The New Huntmastersbbs!: Coyote Attributes

This is topic Coyote Attributes in forum Predator forum at The New Huntmastersbbs!.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://www.huntmastersbbs.com/cgi-bin/cgi-ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000136

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 15, 2003, 09:15 AM:

What do you believe is the ONE, single most important thing that coyote has going for them?

Ability to communicate?
Eyesight?
Hearing?
Sense of smell?
Timid nature? or is it Tenacious nature?

And please don't say that all of their combined senses make Dr. Coyote the smartest, most challenging critter to hunt, yada, yada, yada.

Surprise me...

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on July 15, 2003, 09:43 AM:

ADAPTABILITY!!!!!

Posted by Greenside (Member # 10) on July 15, 2003, 09:52 AM:

They are omnivorous. Can and will eat just about anything to survive.

Dennis

Posted by pup (Member # 90) on July 15, 2003, 10:35 AM:

opportunistic, which also makes them vulnerable.

later pup

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 15, 2003, 10:56 AM:

Humans are fortunate that coyotes never developed opposable thumbs, else there might be another species at the top of the food chain?

They are a lot like us. LB

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on July 15, 2003, 11:00 AM:

Aptitude. Not to sound anthropomorphic, but it would be interesting if someone were to measure a coyote's IQ relative to other animals. I've seen many times when the smart ones all but seemed to rationalize their way through tight situations. With a little more brains than your average critter, all the other categories either work to their advantage, or they're better able to process the information gleaned from better eyes, etc.

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 15, 2003, 11:22 AM:

Omnivorous?
Opportunistic?
Opposable thumbs?
Adaptability?
Aptitude?
The old Johnny Carson vs Ed McMahon debate on which is smarter... pigs or dogs?

C'mon now. Much of what I've read so far leads me to believe that you must be talking about a raccoon.

[ July 15, 2003, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: Jay Nistetter ]

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 15, 2003, 01:03 PM:

I agree with Cal Taylor. Many of the large predators are bigger, faster, stronger and perhaps in the case of the wolf, even smarter than the coyote. But the fact that they are more specialized is their Achilles Heel. The coyote's adaptability has enabled it to flourish while the others have not.

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 15, 2003, 02:08 PM:

You guys are being too analytical, poetic and philosophical about Dr. Coyote with tendencies of giving him much more credit than he deserve sic. Ode To An Opposable Thumb Coyote.

“Adaptable” is relatively close, but are you referring to the coyote adapting to its shrinking environment in order to survive or adapting to growing opportunities? Free your mind and explore the very core of the Coyote Matrix.

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 15, 2003, 02:27 PM:

I did as you instructed Jay. I now agree with you. The obvious answer is "Yada Yada Yada"

Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on July 15, 2003, 02:56 PM:

.....Surprise us! Ask a question that is not rhetorical:)

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 15, 2003, 03:26 PM:

OK. Without rhetoric and simply stated...

Is a coyote able to control its own population?

Wouldn't this be a precept of survival? It's always interesting to hear what other hunters believe.

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 15, 2003, 03:59 PM:

Coyotes are able to control their populations only to a degree. It is true that heavily exploited populations produce larger litters than stable populations, and more yearlings breed in low density populations. It is theorized that litter sizes are influenced by the amount of territorial howling in given areas. This can be categorized as Adaptability. When coyotes do not succeed in restricting their numbers to the carrying capacity of their "rabbitat"(SH) Mother Nature steps in does it for them. See mange,parvo, canine hepatitis, distemper, etc. Question, how is this answer,population control, less analytical than the other answers?

Posted by pup (Member # 90) on July 15, 2003, 04:31 PM:

How would you avoid capture/demise by the hunter(you), if you were the coyote(you)?

How would you avoid capture/demise by the hunter(your buddy), if you were the coyote(you)?

later pup

Posted by Steve Craig (Member # 12) on July 15, 2003, 05:52 PM:

Yes!
Steve

Posted by WhiteMtnCur (Member # 5) on July 15, 2003, 06:03 PM:

Higgins: "It is true that heavily exploited populations produce larger litters than stable populations, and more yearlings breed in low density populations. It is theorized that litter sizes are influenced by the amount of territorial howling in given areas."

I thought that the reason coyotes in exploited populations had larger litters was the younger coyotes (which produce smaller litters) are often the coyotes killed. The older coyotes that are more likely to survive are the ones that have larger litters.

Is this theory incorrect?

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on July 15, 2003, 06:54 PM:

Trevor, I haven't seen any literature coming at it from that angle, but I do have a book in my big stack of relevant nothing stuff that describes compensatroy natality in furbearing mammals as showing heavily exploited and/ or low density populations seeing first breedings in year one versus year two, larger litter size, and proportionally more female offspring being whelped. In lesser exploited pop'ns, you see the exact opposite - first bred at two, sometimes three years old, smaller litters of which more pups are male.

Despite this technical approach, I have to answer Jay's last question by saying, "Apparantly so" as evidence by what I found outside a coyote den just the other day. I didn't know what it was at first, but now realize it must be a coyote condom. [Smile]

And some ppl think coyotes aren't smarter than dogs.

(Edited because I can.)

[ July 15, 2003, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on July 15, 2003, 07:25 PM:

Jay: "What do you believe is the ONE, single most important thing that coyote has going for them?"

I believe it's without question, their sense of smell.

They can survive virtually blind. They can survive without being able to hear. They can survive in some very difficult adverse situations. Without their sense of smell, their ability to survive is reduced incredibly.

They find food based more on their sense of smell than by any other SINGLE factor.

Please prove me wrong, I love to learn.

~SH~

[ July 15, 2003, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: Wiley E ]

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 15, 2003, 08:41 PM:

WMC, I can not say whether or not that theory is correct. It does seem contradictory to me. If the young females are killed off in heavily-exploited areas then it seems logical to assume that young females which give birth to smaller litters do so in stable areas where litter size is reduced anyway? Knowlton reported average litter sizes in Texas during the purge as 7.2 pups. Gier reported the same in Kansas. Crabtree, Camenzind and Lehner reported 4.2-4.4 in their un-exploited populations. If I can find the study that specifically addressed the litter size and exploitation relationship I will E-mail you.

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 15, 2003, 09:08 PM:

Kewl! Turn off the computer for awhile and look what happens. This could prove fun and enlightening at the same time. I’ll be the first to admit that I am by no means a student of the coyote and rely heavily on my degree from UHK.

All answers thus far are certainly important factors, but I fail to see that any single one other than the ability to control population is more important.

This is a tough one and I can certainly see the “adaptive” argument, but it seems as though there is confusion between adaptability and procreation.

Being adaptable is a measure of resilience and not a necessarily the determining factor in survival. Sure, a coyote is adaptive, but it is the ability to control populations in any given environment that determines survivability.

Take you highly adaptive coyote and introduce it to a new environment. Their adaptability doesn’t necessarily mean its survival. The reintroduction of the wolf comes to mind. Heretofore, Dr. Coyote was doing just fine. I suppose one could argue that their adaptability told them to leave Eden lest they fall victim suffering a fate similar to those subjected by their own predation.

The theory about litter sizes and territorial howling sounds good on paper at first glance, but makes me awful confused on how coyote populations are explained in the many areas where coyotes are not vocal at all. I know from personal experience that when I howl, there is no possible chance of discussing litter sizes, because it just ain’t happening.

The parasitic interfusion is something akin to saying that Aspirin is a determining factor in the procreation of mankind (i.e. no headaches) and left for another discussion. I view that as a separate issue. (insert chuckle here)

I like the Trojan angle and I can see considerable loss of desire without the aid of opposable thumbs. LOL

My first inclination as to the single most important factor was the skill (or lack thereof) of hunters and trappers.

Wiley, very poignant and possibly true given the mobility features of our furry subject. Poke out the eyes and they could survive. Lob off a leg or two and the propensity still remains. Whack off “Captain Happy” and the specie is doomed.

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on July 16, 2003, 07:31 AM:

Doesn't almost everything discussed come back to what I said in the first place? Adaptability.
Litter sizes.......
Hunting by smell and not sight......
Surviving high pressure.....
Surviving low pressure and high populations....
A coyote or group of coyotes can adapt to and survive almost any situation. They can adapt to living in places few other animals can live, They can adapt to heat, cold, cities, being blind, peg legged, etc.. The list could go on forever. But they seem to adapt faster than any other animal in nature, except maybe us, and that is debateable.

[ July 16, 2003, 07:40 AM: Message edited by: Cal Taylor ]

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 16, 2003, 08:07 AM:

Jay "What is the one , single most important thing the coyote has going for him?" Jay " Whack of Captain Happy and the species is doomed". So I am to gather that a pee-pee is that one single most important thing? Whacking off Captain Happy and dooming the species is simply cause and effect. If you nail a foot to the floor they will walk in circles. Cal, that's the way I see it too.

Posted by BillfMO (Member # 192) on July 16, 2003, 09:16 AM:

I think I will have to go with the adaptability theory! The coyote is able to adapt to what ever is placed in its way better than any other animal. If not how has it surived all that we as humans have thrown at it rifles,traps, poisons and ect. It uses what ever is needed to surive and alot of this is provided by Mother Nature.

quote:
Coyotes are able to control their populations only to a degree. It is true that heavily exploited populations produce larger litters than stable populations, and more yearlings breed in low density populations. It is theorized that litter sizes are influenced by the amount of territorial howling in given areas. This can be categorized as Adaptability. When coyotes do not succeed in restricting their numbers to the carrying capacity of their "rabbitat"(SH) Mother Nature steps in does it for them.

When the population is down Mother Nature provides a larger and better food source. Meaning they have better nutrition (larger litter size and the younger females having litters.) No matter if we are talking cattle, hogs or Coyote nutrition play a very large part in the size and health of their offspring. Once food source starts to drop the nutritionial value goes down and the adult is not about to produce the large size litter and the young's nutritionial needs are no longer there to grow her own body to the point of being able to have litters until she has reached a older age. Just like everything else the better food we eat the better health we have. This is where the over polutation time comes into being once the nutrition is no longer there the health of all coyote start to drop and we get.

quote:
See mange,parvo, canine hepatitis, distemper, etc.

As to:

quote:
It is theorized that litter sizes are influenced by the amount of territorial howling in given areas.

I believe this has to do with population again. What are most howls for? I feel it is either as Bill Austin said "to invite someone over for tea" or to warn them not to come into my territory, that being the case if there are few coyote to hear the howl there is no need to howl. I think they also know that anytime they howl they are also giving away their position. (If you were being hunted by the bill collector would you announce or presence)? Therfore is you have no one to ask for tea or warn to stay away why howl? Here coyote are run hard with hounds, once the eastern sky show sign of lighting up they will every seldom ever howl back to any locator sound no matter what time of year you try or what the population level is. Because they have found if they do they will have a pack of hounds on them ever shortly. Therefore they refuse to answer back unless it is dark and because more guys are starting to run them after dark in the summer months they are starting to show signs of howling only for pack communication only and at night.

So while they use each and everything listed here I feel it is the ability to adapt and use what ever is needed to survive. Aptitude may come in every strong also as they have to have something more in that head than the average animal to get the adaptability going.

Bill

Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on July 16, 2003, 10:25 AM:

I think Cal gets to sit at the head of the class on this particular issue....he nailed it. Were talking about a damned ole coyote, he's tough and adaptable, but controls nothing, mother nature does that. Good job Cal! short and to the point, without all the postulating.........whats next?

~Az-Hunter~

-------------------------

"Brevity is the soul of wit"

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 16, 2003, 10:57 AM:

az hunter "Good job Cal! short and to the point, without all the postulating.........whats next?"

I'm honestly a little confused. Am I wrong to think you have implied that postulating is not a "good thing"(MS)?

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on July 16, 2003, 03:38 PM:

Cal sits in the front! Seriously, let's look at the coyote's adapatbility versus the condor, an endangered species. Endangered species have several things in common: restrictive habitat requirements, very little tolerance for changes in their environment, usually come of breeding age at a relatively older age, small litter/ clutch sizes. In every category, and even some I forgot, the coyote has evolved to be able to roll with the punches and respond quickly to environmental variations and changes.

I gotta go with Bill on the howling thing. Howling does not, in my thoughts, influence litter size. Rather, the other way around since howling is the means of communication between packs and individuals and serves to allow communication, maintain contact with pack mates, and maintain suitable spatial distribution between packs. As the pop'n has rebounded from mange hereabouts and the overall numbers have increased, we see a greater frequency of vocalizations going on. Five years ago when you couldn't find one anywhere, even the coyote haters were lamenting the fact that they never hear them howling anymore. Just my .02.

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 16, 2003, 05:15 PM:

My previous answer was tongue in cheek, but I can see that Jay is quite taken with the opposable thumb theory. From what I have gathered, cultural anthropologists seem to think the ability to create tools was a major factor in the scope of evolution. How do you do that? With the dexterity afforded by the opposable thumb, and the brain capacity.

Okay, coyotes are resourceful, and addaptable. But many studies have concluded that they are one of the smartest animals on the planet. Of course, not all of them are equally smart.

That's my answer, and I'm sticking to it: intelligence.

Good hunting. LB

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 17, 2003, 06:24 AM:

... however, the coyotes extreme adapability has often rendered predator-control efforts ineffective. The coyotes ability to adapt to a changing environment is ultimately a consequence of it's complex behavior, especially its manifold communication system (Lehner 1978)

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 17, 2003, 09:47 AM:

quote:
That's my answer, and I'm sticking to it: intelligence.

Good hunting. LB

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 20, 2003, 11:04 AM:

Jay, don't you think we have waited long enough to find out the REAL, single most important thing that the coyote has going for him?

Inquiring minds want to know, dude!

Good hunting. LB

Posted by Rich (Member # 112) on July 20, 2003, 11:33 AM:

Another vote for Cal Taylor here. Adaptability sounds like the best answer. Only the coyotes know for certain, and since Jay is part coyote then I'm sure he has correct answer.

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 20, 2003, 11:48 AM:

Apparently from reading the board, the general consensus is Adaptability. Actually I tend to believe it is the human factor that so governs the survivability of the coyote whether it lies in the hunter inabilities or human intervention by so-called animal rights orgs that hamstring efforts to adequately manage wildlife. Factor in the coyote's ability to control its populations to match it's chosen environment and I feel management becomes increasingly impossible.

One human characteristic is that they love mystique and tend to elevate objects, creatures and events beyond what they really are. "Fish stories" are good examples. I truly believe that the cleverness of Dr. Coyote is overrated and overstated. If I can fool coyote with the frequency that I do and in the manner I do, then they aren't all that omnipotent. Coyote are creatures of opportunity. Coyote numbers follow a sine curve that lags behind behind a "food source" sine curve. That food source is mostly created by man in the form of sheep, goats, cattle, stock ponds, domestic dogs, cats and urban trash cans. It's not that the coyote has adapted to "city life", it is because man has allowed it to happen.

Just some quick thoughts to throw at you.

edited due to missing word. I have yet to adapt to the proper use of a keyboard.

[ July 20, 2003, 11:51 AM: Message edited by: Jay Nistetter ]

Posted by Rich (Member # 112) on July 21, 2003, 06:48 AM:

Jay N. said "One human characteristic is that they love mystique and tend to elevate objects, creatures and events beyond what they really are. "Fish stories" are good examples. I truly believe that the cleverness of Dr. Coyote is overrated and overstated"
------------------------
Jay,
I agree with that statement with at least eighty percent of my own thoughts on the subject. [Smile]

There are a few people who are trying to make an exact science out of coyote calling. I feel that a lot of people wanting to get started into calling get scared off by some of the stuff they read on these boards. Remember all of that human scent nonsense that used to be printed in the old trapping books? Never put your nose down near your bottle of lure because you will contaminate it with human odor? Always wear rubber boots and wear clean gloves when setting traps? Some of the same type of nonsense is being taught about calling coyotes too. Nothing is carved in stone when it comes to calling the coyote. Sure a man needs to take reasonable care to be quiet, watch the wind and a few other things like that. You still must get out there and blow on some kind of call before anything will come. [Smile]

I love your way of thinking Jay. You may be ugly but you sure ain't short on smart.

[ July 21, 2003, 06:50 AM: Message edited by: Rich ]

Posted by trappnman (Member # 168) on July 21, 2003, 06:54 AM:

Can (do) coyotes control their own populations?

No.

As Wiley says, if you have evidence that coyotes THEMSELVES control litter size and population, I would like to see it.

Most important attribute?

1)nose 2)eyes. or wait a minute...

1)eyes 2) nose

Easy to fool a coyote? Sure- fool his ears.

Posted by Cory Smith (Member # 69) on July 24, 2003, 10:54 AM:

I am definately not as experienced as all of my fellow writers. At least in coyotes.
Everyone has very valid points, but ......................The key has gotto to be inteligence. My strong point is whitetails and they have a super keen nose. But years ago they were nearly wiped out by hunters. They are highly adaptable. I don't know of a habitat that a coyote exist in that a whitetail doesn't. Or at least it will in a few more years. But a coyote is 10x more superior at living than a deer. We would have no more deer if it weren't for human intervention.
I have read these boards constantly for about a year now and value everyone's opinion, becaause of the vast experience. But looking at this topic from a survivability standpoint INTELIGENCE

Posted by Cory Smith (Member # 69) on July 24, 2003, 11:07 AM:

Sorry I screwed up. But from a survivability standpoint, Inteigence is the only difference that keeps him a head of the game, from other animals. deer have adapted to most places but could still be shot out. Vocalaztion , crows have a tremendous array of calls. But you can go out and hammer crows. Litter size heck, alligators have huge litter sizes and they control their population becaus ethey are canabalistic. It's kinda territorial thing.
Wiley sense of smell , well thats agood one but with out the superior intelligence to use it it's trivial. Without intelligence they smell human """ STAY AWAY''""" Then how come they are tumping garbage cans over eating scraps, living in neighborhoods, stealing cats and dogs. All of this stuff wreaks of human scent. Bu they have the intelligence to hopefully know when they are safe and when they might have to circle down wind.

Feed me to the flames

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 24, 2003, 11:27 AM:

Cory, you make excellent points, and I happen to agree, which is just coincidental. [Smile]

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on July 24, 2003, 11:45 AM:

So Cory, by talking about them getting used to human scent and being able to take pets and garbage cans is that they have "adapted" to being able to live around people, right? Without adaptation, intelligence does them no good. Intelligence is a good answer, but without the ability to adapt to different situations it still isn't quite right. When you talk about deer adapting to humans, but still being able to be shot out, then they haven't adapted well enough to avoid human contact. The way I look at it if it was purely intelligence we wouldn't be able to trap or call a coyote, they would be too smart.

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 24, 2003, 04:24 PM:

quote:
The way I look at it if it was purely intelligence we wouldn't be able to trap or call a coyote, they would be too smart.

Cal, you could be right as rain. But, Cory's point was that without seasons and protection, deer in America may have become extinct long ago.

The coyote, however has filled the vacuum, expanded his range and his numbers in spite of a virtual all out war, no protection whatsoever.

The fact that you are able to trap coyote means very little, as trapping, in one form or another can capture any animal on the planet; smart, dumb rare or common.

You have been put at the head of the class by some pretty heavy hitters. Me and Cory (respectfully) disagree with your analysis. [Smile]

Good hunting. LB

Posted by Cory Smith (Member # 69) on July 25, 2003, 05:22 AM:

I simply see that their intelligence allows them to be very adaptive. Kinda the chicken or the egg first.
A raccon is very adaptive to his environment but just hasn't got the intelligence to be in the same class as Mr. coyote.

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on July 25, 2003, 06:12 AM:

Many researchers consider the wolf to be the most intelligent of the canids. {you should hear some of the stories Danny tells about the two he raised)The wolf was extirpated through out the lower 48 because it was so specialized. The coyote thrives in the same area under the same pressure because it is so adaptable.

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on July 25, 2003, 08:07 AM:

I agree with Cory that it is kind of like the chicken and the egg. As for the war Leonard, it was over when they outlawed 1080. That was the true beginning of the coyote population explosion. There is no other method that could actually wipe out or signifigantly lower for any time period the total coyote population on a large scale.

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on July 27, 2003, 07:40 AM:

The question was:

JN: "What do you believe is the ONE, single most important thing that coyote has going for them?"

Adaptability was the first thing that came to my mind also but adaptability encompasses "many" things, not just "one" thing.

Adaptability considers smell, hearing, sight, reproductive efficiency, maternal instincts, territorial instincts, social behavior, wariness, learned behavior/conditioned responses (intelligence), etc. etc.

If you had to pick ONE "sense" (thing?) from their list of "adaptable" characteristics, I still contend that it would be their sense of smell. Their "intelligence" (looking for a better word due to human inference) allows them to process the information that they gather with their nose. I suppose you could say that their nose doesn't do them much good without their "intelligence" and I could say that their "intelligence" doesn't do them much good without their nose.

Maybe Cal's answer is right and the question is in error because you can't single out one thing.

As far as humans being the single biggest influence, that's interesting when one considers how the Hollywood and Chicago dumpster coyotes have demonstrated how they can survive with man and the 1080 era has demonstrated how they can suvive in spite of man.

Coyotes expanded their range into the Eastern United States during the peak of the fur boom if that tells us anything about man's influence. A good argument could be made that man has influenced their survivability in a positive manner.

As far as wolves intelligence, I think wolves are more intelligent than coyotes but they are less adaptable. Too large of home ranges, packing behavior, boldness, etc. etc.

They were not as adaptable as coyotes so they were eliminated by crude trappers on horseback.

The litter size issue is also a topic for debate. I believe a better case can be made for the number of yearlings that breed having more influence on population dynamics than litter size in "MANY" cases.

In my snapshot of the world (S.D.) we have seen population highs and lows with very little change in litter size from year to year. I suppose it's because food is relatively constant and ever changing (birds, mice, rabbits, deer, fruits, vegetables, carrion, etc. etc.).

Maybe in certain areas coyotes are more dependant on a single food source that could be affected by their populations and in turn affect their litter sizes. I think in most situations, coyotes will experience territorial issues before they run out of food.

Why do I think that?

Because, short of a diseased coyote (mange, parvo, etc.), I have never seen a skinny coyote during breeding season.

~SH~

[ July 27, 2003, 07:45 AM: Message edited by: Wiley E ]

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 27, 2003, 08:02 AM:

Hey, baby! I like it! We're all right!

Jay's question is wrong. Bad boy. Go to your room!

You can come back when you debug your question.

Good hunting. LB

[Smile]

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on July 27, 2003, 08:14 AM:

Wiley,
I think you are absolutely right on the yearlings breeding topic. I have never understood it, but some years you find several wet yearlings, usually with an older dog. And some years they don't seem to breed. I always wondered if it had something to do with the previous years conditions causing them to cycle sooner. They have been doing it with cattle for years. Upping food amounts and quality to get them to breed earlier. One more observation is that the dens taken with yearling bitches, the pups are almost always 2 weeks to a month younger than the average. I have found 2 week old pups in the middle of July, but off of a yearling bitch.

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 27, 2003, 04:29 PM:

This might also be part of that chicken or the egg question, but let's assume that we have an inballance of breeding age males, one year.

What's a dog coyote gonna do? they all can't fight over not enough mature bitches to go around.

So, he courts the YOY female. It takes a while, but eventually, she comes into season with all the attention, and better late than never, we have a litter.

If this happens across an entire region, who knows why? But, there might be some obscure condition that favors the survival of an adult male, over a female?

Beats me, but I always have heard that the whole population thing was controlled by the seven year rabbit cycle, but lagging behind a year. Not so?

Good hunting. LB

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on July 28, 2003, 06:43 AM:

Leonard,

I think the whole bred yearling female issue is a little more complex than a skewed ratio of males to females. I think it has more to do with exploitation.

If you take Yellowstone PRIOR TO WOLF REINTRODUCTION and other unexploited populations. The yearling females "USUALLY" stay with the group and "USUALLY" do not breed. There is a lot more pack formation also. It stands to reason as so few are being killed. The adjacent home ranges are also filled with packs so anyone that tries to immigrate gets their butt kicked back home again. Hence, the safety of the pack.

Outside of Yellowstone there is continual mortality. You may have a mated pair where the old female gets shot. This creates a prime situation for the dispersing yearling that is dispersing due to the voids created by mortality.

I don't know if I explained it very well but this makes more sense to me.

No need to go to the singles bar unless your single. If you are single, you don't stay in a bar where everyone's paired up.

Hope this helps!

This is why I say that I think the number of yearlings that breed is a pressure release valve for coyote populations.

~SH~

Posted by Cory Smith (Member # 69) on July 28, 2003, 12:01 PM:

I know we are off the point of the thread, but pop. control were some suggestions brouht up. I have a mere questions, Does a YOY female come into heat when a pop. is high? If she does SHE WILL BE BRED!!! This may only make family group territories a lil' smaller, if prey is abundant.
If YOY females don't come into heat , Why?? Social structure,keep it down? I'm just trying to get a better grasp on pop. dynamics so I can apply them to my area.
I am assuming the only time she wouldn't come into heat is in a high populated area, with no exploitation. These areas are far and few between.

Just learning, Cory

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 29, 2003, 07:43 AM:

I probably should have asked what 30 things, etc...

OK Leonard, I'll shorten the obviously flawed question but this just may explode your server.

Here goes....Short and sweet.

Q: What do you believe?

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on July 29, 2003, 03:36 PM:

Jay,
I believe that it takes a big coyote to weigh a ton.

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on July 29, 2003, 03:50 PM:

No argument there Cal.

I was thinking and sometimes it really hurts but....

Back in the late 70's and early 80's it was considered a bad day if two of us out calling didn't call in at least 10 or 11 shootable coyotes on an average. Some days more, some less. That includes the ones that would have counted as "shootable" had we been alert and ready 100% of the time instead of our usual fiddle-farting around. (Just seeing a coyote trotting across a field while driving along doesn't count unless we stop and actually call the thing back in.)

Nowadays it seems as though a good day of calling (sun up to sundown) only nets in 4 to 6 shootable dogs on an average. Again, sometimes more and sometimes less.

Clarification: Sometimes doubles and triples come in and there is no chance at bagging all of them, BUT they were all readily at some point in time "shootable". Just because we chose different dogs to shoot at doesn't mean the others weren't shootable.

So... having said all that...

Does anybody else feel that way?

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on July 29, 2003, 06:31 PM:

Jay, I guess you are right, at least in those readily accessable areas.

I think the key is to channel your efforts into the most active times and pay attention to the moon phases. Now is the time to develop those honey holes, like the one's you thought would be there forever.

Personally, I have been guilty of driving bad "roads" for four hours, just to reach prime areas. The difference in results is staggering.

Good hunting. LB

Posted by Jay Nistetter (Member # 140) on January 12, 2005, 11:54 AM:

I had forgotten about this discussion and still find it interesting.

Wondering if anyone has had a change of heart or comments from some new experts.

Posted by lupus caninus (Member # 484) on January 12, 2005, 05:19 PM:

Jay,
I'm no expert but I think the best thing going for them is they don't taste good. [Big Grin]

Posted by Yellerdog (Member # 356) on January 12, 2005, 07:45 PM:

Fascinating discussion! I'm glad you brought this one back up Jay, I had never read this thread before.
After two and half pages of discussion I think lupus caninus may have nailed it. Although I'll have to take his word on how they taste! [Big Grin]

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.0