Copyright (c) 2008 University of Nebraska - Lincoln All rights reserved. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw Recent documents in Symposium Proceedings--Coyotes in the Southwest: A Compendium of Our Knowledge (1995) en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2008 02:47:09 PDT 3600 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/44 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/44 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:44:59 PDT The development of the reproductive system and the dynamics of reproductive hormones were studied in captive male and female coyotes (Canis latrans). Captive male coyotes exhibited incomplete sexual maturation at the first reproductive season (< 12 months of age). Peak serum testosterone levels in 1 -year old males were 50% (300±200 vs. 810±300 pg testosterone/ml) and total sperm production was only 10% (57.4±6.6 vs. 558.8±26 x 106 total sperm) of that observed in males older than 1 year. Yearling males were never observed copulating with a female. The sexual maturation of captive female coyotes was less equivocal than their male counterpart's. The pregnancy rate of yearling females was 40% compared to 63% m older females. Average peak serum LH values at the ovulatory surge were 33 ng/ml in yearling females compared to 60 ng/ml in older animals. Serum FSH, estradiol and progesterone levels were similar. There also appears to be an inhibition of fecundity in subordinate females, the mechanism for which IS currently unknown. Our long range goal IS to capitalize upon this information to develop methodologies for coyote population control. Max S. Amoss Jr. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/43 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/43 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:43:06 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) live in social groups with relatively small territories or as single, non-territorial transients with large home ranges in southern Texas. Coyotes communicate and establish territories through auditory, olfactory, and visual means They consume mammals, fruits, and insects with their diets reflecting difference sin abundance and vulnerability of prey, effects of plant phenology and weather conditions. Coyotes have adapted to human exploration by avoiding humans and their control techniques. Because coyotes habituate to nonlethal control techniques (e.g., frightening devices), I suggest apply frightening devices only when coyotes are a problem. Lethal techniques likely will be most effective at resolving coyote depredations if they are applied at depredation sites and immediately before or when losses occur. William F. Andelt http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/42 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/42 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:43:05 PDT Audubon has a membership which probably spans all views of coyotes (Canis latrans) Audubon's staff views coyotes as biologically appropriate predators in most of the Southwest. We believe that they can be an asset to a well-managed ranch, but that they can also cause localized depredation which must be answered. Our members value predators, including coyotes, for then- natural role in ecological systems, including their influence on prey species. Many of our members travel broadly and spend money to view wildlife, and consider it a treat to see and hear coyotes. Dede Armentrout http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/41 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/41 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:38:55 PDT I think I can speak for the coyote With more understanding than most Especially those who defend him And live on the New Jersey coast Baxter Black http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/40 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/40 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:37:13 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) occur sympatrically with several predators throughout their range. Habitat and food resources are similar, although the coyote typically utilizes a wider range of food items. Larger predators generally select larger prey, allowing predators of different sizes to coexist. Coyotes exhibit aggressive actions towards smaller predators, but in most cases they avoid contact with other predator species. Studies indicate that coyotes can exclude 01- displace foxes (Vulpes vulpes, Urocyon spp.), and an inverse relationship exists between abundance of coyotes and foxes. There is evidence suggesting that extensive reduction of coyote populations allows other predator populations to increase. Terry L. Blakenship http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/39 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/39 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:34:28 PDT There are situations where it is necessary to determine the cause of death of livestock, game animals, or other wildlife. Criteria used for recognizing predator kills are well known and scientifically documented. These criteria include the attack, killing and feeding behavior of predators as well as the characteristics of their tracks, droppings, and canine teeth size and spacing. Diagnostic criteria for recognizing coyote (Canis latrans), domestic dog, fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus, Vulpes vulpes), cougar (Felis concolor) , bobcat (Lynx rufus), bear (Ursus spp ), and eagle (mostly Aquila chrysaetos) predation are presented in this paper. James E. Bowns http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/38 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/38 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:31:54 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) and pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) have co-existed for thousands of years, but in today's production-oriented society the Pronghorn may need some help periodically. Although pronghorn numbers have rebounded dramatically since the early 20th century, continued management of this species is necessary and may include "management" of its primarily predator, the coyote. Pronghorn defense mechanisms offer protection from predators, but the coyote's hunting strategies overcome these mechanisms The Trans-Pecos region of Texas holds the greatest numbers of pronghorn In the state. Ranchers in the Trans-Pecos can use predators, such as rainfall; strategies, such as proper livestock stocking rates and pasture deferment; and tools, such as predator control, to help manage pronghorn populations in the presence of coyotes. S. Kemble Canon http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/37 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/37 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:28:18 PDT In 1994, the canine rabies epizootic in South Texas was declared a state health emergency; a statewide rabies quarantine was enacted in 1995. Prior to 1988, rabid coyotes (Canis latrans) were reported only infrequently in Texas. In 1988, Stan and Hidalgo Counties, located In extreme South Texas, experienced an epizootic of canine rabies resulting in 11 laboratory-confirmed cases of canine rabies in domestic dogs and 6 cases in coyotes. By 1991, the epizootic had expanded approximately 100 miles north of the US-Mexico border and included 10 counties. During the next 3 % years, 10 additional counties became involved in the epizootic as it continued to move northward. There have been 644 cases of canine rabies documented in this 20-county area from 1988-95. Antigenic and genetic analysis revealed the ecotype primarily affecting domestic dogs and coyotes in South Texas to be urban Mexican dog (UMD). The epizootic is approaching large metropolitan areas. An increase in vaccination levels of domestic animals would help provide a barrier between rabid wild animals and humans. Keith A. Clark http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/36 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/36 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:25:58 PDT Population dynamics models are useful for estimating coyote (Canis latrans) population responses to exploitation w well as to hypothetical birth intervention techniques At least 6 coyote simulation models have been developed over the past 25 years. This paper reviews the model developed by Connolly and Longhurst (1975), and identifies some potential improvements based upon new biological information and modem computing technology. The biological concepts embodied in the Connolly-Longhurst (C-L) model seem as valid In 1995 as they were in 1975. Newer studies have tended to reaffirm rather than revise earlier concepts of coyote population mechanics. One significant shortcoming of the C-L model, as acknowledged by the authors at the time, was its failure to include immigration as one of the mechanisms for replacement of coyotes removed in control. Subsequent studies have reiterated the importance of immigration and emigration in the dynamics of exploited coyote populations, but researchers have not made corresponding progress toward the incorporation of these phenomena into simulation models. Updating the C-L model would consist largely of revamping it to run on modem computers and software. A new edition would make the model useful to wildlife managers interested in the effects of predator control on the dynamics of selected coyote populations. The updated model would calculate births and deaths monthly rather than annually, and minor changes could be made to the birth and natural mortality functions. However, the revised model probably would sustain most of the conclusions stated in 1975. Guy E. Connolly http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/35 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/35 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:23:26 PDT One factor that potentially affects coyote (Canis latrans) abundance is recreational and commercial trapping for harvest of coyote fur. Herein I report how the economic impact of coyote pelts has changed from 1979-94 for landowners and trappers from the Texas. Pelt values accounted for over 50% of the variability observed during this 15-year period. The future of this economic incentive for managing coyotes is questionable because of the impending ban by the European Union of furs from North America. Jerry L. Cooke http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/34 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/34 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:19:49 PDT Lethal control methods are required to stop coyote depredation or to reduce the coyote population in an area. Various lethal control options are available, including traps, snares, shooting, denning and toxicants. The effectiveness, selectivity, and specificity of each method should be considered before being utilized. Each method requires varying degrees of skill and experience to be made effective. Usually a combination of control methods is most effective in coyote control situations. John W. Dorsett http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/33 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/33 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:15:10 PDT Most information published by the Texas Agricultural Statistics Service (TASS) is based on data gathered through a system of Sample Surveys. TASS regularly surveys sampled farms and ranches and agricultural businesses m order to make statistical inference (estimates) for a total population. The alternative to using a sample survey would be to make a complete enumeration or count of the entire population. Both cost and timely results favor the survey approach. This discussion is an attempt to explain the concepts and sampling methods TASS employs in conducting basic surveys, for both inventory and death loss data for cattle, sheep and goats The discussion will include how estimates were developed for sheep and goat losses to predators and other causes during 1994. Charles Drain http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/32 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/32 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:12:15 PDT Loss of cattle to predators influences productivity of many livestock operations. Statistics indicate that coyote (Canis latrans) predation is a principle threat. Impacts to livestock resources by coyotes are appraised. Implementation of control strategies which capitalize on coyote dispersion and social interactions are discussed. Predator management to reduce livestock losses and promote a younger age structure in coyotes is suggested as a long term solution. Rickey L. Gilliland http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/31 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/31 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:10:48 PDT That coyotes (Canis latrans) destroy nests and individuals of bobwhites (Colinus virginianus) and wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) is well documented. In many situations, however, the removal of coyotes would have little observable effect on gamebird recruitment and population dynamics. This counterintuitive result occurs because (1) renesting reduces the hen failure rate and (2) loss sources other than coyotes become stronger when coyotes are removed from a predator-prey system. Fred S. Guthrey http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/30 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/30 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:08:23 PDT Management of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) holds a high priority on many Texas ranches today The use of "prescribed aerial control" of coyotes to increase white-tailed deer productivity may provide wildlife managers with an economical management tool. I describe two case studies of ranches in the Lower Rolling Plains where prescribed coyote control has increased the deer herds. Tommy L. Hailey http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/29 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/29 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:03:11 PDT When asked their views about coyotes and coyote damage, the words used by producers to describe their perspectives and comments are less than kind. It is difficult for a producer to find anything good to say about an animal that has cost him so much. Ellis Helmers http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/28 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/28 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:01:33 PDT Knowledge of coyote abundance is needed to make intelligent management decisions Several methods have been devised to enumerate coyote (Canis latrans) population size. We review several techniques and attempt to identify biases associated with each method. Once biases are understood, recommendations can be made to minimize their impact on data collection processes and yield better estimates of coyote population trends. Scott E. Henke http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/27 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/27 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 06:59:22 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) are often removed from an area because of their predatory nature, regardless of the effect such removal may have on the ecosystem. Research results concerning ecosystem changes due to coyote removal appear ambiguous; however, differing lengths of coyote control can produce different results. Short-term coyote removal efforts (≤ 6 months) typically have not resulted in increases in the prey base; however, long-term, intensive coyote removal reportedly has altered to alter species composition within the ecosystem. Scott E. Henke http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/26 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/26 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 06:57:31 PDT It appears that coyote (Canis latrans) abundance is determined primarily by availability of food (prey) as mediated through social dominance hierarchies and a territorial land tenure system. This is reflected in rates of reproduction, dispersal, and mortality, with survival of juveniles a major factor. Suggestions for a new generation of simulation models to explore coyote population functions are included. Frederick F. Knowlton http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/25 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/25 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 06:54:02 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) occur within the city limits of most urban areas in Texas, and the Incidence of human X coyote interactions appears to be increasing in recent years. The major damage caused by coyotes in urban areas has been depredation on pets (primarily) and to other animals (e.g., ducks). Direct control of such problem coyotes is often hampered by city/state regulations and/or concern from local officials about negative publicity. Jan E. Loven http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/24 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/24 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:09:41 PDT Perhaps one of the first mentions of the coyote (Canis latrans) by Anglos in early-day journalism was from Mask Twain's notes during his travels through the plains frontier in the early- to mid-19th century. Touring the frontier region before its inevitable subjugation to ranching and farming, Twain wrote of the coyote and its larger more infamous cousin, the wolf(C. lupus), In words which left no doubt to the reader the popular sentiments for such predators of the day Although derogatory in some respects, Twain did concede respect for Canis latrans and made mention of the tricks the coyote would play on domestic dogs as the wagons lumbered across the pristine landscape. Wyman P. Meinzer http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/23 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/23 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:02:48 PDT Wildlife photography has become an increasingly popular hobby over the last 10 years. Coyotes (Canis latrans) are among the more difficult animals to photograph under natural field conditions (i.e., in the "wild"). For studying and photographing coyotes behaving routinely, I recommend the use of a "draw station" (i.e., cow carcass) and a blind that will all low relatively close inspection of coyote interactions. Wyman P. Meinzer http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/22 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/22 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:00:31 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) in the Rolling Plains region of Texas have experienced several factors in the last 40 years that may have possibly influenced population dynamics and feeding niche. The 3 most important changes were (a) the demand for coyote pelts during the 1970s, (b) a region-wide growth of the stocker cattle industry and (c) the increasing incidence of sarcoptic mange. The availability of stocker cattle carcasses may be providing a source of dependable food during a previously stressful period, thus inflating coyote survival and abundance superficially relative to traditional cow/calf ranching areas Sarcoptic mange has been present in Rolling Plains coyotes for about 10 years and appears to be depressing the abundance of coyotes in this region. Wyman P. Meinzer http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/21 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/21 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:58:38 PDT The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America produces about half of the continent's duck population. Predation on hens, young, and eggs severely impacts duck production In the region decreasing fall flights. Recent studies conducted in the region suggest that management efforts to increase duck production need to consider both habitat and predator effects. Research indicates that managing on the landscape level to protect coyotes in sufficient numbers to exclude red foxes should be encouraged in PPR areas suitable for duck production and where the risks of damage to domestic livestock and other wildlife species are minimal. Terry A. Messmer http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/20 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/20 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:54:16 PDT The development of immunocontraception as a tool for population management of coyotes (Canis latrans) and reduction of coyote predation may provide an environmentally safer alternative to pesticides. Because they are proteins, immunocontraceptive vaccines do not persist in the environment or bioaccumulate in the food chain. The National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) will examine the effects (immunological, hormonal and behavioral) of treating penned coyotes with 2 immunocontraceptive vaccines: porcine zona pellucida (PZP) and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH). Initial studies will be conducted using traditional subcutaneous injections; however, the goal IS to develop an orally-deliverable immunocontraceptive vaccine as an alternative tool for coyote population management. Lowell A. Miller http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/19 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/19 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:51:59 PDT The average reported sheep and goat loss to coyotes (Canis latrans) in 1992 on those properties worked by the cooperative animal damage control program were relatively low. Sheep and goat losses were not evenly distributed among the producers. Geographical distribution of the losses reflected a positive relationship between relative coyote density and livestock losses. The sheep and goat industry is adversely affected by the cumulative losses of those producers suffering high levels of predation. Gary Lee Nunley http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/18 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/18 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:49:42 PDT In the early 1900s organized predator control was initiated to remove coyotes (Canis latrans) and wolves (C. lupus and C. rufus) from the sheep and goat producing areas of Texas. Operations were begun in the Edwards Plateau, the largest area of sheep concentration. By the 1920s, many of the inner Edwards Plateau counties were considered to be almost free of coyotes and wolves In the 1950s coyotes and wolves were extirpated from most of the Edwards Plateau After a coyote population irruption in the early 1960s, coyotes began to re-establish themselves on the periphery of the Plateau. This encroachment process has accelerated in the 1990s and thus continues to expose more sheep and goats to predation by coyotes. Gary Lee Nunley http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/17 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/17 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:47:27 PDT The coyote (Canis latrans) population in southern Texas has a recurring group of 3 common helminthes and several peripheral species of lesser importance. Although recurrent group analyses have not been applied to other macro- or microparasite communities, there are certain infectious agents with high prevalences that could form recurrent groups, and that are potentially important in tams of impacting host population (ie , coyote) abundance. While the current rabies epizootic involving coyotes in southern Texas is of public health concern, it probably will not have a major impact on the coyote population. Most likely, the net effect of canine rabies will be compensatory with other mortality factors as occurred in other introduced microparasitic (canine distemper virus, canine parvovirus) and periodically recurring macroparasitic (sarcoptic mange) infections that have caused recent epizootics in this coyote population. In contrast, neotatal mortality from hookworm is conjectured to have a possible regulatory effect on the coyote population in southern Texas, but this remains unproven The effects of disease on the host populations should always be considered prior to initiating management or control strategies for any vertebrate species. Danny B. Pence http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/16 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/16 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:46:14 PDT A variety of control methods used over an 80-year period (1915-1995) contributed to the effective and successful coyote (Canis latrans) damage management program that exists in Texas today. Traps, toxicants, shooting, denning, and dogs were important during the early years of the Texas Animal Damage Control Service (TADCS) program. Aerial hunting and snares evolved as important control tools following the ban on strychnine and Compound 1080 in 1972. The livestock protection collar (LPC) has received increased use in recent years and has been useful in resolving difficult depredation problems. ADC policy along with changing state and federal regulations and public opinion will dictate how specific control tools are used in the future. Robert L. Phillips http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/15 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/15 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:43:58 PDT A national survey of public attitudes to ward wildlife damage management provided the opportunity to extract a data set from Texas respondents on predator management Texas respondents were generally more supportive of predator control for livestock protection than the rest of the U S., although the overall trends were similar. Lethal technologies scored low on a humaneness scale. Douglas Reiter http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/14 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/14 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:41:48 PDT Lethal control techniques for controlling coyotes (Canis latrans) are often maligned as a means for resolving coyote depredations on domestic livestock. With the exception of the Livestock Protection Collar (LPC), lethal control methods (e.g., foot-hold traps and neck snares) lack the ability to specifically remove those coyotes actually preying upon livestock. The LPC capitalizes on attack behavior of coyotes to remove offending individuals. Although currently registered for use in 5 states, LPCs have been used routinely only in Texas. Success with LPCS involves an understanding of coyote behavior and proper targeting of collared livestock. LPCs have been used in Texas to successfully remove problem coyotes that have learned to evade other forms of control, and this may be their niche In an arsenal of lethal and nonlethal control alternatives. Herein, I review the development and testing of LPCs and current use in Texas. Dale Rollins http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/13 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/13 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:40:14 PDT This symposium is dedicated to the life, achievements and memory of Samuel L. Beasom. From the first time that I considered trying to assemble this symposium, Sam Beasom was on my list of key people to include. Sam's professional contributions and his dry wit would surely play a pivotal role in a conference on coyotes in the Southwest, especially one to be conducted in Texas. I never dreamed then that his contributions, and subsequent recognition, would be presented posthumously here today. Dale Rollins http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/12 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/12 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:38:04 PDT Long before the recent clamor over endangered species, predators and their management were controversial The coyote (Canis latrans) is often at the center of such debates. Cursed by some, revered by others, respected by all, the coyote is an icon of the Southwest. Dale Rollins http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/11 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/11 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:35:53 PDT Some call him a song dog, Some call him an ol' wolf Let me tell you fellers, He shore is tuff Kent Rollins http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/10 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/10 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:33:44 PDT Predators and predator management in general are always controversial topics. As with most controversies, both ends of an emotional continuum vie for the attention of the nonvocal, uncommitted majority. To provide unbiased information on the controversy surrounding coyotes (Canis latrans) in Texas, the Texas Agricultural Extension Service produced a 23-minute video in 1991. The video addresses both "sides" of the coyote "coin" while providing factual biological information on the topic. The video has been quite popular, and has received both state and national awards. Dale Rollins http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/9 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/9 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:31:37 PDT My career as an extension wildlife specialist and a university administrator has allowed me to monitor both the public and private sectors' perspectives on coyotes (Canis latrans) and their associated management policies. Selected experiences described herein illustrate the problems (current and future) that characterize emotionally-charged conflicts like those typified by coyote control efforts. Milo J. Shult http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/8 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/8 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:28:29 PDT The coyote (Canis latrans) is certainly one of the most destructive predators affecting the livestock industry, particularly sheep and goats. In fact, title of this session is very appropriate, because when you talk about "politics", coyotes seem to have more politicians working for them than any other animal. Bill Sims http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/7 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/7 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:07:20 PDT Coyotes (Canis latrans) are abundant throughout North America, some of the highest densities occur in south Texas. Most studies indicate abundance of food as a contributing factor of coyote density. High coyote populations can lead to localized depredation problems and the current canine rabies epizootic is of concern to residents of south Texas. Rick Sramek http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/6 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/6 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:06:10 PDT The challenge and thrill of recreational hunting for coyotes (Canis latrans) has increased greatly over the last 20 years. The popularity of calling coyotes especially is increasing east of the Mississippi River as coyote populations continue to increase their range and abundance in that area. Gerald Stewart http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/5 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/5 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:03:56 PDT Acceptable solutions to animal damage problems must consider the social and recreational values of wildlife, regulation of population levels, potential hazards of chemical use, human safety and disturbance to biotic communities. The objective should be to reduce harm and economic loss of livestock to an acceptable level. This paper, reviews alternative, i.e. nonlethal, predator management methods. Alternative methods include guard animals, fencing, repellents, frightening devices and perhaps someday, immuno-contraception. The intent of animal damage control should be an integrated pest management approach tailored to fit the individual landowner's needs. Crystal A. Wilbanks http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/4 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/4 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:01:27 PDT White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) herd control is one of the principal problems faced by private lands game managers. Private landowners unwilling to permit adequate numbers of sport hunters on their lands force deer managers to exercise other harvest strategies, one of which is natural population control by protecting the coyote (Canis latrans). I describe an ongoing case study in South Texas where predation by coyotes may be considered a positive tool in deer population management. Robert E. Zaiglin http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/3 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/3 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:17:48 PDT Sections are: Biology Ecology Perspectives Management Coyotes vs. Game Management Coyotes vs. Livestock Politics Control Alternatives Appendix http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/2 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/2 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:14:27 PDT Includes: Cover Editors Sponsors Steering Committee Acknowledgements Printer http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/1 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/coyotesw/1 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:07:43 PDT This is the complete volume, containing all 40+ articles and presentations. Each article is also hosted here separately under its individual title and authors. Dale Rollins