Urban Coyotes in Kansas

1
Urban Coyotes in Kansas

• Matt Peek
• Furbearer Biologist
• Kansas Dept of Wildlife and Parks

2
Background

• Distribution

• Abundance

Voigt Berg, 1987
3
Description Life History

• 25-35 pounds
• Lifespan 3-5 yrs
• Reproduction
• Mate in Feb/March
• Pups in April/May
• Mobile at 1 month
• Nearly adult-sized at 6 months
• Disperse in Oct/Nov (6-9 months)
• Learn from adults

Coyote
Red fox
4
Home Range

• Rural 8-15 sq mi
• Urban
• LA 1.1 sq mi
• Tuscon 5 sq mi
• Chicago 2-9 sq mi
• Transients vs Residents

5
Habits

• Most active at dawn dusk
• Highly Omnivorous

Gehrt, 2004
Andelt Mahan, 1978
6
(No Transcript)
7
Urban Coyote Issues

• Not new in U.S.
• Originated in SW
• Newer in Midwest
• Infrequent (new?) in KS

Gehrt, 2004 (from IL DNR)
8
Concerns

• Diseases/Parasites
• Rabies
• Mange (mite - Sarcoptes scabiei)
• Canine Distemper
• Parvovirus
• Canine Heartworm
• Fleas Ticks
• Intestinal Parasites
• Pet attacks
• Cats
• Small-medium sized dogs
• People (children) attacks
• Originated in SW
• Over 100 attacks in S Cal since 1970s
• AZ, NJ, Canada
• 1 death, S Cal, 1981
• Increasing

9
Precautions

• Do not feed the coyotes
• Pet food, food scraps, bird feeders, etc.
• Reduces association with people
• Makes area less hospitable
• Minimize shrubs tall vegetation
• Do not let coyotes lose fear of people
• Neg. Stimuli (chase, make noise, throw rocks)
• Keep pets confined/supervised
• When should you be concerned? (Gehrt)
• Coyotes in yards during day, flee when
  approached, attack pets consider removal
  program
• Coyotes taking pets from yards, approaching
  people w/out fear, showing aggression towards
  negative stimuli, following children initiate
  removal program

Food directly from people
Association with people
Positive stimuli
Acclimation
Other food
Negative stimuli
Avoidance
10
Removal Options

• Shooting
• Shotgun w/ buckshot
• Isolated areas only
• Trained personnel
• Consider pre-baiting
• Trapping
• Cage traps
• Foothold traps
• Snares (cable restraints)
• Body gripping traps (n/a)

11
Cage Traps

• Way et al, 2002
• Urban Massachusetts
• 22 coyotes captured (7 repeat captures)
• 1447 trap nights (7006 total nights)
• 1 coy/50 t.n. (1 coy/140 total t.n.)
• 358 non-coyote captures (lt6 selective)
• Box traps were undesirable to use for capturing
  coyotes because of trap expense, time involved in
  baiting and conditioning coyotes to traps, the
  high rate of nontarget captures, and the fact
  that it was difficult to capture gt1 adult in a
  social group.
• Shivik et al, 2005
• Rural AZ TX
• 0 coyotes in 492 t.n.
• (25 coyotes captured in padded trap in 517 t.n.)

12
Foothold Traps

• Modern
• Vary by
• Size
• Jaw design
• Width
• Distance offset
• Padding
• Features
• Pan tension screw
• Shock absorber
• Intent is injury free capture
• gt95 of coyotes captured in certain trap types
  had no moderately severe or severe injuries
  (IAFWA BMPs, in process)
• Most versatile trap type

13
Cable Restraint

• Modern
• Passive (non-powered)
• Features
• Restraining lock, b.a.d., deer stop
• Intent is live-restraint
• Over 200 canines, 0 mortalities (WI DNR,
  2001-2003)

14
Trap Research

• Goal of BMPs to identify the best traps and
  trapping systems
• Based on
• Injury levels
• Efficiency
• Selectivity
• Captured gt1000 coyotes in 20 different trap types
• Identification document available, scientific
  publication under review
• www.fishwildlife.org

15
Do they work?

• Cook Co, IL - Urban Coyote Capture
• Gehrt - Over 300 coyotes captured
• So far Ive captured over 60 coyotes. There was
  no permanent damage to the coyotes caught in
  either the snares or the footholds. Traps were
  checked on a 24-hour basis. I did have one
  pullout and a couple of chewouts on snares. With
  the snares we have held no non-target catches in
  2½ years, and no fatalities on a single coyote
  using the Reichert lock. Rob Erickson, WCT
• Research
• NADC permittees
• Mostly padded foothold
• traps, cable restraint by
• by permit (Bluett)
• Removal

16
Do they work?

• Reintroductions
• KS river otters
• CO lynx
• Mexican wolves (SW)
• Research
• KS River otters, 2008
• KS coyotes and bobcats, 1998

17
Other devices

• Belisle foot snare

• Collarum

18
Control Summary

• No technique is perfect
• Several techniques have been used effectively in
  intensely urban areas
• Multiple techniques may be necessary
• Coyotes are wary
• Situations vary
• Trapping and pets
• Selecting the proper devices will minimize
  likelihood of capture and injury
• There are other hazards besides trapping. The
  owner should be responsible for free-ranging pets.

19
Relocation

• Often driven by emotional concern for welfare of
  ONE ANIMAL

20
Relocation

• The bigger picture

21
Concerns About Relocations

• Disease Spread
• High mortality
• Reoccurrence of problem
• Impacts on resident wildlife likely negative
• No conservation benefits at population level