|
|
Fear Of The Coyote
Call
by:
Heather Smith Thomas |
Over the years, ranchers in our
Idaho valley continually lose a few calves to coyotes,
especially when calves are newborn or very young. One of the
benefits we found while winter calving for 35 years was that by
having the calving cows close at hand (for barn calving) and
continually observed; we didn’t lose any newborns to coyotes. By
contrast, when calving in larger areas, losses were almost a
given; a pair of coyotes could easily kill a newborn calf
because the cow couldn’t protect it from both of them. While she
was chasing one, the other would grab the calf. In a group of
cows, coyotes are often to blame for death and injury to calves
when worried mothers charge around trying to protect their
babies and stampede over young calves that are not yet agile
enough to get up and run. Our son has lost numerous calves over
the years this way, when coyotes sneak into the calving grounds
at night and the cows go ballistic.
Coyotes are also opportunists. One of our neighbors lost 6
calves one spring, in a small group of first calf heifers. The
coyotes got smart to the fact that a heifer might be defenseless
when she was lying down in hard labor. They would start eating
on the calf’s head (and sometimes the heifer’s hindquarters) as
she lay there trying to calve.
Of all the predators that plague stockmen, coyotes are probably
the most damaging. Even though wolves, cougars and bears may
sporadically kill more animals in a certain herd or region,
coyotes are always with us and are responsible for the majority
of losses across the country. Most efforts at predator control
are aimed at coyotes. Much of the funding for these control
measures is shared, coming from federal, state and county
programs. In Oregon, for instance, state funding has become more
limited and the counties continue to provide most of the money
for coyote control.
The 2001 Government Accounting Office report on Wildlife
Services listed a benefit to cost ratio of anywhere from 2 to 1
up to 27 to 1 according to Dave Williams, Oregon division of
USFWS. “These ratios depend on whether you are looking at just
the value of the actual losses we estimate are being prevented,
or looking at each dollar of livestock production saved that
ripples through the local economy several times. It’s hard to
put a value on some facets, but predator control results in
savings to agriculture, to game populations (where USFWS is
helping the state manage predators), etc.” he says.
“It’s more than coincidence that some of the best antelope herds
in the state—which generate funds for the wildlife agencies, are
in areas where we have a long-term predator management program
going on,” says Williams.
He says it’s hard to get exact numbers on livestock killed by
coyotes, but statewide, the coyote is the major predator
regarding numbers of livestock killed and dollar value of
losses. “Probably 60 to 65 percent of predation in Oregon is
attributed to coyotes. We don’t have a program in every county,
and we don’t hear about every depredation event even in the
counties where we do have control programs. If we look at the
National Ag Statistics Service (NASS) survey, the latest one for
sheep losses in Oregon was done for 2005. This is the most
comprehensive number we have, for predator losses. Some states
have NASS do them every year, but on a national basis these are
done every 5 years for sheep and the following year for cattle.
In Oregon, in 2005 there were 2800 adult sheep killed ($325,000
value) by all predators and 5800 lambs killed (worth $331,00).
The 2006 NASS survey for cattle showed that in Oregon 400 adult
cattle were killed, worth $386,000, and 4100 calves killed,
worth $1,464,000,” says Williams. Most of the adult cattle were
killed by larger predators, but the majority of calves lost are
killed by coyotes.
In California, the NASS figures for coyote losses in the year
2000 included 900 adult cattle and 8100 calves. The 2005 survey
listed 100 cattle and 3000 calves lost to coyotes. California
has varied problems with predators because it is a large state
with a thriving livestock industry, says Bruce Hafenfeld
(immediate past president of the California Cattlemen’s
Association) who ranches near Weldon, California. “We are 5th or
6th in the nation for beef production and number one for dairy.
Probably about 1/3 of our state is still owned by people who
raise livestock.
His operation involves private and public land grazing (BLM and
Forest Service) in Kern and Tulare counties in the southern San
Joaquin Valley. “Our cattle run in the Sierras. We have more
predation from coyotes than anything else. They are mainly a
problem during calving, and losses vary depending on the
coyote’s food sources. On a drought year they are more problem
and our losses may be double or triple. In our calving fields,
especially our first calving heifers, coyotes can be difficult
to deal with. They start off eating placentas and the next thing
you know they are getting interested in the calves. When they
start hunting in groups they do a lot of damage,” says Hafenfeld.
In his herd he generally loses 10 to 20 calves per year to
coyotes. “Some years it’s more. Two years ago we got hammered
badly and lost about 30 calves. On first calf heifers it
amounted to about 5 to 7 percent loss, just to predation. On a
normal year it’s more like 2 percent,” says Hafenfeld.
“We don’t want to completely eliminate coyotes because they are
part of the natural balance, eating rodents and rabbits, but
when they get out of hand they cause significant problems—to
farmers as well as ranchers. Some of the worst damage in farming
areas is coyotes chewing on drip irrigation lines. One coyote
can go through an area and chew them up overnight,” he says.
For coyote control, most ranchers rely on their own efforts—to
shoot or snare them. “We sometimes utilize Wildlife Services.
It’s an important program but they are under serious economic
pressures to eliminate or curtail their predator control. The
increasing urban-related problems are getting more attention,”
says Hafenfeld.
Aerial hunting of coyotes, for instance, has been vastly
curtailed due to budget cuts. “Here in California, Wildlife
Services pays a portion of the bill and each county kicks in the
balance, the counties are facing difficult financial situations,
too. Some counties may be lucky to have even one Wildlife
Services person. They are very spread out. Urban calls take up
most of their time when people in town are complaining about
skunks, raccoons, etc. and we have trouble getting them out in
the country where we need them,” says Hafenfeld.
Craig Coolahan, Wildlife Services, says their agency has
agreements in 40 of the 58 counties in California. “In those 40
counties they split costs with us to put specialists into the
counties,” he says. In California coyotes are a non-game animal.
If found damaging crops or harassing livestock they can be
killed by the landowner or producer. Wildlife Services can do
aerial hunting if there is a serious problem in a certain area.
Legal means for coyote control in California is somewhat
limited. The use of leghold (jaw) traps, M-44s and livestock
protection collars was outlawed in 1998 by Proposition 4.
“Protection collars were typically put on lambs, utilizing a
couple rubber bladders filled with 10-80. If a coyote grabbed a
lamb and bit into one of those bladders, the toxic chemical
would kill the coyote,” says Coolahan.
Jay Bodner (Natural Resources committee, Montana Stockgrowers
Association) says that his state has seen an increase in coyote
numbers and livestock losses, but the documentation is sketchy.
“We have some numbers for sheep, but not for cattle. The numbers
compiled by game departments and USFWS are always conservative.
They generally downplay the role of predators in livestock
losses and often say that the unofficial losses are more likely
due to weather, disease and other factors,” says Bodner.
Aerial Hunting
“We do aerial hunting as one of our tools to reduce predation
throughout eastern Oregon,” says Williams. “We have 2 airplanes
and use them a little in the fall, but December through early
June is when we do most of our aerial hunting of coyotes. The
airplanes are important because some of our guys are responsible
for covering up to 11,000 square miles. With planes we can go
into areas of historic coyote predation and try to remove some
of those coyotes prior to calves arriving. We also use the
planes to address a crisis situation if a rancher is being hit
hard by coyotes,” says Williams.
“If we were limited to just using foothold traps, snares, and
the M-44s (cyanide guns)—which all require our people to drive
to every location, this would be too labor intensive and time
consuming. Trap and equipment checks are required by law and
agency policy. The airplane cuts down on the amount of driving
time a trapper must do. He does the best he can with these other
tools, but the airplane can help him stay ahead of the curve on
coyote predation and not have so many livestock producers taking
heavy losses throughout his area of responsibility,” says
Williams.
A ground crew is often crucial to the success of an aerial hunt.
If a rancher is experiencing livestock loss, he calls the
trapper, who determines if it’s coyote, cougar or bear. If it’s
a coyote problem, he determines if it can be adequately handled
with ground control methods or if the airplane is needed. “Being
able to order the airplane and work with our pilot and gunner is
important, as well as having someone on the ground in the
problem area when the plane is working. The ground crew can help
locate coyotes that might not be making themselves known or
can’t be seen from the airplane,” he says.
The ground crew can help lure coyotes out where the airplane
crew can see them, either by calling, or using trained dogs.
“The decoy dogs will go out and entice the coyotes to come
closer, or out into an open area. Another technique is to use
the dogs to lure coyotes into range to shoot from a blind on the
ground. The plane is often very effective by itself, but in
certain situations having someone on the ground working with the
pilot can make it even more effective,” explains Williams.
Trained dogs can also help a trapper locate coyote dens so pups
can be eliminated. “These dogs are trained to go out and attract
the attention of a coyote and run back. The trapper generally
calls the dog back when he sees or hears the coyotes,” he says.
Jack Field (Washington Cattle Association) says that in his
state if a producer has documented impact from coyotes, he can
work with Wildlife Services for aerial control. “Wildlife
Services comes out and does an assessment to see if coyotes have
been killing the sheep or calves. They must do some groundwork
before they can send out a plane. They visit with the landowner
and adjacent landowners to learn the topography and figure out
property lines, and the best areas to take the plane. Generally
the places they have the highest degree of success is where
there’s wide-open landscape (like the Columbia Basin) without
trees or other areas where coyotes can hide,” says Field.
Funding
Utah has a combined state and federal program that helps with
predator control. More than half the trappers in Utah are state
employees, and funding for predator programs is split between
state and federal, augmented by producer matching funds. “We
have a head tax—25 cents per head collected by the brand
inspector at the time of sale on cattle—and this is used for the
predator program,” says Mike Linnell, Utah Division of USFWS.
“There’s also a 75 cents per head on wool sales, collected by
the wool warehouses. We get 59 cents of that, to help manage the
predator program. On top of that, we have a predator damage
control fund, where individual producers pay in and the state
sets money aside to help match whatever the producers put in, up
to $150,000, which puts it up to $300,000. This helps fund the
aerial hunts for coyotes,” says Linnell.
Utah often uses helicopters instead of planes to fly over summer
ranges in the mountains where they can’t safely use a plane. “We
fly our 3 planes over the flatter country, but the match money
is used in the mountains for the helicopters, which is more
expensive. With producers paying into it, and the federal and
state money, this helps stretch our dollars a lot farther—with
everyone contributing. We get very good support from the
livestock community here in Utah,” he says. The predator problem
in that state is huge and if the ranchers had to deal with it by
themselves it would break them. They are operating on very small
profit margins, so every loss cuts into this.
In Wyoming, livestock producers help pay for predator control in
every county, but funding is still sometimes short. Kent Drake,
Predator Management Coordinator (Wyoming Department of
Agriculture) says losses vary from year to year, partly due to
the differences in the amount of predator control that can be
accomplished. Due to budget cuts, some years there is not
adequate control. “The most critical time is during lambing and
calving, and coyotes are a constant problem,” says Drake.
“Each Wyoming county has a predator management board that sets
the price for predator control that’s put on every brand
inspection. Currently we have 19 districts out of the 23 that
are also participating in a state predator management
program—money given by the legislature for this purpose. To
participate, the predator districts charge $1 per head for
cattle and for sheep, and are then eligible to request grant
funding for control measures within their district,” says Drake.
This money can be used for aerial hunts, ground crews, or
whatever is needed. Most counties have contracts with the USDA
Wildlife Services, and can call them into certain areas where
there are problems.
Gene Hardy is one of the ranchers on the Wyoming Animal Damage
Management Board (ADMB). This 15 member board includes cattle
and sheep producers, sportsmen, urban representatives, game and
fish, BLM, Forest Service, etc. “Each county has a predator
management board which obtains funding in various ways. A long
time ago it was done with a tax; you turned in your number of
livestock to the county assessor, who gave them an evaluation,
and you paid that in our taxes—money that was set aside for
predator management. That system didn’t generate enough money
for adequate predator control, however, so it was changed to
where you pay a predator fee, charged whenever an animal changes
hands—at brand inspection,” says Hardy.
“But a few years ago the predator boards were basically broke.
Fees were not high enough to keep up with costs of predator
control, and also the livestock numbers decreased dramatically
during the past 10 years due to drought conditions. So we went
to the legislature 4 years ago to get money from the Wyoming
Board of Agriculture. That money is funneled through our ADMB,
dispensing it to the county boards,” he says. The county boards
have to meet certain qualifications to be eligible.
Coyotes account for about 2/3 of the predator losses in Wyoming.
“We kill a lot of coyotes with aerial hunting and are also
allowed to use M-44s and livestock protection collars (a collar
on the sheep or lamb that contains 10-80). Those collars aren’t
used much, but we do use the M-44, which is a cyanide gun. It’s
triggered when the coyote pulls the top of it (a bait) and it
shoots cyanide into the coyotes’ mouth. We also use traps and
snares,” says Hardy.
In Wyoming the counties participate with Wildlife Services who
supply trappers. Some counties provide their own trappers, but
work with Wildlife Services on aerial control. The state funds
were recently cut by $300,000, however, and this leaves the
programs quite short. In these shaky economic times, predator
control programs are struggling to remain viable in all the
western states.
Sidebar
Wolves are Hindering Coyote Control Programs
When wolves are present in a state and afforded protection under
endangered species laws, not only are you limited in what you
can do to the wolves, but when you are trying to deal with and
control other predators some of your traditional tools may be
limited. “Some of these tools can be restricted because of the
possibility they might endanger a wolf,” says Dave Williams
(Oregon). This can impact the total predator program.
“In Idaho, for instance, this has driven up the cost of predator
control significantly and I suspect it will also happen here in
Oregon. Wolves will definitely get into trouble here, once they
form packs. Right now we just have a few wandering individuals
or pairs, like Idaho had 10 years ago,” says Williams.
Jay Bodner (Montana Stockgrowers Association) says that in the
past few years, the USFWS has become short on money for predator
control. “So there are a lot of Montana counties that are trying
to help cover some of the additional costs. But in the counties
where there are wolf problems, the USFWS is spending almost half
their time dealing with wolves, and have much less time to do
preventative coyote work,” says Bodner. “With all expenses going
up, and flight times being reduced for aerial hunts, predator
control has become more difficult.”
Sidebar
The Challenges Grow
Much of the public is against predator control, not
understanding the importance of these programs. Some people
think that predator control is aimed at helping a few rich
ranchers. “But when you look at the demographics of livestock
producers here in Oregon, at least 95 percent of them are family
operations struggling to survive,” explains Dave Williams.
“In 1997 when Oregon had NASS survey farmers for every type of
wildlife damage, I had them add a question about how much the
producer was spending to prevent wildlife damage. Back then, the
estimate was 6 million dollars spent by farmers and ranchers
across the state, and 1.3 million was spent by livestock
producers to try to prevent predation. The majority of that
expense was good fencing, but also for guard dogs and llamas.
Producers are spending plenty of their own money to try to
protect their livestock,” says Williams.
This is one of the costs of doing business and it keeps going
up. Some people who are not in favor of managing predators say
predation IS the cost of doing business and that stockmen just
have to accept it. Some naïve people actually think the producer
can just pass that added cost on to the consumer who buys the
meat, not realizing that cattle raisers can’t set the price they
receive for their animals. “Even if they could, the predator
losses and costs are not evenly distributed. One rancher might
lose a lot of animals one year while another didn’t lose any.
The general public doesn’t understand this because they are not
in touch with agriculture,” says Williams.
He says our country has the most abundant, affordable and
wholesome food supply in the world. Farmers and ranchers are
taken for granted, and it is a frustrating challenge for many of
them to stay in business. Predator problems are just one more
expense/loss that might wipe them out. Predator control programs
are never enough, but they do help. “The tough economy today is
taking a toll on individuals and also on our budget. We’re going
to be cut 75 percent from the state funding we receive from the
Oregon Department of Agriculture, and cut 33 percent of the
funding from Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,” says
Williams.
“This will impact field employees because that’s were we put
every penny of that money, along with the county money. These
cuts come out of the budget for the person in the field. It may
reduce the number of agents, and impact the timeliness of our
response to predator problems, which is absolutely critical.
More financial burden will be placed on the county to maintain
the local level of service. The state is not only passing on
more of the cost of predator management to the counties, but
also passing on noxious weed control, mental health care
programs, etc. Our counties to date have continued to put in
what they can to the predator programs, at least here in Oregon,
because they recognize the importance of agricultural production
to the local economy. They also recognize it as a resource to
call on when human health and safety is threatened,” explains
Williams.
Jack Field (Washington Cattle Association) says Washington’s
budget for Wildlife Services has been drastically cut. “About 10
years ago the governor eliminated $300,000 of state money on an
annual basis that went to Wildlife Services. This was money
they’d used in the past to cost share on depredation—whether it
was bird control at feedlots, dairies and farms, or aerial
control of coyotes. That money has never come back and never
will,” says Field.
The need for these services continues, however, so the
responsibility falling on private landowners just went up that
much more.
Sidebar
One Rancher’s Experience
Pete Paris, who runs both cattle and sheep on Nevada rangeland
in Elko County, has a lot of problems with coyotes, especially
in his 4 bands of sheep. A female coyote with a litter of pups
will kill lambs daily. “In the spring it may be 5 lambs every
day because they eat only the parts they really like, such as
the internal organs (hearts and livers) and the milk sac. When
the pups are small the adult coyote will gorge itself on these
parts of the lamb and then go back to the den and regurgitate
these for the pups to eat,” says Paris.
“Later on, the adults will eat as much as they can for
themselves and then tear a lamb in half. The male will pack half
a lamb and the female the other half, to take back to their
pups. For themselves, the adults will kill 2 or 3 lambs every
night and eat as much as they can of their favorite internal
parts and then take the meat back to the pups. Often when the
lambs are anywhere from newborn to a month old, a pair of
coyotes will kill 4 or 5 every night,” he explains. If this goes
on night after night it adds up to a serious loss, especially
when you have 3 or 4 bands in which this is happening.
“We get some help from the government hunters but they don’t
have the staff now that they used to. This year they are talking
about cutting 5 more positions in Wildlife Services, due to
budget cuts. They’ve cut numbers for years. There are so many
bands to take care of, they can’t spend enough time on them and
can only work on the one that’s getting the most depredation,”
says Paris.
“We have guard dogs now but can’t use them during lambing time
because here in Nevada we lamb on open range and scatter the
sheep. During that time we have to gather the guard dogs up
because there is no one to feed them. We turn the sheep loose
for about 10 to 15 days. When we do bunch them up, if the
coyotes have been killing lambs we have a hard time getting them
stopped. Once they are doing it, even with a guard dog, they
still keep killing,” he says.
Several years ago he started trying to not depend on the agency
people so much, and to educate his herders about better coyote
control. “We try to teach them to become better shots and to
take only the good opportunity shots—to actually kill the coyote
rather than just scare it away. When I was a kid, hardly any of
the herders were very good with guns; they merely used the gun
to shoot a bunch of times at the coyotes. But a coyote gets used
to that. If you shoot at him in the morning he runs away, and
that night will sneak back in and kill lambs,” says Paris.
Now he has his herders practice with 22s to become better shots,
and coaches them to make every shot count. “I tell them to not
shoot unless they think they can hit the coyote. The coyotes get
braver and if you don’t shoot they will come closer. The herders
argue with me saying the coyote will kill lambs if he comes
closer. But I tell them, what’s better? If he comes in and kills
5 lambs this week and you eventually shoot him, or if you scare
him away the first day and he stays all summer and kills 50 or
60 lambs. It’s hard to get the herder to outwait the coyote
because his natural inclination is to scare it off so it won’t
kill a lamb.”
Another thing he tells his herders is to pay attention to
details. “I tell them, when things are calm and coyotes are
howling, try to pinpoint where they are howling, because this
may be where their den is. Then when the trapper comes, he
doesn’t have to search thousands of acres.” The trapper can more
readily locate the tracks and patterns of travel.
“We still use traps here, and can also call the coyotes to shoot
them. The aerial hunting is a big help, especially if you have a
ground crew with good dogs to help coordinate the aerial hunt.
The coyotes get smart about the airplane and hide. The
sheepherder can tell the ground trapper where the coyotes are
and the ground trapper goes in first with his dogs and has radio
contact with the plane. If the plane is hunting close enough to
where it can be back in 5 minutes, the guy with the dogs can
call for the airplane when the coyotes are located.”
|
|
|
|
