Read the following statements found on the Maine.gov website and it is easy to believe that Maine is putting the health of our natural ecosystems in jeopardy:
“By continuing the coyote control program, the public may perceive the Department [of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife] implicitly believes the control program has a strong biological basis, when in fact, the biological benefits of coyote control are unknown.” (This implies that the biological harm is also unknown).
As well as this statement: “It is not known whether the current snaring program, or other forms of coyote control, has any effect on increasing local or regional deer numbers.”
And this: “The possibility exists that the removal of territorial coyotes may allow nonterritorial coyotes into an area, and exacerbate the deer predation problem.”
All of these statements were issued by IF&W in its 2001 report “Feasibility Statements for Eastern Coyote Goals and Objectives.” This is the latest information available on the coyote control program in Maine and, according to the IF&W staff member who wrote this report, is still relevant today. Which means no further research has been conducted or analyzed.
Coyote control in Maine is facilitated through shooting, trapping, baiting and running down coyotes with dogs. These can be inhumane methods and are not regulated, as no permit is required for general hunting of coyotes and hunters are not required to tag any coyotes they kill.
It is open season on coyotes year-round in Maine, which means that people hiking through the woods with their dogs are at risk any time of the year, not just during deer hunting season. This past fall there were four different cases of domestic dogs being shot and killed near their homes throughout Maine, mistaken by hunters for coyotes. One dog was even a black lab.
Coyotes are often blamed for killing too many deer, when in actuality the number of deer that coyotes kill cannot be estimated. And these numbers are probably not as high as the amount of deer that hunters kill each year.
Coyotes are opportunistic feeders, which means that they will eat almost anything that is edible and available. According to a 2011 study conducted by a UVM graduate student, “Food Habits and Foraging Behavior of Coyotes in Vermont,” scat analyses revealed that the majority of a coyote’s diet consists of small mammals, birds, insects, vegetation and human refuse.
Though to be fair, who is more deserving of their efforts — the deer hunter, driven mainly by the thrill of the hunt, or the coyote, which must kill in order to survive? Despite assumptions that coyotes decrease the deer population, there has been no research that proves that coyote control results in larger deer numbers.
According to the Eastern Coyote Institute, when a coyote population is thinned out through the killing of individual members, a survival response actually stimulates their population growth through larger litters and more breeding females. Based on these considerations, the reason for decreasing the number of coyotes is unfounded and the whole process of coyote control could be seen as counterproductive, unless hunters were able to nearly wipe out the entire species.
Maine’s coyote control is needless and unregulated and merely serves the purpose of providing financial stability to the IF&W rather than an environmentally responsible way to manage wildlife.
IF&W cannot claim to be stewards of Maine’s wildlife and represent the Maine people if it does not equally uphold the values of all of our state’s citizens, not just those who hunt. Less than 5 percent of the entire population of the United States are registered hunters (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation”), and yet the voices of hunters are often listened to more than nonhunters because they bring in profits.
This is not a fair representation of the population and this is not fair for wildlife. We need to make a concerted effort in Maine to conduct responsible and educated management of our coyote population or face the consequences of an irreversibly unbalanced natural ecosystem.
Heather Bolint of Damariscotta is a 2009 graduate of Eckerd College in St. Petersburg, Fl., where she earned a BA in environmental studies.
Thinning out the coyote population will be a boon to other predators also. I would hope the rabbit and other small mammal populations would rebound and bobcats, lynx, fishers, etc. would have a more suitable food source.
Interestingly enough studies have been done where predator management have shown that it does have a direct effect on a variety of species. Especially in small game and birds. Predator exclusion and removal studies have shown a much higher rate of survival on waterfowl in marshes. You could certainly tip the population dynamic in either direction.
Personally I hope the small animals that the coyotes mostly eat rebound and become a nuisance. I want to see farms overrun with rats and mice; gardens destroyed by herds of rabbits. Maybe then people will understand the necessity of having an apex predator in the mix.
Everything the writer said regarding the biology of the eastern coyote is absolutely true. And she was pretty darn close to the mark too when she related the war on coyotes to the hunting industry.
BTW, I am not anti-hunting. I just don’t think that we need to destroy the top predators to keep the deer herd larger for the hunt. The current atrocities inflicted on one of the Creator’s children in order to raise revenue should be a point of disgust for everyone.
Man is the top predator In the Bible in the book of Genesis chap. 1 verse26 for man to rule over all the creatures of the earth ,so man is the apex predator by the design of God. Also I ask have you ever been to a deer yard . Yes coyotes are oppurtunists but the available food source in the winter is a short list and deer are at the top of the list in the winter when the snow is deep.The coyotes hang around the deer yards with the groceries close by that is called oppurtunity with minimal energy spent . And the coyotes dont holler to one another and say hold up stop the killing we got enough for this week. no they kill till the deer run away if you dont run then thanks for the oppurtunity. now picture this with 4 to5 feet of snow on the ground with enough crust on the snow to hold the coyote up. that is called a slaughter. I the hunter come along next year and say what happend to all the deer?No, man will not wipe out the coyote but his population can try to be controlled through trapping and hunting and the fish & wildlife does know how many are taken because they are tagged before they are sold
Well the small rodents would be kept in check by animals that people find more favorable like bobcats, foxes, and birds of prey.
The author is, in my opinion , clearly anti hunter and most probably ” from away “. I do wish she had researched her information a little more . The DIF&W supports itself entirely on fees paid by hunters. She also said that there were no permits required to hunt these pests and later stated that the hunt merely serves to provide financial stability to the DIF&W. How can that be Ms. Bolint ?
There is a night permit, and I also picked up an anti-hunting sentiment. Though what the author probably meant by not needing a permit to shoot a coyote would be like getting the migratory stamp, or a bear tag, something that is bought after the hunting license is bought, but that is still a permit I suppose. Interesting to see that no mention is made of private reserves and ranches where heavy predator management is taken so they can maintain their herd sizes. I can’t help but wonder if anyone has been doing studies on deer habits in proximity to coyotes, like they have done with elk and wolves. The elk moved to areas of better cover and safety but in doing so were subject to less feed, higher densities, thus resulting in fewer young and more mortality. It’s not always a direct impact and I don’t think anyone is really looking at it.
Thank you
Also if you plan on doing anything with the hide, you must tag the animal at a fur tagging station.
That actually only applies to certain fur bearers, of which the coyote is not one.
“from away” huh ? That statement is the perfect example of why Maine is a dead state. I have traveled all over the world and have NEVER heard of people that are so adept at driving people away because they were not “born Mainers”…..
You’re all welcome here just don’t tell us how you think we should live !
North Dakota is pretty close, but not quite as bad.
“the whole process of coyote control could be seen as counterproductive, unless hunters were able to nearly wipe out the entire species”.
You may be onto something here.
Ms. Bolint, I checked out the “study” and find it not much of anything but more bunny hugger “facts”. 1) the “study” timeline seems narrow to draw any conclusion of the diet of a coyote (Nov. 2010 to Feb. 2011). With those dates most anyone can see that they ended the study when they should have started it (actually it should be a year long study or more). The coyotes will do most damage to deer herds once snow gets too deep and during fawning. 2) Location. Although multiple location is great, the lack of information about species in area is disappointing. The study did list the species in the area but lacked species population and presents of said species. To give an example of the importance of that. I normally hunt a certain mountain and valley. Most of the year the bigger bucks stay higher on the mountain and the does stay lower or in the valley. About mid Nov. the bucks come lower and by Dec. all the deer are in the valley until spring. Without the knowledge of quantity of food sources the study would be flawed. 3) Sample size. 20 scats seems far to small to conclude anything about their diet. That is 20 samples over 4 months gathered from 3 different location. Also no notes of when each sample was collected and no notes on the location the samples where collected.
The thing I find most interesting is that someone with a BA in environmental studies would use such a study to base their opinion on.
I lived in St. John, Maine where the coyotes grew in numbers,ate many deer,but because the small animal population went down in numbers, the coyotes started going after our cats and maybe dogs. Next the author will say the coyotes only go after the old or sick deer. Would you exspect people to buy spoiled food from a grocery store? When you understand the real facts, then maybe we will listen to you.
I also like how this Environmental study major writes about how coyotes will re-populate if harvested. But fails to say that most if not all animals will do that. The reason for this is that the health of the mother directly effects the birth rate. If there is more food for the mother the more young she will have. Most animals will do this, coyotes are not special.
True, in fact studies have been done on coyote litter size/ survival that show both are directly related to the age of the mother. However, any study that does not agree with these authors mindsets are ignored.
Quoting anything done by a group thats sole purpose is to end the taking of any species (such as the eastern coyote insitute ) is laughable. But then, these groups depend on mis-information and emotions in order to make a living.
Kurt, you argue the way those who doubt global climate change argue. Yes, you can cherry pick a study here and there that argues against it, but the number of studies showing global climate change vs none are 1000 to 1. There will always be those who have a vested self interest who will fund studies knowing their ultimate outcome will support their beliefs, but that is not the case here, nor with global warming. The study you speak of covered very narrow parameters and did not address the fact that there are many other factors to coyote productivity that are every bit as important. This argument, and the insults from those who hate coyotes, seem to go on and on, but the majority of peer reviewed science and the majority of biological fact continue to disprove any belief that coyote control does anything but kill coyotes, leaving room for other dispersing coyotes to move in and take their place. Studies in 2009 and 2010 in New England showed both a doubling of litter size when mortality rose in coyote packs and that pack size actually doubled when coyote mortality rose. These are both peer reviewed and published in the Canadian Wildlife Journal. It is important to note that even though Maine IF&W continue to support predator control, they openly acknowledge there is no proof of its effectiveness. That predator comtrol continues is just a testimony to the IF&W Committees inability to listen to their own biologists and science to appease some small minority of Mainers. It is a sad comment on those who hold the fate of wildlife in their hands in Augusta.
Heather Bolint, commenting biasly about lack of information in wildlife reports with lack of information as her foundation!
Pointless discussion. Hunters are always gonna think that the only predator ought to be hunters.
Assigning human qualities to coyotes, as some advocates for coyote culling tend to do, is nonsensical. Coyotes are not evil, nor are their killing methods unusual in nature. Any coyote culling program should be based on professional wildlife management considerations, not misguided public sentiments.
I see em I shoot em!
The coyote population in my area has learned that to be within rifle distance of my house is suicide. No wardens, no photos, no reporters, no discussion, just gone.
Just wait till the idiots re-introduce the wolf! Coyotes numbers have been growing and they are changing behaviors that are more aggressive to humans. Don’t take my word for it, ask the folks in north Nova Scotia, where the teenage Country/folk singer was killed by two of them. One had to be shot before they stopped attacking.
http://lnk.co/IIFDQ