Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Coyote

The coyote (Canis latrans) is a small to medium-sized canine species native to North and Central America, distinguished by its slender frame, pointed ears, and opportunistic lifestyle that enables survival across diverse ecosystems from deserts and prairies to urban landscapes.^[1] Adults typically weigh 9 to 16 kilograms and measure 1 to 1.3 meters in length including the tail, with males slightly larger than females.^[2]^[3] As an omnivorous mesopredator, its diet encompasses small mammals, birds, reptiles, insects, fruits, and carrion, adapting seasonally and locally to available resources.^[4] The coyote's range has expanded dramatically eastward and into former wolf territories following the persecution of larger canids, demonstrating high reproductive rates and behavioral plasticity that include pack formation for hunting larger prey and solitary scavenging in human-modified environments.^[5]^[6] Ecologically versatile, it plays roles in controlling rodent populations while occasionally preying on livestock or pets, prompting management efforts, yet its populations are classified as Least Concern by the IUCN due to abundant numbers and lack of significant threats.^[7] This adaptability has allowed coyotes to colonize cities like Chicago and Los Angeles, where they exploit anthropogenic food sources and shelter, often shifting to nocturnal habits to avoid humans.^[8]

Taxonomy and Evolution

Etymology and Historical Classification

The common name "coyote" entered English from Mexican Spanish coyote, which directly borrows from the Nahuatl word coyōtl, the indigenous term for the species among Mesoamerican peoples.^[9]^[10] This Nahuatl root, from a Uto-Aztecan language spoken by the Aztecs, first appeared in European records through Spanish colonial accounts of North American fauna, reflecting the animal's prominence in pre-Columbian cultures where it symbolized cunning and survival.^[9] The earliest documented English usage dates to 1759, describing the "prairie-wolf" of western North America known for its nocturnal howls.^[10] Scientifically, the coyote received its binomial nomenclature as Canis latrans from American naturalist Thomas Say in 1823, derived from Latin roots meaning "barking dog" to highlight its distinctive vocalizations differing from the howls of gray wolves (Canis lupus).^[11] Say's description was based on a specimen observed in September 1819 near Council Bluffs, Iowa (then part of unorganized U.S. territory), during expeditions echoing Lewis and Clark's earlier encounters, where the animal was informally noted as a smaller, yapping canine akin to a jackal.^[12] Prior to Say, Constantine Samuel Rafinesque proposed Canis chlorops in 1817 for western specimens, but this junior synonym was superseded and is not recognized in modern taxonomy due to Say's priority and more precise morphological diagnosis.^[13] Historically, European classifiers often conflated the coyote with wolves, foxes, or feral dogs based on superficial resemblances, placing it variably as a "brush wolf" or "American jackal" in early natural histories before Linnaean standardization.^[11] By the mid-19th century, its placement in the genus Canis solidified within Canidae, distinguished from Old World jackals (Canis aureus) by North American endemism and adaptations to open habitats, though debates persisted on whether it represented a primitive wolf form or distinct lineage until morphological and later genetic evidence confirmed its basal position among Canis species.^[11] This classification has endured, with C. latrans encompassing 19 subspecies recognized by the 1940s based on geographic variation in pelage and craniodental traits.^[13]

Fossil Record and Phylogenetic Origins

The fossil record of Canis latrans, the coyote, documents its presence in North America throughout the Pleistocene epoch, with the earliest definitive remains dating to approximately 1 million years ago.^[14] Fossils from sites such as the La Brea Tar Pits in California reveal that Pleistocene coyotes exhibited greater morphological variation than modern populations, including larger body sizes and more robust cranial features suited to exploiting megafaunal prey and competing with larger carnivores like dire wolves.^[15] ^[16] Subfossil evidence also confirms coyote distribution extended southward into regions like the Yucatán Peninsula and northwestern Costa Rica by the late Pleistocene.^[17] A notable evolutionary shift occurred around 11,000 years ago, coinciding with the Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions, when coyote mandibles transitioned from robust forms with enhanced shearing capabilities—indicative of hypercarnivory—to slimmer structures better adapted to smaller, more diverse prey and reduced interspecific competition.^[16] ^[18] This size reduction, observed in comparative analyses of post-Pleistocene specimens from the Holocene arid West, underscores adaptive responses to ecological pressures rather than genetic bottlenecks, as coyote populations maintained continuity without evidence of replacement by invading forms.^[17] ^[19] Phylogenetically, C. latrans represents a distinct North American lineage within the genus Canis, diverging from the gray wolf (C. lupus) ancestor approximately 1–2 million years ago, based on mitochondrial DNA divergence calibrated against fossil chronologies.^[14] Unlike gray wolves, which trace Eurasian origins and Beringian migrations, coyotes evolved endemically in North America, with Pleistocene forms like C. latrans orcutti exhibiting wolf-like traits that prefigure modern adaptability but affirm species-level distinction through consistent dental and postcranial morphology.^[20] ^[14] Genomic studies reinforce this basal position, showing limited ancient admixture with Eurasian canids and emphasizing ecological opportunism as a driver of coyote radiation, though post-colonial hybridization with wolves has introgressed traits in eastern populations without altering core phylogenetic origins.^[21]^[22]

Subspecies and Genetic Diversity

The coyote (Canis latrans) is classified into 19 traditionally recognized subspecies, differentiated primarily by geographic range, body size, pelage coloration, and cranial features. These subspecies occupy diverse habitats from Alaska and Canada southward through the United States to Costa Rica and Panama, with examples including the plains coyote (C. l. latrans) in the Great Plains and Midwest, the mountain coyote (C. l. mearnsi) in the Rocky Mountains, the northern timber coyote (C. l. sayi) in boreal forests of Canada and Alaska, and the diminutive Salvador coyote (C. l. dickeyi) in Central America.^[23]^[24] The validity of some subspecies designations has been questioned due to observed introgression and continuous morphological clines rather than discrete boundaries, though regional adaptations persist.^[24] Genetic analyses reveal high intraspecific diversity in coyotes, characterized by elevated heterozygosity (0.599–0.872) and allelic richness (3.99–5.12) across populations, alongside low differentiation (F_ST values typically below 0.05), indicative of substantial gene flow facilitated by long-distance dispersal averaging tens to hundreds of kilometers annually.^[25]^[26] This diversity supports the species' adaptability during rapid expansions, such as the eastward colonization of North America post-1900, where genomic scans identify selection on genes related to metabolism, immunity, and behavior without evidence of severe bottlenecks.^[26] Urbanization can locally reduce diversity by favoring certain lineages, but overall population structure remains weak compared to less mobile canids.^[27]^[28] Morphometric and nuclear DNA studies correlate size gradients and allele frequencies with latitude and habitat type, reinforcing subspecies as ecotypes shaped by environmental pressures rather than isolated gene pools; for instance, larger-bodied northern forms exhibit variants linked to cold tolerance, while southern subspecies show traits for arid conditions.^[28] Despite high gene flow eroding sharp boundaries, conservation assessments treat the species as a whole due to its demographic resilience and lack of fragmented lineages.^[25]

Hybridization with Wolves and Dogs

Coyotes (Canis latrans) readily hybridize with gray wolves (C. lupus) and, to a lesser extent, domestic dogs (C. familiaris), producing fertile offspring capable of backcrossing and forming admixed populations.^[29] Hybridization with wolves has been particularly documented in eastern North America, where historical range expansions of coyotes following the extirpation of wolves in the 19th and early 20th centuries facilitated interbreeding.^[30] Genetic analyses indicate that eastern coyotes, often termed "coywolves," derive approximately 64% of their genome from coyotes, 13% from gray wolves, 13% from eastern wolves (C. lycaon), and the remainder from dogs, reflecting multiple admixture events over the past century.^[30]^[31] This admixture has resulted in larger body sizes and altered morphologies in eastern populations compared to western coyotes, enhancing their adaptability to forested habitats and prey like white-tailed deer.^[32] Evidence from whole-genome sequencing and SNP genotyping confirms ongoing gene flow, with nearly all North American wolf-like canids showing 10-20% coyote ancestry, though the extent varies clinally from higher in the east to minimal in the west.^[33] A 2011 study using DNA from scat and tissue samples traced coyote migration routes through the Great Lakes to Virginia, revealing wolf-coyote hybrids in the mid-Atlantic by the late 20th century, with hybrids comprising up to 100% of some local coyote populations.^[34] In Ontario, eastern wolves have hybridized extensively with both coyotes and gray wolves, creating hybrid swarms where pure forms are rare.^[35] Red wolves (C. rufus), once considered a distinct species, show genetic signatures of ancient coyote-gray wolf hybridization, with modern populations in the southeastern U.S. exhibiting ongoing coyote introgression that threatens genetic purity.^[36]^[37] Hybridization with domestic dogs occurs but is far less prevalent in the wild, primarily due to asynchrony in breeding cycles—coyotes typically breed in February, while dogs vary widely—and behavioral barriers.^[38] Genetic surveys detect low levels of dog ancestry in coyotes, averaging 5-10% in urban populations like those in New York City, often linked to historical admixture rather than recent crosses.^[39] Comprehensive admixture analyses of over 400 eastern coyotes found dog introgression in a minority of individuals, typically under 10%, with no evidence of widespread coydog swarms; most purported coydogs in the wild are likely misidentified pure coyotes or wolves.^[29]^[40] Captive or intentional breedings produce viable coydogs, but natural occurrences remain rare, with only sporadic maternal wolf or dog mtDNA in coyote samples from regions like Texas.^[29] These hybrids may exhibit traits like blonde fur in eastern coyotes, attributed to dog alleles, but do not significantly alter population dynamics.^[41] Overall, wolf hybridization drives evolutionary changes in coyote populations, while dog admixture remains marginal and localized.^[42]

Physical Characteristics

Morphology and Adaptations

The coyote (Canis latrans) exhibits a slender, agile body morphology suited to versatile locomotion across diverse terrains, featuring a narrow muzzle, erect pointed ears, and a bushy tail often held low with a black tip.^[1]^[43]^[44] Its fur is long and coarse, typically grizzled buff or grayish-brown on the upper parts with whitish underparts and reddish tones on the legs, providing camouflage in varied habitats.^[1]^[45] The skull is elongated with a gently sloping forehead and prominent canine teeth, while the dental formula is I 3/3, C 1/1, P 4/4, M 2/3, totaling 42 teeth adapted for an omnivorous diet including shearing meat and grinding vegetation.^[43] Slender legs and small feet support efficient running and pouncing on prey, with the overall build enabling bursts of speed up to 40 mph for short distances.^[24] Morphological adaptations include fur that thickens in winter for insulation against cold and varies in color for blending with surroundings, enhancing crypsis during hunting or evasion.^[46] Large, pointed ears facilitate acute hearing for detecting prey and thermoregulation via increased surface area for heat dissipation in arid environments, while a long snout and moist nose amplify olfactory detection of food sources over distances.^[47]^[2] These traits collectively support the coyote's opportunistic predatory and scavenging strategies in fluctuating ecosystems.^[48]

Size, Weight, and Sexual Dimorphism

Adult coyotes (Canis latrans) display size variation influenced by geographic range and subspecies, with northern and eastern populations averaging larger than southern ones; for instance, northeastern coyotes can reach maximum body masses of 23 kg, exceeding those in southeastern regions at 19.5 kg.^[49] Total length averages 120 cm, comprising a head-body length of approximately 80–95 cm and a tail of 39 cm.^[50] Shoulder height typically measures 51–61 cm.^[51] Weight ranges from 11–17 kg in Florida populations, though broader continental averages span 7–20 kg, with adults in Texas weighing 14–20 kg on average.^[52]^[50] Sexual dimorphism manifests primarily in body size, with males exceeding females in length and mass; in Texas samples, males average 16.75 kg compared to 13.62 kg for females, reflecting a pattern of greater male bulk across populations, though less pronounced than in gray wolves.^[43]^[1]^[53]

Behavior and Life History

Coyotes (Canis latrans) primarily organize into small family units consisting of a breeding pair and their offspring, with packs rarely exceeding six individuals in size.^[1] These units are characterized by social monogamy, where pairs form long-term bonds, often lasting multiple breeding seasons, and genetic analyses confirm high paternity certainty within litters, indicating low rates of extra-pair copulations.^[54] Both parents participate in territory defense, pup rearing, and provisioning, with regurgitated food provided to offspring; yearling siblings may serve as helpers, assisting in pup care and vigilance to enhance survival rates.^[55] Social flexibility allows solitary living or pair bonding outside breeding seasons, particularly in resource-scarce habitats, while larger, more stable packs form where food abundance supports cooperative hunting and defense.^[56] Packs maintain territorial boundaries through scent marking, vocalizations, and agonistic encounters, with breeding pairs dominating access to resources and mates; unrelated immigrants occasionally join, but genetic studies reveal most members are close kin, challenging earlier assumptions of purely familial composition.^[57] Dispersal typically occurs in autumn or winter, with males leaving between 6 and 9 months of age to reduce inbreeding and competition, while females often remain longer, inheriting territories or delaying dispersal until paired.^[1] This pattern promotes gene flow across populations, adapting to varying ecological pressures like human-altered landscapes.^[58]

Reproduction and Development

Coyotes (Canis latrans) typically reach sexual maturity at approximately 12 months of age and breed seasonally, with mating occurring primarily between January and March in northern populations, though timing can vary slightly by latitude and environmental conditions.^[59]^[2] They are monestrous, producing one litter per year, and form perennial pair-bonds where breeding is usually restricted to the dominant alpha male and female within a pack, with both sexes exhibiting mate-guarding behaviors to suppress subordinate reproduction.^[60] Gestation lasts 60 to 65 days, after which females give birth in a den, often an underground burrow, abandoned fox den, or rocky crevice.^[1]^[2] Litter sizes range from 1 to 19 pups but average 5 to 7, influenced by factors such as food availability, population density, and maternal condition; higher prey abundance correlates with larger litters in field studies.^[1]^[2]^[61] Newborn pups are altricial, born blind and deaf, weighing about 250 grams, and dependent on the female for nursing and warmth.^[1] Both parents participate in pup rearing, with the male provisioning food to the female and later the pups, while older siblings or subordinate pack members may assist in guarding and feeding, enhancing pup survival in pack structures.^[60] Pups open their eyes at 10 to 12 days, emerge from the den at 2 to 3 weeks, and begin consuming regurgitated solid food around 3 weeks of age.^[62] Weaning occurs between 5 and 7 weeks, after which pups accompany adults on foraging trips to learn hunting skills.^[62] Dispersal typically begins at 6 to 9 months of age, coinciding with the next breeding season, though some juveniles remain with the family group for up to 3 years, particularly in established packs; dispersal distances average 50 to 100 kilometers for males and shorter for females, driven by resource competition and inbreeding avoidance.^[62] Annual pup survival rates vary from 0.70 to 0.98, affected by predation, food scarcity, and human-related mortality.^[63]

Territoriality and Movement Patterns

Coyotes exhibit territorial behavior primarily through family groups consisting of a breeding pair and their offspring, which defend mutually exclusive areas against intruders to secure resources and mating opportunities.^[64] Resident coyotes maintain stable home ranges averaging 17.3 ± 4.6 km², with sizes influenced by habitat quality, prey availability, and population density; ranges are smaller in resource-rich environments like urban fringes compared to arid or low-prey areas where they may exceed 100 km² for transients.^[65] Territorial boundaries are reinforced via scent marking, including urine deposition (most common), feces placement in conspicuous locations, and ground scratching, with dominant individuals—particularly alpha males—concentrating marks on peripheries during breeding seasons to signal occupancy and deter rivals.^[66] ^[67] Movement patterns distinguish between residents, who exhibit localized foraging and patrolling within defended territories, and transients (often subadults or displaced individuals), who roam extensively over larger areas averaging 102.8 ± 32.9 km² while seeking vacancies.^[65] Daily travel distances for coyotes typically range from 5.8 km on average, increasing to 9.7 km at night due to heightened hunting activity, with maximum excursions up to 42 km recorded in certain habitats; these patterns shift seasonally, contracting during pup-rearing (January–April) when adults focus on den proximity and expanding post-dispersal (summer–fall).^[68] ^[69] Juveniles disperse primarily in fall, covering straight-line distances of 7–19 km or more to establish new territories, driven by intraspecific competition and resource pressures rather than random wandering.^[70] In urban settings, movements adapt to human-modified landscapes, with coyotes exploiting linear features like roads for efficient traversal while avoiding high-traffic zones during peak human activity.^[71] Overall, these behaviors reflect opportunistic adaptations to varying ecological pressures, prioritizing energy efficiency in foraging against the costs of territorial defense.^[72]

Diet, Foraging, and Predatory Strategies

Coyotes (Canis latrans) exhibit an opportunistic, omnivorous diet dominated by animal matter, with small mammals such as rodents (e.g., voles, mice) and lagomorphs (e.g., rabbits, hares) forming the core, often exceeding 60% of consumed biomass in rural and natural settings.^[73]^[74] Birds, reptiles, insects, amphibians, and larger prey like deer fawns or ungulates supplement this, alongside plant materials (fruits, berries, grasses) comprising up to 20-30% in some seasons, and carrion serving as a reliable fallback.^[75]^[4] Diet macronutrient profiles typically derive approximately 48% of metabolizable energy from protein and 38% from fat, underscoring a carnivore-leaning feeding ecology despite omnivory.^[75] Regional and seasonal variations reflect prey availability and habitat: in temperate forests, diets skew more carnivorous with higher mammal intake, while spring diversity increases due to emergent insects and young vertebrates; human-dominated landscapes introduce garbage, pet food, and rodents, broadening options but not displacing wild prey.^[73]^[76] In one southeastern U.S. longleaf pine study, monthly diet diversity peaked in May with multiple items per scat, including rodents (prevalent year-round) and seasonal fruits like persimmons (up to 15% occurrence).^[77] Another analysis across North America found deer at 26% weighted occurrence, small mammals at 18%, and fruits/vegetation at 26% combined, with pulses like mast crops driving individual and temporal shifts.^[78] Foraging emphasizes efficiency, with coyotes scavenging ungulate carcasses in winter (influenced by snow depth and biomass availability) and actively hunting small game via auditory and visual cues in open habitats.^[79] Predatory strategies prioritize high-return prey under optimal foraging principles: abundant, low-risk items like jackrabbits are selected when profitable, with switches to alternatives (e.g., voles) during scarcity to minimize energy costs and risk.^[74]^[80] Hunting typically involves solitary or paired stalking, pouncing on rodents from cover, or short cursorial chases for rabbits and fawns, with family units rarely cooperating on larger quarry; avoidance of low-profit or defended prey (e.g., healthy adult ungulates) limits specialization.^[81]^[68] In urban edges, anthropogenic attractants alter patterns but do not override innate prey preferences for vulnerable, accessible targets.^[82]

Communication Methods

Coyotes employ vocal, olfactory, visual, and tactile signals to transmit information on identity, territory, reproductive status, dominance, and immediate intentions, adapting these methods to varying distances and social contexts.^[1] Vocalizations form the most conspicuous aspect of coyote communication, with a documented repertoire of at least 11 distinct types, including howls, yips, barks, growls, whines, and huffs, each linked to behavioral contexts such as alarm, threat, affiliation, or distress. Howls, characterized by their low frequency and long duration, function primarily for long-distance signaling, enabling territory advertisement, pack assembly, and individual recognition over several kilometers, as evidenced by acoustic analyses showing unique howl patterns that convey identity and location. Barks, by contrast, serve short-range alarm or aggressive roles, optimized for rapid transmission of threat information rather than spatial details, with playback experiments demonstrating differential responses from recipients based on bark urgency. Group choruses of yips and howls often amplify perceived pack size, deterring intruders.^[83]^[84]^[85] Olfactory signals rely on scent marking via urine, feces, and anal gland secretions, deposited at prominent sites to advertise presence, sex, and dominance while delineating territories. Raised-leg urination by adults, particularly males, occurs at rates influenced by social role—residents mark more frequently (up to 10 times per hour during patrols) than transients to reinforce pair-held territories, as observed in a 1974–1976 study of 20 radio-collared coyotes in Jasper National Park, Alberta, where marking correlated with core area defense and intruder deterrence. Squat urination and defecation provide similar chemical cues, persisting for days and allowing asynchronous communication; females increase marking during estrus to signal receptivity. These marks integrate spatial orientation without forming impassable barriers, per field observations in Yellowstone National Park.^[86]^[66] Visual cues encompass body postures, facial expressions, and movements, conveying subtle social dynamics at close range. Dominant individuals display erect ears, raised tail (often with rapid wagging), and direct gaze, while subordinates avert eyes, lower posture, or expose the abdomen; piloerection along the back signals arousal or threat. Play signals, such as the bow (front lowered, rear elevated with wagging tail), punctuate juvenile and adult interactions to denote non-serious intent, reducing escalation risks in ethological studies of captive and wild groups. Tail position alone differentiates greetings (high arc) from avoidance (tucked), with ethograms noting these as innate responses modifiable by experience.^[87]^[88] Tactile interactions, though less documented, facilitate bonding in family units through allogrooming, nuzzling, and body contact during greetings or resting, reinforcing hierarchies and reducing tension post-conflict, as inferred from general canid patterns and observational data on pair stability.^[1]

Ecology and Distribution

Habitat Utilization and Adaptability

Coyotes (Canis latrans) primarily utilize open habitats such as grasslands, prairies, and deserts across their native range in western and central North America, where they exploit edge environments with abundant prey and cover for denning.^[89] These areas provide suitable conditions for hunting small mammals and scavenging, with coyotes often selecting patches based on food availability, favoring agricultural fields and pastures over dense forests during periods of high rodent abundance.^[90] In such ecosystems, they demonstrate opportunistic den site selection, using self-dug burrows in earthen banks, rock crevices, or thickets, adapting to terrain variations without strict fidelity to specific microhabitats.^[91] The species' adaptability stems from behavioral flexibility and physiological traits enabling survival in diverse conditions, including arid deserts with minimal water intake derived from prey and forests where they shift to ambush tactics amid understory cover.^[68] Post-European settlement, habitat fragmentation from agriculture and deforestation facilitated eastward expansion into eastern deciduous forests and urbanizing landscapes, filling niches vacated by larger predators like wolves.^[92] Studies indicate coyotes select human-modified habitats like farmlands for foraging while avoiding heavily wooded areas unless seasonally beneficial, with selection patterns varying by residency status—residents prioritizing stable food sources in open lands, transients exploring edges.^[64] In urban environments, coyotes exhibit pronounced adaptability, maintaining viable populations through smaller home ranges (often 5-10 km²) and high survival rates by exploiting green spaces, parks, and suburbs for denning and hunting.^[8] They adjust activity to nocturnal peaks avoiding human presence, tolerate proximity to roads and buildings, and demonstrate bolder exploratory behaviors compared to rural conspecifics, with genetic markers suggesting ongoing evolutionary responses to urban pressures like traffic and altered prey bases.^[93] ^[94] Occurrence increases with urban intensity in regions like southern California, where they navigate anthropogenic barriers and utilize anthropogenic food subsidies without dependency, underscoring causal links between landscape alteration and proliferation.^[95] This plasticity, rooted in generalist foraging and flexible sociality, positions coyotes as resilient to habitat perturbations, including recreation-impacted areas where they temporally partition activity to minimize conflict.^[96]

Geographic Range and Expansion Trends

The coyote (Canis latrans) originally inhabited the western and central regions of North America, extending from southeastern Alaska and western Canada through the central prairies and southwestern deserts of the United States into Mexico and parts of Central America as far south as Panama.^[97]^[5] This pre-colonial distribution was limited by competition and predation from larger carnivores such as gray wolves (Canis lupus) and cougars (Puma concolor), which restricted coyotes primarily to open habitats like prairies, deserts, and grasslands.^[98] Since approximately 1900, coyotes have undergone a rapid range expansion, colonizing much of the eastern United States, northern Canada, and isolated southern locales, increasing their overall North American distribution by about 40% between the 1950s and the early 21st century—a rate twice that of other continental carnivores.^[99]^[100] This eastward push into deciduous forests and the Northeast began in the early 20th century, with initial sightings in states like New York and Massachusetts by the 1930s–1940s, and established populations by the 1970s following the extirpation of wolves and habitat fragmentation from agriculture and urbanization that created favorable edge habitats.^[31]^[101] In Canada, coyotes advanced northward into taiga forests, while in the U.S., they now occupy all 49 continental states, including urban centers and even offshore islands like those in the Florida Keys.^[101]^[102] Factors driving this expansion include the anthropogenic reduction of apex predators, which diminished competitive exclusion, and coyote adaptability to human-modified landscapes providing abundant prey and reduced hunting pressure in some regions.^[103]^[98] Populations continue to grow in density and spread into previously unoccupied areas, such as southern Central America, with no signs of stabilization as of the 2010s.^[104]^[100] In Mexico, coyotes maintain stable core populations but show southward trends correlating with habitat alterations.^[105]

Population Dynamics and Density Factors

Coyote populations in North America exhibit high resilience, with overall numbers remaining stable or increasing despite extensive harvesting and habitat changes. Since the early 20th century, coyotes have expanded their range across the continent, occupying habitats from deserts to urban areas, with a 40% increase in suitable habitat since the 1950s.^[100] ^[102] This expansion correlates with declines in larger competitors like wolves and cougars in eastern regions, enabling coyotes to fill vacated niches.^[99] Nationwide surveys indicate that human hunting often fails to reduce local abundances and may instead elevate them through compensatory reproduction and immigration, as harvested territories attract dispersers and prompt surviving pairs to produce larger litters.^[106] ^[107] Population densities vary widely by region and habitat, typically ranging from 0.2 to 1 coyote per square kilometer in rural areas, but reaching higher levels in resource-rich urban or agricultural zones. In Kansas, estimates place statewide numbers between 150,000 and 300,000 individuals, reflecting seasonal fluctuations tied to pup production.^[108] In Virginia's Bath County, densities approximate 0.22 coyotes per square mile, influenced by terrain and prey availability.^[109] Food abundance fundamentally limits carrying capacity, with social behaviors like territorial defense regulating local numbers; packs maintain densities by excluding outsiders, while food scarcity triggers dispersal.^[110] Key density factors include competition from apex predators, which suppresses coyote numbers where present—such as reduced abundances in areas with reintroduced red wolves—and human land use patterns that provide supplemental resources like garbage and rodents, boosting urban densities.^[111] In densely populated human areas, coyote survival improves due to shelter and foraging opportunities, though this increases spatiotemporal overlap with people.^[112] Management interventions like fertility control can lower densities in targeted zones, but broad-scale population control remains challenging owing to high intrinsic growth rates and mobility.^[111] Climate and precipitation also modulate densities indirectly via prey dynamics, with wetter regions supporting higher abundances.^[95]

Predators, Competitors, and Mortality Sources

Adult coyotes experience low predation rates from larger carnivores, primarily gray wolves (Canis lupus), cougars (Puma concolor), American black bears (Ursus americanus), and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), with incidents concentrated in overlapping habitats where these apex predators exert top-down pressure.^[113] ^[114] In regions with wolves, coyote densities decline due to lethal encounters and avoidance behaviors, as wolves aggressively exclude them from territories and prey bases.^[115] Cougars kill coyotes opportunistically, often to defend kills or caches; one study in Washington estimated cougars caused 23% (95% CI: 8-55%) of coyote deaths annually.^[114] Bears exert stronger suppressive effects in forested areas, preying on coyotes during scavenging or direct attacks, though such predation remains sporadic.^[116] Juvenile coyotes face higher vulnerability, with golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), great horned owls (Bubo virginianus), and conspecifics targeting pups and dispersers; feral dogs and mountain lions also contribute to pup mortality.^[113] ^[89] Intraspecific killing occurs under resource scarcity, such as extreme weather, leading to cannibalism of carcasses.^[89] Coyotes compete asymmetrically with other carnivores for food and space, dominating smaller mesopredators like red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), gray foxes (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), bobcats (Lynx rufus), raccoons (Procyon lotor), and opossums (Didelphis virginiana) through intraguild predation and interference, often reducing their abundances via exclusion or direct killing.^[117] ^[118] Larger competitors, including wolves and cougars, limit coyote access to resources; wolves, in particular, suppress coyote populations in sympatric areas by outcompeting them for large prey and territories.^[115] Dietary overlap with bobcats and foxes varies by prey availability, but coyotes' generalist foraging and pack dynamics confer advantages over specialists.^[117] Human-induced factors dominate coyote mortality, with legal harvest, illegal killing, and vehicle collisions accounting for the majority of deaths; in urban settings, vehicles cause 40-70% of fatalities due to extensive ranging and road exposure.^[56] In a Wisconsin study of radio-collared coyotes, harvest comprised 83.8% of known mortalities, followed by vehicle strikes at 13.5%.^[119] Natural mortality includes disease (e.g., rabies, distemper, parvovirus), parasites (e.g., ticks, fleas, tapeworms), starvation, and predation, which are secondary but elevate risks for juveniles, where 50-70% fail to reach adulthood amid dispersal hazards.^[120] ^[121] ^[89] Overall annual survival averages 0.72 in monitored populations, with first-year losses highest from combined stressors.^[121] Despite these pressures, coyote populations demonstrate resilience through high reproductive rates and adaptive behaviors.^[116]

Pathogens, Parasites, and Health Threats

Coyotes (Canis latrans) are susceptible to several viral pathogens, including rabies virus, canine distemper virus (CDV), and canine parvovirus (CPV), which can cause significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in unvaccinated or stressed populations.^[89] Rabies incidence in coyotes remains low across the United States, with coyote cases comprising a small fraction of the approximately 3,500–4,000 annual wildlife rabies reports; for instance, in 2022, total animal rabies cases numbered 3,579, predominantly in raccoons, skunks, bats, and foxes rather than coyotes.^[122] Coyote rabies often results from spillover of raccoon rabies virus variant, as evidenced by a 2022 case in West Virginia where genetic analysis confirmed raccoon strain infection in a coyote.^[123] The canine-dog rabies variant, historically prevalent in southern Texas coyotes (e.g., 70 of 75 U.S. coyote cases in 1992), has been largely eliminated since 2007 through oral vaccination programs.^[124] ^[125] CDV poses an ongoing threat, with reports of increased prevalence in coyote populations in regions like Maricopa County, Arizona, as of August 2025, manifesting in symptoms such as disorientation, seizures, nasal discharge, and loss of fear toward humans.^[126] This paramyxovirus targets respiratory, gastrointestinal, and neurological systems, contributing to population declines in susceptible wildlife and posing spillover risks to domestic dogs, though it does not infect humans.^[127] CPV, a DNA virus, similarly affects coyotes, leading to severe enteritis and immunosuppression, often exacerbated by high-density urban environments facilitating transmission from domestic sources.^[128] Parasitic infections are widespread among coyotes, serving as indicators of environmental pathogen loads due to their broad diet and range. Sarcoptic mange, caused by the mite Sarcoptes scabiei, is one of the most prevalent ectoparasitic conditions, particularly in northeastern states like Connecticut, where it induces intense pruritus, alopecia, hyperkeratosis, and secondary bacterial infections, potentially leading to emaciation and death in severe cases.^[129] Affected coyotes exhibit reduced aggression and foraging efficiency but rarely pose heightened risks to humans or pets.^[130] Endoparasites include nematodes such as Ancylostoma caninum (hookworm, infecting up to one-third of southeastern U.S. coyotes), Dirofilaria immitis (heartworm), Trichuris vulpis (whipworm), and Toxascaris leonina, alongside cestodes like Taenia pisiformis and potentially zoonotic Echinococcus multilocularis, which uses coyotes as definitive hosts in areas like southern Ontario.^[131] ^[132] ^[133] Other ectoparasites encompass ticks (Ixodes spp.), fleas (Ctenocephalides spp.), and lice, with surveys in Georgia yielding 128 ticks, 10 fleas, and 257 lice from necropsied coyotes.^[134] High parasite burdens, especially in urban coyotes, correlate with increased zoonotic transmission potential, including hookworms and tapeworms capable of infecting humans and livestock.^[135] Studies in Tennessee and Utah confirm coyotes as sentinels for these agents, with prevalence varying by habitat but consistently documenting multiple helminth species per individual.^[136] ^[137]

Ecological Role and Impacts

Trophic Position and Ecosystem Services

Coyotes (Canis latrans) function primarily as mesopredators in North American ecosystems, occupying an intermediate trophic level that positions them below apex predators like gray wolves (Canis lupus) or cougars (Puma concolor) but above smaller carnivores and herbivores.^[138] This role involves opportunistic predation on a diverse array of prey, including rodents, lagomorphs, birds, and reptiles, supplemented by omnivorous consumption of fruits, insects, and carrion, which allows dietary flexibility across trophic levels typically ranging from secondary consumer (trophic level ~3) to tertiary in predator-scarce environments.^[139] In habitats where larger carnivores are absent or reduced—such as many fragmented landscapes or urban interfaces—coyotes exhibit behaviors akin to apex predators, suppressing intraguild competitors like red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and raccoons (Procyon lotor) through direct predation or interference competition.^[139] A key ecosystem service provided by coyotes is the regulation of small mammal populations, particularly rodents such as mice and voles, which constitute a significant portion of their diet and can otherwise proliferate to damage vegetation, crops, and infrastructure.^[4] Studies indicate that coyotes preferentially target these species, contributing to natural pest control that reduces reliance on chemical rodenticides and mitigates rodent-borne diseases like hantavirus or leptospirosis.^[140] However, empirical assessments of coyote removal programs reveal context-dependent outcomes: short-term interventions (e.g., 5-6 months in Texas rangelands) often show no significant increase in rodent or lagomorph densities, attributable to prey immigration, alternative predators, or compensatory reproduction, though longer-term suppression may allow prey buildup in isolated systems.^[141] Coyotes also deliver sanitation services through scavenging, consuming carrion and organic waste that would otherwise decompose and foster bacterial or parasitic proliferation, thereby recycling nutrients back into soils and limiting disease vectors in both rural and urban settings.^[142] This behavior enhances ecosystem hygiene, particularly in anthropogenic landscapes where human activity generates food subsidies alongside carrion from roadkill or livestock mortality.^[143] By curbing smaller mesopredator abundances—such as skunks or opossums—coyotes indirectly support biodiversity in prey guilds like ground-nesting birds, whose eggs and fledglings face heavy predation from these competitors, though the net biodiversity impact varies with local predator assemblages and habitat fragmentation.^[142] These services underscore coyotes' adaptive contributions to trophic stability, even as their generalist nature invites debates over net ecological costs in human-dominated regions.

Effects on Prey Populations and Biodiversity

Coyotes exert direct predatory pressure on a variety of prey species, primarily small mammals such as rodents, rabbits, and voles, which constitute the bulk of their diet in many regions.^[89] This predation can limit population growth in these species, particularly in areas with high coyote densities, though empirical studies indicate that prey populations often rebound due to coyotes' inability to fully suppress highly fecund small mammals.^[141] For larger prey like white-tailed deer fawns, coyote predation contributes to neonatal mortality rates of up to 20-50% in some eastern U.S. populations following coyote range expansion, potentially slowing deer population growth where alternative predators are absent.^[144] However, such impacts are context-dependent, with coyote effects on deer diminishing in urbanized or highly productive habitats where human subsidies bolster prey numbers.^[145] Indirectly, coyotes influence prey populations and biodiversity by suppressing smaller mesopredators, including red foxes, domestic cats, raccoons, and opossums, through intraguild predation and behavioral avoidance.^[138] This suppression reduces predation on ground-nesting birds, amphibians, and small mammals that would otherwise face intensified pressure from unchecked mesopredators, thereby enhancing overall species diversity in coyote-occupied ecosystems.^[146] For instance, coastal studies have documented lower detection rates of foxes and cats in areas with established coyote populations, correlating with increased bird abundance.^[147] Coyote removal efforts, such as those aimed at livestock protection, often fail to boost targeted prey populations long-term and instead trigger compensatory increases in smaller predators, leading to decreased small mammal diversity and heightened ecosystem instability.^[148]^[141] In biodiversity terms, coyotes function as both regulators and disruptors: their role as emergent apex or mesopredators in landscapes depleted of larger carnivores like wolves or pumas can stabilize food webs by curbing mesopredator outbreaks, averting "mesopredator release" cascades that erode native prey communities.^[149] Yet, in novel or invaded habitats—such as coastal dunes or insular ecosystems—their colonization has been linked to declines in endemic prey and subordinate predators, underscoring potential negative biodiversity costs where historical predator guilds are incomplete.^[138] Experimental coyote control in prairie systems has shown transient rises in lagomorphs but no sustained biodiversity gains, as coyote populations rapidly recover via elevated reproduction and immigration, maintaining ecological pressure.^[150] Overall, while direct prey suppression is evident, coyotes' net biodiversity impact leans positive in mainland terrestrial systems through mesopredator control, though data gaps persist for long-term, landscape-scale assessments.^[151]

Debates on Keystone Status and Invasiveness

Coyotes have been characterized by some ecologists as keystone predators due to their role in regulating mesopredator populations and herbivore numbers, which can prevent trophic cascades such as overabundant rodents damaging vegetation or foxes preying excessively on ground-nesting birds. In ecosystems lacking larger carnivores, coyotes suppress species like red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and raccoons (Procyon lotor), thereby benefiting avian diversity and small mammal communities.^[152]^[153] Studies indicate this dynamic maintains ecosystem balance, with coyotes exerting a disproportionate influence relative to their biomass, akin to classic keystone examples like sea otters.^[154] Critics of the keystone designation argue that coyotes more often function as mesopredators, particularly in areas with intact apex predator guilds including gray wolves (Canis lupus) or mountain lions (Puma concolor), where they experience suppression and contribute less to top-down control. A 2023 analysis in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park found coyotes partially assuming apex functions through predation on fawns and smaller carnivores but displaying mesopredator traits like intraguild killing without fully stabilizing the community.^[139] This partial role underscores that coyote impacts vary by context, with human-induced predator declines amplifying their effects rather than inherent keystone status.^[152] The expansion of coyotes into eastern North America has fueled discussions on invasiveness, with their populations surging from isolated sightings in the 1930s to widespread establishment by the 1970s, facilitated by habitat fragmentation, wolf persecution, and agricultural landscapes. Some stakeholders, including hunters and livestock interests, contend that eastern coyotes—often larger hybrids with wolf ancestry—disrupt native ecosystems by intensifying predation on white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) fawns and competing with or hybridizing with red wolves (Canis rufus), potentially warranting invasive-like management.^[31]^[155] However, most wildlife agencies reject the invasive label, emphasizing coyotes' native continental origins and natural range shift without direct human introduction, distinguishing them from non-native species like feral swine. In Vermont, for instance, they are deemed "naturalized," integrating into food webs by controlling voles and rabbits while facing predation from bears and bobcats.^[156]^[157] Empirical data show no widespread ecological collapse attributable to their spread; instead, they occupy niches vacated by extirpated wolves, with densities stabilizing via density-dependent factors like disease and territoriality.^[158] Debates persist in policy contexts, such as year-round hunting extensions in states like Michigan to mitigate perceived overabundance, but evidence favors viewing them as adaptive natives rather than invasives requiring eradication.^[159]

Interactions with Humans

Historical Exploitation and Persecution

Prior to widespread European settlement, Native American tribes interacted with coyotes primarily through folklore and occasional hunting for food or pelts, without systematic persecution.^[160] With the expansion of ranching and farming in the mid-19th century, settlers increasingly targeted coyotes as threats to livestock, initiating bounties in western states. For instance, Kansas established a $1 bounty per coyote scalp in 1877, raising it to $3 by 1885 before reducing it to $1 in 1907 and discontinuing it by the 1960s; Montana's program paid claims for approximately 30,000 coyotes annually from 1883 to 1928, consuming two-thirds of the state's predator control budget.^[161] These state-level incentives, coupled with private killings by ranchers and trappers, resulted in thousands of coyotes being eliminated yearly to protect sheep and cattle herds.^[162] Federal involvement escalated in 1915 when the U.S. government appropriated $125,000 to the USDA's Bureau of Biological Survey for predator eradication on public lands, focusing on coyotes through strychnine poisoning campaigns.^[162] By the mid-1920s, the program was killing around 35,000 coyotes per year, shifting emphasis to coyotes after larger predators like wolves were largely depleted.^[161] The initiative, later known as Animal Damage Control and evolving into USDA Wildlife Services, pursued aggressive extermination goals; in 1934, the USDA explicitly aimed for the total elimination of coyotes using a combination of methods.^[162] From 1916 to 1999, federal efforts alone accounted for nearly 6 million coyote deaths.^[162] Control methods included strychnine-laced baits deployed since the 1850s, with a federal poison production facility established in Denver by the early 20th century, alongside leg-hold traps, snares, den hunting, and shooting.^[161] Aerial hunting emerged in the 1920s using fixed-wing aircraft and later helicopters for efficiency in open ranges.^[162] Exploitation for fur occurred concurrently, though coyote pelts held limited commercial value until demand grew in the mid-20th century; trappers often combined pelt harvesting with bounty claims.^[163] Bans on poisons like strychnine and Compound 1080 in 1972 prompted shifts to mechanical and aerial techniques, but persecution persisted without federal protections for coyotes, classified as unprotected varmints under state laws.^[163] Despite these intensive measures, coyote populations expanded eastward and numerically, as bounty and control programs inadvertently boosted reproduction rates by disrupting social structures and removing competitive wolves, demonstrating the limitations of such persecution in suppressing adaptable species.^[161]^[162] By the late 20th century, annual federal kills stabilized around 70,000, with private and state efforts adding tens of thousands more, underscoring ongoing livestock protection priorities over conservation.^[161]

Predation on Livestock, Pets, and Game

Coyotes (Canis latrans) are responsible for substantial predation on livestock in the United States, particularly sheep, lambs, goats, and calves, with annual losses exceeding 300,000 head and damages surpassing $40 million.^[164]^[165] In 2015, coyotes accounted for 40.5% of cattle and calf deaths attributed to predators nationwide, followed by unknown predators at 15.8%.^[166] Sheep and lambs experience the highest vulnerability, with coyotes causing 72% of predator-related losses in states like Idaho in 2023, representing 22% of total sheep mortality.^[167] Predation peaks from late spring through September, coinciding with coyote reproduction and the vulnerability of young livestock.^[89] Urban and suburban coyote populations increasingly target pets, especially cats and small dogs, as alternative prey amid habitat overlap. In Los Angeles, scat analysis revealed cats comprising approximately 20% of coyote diets, correlating with reports of 135 cat deaths from coyote attacks in 2018 via community tracking applications.^[168] A retrospective study of 154 dog attacks found 86% involved animals under 10 kg, with a 15.6% overall mortality rate, indicating size-based selectivity.^[169] Incidents have risen in metropolitan areas; for instance, Chicago saw pet attacks increase from 0–2 annually in earlier years to 6 or more by the 2010s, driven by coyote habituation to human food sources.^[170] On game species, coyotes exert significant pressure on neonatal ungulates, notably white-tailed deer fawns, potentially limiting population recruitment. Research demonstrates that coyote removal elevates fawn survival rates, with one study reporting 50% survival to 12 weeks on treated sites versus 25% on controls.^[171] In Virginia, predation accounted for 73% of monitored fawn mortality, with 36 of 44 nonsurviving fawns confirmed killed by coyotes.^[172] This predation is most acute during spring fawning seasons, where coyotes target bedded neonates, contributing to broader declines in deer densities in coyote-abundant regions.^[173]^[174]

Urban Conflicts and Human Attacks

Coyotes (Canis latrans) have increasingly colonized urban and suburban environments across North America, exploiting anthropogenic food sources such as unsecured garbage, pet food, and rodents proliferating in developed areas, which has precipitated conflicts primarily involving predation on domestic animals rather than direct threats to humans. In metropolitan Chicago, reported coyote attacks on pets escalated from 0-2 incidents annually in the early 1990s to 6-14 per year by 2004, correlating with population growth and reduced wariness toward human activity. Similar patterns emerged in Los Angeles, where coyote incursions into residential zones frequently targeted cats and small dogs, with studies indicating that up to 25% of free-roaming cats in fragmented urban habitats succumbed to coyote predation. These incidents often occur during dawn and dusk, when coyotes are most active, and are exacerbated by owners allowing pets unsupervised outdoor access, enabling opportunistic ambushes in yards or parks. Rabies accounts for fewer than 8% of such attacks, with most attributed to healthy coyotes viewing unattended pets as prey akin to natural quarry.^[175]^[176]^[177] Urban conflicts extend beyond pets to include coyotes scavenging unsecured waste, which habituates them to human presence and diminishes flight responses, prompting daytime sightings and approaches toward people walking dogs or in green spaces. In a 2015-2018 citizen science dataset from Madison, Wisconsin, 398 human-coyote encounters were documented, the majority involving non-aggressive observations but with subsets featuring pursuits of leashed dogs or bold staring behaviors indicative of conditioning to human subsidies. Over 80% of large and medium-sized U.S. cities report such conflicts, often concentrated at urban-natural interfaces where green corridors facilitate coyote movement into neighborhoods. These interactions rarely escalate to physical contact with humans but generate public alarm, as evidenced by spikes in hotline calls following viral media reports of pet losses, though empirical data underscore that conflicts stem from ecological mismatches—coyotes filling vacant predator niches in cities devoid of larger carnivores—rather than inherent aggression.^[178]^[179] Direct attacks on humans remain exceedingly rare, with 142 verified incidents across the United States and Canada yielding 159 victims from the 1970s through the mid-2010s, predominantly in suburban or exurban settings rather than dense urban cores, and often involving children under 10 years old encountered alone. In nearly one-third of cases where data was available, attacks occurred proximate to sites of intentional or inadvertent coyote feeding, fostering dependency and reduced fear of people. Fatalities are exceptional, comprising fewer than 0.1% of encounters, typically linked to rabies or extreme habituation; for instance, isolated events in California during the 1980s and 2000s involved alpha-female coyotes defending pups after chronic provisioning by residents. Broader analyses reveal no upward trajectory in per capita human attack rates despite urban coyote proliferation, attributing rarity to coyotes' baseline aversion to adult humans, whose size and posture signal non-prey status under natural selection pressures. Management responses emphasize hazing—yelling, throwing objects, or using deterrents—to reinforce wariness, proving effective in averting escalation without lethal measures.^[175]^[180]^[181]

Management Strategies and Control Methods

Management of coyote populations primarily targets conflicts with livestock depredation, pet predation, and urban intrusions, employing an integrated approach that combines lethal and non-lethal techniques. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS) Wildlife Services program advocates for site-specific strategies, including habitat alterations, exclusion barriers, and targeted removals, rather than broad population reduction, as coyotes exhibit high adaptability and reproductive resilience.^[182] ^[183] Lethal control methods include foothold trapping, snares, shooting (ground or aerial), and occasionally toxicants like M-44 devices ejecting sodium cyanide, though the latter face restrictions due to non-target risks and are under EPA review. Trapping and shooting focus on problem individuals near conflict sites, with USDA APHIS reporting annual removals of over 100,000 coyotes in livestock protection efforts as of fiscal year 2022. However, scientific studies indicate limited long-term efficacy for indiscriminate culling; coyote populations often rebound or increase due to compensatory mechanisms, such as larger litter sizes (up to 7-12 pups in low-density areas) and immigration from adjacent territories, as observed in Texas and South Dakota experiments where removal efforts correlated with higher pup survival rates. A 2024 University of New Hampshire study across multiple U.S. sites found that intensive removals temporarily lower numbers but lead to younger, more reproductive age structures, sustaining or elevating densities. Similarly, 2025 camera trap data from Utah revealed coyote abundances 20-50% higher in heavily hunted areas compared to unhunted ones, attributed to disrupted social structures prompting earlier breeding.^[89] ^[184] ^[185] Non-lethal strategies emphasize prevention and deterrence, proving more effective for sustained conflict reduction without ecological disruptions. Livestock guardian dogs (e.g., Great Pyrenees or Anatolian shepherds) reduce sheep losses by 50-80% in monitored trials by patrolling and harassing intruders, outperforming donkeys or llamas in efficacy. Electric fencing, often combined with fladry (flagged poly ropes), deters coyotes for up to 6-12 months by exploiting their aversion to novel stimuli, with Kansas State University field tests showing near-zero breaches when properly maintained. Hazing techniques—throwing projectiles, using noise makers, or aversive conditioning—habituate urban coyotes to avoid humans, as implemented in programs by state agencies like California's Department of Fish and Wildlife, yielding 70-90% reduced bold behaviors in habituated individuals. Habitat management, such as removing carrion attractants and altering calving/lambing schedules to daylight hours, further minimizes vulnerability, with USDA data indicating 40-60% depredation drops in integrated applications.^[186] ^[187] ^[188] Regulatory frameworks vary by state, with coyotes classified as furbearers, unprotected, or game animals lacking federal oversight under the Lacey Act. As of 2025, year-round hunting without bag limits prevails in most states (e.g., Missouri allows continuous take except daylight restrictions November-March; Oklahoma permits statewide except artificial light bans at night), enabling landowner control for depredation via permits like North Carolina's free year-round certificates. Night hunting with lights or dogs is authorized in over 30 states, including Ohio and Pennsylvania, to target nocturnal activity, though cable restraints require certification in places like Pennsylvania's December-February season. These permissive regimes reflect coyotes' non-game status and resilience, prioritizing localized control over quotas, but critics note they incentivize recreational harvest without addressing root conflict drivers.^[189] ^[190] ^[191]

Hunting, Trapping, and Regulatory Frameworks

In the United States, coyote management falls under state jurisdiction, with coyotes typically classified as furbearers, non-game species, or unprotected wildlife, allowing for year-round hunting and trapping in most states without bag limits.^[192]^[193] No overarching federal hunting season or quota exists, though the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services conducts lethal control operations, killing approximately 80,000 coyotes annually through methods including aerial gunning and ground-based removal to mitigate livestock depredation.^[194] State regulations vary, but common allowances include use of rifles, shotguns, bows, and in many cases, artificial lights or night-vision devices for nighttime pursuit, reflecting coyotes' status as opportunistic predators rather than regulated game.^[195]^[196] Hunting methods emphasize calling and stalking, with hunters often using electronic or mouth calls mimicking prey distress to attract coyotes within rifle range, typically employing calibers like .223 Remington for precision shots.^[192] In states such as Kansas and Oklahoma, no closed season applies, permitting takes 24 hours a day except for restrictions on artificial light use at night in some areas.^[197]^[198] Licenses requirements differ; for instance, Colorado exempts coyote hunting from furbearer permits, while North Carolina mandates depredation permits for private lands in certain counties, restricting takes to daylight hours with legal weapons.^[199]^[190] Public lands may impose seasonal limits, as in Virginia where hunting is confined to September 1 through March 10 on national forests, plus turkey season extensions.^[200] Trapping regulations prioritize foothold, body-grip, and cable-restraint devices, with states mandating daily inspections to minimize suffering, such as Virginia's requirement to check traps once per day and dispatch or release captures immediately.^[201] New Mexico requires trapper education courses since April 1, 2020, for license holders targeting coyotes as nongame species with no bag limits.^[202] Snaring and anchoring specifications apply in western states, often prohibiting unanchored sets to prevent escapes, while Mississippi limits trapping outside furbearer seasons except for coyotes and select species.^[203]^[204] Harvest reporting is inconsistent, but state data indicate tens of thousands taken annually by trappers, contributing to total U.S. removals exceeding 500,000 coyotes yearly when including recreational and control efforts.^[4] Regulatory frameworks emphasize depredation control over population suppression, with programs like Missouri's unlimited daily take during open seasons and special method allowances outside firearm deer periods.^[189] Bounties persist in limited areas, such as recent increases of 1,000–2,000 harvests tied to incentive programs, though efficacy debates highlight coyotes' resilience via larger litters in low-density areas post-removal.^[205] In Canada, similar provincial autonomy applies, with year-round seasons in much of the country, aligning with U.S. patterns of minimal restrictions due to coyotes' adaptability and lack of endangered status.^[192]

Coexistence Approaches and Policy Debates

Coexistence strategies emphasize non-lethal methods to reduce human-coyote conflicts, focusing on modifying human behavior and environments to minimize attractants and reinforce coyotes' natural wariness of people. Public education campaigns, such as those recommended by urban wildlife researchers, aim to dispel myths about coyotes as inherently aggressive while promoting actions like securing garbage, pet food, and compost to eliminate food sources that draw coyotes into residential areas.^[206] ^[207] Hazing techniques, involving noisemakers, water sprays, or thrown objects to startle coyotes without harm, have been advocated to condition avoidance behaviors, with studies indicating potential effectiveness in urban settings when applied consistently by residents.^[208] Cities like Chicago have implemented coexistence plans that include these measures alongside habitat management, such as maintaining open spaces with natural cover while discouraging denning through vegetation trimming, reporting a preference for coyotes to utilize parks over dense neighborhoods when attractants are controlled.^[209] For livestock protection, non-lethal tools include guardian animals like dogs, secure fencing, and range riders to deter predation, which predation management experts describe as reducing the need for killing by addressing root causes of encounters rather than targeting coyote numbers directly.^[188] ^[186] These approaches align with integrated wildlife damage management principles from the USDA, which incorporate education and habitat modification before escalating to removal, though implementation varies by region.^[89] Policy debates center on the efficacy and ethics of lethal control versus coexistence promotion, with empirical evidence challenging the long-held assumption that widespread killing suppresses coyote populations. Research from multiple studies, including field experiments in Texas and Wisconsin, demonstrates that intensive hunting or trapping often fails to reduce local densities due to compensatory reproduction—where surviving coyotes produce larger litters—and immigration from surrounding areas, sometimes resulting in net population increases.^[210] ^[211] ^[212] Non-lethal methods, by contrast, show higher success in preventing conflicts when proactively applied to resident coyotes, as they target behaviors without creating population vacuums.^[213] ^[214] Federal and state policies reflect this tension: the USDA's Wildlife Services program continues aerial gunning and trapping, killing over 100,000 coyotes annually as of recent reports primarily to safeguard livestock, justified by economic losses estimated at $50 million yearly from predation.^[215] ^[89] Critics, including conservation groups, argue such indiscriminate lethal efforts exacerbate issues by disrupting social structures and ignoring non-lethal alternatives, while public attitudes have shifted toward greater tolerance, with surveys showing over 40% increase in positive views since the 1970s, fueling calls for hunting restrictions despite persistent rural demands for bounties or year-round seasons.^[216] ^[217] In urban areas, policies increasingly prioritize hazing and education over culling, as seen in municipal plans, though debates persist over enforcement, with some states like Connecticut facing lawsuits over expanded hunting amid suburban expansion.^[218] These conflicts highlight causal realities: coyote range expansion correlates with habitat fragmentation and reduced larger predators, rendering blanket lethal policies less effective than targeted, evidence-based coexistence frameworks.^[219]

References

[1]
Canis latrans (coyote) | INFORMATION - Animal Diversity Web
Coyotes are native to the Nearctic region. They are found throughout North and Central America. They range from Panama in the south, north through Mexico, the ...Missing: distribution | Show results with:distribution
[2]
Coyote (Canis latrans) - Texas Parks and Wildlife
The Coyote is very similar in size to a small German Shepherd and weighs an average of 25 to 40 pounds. It has long, slender legs, a bushy tail with a black tip ...
[3]
Coyote | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife - | WA.gov
Adult coyotes weigh 20 to 35 pounds, with males being slightly larger than females. At the shoulder, an adult male coyote is about 25 inches tall. Geographic ...<|separator|>
[4]
Coyote Profile
A map of the distribution of the 19 known subspecies of canis latrans plus Canis latrans “var”, the Eastern Coyote, a hybrid between the coyote and wolf.
[5]
Canis latrans - Coyote - NatureServe Explorer
Originally ranged throughout western and central North America, perhaps with only widely scattered populations in the southeastern U.S. Range expanded into ...
[6]
Canis latrans - USDA Forest Service
WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE · GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Coyotes are found from Costa Rica to northern Alaska, and from coast to coast in the United States ...
[7]
Canis latrans • Coyote - Mammal Diversity Database
IUCN Red List status. Least Concern. Species Permalink. https://www.mammaldiversity.org/taxon/1005941. Country distribution map. The map below provides a ...
[8]
[PDF] 303 ECOLOGY OF COYOTES IN URBAN LANDSCAPES STANLEY ...
The relatively small home-range sizes and high survival rates suggest coyotes are successful in adjusting to an urbanized landscape. Key words: Canis latrans, ...
[9]
Coyote - Etymology, Origin & Meaning
Originating from Mexican Spanish and Nahuatl, "coyote" (1759) means a common prairie-wolf of western North America, known for its nighttime howling.
[10]
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coyote
[11]
Coyote: An American Original - HistoryNet
Jun 20, 2017 · His binomial, Canis latrans (“barking dog”), has been the recognized scientific name ever since. William Clark's 1804 description of his “ ...
[12]
Coyotes - Discover Lewis & Clark
Continue reading The first academic description for scientific purposes was published in 1823 by Thomas Say (see below), who classified it in the genus ...
[13]
Rafinesque's names for western American mammals ... - BioOne
Apr 1, 2015 · This process reveals that the earliest scientific name for the coyote (Canis latrans Say, 1822) was Canis chlorops Rafinesque, 1817; this name ...
[14]
Considering Pleistocene North American wolves and coyotes in the ...
Jun 5, 2021 · The Pleistocene coyote (C. latrans orcutti), a larger, more wolf‐like canid than contemporary coyotes was regionally sympatric with dire wolves ...
[15]
Coyotes: Howling from the Ice Age | La Brea Tar Pits
Nov 8, 2023 · “Canis latrans” literally means “barking dog” (one of their other many common names is “song dog”), and their vocalizations are another tool ...
[16]
Evolution in coyotes (Canis latrans) in response to the megafaunal ...
Feb 27, 2012 · We suggest that Pleistocene coyotes may have been larger and more robust in response to larger competitors and a larger-bodied prey base.
[17]
Mapping the expansion of coyotes (Canis latrans) across North and ...
May 22, 2018 · Fossil evidence confirms that coyotes were present in the Yucatán Peninsula and northwestern Costa Rica during the Pleistocene ( Lucas et al.
[18]
Ice Age coyotes were supersized compared to coyotes today, fossil ...
Feb 27, 2012 · Coyotes today are pint-sized compared to their Ice Age counterparts, finds a new fossil study. Between 11,500 and 10,000 years ago -- a mere ...
[19]
Evolution in coyotes (Canis latrans) in response to the megafaunal ...
We examined the evolution of coyotes and wolves through time from the late Pleistocene, during which many large carnivorous species coexisted as predators and ...
[20]
(PDF) Pleistocene origins, western ghost lineages, and the ...
May 27, 2025 · The coyote is a distinct species that evolved in North America during the Pleistocene (Nowak 1978 , Sacks et al. 2021 , Wilson and Rutledge 2021 ...
[21]
Colonization history and ancestry of northeastern coyotes - PMC
We support the conclusion that northeastern coyotes are derived from wolf–coyote hybridization, and we agree that introduced adaptive variation resulting in ...
[22]
Considering Pleistocene North American wolves and coyotes in the ...
Jun 5, 2021 · We propose that Beringian gray wolves (C. lupus) and extinct large wolf-like coyotes (C. latrans orcutti) are likely progenitors to Mexican and Plains gray ...
[23]
Canis latrans (Coyote) | CABI Compendium
Class: Mammalia. Order: Carnivora. Suborder: Fissipeda. Family: Canidae. Genus: Canis. Species: Canis latrans. Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature. The currently ...
[24]
Canis latrans Say 1823 - Plazi TreatmentBank
Nov 25, 2024 · The ancestral Coyote, C. lepophagus, is believed to have become widespread throughout North America by the late Pliocene. In the north-eastern ...
[25]
High Genetic Diversity and Low Differentiation in Colonized Coyote ...
Aug 9, 2024 · We found high levels of observed heterozygosity (0.599–0.872) and allelic richness (3.99–5.12) across our sites but low levels of relatedness.
[26]
High genomic diversity and candidate genes under selection ...
Here, we assess two recent and distinct eastward expansion fronts of a highly mobile carnivore, the coyote (Canis latrans), to investigate patterns of genomic ...
[27]
Urban coyotes are genetically distinct from coyotes in natural habitats
May 4, 2020 · We hypothesized that coyotes in natural habitats are more genetically related to distant coyotes in similar natural habitats and less related to coyotes in ...
[28]
[PDF] Geographic patterns in morphometric and genetic variation for ...
Prior to 1900, coyotes (Canis latrans) were restricted to the western and central re- gions of North America, but by the early 2000s, coyotes became ubiquitous ...
[29]
Assessment of coyote-wolf-dog admixture using ancestry ... - NIH
2012). Evidence for interspecific crosses between male coyotes and female wolves is much scarcer. Only 1 in 70 Texas coyotes surveyed carried maternal gray wolf ...
[30]
Eastern Coyote Genetics - Wolf Conservation Center
Aug 27, 2018 · According to Monzón's research, about 64% of the eastern coyote's genome is coyote (Canis latrans), 13% gray wolf (Canis lupus), 13% Eastern ...
[31]
NETN Species Spotlight - Eastern Coyote (U.S. National Park Service)
Nov 29, 2022 · The eastern coyote (one of 19 subspecies of the animal) inhabits the entire east coast stretching as far west as Ohio. Highly adaptable, it feels equally at ...
[32]
https://nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/111107-hybrids-coyotes-wolf-virginia-dna-animals-science
[33]
Tracing Eastern Wolf Origins From Whole-Genome Data in Context ...
Apr 13, 2023 · Eastern coyotes have a mixed ancestry derived primarily from coyotes, with considerable admixture from eastern wolves and limited admixture from ...
[34]
New Genetic Evidence Confirms Coyote Migration Route to Virginia ...
Oct 27, 2011 · Using DNA samples, the researchers found that Virginian coyotes were most closely related to coyote populations in western New York and ...
[35]
Hybridization Dynamics between Wolves and Coyotes in Central ...
Eastern wolves (Canis lycaon) have hybridized extensively with coyotes (C. latrans) and gray wolves (C. lupus) in Ontario but little is known about the ...
[36]
Genetic evidence for a recent origin by hybridization of red wolves
Genetic data suggest that red wolves (Canis rufus) resulted from a hybridization between coyotes (C. latrans) and grey wolves (C. lupus).
[37]
Whole-genome sequence analysis shows that two endemic species ...
Jul 27, 2016 · However, an alternative hypothesis suggests that the red wolf is a hybrid between coyotes and gray wolves that historically inhabited the ...
[38]
Coyote-Dog Hybrid Test | Veterinary Genetics Laboratory - UC Davis
Natural hybridizations are uncommon, however, because the breeding cycles of dogs and coyotes are not synchronized. Organized breeding programs to produce ...Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence
[39]
Coyotes in New York city carry variable dog genomic ancestry and ...
Aug 15, 2022 · We analyzed genome-wide SNP genotype data and found that NYC-area coyotes carry, on average, low levels (5-10%) of domestic dog genetic ancestry ...Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence
[40]
Do coyotes and dogs interbreed? - Do they mate with one another?
Genetic surveys of wild coyotes have rarely documented evidence of dogs in the genetic makeup of coyotes, despite domestic dogs and coyotes sharing the ...Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence<|separator|>
[41]
Coyotes in New York City Carry Variable Genomic Dog Ancestry ...
Sep 1, 2022 · We explored the genomic composition of 16 coyotes in the New York metropolitan area to investigate genomic demography and admixture for urban-dwelling canids.
[42]
Genetic diversity and family groups detected in a coyote population ...
Nov 14, 2022 · We investigate ancestry and population structure of admixed coyotes (Canis latrans) on Galveston Island, Texas, an island where coyotes with ...
[43]
Canis latrans
Physical Characteristics: Canis latrans is considered a medium-sized mammal with erect pointed ears, slender muzzle and a bushy tail (Messier and Barrette 1982 ...
[44]
Coyotes | Internet Center for Wildlife Damage Management
Physical Description. Coyotes resemble small German shepherd dogs with erect, pointed ears, a slender muzzle, and a black-tipped, bushy tail. They may vary ...
[45]
Coyote (Canis latrans) - Jewel Cave National Monument (U.S. ...
Height at the shoulder on average ranges from 18-23 inches and from nose to tip of tail they may be 4 feet or more. Weight averages from around 20-35 lbs. but ...
[46]
[PDF] What's My Adaptation - National Park Service
• A long snout and moist nose help give the coyote an excellent sense of smell. • The fur of this mammal grows thicker in winter to keep the coyote warm.
[47]
[PDF] Eastern Coyote | Pennsylvania
Howling might occur at any time of day, but the highest activity usually is at night. A coyote's senses of smell, hearing and alertness are especially keen.Missing: fur | Show results with:fur
[48]
Ecological Changes in Coyotes (Canis latrans) in Response to the ...
Dec 31, 2014 · The Pleistocene coyotes had an overall robust mandible with an increased shearing arcade and a decreased grinding arcade, adapted for carnivory ...
[49]
Geographic patterns in morphometric and genetic variation for ...
We assessed geographic patterns in morphology and genetics of coyotes with special consideration of coyotes in the southeastern United States.
[50]
A species account of the Coyote (Canis latrans) | Mammals of Texas
Averages for external measurements: total length, 1.2 m; tail, 394 mm; hind foot, 179 mm. Weight, 14–20 kg. Canis latrans. DISTRIBUTION. Statewide. Distribution ...Missing: body dimorphism
[51]
Coyotes in New Jersey: History, Ecology, and Management
Jan 1, 2021 · Typically, coyotes are about 3–4.5 feet long and have a standing shoulder height of 20–24 inches, which is comparable to a medium-sized dog.Missing: physical | Show results with:physical
[52]
[PDF] The Coyote (Canis latrans) : Florida's Newest Predator 1
Body length is usually 39.4 to 59.8 inches with a 15.7-inch tail (Bekoff 1982). Size varies across geographic range and between subspecies. Adult coyotes weigh ...Missing: dimorphism | Show results with:dimorphism
[53]
[PDF] A Characterization of West Virginia Coyotes (Canis Latrans) Utilizing ...
The fossil record for canids is extensive, but assigning species and deducing their relatedness to one another has been difficult and hotly contended. The genus ...
[54]
Long-term pair bonding and genetic evidence for monogamy among ...
Jun 28, 2012 · Social monogamy is the rarest form of breeding system among mammals, estimated to occur in only 3–5% of mammalian taxa, yet is the most common ...
[55]
Behavioral Ecology of Coyotes: Social Organization, Rearing ...
Many studies of coyote social systems have described packs as family groups, which consist of an unrelated mated pair, often referred to as the "alpha" pair ...
[56]
General Information About Coyotes
Scientific name: Canis latrans | Description , Typical profile: long snout and large upright ears The coyote is a medium-sized member of the dog family that ...
[57]
[PDF] mating strategies and pack structure of coyotes in an urban
Also, observational studies of coyote packs have led researchers to conclude that packs consist of close family members. However, recent genetic investigations ...
[58]
Early life experience influences dispersal in coyotes (Canis latrans)
Apr 21, 2021 · Our study provides evidence that early life exposure influences dispersal behavior; however, it remains unclear how these differences ultimately affect fitness.
[59]
Coyote Biology | Internet Center for Wildlife Damage Management
Coyotes become sexually mature in about 12 months. They usually breed between January and March and produce 1 litter per year. Gestation lasts approximately 63 ...
[60]
Integrity of mating behaviors and seasonal reproduction in coyotes ...
Coyotes (Canis latrans) are native North American wild canids. Their reproductive strategy includes social monogamy, territoriality (Camenzind, 1978, Andelt, ...
[61]
Nutritional effects on reproductive performance of captive adult ...
Field studies of coyote (Canis latrans) reproductive performance suggest mean litter size changes in response to prey abundance. However, this relationship has ...
[62]
Canis latrans, coyote | US Forest Service Research and Development
Pups emerge from the den in 2 or 3 weeks. They begin to eat solid food at about 3 weeks of age and are weaned at about 5 to 7 weeks of age [4]. Dispersal of ...<|separator|>
[63]
Coyote (Canis latrans) | CalEcotox
Coyote (Canis latrans) ; Body Weight - Mean, 10.1, First year non-reproductive, kg, M ; Body Weight - Mean, 11.5, First year reproductive, kg, M ...Missing: dimorphism | Show results with:dimorphism
[64]
Resident and transient coyotes exhibit differential patterns of ...
Mar 22, 2022 · Adult coyotes typically exhibit one of two patterns of territorial space use: residency or transiency. Residents maintain small, mutually ...
[65]
Individual and Temporal Variation in Use of Residential Areas by ...
May 31, 2021 · Average (±SE) home range size estimates were 17.3 ± 4.6 km2 for resident coyotes and 102.8 ± 32.9 km2 for non-residents. We found that coyotes ...
[66]
Scent-marking by coyotes,Canis latrans: the influence of social and ...
Scent-marking in coyotes is influenced by social organization, social class, and time of year. Alpha coyotes mark more, especially during breeding season. ...
[67]
Why do coyotes leave poop in conspicuous places?
Dec 5, 2023 · Coyotes leave poop in conspicuous places to mark territory and communicate, as they are not subtle about it, and it's most apparent where it ...
[68]
Fine‐scale movements and behaviors of coyotes (Canis latrans ...
Jun 15, 2021 · Our findings suggest that behaviors of both resident and transient coyotes are influenced by varying landcover characteristics, which could have implications ...
[69]
(PDF) Home Range, Activity, and Daily Movements of Coyotes
Aug 6, 2025 · The maximum daily distance moved by coyotes in our study is comparable to data in croplands and temperate forest in Georgia (10-42 km; ...
[70]
[PDF] Morphometrics and Movement Patterns of Coyote-like Canids in a ...
Straight-line movements of 3 females averaged 7.1 km (4.4-8.7 km) from capture site and 1 male moved 19.3 km from his capture site. Based on limited telemetry ...Missing: roaming | Show results with:roaming
[71]
How Urbanization Shapes Coyote Behavior and Connectivity in LA
Feb 25, 2025 · A new study of coyote movement patterns published today in Ecology Letters challenges previous research that suggests ecological landscape features
[72]
Fine‐scale movements and behaviors of coyotes (Canis latrans ...
Jun 15, 2021 · Furthermore, home range size and daily movements of coyotes change temporally depending on reproductive activity and seasonal prey ...
[73]
[PDF] Coyote diet in North America: geographic and ecological patterns ...
Coyotes Canis latrans have expanded their geographic range by 40% in the last 120 years, raising questions about their ecological impacts in the newly colonised ...<|separator|>
[74]
Coyote Feeding Strategies in Southeastern Idaho: Optimal Foraging ...
Coyotes primarily eat jack rabbits when abundant, and cottontails and voles when jack rabbits are scarce. They prioritize the most profitable foods.
[75]
Coyote (Canis latrans) Macronutrient Consumption and Diet ...
May 12, 2025 · The diet items consumed by coyotes, overall, mostly contained metabolizable energy from protein ( : 48% [SD 19%]), and fat ( : 38% [SD 16%]), ...1 Introduction · 3 Results · 3.1 Prey ConsumptionMissing: strategies | Show results with:strategies
[76]
[PDF] Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Diet of Coyotes in the Chicago ...
We collected 1429 coyote scats from May 2000 to December. 2002, and conducted prey surveys in 2002, in 4 sites that varied in their degree of urban development.
[77]
Coyote diets in a longleaf pine ecosystem - BioOne
Mar 1, 2016 · The monthly diet diversity (i.e. mean number of prey items per scat) varied throughout the year and peaked in May (Fig. 1). Bimonthly diets of ...
[78]
Resource pulses shape seasonal and individual variation in the diet ...
Jul 4, 2024 · The overall weighted occurrence of foods in coyote diets was 26% deer, 18% small mammal, 15% persimmon, 11% other fruit and vegetation, 9% ...
[79]
Foraging ecology of coyotes (Canis latrans): the influence of ...
Snow depth, ungulate carcass biomass, and habitat type influenced the amount of time coyotes rested, travelled, hunted small mammals, and fed on carcasses.Missing: techniques | Show results with:techniques
[80]
FORAGING STRATEGY OF A GENERALIST PREDATOR TOWARD ...
Feb 1, 2002 · Because coyotes did not specialize on sheep, lambs, or any other prey, these results suggest that their foraging strategy emphasized minimizing ...Missing: studies | Show results with:studies
[81]
Diet selection in the Coyote Canis latrans - PMC - PubMed Central
Nov 4, 2023 · Coyotes and their prey adjust their strategies based on anthropogenic, environmental, and behavioral constraints, which can create pockets of ...Missing: composition | Show results with:composition
[82]
Inter-population differences in coyote diet and niche width along an ...
Nov 6, 2021 · Rodents, small herbivores and ungulates were among the most common dietary items for rural, suburban and greenspace coyotes, along with insects ...
[83]
Coyote vocalizations: A lexicon and comparisons with other canids
A lexicon of 11 vocalizations was constructed based on their: (1) sounds as perceived by the observer, (2) behavioural context, and (3) physical characteristics ...
[84]
Information content of coyote barks and howls - ResearchGate
Aug 7, 2025 · The disparate results for the two vocalization types suggest that howls and barks serve separate functions. Howls appear optimized to convey ...
[85]
INFORMATION CONTENT OF COYOTE BARKS AND HOWLS
The disparate results for the two vocalization types suggest that howls and barks serve separate functions. Howls appear optimized to convey information ...
[86]
(PDF) Scent marking in coyotes - ResearchGate
Aug 6, 2025 · Results show that adult males and females scent mark throughout their territory at all times of the year. Urine is most frequently used in ...
[87]
[PDF] Arizona Sonora Desert Museum - Coyote
Coyotes communicate using a combination of fa- cial expressions, body postures, and sounds. Facial Expressions. Researchers use a host of terms for coyote ...
[88]
[PDF] The Communication of Play Intention: Are Play Signals Functional?
FUNCTIONAL PLAY SIGNALS IN THE COYOTE (Canis latrans) To date it has been accepted that metacomrnunicative signals do exist and are functional in altering the ...
[89]
[PDF] Coyote Ecology and Damage Management - usda aphis
Coyotes feed upon and scatter human garbage; eat unattended pet food or residual seed below feeders; and chew on rigging, straps or tie downs made of leather or.
[90]
Space Use and Habitat Selection by Resident and Transient ...
Jul 6, 2015 · Resident and transient coyotes demonstrated similar habitat selection, notably selection of agricultural over forested habitats. However, ...
[91]
[PDF] Home Range and Habitat Use of West Virginia Canis latrans (Coyote)
However, habitat selection and utilization by Coyotes can be highly variable and likely context dependent (Gosselink et al. 2003, Harrison et al. 1991, Parker.
[92]
[PDF] 2020 Southeastern Coyote Ecology and Management Synthesis
Feb 26, 2020 · Current general consensus is that coyotes remained largely restricted to the western and central regions of North America from the time of ...
[93]
The intrepid urban coyote: a comparison of bold and exploratory ...
Feb 14, 2019 · Our results from both tests indicate that urban coyotes are bolder and more exploratory than rural coyotes and that within both populations there are ...
[94]
Coyote genes may show urban evolution at work - The Source
Jan 15, 2025 · A new study outlines the ways by which city life may be shaping the evolution of urban coyotes, the highly adaptable carnivores spotted in alleyways from ...Missing: morphology | Show results with:morphology
[95]
Environmental factors influencing the occurrence of coyotes and ...
Coyote populations generally respond positively to urban environments. In southern California, coyote occurrence increased with both proximity and intensity of ...
[96]
[PDF] Effects of Human Recreation on Coyote (Canis latrans) Habitat Use ...
Within this study, Coyotes appeared to be attracted to areas that were heavily used for human recreation, but temporally adjusted their activity to peak when ...
[97]
https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/CNRE/cnre-172/cnre-172.html
[98]
The Eastern Spread of Coyotes In the U.S. | NRA Family
Apr 19, 2018 · Coyotes spread east due to adaptability, the gray wolf's near extinction, and man-made changes like urbanization, and their ability to adapt to ...
[99]
Coyotes: Coming to a town near you? - Let's Talk Science
Sep 6, 2022 · Since the 1950s, coyotes have expanded their geographic range by 40%. This is twice the rate of other North America carnivores.
[100]
Coyotes have expanded their range to 49 states—and show no ...
Nov 29, 2019 · They've increased their habitat across North America by 40 percent since the 1950s—twice the rate of any other North American carnivore—and now ...
[101]
Mapping the expansion of coyotes (Canis latrans) across North and ...
May 22, 2018 · Previously restricted to the western two-thirds of North America, the species now occurs across most of the continent, from the Atlantic to the ...
[102]
Mapping the expansion of coyotes (Canis latrans) across North and ...
May 22, 2018 · Coyotes now occur through eastern North America, and are now expanding to isolated islands with recent sightings in the Florida Keys (Greene and ...
[103]
How Coyotes Conquered the Continent
May 22, 2018 · However, fossils from across the arid west link the distribution of coyotes from 10,000 years ago to specimens collected in the late 1800s, ...
[104]
Coyote - Canid Specialist Group
The Coyote has a wide distribution throughout North America, Mexico and into Central America. They are abundant throughout their range and are increasing in ...
[105]
[PDF] Historical and present distribution of coyote (Canis latrans) in ...
Aim Coyote (Canis latrans) distribution in Mexico and Central America has expanded recently reaching the Yucatan peninsula, Belize and Panama, probably.<|control11|><|separator|>
[106]
Research finds coyotes thriving despite human and predator ...
Nov 6, 2024 · Nationwide coyote surveys highlight how hunting may increase, rather than reduce, local coyote numbers. Peer-Reviewed Publication.
[107]
Coyotes Thrive Despite Human and Predator Pressures | UNH Today
Nov 5, 2024 · Human hunting may unintentionally boost coyote populations by increasing reproduction and immigration rates, while competition with larger predators affects ...<|separator|>
[108]
Coyote populations continue to grow throughout U.S.
Nov 30, 2021 · Depending on time of year, the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks estimates between 150,000 and 300,000 coyotes live in Kansas alone.<|control11|><|separator|>
[109]
Random Thoughts and Observations on Coyotes | Virginia DWR
Mar 5, 2019 · student Dana Morin, of Virginia Tech, estimated coyote population densities in Bath County at 22 coyotes per 100 square miles (0.22 mi2) and in ...Missing: trends | Show results with:trends
[110]
[PDF] COYOTE POPULATION PROCESSES REVISITED
While food abundance seems to set the ultimate. Illnits of coyote abundance, and sociality is the driving force for change, proximate effects on density are ...
[111]
Evidence of reduced abundance, density, and survival of coyotes ...
Aug 25, 2022 · Our findings indicate that red wolf presence and federal management of coyotes using fertility control may have limited coyote densities in northeastern North ...
[112]
https://news.osu.edu/dense-human-population-is-linked-to-longer-urban-coyote-survival
[113]
Coyote Species Profile, Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Predators Great horned owls, bald and golden eagles, wolves, and bears all have been known to prey on coyotes. Reproduction Coyotes are quick to respond to ...
[114]
Variable strategies to solve risk–reward tradeoffs in carnivore ...
We estimated that 23% (95% CI: 8 to 55%) of the coyote population in our study area was killed by cougars annually, suggesting that coyote interactions with ...
[115]
[PDF] WBI Studies Repository Social Ecology and Behavior of Coyotes
They show great intraspecific variation in social behavior and social organization, enabling behavioral patterns to be analyzed as phenotypic adaptations to ...
[116]
Coyotes are thriving despite human and predator pressures, large ...
Nov 6, 2024 · Research led by the University of New Hampshire sheds light on how coyotes, North America's most successful predators, are responding to various environmental ...Missing: sources | Show results with:sources
[117]
[PDF] COYOTE INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER CARNIVORES
Coyotes coexist with mountain lions, bobcats, and foxes, often being aggressive towards smaller predators. They can displace foxes, and their population ...
[118]
Asymmetrical intraguild interactions with coyotes, red foxes, and ...
Asymmetrical intraguild interactions with coyotes, red foxes, and domestic dogs may contribute to competitive exclusion of declining gray foxes. Ecology and ...
[119]
(PDF) Survival and cause-specific mortality of coyotes in Wisconsin
The predominant sources of known mortality (n = 37) were harvest (83.8%) and vehicle collisions (13.5%). For our literature review, we identified 56 studies ...
[120]
Coyote Facts - Successful Farming
Nov 28, 2007 · However, hunting, trapping and vehicle collisions are common causes of coyote mortality. Approximately 50-70% of juvenile coyotes do not reach ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[121]
Morbidity-mortality factors and survival of an urban coyote ... - PubMed
The annual survival rate of coyotes was 0.72. Eleven necropsied coyotes were killed by cars, five coyotes were hit by cars, two were killed by a trapper, and ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[122]
Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2022 in
Jul 26, 2024 · RESULTS. During 2022, 54 US jurisdictions reported 3,579 animal rabies cases, reflecting a 2.3% decline from 3,663 cases reported in 2021.
[123]
Genetic Tracking of a Rabid Coyote (Canis latrans) Detected ...
Jul 8, 2024 · In May 2022, a coyote (Canis latrans) infected with the raccoon (Procyon lotor) rabies virus variant (RRV) was collected in Lewis County, West ...
[124]
Translocation of Coyote Rabies -- Florida, 1994 - CDC
Since 1988, rabies in coyotes in southern Texas has accounted for most coyote-associated rabies in the United States, including 70 of 75 cases in 1992, and 71 ...
[125]
NWRC Research Areas: Rabies | Animal and Plant Health ...
The United States also enjoys a canine-rabies free status since 2007 following the elimination of the dog-coyote rabies variant in Texas by oral rabies vaccine ...Missing: incidence | Show results with:incidence
[126]
Canine distemper reports on rise in Maricopa County
Aug 12, 2025 · While distemper cannot infect humans, it poses a serious risk to unvaccinated dogs and certain wildlife species. Pet owners should ensure their ...
[127]
DNR: Fish & Wildlife: Canine Distemper - Indiana State Government
Canine distemper is a virus that attacks the respiratory, gastrointestinal, and nervous system s in a variety of species. It can affect wildlife.Missing: threats mange
[128]
Implications for the Intersection of Companion Animals and Wildlife
Feb 23, 2022 · Canine distemper virus (CDV) and Canine parvovirus (CPV) can cause deadly infections in wildlife and companion animals.Missing: mange | Show results with:mange
[129]
Wildlife Diseases - CT.gov
Sarcoptic Mange. Coyote pup with sarcoptic mange. One of the most prevalent parasitic diseases of red foxes and coyotes in Connecticut is sarcoptic mange.
[130]
Disease - Urban Coyote Research Project
In the Chicago area, there have been no cases of rabid coyotes. If a person is bitten by a coyote that is acting aggressive, he or she may be treated for rabies ...
[131]
Gastrointestinal helminths of Coyotes (Canis latrans) from Southeast ...
Sep 15, 2016 · One-third of the parasites that infected the coyotes were the hookworm Ancylostoma caninum and the cestode parasite - Taenia pisiformis. The ...
[132]
Helminth parasites of the coyote (Canis latrans) in Tennessee
Six species were found including 5 nematodes (D. immitis, Physaloptera rara, Trichuris vulpis, Ancylostoma caninum, and Toxascaris leonina) and 1 cestode ( ...
[133]
Echinococcus multilocularis Infection, Southern Ontario, Canada
Jan 7, 2019 · Wild canids (e.g., foxes and coyotes), dogs, and (less commonly) cats act as definitive hosts, which harbor adult parasites in the small ...
[134]
Investigating the Role of Coyotes, Canis Latrans, in the Spread of ...
A total of 1086 parasites were collected: 215 intestinal nematodes, 116 cestodes, 1 acanthocephalan, 359 filarial nematodes, 128 ticks, 10 fleas, and 257 lice.
[135]
Helminth parasites and zoonotic risk associated with urban coyotes ...
Dec 27, 2018 · Coyotes (Canis latrans) are resilient, adaptable, cosmopolitan ... Coyotes potentially transmit zoonotic parasites, including the tapeworm
[136]
Pathology and parasitology of free-ranging coyotes from Tennessee ...
Feb 10, 2025 · This study demonstrated that coyotes are commonly exposed to numerous parasites and pathogens that affect people and pets and are excellent sentinels for these ...
[137]
PARASITES OF THE COYOTE (Canis latrans) IN CENTRAL UTAH 1
Five species of parasites not reported previously from coyotes in Utah were detected: Filaroides osleri, Physaloptera sp., Spirocerca sp., Ancylostoma caninum, ...
[138]
Impacts of coyote colonization on coastal mammalian predators
Aug 1, 2024 · Colonization of a dominant predator may lead to top-down control of mesopredators and restore trophic balance. Coyotes are a novel colonizer of ...
[139]
Can a mesocarnivore fill the functional role of an apex predator?
Jan 19, 2023 · Coyotes fill apex functional role by suppressing closest competitor and releasing other small carnivores · Coyotes undergo mesopredator release ...Introduction · Statistical Analysis · DiscussionMissing: position | Show results with:position
[140]
Fish & Wildlife | Coyote - NJDEP
Aug 19, 2025 · Coyotes play an important role in the ecosystem, helping to keep rodent populations under control. They are by nature wary of humans ...
[141]
[PDF] EFFECTS OF COYOTE CONTROL ON THEIR PREY: A REVIEW
The Texas studies which involved short-term (5 6 months) coyote removal programs did not note differences in rodent and lagomorph populations. However, those ...
[142]
[PDF] benefits of coyotes
As the top carnivore in some ecosystems, coyotes provide a number of benefits including regulating the populations of smaller predator species, such as skunks, ...
[143]
[PDF] the ecological benefits of coyotes - Heartland Rewilding
Coyotes clean up the environment. As scavengers, coyotes provide a service by helping to keep our communities clean of animal remains and other waste.
[144]
[PDF] Effects on white-tailed deer following eastern coyote colonization
However, after coyotes become more abundant, deer population growth rate may decline because of predator numerical and functional responses.<|separator|>
[145]
Urbanization and primary productivity mediate the predator–prey ...
Jun 18, 2024 · Our results indicate the possibility that coyotes could have stronger effects on deer populations in NC if their densities rise, but primarily in less ...
[146]
Impacts of coyote colonization on coastal mammalian predators - PMC
Aug 1, 2024 · We found sizeable effects of coyote habitat use on that of red foxes and free-ranging domestic cats, suggesting that coyotes function as apex predators in ...
[147]
Ecosystem service assessment of coyote stories reveals tradeoffs ...
Oct 16, 2024 · Our a priori ecosystem service assessment showed that human–coyote interactions can have simultaneous positive and negative human well-being ...
[148]
Coyote control breeds small predators - November 17, 2000 - CNN
Nov 17, 2000 · Removing the coyote as a "keystone predator" reduces diversity of small mammal prey species and increases the presence of small predators like ...
[149]
Coyote Relationships with Other Animal Species
Some research has suggested that coyotes may limit other medium-sized predators that are smaller than coyotes, including raccoons, striped skunks, and opossums.
[150]
[PDF] Effects of Removal on a Lightly Exploited Coyote Population in ...
To determine if the removal had an effect on the coyote populations, I measured 3 parameters: the presence or absence of skewed sex ratios; proportions of ...
[151]
People or predators? Comparing habitat‐dependent effects of ...
Nov 5, 2024 · Coyote abundance was highest in southwestern USA and lowest in the northeast. Abundance responded to some factors as expected, including ...
[152]
[PDF] The Ecological Role of Coyotes, Bears, Mountain Lions, and Wolves
In fact, coyotes are a keystone species, meaning that their presence or absence has a significant impact on the surrounding biological community.Missing: debate | Show results with:debate
[153]
Coyotes — The Canid Project
ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE. Where coyotes are prevalent they are a keystone species, meaning their presence or absence plays a significant role in our ecosystems.
[154]
Do coyotes Canis latrans influence occupancy of prey in suburban ...
With the extirpation of apex predators from many North American systems, coyotes Canis latrans have become the de facto top predator and are ubiquitous ...
[155]
Should coyotes be treated like invasive species? : r/wolves - Reddit
Jul 21, 2025 · Coyotes are only native to Central United States and Mexico. With Wolf reintroduction gaining traction, should Coyotes be removed from these ...Does the spread of coyotes across the U.S. poses a danger to some ...A look at the debate over managing coyote populations as they ...More results from www.reddit.comMissing: invasiveness | Show results with:invasiveness
[156]
Coyote | Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department
They usually begin breeding at two years of age and may mate for life. The gestation period is approximately nine weeks, with an average litter of six pups.
[157]
Myths and Facts about coyotes - New Hampshire Wildlife Coalition
FALSE: COYOTES ARE AN INVASIVE SPECIES. TRUTH: An invasive species is one that causes ecological or economic harm to a new environment where it is not native.
[158]
Coyotes in Maryland
Establishment in unoccupied regions of the eastern US, coyotes have assumed the role of top-order predator. Consequently, they tend to fundamentally alter ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[159]
A look at the debate over managing coyote populations as they ...
Aug 26, 2025 · After a long debate, the Michigan Natural Resources Commission says it is committed to extending coyote hunting season all year long. MARTÍNEZ: ...Missing: keystone | Show results with:keystone
[160]
Coyote America: Author Dan Flores Speaks about North America's ...
Nov 15, 2016 · Coyotes co-evolved alongside larger canids like wolves, which often persecuted and harassed them and killed their pups. As a result, natural ...
[161]
[PDF] COYOTE CONTROL IN THE UNITED STATES: ONE STEP ...
Aug 20, 2020 · This Note examines the ecologic impacts of the coyote and the history of their treatment in the United States. With a better understanding of.
[162]
[PDF] Coyote Management Timeline | Sunnylands
They were viewed as a threat through livestock predation, hunting competition, and a danger to public safety. Colonists actively moved towards elimination of ...
[163]
historical perspective on coyote control methods in texas
Aerial hunting and snares evolved as important control tools following the ban on strychnine and Compound 1080 in 1972. The livestock protection collar (LPC) ...
[164]
Predators Cause $232 million in Livestock Losses in 2019
Oct 10, 2020 · This included 62,000 coyotes, the most often removed native mammal. Coyotes reportedly kill more than 300,000 head of livestock annually and ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[165]
[PDF] Coyote depredation management: current methods and research ...
Based on these statistics, coyotes are responsible for over $40 million in damages to livestock pro- ducers every year, with proportionally more dam- age to ...
[166]
[PDF] Death Loss in U.S. Cattle and Calves Due to Predator ... - usda aphis
In 2015, coyotes accounted for the highest percentage of cattle deaths due to predators (40.5 percent), followed by unknown predators (15.8 percent) and dogs. ( ...
[167]
[PDF] PRESS RELEASE - USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
Coyotes were the largest predator for both sheep and lambs in Idaho. Coyotes accounted for 72 percent of the predator-caused losses and 22 percent of all ...
[168]
High-cat diet: urban coyotes feast on pets, study finds - The Guardian
Apr 12, 2019 · In 2018, the app recorded 135 cat deaths by coyote attack, and 58 dog deaths. Brown advises people to keep their pets safe by reducing food ...
[169]
Retrospective evaluation of coyote attacks in dogs: 154 cases (1997 ...
Apr 18, 2017 · Eighty-six percent of dogs presenting following coyote attack weighed <10 kg. Overall mortality rate was 15.6%.
[170]
How to Protect Your Dogs from Coyotes? Top 17 Effective Tips, Tested
According to Urban Coyote Research Project, the number of coyote attacks on pets in the Chicago Metropolitan Area has increased from 0-2 attacks per year to 6- ...<|separator|>
[171]
Coyote Predation Effects on White-Tailed Deer Fawns
Survival rates for all fawns were greater (P = 0.048) where coyotes were removed compared to non-removal sites, with 50% and 25% of fawns surviving to 12 weeks ...
[172]
What Impact Do Coyotes Have on Virginia's Deer?
Sep 3, 2020 · That study monitored 60 fawns and 44 did not survive until fall, meaning predation was 73 percent. Thirty-six of those 44 fawns were confirmed ...
[173]
The Effect of Coyotes on Deer Populations - Stacy Lyn Harris
Studies have confirmed that coyotes dramatically affect white-tailed deer populations. Coyotes prey on deer fawns; thus fawn survival naturally is threatened.
[174]
Coyotes Impacting Deer Fawns - Mossy Oak
Aug 10, 2018 · The biggest impact coyotes have on a whitetail herd is when fawns are being born and raised during the spring and summer months.
[175]
Conflicts: A Research Perspective - Urban Coyote Research Project
We located accounts of 142 coyote attack incidents, resulting in 159 human victims. These attacks took place over a wide geographic area, including 14 states ...
[176]
Coyote Attacks: An Increasing Suburban Problem
Coyote attacks on humans and pets have increased within the past 5 years in California. We discuss documented occurrences of coyote aggression and attacks ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[177]
Regional Risk of Coyote Attacks on Pets - Lost Pet Research
Crooks and Soule (1999) also found that 25% of radio-collared cats in the study were killed by coyotes, and 42% of cat owners reported that coyotes had attacked ...
[178]
Evaluating human–coyote encounters in an urban landscape using ...
Jan 22, 2021 · We report 398 citizen science accounts of human–coyote encounters in the Madison area between October 2015 and March 2018.Missing: incidents | Show results with:incidents
[179]
Urban Coyotes: Conflict and Management | Ohioline
Oct 24, 2012 · Rabid coyote attacks on humans account for less than 8% of total reported cases, and most pet attacks are caused by healthy, non-diseased, ...
[180]
Coyote Attacks on Humans in the United States and Canada
Aug 7, 2025 · We conducted an analysis of coyote attacks on humans in the United States and Canada, including 142 reported incidents of coyote attacks ...
[181]
[PDF] ÿþC o y o t e F A C T S H E E T - Urban Coyote Research Project
In almost one third of reported coyote attacks on people, it was known that coyotes were being fed. (either intentionally or accidentally) near the attack site.
[182]
Operational Activities: Protecting Livestock From Predators
For every Federal dollar spent on predation management $10.88 in livestock is saved. Counting cooperative dollars, the cost-benefit ratio is $1:$4.87. ...
[183]
[PDF] ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Integrated Wildlife Damage ...
In other situations, coyotes and feral dogs would be removed as humanely as possible using shooting, trapping, snare/cable restraints or registered euthanasia ...<|separator|>
[184]
Research Finds Coyotes Thriving Despite Human and Predator ...
Research led by the University of New Hampshire sheds light on how coyotes, North America's most successful predators, ...Missing: sources | Show results with:sources
[185]
Coyote numbers are often higher in areas where they are hunted
Jan 8, 2025 · The 97% positive abundance for hunting at a 100-meter scale heavily implies that coyotes thrive in the face of hunting pressure. “Because they' ...
[186]
[PDF] Non-Lethal Methods to Prevent Conflicts Between Predators ... - NRDC
While ranchers have used donkeys and llamas to harass and chase off predators that approach their livestock, guard dogs have generally proven the most effective ...
[187]
Wildlife Services' Nonlethal Initiative | Animal and Plant Health ...
WS Nonlethal Damage Management Activities · Habitat Modification · Fencing and Other Barriers · Repellents and Scare Devices · Vaccines · Wildlife Contraceptives ...Missing: strategies | Show results with:strategies
[188]
Using Coyotes to Protect Livestock. Wait. What?
Surprisingly, these researchers found that as more predators were removed, more livestock were killed. Similarly, in a 14-year USDA study at the University of ...
[189]
Coyote: Regulations | Missouri Department of Conservation
Dogs may not be used to hunt coyotes during daylight hours statewide from November 1 to the close of the November portion of the firearms deer season and during ...
[190]
Coyote Hunting and Depredation Permits - NC Wildlife
There is no bag limit on coyote, and hunters may use electronic calls. Coyote hunting permits are valid for one season and expire June 30th each year. Permits ...
[191]
PRELIMINARY 2025-26 SEASONS APPROVED | Game Commission
Jan 25, 2025 · COYOTE and FOX, CABLE RESTRAINTS (Statewide): Dec. 26-Feb. 22, 2026. No limits. Participants must pass cable restraint certification course.<|control11|><|separator|>
[192]
State by state coyote hunting regulations | Predator Masters
Apr 6, 2014 · Permission must be obtained to shoot predators on private land. Nonresidents are required to purchase a Nonresident Trapping License to take ...Missing: United | Show results with:United
[193]
Coyote / Furbearers / Furharvesting / Hunting / KDWP
Coyotes (Canis latrans) are not legally classified as furbearers in Kansas, but in many ways, they are monitored and managed as if they were.
[194]
The Truth Behind the Coyote Populations and Hunting Contests
Jun 25, 2021 · The USDA kills over 80,000 coyotes annually in the U.S., and does so very efficiently. They will kill on average about 100 coyotes in a day by ...Missing: harvest North
[195]
Coyote hunting regulations | Mass.gov
Daytime hunting: During the period from ½ hour before sunrise to ½ hour after sunset, there are no restrictions on size or caliber of rifles or handguns.Missing: United | Show results with:United
[196]
Coyote - WVDNR
Air rifles for coyote hunting must be at least .22 caliber. In addition, fox are permitted to be hunted with artificial lights or night vision technology, ...Missing: United | Show results with:United<|separator|>
[197]
Furbearer Seasons - When to Hunt - KDWP
Season Dates (statewide): All year. Season Limit: No limit. There is no closed season for trapping or hunting coyotes. Motor vehicles and radios in vehicles ...
[198]
Furbearer/Coyote Regulations | Oklahoma Department of Wildlife ...
Open statewide year-round, except it shall be unlawful to hunt, take or attempt to take coyotes from dark to daylight with the aid of any artificial light and/ ...
[199]
Furbearers - In the Field - Colorado Parks and Wildlife
Hunting Coyotes: While coyotes are considered furbearers, you do not need a furbearer harvest permit to hunt this species. You may hunt coyotes with a ...Missing: United | Show results with:United
[200]
Furbearer Hunting Regulations and Seasons | Virginia DWR
Coyote hunting on National Forest lands and Department lands is permitted from September 1 through March 10 and during the spring turkey season. Coyotes may ...Missing: United | Show results with:United
[201]
Furbearer Trapping Regulations and Seasons | Virginia DWR
Trappers must visit all traps once each day and remove all animals caught therein, except for completely submerged body-gripping traps which must be visited at ...<|separator|>
[202]
https://wildlife.dgf.nm.gov/hunting/information-by-animal/furbearers/
[203]
[PDF] State Laws and Regulations on coyote trapping and snaring in the ...
Feb 17, 2022 · State Laws and Regulations on coyote trapping and snaring in the Western US. Generally, if a state has multiple definitions of coyotes and ...
[204]
Furbearing and Trapping Regulations | Mississippi ... - MDWFP
It is unlawful to trap any animal, except beaver, coyote, fox, nutria, skunk, and wild hogs, in any period other than the trapping season on furbearing animals.
[205]
Trying to use data to see if coyote hunts help deer numbers - HJNews
Jan 11, 2025 · Harvest increased by 1,000 to 2,000 when the bounty was put in place, but the value of this program has been declining since. Paying hunters to ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[206]
Coyote Management Strategies
Management programs for urban coyotes should begin with public education and untangling facts from myths. People should become aware of coyote signs.
[207]
How to Avoid Conflicts with Coyotes
1. Do not feed coyotes. The number one most effective way to prevent coyote attacks in your neighborhood is to eliminate wildlife feeding.
[208]
Coexistence across space and time: Social‐ecological patterns ...
Oct 10, 2023 · Urban parks are less likely to have a high pollution burden, and coyotes have been reported to be more likely sighted in parks2. Human ...
[209]
[PDF] COYOTE MANAGEMENT & COEXISTENCE PLAN - City of Chicago
Coyotes tend to prefer more open areas and spaces with natural shielding from human activity. It is not rare for an individual or group to settle in urban parks ...
[210]
Killing Coyotes Is Not As Effective As Once Thought, Researchers Say
Jun 14, 2019 · "Oftentimes, coyote control programs have been implemented, and in some or many instances, the effects were negligible," Monteith says. Enlarge ...
[211]
Coyote hunting doesn't always decrease populations
Nov 14, 2024 · Researchers found that human hunting did not reduce coyote populations but instead led to an increase in coyote numbers, perhaps due to reproduction and ...
[212]
[PDF] Evaluating lethal and nonlethal management options for urban ...
Conceptually, proactive nonlethal strategies might be most appropriate for stable, resident coyotes because nonlethal efforts could be more easily applied.
[213]
Why Killing Coyotes Doesn't Make Livestock Safer
May 31, 2017 · There is no clear evidence that lethal control works to reduce human-predator conflict. It can even make the problem worse.
[214]
[PDF] Predator control should not be a shot in the dark
• Non-lethal methods were more effective than lethal methods ... evaluated the effectiveness of lethal methods of predator control that fit our criteria but had.
[215]
Why is the federal government still killing coyotes? - NPR
Mar 17, 2025 · DARIO: Wildlife Services plus other state and local agencies still see killing coyotes as a solution, primarily to protect livestock. Reports of ...<|separator|>
[216]
[PDF] Why Killing Coyotes Doesn't Work
The best available, peer-reviewed science shows that indiscriminately killing coyotes is counterproductive and a threat to healthy ecosystems. There is no ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[217]
Public support for restrictions on the killing of coyotes at odds with ...
Aug 13, 2025 · Recent research shows that positive attitudes toward coyotes in the U.S. have increased more than 40% since the late 1970s. Both lethal and ...
[218]
A look at the debate over managing coyote populations as they ...
Aug 26, 2025 · Across the U.S., coyotes seem to have invaded neighborhoods that humans consider their own. NPR looks at the debate over managing their ...
[219]
Predator control should not be a shot in the dark
Sep 7, 2016 · Non-lethal methods face higher standards of evidence—and are also generally more effective than killing predators, say Adrian Teves, Miha Krofel ...<|control11|><|separator|>