The New Coyote and Other Predators..... Can You Win?
- Thread starter dogghr
- Start date
I cant provide the link - it is bogged down in Academia. Wayne Thogmartin is the researcher and author. Google his name and add Arkansas Turkey nesting study and it will come up if you can get through Academia.
Chipdasqrrl
Active Member
Sounds like evolution has treated the yotes well. They wont be going away anytime soon.. but it makes me wonder how wolves disappeared from Michigan (most of it)
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
I don't think wolves are as adaptable as coyotes. I don't think we will see wolves living in culverts under city streets anytime soon. I also think wolves require more of their sustenance from larger game animals, whereas a coyote will subsist on grasshoppers, grapes, and berries, house cats, and poodles. BUT, from what I have read about the wolf population in Wisc - they have populated far more area than was first anticipated during their "comeback" - even populating some areas outside of extensive forest areas with an existing human population. I know an Ecologist who works for the city of Atlanta, GA - and they consider urban coyotes to be a benefit to the city - helping to control the urban deer population and eating a lot of rats and mice - and probably stray cats. In many eastern states, bears are also increasing into areas not considered typical bear habitat. Who knows what the next fifty years will bring.
Wayne Thogmartin did an Arkansas turkey nesting study in the mid-90's - where very poor nesting success was attributed to predation. While the results are listed in the study, I am not positive the species of predator was determined - although most were attributed to raccoons - and most of the hens were not killed. A study 15 years later by Alexander Badyeav did not indicate the actual predator either, although I know some hens were killed on the nest and attributed to coyote depredation.
I will further attempt to explain my point of view on predators - and this is going to be an extended post - so if you get bored easily, you probably need to move on to something more exciting. I have a degree in Wildlife Biology and worked in the Natural Resources field with the Federal Govt for 34 years - so I do understand some things about wildlife population dynamics and interrelationships. But, there is a lot I am still learning and a lot I just plain don't understand. One thing I know positively - what happens on my ground doesn't necessarily happen on your ground - and vice versa. I own two parcels of land, eight air miles apart, in the same river basin - and they are as different as night and day. So I understand areas 500 miles apart can be entirely different.
I do not support the annihilation of predators. But, I also understand that as wildlife managers on our home properties, we manage cover, food, hunting pressure - and many other things - and depending on the property - we might have to manage predators. I know that our adult does average carrying 1.7 fetuses. I also know our statewide fawn recruitment numbers are around .47 fawns per doe. If you have plenty of deer around your place, you needn't be concerned with those numbers. If you wish to increase the number of deer on your place, you should be very interested in those numbers. What is causing the disparity between 1.7 fetuses, and .47 fawns per doe. What is killing 66% of your potential fawn crop. Are those fetuses being aborted prior to birth - due to stress, disease, poor nutrition - or some other factor? Or are the does bearing the fawns, and something is killing them between fawn drop and fall surveys? I don't know the answer to that. But, I do know this - on my own little piece of paradise, I can provide acres of high protein food plots, mineral licks, watering holes, bedding cover, and fawning cover - and I can eliminate all doe harvest and tightly restrict buck harvest - and the fawn recruitment numbers still remain below .5. It is easy to reduce deer populations on your place - it is difficult to increase them if you only own 300 acres like I do - and are influenced by neighboring hunters. Neighboring hunters might influence your total deer numbers - but they don't influence fawn recruitment. So, if I have 20 deer per square mile, and I would like to get to 30 deer per square mile - and I am doing everything possible to my habitat to increase the deer herd, and we aren't shooting any does - (but cant control neighboring hunters) - what is a property owner to do? I cant improve my neighbor's habitat to increase deer production. I can't control how many deer my neighbors are killing. I cant control how many deer die of disease or automobiles, drowning from flooding, or lightening strikes. So, it gets back to that question - what is happening to those 1.7 fetuses that turn into .47 fawns. It might be disease - it might be automobiles - it is not neighboring hunters. It could be a number of things - I am doing all I can to provide for the deer on my place - that is what I do now that I am retired. I don't know what is causing it, but I know one of the few things that MIGHT be causing it that I can do something about - is some timely predator control. Coyotes eat deer - and especially fawns - that is an undeniable proven fact. While the home range of coyotes varies greatly depending upon the area - one thing I know - I might not be able to do anything about my neighbor's hunters or habitat - but his coyotes get on my land and I can do something about them for a short duration. How much removing a couple of coyotes each spring off my 300 acres helps - I don't know. I have seen an increase in fawn recruitment - but I would not go so far as to attribute it entirely to coyote removal. Nine months out of the year, I probably average one or two game cam pictures of coyotes each week on my 12 game cameras. In May and June, near my prime fawning cover, it is not uncommon to get pictures of three coyotes a night. They know what I know (and probably more) - that prime fawning cover is going to be utilized by a number of does. They actively hunt those fawns during fawning season - there is no doubt. I am not overrun with coyotes. I am underrun with deer. If you have 20 deer per square mile - on three hundred acres - your average population is ten deer. If you have a buck:doe ratio of 1:2 - you have 3 bucks, six or seven does, and three fawns at a fawn recruitment level of .47. Natural mortality takes 10% - or one deer - leaving you two deer to take each year on 300 acres that you paid most of your life savings. If you are not now killing does - what are you left to do to increase your deer herd? In my mind - the only thing left is to increase fawn recruitment - by doing everything you can - habitat, food, cover - AND predator reduction immediately preceding and during fawning season. When I remove a coyote in May - it will be some time before that coyote is replaced. I don't care if they come back in August - my fawns are mobile then.
I planted two plots of sweet corn last year - both the same size - four 250 ft long rows. I watered, fertilized, weeded, cultivated, sprayed for insects, provided bees for pollination - everything I could do to insure a bumper crop. One plot was unfenced. One plot was fenced with 48" field fence and two strands of hot wire 4" and 12" off the ground. The fence plot had a dogproof coon traps at each corner, three #1.5 coil springs in the plot, and one live trap in the plot. In addition, my wife and I made a pass every night about ten oclock with a spot light and .22. We caught/killed 18 coons in ten days during corn ripening time. We did not do any coon control on the unfenced plot. The plot where we killed the coons - we were able to pick ears off about 66% of the plants that were not damaged by coons. The plot we provided no coon control - every stalk of corn was torn down and every ear was destroyed. The only difference between the two plots - the successful plot had predator control - the unsuccessful did not. Would it have been beneficial to control the coons in January during trapping season? No - they would have repopulated the area. Was that coon control last year going to be enough for my corn patch this year? No - it is an every year prescription - just like planting, fertilizing, watering, cultivating, etc.
The same goes for predator control during fawning season - it is an ongoing process. It is one component of the total management plan. Do you need to do it? If you are satisfied with your deer population, then no. If you are not satisfied with your deer population, I would suggest property improvements first. Secondly, I would recommend reduction in doe harvest. If you are doing all you can do - and would like to see an increase in deer population - it might be your only option left.
As hunters and land managers, we provide food, cover, water, minerals - we restrict harvest and pressure - yet the predator population more than likely goes unmanaged. We are not going to annihilate the predator population. Fur prices no longer give us an incentive to persecute them night and day like we did forty or fifty years ago. I don't want to get rid of them - I believe coyotes are the main thing between a livable number of wild hogs and being overrun. I also believe that the more deer you have, the less you have to worry about. The fewer deer you have, then everyone counts. If you have a 600 acre field full of corn, you are probably going to be able to withstand some soon damage. If you have four sixty foot rows of corn, you better load your gun and protect what you have.
There is a ton of quail nesting information on the Tall Timbers website - located in North Florida. It was always known that cotton rats ate quail eggs. They got rid of the cotton rats. Cotton rat predators turned to eating other things - among them - bobwhite quail. Tall timbers plantation now manages for a healthy cotton rat population - even to the point of providing supplemental feed for them to produce health and increase litter size - thus taking some of the predation off quail. In the duck nesting country of the Dakotas, red foxes are the primary nest predator on nesting ducks. In areas of higher coyote populations - the coyotes kill or run the red foxes out of the area. Coyotes are not as effective nest predator as are red foxes - thus, duck nesting success is higher in areas populated by coyotes.
We don't have any quail left where I live. We don't hardly any rabbits. We have very few cotton rats and turkeys. All of these animals used to be plentiful. We still have a lot of squirrels - but, squirrels are not ground nesters.
I try to provide habitat for everything on my place - even down to the rats and insects and song birds. I believe that the more balanced the wildlife community - the more it will flourish. I was out squirrel hunting today and saw a coyote dropping containing rabbit fur. I don't see many rabbits on my place - but I consider each one a buffer between the predators and my deer and turkeys. It made me feel good to know my efforts now provide a few rabbits for my predators to eat.
https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/vangilder_cory_l_200808_ms.pdf
https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/2684/Jackson Thesis Final.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
http://sedsg.com/docs/2012_proceedings.pdf
Here are just a few articles on predator influence on deer herds across the southeast. That last source is the interesting one because it provides abstracts of multiple studies - not all of which arrive at the same conclusion. That is why it is important for us as wildlife property managers to not jump to conclusions about a property we have never laid eyes on. Different properties have different dynamics - even only a few miles apart. Just because something works well on one property does not mean it works well on another property. Just because predation lowers fawn recruitment to an undesirable level in one area does not mean it does the same thing in another area.
I believe habitat conditions, hunting pressure, land use, human perception, etc are so varied across the range of whitetail deer that we dont have the luxury of making broad statements concerning managing that species in all the nooks and crannies where they live.
If the deer herd in YOUR area lives up to your expectations - consider yourself lucky. If it does not, you have to determine what the limiting factors might be and start trying to correct the deficiencies.
https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/2684/Jackson Thesis Final.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
http://sedsg.com/docs/2012_proceedings.pdf
Here are just a few articles on predator influence on deer herds across the southeast. That last source is the interesting one because it provides abstracts of multiple studies - not all of which arrive at the same conclusion. That is why it is important for us as wildlife property managers to not jump to conclusions about a property we have never laid eyes on. Different properties have different dynamics - even only a few miles apart. Just because something works well on one property does not mean it works well on another property. Just because predation lowers fawn recruitment to an undesirable level in one area does not mean it does the same thing in another area.
I believe habitat conditions, hunting pressure, land use, human perception, etc are so varied across the range of whitetail deer that we dont have the luxury of making broad statements concerning managing that species in all the nooks and crannies where they live.
If the deer herd in YOUR area lives up to your expectations - consider yourself lucky. If it does not, you have to determine what the limiting factors might be and start trying to correct the deficiencies.
dogghr
Well-Known Member
Well actually we can and do. We interpolate information all the time that is viable in medicine, business, personal , and yes animal and habitat management with great success.https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/vangilder_cory_l_200808_ms.pdf
https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/2684/Jackson Thesis Final.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
http://sedsg.com/docs/2012_proceedings.pdf
Here are just a few articles on predator influence on deer herds across the southeast. That last source is the interesting one because it provides abstracts of multiple studies - not all of which arrive at the same conclusion. That is why it is important for us as wildlife property managers to not jump to conclusions about a property we have never laid eyes on..
Those links are very good and support the observations I shared in my first post for the most part. And as I said from the get go, killing coyotes is an option but a very fruitless one for most managers who seldom take more than a half dozen / 100 ac/yr. So their money and sweat much better spent in managing bedding and fawning cover without guilt they are not actively chasing a predator. Just as, if not more so , effective and the studies, including the ones listed in your thread support such an assertion.
If predators are removed their is a lag time to refill?? Not true but would be if animals existed in walled territories. But as with any animal, including deer, they have home ranges existing more as circles each of which is overlapping home ranges of others. They travel across each other’s areas without residing there and when that void occurs, especially the young, non dominant predator, immediately can set up residence just as the NC study showed that I quoted. No different than that we see young bucks doing trying to become the dominant in an area. Coyotes range up to 8 miles with the females being more homebodies and the males overlapping larger areas that encompass other packs. Bear can have ranges of up to 40 sq miles , bobcats range up to 25 miles, but that is another discussion. Predators do not live in a static box but are continually looking for better food, habitat, and mates.
This may be in contrast with a deer forum. The whitetail has been here over 3 million years. They are the oldest of the deer species. They have survived the ages that have come and gone, the hunts of the Native Americans, changes in the environment, the removal of the forests, overtaking of their habitat by man and his structures and land management. Yet they survived and will survive regardless of how self important we try to make our minuscule efforts on limited land seem to us to be required for their life support. Predators, whether they fly, walk on two or four legs, crawl or swim, will exist as long as there are prey to chase. And they will never outlive their prey in numbers unless we mismanage. What we deem is the proper fawning rate, or survival rate, or deer herd numbers is based on our way of thinking and not of what the mountain knows. We simply do not know what it knows.
Manage by trapping and shooting if you will, I’ve done it. And I also know how frustratingly unsuccessful method it is.
And while I’m not starting a save the predator campaign , or worshiping the canine bearers, or making them something they are not, rest assured I accept them as filling a niche in the habitat community providing a need that I sometimes don’t understand.
I’ll leave this section to run its course and start “ The New Coyote and Other Predators...Can You Win? Part 2, The Black Bear” in separate thread to allow this one to continue if needed. Thanks for all the responses, I’ve really enjoyed the talk.
I don't understand where the perception that trapping coyotes is so expensive and labor intensive on your own property. I have had many folks make that comment, so last year, I kept track of my trapping time. Understand, we can only trap during the spring in and around a garden. I have four different garden locations on my place. I have six MB 550 traps that cost me $20 apiece. I have had them going on five years. Wolfgang stakes, coyote pee and commercial bait. Lets say the traps last ten years - which they are still in like new condition - so that is probably conservative. $120 in traps, spread out over ten years is $12 per year in traps. I probably spend another $30 - $40 in stakes, lures, and baits. I ride around my property every evening - if I am not hunting or fishing - whether traps are set or not. It takes me two hours to set six traps and one hour each day to cruise around on my sxs, feed my fish, pull game cam cards, check my food plots, and check my traps. I do this for two weeks and usually catch a couple of coyotes - maybe three. Game cam pics of coyotes will drop off to nothing for a couple of months. Fortunately for me, the coyotes don't know they are supposed to repopulate my ground immediately - because they don't. My fawn recruitment numbers jumped almost 20% last year - the first year I have done this - but I am not attributing all the success to the timely removal of a few coyotes, but, we will do it again and see what the result will be. If this coyote removal does increase fawn recruitment by 5 or 10 percent - it will be the cheapest, least labor intensive wildlife manage practice I have ever engaged in, in my 40 years of professional and private wildlife management career.
You will have people tell you - but, but, you have to do it every year for it to be effective. No kidding. That is the whole premise on which our conservation practices are based - the wise use of resources. We harvest a select percentage of animals each year, knowing they will be replaced and we do it all over again next year. Predators are no different - take some this year, they repopulate, take some more next year. Plant food plots this year, plant them again next year. Burn your NWSG this winter, burn it again 18 months later. It is an ongoing process and to think otherwise is to be naïve.
Whether predator control will work for you is a question only you can answer. You may not need it. You may not be in a position to do it. But to think it is to be dismissed as ineffective and unnecessary across all areas of the country is also being naïve.
You will have people tell you - but, but, you have to do it every year for it to be effective. No kidding. That is the whole premise on which our conservation practices are based - the wise use of resources. We harvest a select percentage of animals each year, knowing they will be replaced and we do it all over again next year. Predators are no different - take some this year, they repopulate, take some more next year. Plant food plots this year, plant them again next year. Burn your NWSG this winter, burn it again 18 months later. It is an ongoing process and to think otherwise is to be naïve.
Whether predator control will work for you is a question only you can answer. You may not need it. You may not be in a position to do it. But to think it is to be dismissed as ineffective and unnecessary across all areas of the country is also being naïve.
dogghr
Well-Known Member
I should clarify Swampcat, I meant my time is expensive. For those that don't live on their land, and who work hard hours, and who get limited time every few weeks to work their land, it is time and sweat/expense that can be spent in other areas as much or more productive. I do like to trap, have always enjoyed it and consider it more productive than possibly shooting the few I ever had success with. I am not disagreeing with your wanting to do predator control, just think many have a notion they will have much affect on limited predator control. I still stand by my remarks as it provides limited benefit,supported by the links you showed, but certainly won't hurt drastically.. But they are here to stay and we really will have lilttle affect on their survival. My opinion. Again, thanks for the links you have show, I read them all except the turkey one I couldn't track down.
And I agree , managers need to take into account predator numbers when they choose harvest numbers for deer regardless of what the DNR promotes. But that goes without saying for most on a forum such as this.
And I agree , managers need to take into account predator numbers when they choose harvest numbers for deer regardless of what the DNR promotes. But that goes without saying for most on a forum such as this.
Great thread with interesting dialogue! I'm just now having an opportunity to catch up here. One takeaway I believe completely is that circumstances can be different warranting different responses.
I can offer observations from a couple of very disparate locations...the vast brush country along the Rio Grande River deep in south Tx/Mexico and semi urban property in central La.
My ranch is located in an ocean of mostly unpopulated brush of easily over a million acres. Predator/prey populations are essentially unaffected by the presence of man. We have a robust population of mountain lions, bobcats [ my ranch is named El Gato } badgers, giant diamond back rattle snakes, blue indigo snakes [ largest snake in N.America ] eagles, hawks ...and yes coyotes. It is very common to see 10-15 yotes a day or more. One thing I've learned from this forum is that it seems the yotes down there aren't quite as big as their eastern relatives . However I don't see much difference in size from the yotes here on my farm in La. Considering the scale of the country effective predator control is essentially impossible.
We also have a buffet of prey species...deer obviously as well as jack rabbits, bunny rabbits, mice and rats of numerous species,javelinas, migratory and native birds by the bazillion, feral hogs, ground squirrels, ...I'm sure I'm missing others. We also have an incredible quail population, both blues and bobwhites.Weather conditions are what control quail numbers not predation in our country. Wildlife flourishes in this area. With that we see deer and coyotes interacting together on a daily basis. Very common. The deer pay little attention to the yotes beyond keeping them a respectable distance away [ a few feet ] In fact deer will frequently run a coyote off if bothered. In all the years I have been in that country I have seen 1...ONE... live healthy deer killed and eaten by yotes. Now let a deer get injured and he's gone overnight.
Fawn survival rates are always a concern with coyotes frequently considered the biggest culprit. I agree they can have a material impact if habitat and management practices doesn't support healthy recruitment. In the arid brush country rainfall can be the biggest factor in fawn survival. Rainy springs equal lots of grass equals lots of hiding spots equals better nutrition for mother and fawn equals higher survival. Droughts the reverse. To counter this we have removed or reduced all cattle from the pastures which allows the habitat to flourish in most conditions. Which becomes my primary mantra...everywhere I have been able to manage, habitat management is key to fawn survival.
The other variable we exercise for fawn survival is herd management. With a 1/1 b/d ratio, lots of bucks 4 yrs old and older the rut is short, and intense yielding a short window for fawn dropping. Certainly there is mortality...fortunately. But recruitment is rarely a problem.
As a side note I also offer that with a large population of mountain lions we really don't see much deer impact from them either. Certainly some but generally once a deer gets about 3 or 4 when we start paying attention to him they usually either die of old age or us.We see lions every year and while we occasionally kill one [ an old male started killing colts so we chased him down with dogs ] mostly they are just tolerated as part of the landscape.
Regarding my farm in La. essentially everything can be repeated except there are not nearly as many coyotes though plenty and no lions. The wildlife is not as diverse nor abundant excepting a rich deer herd. I've never seen a coyote kill a mature deer here and accepting fawn survival is around 50%+/- I'm sure they might get some fawns but with a healthy herd its ok. Again our primary focus is on habitat management and herd management which yields results we are very happy with.
Apologies for the diatribe. Candidly I like watching all of nature at work and have never done any predator management. My focus is on creating the healthiest habitat possible and letting all of nature flourish.
I can offer observations from a couple of very disparate locations...the vast brush country along the Rio Grande River deep in south Tx/Mexico and semi urban property in central La.
My ranch is located in an ocean of mostly unpopulated brush of easily over a million acres. Predator/prey populations are essentially unaffected by the presence of man. We have a robust population of mountain lions, bobcats [ my ranch is named El Gato } badgers, giant diamond back rattle snakes, blue indigo snakes [ largest snake in N.America ] eagles, hawks ...and yes coyotes. It is very common to see 10-15 yotes a day or more. One thing I've learned from this forum is that it seems the yotes down there aren't quite as big as their eastern relatives . However I don't see much difference in size from the yotes here on my farm in La. Considering the scale of the country effective predator control is essentially impossible.
We also have a buffet of prey species...deer obviously as well as jack rabbits, bunny rabbits, mice and rats of numerous species,javelinas, migratory and native birds by the bazillion, feral hogs, ground squirrels, ...I'm sure I'm missing others. We also have an incredible quail population, both blues and bobwhites.Weather conditions are what control quail numbers not predation in our country. Wildlife flourishes in this area. With that we see deer and coyotes interacting together on a daily basis. Very common. The deer pay little attention to the yotes beyond keeping them a respectable distance away [ a few feet ] In fact deer will frequently run a coyote off if bothered. In all the years I have been in that country I have seen 1...ONE... live healthy deer killed and eaten by yotes. Now let a deer get injured and he's gone overnight.
Fawn survival rates are always a concern with coyotes frequently considered the biggest culprit. I agree they can have a material impact if habitat and management practices doesn't support healthy recruitment. In the arid brush country rainfall can be the biggest factor in fawn survival. Rainy springs equal lots of grass equals lots of hiding spots equals better nutrition for mother and fawn equals higher survival. Droughts the reverse. To counter this we have removed or reduced all cattle from the pastures which allows the habitat to flourish in most conditions. Which becomes my primary mantra...everywhere I have been able to manage, habitat management is key to fawn survival.
The other variable we exercise for fawn survival is herd management. With a 1/1 b/d ratio, lots of bucks 4 yrs old and older the rut is short, and intense yielding a short window for fawn dropping. Certainly there is mortality...fortunately. But recruitment is rarely a problem.
As a side note I also offer that with a large population of mountain lions we really don't see much deer impact from them either. Certainly some but generally once a deer gets about 3 or 4 when we start paying attention to him they usually either die of old age or us.We see lions every year and while we occasionally kill one [ an old male started killing colts so we chased him down with dogs ] mostly they are just tolerated as part of the landscape.
Regarding my farm in La. essentially everything can be repeated except there are not nearly as many coyotes though plenty and no lions. The wildlife is not as diverse nor abundant excepting a rich deer herd. I've never seen a coyote kill a mature deer here and accepting fawn survival is around 50%+/- I'm sure they might get some fawns but with a healthy herd its ok. Again our primary focus is on habitat management and herd management which yields results we are very happy with.
Apologies for the diatribe. Candidly I like watching all of nature at work and have never done any predator management. My focus is on creating the healthiest habitat possible and letting all of nature flourish.
Our country is so very diverse - in species, habitat, people, and the interaction and dynamics between all of them. I have done a fair bit of hunting out west. My last trip was to SW New Mexico on an elk hunt. I saw more coyotes during those ten days than I have seen at home in the last five years. I also saw more rabbits and rats in those ten days than I have see in the last ten years. Those small animals evolved with coyotes always around them. Those cottontail rabbits and kangaroo rats - and even some of their squirrels - live in holes in the ground. I suspect that was an evolutionary process that favored those animals that lived in holes, which reduced the likelihood of them becoming coyote food. Our coyotes supposedly moved in about the early to mid 1900's. Those is the SE moved in even later than that. I have lived in GA, FL, LA, and AR - and for the most part our rabbits and rats do not live in holes - they live in brushpiles, or ground nests. Yes, I am sure some go in a hole every now and then - but for the most part - they don't live in holes. We historically had red wolves - which - obviously were not as successful as coyotes and probably predated larger animals on average than do coyotes. So, now that coyotes have taken over, our cottontail rabbits do not have the same defenses their western cousins have - the western rabbits evolved for eons with coyotes hunting them.
I often hear folks say - well look at Kansas, they are covered up with coyotes - and they have lots of turkeys, quail, pheasants, prairie chickens, rabbits, deer, etc - so it cant be predators. Those same people are not understanding what they just said. In my own home state, if I were to make a similar statement, I would say we are covered up with coyotes, but we have a few turkeys, a few rabbits, almost no quail, and no pheasants or prairie chickens. There is a LOT of preferred coyote food for a coyote to eat in Kansas. There is not in my home state. I can plant a half acre of sweet corn - and the coons will get EVERY ear. I can plant forty acres of sweet corn and probably get 90% of the ears. The point being - if the prey base is large enough to withstand the predator base - then everything is good. Like Kansas, New Mexico, etc.
I think a lot of people with a healthy deer population fail to see the impacts coyotes may have. If you have 30 or 40 deer per square mile - coyotes may well be your best friend. If you have fifteen deer per square mile, coyotes may be your worst enemy. If you read the articles about "predator pits" described in Alabama - I don't think they come out and say those conditions were caused by coyotes. I would not blame coyotes for our low deer density of the past. I think low deer densities in the south and maybe the east are caused by a variety of things - drought, flooding, disease, and over harvest of does. The coyote comes into play when your deer densities decline. If you have 40 deer per mile and five coyotes per mile - everything probably works out great. When that deer population declines over the course of five years to 15 deer per mile (for whatever reason) and you still have your five coyotes per square mile - now you are probably going to see some adverse impacts caused by coyotes on your fawn recruitment.
It is easy to lower deer density - even if you don't control much land - you can easily lower deer density on your hunting grounds and your neighbor's land - when considering the liberal doe harvest regulations most states have now implemented. But, if you only have a small hunting area - several hundred acres or less - it is very difficult to increase deer density. You can stop shooting does, but your deer are going to get on your neighbors land and be subjected to harvest. You can do everything you can to provide better habitat - but lets face it, the best habitat in the world on 200 acres is not going to have much affect increasing the population in the big picture if your neighbors don't do anything. You can provide more and more food, to attract more and more deer to your land - lessening the time they spend on your neighbor's land.
It helps to be able to identify the problem. If you do camera surveys and find out you only have two or three does on your 200 acres - you have a problem with too few does and not shooting any does may improve that scenario. If you do a camera survey, and find out you don't have many does and your fawn recruitment is less than .5 per doe - you know you are also losing some of your fawns to something. Adult does average around 1.6 or 1.7 fetuses. If those 1.7 fetuses are translating into .5 fawns - something is probably happening to a lot of fawns after birth. A decline if fawn recruitment numbers has been documented across the SE US - coincidental with an increase in coyote numbers.
Even in Alabama and South Carolina - they don't come out and profess eradication of coyotes. Generally, almost under their breath, they softly say you might remove some coyotes, or you may have to LIMIT YOUR DOE HARVEST. In my case, I had done everything I could with my habitat, we had stopped shooting does altogether - there was nothing left to try. Coyote removal wasn't my first choice, it was my last. For what I have invested in my property - money, time, and effort - I am not willing to concede MY doe harvest to the coyotes without a fight. One month out of the year (or less) is all I aggravate them. I understand the balance of nature and wildlife dynamics better than most - and that is all I want - that one month, and the rest of the year is theirs. I well understand they have a place in the environment. In fact, I fear one day we may have distemper or parvo or something else come through and really lower the number for a while. I know coyotes are my buffer between manageable hog numbers and overwhelming hog numbers. The included picture is what I commonly see when I find coyote dropping around my area - that aint deer or rabbit hair in there - that is hog hair.
I often hear folks say - well look at Kansas, they are covered up with coyotes - and they have lots of turkeys, quail, pheasants, prairie chickens, rabbits, deer, etc - so it cant be predators. Those same people are not understanding what they just said. In my own home state, if I were to make a similar statement, I would say we are covered up with coyotes, but we have a few turkeys, a few rabbits, almost no quail, and no pheasants or prairie chickens. There is a LOT of preferred coyote food for a coyote to eat in Kansas. There is not in my home state. I can plant a half acre of sweet corn - and the coons will get EVERY ear. I can plant forty acres of sweet corn and probably get 90% of the ears. The point being - if the prey base is large enough to withstand the predator base - then everything is good. Like Kansas, New Mexico, etc.
I think a lot of people with a healthy deer population fail to see the impacts coyotes may have. If you have 30 or 40 deer per square mile - coyotes may well be your best friend. If you have fifteen deer per square mile, coyotes may be your worst enemy. If you read the articles about "predator pits" described in Alabama - I don't think they come out and say those conditions were caused by coyotes. I would not blame coyotes for our low deer density of the past. I think low deer densities in the south and maybe the east are caused by a variety of things - drought, flooding, disease, and over harvest of does. The coyote comes into play when your deer densities decline. If you have 40 deer per mile and five coyotes per mile - everything probably works out great. When that deer population declines over the course of five years to 15 deer per mile (for whatever reason) and you still have your five coyotes per square mile - now you are probably going to see some adverse impacts caused by coyotes on your fawn recruitment.
It is easy to lower deer density - even if you don't control much land - you can easily lower deer density on your hunting grounds and your neighbor's land - when considering the liberal doe harvest regulations most states have now implemented. But, if you only have a small hunting area - several hundred acres or less - it is very difficult to increase deer density. You can stop shooting does, but your deer are going to get on your neighbors land and be subjected to harvest. You can do everything you can to provide better habitat - but lets face it, the best habitat in the world on 200 acres is not going to have much affect increasing the population in the big picture if your neighbors don't do anything. You can provide more and more food, to attract more and more deer to your land - lessening the time they spend on your neighbor's land.
It helps to be able to identify the problem. If you do camera surveys and find out you only have two or three does on your 200 acres - you have a problem with too few does and not shooting any does may improve that scenario. If you do a camera survey, and find out you don't have many does and your fawn recruitment is less than .5 per doe - you know you are also losing some of your fawns to something. Adult does average around 1.6 or 1.7 fetuses. If those 1.7 fetuses are translating into .5 fawns - something is probably happening to a lot of fawns after birth. A decline if fawn recruitment numbers has been documented across the SE US - coincidental with an increase in coyote numbers.
Even in Alabama and South Carolina - they don't come out and profess eradication of coyotes. Generally, almost under their breath, they softly say you might remove some coyotes, or you may have to LIMIT YOUR DOE HARVEST. In my case, I had done everything I could with my habitat, we had stopped shooting does altogether - there was nothing left to try. Coyote removal wasn't my first choice, it was my last. For what I have invested in my property - money, time, and effort - I am not willing to concede MY doe harvest to the coyotes without a fight. One month out of the year (or less) is all I aggravate them. I understand the balance of nature and wildlife dynamics better than most - and that is all I want - that one month, and the rest of the year is theirs. I well understand they have a place in the environment. In fact, I fear one day we may have distemper or parvo or something else come through and really lower the number for a while. I know coyotes are my buffer between manageable hog numbers and overwhelming hog numbers. The included picture is what I commonly see when I find coyote dropping around my area - that aint deer or rabbit hair in there - that is hog hair.
Swampcat to keep the dialogue going Let me add a bit more to my experience in mexico with deer and coyotes. The ranch I bought was part of a 250,000 acre ranch. The countryside was all held by very large ranches. There were very few roads, very little water, routine droughts, and all the country was grazed with cattle. I started hunting and playing on my buddies ranch in early 1980's. Back then there were very few deer...maybe a deer to 100 acres... mostly compromised by lack of water. Always been plenty of coyotes, lions etc.
Fast forward to Americans buying up large swathes of the countryside and things changed fairly quickly. We added lots of water, started supplemental feeding and managing the deer. Now literally we trap does with helicopters and sell them to other ranches wanting our genetics. I don't think anyone has ever compared predator populations past to present but my guess is we have more predators today than ever. Unarguably the deer population has exploded for reasons stated along with the screw worm eradication that took place decades back.
All this points back to the reality that every place needs looking at differently. I also add that land fragmentation makes actually managing a deer herd impossible in most circumstances minimizing any material contribution one small track may have to the whole irrespective of isolated predator control . Hence the QDMA model of cooperatives. Same with predator/deer mgt. If a large enough area isn't cooperating to build/diminish/manage a deer herd anything done on small isolated tracts is of minimal consequence. Doesn't mean you shouldn't try though.
Fast forward to Americans buying up large swathes of the countryside and things changed fairly quickly. We added lots of water, started supplemental feeding and managing the deer. Now literally we trap does with helicopters and sell them to other ranches wanting our genetics. I don't think anyone has ever compared predator populations past to present but my guess is we have more predators today than ever. Unarguably the deer population has exploded for reasons stated along with the screw worm eradication that took place decades back.
All this points back to the reality that every place needs looking at differently. I also add that land fragmentation makes actually managing a deer herd impossible in most circumstances minimizing any material contribution one small track may have to the whole irrespective of isolated predator control . Hence the QDMA model of cooperatives. Same with predator/deer mgt. If a large enough area isn't cooperating to build/diminish/manage a deer herd anything done on small isolated tracts is of minimal consequence. Doesn't mean you shouldn't try though.
Native Hunter
Well-Known Member
I have two thoughts on this subject:
1. Experts and studies don't all agree, and a very good example is the thing I keep hearing about thick cover being able to help protect fawns from coyotes. Well what you take for granted as being the Gospel is looked at entirely differently by one of the top experts in the US Forest Service. In the article at the link shown below, Diane Banegas quotes top expert and researcher John Kilgo:
"Some biologists have suggested that beefing up the undergrowth in southern forests would make it more difficult for coyotes to find fawns, thereby allowing more to survive. On the contrary, Kilgo’s research showed that fawns living in areas with dense understories were even more likely to be taken by coyotes. “It seems that dense undergrowth may just serve as a message to the coyotes that the brush is hiding something,” Kilgo said...."
Source for the above is: https://www.fs.fed.us/blogs/study-concludes-coyotes-help-manage-deer-population-southeast-us
So there you go - what you have taken for the Gospel is actually from the pits of FAKE COYOTE NEWS Hell....
2. The lesson of the supernatural "Leupold Mountain" that keeps being brought up isn't even applicable to large areas of habitat as they now exist. His story was about a place where man destroyed all of the predators and there wasn't enough hunting pressure from humans to keep the deer population in check. That is true in some places (Like Bullwinkle's area) but not even remotely relevant where I live. I have never shot a doe on my place and shoot very few bucks, but despite that, the population does not grow. We have enough predators (man) without having another one (the coyote) that destroys half the population before they are a month old.
I hate to be so critical, but it seems to me that "Leupold's Mountain" is the place that the "predator people" run too every time this subject comes up - just like the liberals start shouting "racism, racism" on everything whether it is or not. I'm a fan of Leupold myself, but I think we do the man a great disservice by trying to apply his good reasoning like a blanket over the whole world - including places where it isn't applicable.
One more thing about Leupold's story that isn't applicable to the coyote discussion - In his story, man was able to eliminate the wolf completely on the mountain. I hear you saying over and over (and I agree myself) that the new coyote is here to stay and man is unable to eliminate it. You also say that the more you kill, the more there are. If you really believe that nonsense, then you should be shooting more so you can have more to love....
1. Experts and studies don't all agree, and a very good example is the thing I keep hearing about thick cover being able to help protect fawns from coyotes. Well what you take for granted as being the Gospel is looked at entirely differently by one of the top experts in the US Forest Service. In the article at the link shown below, Diane Banegas quotes top expert and researcher John Kilgo:
"Some biologists have suggested that beefing up the undergrowth in southern forests would make it more difficult for coyotes to find fawns, thereby allowing more to survive. On the contrary, Kilgo’s research showed that fawns living in areas with dense understories were even more likely to be taken by coyotes. “It seems that dense undergrowth may just serve as a message to the coyotes that the brush is hiding something,” Kilgo said...."
Source for the above is: https://www.fs.fed.us/blogs/study-concludes-coyotes-help-manage-deer-population-southeast-us
So there you go - what you have taken for the Gospel is actually from the pits of FAKE COYOTE NEWS Hell....
2. The lesson of the supernatural "Leupold Mountain" that keeps being brought up isn't even applicable to large areas of habitat as they now exist. His story was about a place where man destroyed all of the predators and there wasn't enough hunting pressure from humans to keep the deer population in check. That is true in some places (Like Bullwinkle's area) but not even remotely relevant where I live. I have never shot a doe on my place and shoot very few bucks, but despite that, the population does not grow. We have enough predators (man) without having another one (the coyote) that destroys half the population before they are a month old.
I hate to be so critical, but it seems to me that "Leupold's Mountain" is the place that the "predator people" run too every time this subject comes up - just like the liberals start shouting "racism, racism" on everything whether it is or not. I'm a fan of Leupold myself, but I think we do the man a great disservice by trying to apply his good reasoning like a blanket over the whole world - including places where it isn't applicable.
One more thing about Leupold's story that isn't applicable to the coyote discussion - In his story, man was able to eliminate the wolf completely on the mountain. I hear you saying over and over (and I agree myself) that the new coyote is here to stay and man is unable to eliminate it. You also say that the more you kill, the more there are. If you really believe that nonsense, then you should be shooting more so you can have more to love....
Last edited:
Interesting article. I wish it would have included the age of fawn mortality . I have always been under the impression that the window for fawn predation is fairly short. Thus if you can condense the birthing period thru tightened rut you likewise increase survivability. Such has been my experience.
once again though to me this points out how different areas need be looked at differently. As mentioned , when it rains in the brush country, grasses explode especially with no cattle. Fawn survival increases proportionately. Having done numerous helicopter surveys I have seen fawn survival vary from ~25% to over 75% directly proportionate to rainfall. I don't necessarily see such a direct correlation in La. . Lord knows we have super thick habitat and fawn production remains consistently high . Predation seems irrelevant .
It is also my impression that man perverts many things associated with deer and deer behavior. Excess pressure is just one example. For me I cherish a balanced diversity of wildlife just as I cherish diverse plant life.
once again though to me this points out how different areas need be looked at differently. As mentioned , when it rains in the brush country, grasses explode especially with no cattle. Fawn survival increases proportionately. Having done numerous helicopter surveys I have seen fawn survival vary from ~25% to over 75% directly proportionate to rainfall. I don't necessarily see such a direct correlation in La. . Lord knows we have super thick habitat and fawn production remains consistently high . Predation seems irrelevant .
It is also my impression that man perverts many things associated with deer and deer behavior. Excess pressure is just one example. For me I cherish a balanced diversity of wildlife just as I cherish diverse plant life.
dogghr
Well-Known Member
Ah Native, Native, Native. You raise them and then they go there off ways. LOL. I knew you couldn’t resist getting in here. So we are going to pull up one study and fly with that? I tried my best not to use islolated studies on any of this material, and it can be easily done, but I won’t dispute that study you show that I’m familiar with. I also know that the SE has a very unique situation shown by studies that I never even delved in to as it is poorly understood at this time by most reserchers. And no, improved cover does not negate loss of wildlife by predator, but it does make the prey have a greater chance of survival.
I quote Leopold often because many are so familiar with him. His philosophy is intergrated in most all his writings whether they be books or papers. I dont’ always even agree with him. His point was meant to be that man often dictates what man wants. To him and his writings, he isn’t concerned with the wolf but rather how man perceives the habitat as whole and not with tunnel visions of what man want to be.
Anyways, Why do rabbits reproduce so much? Why do birds fill a nest with eggs? Why do mice copulate continually ? Why do turtles and fish lay so many eggs? Why do deer produce 1,2, or maybe 3 fawns? Are those offspring expected to survive? There is a reason for multiple births. Maybe .5, or 1 or 2 is the norm survival rate for the habitat in which a deer is born? Maybe the habitat is incapable of supporting more than a certain number either in food or cover? Maybe the predator is simply taking what will not survive or survive below healthy standards? Maybe the assumption that predators are responsible for birth rates is inaccurate?
So lets assume we eradicate the coyote. Have you seen the video of the guy taking grown deer with his hawk? Do we now shoot all the hawks and eagles now that the yotes are gone? There is no doubt my bald eagle can easily take a fawn. I’ve seen them feed on deer carcass so I know they like venison. Now lets eradicate the bobcat. Studies show they are almost equal to coyotes in fawn deaths. Bears where they exist take more fawns probable than anything. But my area, the people like the bear but hate the coyote, until the bear tears up their dog. Where would we like this to end? Most hunters point to the coyote since he is easy to despise, but he is only part of the predator “problem”. My argument is the problem is our perspective of what we deem the norm.
We have a poster on this forum from Washington state. He shows everything from lions to bear to moose to deer. Why is it that many of the eastern whitetail hunter is so unacceaptable of the balance? If a manager chooses to remain frustrated then so be it, I am no longer in that position. I know I’ve hunted in areas of NA with the most intense predators in NA, and the game was healthier than any I’ve witnessed. I may be guilty of fake news but I base it on many years of research and observations. As I said in my first post, adjacent county has had coyote bounty for several decades and I’ve seen the boxes of paws brought in to claim those bounties each year. And yet they obviously still have as many as they started or the bounty would be not more.To each their own, their choice. I’m off to bears, I will accept as always difference of opinion on this sensitive subject. Thanks again everyone, and you can continue.
I quote Leopold often because many are so familiar with him. His philosophy is intergrated in most all his writings whether they be books or papers. I dont’ always even agree with him. His point was meant to be that man often dictates what man wants. To him and his writings, he isn’t concerned with the wolf but rather how man perceives the habitat as whole and not with tunnel visions of what man want to be.
Anyways, Why do rabbits reproduce so much? Why do birds fill a nest with eggs? Why do mice copulate continually ? Why do turtles and fish lay so many eggs? Why do deer produce 1,2, or maybe 3 fawns? Are those offspring expected to survive? There is a reason for multiple births. Maybe .5, or 1 or 2 is the norm survival rate for the habitat in which a deer is born? Maybe the habitat is incapable of supporting more than a certain number either in food or cover? Maybe the predator is simply taking what will not survive or survive below healthy standards? Maybe the assumption that predators are responsible for birth rates is inaccurate?
So lets assume we eradicate the coyote. Have you seen the video of the guy taking grown deer with his hawk? Do we now shoot all the hawks and eagles now that the yotes are gone? There is no doubt my bald eagle can easily take a fawn. I’ve seen them feed on deer carcass so I know they like venison. Now lets eradicate the bobcat. Studies show they are almost equal to coyotes in fawn deaths. Bears where they exist take more fawns probable than anything. But my area, the people like the bear but hate the coyote, until the bear tears up their dog. Where would we like this to end? Most hunters point to the coyote since he is easy to despise, but he is only part of the predator “problem”. My argument is the problem is our perspective of what we deem the norm.
We have a poster on this forum from Washington state. He shows everything from lions to bear to moose to deer. Why is it that many of the eastern whitetail hunter is so unacceaptable of the balance? If a manager chooses to remain frustrated then so be it, I am no longer in that position. I know I’ve hunted in areas of NA with the most intense predators in NA, and the game was healthier than any I’ve witnessed. I may be guilty of fake news but I base it on many years of research and observations. As I said in my first post, adjacent county has had coyote bounty for several decades and I’ve seen the boxes of paws brought in to claim those bounties each year. And yet they obviously still have as many as they started or the bounty would be not more.To each their own, their choice. I’m off to bears, I will accept as always difference of opinion on this sensitive subject. Thanks again everyone, and you can continue.
As I have said, I hear it said all the time, Kansas has a bunch of coyotes, and they have a bunch of turkeys, deer, quail, pheasants, rabbits, etc. The same could be said about our forum member from Washington - they have bears, and wolves and lions - yes - and they have whitetails, mule deer, elk, and moose. Bingo. Again, People often say this and dont realize they gave the answer to their question why that many predators can exist there - because there is a big food source. If I say we have a lot of coyotes, I cant say we have a lot of one other species other than squirrels, coons or hogs. Outside of my yard, I may go months without seeing a rabbit, years without seeing a turkey, and never see a quail. We do have a few deer. Statewide fawn recruitment was advertised to be .8 just ten years ago. Now it is below .5. While fawn recruitment numbers have declined, liberal antlerless regulations have remained the same. In area, they prey species are hogs, coons, and deer - primarily fawns. If you have forty deer per square mile and five coyotes - and each coyote takes one fawn - you probably wont even know it. You have 15 deer per square mile and those same five coyotes each take one fawn, you just had no net gain in the deer herd before hunting.
Predators used to be hunted hard. Predation is an importantant component of the ecosystem. What was once hunted and trapped with abandon, now goes largely unchecked. Fur prices across the south are the lowest on record. Think what would happen the deer population if we basically quit hunting them - like we have predators.
And while I believe in my area, I need to kill a few coyotes each spring to assist my deer herd - and turkey flock - I in no way consider the other predators to be innocent in the big picture - maybe not to our deer herd - but to our small game population. Coons are the scourge of all ground nesting small game animals.
Predators used to be hunted hard. Predation is an importantant component of the ecosystem. What was once hunted and trapped with abandon, now goes largely unchecked. Fur prices across the south are the lowest on record. Think what would happen the deer population if we basically quit hunting them - like we have predators.
And while I believe in my area, I need to kill a few coyotes each spring to assist my deer herd - and turkey flock - I in no way consider the other predators to be innocent in the big picture - maybe not to our deer herd - but to our small game population. Coons are the scourge of all ground nesting small game animals.
I dont know if it is better to have great cover or mediocre cover. I have a two acre plot of arrowleaf clover the does actually fight over. Prior to fawning, there will be four or five does hanging around that two acres. Last year, two does gave birth to fawns in that two acres. Coyote presence increases probably ten fold during fawning season. Is that because the coyotes know it is good fawning habitat and increase hunting activity in that area? More likely, I would guess the coyotes increase their presence because the pregnant does increase their presence. The does are around there all the time and I am sure to a coyote, it smells like a stock yard.
Similar threads
