# My Gutpile question thanx 4 the reply NBR



## pheaz (Feb 11, 2011)

I have a hard time understanding when is the "CORRECT TIME" to kill yotes? A dead yote is a good yote anytime I see one. Kill one before the breed or while carrying you then killed a bunch. Kill one before breeding they cant breed after that. Kill em anytime and save the deer year round. Please someone with biology skills explain this to me?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

That reply from Reb was spot on FOR SURE!

Not sure why the UWN has to lock it?.....
The expletives are blanked out......I mean really, That's school kid stuff these days.

And as far as coyotes go, Once they are raised old enough to fend for themselves,
They DISPERSE,,,,NOT pack up, as wolves do...

The argument of ' killing them at the right time',,, Doesn't hold a thimble full of water!
Kill every one you see,,,,When ever you see it...

(pheaz, Bull info PMed)


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I get how killing them in the spring will possibly make the pups starve and reduce the number of yotes preying on fawns. I also get killing them in the winter will stop them before they ever get a chance to reproduce and prey on fawns. 

I get it if you let up the pressure on them they grow out if control just like wolves. A dead yotes is a dead yotes. 

I just wish people in utah hunted them as hard as they hunt the deer.


----------



## bigbr (Oct 24, 2007)

Rebel,

You are spot on with me man...
I guess I got to get a guttpile membership!
Big


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Not sure why the UWN has to lock it?.....
> The expletives are blanked out......I mean really, That's school kid stuff these days.


Why it was locked? It was clearly explained, but I will repeat; this is a forum for outdoors discussion in a civilized manner, not a place for drunks to post their filthy rants in a semi crazy manner. If posts are really good or points have merit, why would they need to add emphasis with expletives? Quite simply they lack the brain power IMHO. The forum is frequented by youth as they learn about the outdoors and they simply don't need the filth; that is available anywhere...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> That reply from Reb was spot on FOR SURE!
> 
> Not sure why the UWN has to lock it?.....
> The expletives are blanked out......I mean really, That's school kid stuff these days.
> ...


I wonder why you feel differently about mountain lions.....could it be because you earn money off of lions and not coyotes........? Why aren't you calling for the "kill every one you see,,,,when ever you see it..." for cougars? :shock: :O•-:


----------



## creature22 (Jul 25, 2011)

I would say now is the time to kill coyotes because areas I hike I always see more of them this time of year. Deer are still in larger groups and I the coyotes always seem to be nearby.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > That reply from Reb was spot on FOR SURE!
> ...


Let me fill you in on a little secret here BART......

In most units of the state, ( I'll use caps and type slowww), LION NUMBERS ARE DOWN

Right now, 75% of the state is OPEN to Harvest objective lion hunting WITH,,
Wait for it...............................................UNLIMITED TAGS!!

Here ya go BART, Shot them all (lions), Or should I say shoot the few that are left.

As of today, counting ALL cougar mortality, HO,LE, Depredation,,,,,This season (year),
that started in November, There have been 276 lions killed in the entire state....!!!

Two weeks ago, aerial gunners shot that many coyotes off ONE corner section
of Monroe!!!! Maybe a 50 mile square area!

See BART, I'm calling for "shooting every coyote"...Because thats were the problem is 

Were are all the fawns been going????? ...... I'll answer that ..... COYOTES .......


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I don't know about the right time or wrong time thing. All I know is that my dog has had 8 puppies with every litter. She could have 2 litters per year. Dogs multiply much faster than big game.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

My personal opinion is that we should optimize our ROI and use the funds in the most efficient way possible. If we want to have the greatest impact on coyotes and subsequently deer, removing coyotes in specific problem areas (Not all areas are being inundated with coyote predation) is key. Handing out 50 dollars statewide to every Thomas, Richard and Harold that brings in a coyote isn't optimal. Killing the right dogs at the right time of year in specific locations is.

Here's a bit of information to chew on.

http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Doc ... _2001a.pdf

http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/predators-mule-deer.html

http://www.cfc.umt.edu/HebLab/PDFS/WM_H ... _small.pdf



> Changes in estimates of pack size and coyote density, plus the number of animals removed, indicated the coyote population was reduced 44-61% and 51-75% in the removal area during 1987 and 1988, respectively.
> 
> As expected, annual survival rates declined significantly for coyotes in the removal area compared to coyotes in the non-removal area. Removals brought about a drastic reduction in pack size and a corresponding decrease in density. However, both pack size and density rebounded to pre-removal levels within 8 months post-removal.





> Litter size significantly increased in the removal area 2 years after the beginning of exploitation.


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_dama ... ese056.pdf


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

So tell me Tree,,,,

Why cant we (Utah) do Both????

Let the recreational, $50, guy go anywhere.....

Let wildlife services & DWR concentrate on targeted problem areas......

It's a win / win situation,,YET, some still want to argue/debate a very good thing.. :lol:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

If we had unlimited funds, I'd be in favor. But we don't, so I'm inclined to think we need to spend it wisely. 

If you owned an orange grove and had a budget to harvest oranges, would you just hand out money to whomever had two hands and wanted to pick oranges? I'd personally want to hand money to folks who knew what a ripe orange looked like and a ladder in the back of their truck.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Why not have a $50 bounty season. (From April 1st to Aug. 1st) on certain units that need it and keep the $20 bounty for the rest of the year and state.
Those who want to be part of the $50 bounty system, will need to take an education course.
Also, those who illegally harvest coyotes outside the bounty boundries or season dates and collect a bounty for illegal coyotes, will be subject to a $1,000 fine.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Good ideas and I think these are the types of things that need to be addressed. The truth is, bounties may not be available to just anyone, which I agree with. 

Selective harvest of coyotes on a large scale will ultimately assist deer herd growth. I just want to see that maximized.

I'd up that to a $10,000 fine. No reason not to make it stiff.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> So tell me Tree,,,,
> 
> Why cant we (Utah) do Both????
> 
> ...


Tree makes a good point! Money spent in the services of professionals is much more valuable than that spent on the recreational, $50, guy. The professional may charge more per coyote SHOT, but not per coyote KILLED, nor per mule deer saved. A coyote shot in the right area at the right time of year reduces the coyote population six or seven-fold due to fetus/den/pup reductions and saves more deer than a coyote shot in the wrong area at the wrong time. For instance, I could go west of here (Enoch) and shoot a coyote almost any time of year. The trouble is, the coyotes west of here take pronghorn fawns, not mule deer, and only in the spring, but I'll still take my $50, thank you very much!

Per Tree's links: "Small reductions in predator numbers are unlikely to have any lasting effect on predator populations. For Example, Connolly and Longhurst (1975) estimated that coyotes could easily withstand annual harvests of 70% and even with 75% harvest, coyote populations could persist for 50 years." Your example of the aerial shooting of 200+ (1400 total dead) coyotes in a 50 square mile area isn't likely to be 70% of the population in that area and that area is only 1/930th (50x930=46,500 sq.mi.) approx of public accessible deer habitat, let alone total coyote habitat, which is almost everywhere in Utah's 82,158 square miles. There is no way at $50 per each in the hands of recreational hunters, we could afford to kill enough coyotes statewide to make a difference. If we could indeed regulate and verify the location of the kill, it could make a difference in some specific areas, but that would be difficult to accomplish. The fine would certainly help!

However, if that $1,250,000 all went to the professionals, we'd get much more for our money and it would make a difference in the areas where it needs to. It's not the $5 increase that's the issue for me, it's how it is used.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

elkfromabove said:


> It's not the $5 increase that's the issue for me, it's how it is used.


Since the bill the legislature passed is open ended as for how the DWR is to spend the money, the DWR is able to do just what you guys are talking about. And I would expect them to do so.

In the meantime, those of you that want to go out and lay waste to the yote population, knock yourselves out! Nobody is saying you can't or shouldn't on here. Some of this debate is cracking me up here at work. o-||


----------



## pheaz (Feb 11, 2011)

I really dont care when and where a yote is killed bottom line its dead. A dead yote will not and cannot reproduce RIGHT? A dead yote is a good yote. End of story. Whether its killed by professional sharp shooter or the recreational guy its dead. EFA I feel different the professional guys pobably charge for a variety of things fuel surcharges etc etc. The recreational guy gets $50 bucks per/yote no matter If he goes 1 mile or 1000 miles to kill yotes. Is there really a right or wrong time of year to kill yotes I REALLY DONT THINK SO.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

ridgetop said:


> Why not have a $50 bounty season. (From April 1st to Aug. 1st) on certain units that need it and keep the $20 bounty for the rest of the year and state.
> Those who want to be part of the $50 bounty system, will need to take an education course.
> Also, those who illegally harvest coyotes outside the bounty boundries or season dates and collect a bounty for illegal coyotes, will be subject to a $1,000 fine.


I like these ideas.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

pheaz said:


> I really dont care when and where a yote is killed bottom line its dead. A dead yote will not and cannot reproduce RIGHT? A dead yote is a good yote. End of story. Whether its killed by professional sharp shooter or the recreational guy its dead. EFA I feel different the professional guys pobably charge for a variety of things fuel surcharges etc etc. The recreational guy gets $50 bucks per/yote no matter If he goes 1 mile or 1000 miles to kill yotes. Is there really a right or wrong time of year to kill yotes I REALLY DONT THINK SO.


Your original post was about the CORRECT TIME to shoot coyotes and you wanted, "Please someone with biology skills explain this to me?" Unfortunately, the only responses thus far are from us biologically unskilled amateurs who can only reference the findings of the "skilled" biologists and that doesn't seem to answer your request. Maybe you've asked the wrong question. You may be right in that there may not be a CORRECT TIME or a right or wrong time. I think, however, there may be a BETTER TIME (and PLACE) and since our funds are limited, we ought to do our best to maximize the use of those funds.

It's like most everything in life (losing weight, getting an education, hunting for a trophy, raising a family, earning a living, etc.) in that we all have only 24 hours per day and we can spend them however we wish, but some things we choose to do with those hours will be more beneficial to reaching our goals than others. (Thus, I need to get off this #*#* computer and work on the shower so that we can get the house ready for appraisal for our refinance loan.) All we're saying is that most findings indicate that February to June is biologically better, per the breeding, birthing, litter size adjustments and care of youngens of both species, than July to January if our goal is to kill enough coyotes to make a difference in the long range health of the deer population. In July to January, you have to shoot six or seven times more coyotes to make a difference than the number required in February to June, so there seems to, indeed, be a BETTER TIME.

That being said, you're correct in saying ANY dead coyote is certainly better than ANY live coyote for the purposes of saving or growing the deer herds and the $500,000 in the hands of recreational hunters is better than not having the $500,000.


----------



## BEASTWOOD (Jun 29, 2010)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> If we had unlimited funds, I'd be in favor. But we don't, so I'm inclined to think we need to spend it wisely.
> 
> If you owned an orange grove and had a budget to harvest oranges, would you just hand out money to whomever had two hands and wanted to pick oranges? I'd personally want to hand money to folks who knew what a ripe orange looked like and a ladder in the back of their truck.


 Sorry Tree but I cant seem to make the connection between a citrus fruit grown in Florida 
and a bunch of deer eating coyotes in Utah. I understand that if you pick an orange at the wrong time the whole grove will go into a manic reproduction overdrive and the state could possibly end up completely juiced. So with that in mind your best bet would be to go down to the local Home Depot parking lot and hire some amigos that know fruit picking (and drywall) like nobody's business. They may or may not have a ladder in their peek up truck though. :lol: :twisted: :lol: :twisted:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Let me fill you in on a little secret here BART......
> 
> In most units of the state, ( I'll use caps and type slowww), LION NUMBERS ARE DOWN
> 
> ...


WOW, you called me by my name, RANDY. See, I can do it to, and you know what...it makes me so much cooler than before.......
I also noticed you ducked the question, not that I am even slightly surprised. If coyotes are keeping deer numbers down, then how can cougars not be hurting deer numbers also? After all, a mature lion will kill a deer a week, while I highly doubt even the biggest and baddest coyotes comes anywhere near that number. So, to be consistent, you should be calling for the eradication of cougars in Utah, forget your bank account, its all about the deer population, remember?!
As for fawns, if you are interested, come on down to my place, RANDY, and we will go observe the local deer population. In doing so, you will observe loads of fawns, with many of them being sets of twins. And, if you stick around until evening you will hear a chorus of yips, barks, and howls from all directions. Yes, there are that many coyotes in the SAME area as all those fawns. Don't believe me? Take me up on my offer and prove me wrong. Then you can come on here and shout to the UWN world....and no doubt the MM world, how you proved BART is full of dung and doesn't know squat. How about it?


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

BART is full of dung and doesn't know squat. How about it?


PS-this may have been taken out of context! :O•-:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

After I squat, am I still full of dung?


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> After I squat, am I still full of dung?


I would guess only up to your collarbone after that.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

How many coyotes need to be killed to even make a difference? Coyotes are like rats and they will have large litters when the food supply is high. Hunting coyotes takes a lot of skill because coyotes are a very smart animal. Even if you do call in a coyote then most people can't even shoot him especially when he's on the run. Coyotes also get educated fast and many won't come into a call or will circle down wind to catch the scent.

I believe with this $50 bounty coyote we might kill 5,000 and this number seems pretty high. 5,000 coyotes isn't nothing. Even if we do kill a few coyotes that does mean the deer survive because many deer get hit by cars. 

We trapped, shot, poisoned coyotes for years and they never were eliminated like the wolves.

How many coyotes do you think some of the best coyote hunters kill a year?

People on this site talk about the 200 plus coyotes killed on the Monroe. Well taking those coyotes out is fine, but 200 plus more coyotes will move into that area. Plus they probably didn't even kill half the coyotes in that area.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

ya we should just give up and let the coyotes have the deer. We cant control them! We as hunters dont have a role in the natural cycle anyways. Its useless to even try laughs peta!

While were add it we should just ban bear hunting with dogs and bait and ban hunting lions with dogs. We cant control or manage them either laughs peta!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

SWbuckmater, lions and bears are far easier to control than coyotes as I'm sure that you are aware. I believe that killing coyotes is more a feel good proposal because people think we are going to save our deer. Yes, killing coyotes helps and I always try to do my part. We as hunters shouldn't be expecting that if we kill a few coyotes then we are saving deer. 

Again, I ask how many coyotes need to be killed to even make a difference? But hey killing coyotes takes a lot of attention off of SFW. Coyotes are a very tough animal to get rid of otherwise we would have exterminated them long ago.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> SWbuckmater, lions and bears are far easier to control than coyotes as I'm sure that you are aware. I believe that killing coyotes is more a feel good proposal because people think we are going to save our deer. Yes, killing coyotes helps and I always try to do my part. We as hunters shouldn't be expecting that if we kill a few coyotes then we are saving deer.
> 
> Again, I ask how many coyotes need to be killed to even make a difference? But hey killing coyotes takes a lot of attention off of SFW. Coyotes are a very tough animal to get rid of otherwise we would have exterminated them long ago.


I believe you need to kill something like 75% of the population in order to keep populations down. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but that is a very common figure I've found in my limited research on coyote predation studies.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

JuddCT said:


> coyoteslayer said:
> 
> 
> > SWbuckmater, lions and bears are far easier to control than coyotes as I'm sure that you are aware. I believe that killing coyotes is more a feel good proposal because people think we are going to save our deer. Yes, killing coyotes helps and I always try to do my part. We as hunters shouldn't be expecting that if we kill a few coyotes then we are saving deer.
> ...


----------



## HunterGeek (Sep 13, 2007)

I'm not normally pessimistic, but I am realistic about the data. And unfortunately, the available scientific evidence suggests that it will be nearly impossible to lower coyote numbers by simply upping hunting pressure on them.

Coyotes, like most animals, increase in numbers until their densities balance out with the limiting factors of available food, habitat, disease, etc. Because coyote pairs typically produces 4 to 8 pups per litter per year, coyote numbers can increase rapidly until the point where those limiting factors balance births with deaths. Once coyote populations reach this equilibrium point of births to deaths, their high reproductive rates make it very difficult to reduce their numbers. Hunters can kill more than half the coyotes in a given area during a year, but because of their high birth rates, their total numbers the following year will rebound to pretty much what they would have been if no coyotes had been hunted. In other words, once the limiting equilibrium point is reached in their populations, it really makes no difference whether hunters kill a given percentage of the population or whether the limiting factors of available food supply kills them - either way, the same number of coyotes die during the year and are replenished the following year from the remaining female's high birth rates.

Mathematical models suggest that it might be necessary to kill or prevent the birth of 70 to 75 percent of all coyotes in a given area each year, then repeat that process with equal effectiveness in all subsequent years in order to have a longterm effect on coyote numbers.



Texas Natural Wildlife said:


> The Effects of Control on Coyote Populatons
> Simulation experiments with the C-L model showed that the primary effect of killing coyotes was to reduce coyote population density, thereby stimulating density-dependent changes in natality and natural mortality rates. The simulated population survived indefinitely when 70% of its members were killed annually, but declined to zero in about 50 years when 75% were killed each year. Coyote populations reduced by intensive control returned to pre-control densities within 3-5 years after control was terminated.


Coyotes are arguably the most intelligent animals in North America. They're also extremely adaptable, and even though they're carnivorous predators, they're also opportunistic feeders that can survive on most anything from roadkill to insects to mice to berries to prickly pears. They're also highly mobile in the sense that a population at equilibrium with limiting factors will simply expand into adjacent areas using the excess numbers of coyotes that normally would have perished because of those limiting factors. My best guess is that if 100 percent of the coyotes on Monroe mountain were killed this year, that within two years the population would be back up to maximum density due to immigration from the adjacent Fish Lake, Parker Mtn., Tusher and Mt. Dutton areas.

Add all this up, and if God managed to design a perfect animal, it would likely be a toss-up between the ****roach and the coyote.

So yes, I agree with Coyoteslayer on this one. This whole recent drive to hunt coyotes into submission that SFW, through our gullible state legislature, has imposed on the DWR has been little more than either ignorance or pandering to feel-good emotions on the part of SFW. Even though the DWR knows that the scientific evidence suggests that hunting coyotes will do little to nothing to control coyotes (remember, they didn't ask the legislature for this extra money), I hope that they figure out a way to effectively use the money to explore alternative methods of effectively reducing coyote populations.

So far, however, the only proven method of reaching that 70-75 percent yearly kill and birth prevention number is through a combination of all current kill/control methods, plus the widespread use of 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate) poison bate targeting pregnant females or coyote pairs with pups. The feds, though, have placed so many restrictions on its use that it's not even an option that's on the table. There are some interesting possibilities out there, though, like bait containing birth control chemicals instead of poison, but even this faces big EPA hurdles to implement - even if it's proven to work.

Due to all the reasons listed above and more, the current mad rush to fix the mule deer problem by killing coyotes likely won't work. It seems that over the past decade that a new idea on how to increase mule deer numbers floats to the surface every other year or so. Unfortunately, most of these ideas are populist measures with little or no biological science supporting them. It's too bad, but these are the sorts of things that happen when we have wildlife management driven by social pressure instead of data and science.

For those inclined to do so, there are lots of good studies on this whole subject that have been done over the years. The best, however, are locked behind pay subscriptions to scientific journals, but still, they're there for those wanting to know more. For example, Googling "coyote population dynamics" and similar phrases will turn up a wealth of good data and information.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

HunterGeek said:


> Add all this up, and if God managed to design a perfect animal, it would likely be a toss-up between the ****roach and the coyote.
> 
> So yes, I agree with Coyoteslayer on this one. This whole recent drive to hunt coyotes into submission that SFW, through our gullible state legislature, has imposed on the DWR has been little more than either ignorance or pandering to feel-good emotions on the part of SFW. Even though the DWR knows that the scientific evidence suggests that hunting coyotes will do little to nothing to control coyotes (remember, they didn't ask the legislature for this extra money), I hope that they figure out a way to effectively use the money to explore alternative methods of effectively reducing coyote populations.
> 
> Due to all the reasons listed above and more, the current mad rush to fix the mule deer problem by killing coyotes likely won't work. It seems that over the past decade that a new idea on how to increase mule deer numbers floats to the surface every other year or so. Unfortunately, most of these ideas are populist measures with little or no biological science supporting them. *It's too bad, but these are the sorts of things that happen when we have wildlife management driven by social pressure instead of data and science.*


HunterGeek, I nominate your post as Post of the Year! Spot on, very insightful, and well stated! I have been referring coyotes to ****roaches for years.....


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

:shock: So you guys are telling me if you had ****roaches in your home and you couldn't use poison to control their numbers you wouldn't try and suck them out with a vacuum, smash them, burn them, ect. You would just allow them to take over your home and reach a natural state where they control their own numbers? Yuk!


----------



## HunterGeek (Sep 13, 2007)

For all I know vacuuming up ****roaches is just as effective as poisoning them — assuming you can catch them before they run off.

A better analogy, I think, would be like trying to control the number of blow flies on a dead cow with a fly swatter. Stay out all day in the hot sun, endure the stink, swat thousands of flies and at the end of the week you'll end up with just as many maggots as you would have had if you'd spent the day indoors drinking lemonade.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

No, you kill the ****roaches. Another good way to get rid of ****roaches is to clean your house or apartment. BUT, you will always have ****roaches if your neighbors have ****roaches. I speaking from experience living in Mexico.

No one is saying not to kill coyotes because I love it. It just won't have the affect that most hunters are expecting. SFW is selling false hope.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> :shock: So you guys are telling me if you had ****roaches in your home and you couldn't use poison to control their numbers you wouldn't try and suck them out with a vacuum, smash them, burn them, ect. You would just allow them to take over your home and reach a natural state where they control their own numbers? Yuk!


You kill the ****roaches using the best/most effective resource available (biowarfare). Unfortunately we don't have that option. That is why we are debating what is the next best option.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I have an analogy that I think is similar.....I have LOTS of pot guts, and I have asked for help on thinning them out. Many from this site have graciously enough to VOLUNTARILY come down and let the lead fly. After four straight weeks of having people shooting them, I am just starting to notice a difference. But, I will be surprised if the numbers stay down for long, as the babies should be emerging shortly, and then it will be like none were ever killed. It is fun to kill the dirty buggers, and it is likely there would be far more if no one thinned them out, but I would be foolish to think I could wipe them all out w/o a massive poison campaign, and even then it would be short-lived if the neighboring land didn't do likewise.... Oh, and I REALLY appreciate those who have been nice enough to come down and throw lead around!!
Managing coyotes is wise, and prudent. But, to think placing a $50.00 bounty on them will have any serious short/long term effect is a mistake. Sure, hunting coyotes is fun, and is useful in some ways, but having people pay extra to do so is a waste of precious resources, IMHO.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

HunterGeek said:


> A better analogy, I think, would be like trying to control the number of blow flies on a dead cow with a fly swatter. Stay out all day in the hot sun, endure the stink, swat thousands of flies and at the end of the week you'll end up with just as many maggots as you would have had if you'd spent the day indoors drinking lemonade.


 But, you would be 20 lbs thinner........ :mrgreen:

I learned that pulling morning glory in my lawn was a waste of time/energy. I finally did some research and found that when you pull them, they regenerate 2-5 new plants for every one you pull. Sure, my lawn looked better for a few days, but 1-2 weeks later it was over-run with the vermin! Coyotes have proven to be incredibly resilient, and if the goal is eradication, the goal will NEVER be met. Now, managing them is a worthy goal, and one that can be met. I just don't see how raising the costs to hunt deer will help in any measurable way. IMHO, this is yet another INTENTIONAL distraction that takes the focus of the real issues/causes of the struggling deer numbers, and puts the focus on fluff!


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

Pheaz, the answer to your question is that killing coyotes not at the right time is that if you kill coyotes before breeding season then when breeding season comes they are going to have more pups than if you didn't kill them.
Coyotes have pups based on the coyote population. If the population is low a female will have more pups during that breeding season, if the population is high or at max capacity the female will have less pups. 
If the coyotes are killed after breeding and before giving birth then you can make a difference. 
Not saying don't kill every coyote you see. but just so you know that one coyote you kill could be a dominate male and when you kill him 3 or 4 less dominate coyotes might move in. So now instead of one deer killer you have four.
This is why population control should be left to the professionals. 
I don't know if I made sense. Hope it helps.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

As someone who hunts coyotes quite often( just ask the wife!) I have watched countless coyotes all times of the year and have noticed that the are very oppirtunistic. In Nevada I have seen coyotes around deer with fawns and not even think about going after them. Why because there were millions of pot guts that they were after. Same with cows and calves. I thought for sure they would take into some of those newborn calves but they never did. They just would pounce on a dirt pile and come up with a mouse or pot gut. 
Don't get me wrong I do believe they kill deer as I have seen it too, but if there are other available food sources that are easier to get they will go after that.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Mike, great post.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

We should allow predator populations to be at maximum capacity. Close the hills down to any human activity from December thru June. Put a moratorium on any cabin building and eliminate urban sprawl. Outlaw ATV's and reduce the speed limit to 25mph statewide. Then eliminate hunting for white men and only allow a few 1000 deer to be harvested by Native Americans. That would truly be responsible wildlife management. 

Lets see some of you ACB's post a link to a study saying that wont work. :mrgreen:


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Iron Bear said:


> We should allow predator populations to be at maximum capacity. Close the hills down to any human activity from December thru June. Put a moratorium on any cabin building and eliminate urban sprawl. Outlaw ATV's and reduce the speed limit to 25mph statewide. Then eliminate hunting for white men and only allow a few 1000 deer to be harvested by Native Americans. That would truly be responsible wildlife management.
> 
> Lets see some of you ACB's post a link to a study saying that wont work. :mrgreen:


What a novel study! I searched and searched (not!) and couldn't find one, so I guess, since you're so knowledgeable and persuasive, I look forward to your proposal at the next RAC's and Wildlife Board meetings. That'll fix Monroe for sure. And if that doesn't work, go to the Ute Tribe, Piute Tribe or Navajo Nation and see if they buy any of your ideas! OOO°)OO


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I think Bear should file a lawsuit alleging the DWR has been negligent in managing Utah's deer herds...he should use the same arguments in court that he uses on this forum and see where that gets him!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

I admit I haven't read all of the posts so I may be reiterating what has already been said but I'll throw in my 2 cents on this one. Maybe we shouldn't say the "right" time or "correct time" of year anymore and we should say the "best" time of year to kill coyotes. 

1 - First just to clarify it is not BAD to kill coyotes any time of year. A dead coyote is a dead coyote and any time of year is a "good" time to kill coyotes.

2 - As Tree mentioned it becomes a game of simple economics. Meaning it is difficult to kill enough coyotes to even make a small difference so selecting the best time of year to take coyotes gives you the best bang for your buck.

3 - I think Mike mentioned that if you kill coyotes at the "less ideal" time of year they will breed at a higher rate which is true. As long as the food source is there they will breed at a higher rate as there is less competition for available food and the females get very healthy and strong. (Think of mule deer starting to have twins and even triplets at a higher rate when they are way under carrying capacity because they are very fat and healthy. Same concept applies to coyotes.)

4 - I don't think this has been mentioned but the DWR really tries to target fawning grounds and other areas where coyotes have the biggest impact on mule deer. In these areas if you kill the dominant dogs too early in the year, more dogs simply move in and continue taking deer at key fawning times in key areas. By taking the dominant dogs out of a critical area at the right time then coyotes will have a smaller impact on deer when the fawns are most vulnerable. This is simply an attempt to ensure coyotes kill less deer when deer are easy to kill.

5 - Someone else mentioned this but by taking out pregnant females or females that are taking care of young pups then you actually wipe out one animal plus a few from the next generation. If you take out dominant females too early the dominant males simply find new mates.

I don't think anyone is saying never shoot coyotes. All anyone is saying is that to have the biggest impact the effort should be focused on certain times of the year since we don't have the resources to kill enough dogs to reduce their numbers significantly.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Hey BTW NBR isn't related to Orson Welles is he? That was a fun little story he wrote and well writen I might add. If he isn't already he would be a GREAT fictional writer!! It got be me all jacked up to see the next Bourne movie.

In fact I think it's high time for a Coyote killing super hero....someone take the idea to Marvel. I don't even want any credit for that one.


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

bullsnot said:


> I admit I haven't read all of the posts so I may be reiterating what has already been said but I'll throw in my 2 cents on this one. Maybe we shouldn't say the "right" time or "correct time" of year anymore and we should say the "best" time of year to kill coyotes.
> 
> 1 - First just to clarify it is not BAD to kill coyotes any time of year. A dead coyote is a dead coyote and any time of year is a "good" time to kill coyotes.
> 
> ...


Most reasonable post I think I've read on this topic... And that's including all 43,243,253 other threads that have been started.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

I think NBR tried one of those deer collars on to test if it was to tight. I believe someone needs to sneak over to his house and tranquilize him and remove it because he isn't thinking clearly anymore.


----------

