BrentD
Well-known member
That is pretty much the story as I know it.
This does not seem to be happening to Montana wolves, however. Which is a little surprising.
I need to see the science on this one
- Thread starter Bigjay73
- Start date
This does not seem to be happening to Montana wolves, however. Which is a little surprising.
Immigration is a separate issue from the compensatory reproduction mechanisms. Both separately work to rebound local coyote populations. Anytime the local population falls, you create a territory vacancy that peripheral coyotes will naturally flood into, but via mechanisms listed in my last post, you also set off compensatory reproductive mechanisms (increased average litter size, breeding by subordinate females, etc.).
Do you mean to wolves themselves, or are you talking about coyotes' response to wolves?
BrentD
Well-known member
Wolves themselves. Being pack animals with a similar social system, you might think that it would but Mike Mitchell told me that is not the case. He would know.
Ya, wolves definitely don't have those same compensatory mechanisms, for whatever reason. It's seemingly just about unique to coyotes. Part of it may be tied to both species' evolutionary history; before people were regularly hunting them, wolves had no natural predators. Coyotes, meanwhile, have always been hunted by wolves, which see them as competition (there's also some research to suggest wolves kill coyotes as a means of letting younger wolves practice how to engage in wolf on wolf/ inter-pack conflict). Since coyotes have always had to deal with mortality via wolf, it makes sense that, to succeed, they would evolve compensatory mechanisms to overcome that mortality.
Yellowstone coyotes took an initial hit from the wolves, but have rebounded to 75% or so of their pre-wolf numbers. Drastic changes in how many you see are likely more tied to behavioral changes than signals of abundance.
So, if I am hearing it right, you are saying that coyote numbers have been reduced 25% by hunting.
Not quite. Rather, they took an initial hit from wolves, then recovered, and now that things have stabilized coyotes respond to a high density of wolves much like they'd respond to a very high density of coyotes - their reproduction numbers decrease (in terms of litter size and subordinates not breeding). It's competitive exclusion.
johnp
Well-known member
I thought we were already above capacity with coyotes. Wish this bunch would have been resorbed.
Not above capacity, though as the original topic of this thread points out, there is some decent evidence that hunting tends to drive population levels up to some degree, so intense or erratic hunting of the population may cause momentary overreaches.
@MT22 do you know of any studies that compare hunted populations of coyotes and unhunted populations of coyotes and depredation of deer, or even tame sheep? It would seem to me that a younger population of coyotes might have different diets/ hunting success when compared to an older population of coyotes and I would expect the unhunted coyotes to be considerably older.
Really good questions. I remember one pretty old study that was on sheep and was set up pretty well (proper control and whatnot). It found that hunting at the right time of year (immediately before lambing season) helped some. Coyote population measured in the summer never changed, so it was no long-term effect on population, just targeted management with a very specific goal.
I've seen a couple of studies relating pretty intensive coyote control to fawn recruitment, and they found some effect if done the right time of year, though they admitted there were too many conflicting variables to know for sure if that trend would persist long term. I still think very targeted/ well-planned management can be effective in some cases.
The biggest problem hindering better research like this is that it's just really difficult to get a long-term study of an unexploited coyote population since they're hunted so extensively. Based on the literature I've seen, I'd say concentrated control efforts at either specific animals (if you have a problem with a coyote and chickens/ lambs, for example) or at the exact right time of year (just before lambing/ fawning) could have a positive effect.
Your question on age structure is another good one. I swear in the back of my mind I've seen a study that found hunted populations to trend younger, which I would certainly expect, but I can't remember where it was. There was a recent study - Kilgo, I think - that found that, too, and it was because of a rush of dispersal from youngsters nearby to fill vacant territories. I have no doubt changing the age structure would impact hunting habits. I know in other critters there's research to indicate that younger animals are much more likely to become "problem" animals for farmers/ ranchers, since they don't know the ropes, whereas older animals are likely old because they've found ways to co-exist (meaning, they leave the farmer's stuff alone).
BrentD
Well-known member
There are several studies showing that Ground nesting bird success including pheasants, ducks, turkeys and passerines do worse where coyotes are hunted or trapped then where they are not. Coyotes are a bird hunter's best friend.
Similar threads
