report, FWS/OES. 54 pp.
14 Baker, R. 1956. Mammals of Coahuila, Mexico. Univ. Kansas Publ.
Mus. Nat. Hist. 9(7):125-335.
15 Russell, D.N. 1971. History and status of the felids of Texas.
Pp. 54-58. In: Proc. of the native cats of North America, their
status and management symposium. E.E. Jorgensen and L.D. Mech,
eds, USDI/FWS, Twin Cities, MN.
16 Davis, W.B. 1974. The mammals of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildl.
Bull. No. 41. 252 pp.
17 Culbertson, K. and D. Schmidly. 1974. Summary of statements on
the status of the Rare, Endangered and peripheral mammals of Texas.
TX Organiz. for Endan. Sp., Temple.
18 McBride, R. 1976. Ocelot survey. USFWS, Albuquerque. 7 pp.
19 Smith, J.C. 1981. Feline status survey. Performance Report, Job
No. 12, Texas Parks and Wildl. Dept., Austin. 6 pp.
20 Burt, W.H. 1961. A fauna from an Indian site near Redington,
Arizona. J. Mamm. 42:115-116.
21 Taylor, W.P. and W.B. Davis. 1947. The mammals of Texas. Texas
Game, Fish, and Oyster Commission. Bull. No. 27.
22 Bailey, V. 1905. Biological survey of Texas. North American
fauna, Vol. 25. USDA/BBS. 222 pp.
References - 4